Wittkower - Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600 To 1750

The Pelican History of Art
Art and Architecture

in Italy 1600-1750 Rudolf Wittkower
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
THE PELICAN HISTORY OF ART
Joint Editors: Nikolaus Pevsner and Judy Nairn
Rudolf Wittkower
ART AND ARCHITECTL RE IN ITALY 1600 TO 1750
Until 1956 Rudolf Wittkower was Durnin^-I.awrence Professor of the History of Art in
the University of London, and a member of the Warburg Institute. PVom 1956 to 1968
he was Chairman of the Department of Art History and Archaeology at Columbia

University, New York. .After his retirement in 1969 he served as Kress Professor at the
National Gallery, Washington, and as Slade Professor at Cambridge. He died in October
197 1 . Professor W ittkower was singularly well equipped to undertake this study. .-Kmong
his many publications on the art and architecture of the period are his books on Bernini
at Windsor C-astle. In the present work
and on the Carracci draw ings is offered a
summing-up of views formed during years of devoted research.
BIBLOSARTE
Rudolf Wittkower
ART AND ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY

1600 TO 1750
BIBLOSARTE
Penguin Books
BIBLOSARTE
Penguin Books Ltd, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England
Penguin Books, 62s Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10022, U.S.A.
Penguin Books Australia Ltd, Ringwood, Victoria, Australia

Penguin Books Canada Ltd, 2801 John Street, Markham, Ontario, Canada LjR 1B4
Penguin Books (N.Z.) Ltd, 182-igo Wairau Road, Auckland 10, New Zealand
Copyright © the Estate of Rudolf Wittkower, ig^S, 1965, ig6g, igjs
First published igs8

Second revised edition igbs
Reprinted ig6g
Third revised edition igjj
First paperback edition, based on third revised edition, igjj
Reprinted igjs, igjS
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number : j§- 128578
Set in Monophoto Ehrhardt

by Oliver Burridge Filmsetting Ltd, Crawley, Sussex
Printed in Great Britain by Fletcher (^ Son Ltd, Norwich
and bound by
Richard Clay (The Chaucer Press), Ltd, Bungay, Suffolk
Designed by Gerald Cinamon and Anthony Cohen
BIBLOSARTE
TO MY WIFE
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CONTENTS
Forewords 1
Maps 16-19
Part One : The Period of Transition and the Early Baroque

circa 1600-circa 162^
1. Rome: Sixtus V to Paul V (i 585-1 621) 21
The Council of Trent and the Arts - The Church and the Reformers -
The 'Style Sixtus V and its Transformation -

Paul V and Cardinal Scipione Borghese as Patrons -
Caravaggio's and Annibale Carracci's Supporters -
The new Churches and the new Iconography - The Evolution of the 'Genres'
2. Caravaggio 45
3. The Carracci 57
4. Caravaggio's Followers and the Carracci School in Rome 73

The Caravaggtsti - The Bolognese in Rome and Early Baroque Classicism
5. Painting outside Rome 91
Bologna and Neighbouring Cities 92

Florence and Siena 97
Milan 98
Genoa 104
Venice 106
Conclusion 108
6. Architecture and Sculpture 1 1
Architecture 1 1
Rome: Carlo Maderno ( iss^~^^-^9) ~ Architecture outside Rome

Sculpture 127
Rome - Sculpture outside Rome
BIBLOSARTE
Part Two: The Age of the High Baroque
circa 162^-circa i6js
7. Introduction 137
Seicento Devotion and Religious Imagery -
Rhetoric and Baroque Procedure - Patronage
8. Gianlorenzo Bernini (1598- 1680) 143

Introduction 143
Sculpture 144
Stylistic Development - Sculpture with One and Many Views -
Colour and Light - The Transcending of Traditional Modes - New Iconographical Types -
The Role of the 'Concetto' - Working Procedure
Painting 172
Architecture 174
Ecclesiastical Buildings - Secular Buildings - The Piazza of St Peter's
9. Francesco Borromini (1599- 1667) 197

5. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane - S. Ivo della Sapienza -
S. Giovanni in Laterano, S. Agnese, S. Andrea delle Fratte, and Minor Ecclesiastical Works
The Oratory of St Philip Neri - Domestic Buildings - The Collegia di Propaganda Fide
10. Pietro da Cortona (1596-1669) 231

Introduction 231
Architecture 232
The Early Works - SS. Martina e Luca -
S. Maria della Pace, S. Maria in Via Lata, Projects, and Minor Works
Painting and Decoration 247
The Early Works - The Gran Salone of the Palazzo Barberini -
The Frescoes of the Palazzo Pitti and the Late Work
11. 'High Baroque Classicism': Sacchi, Algardi, and Duquesnoy 261

Andrea Sacchi (i 599-1 661) 261
The Controversy between Sacchi and Cortona
Alessandro xAlgardi (1598- 1654) 266
Francesco Duquesnoy (1597-1643) 272
BIBLOSARTE
12. Architectural Currents of the High Baroque 279
Rome 279
Carlo Ratnaldi - Martina Longhi the Younger, Vincenzo della Greca,
Antonio del Grande, and Giovan Antonio de' Rossi
Architecture outside Rome 290
Baldassare Longhena (1598-1682) - Florence and Naples: Silvani and Fanzago
13. Trends in High Baroque Sculpture 305

Rome 305
The First Generation - The Second Generation -
Tombs with the Effigy in Prayer - Minor Masters of the later Seventeenth Century
Bernini's Studio and the Position of Sculptors in Rome
Sculpture outside Rome 318
14. High Baroque Painting and its Aftermath 321

Rome 321
Baroque Classicism; Archaizing Classicism; Crypto-Romanticism -
The Great Fresco Cycles - Carlo Maratti (1625-1713)
Painting outside Rome 339
Bologna, Florence, Venice, and Lombardy - Genoa - Naples
Part Three : Late Baroque and Rococo

circa ibj^-circa ijô
15. Introduction 363
16. Architecture 369

Introduction Late Baroque Classicism and Rococo
: 369
Rome 373
Carlo Font ana ( i6j8-iyi4) - The Eighteenth Century
Northern Italy and Florence 386
Naples and Sicily 393
17. Architecture in Piedmont 403

The Prelude 403
Guarino Guarini (1624-83) 403
Filippojuvarra (1678- 1736) 413
Bernardo Vittone (1702, not 1704/5-70) 424
BIBLOSARTE
i8. Sculpture 433
Rome 433
Typological Changes : Tombs and Allegories
Sculpture outside Rome 446
19. Painting 461

Introduction 46
Naples and Rome 462
Florence and Bologna 469
Northern Italy outside Venice 476
Venice 479
Sebastiano Ricci and Piazzetta - Pellegrini, Amigoni, Pittoni, Balestra -
Giambattista Tiepolo ( ibgb-ijyo)

The Genres 49
Portraiture - The Popular and Bourgeois Genre - Landscape, Vedute, Ruins
Abbreviations Used in the Notes and Bibliography 506

Notes 507
Bibliography 581
List of Illustrations 621
Index 631
BIBLOSARTE
FOREWORD TO THE FIRST EDITION
In all fairness, I feel the reader should be warned reserved a detailed discussion for those works of
of what he will not find in this book. Such a first art and architecture which, owing to their
sentence may be psychologically unwise, but it intrinsic merit and historical importance, appear
is morally sound. I am concerned with the Italian to be in a special class. Intrinsic merit and
Baroque period in the widest sense, but not with historical importance - these notions may be
the European phenomenon of Neo-classicism. regarded as dangerous measuring rods, and not
Thus Winckelmann and his circle as well as the every reader may subscribe to my opinions: yet
Italian artists who followed his precepts fall out- history degenerates into chronicle if the author
side the scope of my work. Nor will the struggle shuns the dangers of implicit and explicit judge-
between the supporters of Greece and those of ments of quality and value.
Rome be reported, a battle that was joined in the At this point I make bold to express a view
1750s from Scotland to Rome and in which which may be unpopular with some students of
Piranesi took such an active part. In addition, the Italian Baroque. Excepting the beginning
little or next to nothing will be said about the and the end of the period under review, i.e.
festive life of the period: the Baroque stage and Caravaggio, the Carracci, and Tiepolo, the
theatre, and the sumptuous decorations in easily history of painting would seem less important
perishable materials put up on special occasions than that of the other arts and often indeed has
often by first-rate artists. Finally, the develop- no more than strictly limited interest - an ideal
ment of the garden, of town-planning, and of hunting-ground for specialists and 'attribu-
interior decoration could hardly be touched tionists'. This fact has been somewhat obscured
upon, though I am only too well aware that all by the great mass of valuable research made
this is particularly relevant for a comprehensive during the last forty years in the field of Italian
picture of the Baroque age. My aim is narrower, Baroque painting at the expense of studies in the
but perhaps even more ambitious. Instead of history of architecture and sculpture. Roughly
saying little about many things, I attempted to from the second quarter of the seventeenth
say something about a few things, and so con- century on, the most signal developments in
cerned myself only with the history of painting, easel-painting lay outside Italy, and Italian
sculpture, and architecture. painters became the recipients rather than the
Even so, the subject and the space at my instigators of new ideas. It is, however, in con-
disposal dictated severe limitations with which junction with, and as an integral part of, archi-
the reader may want to be acquainted before tecture, sculpture, and decoration that Italian
turning to the pages of this book. It was neces- painters of the Baroque made a vital and inter-
sary to prune the garden of history not only of nationally significant contribution with their
dead but, alas, also of much living wood. In large fresco cycles. The works without peer are
doing this, I availed myself of the historian's Bernini's statuary, Cortona's architecture and
right and duty to submit to his readers his own decoration, and Borromini's buildings as well
vision of the past. I tried to give a bird's-eye as those by Guarini, Juvarra, and Vittone. But
view, and no more, of the whole panorama and it was Bernini, the greatest artist of the period,
BIBLOSARTE
12 lORtWORDS
who with his poetical and visionary masterpieces position has resulted in an all too brief discus-
created perhaps the most subHme reaHzation sion of eighteenth-century painting, particularly
of the longings of his age. of the Venetian School, but a fairly full treat-
Based on such considerations, I have placed ment would in any case have gone far beyond
the accents in the story that follows. Approxi- the space at my disposal ; also I believe that the
mately one-fourth of the text is devoted to structure I wanted to give the book justified
Bernini, Cortona, and Borromini; the chapter and even demanded this brevity.
on Bernini alone takes up over ten per cent of For the main divisions of the whole period I
the book. Another ten per cent is concerned have used the terms, by now well established,
with Caravaggio, the Carracci, and Tiepolo, of Early, High, and Late Baroque. Only recently
while roughly the same space is given to Sacchi, have we been reminded' that such termino-
Algardi, Duquesnoy, and the great Piedmontese logical barricades contain fallacies apt to mis-
architects. This accounts for more than two- lead the author as well as his public. Yet no
fifths of the text. Since hundreds of artists, historical narrative is possible without some
many of them of considerable stature, share form of organization, and though the traditional
between them as much text as I have given to a terminology may have - and indeed has -
mere dozen of the greatest, my narrative may serious shortcomings, it conveniently and sen-
be criticized as lopsided. But I am prepared to sibly suggests chronological caesuras during
accept the challenge. New and pregnant ideas one hundred and fifty years of history. If we
have always been few and far between. It is the accept 'Baroque' - like 'Gothic' and 'Renais-
origin, unfolding, and expansion of these ideas sance' - as a generic term and take it to cover
with which I am here concerned. Their echo the most diverse tendencies between roughly
and transformation in the work of minor artists 1600 and 1750, it will yet be seen in the text of
can be sketched with a large brush. the book that the subdivisions 'Early', 'High',
My story begins with the anti-Mannerist ten- and 'Late' indicate real historical caesuras; but
dencies which arose towards the end of the it became necessary to expand the 'primary'
sixteenth century in various Italian centres, and terminology by such terms as 'transitional style',
the curtain falls over the Baroque scene at 'High' and 'Late Baroque classicism', 'archaiz-
different places in different decades. If one ing classicism', 'crypto-romanticism', 'Italian
postulates the year 1750 roughly as the water- Rococo', and 'classicist Rococo', all of which
shed between the Late Baroque and Neo- will be explained in their proper place.
classicism, it appears that the three main sec- I dictated a rough draft of large parts of the
tions of this book comprise spans of approxi- manuscript in the summer of 1950. Most of my
mately thirty, sixty, and again s'xty years. Two- spare time in the following seven years was
fifths of the text have been devoted to the two given to elaborating, revising, and completing
generations limited by the beginning and the the work. The manuscript reached the editor
end of Bernini's career, since I consider the in batches from the beginning of 1956 on; by
Roman High Baroque of Bernini, Borromini, the summer of 1957 almost the entire text had
and Pietro da Cortona the most exciting years been dispatched. I mention these facts because
of the century and a half under review and one they explain why recent research is not so fully
of the most creative periods of the whole history incorporated as I should have liked. Since new
of Italian art; the remaining three-fifths are and often important results appear in an un-
equally divided between the first and third interrupted stream, it was virtually impossible
parts. Some readers may regret that this dis- to keep the older chapters of the manuscript
BIBLOSARTE
13
permanently up to date. I have attempted, how- himself the self-denying task of reading one set
ever, to incorporate in the Notes all the major of proofs. Ever watchful and scrupulously con-
publications until the autumn of 1957. scientious, he covered the galleys with comment;
It is not possible to mention all the names of his many constructive suggestions as to content
friends and colleagues who answered my in- and style considerably improved my final text.
quiries. I am particularly indebted to Peggy The book was prepared and written mainly
Martin, Sheila Somers, and St John Gore, with the resources of the Warburg Institute
through whose assistance the manuscript made and the Witt Library (Courtauld Institute),
progress at a difficult period. Paolo Portoghesi London; the Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome; the
and G. E. Kidder Smith allowed me to use some German Art Historical Institute, Florence; and
beautiful photographs. Howard Hibbard helped the Avery Library, Columbia University, New
with the search for, and supply of, illustrations. York. I wish to put on record that without the
In addition, I am greatly indebted to him for loyal support of the directors and staffs of these
many corrections of facts and for allowing me excellent institutions the work could never have
to use some of the results of his researches in the been finished in its present form.
Borghese archive. Philip Pouncey and Henry Finally, I have to thank the editor, Nikolaus
Millon emended some errors at proof stage. Pevsner, not only for constant advice and en-
My gratitude goes above all to Ilaria Toesca couragement, but also for his infinite patience.
and Italo Faldi, who year after year put their Whenever my own spirit began to flag, the
time and resources unflinchingly at my disposal. thought sustained me of how much easier it
I am deeply grateful for what they have done was to be an author than an editor.
for me by correspondence and during my regular
visits to Rome. Milton J. Lewine took upon Neip York, December ig^j
FOREWORD TO THE SECOND EDITION
In the five and a half years since the appearance Turin have brought together, sifted, and sub-
of the first edition of this book Italian Baroque mitted to scholarly discussion an enormous mass
studies have taken immense strides forward. of new material. One-man shows, often accom-
Many key figures had then lacked modern panied by bulky and monographic catalogues,
monographs but this deficiency has now been have helped to clarify the ceiivre and develop-
partly overcome. Arisi's Panini, Bologna's SoH- ment of Cerano, Cigoli, Morazzone, Pellegrini,
mena, Briganti's Cortona, Constable's Cana- Pianca, Marco Ricci, Tanzio, and others. Scores
letto, D'Orsi's Giaquinto, Enggass's Baciccio, of papers, many of them written by a rising
and Morassi's Tiepolo indicate the breadth and generation of intensely active, perspicacious,
importance of the research concluded in the and devoted scholars - among whom I gratefully
intervening period. Moreover, minor masters name Borea, A. M. Clark, Ewald, Griseri,
such as Cameo, Carpioni, Cecco Bravo, and Hibbard, Honour, Noehles, Posner, and Vitz-
Petrini have recently found biographers. Exhi- thum - have helped to correct old misconcep-
bitions from the Venetian and Bolognese Sei- tions and to expand the confines of our know-
cento to the splendid Baroque Exhibition in ledge. In a word, much of the groundwork for
BIBLOSARTE
14 FOREW ORDS
the book which I rashly undertook to write The reception of the first edition has been
years ago has only in the last half decade been favourable beyond expectation. If the test of an
laid by the concerted endeavour of many author's success lies in the extent to which his
scholars. ideas percolate and become, acknowledged as
Confronted with this situation, I felt tempted well as unacknowledged, common property, I
to recast some of the old chapters. In the end, I have no reason to be dissatisfied. I hope that the
decided against such a course, because I had considerably increased critical apparatus will
regarded it as my primary task to submit a make the book even more useful. But, as before,
coherent historical vision of the entire period the text is meant to stand on its own and be
and, despite all the valuable work done in recent perused by those who want to read a coherent
years, dismissed the need for a change or dis- narrative rather than use a textbook, without
ruption of the original structure of the book. the constant and irritating turning of pages to
Nevertheless, a great many errors have been the back of the book.
amended in the text, and facts, ideas, and judge- It only remains to thank the many friends
ments have been brought in line with new re- who helped me with comments and corrections.
sults wherever and whenever I found them Among them Julius Held and Howard Hibbard
convincing. should be specially mentioned; their vigilant
The bulk of the new research has been incor- eye caught a number of blatant errors.
porated in the Notes, to which I have added Judy Nairn watched over the new edition as
about 15,000 words. In addition, the Biblio- she did over the old. Her whole-hearted co-
graphy has been brought up-to-date (until sum- operation spurred me to action. She also took
mer, 1964); in some cases I have listed weak and upon herself the unenviable task of compiling
unsatisfactory writings for the sole purpose of a new and fuller index.
saving time to students who might otherwise be

misled by a promising title. Florence, August ig64
FOREWORD TO THE THIRD EDITIO.N
In some fields of the history of art and especially 1 97 1, has been incorporated in the Notes and
in the field of Baroque studies research has the Bibliography. Both Notes and Bibliography
made and is making such giaot steps forward have grown very considerably and have reached
that a book first vaguely envisaged more than a size that, in my view, should not be trans-
a generation ago and written in the 1950s can gressed. Even so, it was impossible (nor was it
only survive if the process of bringing it up to my intention) to aim at anything approaching

date never ceases. Once again, however, I had completeness. The selection of the material
to abandon the temptation of recasting whole newly incorporated in this edition was dictated
chapters of the text of the book and had to not only by the importance of contributions,
restrict myself to a few extensive and a vast but also by my own interests and reading capa-
number of minor corrections. The bulk of the city. Moreover, I have to admit frankly that
new critical material, covering mainly the period some fine studies may never have come to my
between the spring of 1964 and the spring of knowledge. Thus I have to emphasize strongly
BIBLOSARTE
that omission only rarely implies refutation. one way or another, given me the benefit of
Once again, I have to point out that the notes their criticism and corrected mistakes. Among
and the bibliography supplement each other: them I mention gratefully the names of Diane
a great deal of bibliographical material only David, Howard Hibbard, C. Douglas Lewis Jr,
appears in the notes, while a good many works Carla Lord, Tod Marder, Jennifer Montagu,
are only mentioned in the bibliography, where and Werner Oechslin.
I have often given fuller comments than in the
previous editions. And once again I have to Podere La Vescina, Lucignano,

thank many friends who have helped me in June igji
BIBLOSARTE
VaralJo q ^jlVarcse • ^^ Alzano
* \fOrta * Mendiisioy Aiaqqiore *%
Griqnasco, ^ \^ \jcrate • li
St
^yo^, Castellazzo di Bollatf^
^CcXusco ^'l''^''
.Vercell
SanGeriano VerccUcsc* Mont\
^^t° ^^ Monjerrato Crema
Rivo]i»''Z<*^\, ' Cremona

'Villadcat
V
Sabbioneta
*
Alessandria
K;7/a Pasquali^\^
-^ Racconigi ^Cavallermaggiore Parma •
* Fossano
Reggio Emilia •
Sav>9
'^ôndov) *Ganu
Genoa
L I G U R I A N SEA
Km
60
Miles
BIBLOSARTE
Udine , • Cividale
Trent Santa Giustina
* Passariano
Maser
•^'^4.
ViJlavcrla . ^^ ^'''
'
Trcviso
Montecchio ^^,
HA '''tcnzu Santa
^m*Viccnza Mana di Sala
Maqqwre**
\r • <\ ^ Padua fr^^î^s^'^^
'
Mantua ,.•„ , ^•K'-'W'"
BIBLOSARTE
Caprarola
• Caspc
f<^trana'
Bassano di
• Fara San Alartino m
Sutri
Arsoli ^
Bracciano
,..vcc'^"v^ Tivoli • ,,{Pakstr'"^J
Civ Villa del P'ujnctot
~^<^Romc fhrascati \^ Qf^yiazzano Pescocostanzo
GrottafcrrataS • ** • » ;•
CO %i<^ Montccassino
Pontccorvo
T Y R R E N I
SEA
BIBLOSARTE
ART AND ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY
1600 TO 1750
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
PART ONE
THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION

AND THE EARLY BAROQ.UE
CIRCA 1600-CIRCA 1625
CHAPTER I
ROME: SIXTUS V TO PAUL V
1585-1621
With the Sack of Rome in 1527 an optimistic, reform over a period of almost twenty years,
intellectually immensely alert epoch came to pertinently defined the role assigned to the arts
an end. For the next two generations the climate in the reformed community. Religious imagery
in Rome was austere, anti-humanist, anti- was admitted and welcomed as a support to
worldly, and even anti-artistic. The work of religious teaching. One passage of the decree
reform of the Church, begun at the Lateran demands that 'by means of the stories of the
Council in 15 12 on Julius ITs initiative, was mysteries of our Redemption portrayed by
seriously taken in hand and carried out with paintings or other representations, the people
grim determination. During Pius IV's pontifi- be instructed and confirmed in the habit of
cate (1559-65) the Venetian envoy reported remembering, and continually revolving in mind
from Rome: 'Life at Court is mean, partly the articles of faith'. Consequently strictest dis-
through poverty, but also owing to the good cipline and correctness in the rendering of the
example of Cardinal Borromeo. . . . They [the holy stories were required, and the clergy was
clergy] have altogether withdrawn from every made responsible for the surveillance of the
sort of pleasures. . . . This state of things has artists. The terse deliberations of the Council
been the ruin of artisans and merchants. . .
.'
were soon enlarged upon by a veritable flood of
But the practice of art was far from being ex- literature, produced by churchmen and re-
tinct: it was turned into an important weapon formers rather than by practising artists.
to further Catholic orthodoxy. Leaving all details aside, the recommenda-

tions of such writers as St Charles Borromeo,
Cardinal Gabriele Paleotti, the Fleming Mo-
The Council of Trent and the Arts
lanus, Gilio da Fabriano, Raftaello Borghini,
At its last session in December 1563 the Council Romano Alberti, Gregorio Comanini, and Pos-
of Trent, which had accomplished the work of sevino mav be summarized under three head-
BIBLOSARTE
21 THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
ings: (i) clarity, simplicity, and intelligibility, the obvious demands of counter-reformatory
(ii) realistic interpretation, and (iii) emotional decorum, such as the avoidance of nude figures.
stimulus to piety. The first of these points is In another respect the answer is more baffling.
self-explanatory. The second has a dual aspect. The Church was vociferous in laying down the
Many stories of Christ and the saints deal with rules, but how to sublimate them into an artistic
martyrdom, brutality, and horror and, in con- language of expressive power - that secret could
trast to Renaissance idealization, an unveiled be solved only by the artists. This granted, are
display of truth was now deemed essential even ; we at all capable to judge whether, where, and
Christ must be shown 'afflicted, bleeding, spat when the artists caught up with the spirit of the
upon, with his skin torn, wounded, deformed, Council } Since apodictic statements in an area
pale and unsightly',' if the subject requires it. pertaining to individual sensibility are doomed
Truth, moreover, called for accuracy down to to failure, our conclusions have relative rather
the minutest detail. On this level, the new than absolute value. After this proviso, it may
realism almost becomes synonymous with the be said that, with the exception of the Venetians
old Renaissance concept of decorum, which re- and a few great individualists like the aged
quires appropriateness of age, sex, type, expres- Michelangelo, most of the artists working
sion, gesture, and dress to the character of the roughly between 1550 and 1590 practised a
figure represented. The relevant literature formalistic, anti-classical, and anti-naturalistic
abounds in precise directives. It is these 'cor- style, a style of stereotyped formulas, for which
rect' images that are meant to appeal to the the Italians coined the word maniera* and which
emotions of the faithful and support or even we now call 'Mannerism' without attaching a
transcend the spoken word. derogatory meaning to the term. Virtuosity of

And yet, in the decrees of the Council and execution and highly decorative surface qualities
in the expositions by its severe partisans, there go with compositional decentrahzation and
is almost an iconoclastic streak. In no uncertain spatial and colouristic complexities ; in addition,
terms did the Council proscribe the worship of it is not uncommon that deliberate physical and
images: in the words of the decree 'the honour psychic ambiguities puzzle the beholder. Finally,
shown to them refers to the prototypes which the intricacies of handling are often matched
those images represent'.- But it is easier to by the intricacies of content. Many 'pictures
postulate the difference between idol and image and fresco cycles of the period are obscure and
than to control the reaction of the masses. We esoteric, possibly not in spite of but because of
therefore find men like St Philip Neri warning the close collaboration between painter and
his penitents not to fix their eyes too intently priest. One is inclined to believe that this art,
on images, and St John of the Cross advocating which not rarely reveals a hardly veiled licen-
that the devout man needs few images and that tiousness under the guise of prudery, was suited
churches, where the senses are least likely to to please the refined Italian society, then fol-
be entertained, are most suitable for intense lowing the dictates of Spanish etiquette, but it
prayer. had hardly the power to stir religious emotions

It has long been a matter of discussion among in the mass of the faithful. To be sure, Man-
art historians to what extent the art of the later nerism as it was practised during the later
sixteenth century expressed the exigencies of sixteenth century was not an answer to the
the reformed Catholic Church.' In one respect artistic requirementsof the counter-reformatory
the answer is not difficult to give; artists of Church : it lacked clarity, realism, and emotional
religious imagery had to comply with some of intensity.
BIBLOSARTE
ROME: SIXTLS V TO PAUL V 23
It is only from about 1580 onwards, or had passed, and with this returned an easier
roughly twenty years after the promulgation of deportment and a determination to enjoy Hfe
the Council decrees, that we begin to discern a such as had not existed in Rome since the days
counter-reformatory art on a broad basis. So of the Renaissance. Moreover, progressive reli-
much may be said at present: the new art has gious movements, bom in the days of the
not a clear-cut unified physiognomy. Either the Council of Trent but not always looked upon
realistic or the emotional component may be with approval by the reactionary faction of the
stressed as a rule, clarity supersedes complexity
: reformers, were now firmly established. Pro-
and often, though by no means always, deli- tected and encouraged by papal authority, they
berate formal austerity provides the answer to developed into the most effective agencies of
the severe 'iconoclastic" tendencies which we the Catholic Restoration.
have mentioned. Meanwhile, however, the The most important movements, St PhiUp
Counter-Reformation moved towards a new Neri's Oratory and St Ignatius of Loyola's
phase. Before discussing in some detail the pat- Society of Jesus, two seemingly opposed off-
tern of artistic trends in Rome, certain aspects shoots of neo-Catholicism, have yet much in
of the historical setting must be sketched. common. Philip's Oratory grew out of informal
meetings of laymen who preached and dis-
coursed spontaneously, following only their

The Church and the Reformers
inner voices. \ cheerful but deeply devotional
The period from Sixtus V (1585-90) to Paul V spirit prevailed among Philip's disciples, a spirit
(1605-21) has a number of features in common that reminded the learned Cardinal Baronius
which single it out from the periods before and of early Christianity. It is clear that such an
after. Spanish influence, which Italy had nur- unorthodox approach to religion aroused awe
tured in all spheres of life during the sixteenth and suspicion. But in 1575 Gregory XIII for-
century, began to decline. Paul I\ 's war against mally recognized the Oratory and in the same
Spain (1556-7), though a disastrous failure, was year its seat was transferred to the church of
a first pointer to things to come. Sixtus V re- S. Maria in Vallicella. .\fter that the Oratory
newed the resistance against Spanish predomi- soon became fashionable, and a pope like Cle-
nance. Clement VIII (1592-1605) reconciled ment VIII was very close to it. Although the
Henry IV of France to the Holy See, and from rules were written in 1583 and a definite consti-
then on dates the ascendancy of France at the tution, solemnly approved by Paul \ was draw n ,
expense of Spain. This change is symptomatic. up in 1612, the democratic spirit of the original
The rigours of the reform movement were over. foundation was preserved. PhiUp's ap>ostolate,
Never again was there a pope so austere, so as Ludwig von Pastor says, extended down from
ascetic and uncompromising as Paul IV (1555- the pope to the smallest urchin in the streets.
9), so humble and saintly as Pius V (1566-72). The Congregation remained a group of secular
From the 1570s and 80s on Protestantism was priests tied together by voluntary obedience
on the defensive; Catholic stabilization and and charity. Philip died in May 1595. It is
restoration began and in the following decades characteristic of the universal reverence in
all of Poland, Austria, southern Germany, which he was held that the process of canoniza-
France, and parts of Switzerland consolidated tion began as early as two months after his
their Catholic position or even returned to the death."

old Faith. The deep sense of danger which By contrast to the Oratory, the Society of
pervaded the Church during the critical years Jesus was monarchical and aristocratic in its
BIBLOSARTE
24 • Tilt I'KRIOD Ul' I R ANSI! ION AND THK KARLV BAROQUE
constitution, pervaded by a spirit of military During this time the periods of contemplation
discipline, bound by strict vows, and militant are relatively brief and hardly interfere with
in its missionary zeal. But, like the Oratory, the normal duties. The cleansing of the soul does
Society was designed to serve the common not prepare for, or take place in, cloistered
people; like the Oratorians, the Jesuits were seclusion ; it prepares, on the contrary, for the
freed from the bonds of monastic observance active work as a soldier of the Church Militant.
and replaced the traditional withdrawal behind And secondly, all a man's faculties are employed
the walls of the monastery by an active partici- to make the Exercises an extremely vivid per-
pation in the aflairs of the world. Notwith- sonal experience. The senses are brought into
standing their determined opposition to the new play with almost scientific precision and help to
scientific age that was dawning, their intellec- achieve an eminently realistic awareness of the
tualism, casuistry, and interest in education subjects suggested for meditation. The first
were as typical of the new spirit as their approach week of the exercises is devoted to the con-
to the doctrine of Grace and the guide to devo- templation of Sin, and St Ignatius requires the
tion down by Ignatius himself in the
laid exercitant to see the flames of Hell, to smell the
Spiritual Exercises. The Dominicans were up- sulphur and stench, to hear the shrieks of
holders of Thomism, which had seen such a sufferers, to taste the bitterness of their tears
powerful revival in the days of the Council of and feel their remorse. During the last two
Trent, and championed the Pauline-Augus- weeks the soul Hves with equal intensity through
tinian-Thomistic position, that Grace des- the Passion, Resurrection, and Ascension of
cended on man irrespective of human partici- Christ. The Spiritual Exercises were written
pation. The Jesuits, by contrast, taught that early in St Ignatius's career and, after many
human collaboration was essential to render revisions, were approved by Paul III in 1548.
Grace efficacious. This point of view was advo- Although large numbers of the clergy practised
cated with great learning by the Spanish Jesuit the Exercises at an early date, they became most
Luis de Molina in his Concord of Free Will with effective in the course of the seventeenth cen-
the Gifts oj Grace, published in 1588, and re- tury, after the publication in final form in 1599
sulted in a long-drawn-out struggle with the of the Directory (Directorium in Exercitia),
Dominicans which ended only in 1607, by order drawn up by Ignatius as a guide to the Exercises.
of Paul V himself. Although the Holy See re- The list of distinguished seventeenth-century
served judgement and sided neither with Thom- artistswho were Jesuits is longer than is gene-
ism nor Molinism, the suspense alone was like rally realized." Even among the others there
a battle won by the Jesuits: the more positive were probably not a few who felt drawn towards
and optimistic Jesuit teaching, that man has an Jesuit teaching. Bernini's close relations with
influence on the shaping of his destiny, was the Jesuits are well known, and it has been
admitted and broke the power of medieval noticed that there is a connexion between the
determinism. directness of Loyola's spiritual recommenda-
Although inspired by the ascetic writings of tions, their tangibility and realism, and the art
the past, St Ignatius's Spiritual Exercises were of Bernini and his generation." At an earlier
equally new and progressive. Their novelty was date the same observation can be made with
twofold. First, the method of guiding the exer- regard to Caravaggio's art."" But there is no
citant through a four-weeks' course is eminently common ground between the spirit of the Exer-
practical and adaptable to each individual case. cises and the broad current of Late Mannerism.
BIBLOSARTE
ROME: SIXTUS V TO PAUL V ^5
Nor is it possible to talk of a 'Jesuit style'," as Sixtus V ended only when Gregory XIV con-
has often been done, or to construe a direct firmed St Ignatius's original constitutions in
influence ofthe Jesuits on stylistic developments 1591; but the internal difficulties were not
at any time during the seventeenth century. resolved until Paul V's reign {1606).
Ignatius's practical and psychological ap- Ignatius died as early as 1 5 56 ; Francis Xavier,
proach to the mysteries of faith, so different from the great Jesuit missionary, the 'Apostle ofthe
the abstract theological speculations of the Indies', had died four years before; Teresa
Council discussions, was shared not only by passed away in 1 582, Charles Borromeo in 1 584,
men like St Philip Neri and St Charles Bor- and Philip Neri in 1595. The processes leading
romeo, but even by such true sixteenth-century to their beatification and canonization were con-
mystics as St Teresa and St John ofthe Cross. ducted during the two decades ofthe new
first
Unlike the mystics of the Middle Ages, they century. The inquiry into St Charles's life began
controlled, ever watchful, the stages leading to in 1604, and he was canonized in 1610. Ignatius
ecstasy and supplied in their writings detailed was beatified in 1609 after a long process begun
analyses ofthe soul's ascent to God. It character- under Clement VIII. Teresa's process of beatifi-
izes these counter-reformatory mystics that they cation was concluded after ten years in 1614,
knew how to blend the vita activa and contem- Philip Neri's in 1615, and Francis Xavier's in
plativa. No more practical wisdom and down- 1619. After protracted discussions initiated
to-earth energy can be imagined than that under Paul V, the four great reformers, Ignatius,
shown by Teresa and John of the Cross in re- Teresa, Philip Neri, and Francis Xavier, were
forming the Carmelite Order. canonized during Gregory XV's brief pontifi-
Similarly, determination, firmness, and tena- cate, all on 22 May 1622.
city in translating into action the decrees of the This date, if any, is of symbolic significance.
Council guided St Charles Borromeo, the youth- It marks the end of the 'period of transition'
ful Archbishop of Milan who was Pius IV's here under review. When these reformers joined
nephew. At the time of his death in 1584 (aged the empyrean of saints, the struggles were past.
forty-six), he had, one is tempted to say, stream- It was a kind of authoritative acknowledgement
lined his large diocese, had modernized clerical that the regenerative forces inside Catholicism
education by founding his famous seminaries, had saved the Church. This date may also be
and had prepared manuals for pupils, teachers, regarded as a watershed in matters of art. The
and artists. Charles Borromeo was a staunch period from Sixtus V to Paul V has none or
supporter of both the Oratory and the Society little of the enthusiastic and extrovert qualities
of Jesus. He practised the Spiritual Exercises of the exuberant Baroque which came into its
and leant heavily on Jesuit support in carrying own in the 1620s and prevailed in Rome for
through his reforms at Milan. It was he who about fifty years. Moreover, during the earlier
formed the most important link between the period the old and the new often exist indis-
papal court and the new popular movements, criminately side by side. This is one of the
and who promoted the ascendancy of Jesuits important characteristics of these forty-odd
and Oratorians. Both Philip and Ignatius had years, and it must be said at once that the
to struggle for recognition. In spite of the official art policy ofthe popes tended to support
latter's fabulous success, external vicissitudes reactionary rather than progressive artists. The
under the Theatine Pope Paul IV, the Domini- reverse is true from Urban VIII's reign on-
can Pope Pius V, and the Franciscan Pope wards.
BIBLOSARTE
Zb THE HKRIOD OK TRANSITION AND THt EARLY BAROQUE
The 'Style Sixtus V and its Transformation plexities without abandoning Mannerist for-
malism. It is often blunt and pedestrian, on
Compared with the second and third quarters occasions even gaudy and vulgar, though not
of the sixteenth century, its last decades saw infrequently relieved by a note of refined
an immense extension of artistic activity. The classicism. This characterization applies equally
change came about during the brief pontificate to the three arts. It is patently obvious in
of the energetic Sixtus V (1585-90). It is well architecture. Sixtus gave the rebuilding of Rome
known that he transformed Rome more radi- into the hands of his second-rate court architect,
cally than any single pope before him. The Domenico Fontana (1543- 1607), although the
urban development which resulted from his much more dynamic Giacomo della Porta was
initiative and drive reveals him as a man with available to him. Fontana's largest papal build-
a great vision. It has rightly been claimed that ing, the Lateran Palace, is no more than a dry
the creation of long straight avenues (e.g. 'Strada and monotonous recapitulation of the Palazzo
Felice', linking Piazza del Popolo with the Farnese, sapped of all strength. A similar acade-
Lateran), of star-shaped squares (Piazzas S. mic petrifaction is evident in a fa9ade like that
Maria Maggiore and del Popolo, before Vala- of S. Girolamo degli Schiavoni which Sixtus
dier), and the erection of fountains and obeHsks commissioned from Martino Longhi the Elder
as focusing points for long vistas anticipate (1588-9). Without altogether excluding Man-
seventeenth-century town-planning ideas. In nerist superimpositions of motifs, this archi-
the historic perspective it appears of decisive tecture is flat, thin, and timid. It is against such
importance that after more than half a century a background that Carlo Maderno's revolu-
a pope regarded it as his sacred duty - for the tionary achievement in the facade of S. Susanna
whole enterprise was undertaken 'in majorem (1603) [51] must be assessed. It is true that
Dei et Ecclesiae gloriam' - to turn Rome into Clement VIII favoured Giacomo della Porta
the most modern, most attractive, and most and that after the latter's death in 1602 Carlo
beautiful city of Christianity. To be sure, this Maderno stepped into his position as architect
was a new spirit ; it was the spirit of the Catholic of St Peter's. But it is also true that the architect
Restoration. But the artists at his disposal were after Paul V's own heart was Flaminio Ponzio
often less than mediocre, and few of the works (1559/60-1613),'" who perpetuated until his
produced in those years can lay claim to distinc- death a noble version of the academic Man-
tion. After the Sack of Rome a proper Roman nerism of the 1 580s and 90s. And it is equally
school had ceased to exist, and most of the true that the Cavaliere d'Arpino, whose feeble
artists working for Sixtus were either foreigners classicism is the exact counterpart in painting
or took their cue from developments outside of Longhi's and Ponzio's buildings, was in al-
Rome. In spite of all these handicaps something most unchallenged command during the 1 590s'
like a 'style Sixtus V developed, remaining in and maintained a position of authority through-
vogue throughout the pontificate of Clement out Paul V's pontificate.
VIII and even to a certain extent during that The frescoes of the Vatican Library (which
of Paul V. Domenico Fontana had built), the papal chapel
This style may be characterized as an aca- erected by Fontana in S. Maria Maggiore, and
demic ultima mamera, a manner which is not the frescoes in the transept of S. Giovanni in
anti-Mannerist and revolutionary in the sense Laterano exemplify well the prosaic nature and
of the new art of Caravaggio and the Carracci, vulgarity of official taste under Sixtus V and
but tends towards dissolving Mannerist com- Clement VIII. Although varying somewhat in
BIBLOSARTE
ROME: SIXTHS V TO PAUL V •
27
Style and quality, the painters engaged on such Before the end of the century four principal
and other official tasks - Antonio Viviani, tendencies may be differentiated in Rome itself,
Andrea Lilio, Ventura Salimbeni, Paris Nogari, each having its roots far back and each having
Giovan Battista Ricci, Giovanni Guerra, Arrigo much wider, all-Italian implications. There was
Flamingo (Hendrick van den Broeck), and first the facile, decorative manner of the arch-
Cesare Nebbia - fulfilled at least one require- Mannerist Federico Zuccari (i 542/3-1 609), who
ment of the Council decrees, namely that of combined in his art elements from the latest
clarity. At the same time, mainly two Flemings, Raphael and from Tuscan and Flemish Man-
Egidio della Riviera (Gillis van den Vliete) and nerism with impressions which had come to him
Nicolo Pippi of Arras (Mostaert), and the Lom- from Veronese and the Venetians. He was the
bard Valsoldo (Giovan Antonio Paracca), were truly international artist of the^?; de siecle, con-
responsible for the flabby statues and narrative stantly travelling from court to court, Olympian
reliefs in Sixtus V's multicoloured chapel. The in demeanour, prone to esoteric intellectual
two former died in the early years of the seven- speculations, superficial and quick in his pro-
teenth century, while Valsoldo lived long duction. Although he had no official commis-
enough to work again on the decoration of sions in Rome after 1589 and was indeed absent
Paul V's chapel, the counterpart to that of from the city most of the time after that year,
Sixtus V. This 'pragmatic' style fulfilled its his influence was yet great on the painters
purpose and gratified the patrons, even when working for Sixtus V and Clement VIII.
it sank down to the level of pure propaganda. \ second trend was that of the Florentines,
The example that comes to mind is the many who had a considerable share in mid-sixteenth-
frightful scenes of martyrdoms in S. Stefano century fresco-painting in Rome. Their com-
Rotondo, which invariably have a nauseating plex Mannerism, tied to the old Florentine
effect on the modern beholder. But Nicolo emphasis on rhythmic design, followed the
Circignani (called Pomarancio, 1516-96), who general development and gave way towards the
painted them, was the artist favoured by the end of the century to a more simplified and
Jesuits;'- the church belonged to the German solid academic manner, which is mainly repre-
novices of the Order. It was just the unrelieved sented by Bernardino Poccetti. Artists such as
horror of these representations that was to in- Passignano and Ciampelli transplanted this
flame missionary zeal. In the words of Cardinal Florentine manner to Rome, not without blend-
Paieotti: 'The Church wants, in this way, both ing it with Venetian colourism and Zuccari's
to glorify the courage of the martyrs and to set mamera facile. For the third trend, there was
on fire the souls of her sons.'" Nor can it be Girolamo Muziano, who came into prominence
denied that such paintings hardly evoke aes- under Sixtus V's predecessor, Gregory XIII.
thetic satisfaction. Coming from Brescia and steeped in the tra-
If a bird's-eye view of the whole period from ditions of Venetian painting, he never fell
Sixtus V to the end of Paul V's reign shows wholly for the mamera then in vogue. It was
some intrinsic common qualities, a closer in- really he who introduced into Rome a sense for
quiry reveals the existence of a variety of trends. Venetian colour and a taste for rich landscape
In addition, there is a slow but continuous shift settings. This was taken up and developed by
even of official art policy away from Sixtus V's Flemings, mainly Paul Brill (1554- 1626), whose
philistine counter-reformatory art towards a 'picturesque' northern vedute were admitted
fuller, more vigorous, more poetical, and also even in churches and on the walls of the Vatican
more emotional manner. Palace in the reign of Paul V. '^
A good deal of
BIBLOSARTE
28 nit PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
Muziano's chromatic approach to painting was the Cappella Paolina in S. Maria Maggiore, and
assimilated in Rome. Artists like his pupil the Quirinal Palace. By far the greatest problem
Cesare Nebbia (( . 1536-1614), one of the busiest facing Paul V was the completion of St Peter's.
and most slapdash practitioners of the period, Once he had taken the decision to abandon
showed how to reconcile it with Federico Michelangelo's centralized plan, the pope pro-
Zuccari's academic Mannerism. Finally, Fede- ceeded with great determination. Carlo Ma-
rico Barocci's Correggiesque emotionalism must derno began the fa9ade in 1607 and the nave in
be mentioned, although he was working in 1609 and finished them both in 1612 (with the
Urbino. His pictures reached Rome at an early exception of the farthest bay at each end) [i].
date, but his influence spread even more through Shortly after (1615-16) he built the Confessio,
themany artists who came under his spell. which opens in the form of a horse-shoe before
Taken all in all, during the first decades of the the high altar under the dome. Although the
new century the tendency of the older painters pope himself supported Maderno's appoint-
of all shades was to supplant Zuccaresque and ment in spite of strong competition from less
late Tuscan Mannerism by a softer and warmer progressive architects, the decoration of the
palette and a more sensitive characterization of new building went into the hands of steadfast
figures. Caravaggio's and Annibale Carracci's Mannerists.
revolts broke into this setting at the end of the Paul V, it is true, was not responsible for the
nineties. But it must be emphasized that there decoration of the dome, consisting of trite repre-
was no immediate repercussion on papal art sentations in mosaic of Christ and the Apostles,
policy. Nor did the art of these masters appre- half-figures of popes and saints, and angels with
ciably influence the development of the older the Instruments of the Passion. This commis-
artists, although a painter Uke Cristoforo Ron- sion, for obvious reasons unrivalled in impor-
caUi (1552-1626) used a Carraccesque 'cloak' tance and by far the largest available at the turn
for his pictures at the end of his career'" and of the century, was handed over by Clement
Giovanni Baglione turned Caravaggesque for VIII to his favourite Cesare d'.\rpino in 1603.
brief moments. Moreover while Annibale's Owing to its magnitude, it was not finished
Bolognese followers entrenched themselves until 1612.'" Clement VIII also chose most of
firmly in Rome during the first two decades of the artists for the huge altarpieces, later trans-
the seventeenth century and pubHc taste shifted ferred into mosaic. Roncalli, Vanni, Passignano,
decisively in their favour away from the older Nebbia, Castello, Baglione, and Cigoli were
Mannerists, Caravaggism remained almost en- here given splendid opportunities, while neither
tirely an affâir for eccentrics, connoisseurs, and Caravaggio nor Annibale had a chance of being
artists and had run its course - as far as Rome considered.
was concerned by the time Paul V died. Paul V's principal sculptor in St Peter's was
the Milanese Ambrogio Bonvicino (t. 1552-
1622),'' the friend of Federico Zuccari and
Paul V and Cardinal Scipione Borghese as Patrons
Cristoforo Roncalli. His is the classicizing relief
A brief survey of patronage during Paul V's of Christ handing the Keys to St Peter over the
reign will help the reader to assess the com- central entrance to the church. Giovan Battista
plexities which beset the historian who tries to Ricci from Novara (1545- 1620), one of the least
define the art of the first quarter of the seven- solid maniera painters under Sixtus V, was
teenth century. Official patronage in Rome was given the honourable task of painting frescoes in
concerned with three major tasks, St Peter's, the Confessio, and he also designed the stucco
BIBLOSARTE
ROME: SIXTUS V TO PAUL V 29
I. Rome, piazza and fa9ade of St Peter's
decorations of the portico. Since elegant and official taste than the vast complex of St Peter's.
rich stucco decorations were the only field in .Almost the size of a church, the Greek-cross
which Roman Mannerists under Gregory XIII chapel with its highdome rose to the design of
and Sixtus V had shown real inventiveness and Flaminio Ponzio, who had to follow closely the
originality, Ricci here drew upon a vigorous, model of the Chapel of Sixtus V. These two
living tradition and created a work the excel- chapels, forming a kind of transept to the Early
lence of which has always been acclaimed. Christian basilica, are testimonies of the begin-
Finally, it should be mentioned that Ferra- ning and the end of an epoch. Ponzio's structure
bosco's famous clock-tower of 1 6 1 6- 1 7, "* which was completed in 16 11, but the decoration was
had to be pulled down when Bernini built his not finished until the end of 1616. Coloured
colonnades, was not an impressive example of marbles, gilding, and precious stones combine
architectural grandeur. During the time it was to give an impression of dazzling splendour
standing, it must have clashed strangely with which surpasses the harsher colour effects of
the early Baroque vigour of Maderno's facade. Sixtus's Chapel. It was Sixtus V who with his
The Cappella Paolina in S. Maria Maggiore multicoloured chapel began a fashion which
[2], which the pope resolved to build as early as remained in vogue far into the eighteenth cen-
June 1605, supplies a more coherent idea of tury. One should be careful not to explain this
BIBLOSARTE
jO rilh PtRlOD OK TRANblTlUN A NU Tilt KARIY BAROQLL
custom simply as the 'baroque' love for swagger massive and rich that it dwarfs the relatively
and magnificence. Much ofthe coloured marble small-scale sculptural decoration (3]. Com-
was taken from ancient buildings. This was an pared with their models in the Chapel of Sixtus
important part of Sixtus \ 's counter-reforma- V, these tombs show a further accretion of
tory programme of systematically transforming decorative detail, to the detriment ofthe effec-
pagan into Christian Rome. Moreover, by tiveness of the sculpture. The artists respon-
placing this sumptuous spectacle before the sible for the statues and reliefs belonged mainly
eyes of the faithful, Sixtus fulfilled the neo- to the older generation born about 1560: Silla
medieval demand, voiced by men like Molanus, da Viggiii, Bonvicino, Valsoldo, Cristoforo
that the Church, the image of heaven on earth, Stati, Nicolo Cordier, Ippolito Buzio, Camillo
ought to be decorated with the most precious xMariani, and Pietro Bernini, Gianlorenzo's
treasures in existence. Along the side walls of father. In addition, two younger artists, Stefano
the Paolina rise the enormous tombs of Clement Maderno and Francesco Mochi, were em-
VIII and Paul V with the statues ofthe popes ployed.'" In other words, practically every
surrounded by painterly narrative reliefs - all sculptor then working in Rome made some
set in a triumphal-arch-architecture which is so contribution. It is indicative of the change
2. Flaminio Ponzio: Rome,

S. Maria Maggiore, Cappella Paolina, 1605-11
BIBLOSARTE
3- Rome, S. Maria Maggiore, Cappella Paolina, Tomb of Paul V, 1608-15
BIBLOSARTE
4- Rome, S. Maria Maggiore, Cappella Paolina.
One of the pendentives and arches with frescoes by the Cavaliere d'Arpino and Guide Reni, 1610 12
BIBLOSARTE
taking place that Italians should supersede the Maderno was ordered to continue after the
Flemings who were so prominent in Sixtus's former's death in 1613.-- A number of splendid
Chapel. The Lombard element now prevailed. new rooms were ready for decoration from 16 10
In spite of the uniformity of the sculptural onwards, two of which deserve special attention :
decoration, style and quality differ; and it is the 'Sala Regia' (now 'Sala de' Corazzieri') and
probably not by chance that the most reactionary the pope's private chapel (Cappella dell'Annun-
and timid among the sculptors, Silla da Viggiu, ciata). The decorative framework of the painted
received the lion's share: to him fell the statues frieze along the walls of the Sala de' Corazzieri
ofClement VIII and Paul V. (1616-17)-' was apparently designed by Ago-

Sculpture at this moment lagged behind the stino Tassi {c. 1580-1644). Its crowded organi-
revolutionary events in painting brought about zation on the short walls reveals Tassi's late
by Caravaggio and Annibale Carracci. It is not Mannerist Florentine training, while the per-
astonishing that the schism between the old spective openings into imaginary rooms on the
guard and progressive masters like Mariani and long walls show him influenced by the North
Mochi - obvious post festum to art-historically Italian illusionism that had had a home in Rome
trained eyes - was hardly noticed in the pope's since the days of Gregory XIII. Lanfranco and
circle. But the situation in painting was vastly Carlo Saraceni were the principal executants of
different, and here the compromise character of the figures and scenes.-^ The division of hands
Paul V's policy cannot be overlooked. Charac- between the artists participating is not easily
teristically, he gave the direction of the whole established,-^ but the phenomenon is interest-
enterprise into the hands of the Cavaliere ing enough we are faced with an
: entente cordiale
d'Arpino. The Cavaliere himself painted the of a Carracci pupil and a Caravaggio follower
pendentives of the dome [4] and the lunette under the direction of a Roman who had studied
above the altar; the Florentine Ludovico Cigoli in Florence. It may be added that it was rare for
decorated the dome, and Guido Reni, possibly a Caravaggista to be considered for public fresco
on the initiative of the Cavaliere, executed ten commissions of this kind.-" Tassi himself con-
smaller frescoes in all, among them the unsatis- solidated here his reputation as a specialist in
factorily shaped lunettes flanking the windows illusionist architecture (quadratura) ; in this
(1610-12). In addition, the Florentine Passi- capacity he collaborated with Domenichino

gnano (frescoes in the sacristy),^'' and the Man- and later, above all, with Guercino.
nerists Giovanni Baglione and Baldassare Croce The main glory of the place is the Cappella
(1553-1628) were given a share, while Lan- dell'Annunciata, which was decorated between
franco joined them later.-' It is typical of one 1 609 and 1 6 1 3^^ by Guido Reni assisted by Lan-
facet of official patronage during the second franco, Francesco Albani, Antonio Carracci,
decade that all these artists. Mannerists, 'transi- and the less distinguished Tommaso Campana.
tionalists', and 'modernists', worked side by Here at last is a fully fledged co-ordinated enter-
side, and that the academic eclecticist d'Arpino prise by the young Bolognese masters. It found
topped the list. enthusiastic approval at the papal court; one
A study of the third great papal undertaking, can, however, hardly doubt that the pope's pre-
the Quirinal Palace, allows one to revise to a ference for Reni in the Quirinal as well as in S.
certain extent the impression carried away from Maria Maggiore and the Vatican-* was due to
the PaoHna. Late in 1605 the pope entrusted his Cardinal Scipione Borghese's good offices.
court architect, Flaminio Ponzio, with the en- The cardinal nephew, Paul V's favourite,
largement of the existing building, which Carlo was perhaps the most brilliant representative of
BIBLOSARTE
34 "
THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
the Pauline era. Jovial, vivacious, worldly in his

outlook, famed for his sumptuous banquets, he
invested much of his immense wealth in his
buildings, collections, and the patronage of
living artists. He was a true enthusiast and, con-
trary to the admonitions of the Trent Council,
loved art for art's sake. His rapacity was matched
by a catholicity of taste which also seems to have
been a hallmark of other aristocratic patrons of
these years. Not only a vast number of ancient
works, but also many of the finest jewels of the
present Borghese Gallery, paintings by Titian,
Raphael, Veronese, Dossi, and others, adorned
his collection; but it is more interesting in this
context that he bought with equal zest pictures
by the Cavaliere dWrpino, by Passignano,
Ggoli, Barocci, Caravaggio, Domenichino, and
Lanfranco.- ' In fact, he was one of the earliest
admirers of Caravaggio, just as he discovered at
a remarkably early period the genius of Bernini. 5. Giovan Battista Soria:
In his munificent commissions of works in Rome, S. Gregorio Magno, 1629-33
fresco, both for private and public buildings,

he showed partiality to the Bolognese, particu- on the cardinal's initiative, had executed the
larly to Guido Reni, who belonged to his house- delicate classicist renovation of S. Sebastiano
hold from 1 608 onwards, and later to Lanfranco. fuori le mura (1609-13, completed by Vasan-
But he did not hesitate to employ even feeble zio)"' [6, 7]. During his lifetime Ponzio remained
Mannerists, men hke Nicolo Pomarancio (St the family architect and in this capacity con-
Andrew Chapel, S. Gregorio .\Iagno) or the tinued the palace at which the elder Martino
latter's pupil, Gaspare Ceho (CaffareUi Chapel, Longhi had worked for Cardinal Deza and
S. Maria sopra Minerva). which Paul V had purchased shortly before he
After Ponzio's death, the architect Scipione was raised to the pontificate (February 1605).
Borghese favoured for ecclesiastical buildings Irregular in shape, the western facade, the
sponsored and paid by him was Giovan Battista longest palace front in Rome, is largely the
Soria (1581-1651), who continued an academic work of Ponzio. It follows the sombre tradition
manner far into the seventeenth century. His of the Palazzo Farnese, while the festive double-
facade of S. Maria della Vittoria (1625-7); his column courtyard (a novelty in Rome) points
masterpiece, the facade and forecourt of S. to the import of north Italian, probably Genoese,
Gregorio Magno (begun 1629) [5] and the nave
; ideas.*' The Palazzo Borghese was reserved by
of the cathedral at Monte Compatri near Rome Paul V for the use of his brothers. In addition.
(1630), were all executed for Scipione Borghese. Cardinal Scipione built for himself the present
Though not without dignity, they testify to the Palazzo Rospigliosi-Pallavicini in Piazza Monte-
latter's conservative views as far as church cavallo, begun in 1613. As in S. Sebastiano, the
architecture is concerned. Soria's architecture Dutchman \asanzio (Jan van Santen), trained
is somewhat more forceful than Ponzio's, who, as a cabinet-maker and later Ponzio's col-
BIBLOSARTE
ROME: SIXTLS V TO PALL V 35
laborator and successor as papal architect, took

over after his master's death.'- It was \ asanzio
who buih the attractive Casino ( 1 6 1 2 - 1 3 ), w hich
Antonio Tempesta, Paul Brill, Cherubino Al-
berti, Passignano, Giovanni Baglione,*^ and,
above all, Guido Reni decorated with frescoes.
.\gostino Tassi and Orazio Gentileschi painted
the ceiling of the nearby 'Casino of the .Muses'
(161 1
-12) and Ludovico Cigoli a cycle of fres-
coes in yet another casino.^* Thus this ensemble,
created for Scipione Borghese, suppHes once
again a fascinating cross-section through the
variety of tendencies existing side by side at
the beginning of the second decade.

The cardinal's enthusiasm was concentrated
on the erection of his villa on the Pincio (the
present Galleria Borghese), which he wanted
to be built by Ponzio." But once again death
interfered, and \ asanzio served as architect of
6 and 7. Flaminio Ponzio and Giovanni \ asanzio:

Rome, S. Sebastiano, 1609-13
BIBLOSARTE
the structure which rose between 161 3 and

1615. If any building, it was this villa in its
original condition that represented the quintes-
sence of its patron's taste. I'he type follows that
of the Roman villa suburbana, established a

hundred years before in Peruzzi's Farnesina.
But where Peruzzi used a classical severity,

Vasanzio covered the whole U-shaped front
with niches, recesses, classical statuary, and
reliefs [8] (much of the decoration was stripped
at the beginning of the nineteenth century) - a
late example of that Mannerist horror vacui

which had found its 'classical' expression in
Pirro Ligorio's Casino of Pius IV and Annibale
8. Giovanni Vasanzio Rome,
:
de' Lippi's Villa Medici on the Pincio. Vasanzio
Villa Borghese, 1613-15. Detail from a painting
also enlarged Martino Longhi's Villa Mondra-
gone at Frascati (1614-21)^'' for Scipione Bor-
9. Frascati, Villa Mondragone.
Garden front. Begun by M. Longhi, 1573, ghese, and it is here, in the fountains and the
continued by Vasanzio, 16 14-21 beautiful loggia [9], so often erroneously attri-
BIBLOSARTE
buted to Vignola, that his picturesque approach Piazza Scossa Cavalli and Piazza di Castello
to architecture found a new, unexpected outlet. (destroyed). None of them can compete with
Although far from exhaustive, our list of the stateliness and elegance of Maderno's mush-
works executed for Paul V and his illustrious room-shaped fountain in the Square of St
nephew is remarkable enough. But the impres- Peter's or the monumentality of Ponzio's trium-
sion of their lasting achievement as patrons of phal-arch front of the Acqua Paola (on the
the arts would be incomplete without men- Janiculum) with its cascades of gushing water
tioning the many fountains with which they (1610-14) [10].'' Ever since Sixtus V's days
embellished Rome. Fountains rose in the squares fountains had played an important part in
of S. Maria Maggiore and the Lateran, in Rome's urban development, but in contrast to
10. Flaminio Ponzio; Rome, Acqua Paola, 1610-14
BIBLOSARTE
38 • THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
the tradition of Florentine fountains with their If Caravaggio found devoted patrons among
predominantly sculptural decoration, Roman the nobility and higher clergy, it would yet be
fountains were either unadorned, consisting of incorrect to talk of a distinct faction in his
a shaft which supported a combination of basins, favour. The men who sided with him seem to
or, if placed against a wall, were architectural have been enterprising, enthusiastic, and liberal
and monumental. It is again a sign of the in their outlook. This is certainly true not only
essential unity of the period from Sixtus V to of Scipione Borghese and Vincenzo Gius-
Paul V that the approach to this problem re- tiniani, but also of Cardinal Francesco Maria
mained basically unchanged. Ponzio's Acqua del Monte, Caravaggio's earliest patron, who
Paola was merely an improved version of has been described as 'a kind of ecclesiastical
Domenico and Giovanni Fontana's Acqua minister of the arts in Rome';^" it is true of the
Felice {1587).As in so many other respects, the brothers Asdrubale and Ciriaco Mattei, who
change came only during Urban VIIFs ponti- had 'fallen victim to the fashion for Caravaggio'
ficate when Bernini broke irrevocably with this (Baglione), but at the same time patronized
Roman tradition [92]. artists like Cristoforo Roncalli and Gaspare
Celio. These last artists were also favoured by
the Crescenzi brothers, who were responsible
Caravaggio's and
for Caravaggio's getting the commission for the
Annihale Carracci's Supporters
Contarelli Chapel; and this list might easily be
The most distinguished patron in Rome after continued.
Scipione Borghese was surely the Marchese Quite different were the fortunes of Annibale
Vincenzo Giustiniani (1564 1637). As a young Carracci and his Bolognese friends and fol-
man he gave Caravaggio his unstinted support, lowers. Indeed, it is permissible in their case
and his courageous purchase of the St Mattheiv, to talk of a faction, or rather two factions,
refused by the priests of S. Luigi de' Francesi, determined to promote the Bolognese cause.
probably prevented the shipwreck of Cara- There were the Farnese, in particular the power-
vaggio's career as a painter of monumental ful Cardinal Odoardo, under whose aegis .Anni-
religious pictures. But the Marchese collected bale painted the Farnese Gallery; he remained
with equal relish works of the Bolognese""* and, unfailingly loyal to his Bolognese proteges, em-
moreover, reserved a special place in his house- ployed Domenichino and Lanfranco in the
hold for the Mannerist Cristoforo Roncalli palace, and must be credited with having col-
(called Pomarancio, 1552- 1626), who began as lected most of the sixty-odd works attributed
a pupil of the older Nicolo Pomarancio and in the Farnese inventory of 1662 to the Carracci
developed into a highly esteemed 'transitiona- and their school. The second faction was asso-
list'. It was this painter who served as Gius- ciated with the circle of Cardinal Pietro Aldo-
tiniani's counsellor in artistic matters and who brandini, Clement VIII's nephew and secretary
accompanied him in 1606 on his travels through of state, for a time the most influential man in
Italy and Europe.'' Later in Giustiniani's life Rome, and the political antagonist of Odoardo
the German Sandrart published for him his Farnese. The cardinal himself cherished the art
collection of ancient marbles [Galleria Giiis- of the Cavaliere d'Arpino. But his secretary,
tiniiini, 1 631) to which Frenchmen, Duquesnoy Monsignor Giovanni Battista Agucchi (1570-
and other Flemings as well as Lanfranco and 1632), born at Bologna, was Annibale's devoted
Domenichino's pupil Giovan Battista Ruggieri admirer and Domenichino's close friend ; to the
contributed the designs and engravings. same circle belonged Monsignor Giovanni
BIBLOSARTE
ROME: SIXTUS V TO PAUL V •
39
Antonio Massani and Francesco Angeloni, of St Luke was an anachronism even before it
Cardinal Ippolito Aldobrandini's secretary." ingloriously petered out as a result of the artists'
Both Massani and Angeloni concentrated on resistance. Both Caravaggio and .\nnibale Car-
collecting the Bolognese masters, and we happen racci derided the clever chattering about art of
to know that Angeloni possessed at least 600 which the Mannerists were so fond. The liberal-
Annibale drawings for the Farnese Gallery. It minded patrons seem to have been interested
is at once evident that the men of this coterie, in experiment and quality rather than in prin-
unlike Caravaggio's unbiased patrons, were ciples. Moreover, no important treatise extol-
guided by principles. Their single-minded ling the new ideas was published during the
partisanship was to become of ever greater first half of the seventeenth century. And yet
importance in the early seventeenth century. the flame kindled in Agucchi's circle was never
Agucchi himself tried his hand at a theoretical again extinguished. On the contrary, the clas-
treatise, his Trattato della Pittura,^- in which, sical-idealist theory, which guaranteed the dig-
among other ideas, he formulated anew the nity of painting on a level with Zuccari's
central principle of the classical doctrine, that academic eminence, was soon more or less voci-
nature is imperfect and that the artist has to ferously championed, strengthened, and stream-
improve upon her by selecting only her most lined by amateurs and artists alike. It may be
beautiful parts. This empirical, Aristotelian recalled that Domenichino sided, as one would
theory was harnessed for an attack on two fronts: expect, with the extreme classical point of view
belief in it justified stricture of the mamera by exalting disegno (line) at the expense oi' colore
painters as much as of the Caravaggisti. From (colour), and that later Francesco Albani plan-
this point of view neither the Platonic concept ned a treatise the orthodoxy of which, judging
of an a priori idea of beauty in the artist's mind from Malvasia's report, would have gone far
(Zuccari's disegno interna) nor the exact imita- beyond Agucchi's rather broad-minded exposi-
tion of imperfect nature (Caravaggio) was a tions.^^ In any case, the cognoscenti of the early
defensible position. It is interesting that this seventeenth century sided more and more
new affirmation of the classical doctrine was determinedly with the opinions of the Agucchi
written between 1607 and 161 5, just after Zuc- circle and helped to bring about the climate in
cari's Idea had appeared (1607), which in a which the ascendancy of Bolognese classicism
happy phrase has been called 'the swan song of over Mannerism and Caravaggism was secured.
the subjective mysticism of Mannerist theory'.^* This ascendancy may be gauged by a glance
Agucchi and his circle found the realization of at the list (p. 79) of important fresco cycles in
their theoretical approach - namely nature em- palaces and churches executed by the Bolognese
bellished and idealized in the art of Annibale from 1608 onwards. Especially as regards the
Carracci and Domenichino. They despised the decoration of palaces, they enjoyed almost a
older Mannerists and created the legend of monopoly during the second decade.
Caravaggio's unbridled naturalism.
More than one distinguished scholar has
The new Churches and the new Iconography
pointed out that the period around 1600
was averse to theoretical speculations.'^ The No appreciation of the vast changes that came
essential truth of this cannot be contested. The about in the artistic life of Rome from Sixtus
artists themselves became tongue-tied. Federico V's days onwards is possible without due con-
Zuccari's elaborate programme ot lectures to sideration of the hectic activity in the ecclesi-
be delivered before the newlv founded Academv astical field. Few churches had been built in
BIBLOSARTE
Rome during the first half of the sixteenth more medium-sized and small churches
saints,
century. But as the century advanced the new were erected during the three decades of Cle-
intensity of devotion in the masses required ment VIIFs and Paul V's pontificates than in
energetic measures, and, above all, the new the preceding 150 years. One need only call to
Orders needed churches to accommodate their mind S. Maria della Scala (in Trastevere, 1592),
large congregations. The beginning was made S. Nicolo da Tolentino (i 599-1614), S. Giu-
with the Gesii, the mother church of the Jesuit seppe a Capo le Case (1598, rebuilt 1628), S.
Order, rising from 1568 and consecrated in Bernardo alle Terme (1598 1600), and S. Su-
1584. With its broad single nave, short transept, sanna (fafade, begun 1597), all built during
and impressive dome this church was ideally Clement VIII's reign, or S. Maria della Vittoria
suited for preaching from the pulpit to great (1606), S. Andrea delle Fratte (1612), SS.
numbers of people. It established the type of Trinita de' Pellegrini (1614), S. Maria del Suf-
the large congregational church that was fol- fragio (1616), and S. Maria Liberatrice (1617),
lowed a hundred times during the seventeenth all rebuilt or newly raised under Paul V. To
century with only minor variations. During the this list may be added such important restora-
next decades Rome saw three more large tions as Cardinal Baronius's of SS. Nereo and
churches of this type rising, each surpassing the Achilleo,^*^ Cardinal Pietro Aldobrandini's of
,
previous one in size. In 1575 the Chiesa Nuova S. Niccolo in Carcere, and Cardinal Sfondrate's
(S. Maria in Vallicella) [135] was begun for St of S. Cecilia in the days of Clement VIII as well
Philip Neri's Oratorians by Matteo di Citta di as those of S. Francesca Romana, S. Crisogono,
Castello and continued by the elder Martino S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura, SS. Quattro Coro-
Longhi.^'' The building was consecrated in 1 599, nati, and S. Maria in Trastevere during Paul's
but Fausto Rughesi's traditional fa9ade was not pontificate. Finally, large and richly decorated
yet finished in 1605. S. Andrea della Valle, a chapels like that of Cardinal Caetani in S.
stone's throw from the Chiesa Nuova, was de- Pudenziana (1595), of the Aldobrandini in S.
signed by Giacomo della Porta (not by Pietro Maria sopra Minerva (1600-5), of Cardinal
Paolo Olivieri) for the Theatines, whose Order Santori in the Lateran (begun before 1602), and
had been founded during the early years of the of the Barberini in S. Andrea della Valle (1604-
religious strife (1524).^' Begun in 1591, the 16) show that the first families of Rome com-
building was taken over by Carlo Maderno in peted in adding lustre to old and new churches.
1608 and completed in 1623 except for the In spite of solid and worthy achievement,
fa9ade. Finally, a second vast Jesuit church, the masters of the period here under review
S. Ignazio, was planned after the founder's on the whole lack initiative, inventiveness, and
canonization and begun in 1626. The canoniza- a spirit of adventure. It seems to have been hon
tion of St Charles Borromeo in 16 10 was im- ton in those years not seriously to infringe estab-
mediately followed by the dedication to him of lished patterns. Thus a cloud of anonymity, if
no less than three churches in Rome: the very not of dullness, hangs over much ecclesiastical
large S. Carlo al Corso, S. Carlo ai Catinari, work of the time. One wonders how a Bernini,
built for the Barnabites, a congregation founded a Cortona, or a Borromini would have solved
at Milan in 1533, and the small S. Carlo alle the problem of the large congregational church
Quattro Fontane, which the Discalced Trini- if such an opportunity had been offered them.
tarians later replaced by Borromini's structure. In any case, the great masters of the post-
In addition to these new buildings, owed to Pauline era found stirring, imaginative, and
the counter-reformatory Orders and the new highly personal solutions for traditional ecclesi-
BIBLOSARTE
astical tasks. The change effected during Urban and Holofernes), on models of repentance (St
VIITs pontificate is no less revolutionary in Peter, the Prodigal Son), on the glory of martyr-
this than in other respects. dom^" and saintly visions and ecstasies, or on
All the immense work of construction going hitherto unexplored intimate events from the
on in the last decades of the old century and childhood of Christ. These remarks indicate
the first of the new required decoration by that one can truly talk about a counter-
painters, sculptors, stucco workers, and crafts- reformatory iconography.^"
men. As a rule, the direction remained in the The rise of the new iconography may be ob-
hands of the architect. In the case of the Aldo- served from the last two or three decades of the
brandini Chapel in S. Maria sopra Minerva sixteenth century onwards, but it must be
(begun 1600, consecrated 161 Giacomo della
1), stressed that in Rome the vast majority of the
Porta and, after his death, Carlo Maderno filled great cycles of frescoes, in the Gesu, S. Andrea
this post. But they were no more than the primi della Valle, S. Carlo al Corso, the Chiesa Nuova,
inter pares in co-ordinating the works of the S. Ignazio, S. Carlo ai Catinari, and elsewhere
painters Barocci {Last Supper, altar) and Cheru- were painted after the first quarter of the seven-
bino .'Mberti (vault) and of the sculptors Camillo teenth century. In other words, the decoration
Mariani, Nicolo Cordier, Ippolito Buzio, Val- of these churches belongs to a stylistic phase
soldo, and Stefano Maderno. Collective enter- later than the buildings themselves. The reason
prises became the rule from Sixtus V to the end lies, partly in any case, in the time-lag between
of Paul V's pontificate, even though the artists the early activities of the new Orders and the
engaged on the same task often held very dif- canonization of their founders. But this is not
ferent views. This trend was reversed under the whole story. It was, for instance, in keeping
Urban VIII. Chapels such as those of the with the early austere 'iconoclastic' tendencies
Raimondi and Cornaro families show through- that St Philip Neri wanted the walls of the
out the imprint of Bernini's master-mind: co- Chiesa Nuova whitewashed,''' the same walls
workers were assistants rather than artists in which half a century later were covered with
their own right. Pietro da Cortona's exuberant decorations.
The new churches confronted painters in Moreover, although it is true that one can hardly
particular with a prodigious task. They had not expect representations of the apotheoses of
only to cover enormous wall-spaces with fres- saints before they are canonized, the climate
coes but had, above all, to create a new icono- under Clement VIII and Paul V was not favour-
graphical tradition. Saints like St Charles Bor- able to the 'deification' in pictures of the great
romeo, St Ignatius, St Francis Xavier, and St men of the Counter-Reformation. As we have
Teresa had to be honoured ; their lives, miracles, mentioned, the popes themselves ordered the
and worldly and spiritual missions had to be most meticulous inquiries into the cases of the
solemnized. In addition, in the face of the prospective saints and the processes dragged on
Protestant challenge, the dogmas of the Catholic over many years. It is also important to notice
Church had to be reasserted in paintings which that, as a rule, there is a considerable difference
would strengthen the belief of the faithful and in the representation of the saints between the
grip their emotions. Finally, as regards many earlier phase and the later. In pictures of the
scenes from the Old and New Testaments and second decade, such as those by Orazio Bor-
from the lives of the saints, a shift was needed gianni (S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, Rome)
away from tradition towards an emphasis on [25], Orazio Gentileschi (S. Benedetti, Fab-
heroic exemplars (David and Goliath, Judith riano), or Carlo Saraceni (S. Lorenzo in Lucina,
BIBLOSARTE
42 •
Rome), the saints may be shown in a state of art of the .Middle Ages to the primarily secular
devotion and ecstasy, and in this exalted frame art of modern times was accomplished during
of mind they may see visions to which the the seventeenth century. There is truth as well
beholder becomes a party. But rarely do they as fallacy in this statement. It is fallacious to
appear soaring up to heaven or resting on clouds believe that an equation exists between the
in the company of angels, presupposing, as it degree of naturalism and realism - in themselves
were, that the entire image is the beholder's highly problematical notions - and the profane
visionary experience [216]. character of works of art. Verisimilitude is no
Such scenes belong High Baroque, and
to the synonym for irreverence. Although the logic
for size and grandeur alone they establish a new of this statement is unassailable, whether or not
artistic convention. When this happened, the the beholder will regard the art of the seven-
great reformers had been dead for at least two teenth century as a truly religious art depends
generations, and it is evident even without any on his own, partly subconscious, terms of refer-
further comment that nothing could be more ence. But it cannot be denied that the largest
averse to the spirit in which they had worked. part of artistic production during the period
No doubt is possible, then, that the Counter- under review is of a religious nature. By com-
Reformation made necessary a specific counter- parison the profane sector remains relatively
reformatory iconography ; nor that the icono- insignificant. This is correct, even though after
graphical pattern of the early seventeenth cen- Annibale Carracci's Farnese ceiling classical
tury changed to a certain extent during the mythology and history become increasingly im-
post-Pauline period. But can one also talk of a portant in the decoration of palaces. In this
specific counter-reformatory style.' Summariz- respect Paul V's reign reveals an undeniable
ing what has been indicated in the foregoing affinity with the Roman High Renaissance.
pages,we may conclude that, of course, the These observations may now be given more
Church made use of various artistic manifesta- substance. It was in the years around 1600 that
tions and stylistic trends which in turn were not a long prepared, clear-cut separation between
independent of the religious temper of the age. ecclesiastical and secular art became an estab-
In the coexistence of 'classical' reticence and lished fact. Events in Rome hastened this divi-
'vulgar' pomp one may be able to discern two sion for the whole of Italy . Still fife, genre scenes,
different facets of counter-reformatory art. But and self-contained landscapes begin to evolve
above and beyond all this, it seems possible to as species in their own right at this historical
associate a distinct style with the spirit of the moment. None of these remarkable develop-
reformers: a style which reveals something of ments takes place without the active participa-
their urgency and enthusiasm, of their direct- tion of northern, mainly Flemish, artists.^-
ness of appeal and mystic depth of conviction. Rome, of course, was not the only Italian city
Since this is a matter concerning all Italy, a where northern influence made itself felt. It
more explicit verdict must be postponed until may suffice to recall Florence, Bologna, and
the development of painting in the provinces Genoa. Yet many northern artists were magi-
has been surveyed (p. 109). cally drawn to Rome, and Rome became the
international meeting place where new ideas
were avidly exchanged and given their charac-
The Evdiulion of the 'Genres'
teristically Italian imprint.
It is often said that a significant step in the slow The new species aroused such interest that
and persistent shift from the primarily religious even a man of Cardinal Federico Borromeo's
BIBLOSARTE
romk: si XT is \ to hall \
43
stern principles was rriuch attracted by such rate, regarded landscape painting as a pleasant
'trifles' as landscapes and still lifes. We arc recreation from the more serious business of
choosing him as an example because his case 'high art'. This was precisely how an artist like
illustrates that around 1600 a collector had to .•\nnibale Carracci felt. Exclusive specialization
turn to Rome for specimens of the new genres. in the lower genres was therefore left to the
It is well known that the cardinal owned Cara- foreigners. These remarks, of course, apply also
vaggio's Basket of Fruit (now Ambrosiana, to still life and the popular genre.
Milan); he admired, moreover, the art of Paul In spite of their theoretical approach, the
Brill and Jan Bruegel, both of whom he be- contribution of Italians to the development of
friended and whose works figured prominently the genres in the early years of the seventeenth
in his collection at Milan. Whenever he stayed century was not negligible. The popular genre
in Rome he visited Brill's studio,"' and on one had a home in Bologna and was cultivated by
occasion at least, in 16 11, Giovan Battista Cre- the Carracci rather than by Caravaggio. Al-
scenzi acted as intermediary between artist and though working with essentially Mannerist
patron. The correspondence reveals that Cre- formulas, the pupil of the Fleming Stradanus,
scenzi, the supervisor of Paul V's official artistic .Antonio Tempesta (1555- 1630), who spent
enterprises and thus a great power in matters most of his working life in Rome, became instru-
of taste, had an eye for the qualities of Brill's mental in creating the realistic battle-piece and
seascapes. hunting-scene. In Caravaggio's circle the de-
Paul Brill, the younger brother of the less tailed realism of the Flemish fruit and flower
important Mattheus, held a key position in the still life was to a certain extent stylized and
process of assimilating Flemish landscape paint- replaced by a hitherto unknown fullness of
ing in Italy.^^ His early Flemish manner changed vision." But during the period with which we
considerably, first under Muziano's and later are at present concerned all this was still in its
under Annibale Carracci's influence. Thus beginnings.'''"
monumentalized and italianized, his landscapes Only after the first quarter of the seventeenth
and seascapes became part of the broad stream century do we find that Italians are devoting
of the Italian development. They lead on to themselves wholly to the practice of the specia-
Agostino Tassi's seascapes^ and "*
finally to those lized genres, that the market for these adjuncts
of Claude. to high art grows by leaps and bounds, and that
It is true that landscape painting had emerged each speciality is further subdivided into dis-
as a specialized branch during the second half tinct categories. Foreigners again had a vital
of the sixteenth century. Italians of the six- share in this process. The most patent case is
teenth and seventeenth centuries admitted the that of landscape painting the : names of Poussin
'genre' as legitimate, probably not uninfluenced and Claude are forever associated with the full
by the prominence Pliny gave to the work of flowering of the heroic and pastoral landscape.
the Roman landscape painter Studius.^'' But But it was left to the Italian Salvator Rosa to
from Alberti's days on the noble art of history establish the landscape type which the eigh-
painting had pride of place in the hierarchy of teenth centurv called 'sublime'.
values, and Italians, for the time being at any
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 2
CARAVAGGIO
Caravaggio, in contrast to Annibale Carracci, When he first reached Rome, he had had to
is usually considered a great revolutionary. earn his living in a variety of ways. But hack-
From the mid seventeenth century onwards it work for other painters, among whom was per-
has indeed become customary to look upon haps the slightly older Antiveduto Gramatica
these two masters as being in opposite camps: (1571-1626)," left a youth of his temperament
the one a restorer of time-honoured tradition, and genius thoroughly dissatisfied. For a short
the other its destroyer and boldest antagonist. time he also worked for Giuseppe Cesari (later
There is certainly some truth in these charac- the Cavaliere d'Arpino) as a studio hand,*" but
terizations, but we know now that they are soon started on his own. At first unsuccessful,
much too sweeping. Caravaggio was less ot an his fortunes began to change when Cardinal
anti-traditionalist and Annibale Carracci more Francesco del Monte bought some of his pic-
of a revolutionary than was believed for almost seems that through the agency of this
tures.' It
300 years.' same prince of the Church he was given, in

Michelangelo Merisi, called Caravaggio, was 1599, his first commission for a monumental
born on 28 September 1573 in the small town work, the paintings in the Contarelli Chapel of
of Caravaggio, south of Bergamo. Before the S. Luigi de' Francesi [15]. This event appears
age of eleven he was apprenticed in Milan to in retrospect as the most important caesura
the mediocre painter Simone Peterzano and in Caravaggio's career. From then on he pro-
stayed with him for about four years. Peterzano duced almost exclusively religious paintings in
called himself a pupil of Titian, a relationship the grand manner. With these data at hand,
not easily revealed by the evidence of his Late the brief span of Caravaggio's activity may con-
Mannerist work.- One has no reason to doubt veniently be divided into four diff"erent phases
that in this studio Caravaggio received the 'cor- first, the Milanese period ; even though paint-
rect' training of a Mannerist painter. Equipped ings of this period will probably never be dis-
with the current knowledge of his profession, covered, it is of great consequence not only
he reached Rome
about 1590 and certainly not because of the conventional training with Peter-
later than 1592.' His life there was far from zano, but also because of the lasting impressions
uneventful. Perhaps the first consistent bohe- "made on him by older North Italian masters
mian, he was in permanent revolt against such as Savoldo, Moretto, Lotto, and the
authority, and his wild and anarchic character brothers Giulio and Antonio Campi; secondly,
brought him into more than one conflict with the first Roman years, about 1590-9, during
the police.^ In 1606 he had to flee from Rome which Caravaggio painted his juvenilia, for the
because of a charge of manslaughter. During most part fairly small pictures consisting, as a
the next four restless years he spent some time rule, of one or two half-figures [11]; thirdly,
at Naples, Malta, Syracuse, and Messina. On the period of monumental commissions for
his way back to Rome he died of malaria in Roman churches, beginning in 1599 and ending
July 1610, not yet thirty-seven years old. with his flight from Rome in 1606;'* and finally.
BIBLOSARTE
46 •
the work of the last four years, again mainly for examples are legion showing the sitter address-
churches and done in a fury of creative activity, ing the beholder, as it were, from behind a
while he moved from place to place. table or parapet. What, then, is remarkable
A comparison between an early Roman and about this picture.^ Wine and wreath apart,
a post-Roman work [i i and 14] gives the mea- there is little that is reminiscent of the god of
sure of Caravaggio's surprising development. antiquity. His gaze is drowsy, his mouth soft
His uninhibited genius advanced with terrific and fleshy; white, overfed, and languid, he
strides into uncharted territory. If we had only holds the fragile glass with a dainty gesture.
his earliest and his latest pictures, it would be This well-groomed, pampered, lazy androgyne,
almost absurd to maintain that they are by the static like the superb still life on the table, will
same hand. To a certain extent, of course, this never move or ever disarrange its elaborate
is true of the work of every great master; but coifture and its precious pose. Contemporaries
in Caravaggio's case the entire development may have looked upon this interpretation as
was telescoped into about eighteen years. In mythological heresy," which was not Cara-
fact, between the paintings shown in illustra- vaggio's invention either. It originated in the
tions II and 14 there may not be more than era of Mannerism when artists began to play
thirteen years. so lightly with mythological themes that the
Not unexpectedly, the biographical caesuras ancient gods could even become objects of
coincide with the vital changes in his style, but derision.'- But the Bacchic paraphernalia of
these changes have too many ramifications to Caravaggio's picture should not be regarded
be described by a purely formal analysis. Much asmere supercilious masquerade: he chose the
more may be learned about them by inquiring emblems of Bacchus to express his own sybaritic
into his approach to mythological, genre, and mood. When Bronzino represented Andrea
religious subjects and by focusing on the char- Doria as Neptune, he conveyed metaphorically
acter and meaning of his realism and his tene- something about the admiral's mastery of the
broso, the two pillars on which his fame rests. sea. Caravaggio's disguise, by contrast, makes
Contrary to what is often believed, genre scenes sense only as an appropriate support to an
play a very subordinate part in Caravaggio's emotional self-revelation. The shift from the
production. They seem even more marginal statement of an objective message to the indica-
than mythological and allegorical** themes and, tion of a subjective mood adumbrates a new
may it be noted, almost all the non-religious departure the importance of which hardly needs
pictures belong in the first Roman years. In stressing.'*
contrast to genre painting, mythologies and The sitter's dissipated mood is also clearly
allegories clearly indicate an artist's acceptance expressed by the key in which the picture is
of a learned tradition ; and it cannot be suffi- painted: bright and transparent local colours
ciently emphasized that we find the young Cara- with hardly any shadows are set off against the
vaggio working within this tradition, of his own shining white of the mass of drapery. The
accord. It is fair to assume that in the Uffizi colouristic brilliance is combined with an extra-
Bacchus [11] he represented himself in mytho- ordinary precision and clarity of design and a
logical disguise.'" scrupulous rendering of detail, particularly in
Mythological or allegorical portraiture has, the vine leaves of the wreath and the still life
of course, a pedigree leading back to Roman of fruit on the table. '^ No atmosphere sur-
times. Nor is the attitude of the sitter here new rounds the figure; colour and light do not create
in the history of portraiture. On the contrary. space and depth as they do in Venetian painting.
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO •
47
II. Caravaggio: Bacchus, c. 1595. Florence, Uffizi
Depth, in so far as it can be visualized, is sug- described, but in none of them are the tones so
gested by foreshortenings such as those of the glassy, the whites so penetrating, and the pink
arm and hand holding the wine-glass. Other of the flesh so obscene. Colours and tone values
early pictures by Caravaggio may be similarly .
clearly sustain the precious mood of the picture.
BIBLOSARTE
48 •
At this period Caravaggio's method ot stressing reads a romantic narrative the special attraction
individual forms with local colour is as far re- of which consists in its air of unreality.
moved from the practice of Venetian colourism It has been mentioned before that from 1599
as it is indeed from the elegant and insipid onwards by far the greater part of Caravaggio's
generalizations of the Mannerists. On the other activity was devoted to religious painting, and
hand, a marked Mannerist residue is perceptible henceforth very considerable changes in his
in the Bacchus, not only in such details as the approach to his art are noticeable. These changes
folds and the flaccid bare arm, but, above all, may here be observed in a cabinet picture, the
in the pervading quality of stylization, which National Gallery Supper at Emmaus (c. 1600)
proves that the old catchword of Caravaggio's [12].'' Only the rich still life on the table links
realism should be used with caution, particu- the picture to his early Roman period. But, as
larly in front of the early Roman works. Soon if his youthful escapades were forgotten and
after the Bacchus, Caravaggio again represented eradicated, suddenly and unexpectedly Cara-
himself in a mythological disguise, but this time vaggio reveals himself as a great painter of
appropriately expressing his own frenzy through religious imagery. The change is marked not
the horrifying face of Medusa (Florence, Uffizi). only by a revision of his palette, which now turns
The simple fact that he painted the picture on dark, but also by a regression to Renaissance
a round wooden shield proves his awareness of exemplars. Compositionally the work derives
traditional literary associations, and those who from such representations of the subject as
quote this work as an extreme example of his Titian's Supper at Emmaus in the Louvre,
realism unpermissibly divorce the content from painted about 1545. In contrast, however, to the
the form. Nor is the formal treatment really solemn stillness in Titian's work, the scene is
close to nature, as anyone who tries to imitate here enacted by means of violent gestures -
the pose will easily discover. This image of intense physical reactions to a spiritual event.
terror has the power to 'petrify' the beholder Christ is deeply absorbed and communicates
just because it is unrealistic and reverts to the the mystery through the slight bending of His
old expressive formula of classical masks of head and His downcast eyes, both accompanied
tragedy.'^ by the powerful language of the blessing hands.
Similarly, Caravaggio's few genre pieces can The sacramental gesture of these hands takes
hardly be called realistic. Like other Italian on an added emotional significance through
artists of the period, he was indebted to Nor- their juxtaposition to the lifeless legs of the
therners who had long practised this branch of chicken on the table. The incomprehension of
art and had begun to invade the Italian market the inn-keeper is contrasted with the reaction
in the later sixteenth century. But if their genre of the disciples who recognize Christ and ex-
painting, true to the meaning of the word, press their participation in the sacred action by
shows anonymous people following their every- rugged, almost compulsive movements. In
day occupations, it must be said that neither keeping with the tradition stemming from W-
Caravaggio's Card-Sharpers nor his Fortune- berti and Leonardo, Caravaggio, at this stage
TelUr reflect fresh observations of popular con- of his development, regarded striking gestures
temporary life. Such slick and overdressed as necessary to express the actions of the mind.
people were not to be found walking about and ; With Caravaggio the great gesture had an-
the spaceless settings convey a feeling of the other distinct meaning; it was a psychological
tableau vivant rather than of 'snapshots' of device, not unknown in the history of art,'** to
actual life.'*' One looks at these pictures as one draw the beholder into the orbit of the picture
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO "
49
12. Caravaggio: Supper at Emmaus, 1600.

London, National Gallery
and to increase the emotional and dramatic foreshortened body of the saint in the Conver-
impact of the event represented : for Christ's sion of St Paul in S. Maria del Popolo [13] and
extremely foreshortened arm as well as the out- the jutting corner of the Stone of Unction in
flung arm of the older disciple seem to break the Vatican Deposition, which is echoed by
through the picture plane and to reach into Joseph of .\rimathea's elbow.'"
the space in which we stand. The same purpose Towards the end of his Roman period Cara-
is served by the precarious position of the fruit- vaggio painted a second Supper at Emmaus
basket which may at any moment land at our (Milan, Brera). Here he dispensed with the
feet. In his middle period Caravaggio often still life acessories on the table and, even more
used similar methods in order to increase the significantly, with the great gestures. The pic-
participation of the worshipper in the mystery ture is rendered in a much less dramatic key and
rendered in the picture. Special reference may the silence which pervades it foreshadows a
be made to the first version of the St Matthew trend in his post-Roman work.
and the Angel painted for the Contarelli Chapel, In the works of the middle period Caravaggio
where the saint's leg appears to jut right out takes great pains to emphasize the volume and
of the picture, or to the second version with one corporeal solidity of the figures, and sometimes,
leg of the stool dangling over the ledge into packs them so tightly within the limits imposed
the beholder's space; and also to the extremely bv the canvas that thev seem almost to burst the
BIBLOSARTE
(rame (13]. In other paintings of this period, pictures, by contrast, figures tend at first glance
however, a tendeno^ is stressed that was already tomerge into an almost amorphous mass. .\s
noticeable in a few of the early pictures, namely one would expect, traditional gestures are
the creation of a laree spaceless area above the abandoned and emotions are expressed by a
fisrures. an emptiness which Caravaggio ex- simple folding of the hands, by a head held
ploited with tremendous psychological eftect. pressed between the palms or bowed in
Not only is the physical presence of the figures silence and sorrow. When ample gestures are
more \igorously felt by contrast with the un- used, as in the Raising of Lazarus, they are not
relieved continuum, but the latter may e\en borrowed from the stock of traditional rhetoric,
assume svinboUc significance as in the dillttis as were the upraised hands of the .Mary in the
of St Mjtihco'. where darkness lies menacingly Deposition or the extended arms of St Paul in
over the table around which St Matthew and the Conversion [13]. The spread-out arms of
his companions sit. In the majority of the p>osi- Lazarus at the moment of awakening have no
Roman pictures the relation of figures to space parallel in Italian painting.
changes in one direction, the most telling In his early pictures, Caravaggio often created
examples being the S\Tacuse Bunal of St Lui) an atmosphere of peculiar still life i>ermanency.
and the Messina Raising ofLazarus[i4].^ Here During the middle period he preferred a tran-
the deeply disturbing and oppressive quahty of sitory moment, stressing the dramatic climax of
the void is rendered more acute by the devalu- an event, as in the first Supper at Emmaus. the
ation of the individual figures. Following Italian Judith killing Nolo femes (Rome. Casa Coppi).
tradition, during the middle period each single and the Coniersion ofSt Paul. In the late period,
figure was sharply indi\idualized ; in the late the drama is often transposed into a sphere of
13 (Iffl^. Caravaggio: Conversion of St Paul,

1 600- 1. Rome. S. Maru del Popolo. Cerasi Chapel
14 ( opposite J . Caravaggio: Raising of Lazarus,

1608-9. -îesstna, .Museo Sazwnale
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
ghost-likc unreality. Although in a picture like arrangement. In this respect, perhaps none of
the Naples Flagellation oj Christ no real action his monumental works is more indebted to the
is shown and the hangmen do not strike, as was past than the MartyrJniu of St Matthew [15]. In
the rule in the iconographical tradition, the this work he used to a considerable extent the
scene is more cruel and infinitely more gripping Mannerist repertory of repoussoir figures to-
and Christ's suffering even more poignant than gether with compositional devices and refine-
in any previous rendering ot the subject in Italy. ments which were becoming rare at this moment
Many of Caravaggio's pictures of the middle in Rome.-- The type of composition with the
period are tied to tradition not only in their figures revolving, as it were, round a central
language of expressive gesture and in their pivot is dependent on works like Tintoretto's
iconography,-' but even in their compositional St Mark rescumti a Slave, while the group of the
15. Caravaggio: Martyrdom of St Matthew, 1599.

Rome, S. Luigi de Frances!, Cnntarelli Chapel
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO •
53
executioner, saint, and frightened acolyte is emotional impact he wished to convey. This
hoTTOVtxdirom'l hrin\l)i(ilh i>J St Peter Martyr tendency is already noticeable in the early
(destroyed). It is not unlikely that the present Miisnal Parly, and is much more in evidence
composition, painted over an entirely diHereni in the works after 1600. In one of the most
earlier one, was a concession forced upon Cara- striking pictures of this period, the Conversion
vaggio by the difficulties which he encountered of St Paul, it is impossible to say where the
during the work in the C-ontarelli Cihapel. Ihis saint's lower right leg would be or how the
explanation is also suggested by the unique attendant's legs can possibly be joined to his
occurrence in his (n'lnrc of an angel appearing body. Later, in the post-Rt)man works, he was
from heaven upon clouds. Clouds were the on occasions quite reckless, and nowhere more
traditional emblem to be used for the repre- so than in the Seven Horks ofMercy, one of his
sentation of visions and miracles: Caravaggio most moving and powerful pictures. The mean-
never admitted them, with this one exception. ing of this procedure becomes patently clear in
Whenever he had to show angels, he robbed the Burial oj St Luey. By enormously exaggerat-
them of those soft props which by no stretch of ing the size of the grave-diggers, sinister and
the imagination can support a figure of flesh obnoxious creatures placed painfully close to
and blood in the air. the beholder, and by representing them out of
Most of the later Roman works are much all proportion to the scale of the mourners only
more severely constructed than the Martyrdnm a few steps further back, the brutality and
of St Mat I hew, witness the Deposition of Christ senselessness of the crime are more convin-
or the Death of the Vtrjiin. But the post-Roman cingly exposed than could ever have been done
paintings are by comparison even more austere, by a 'correct' distribution of figures in space.
and their compositions are reduced to a seem- All these observations lead one to conclude
ingly artless simplicity. Reference may be made that Câravaggio progressively abandoned work-
to the solid triangle of figures in the Messina ing from life models and that his post-Roman
Adoration of the Shepherds, the closely packed pictures, above all, were to a large extent painted
group of figures in the Lazarus, or the hieratic from memory. This is also supported by the fact
symmetry of the coactors in the Decapitatioti of that no drawings by Caravaggio survive. He

St John. must, of course, have drawn a good deal in
Looking at his early work in particular, one Peterzano's studio, but he seems to have re-
may be inclined, as generations have been, to versed .Mannerist procedure once he was on his
regard Caravaggio as an artist who renders what own. Compared with the Renaissance masters,
he sees with meticulous care, capturing all the late .Mannerists neglected studies from nature;
idiosyncrasies of his models. Caravaggio him- they used stock poses for their preparatory
self seems to have spread this legend, but we designs and cartoons. It may be surmised that
have already seen how little it corresponds to Caravaggio, by contrast, made many incidental
the facts. .Moreover, apart from his recognizably sketches from nature, which one would not
autograph style, he developed what can only be expect to survive, but dispensed with any form
called his own repertory ot idiomatic formulas of cumbersome preparation for his paintings. In
for attitudes and poses, the recurrent use of fact it is well known that he worked alia prima,
which was surely independent of any life straight on to the canvas, and this is the reason
model.-' In addition, he sacrificed by degrees whv his pictures abound in pentimenti, which
the interest in a logical disposition and rational can often be discovered with the naked eye. This
co-ordination of the figures in favour ot the procedure, admirably suited to his mercurial
BIBLOSARTE
54 THE PKRIOD Ol TRANSITION AND THE EARI.V UAROQLE
temperament, makes for directness and im- falls on them, models them, and gives them a
mediacy of contact between the beholder and robust three-dimensional quality. .\x first one
the picture, whereas distance and reserve are may be inclined to agree with the traditional
the obvious concomitants of the 'classical' view that his lighting is powerfully realistic; it
method'^ of arriving at the finished work by seems to come from a definable source, and it
slow stages. has even been suggested that he experimented

Caravaggio's ad hoc technique stemmed from with a camera ohscura. Further analysis, how-
a Venetian tradition, but in Venice, where pre- ever, shows that his light is in fact less realistic
paratory drawings w ere never entirely excluded, than Titian's or Tintoretto's. In Titian's as later
this 'impressionist' approach to the canvas had in Rembrandt's pictures light and darkness are
two consequences which seem natural : it led to of the same substance; darkness only needs
a painterly softening of form and to an emphasis light to become tangible; light can penetrate
on the individual brush-stroke. In Caravaggio's darkness and make twilight space a vivid ex-
work, however, the forms always remain solid, perience. The Impressionists discovered that
his paint is thin, and consequently the brush- light creates atmosphere, but theirs is a light
stroke is hardly perceptible. In his middle period without darkness and therefore without magic.
it begins to be more noticeable, particularly in With Caravaggio light isolates; it creates neither
the highlights, while in his post-Roman pictures space nor atmosphere. Darkness in his pictures
two new conflicting tendencies are apparent. is something negative; darkness is where light
On the one hand, forms harden and stiffen, and is not, and it is for this reason that light strikes
bodies and heads may be painted with little upon his figures and objects as upon solid, im-
detail and few transitions between light and penetrable forms and does not dissolve them,
dark - resulting in near-abstractions. Certain as happens in the work of Titian, Tintoretto, or
passages in the Seven Works of Mercy illustrate Rembrandt.
this trend very fully. Side by side with this The setting of Caravaggio's pictures is usually
development can be found what is, by compari- outside the realm of daily life. His figures occupy
son, an extremely loose technique: the face of a narrow foreground close to the beholder.
Lazarus, for example, is rendered by a few bold Their attitudes and movements, their sudden
brush-strokes only. Instead of the careful foreshortenings into an undefined void, heighten
definition of form still prevalent during the the beholder's suspense by giving a tense sen-
middle period, or the daring simplification and sation of impenetrable space. But despite, or
petrifaction of form in certain post-Roman because of, its irrationality, his light has power
works, one is faced in the Raising of Lazarus to reveal and to conceal. It creates significant
with shorthand patterns symbolizing heads, patterns. The study of a picture like the Doria
arms, and hands. St John the Baptist of about 1600,-'' which de-
Little has so far been said about the most rives from the nudes of the Sistine ceiling, will
conspicuous and at the same time the most clarify this point. The pattern created by light
revolutionary element of Caravaggio's art, his and darkness almost gainsays the natural articu-
tenebroso. With his first monumental commis- lation of the body. Light passages radiate from a
sions he changed from the light and clear early darker centre like the spokes of a wheel. Thus
Roman style to a new manner-' which seemed by superimposing a stylized play of light and
particularly suitable to religious imagery, the shade over the natural forms, an extraneous
main concern during the rest of his life. Figures concept is introduced which contradicts .Michel-
are now cast in semi-darkness, but strong light angelo's organic interpretation of the human
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO 55
body. Caravaggio used wheel-patterns of light narrative method. Language was far in advance
in some of the multi-figured compositions of of the visual arts. Seventeenth-century painters
his later Roman years, for instance the Martyr- caught up with it. \ painter like Cigoli was well
dom of Si Miittlu'w, the Crucifixion of St Peter, able to render St Francis's psycho-physical
and the Death of the Virgin. A glance at the reactions [42]. But although he made true in his
illustration of the Martyrdom [15] suffices to painting the sensation described by Bonaven-
see that the abstract pattern of light is given tura, he was still tied to the traditional descrip-
precedence in the organization of the canvas. It tive method : for the vision itself is shown
is the radiating light that firmly 'anchors' the bathed in heavenly light breaking through the
composition in the picture plane and, at the clouds. It must be remembered that the ecstasy
same time, singles out the principal parts of of vision is a state of mind to which no outsider
dramatic import. In pictures of the middle is admitted; it is perception and revelation
period the areas of light are relatively large and inside one man's soul. This was the way Cara-
coherent and coincide with the centre of interest. vaggio interpreted visions from the very begin-
In the late pictures darkness engulfs the figures ning. InhisEcstasyofStFrancisot'uhout 1595-'
flashes and flickers of light play over the surface, he showed the saint in a carefully observed
heightening the mysterious quality of the event state of trance one eye ; is closed ; the other, half
depicted. This is nowhere more striking than in open, stares into nothingness and the body,
the Raising of Lazarus, where heads, pieces of uncomfortably bent backward, seems tense and
drapery, and extremities break through the stiff. Mystery is suggested by the glimmer of
surrounding darkness - a real-unreal scene over light breaking through the dark evening sky.
which broods an ineffable sense of mystery. The invisible is not made visible, but we are
From the very beginning of Christian imagery allowed to wonder and to share a wide scope ; is
light has been charged with symbolism. God's left for the imagination. It is the light alone that
presence in the Old Testament or Christ's in the reveals the mystery, not light streaming down
New is associated with light, and so is Divine from the sky or radiating from the figure of
Revelation throughout the Middle Ages, whe- Christ. The mature Caravaggio drew the last
ther one turns to Dante, Abbot Suger, or St consequences. In his Conversion of St Paul he
Bonaventura. Although from the fifteenth rendered vision solely on the level of inner
century onwards light is rendered naturalistic- illumination. Light, without heavenly assist-
ally and even atmospherically, particularly in ance, has the power to strike Saul down and
Venice, it never loses its supernatural connota- transform him into Paul, in accordance with
tion, and the Baroque age did not break with the words of the Bible : 'Then suddenly there
this tradition. Nevertheless, painters of religious shone round about him a light from Heaven
imagery were always faced with the seemingly and he fell to the earth and heard a voice say
insoluble problem of translating visions into unto him : Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou
pictorial language. Describing St Francis's me.'' Paul, eyes closed, mouth open, lies com-
stigmatization, St Bonaventura says 'when the pletely absorbed in the event, the importance of
vision had disappeared, it left a wonderful glow which is mirrored in the moving expression of
in his [St Francis's] heart'. Giotto was quite the enormous horse.
incapable of translating the essence of these By excluding a heavenly source, Caravaggio
words into pictorial language. He and many sanctified light and gave it a new symbohc
after him had to express the human experience connotation. One may return to the study of his
of mystical union with God by a descriptive. symbolic use of light in the Calling of St
BIBLOSARTE
56 •
Matthew, where Christ stands in semi-darkness St Charles Borromeo in Milan and St Philip
and the wall above him shines bright, while a Neri in Rome as well as in St Ignatius's Spiritual
beam ol light falls on those who, still under the Exercises.-' Like these reformers, Cara\aggio
large shadow of darkness, are about to be con- pleaded through his pictures for man's direct
verted. It is precisely the antithesis between the gnosis of the Divine. Like them he regarded
extreme palpability of his figures, their closeness illumination by God as a tangible experience on
to the beholder, their uncomeliness and even a purely human level. It needed his genius to
vulgarity - in a word, between the 'realistic' express this aspect of reformed religion. His
figures and the unapproachable magic light that humanized approach to religious imagery
creates the strange tension which will not be opened up new territory; for his work
a vast
found in the work of Caravaggio's followers. is a milestone on the way to the representation
It has been shown in the first chapter that of those internalized 'private' visions which his
Caravaggio had devoted patrons among the own period was still unable and unwilling to
liberally minded Roman aristocracy. And yet, render.
his large religious pictures were criticized or The aversion of the people to his truly popular
refused with almost clockwork regularity.-"* The art is not the only paradox in Caravaggio's life.
case of the Death ofthe Virgin throws an interest- In fact the very character of his art is paradoxical,
ing Hght on the controversy which his works and the resulting feeling of awe and uneasiness
aroused and the fervour of the partisanship. It may have contributed to the neglect and mis-
was rejected by the monks of S. Maria della understanding which darkened his fame. There
Scala, the church of the Discalced Carmelites; is in his work a contrast between the tangibility
but Rubens, at that time in Rome, enthusiastic- of figures and objects and the irrational devices
ally advised his patron the Duke of Mantua to of light and space; between meticulous study
acquire the painting for his collection. Before it from the model and disregard for representa-
left Rome, however, the artist enforced a public tional logic and coherence; there is a contrast
exhibition and great crowds flocked to see the between his ad hoc technique and his insistence
work. Caravaggio's opponents, it seems, were on solid form between

; sensitivity and brutality.
mainly recruited from the lower clergy and the His sudden changes from a delicacy and tender-
mass of the people. They were disturbed by ness of feeling to unspeakable horror seem to
theological improprieties and offended by what reflect his unbalanced personality, oscillating
appeared an irreverent treatment of the holy between narcissism and sadism. He is capable
stories and a lack of decorum. They were of dramatic clamour as well as of utter silence.
shocked to find their attention pinpointed by He violently rejects tradition but is tied to it in a
such realistic and prominent details as the dirty hundred ways. He abhors the trimmings of
feet in the St Matthew and the Madonna di orthodoxy and is adamant in disclaiming the
Loreto or the swollen body of Mary in the Death notion that supernatural powers overtly direct
of the Virgin. Only the cognoscenti were able to human affairs, but brings the beholder face to
see these pictures as works of art. face with the experience of the supernatural.
It is a paradox that Caravaggio's religious But when all is said and done, his types chosen
imagery, an art of the people for the people, was from the common people, his magic realism
heartily distrusted by the people; for it can and light reveal his passionate belief that it was
scarcely be denied that his art was close in spirit the simple in spirit, the humble and the poor
to that popular trend in Counter-Reformation who held the mysteries of faith fast within their
religion which was so marked in the activity of souls.
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 3
THE CARRACCI
At the beginning of the last chapter it was noted eenth centuries still regarded as the finest flower
that it is still customary to see Caravaggio and of art and the supreme test of a painter's com-
Annibale Carracci as the great antagonists in petence. This approach, which was deeply
Rome at the dawn of the seventeenth century. rooted in their theoretical premises and histori-
The differences between them are usually cal background, was detrimental to the fortunes
summed up in pairs of contrasting notions such of the easel-painter Caravaggio. It helped, on

as naturalism-eclecticism, realism-classicism, the other hand, to raise Annibale Carracci to his
revolt-traditional. This erroneous historical exalted position, for, next to Raphael's Stanze
conception has grown over the centuries, but and Michelangelo's Sistine Ceiling, his frescoes
before the obvious divergencies to be found in in the Farnese Gallery were regarded until the
their art hardened into such antithetical patterns, end of the eighteenth century as the most im-
contemporaries believed that the two masters portant landmark in the history of painting.
had much in common. Thus the open-minded And now that we are beginning to see rule
collector and patron Marchese Vincenzo Gius- rather than freedom in Caravaggio's work, we
tiniani, who has often been mentioned in these are also able once again to appreciate and
pages, explained in a famous letter' that, in his assess more positively than writers of the last
view, Caravaggio, the Carracci, and a few others 150 years- the quality of Annibale's art and his
were at the top of a sliding scale of values, historical mission. Once again we can savour
because it was they who knew how to combine those virtues in Annibale's bold and forthright
in their art maniera and the study from the 'classicism' which were inaccessible to the in-
model maniera being,

: as he says, that which the dividualist and 'realist' Caravaggio.
artist 'has in his imagination, without any One must study Annibale's artistic origins
model'. Vincenzo Giustiniani clearly recognized and see him in relation to the other painters in
the maniera in Caravaggio and also implied by his family in order to understand the special
his wording that the mixture of maniera and circumstances which led up to the climax of his
realism (i.e. work done directly from the model) career in the frescoes of the Farnese Gallery.
was different in Caravaggio and the Carracci. Among the various attempts at reform during
Even though our terminology has changed, we the last decades of the sixteenth century Bologna
are inclined nowadays to agree with the opinions soon assumed a leading position, and this was
of the shrewd Marchese. due entirely to the exertions of the three Car-
Nevertheless it was, of course, Annibale Car- racci. Agostino (i 557-1602) and Annibale
racci and not Caravaggio who revived the time- (1560- 1 609) were brothers; their cousin Lodo-
honoured values in Italian art and revitalized vico ( 1 555- 16 19) was their senior by a few years.
the great tradition manifest in the development It was Lodovico without any shadow of doubt
of painting from Giotto to Masaccio and on to who first pointed the way to a supersession of
Raphael. Caravaggio never worked in fresco. the complexity, sophistication, and artificiality
But it was monumental fresco-painting that of Late Mannerism. In the beginning the three
educated Italians of the seventeenth and eight- artists had a common studio, and during the
BIBLOSARTE
58 •
early period of their collaboration it is not nerism, give his work a distinctly down-to-
always easy to distinguish between their works.
*
earth quality; by comparison. Central Italian
After 1582 they opened a private 'academy', High Renaissance paintings appear cold and
which had, however, a quite informal character. remote. Annibale's rich and mellow palette de-
This active school, in which special emphasis rives from Correggio and the Venetians. These
was laid on life drawing, soon became the masters rather than Raphael were from the be-
rallying point of all progressive tendencies at ginning of his career his consciously elected
Bologna. At the same period,
' in the early 1 5805, guides in the revolt against contemporary Man-
the personalities of the three Carracci become nerism. The Virgin with St John and St Cath-
more clearly defined, and from about 1585 erine is, in fact, the first picture in which Anni-
onwards a well-documented series of large altar- bale's turn to a Central Italian type of composi-
pieces permits us to follow the separate develop- tion is evident.

ments of Annibale and Lodovico. x\gostino, a Individual motives prove that even at this
man of considerable intellectual accomplish- important moment Annibale was more indebted
ments, was primarily an engraver and also, so it to North than to Central Italian models: the
seems, a devoted teacher with a real knack of figure of St Catherine borrowed from Vero-
is
communicating the elements of his craft.' As a nese, the medallion on the throne from Correg-
painter he attached himself to Annibale rather gio's throne in the Virgin with St Francis (Dres-
than Lodovico. It is, therefore, justifiable to den), and the Child resting one foot on His
concentrate on the two latter artists and begin Mother's foot from Raphael's Madonna del
with a study of some of their fully developed Cardellino (Louvre). These models were used
Bolognese works as a springboard to a correct almost undisguised, for everyone to see. At this
assessment of the pre-Roman position. juncture it may be asked whether such a picture
Annibale's Virgin with St John and St Cath- is a sterile imitation, an 'eclectic' mosaic selected
erine of 1593 (Bologna, Pinacoteca) [16]'' im- from acknowledged masterpieces. The reader
mediately calls to mind works of the Central hardly needs to be reminded that until fairly
Italian High Renaissance of 1510-15. Three recently the term 'eclectic' was liberally em-
powerfully built figures are joined by the com- ployed to support the condemnation of post-
positional device of the triangle, well known Renaissance art in general and that of the Car-
from High Renaissance paintings, and are racci in particular; nor has this designation
placed in front of a simple and massive classical disappeared from highly competent specialized
architecture. Moreover the contrapposto is ex- studies.' If the term 'eclecticism' implies the
tended from governing the unit of each figure to following of not only one but more than one
determining the greater unit of the whole, for and even many masters, Annibale, like so many
the two saints, left and right of the central axis, artists before and after him, availed himself of a
form balanced contrasts. This is the composi- traditional Renaissance method; a method
tional method first practised by Leonardo and advocated, for instance, by Leonardo as the
followed by Raphael, Fra Bartolommeo, and proper road to a distinguished style. This pro-
other High Renaissance masters. Also the firm cedure came into disrepute only with the adula-
stance and the clear, unequivocal gestures and tion of the naivete of genius in the Romantic
expressions of Annibale's figures are reminiscent era." If 'eclecticism' is used, however, as a term
of early sixteenth-century Florentine art. But to expose a lack of co-ordination and trans-
Annibale's deep, warm, and glowing colours, formation of models - and in this sense it may
replacing the pale, often changeant hues of Man- justifiably be used - then it does not fit the case
BIBLOSARTE
i6. Annibale Carracci: The Virgin with St John and St Catherine, 1593. Bol(it;na, Pinacoteca
BIBLOSARTE
6o •
under review; for, like every great artist, Anni- Bolognese works continued to be pre-eminently
bale did create something entirely new from his Venetian right to his departure from Bologna;
models: he wedded Correggiesque sfumato and he moved away from Correggio towards solidity
warm Venetian tone values to the severe compo- and clear definition of attitudes and expressions
sitional and figure conceptions of the Central and towards an impressive structural firmness
Italian High Renaissance, while at the same of the whole canvas.
time he gave his figures a sculptural quality and His cousin Lodovico turned in a different
palpability which will be sought in vain during direction. A study of his Holy Family with St
the High Renaissance, but which conform to Francis of 1591 (Cento, Museo Civico) [17]
the seventeenth-century feeling for mass and makes this abundantly evident. The basic con-
texture. ception of such a picture has little in common
Some of the steps by which Annibale arrived with Titian, as a comparison with the latter's
at this important phase of his development may Pesaro Madonna may show. The principal group
be retraced. The Crucifixum of 1583 (Bologna, recurs in both pictures: the Virgin on a high
S. Niccolo) illustrates his Mannerist beginnings. throne with St Joseph beneath and St Francis
Two years later, in the Baptism of Christ who recommends with a pleading gesture the
(Bologna, S. Gregorio), the Correggiesque donors in the right-hand corner. Yet how
quality cannot be overlooked, although formallv different is the interpretation! The mere bulk
and colouristically Annibale is here still strug- and weight of Lodovico's figures make his work
gling against the older conventions. After that different in essence from any Renaissance paint-
date he surrenders increasingly to Correggio's ing. Moreover, St Joseph and St Francis have
colour and emotional figure conceptions. This exchanged places, with the result that, in con-
development may be followed from the Parma trast to Titian's work, the relation between the
and Bridgewater House Lamentations over the donors, St Francis, and the Virgin runs zigzag
Body of Christ (the latter destroyed) to the across the picture. Lodovico's figures are deeply
Dresden Assumption of the Virgin of 1587. From engaged and their mute language of gestures
then on, Titian and Veronese begin to replace and glances is profoundly felt - very different
Correggio, with important consequences: from Titian's reserve as well as from the cold
Titian's dramatic colour contrasts replace the correctness of the Mannerists. It is precisely
lighter Parmese tonality, and Venetian com- this emphasis on gesture and glance that strikes
posure and gravity Correggio's impetuous sen- a new note St Francis's eyes meet those of the
:
sibility. To assess this change, one need only Virgin and emotions quiver; the mystery of
compare the Assumption of 1592 (Bologna, Divine Grace has been humanized, and this is
Pinacoteca) with the earlier versions of the same also implied in the spontaneitv' of the Child's
subject. But already the Dresden Virgin with St reaction. All the registers are pulled to draw the
John, St Francis, and St Matthew of 1588 was beholder into the picture. He faces the Virgin,
essentially Venetian, as the asymmetrical, Vero- as does St Francis - indeed, he can imagine him-
nese-like composition immediately reveals. self kneeling directly behind the saint; the close
None the less Correggio's grace and charm per- viewpoint helps to break down the barrier
vade the picture, and it must be said at once that between real and painted space and, at the same
in spite of his reduced influence, the Correg- time, the strong sotto m su ensures that the
giesque component remained noticeable even \ irgin and Child, in spite of their nearness,
in Annibale's Roman years. The trend of his remain in a world removed from that of the
development is clear: the character of his late beholder. Titian, by contrast, has done every-
BIBLOSARTE
17 Lodovico Carracci: The Holy Family with St Francis, 1591. Cento, Museo Civico
BIBLOSARTE
62 •
THF. PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
thing to guarantee the inviolability of the picture never forgetting of course that there is in their
plane and, coinpared with Lodovico's, his work that close affinity which we have noticed,
figures show the restraint and aloofness of a cult and that I am, therefore, stretching the terms
image. beyond their permissible limits. But with this
Although for the sheer volume of the figures proviso it may be said that Lodovico at the
and the immediacy of their presence the two beginning of the nineties had evolved a painterly
cousins form here in the early nineties what Baroque manner in contradistinction to Anni-
might be called a 'united Seicento front', the bale's temperate classicism. Although pictures
spirit informing Annibale's art is closer to that of such importance as the MaJaniia det Bargellini
of the Renaissance masters than to Lodovico's, of 1588 and the Preaching of St John of 1592
for Annibale lacks Lodovico's intense emotion- (both Pinacoteca, Bologna) are essentially Vene-
alism. It is only to be expected that their tian with Correggiesque overtones - in the St
approach to colour would also be fundamentally John he followed Veronese for the composition
different. Annibale, conforming to the Renais- and Tintoretto for the light - Lodovico's whole
sance tradition, used light and shade, even in trend in these years is towards the colossal, the
his most painterly Bolognese works, primarily passionate, dramatic, and heroic, towards rich
to stress form and structure. Lodovico, on the movement and surprising and capricious light
other hand, created patterns of light and dark effects ; in a word, away from Venice and towards
often independent of the underlying organic the style of Correggio's fresco in the dome of
form; and he even sacrificed clarity to this Parma Cathedral. The principal document of
colouristic principle. One need only compare this tendency is the Transfiguration of 1593
the right knee and leg of the Virgin in illustra- (Bologna, Pinacoteca) pictures like the dramatic
;
tions i6 and 17 to see how decisively Annibale's Conversion of St Paul of 1 587-9, the Flagellation
and Lodovico's ways part. It is evident that and Crowning with Thorns of 1594-5 (^H three
Lodovico owed much more than Annibale to the Bologna, Pinacoteca), even the ecstatic St
study of Tintoretto, in whose pictures one finds Hyacinth of 1594 (Louvre), illustrate this Baro-
those brilliant and sudden highlights, that que taste. To a certain extent, therefore, Lodo-
irrational flicker which conveys emotion and a vico and Annibale after their common Mannerist
sense of mystery. The basic quality of classic beginnings developed in different directions.
art, namely clear definition of space and form, With advancing age, however, and after the
meant very little to an artist steeped in this departure of his cousins from Bologna, Lodo-
painterly tradition. It is characteristic of this vico's work became by degrees retrogressive,
approach that foreground stage and background and some of his late pictures show a return to
scenery are often unrelated in Lodovico's patently Mannerist principles.' With some
pictures; in the Cento altarpiece [17] the colon- signal exceptions, there was at the same time a
nade looks like an added piece of stage property, notable decline in the quality of his art. The
and the acolyte behind St Francis emerges from better pictures of this period, like the Meeting of
an undefined cavity. Such procedure frequently St Angelas with St Dominic and St Francis, the
makes the 'readability' of Lodovico's settings Martydom of St Angelas, and St Raymond walk-
elusive. ing over the Sea (all three 1608-10,'" Bologna,
For the sake of clarity, we may now define Pinacoteca and S. Domenico), appeal by the
the difference between Annibale and Lodovico depth of mystical surrender and by their linear
as that between the Classical and the Baroque, and decorative grace ; his failures show a studied.
BIBLOSARTE
THE CARRACCI •
63
superficial classicism, mask-like expressions, before Agostino's arrival. On the ceiling and in
tired gestures, and a veneer of elegant sweet- the lunettes he painted scenes from the stories
ness." Lodovico's sense for decorative patterns, of Hercules and Ulysses, which have, in accor-
his emotionalism, and above all his painterly dance with contemporary taste, not only a
Baroque approach to colour and light contained mythological but also an allegorical meaning:
potentialities which were eagerly seized on by they illustrate the victory of virtue and effort
masters of the next generation, particularly by over danger and temptation.'- The decorative
Lanfranco and Guercino; taken all in all his framework in which the stories are set is still
influence on the formation of the style of the dependent on North Italian models, in particu-
younger Bolognese masters cannot be over- lar on the monochrome decorations in the nave
estimated. But it was mainly his earlier manner of Parma Cathedral; but in the structure of the
up to about 1600 which attracted them, while mythological scenes and in the treatment of
his less satisfactory later manner had often an individual figures the impact of Rome begins to
irresistible appeal to minor masters who were be noticeable. It was fully developed in the
directly or indirectly dependent on him, such Gallery of the same palace, the decoration of
as Francesco Brizio (1574- 1643), Lorenzo Gar- which began in 1597 and may not have been
bieri (1580- 1654), and even Reni's pupil Fran- completely finished until 1608.''
cesco Gessi (1588- 1 649). It is then evident that The hall of about 60 by 20 feet has, above the
Lodovico was not the man to lead painting back projecting cornice, a coved vault which Anni-
to classical poise and monumentality. Such bale was asked to decorate with mythological
qualities were, however, manifest in Annibale's love scenes chosen from Ovid's Metamorphoses
work of the 1590s and were even implicit in his [18]. It has been made probable that Cardinal
pictures of the 1 580s. It was therefore more than Farnese's librarian, Fulvio Orsini, wrote the
mere chance that he, rather than Lodovico, programme for the ceiling'^ and that in the final
accepted Cardinal Odoardo Farnese's invitation stages Annibale's learned friend, Monsignor
to come to Rome to paint monumental frescoes Giovan Battista Agucchi, may have acted as
in his palace. adviser.'^ The theme is the power of all-
With Annibale's departure in 1 595 the com- conquering love, to which even the gods of
mon studio broke up. Two years later .Agostino antiquity succumb. In contrast to the emble-
followed him, leaving Lodovico alone in matic character of most Mannerist cycles of
Bologna. During his ten active years in Rome, frescoes the programme of this ceiling is centred
between 1595 and 1605, Annibale fulfilled the on mythology, and Annibale painted the stories
promise of his late Bolognese work he became : with such vigour and directness that the be-
the creator of a grand manner, a dramatic style holder is absorbed by the narrative and enter-
buttressed by a close study of nature, antiquity, taining spectacle before his eyes rather than
Raphael, and Michelangelo. It was this style, distracted by the less obvious symbolical and
equally admired by such antipodes as Poussin moralizing imphcations.'*" In this joyful and
and Bernini, on which the future of 'official' buoyant approach to classical antiquity a return
painting depended for the next 1 50 years. w ill be noticed to the spirit of Raphael's Cupid
Annibale's first work in the Farnese Palace and Psyche frescoes in the Farnesina.
was the decoration with frescoes of a compara- It was precisely at the moment when Caravag-
tively small room, the so-called Camerino gio began his career as a painter of monumental
Farnese, executed between 1595 and 1597, religious pictures that Annibale turned to
BIBLOSARTE
monumental mythologies on an unprecedented For the organization of the whole work Anni-
scale. And just as Caravaggio found a popular bale experimented with a number of possibili-
idiom for religious imagery, Annibale perfected ties. He rejected simple friezes, suitable only
his highly civilized manner to cater for the refor rooms with flat ceihngs, a type of decoration
fined taste of an exclusive upper class. The very used by him and his collaborators in the Palazzi
fact that his patron, a Prince of the Church and Fava and Magnani-Salem at Bologna. Other
one, moreover, who bore that family name, Bolognese reminiscences,'' however, were to
surrounded himself with frescoes of this nature have a more lasting influence, namely the
is indicative of a considerable relaxation of Ulysses cycle in the Palazzo Poggi (now the
counter-reformatory morality. The frescoes University), where Pellegrino Tibaldi had com-
convey the impression of a tremendous yo/V de bined pictures painted like easel-paintings with
vivre, a new blossoming of vitality and of an figures in the corners of the ceiling perspec-
energy long repressed. tively foreshortened for the view from below.
BIBLOSARTE
65
1 8. Annibale Carracci
The Farnese Gallery, begun 1597. Frescoes.
Rome, Palazzo Farnese
This is a combination first found in Raphael's gnesePopeGregory XIII (1572-85) summoned

Logge in the Vatican,"* which were, of course, Tommaso Laureti and Ottaviano Mascherino
well known to Annibale. Illusionist architec- from Bologna to paint in the Vatican Palace,
tural painting ( quadratiira ), aimed at extend- quadratura gained a firm foothold in Rome. It
ing real architecture into an imaginary space, had its most resounding triumph in Giovanni
had existed ever since Peruzzi had 'opened up' and Cherubino Alberti's decoration of the Sala
the Sala delle Colonne in the Villa Farnesina Clementina in the Vatican, executed between
about 1 5 16, but it was not until the second half 1596 and 1598, that is exactly when Annibale
of the sixteenth century that quadratura on began his Farnese ceiling.'" Quadratura was
ceilings really came into its own. Bologna, dt then the last word in wall- and ceiling-painting,
scienze maestra (Bellori), was the centre of this sanctioned, moreover, by the highest papal
practice, which required an intimate knowledge authority. Annibale, however, decided not to
of the theory of perspective. When the Bolo- use pure quadratura but to follow the Palazzo
BIBLOSARTE
66 •
19. Annibale Carracci: Polyphemus.

Farnese Gallery [cf. 18]
Poggi type of mixed' decoration. Like Tibaldi, the four corners and supported all round the
he painted the mythological scenes as cpiadri room by a carefully-thought-out system of
riportati, that is, as if they were framed easel herms and atlantes [19]. It is this whole frame-
pictures transferred to the ceiling, and incor- work, together with the sitting youths handling
porated them in a quadrature framework. His garlands, that is foreshortened for the view-
decision to use quadri npartati for the principal point of the spectator. Since all this decoration
scenes was slmost certainly influenced by is contrived as if it were real - the seated youths
Michelangelo's Sistine ceiling, but he was of flesh-and-blood colour, the hermsand atlantes
doubtless also convinced that the mythological of simulated stucco, and the roundels of simu-
representation, as belonging to the highest class lated bronze - the contrast to the painted pic-
of painting,-" should be rendered objectively tures in their gilt frames is emphasized, and the
and in isolating frames. Thus, although Anni- break in consistency therefore strengthens
bale's ceiling is much more complex than rather than disrupts the unity of the entire ceil-
Raphael's Logge or libaldi's Ulysses cycle, it ing. The crowding within a relatively small
remains in the same tradition of compromise space of such great variety of illusionist painting,
solutions. the overlapping and superimposition of many
Annibale devised a quadratura framework elements ofthe over-all plan, logical and crystal-
consisting of a large cornice fully visible only in clear and nowhere ambiguous as it would surely
BIBLOSARTE
THE CARRACCI •
67
(t^r5C3PW^™*5 V-'-^Mft'lBP)
20.Annibale Carracci The Triumph of Bacchus

;
and Ariadne. Faniese Gallery [cf. 18]
be in a similar Mannerist decoration, the subtle retained something of the classical relief charac-
build-up from the corners towards the centre - ter, while individual figures can be closely
all this gives this work a dynamic quality quite paralleled by classical types. On the other hand,
different from the steady rhythm and compara- the fresco has a flowing and floating movement,
tive simplicity of Michelangelo's Sistine ceiling, a richness and exuberance which one would
to which Annibale evidently owed so many of seek in vain either in antiquity or in the High
his constituent ideas. There is here, moreover, Renaissance. The composition strikes a balance
for the first time a noticeable continuity leading between firm classical structure and imagina-
on from the real architecture of the walls to the tive freedom ; it consists of two crowded groups
painted decorative figures of the ceiling, and which rise gently from the centre of the two
this contributes perceptibly to the dynamic sides, and the caesura between them is bridged
unity of the entire Gallery. by a maenad and a satyr following the beat of the
The centre of the ceiling is dominated by the tambourine with an impetuous dance. The
largest and most elaborate composition in the Bacchic retinue is compositionally enlivened
scheme, the Triumph of Bacchus and Ariadne and same time held together by the undu-
at the
[20]. Surviving drawings show how closely lating rhythm of the flying cupids and by the
Annibale had studied Bacchanalian sarcophagi; telling conlrappostn of the satyr and nymph
in fact, the train of revellers in the fresco has below, reclining figures which have a framing as
BIBLOSARTE
well as a space-creating function. This richness dating from the early 1590s (Bologna, Pina-
ot compositional devices heralds a new age. coteca). His complete conversion to Annibale's
Each single figure retains a statuesque solidity Roman manner is evident in the Parma frescoes,
unthinkable without a thorough study and which display a somewhat metallic and frozen
understanding of classical sculpture, and Anni- classicism. His premature death in 1602 pre-
bale imparted something ot" this sculptural vented the completion of this work.-'
quality to his many preparatory chalk drawings. One other aspect of the I'arnese ceiling should
Nevertheless these magnificent drawings remain here be stressed. In his preparatory work Anni-
at the same time close to nature, since, true to bale re-established, after the Mannerist inter-
the traditions of the Carracci 'academy', every lude, themethod of Raphael and Michelangelo.
single figure was intensely studied from life. It Many hundreds of preparatory drawings must
is this new alliance between naturalism and have existed, of which a fair number survive,
classical models - so often in the past a life- and in these every single part of the ceiling was
giving formula in Italian art, but with what studied with the greatest care. Annibale handed
different results! - that accounts for the bois- down to his school this Renaissance method of
terous vitality of Annibale's Roman manner. slow and systematic preparation, and it is prob-
His classical style, full-blooded and imaginative ably not too much to say that it was mainly
and buttressed by a loving study of nature, through his agency that the method remained
keeps the beholder at a certain distance, how- in vogue for the following 200 years. It broke
ever, and he always remains conscious of a noble down only in the Romantic era, when it was felt
reserve. Clearly, Annibale's was a classical re- that such a tedious process of work hampered
vival that contained many potentialities. From inspiration.
it a way led to Poussin's pronounced classicism Annibale's development in Rome was rapid,
as well as to the freedom of Rubens and the High and the few years him at the beginning of
left to
Baroque. On the other hand, Annibale's com- the new century were crowded with important
bination oi qiiadratura and the qiiadro riporlato works. Again, the fate and careers of Caravaggio
had only a limited following. The broad current and Annibale run strangely parallel. At about
of the Italian development turned towards a the time Caravaggio fled from Rome, never to
complete illusionist spatial unification. return, Annibale retired from life stricken by a
During the execution of the Gallery, Anni- deep melancholia, and during his last years
bale had the help of his rather pedantic brother hardly touched a brush.-'' In his later canvases
Agostino for three years (1597 1600).-' Con- we can follow a progressive accretion of mass
temporary sources attribute to him the two and sculptural qualities coupled with a growing
large frescoes of Cephaliis and Aurora and the economy in the compositions.-" The Assumption
so-called Galatea,-- and this is borne out by the of the Virgin of 1601 for the Cerasi Chapel in S.
cool detachment of these paintings, which lack Maria del Popolo is a characteristic work of his
the brio and energy of Annibale's manner. In fully developed Roman manner [21]. Here for
1600 Agostino fell out with his brother, left the first and only time Annibale and Caravaggio
Rome, and went to Parma, where he decorated worked on the same commission, and the visitor
with mythological scenes a ceiling in the Palazzo to the chapel naturally lets his eye wander from
del Giardino for the Duke Ranuccio Farncse.-' one master to the other. In such a comparison
Agostino's earlier manner may best be studied Annibale's Assumption may appear tame and
in his carefully constructed, strongly Venetian even laboured, but it is worth observing that,
masterpiece, the Comtntinion of St Jerome, just as in Caravaggio's Conversion of St Paul
BIBLOSARTE
THE CARRACCl 69
the Paris Laineiitatiou, are reminiscent of clas-

sical tragedy. Contemporaries realized that
.Annibale was deeply concerned w ith the .Aristo-
telian problem (Poetics, 17) which, since Al-

berti's days, had taken up a central position in
any consideration of the highest classof painting,

namely how to represent in an appropriate and
forceful visual form the ajjetti, the emotions of
the human soul. Annibale had neither the theo-
retical mind of an Albert! nor the experimental
passion of a Leonardo; he was, in fact, opposed
to theorizing and a man of few words. But he
sensed, as it were intuitively, the temper of the
age, and in his concern for the telling use of
gestures and expressions one has no difficulty in
recognizing a new rationalist spirit of analysis.
To base the rendering of the affetti on rational
and generally valid findings became an import-
ant preoccupation of seventeenth-century art-
ists. Poussin learned his lesson from Annibale,
and the same problems were later submitted to
philosophical analysis by Descartes in his
Passions de I'Ame of 1649.

A new sensibility characterizes the seven-
teenth century, and this manifests itself not only

21. Annibale Carracci:
in what may appear to us nowadays as the con-
The Assumption of the Virgin, 1601.
Rome, S. Maria del Pupolu. Cerasi Chapel ventional language of rhetoric, but also in highly
charged subjective expressions of feeling, grief
[13] and his Cnictfixwn of St Peter, it is the over- and melancholy. The rational medium of design
powering bulk of Annibale's figures that domi- gives conventional gestures an objective quality,
nates the canvas. In spite of this triumph of the while the irrational medium of colour adds to
massive sculptural figure, Annibale's Assump- conveying those intangible marks which are not
tion shows that he never forgot the lesson learnt readily translatable into descriptive language.
from Titian and Correggio. By fusing Venetian The early Roman Bacchus playing the Lute to
colour with Roman design, a painterly ap- Silenus (London, National Gallery) exemplifies
proach with classical severity of form, Anni- very well this important element in Annibale's
bale demonstrated in practice - as was correctly oeuvre. There is an atmosphere of melancholy
seen in his own day-' that these old contrasts, pervading this little picture, and this is due to
about which so much ink had been spilt in the wonderfully rich Titianesque evening sky
theoretical discussions of the sixteenth century, casting a sombre mood over the wide deserted
were no longer irreconcilable. landscape behind the figures. Characteristically,
In their measured and heroic expressions this mood is transmitted through the landscape,
many of Annibale's late pictures, such as the and, as in Venice, landscape always plays an
London Domme Qiio Vadts, the Naples Piet a, or important part in Annibale's canvases as a foil
BIBLOSARTE
70 THE PKRIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
22. Annibale Carracci: The Flight into hgjpt, c. 1604. Rome, Galleria Dana-Pamphili
against which to set oft and underline a picture's landscape - and by the trees to the right in the
prevailing spirit.-*" Considering this Venetian middle distance; nor is the position of the Holy
evaluation of the landscape element, it is not Family fortuitous: the group moves forward
strange to find pure landscapes early in Anni- protected, as it were, by the firm lines of the
bale's career. castle above it and, in addition, it is placed at
His first loosely constructed landscapes, the meeting points of two spatial diagonals
peopled with huntsmen and fishermen (Louvre), formed by the sheep and the river; thus figures
are essentially Venetian. But in accordance with and buildings are intimately blended with the
the general trend of his development and under carefully arranged pattern of the landscape.
the impression, it would seem, of the severe This is neither Nature untouched and wild
forms of the Campagna, Annibale in Rome re- where the role of man shrinks into insignificance
placed the freedom and rusticity of his early - as in the landscapes of some contemporary
landscapes by carefully constructed landscape northern artists working inRome, above all
panoramas. The most celebrated example of Paul Brill and Jan Bruegel nor is it on the other
this new landscape style is the lunette with a hand the fairy-lands which Elsheimer created
Flight into Egypt (Rome, Galleria Doria- in his Roman years; instead it is a heroic and
Pamphih) [22], dating from about 1604.-' An aristocratic conception of Nature tamed and
integral part of these panoramas is always the ennobled by the presence of man. It was Anni-
work of man castles and houses, turrets and bale's paintings of ideal landscapes that pre-
bridges, severely composed of horizontals and pared the way for the landscapes of Domeni-
verticals and placed at conspicuous points in the chino and Albani, of Claude and Poussin.
landscape. The architectural motif in the centre Annibale's grand manner of the Roman years
of the Doria Flight into Egypt is framed by a may rightly be regarded as his most important
cluster of large trees in the left foreground - achievement, but the formal side of his art had
such trees become de rigueiir in this type of an interesting counterpart of informality. Both
BIBLOSARTE
THE CARRACCI 71
Annibale and Agostino had an intimate, genre- two or three years before Caravaggio's Bacchus
like idiom at their disposal. This, it seems, in the Uffizi [i ij. Compared with it, Annibale's
found expression more often in drawings than painting strikes one as 'impressionist' and pro-
in pictures, although a number of genre paint- gressive ; it is, moreover, genre pure and simple.
ings do exist and many more must have existed, It is clear from contemporary sources - in the
judging from contemporary notices. A picture first place from Malvasia, the biographer of
like the Butcher's Shop at Christ Church, Bolognese artists - that the two Carracci
Oxford, makes it evident that the Carracci at brothers regarded nothing as too insignificant
Bologna had come in contact with, and were or too uninteresting to be jotted down on paper
deeply impressed by, northern genre painting on the spur of the moment. They were tireless
in the manner of Pieter Aertsen."' Annibale's draughtsmen and their curiosity was unlimited.
homely portrait sketch in oil of a smiling young They had an eye for the life and labours of the
man (Rome, Galleria Borghese) and, above all, common people, for the amusing, queer, odd,
the half-length of a Man with a Monkey looking and even obscene happenings of daily hfe, and
for lice in his master's hair (Uffizi) [23] illustrate something of this immediacy of approach will
the trend with an admirable and entertaining also be noticed in their grand manner. But with
candour. This last picture was probably painted these two idioms, the official and the unofficial,
at their command, a duality was possible which
would have been unthinkable in the age of
Raphael. By being able to work simultaneously
on two levels, the Carracci reveal a dichotomy
which from then on became more and more
pronounced in the work of great artists and
culminated in the dual activity or aspirations of
a Hogarth or a Goya.
It is not at all astonishing that this mentality
predestined the Carracci to become the origi-
nators of modern caricature: caricature, that is,
in the pure sense, as a mocking criticism of other

people's shortcomings. It is well attested that
Annibale was the inventor of this new form of
art." The caricaturist substitutes a primitive,
timeless technique for the established conven-

tions of draughtsmanship, and an uninhibited
personal interpretation for the objective render-
ing of reality which was the principal require-
ment of the Renaissance tradition. The artist who
23. Annibale Carracci: Man with a Monkey, was acclaimed as the restorer of that tradition
before 1595. Florence, Uffizi also forged dangerous weapons to undermine it.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 4
CARAVAGGIO'S FOLLOWERS
AND THE CARRACCI SCHOOL IN ROME
Annibale Carracci alone had a school in Rome painters Orazio Gentileschi { 1 563- 1 639' ) stands
in the accepted sense of the term. Not only were out. Next to him artists like Antiveduto Grama-
he and the other members of his family good tica (1571-1626) and Giovanni Baglione (c.
teachers, but his art, particularly his Roman 1573- 1 644) are of only marginal interest. The
manner, lent itself to being taught. The founda- most important younger artists were Orazio
tion of the school was, of course, laid in the Borgianni (1578 or earlier- 1616), Bartolomeo
Bolognese 'academy', and his young pupils and Manfredi {c. 1 587- 1620/ 1),- Carlo Saraceni
friends who followed him to Rome arrived (1579'- 1620), Giovanni Battista Caracciolo
there well prepared. Caravaggio on the other (d. 1637), Giovanni Serodine (1600-30), and
hand, a bohemian, turbulent and uncontrolled, Artemisia Gentileschi (1593-r. 1652), apart
never tried to train a pupil, nor indeed could he from a host of northerners, among whom the
have done so since the subjective qualities of his Italo-Frenchman Valentin (1594- 1632) should
style, his improvisations, his ad hoc technique, here be mentioned.
his particular mystique of light, and his many These names make it at once apparent that
inner contradictions were not translatable into Caravaggio's manner was taken up by painters
easy formulas. Yet, what he had brought into with very different backgrounds, traditions, and
the world of vision was a directness, a power of training. Few among them were Romans;
immediate appeal that had an almost hypnotic Gentileschi, for example, came from Pisa,
fascination for painters, so that even Carracci Saraceni from Venice, Manfredi from near
pupils and followers fell under his spell at Mantua, and Serodine from Ascona. In con-
certain stages of their development. Moreover, trast to the Bolognese followers of the Carracci
generations of painters inside Italy and even who shared a common training and believed in
more outside her confines sought inspiration similar principles, these artists never formed a
from his work. Nevertheless when one contem- homogeneous group. Caravaggio's idiom was a
plates the life and art of Caravaggio and of kind of ferment giving their art substance and
Annibale, the pattern of the development in direction for a time; but with most of them it
Rome during the first quarter of the seventeenth was like a leaven not fully absorbed and which
century seems almost a foregone conclusion. was to be discarded when they thought fit. In
this respect Orazio Gentileschi's career is
symptomatic. He was in Rome from 1576 on

The Caravaggistt
and came under Caravaggio's influence in the
Few of Caravaggio's followers actually met him early years of the new century. But a typically
in Rome, but most of them were deeply moved Tuscan quality always remained noticeable in
by his work while its impact was still fresh and his work - so much so that his pictures are on
forceful. The list of names is long and contains occasions reminiscent of Bronzino and even of
masters of real distinction. Among the older Sassoferrato : witness his clear and precise con-
BIBLOSARTE
tours, his light and cold blues, yellows, and scuro, and its Caravaggesque types must have
violets as well as the restraint and simplicity of been created in Rome at an early period of his
his compositions. Moreover, his lyrical and career. 5 Examples of Orazio's later manner may
idyllic temperament is far removed from Cara- be seen in a picture such as the Rest on the Flight
vaggio's almost barbaric vitality. into Egypt (known in four versions in Birming-
The chronology of Orazio's ceuvre is not with- ham; the J. Paul Getty Coll., Los Angeles;
out problems, for dated pictures are few and far Vienna; and the Louvre),'' datable c. 1626, and
between. One of his chief works, the graceful in his principal work in England, the nine com-
Annunciation in Turin [24], painted for Charles partmental pictures for the
hall of the Queen's
House, Greenwich, probably executed after

1635, and now in a mutilated condition in
Marlborough House." The difference between
the two latter works makes it evident that the
longer he was away from Rome the thinner be-
came the Caravaggesque veneer. It is undeni-
able that in the setting of the London Court,
with its progressive tendencies represented by
Rubens and Van Dyck, the work of Gentileschi
appears almost outdated. ""
The development of Orazio Gentileschi is
characteristic of much of the history of the early

Caravaggisti. But in the case of an artist such as
Giovanni Baglione the emphasis is somewhat
different. Baglione, nowadays chiefly known
as the biographer of sixteenth- and early
seventeenth-century Roman artists, belongs
essentially to the late academic phase of Man-
nerism. An exact contemporary of Caravaggio's,
he was that artist's bitter enemy. However, for
a brief moment in his career, and even earlier
than the rank and file of the Caravaggisti, he

was overwhelmed by the impact, although never
24. Orazio Gentileschi: The Annunciation, fully understanding the implications, of the
probably 1623. Twin, Pinacnteca great master's work. His Sacred Love subduing
Profane Love (Berlin), painted after 1600 in
Emanuel I of Savoy, probably in 1623, clearly competition with Caravaggio's Earthly Love for
shows him developing away from Caravaggio, Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, is a hybrid
and the pictures painted after he settled in creation where a Caravaggesque formula hardly
England in 1626 as Charles Ts court painter conceals Late Mannerist rhetoric'
carry this tendency still further. They are The art of Orazio Borgianni, Carlo Saraceni,
extremely light in colour, and the Florentine and Bartolomeo Manfredi represents very
note supersedes his Caravaggismo. By contrast different facets of Caravaggismo. Borgianni, a
a work like the Dublin David and Goliath with Roman who grew up in Sicily and spent several
its powerful movement, foreshortening, chiaro- years in Spain, returned permanently to Rome
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO S FOLLOWERS AND THE CARRACCI SCHOOL •
75
Em.-
BIBLOSARTE
76 THK PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
the Holy Nail (c. 1615, S. Lorenzo in Lucina)

and the Miracle of St Benno and Alartyrdom of
Si Lamhertinus (c. 1617 18, both S. Maria
deir.Anima). Saraceni, however, can never
compete with Caravaggio's dramatic Roman
manner nor did he ever
; fully absorb the latter's
lenehroso. It remains true that even before these

monumental pictures one does not easily forget
that his real talent lay in the petite mantere.^* In
1620 Saraceni returned to Venice, where he
died the same year.
Manfredi's known work falls approximately
into the period 1610 20. He was one of the few
close imitators ofCaravaggio and interpreted the
master in a rather rough style which later genera-

tions came to regard as characteristic ofCaravag-
gio himself; for it was Manfredi possibly more
than anyone else who transformed Caravaggio's
manner into proper genre, emphasizing the
coarse aspects of the latter's an 10 the neglect of
his other qualities. Guard-room and tavern
scenes as well as religious subjects suffer this
metamorphosis. Valentin's choice of subjects is
26. Carlo Saraceni similar to that of Manfredi, and indeed the two
St Raymond preaching, c. 161 4. artists have often been confused. The son of an
Rome. Chiesa della Italian, coming from France (Boulogne), Valen-
Casa Generalizia dei Padri Alercedan
tin settled in Rome in about 1612. Most of his
known work seems to date from after 1620. His
pictures are not only infinitely more disciplined
comparison between the latter's Rest on the than Manfredi's, but also exhibit an extensive
Flight into Egypt with the former's similar work scale of differentiated emotions and passages of
of 1606 in Frascati'- shows: Saraceni translated real drama. Valentin carried on Caravaggio's
Caravaggio's tense and mysterious scene into a manner in Rome longer than almost any other
homely narrative enacted before a warm 'Elshei- Caravaggista.^^
mer' landscape. One would, therefore, not Like Valentin, Serodine really belongs to a
expect to find much of Caravaggio's spirit younger generation, but both died so young
during Saraceni's Caravaggesque period which that they should be included among the first
begins in the second decade, after Elsheimer's generation of Caravaggio followers. Yet when
death. Yet in these pictures the format as well Serodine arrived in Rome in about 1615, Cara-
as his vision grows. One can follow this process vaggio was little more than a legend. By far the
of monumentalization from the St Raymond greatest colourist of the whole group, Serodine
preaching {c. 16 14, formerly S. Adriano, now can be followed in his rapid development from
Chiesa della Casa Generalizia dei Mercedari)'^ the Caravaggesque Calling of the Sons ofZehedee
[26] to the St Charles Borrumeo and the Cross of at Ascona (r. 1622), which combines remini-
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO S FOLLOWERS AND TMF. CARRACCI SCHOOL 77
scences of Caravaggio's AUit/oiimi Jt Lorelo and

of Borgianni's palette, to his masterpiece, the
immensely touching . //;«.<!,''i "'A' '{/ -V/ lAiwrctuc
of the mid i()20s (Rome, Gallcria Nazionale);
thence to the freer St Peter and St Paul (Rome,
Galleria Nazionale) and to the Edinburgh
Tribute Money. The last-named picture, with
its light background and its painterly handling
recalling Bernardo Strozzi, prepares the way
for the extraordinary tour deforce of the Portrait
tij his Father.^" painted in 1628 (Lugano, Museo

Civico)|27|, which is reminiscent of the mature
works of Fetti and Lys. Still later is the Si Peter
in Prison (Rancate, Ziist Collection) where he
used Honthorst's candle-light but not his
technique. The impasto calls to mind Rem-

brandt's advanced work, and the 'impressionist'
freedom of the individual brush-stroke leads
further away from Caravaggio than the work of
any other of his followers in Rome. The rapidity
of Serodine's development is equalled only by
that of Caravaggio. The fact that it removed
him from Caravaggio towards rich chromatic
him to the aspirations of a new age.
values ties
By about 1620 most of the Caravaggisti were 27. Giovanni Serodine:
either dead or had left Rome for good. Those Portrait of his Father, 1628.
Lugano, Museo Civico
who returned home quickly adjusted their
styles to their native surroundings; some of

them hardly reveal in their late work that they
had ever had any contact with Caravaggio. '

' Not remained successful only in the popular genre
one of them had really understood the w holencss in cabinet format, the introduction of which
of his conception. They divested his realism of was largely due to the I faarlem artist Fieter van
its irrational quality and his leuchmso of its Laer, who was in Rome from 1O25 to i^)^^. His
mystique. 1 hey not only devitalized his manner, so-called Bambocciate^" [28] survived as an
but as a rule they selected from his art only undercurrent with a long history of their own.
those elements which were congenial to their In spite of the comparatively brief life of
taste and ability. Some of them, like Gentileschi Caraiaggisnio in Rome and in spite of the toning
and to a certain extent Saraceni, were strongly down of the master's example, the diffusion of
attracted by Caravaggio's early Roman phase; his style continued, either directly or indirectly,
others, like Manfredi and Valentin, who saw and by a variety of routes. Apart from Naples,
chiefly the plebeian side of his art, blended the w here his work had a more lasting and invigora-
genre subjects of his early Roman phase with ting effect than anywhere else in Italy, its pene-
the tenehrosd of his later style. Soon after 1(120 tration to Bologna and Siena, Genoa and \ enice,
Caravaggism in Rome had lost its appeal. It and throughout Kurope, is one of the most
BIBLOSARTE
que style tempered by a classical note.'" It is all
the more remarkable that Ciiravai>!iism() did not

begin to spread to any considerable extent until
the third decade of the century, that is, at a
moment when in Rome itself it was moribund

or even dead.
The Bolognese in Rome

and Early Baroque Classicism
I have already indicated that the Carracci school

presents a picture vastly different from the
Cciravaggisti. A phalanx of young Bolognese
artists, observing Annibale's success, chose to
follow him to Rome; nor did events show that
their assessment of the situation was incorrect.

They had besides much to recommend them-
selves. F"irst and foremost they were excellent
artists. They had undergone a thorough train-
ing in the Carracci academy and had acquired a
28. Pieter van Laer(?): solid classical background even before they
The Brandy-Vendor, after 1625. reached Rome. They were supported by Anni-
Rome. Gdlleria Nazionale bale's unrivalled authority and could rely on a
circle of wealthy and powerful patrons. More-

astonishing phenomena in the history of art. over, they were all masters of the fresco tech-
The names of Terbrugghen, Crabeth and Hont- nique and were, therefore, both able to assist
horst, Baburen, Pynas and Lastman, Jan Jans- Annibale in his own work and to executemonu-
sens, Gerard Seghers, Rombouts, and Vouet, mental fresco commissions on their own ac-
most of them working in Rome at some time count. In addition, during the short reign of
during the second decade of the century, indi- Gregory XV (1621-3), who was himself born in
cate the extent of his influence; and we know Bologna, they were in undisputed command of
now that neither Rubens, who had very early in the situation.
his career experienced Caravaggio's direct in- Guido Reni (1575 1642) and Francesco
fluence in Rome, nor Rembrandt, Velasquez, Albani (1578- 1660) appeared in Rome shortly
and Vermeer, would have developed as they after April 1600, Lanfranco (1582-1647) and
did without the Caravaggio blood-transfusion. Domenichino ( 1 58 1 - 64 1 1 ) came soon after, and
But while elements of Caravaggism became a the much younger Guercino (1591 1666)
permanent feature of European painting, I must arrived in 1621. Annibale used Domenichino
repeat that many of those who were responsible for work in the Galleria Farnese,-" and it was
for its dissemination discarded it on their return mainly Albani, assisted by the Parmese Lan-
to their home countries in favour of current franco and Sisto Badalocchio, also from Parma,
styles. As an example, the Frenchman Vouet, who carried out from .\nnibale's designs most
after an intense early Caravaggesque phase, of the frescoes in the S. Diego Chapel in S.
submitted entirelv to an easv international Baro- Giacomo degli Spagnuoli between 1602 and
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO'S FOLLOWERS AND THE CARRACCI SCHOOL •
79
1607.-' At the same time Innocenzo Tacconi,-- figuration, Ascension of Christ, and Pentecost
another Bolognese of the second rank, executed on the vault of the room
the frescoes on the vault of the Cerasi Chapel in 1608: Oratory of St Andrew, S. Gregorio Ma-
S. Maria del Popolo, for which Annibale painted gno, Rome. The large frescoes of St Andrew
the Assumption of the Virgin. adoring the Cross by Reni and the Scourging
In the succeeding years these Bolognese of St Andrew by Domenichino, commis-
artists firmly established a style in Rome which sioned by Cardinal Scipione Borghese.
by and large shows a strengthening of the 1608-9: S. Silvia Chapel, S. Gregorio Magno,
rationalist and classical tendencies inherent in Rome. The apse decorated by Reni with God
the Farnese ceiling. With the exception of the Father and Angels.
Domenichino and Lanfranco, however, the 1608-10: Abbey of Grottaferrata. Chapel de-
time spent in Rome by these artists was neither corated by Domenichino with scenes from
consecutive nor protracted. Domenichino the Legends of St Nilus and St Bartholomew.
stayed for a period of almost thirty years, though The commission was due to Cardinal Odo-
he returned to Bologna between 1 6 1 7 and 1 62 1 ardo Farnese on Annibale's recommendation
and Lanfranco, who was once absent from Rome 1609: Palazzo Giustiniani (now Odescaluhi),
between 1610 and 161 2, left for Naples only in Bassano (di Sutri) Romano. The ceiling of a
1633-4. On the other hand Reni, after visits to small room painted by Domenichino with
Rome between 1600 and 1604 and again from stories of the myth of Diana, in the manner of
1607 to 161 1 and from 1612-^ to 1614, made the Farnese Gallery. The frescoes of the large
Bologna his permanent home, remaining there hall by Albani. On the ceiling of the hall Al-
except for a few relatively brief intermissions bani represented the Fall of Phaeton and the
until his death in 1642. Albani did not leave Council of the Gods, the latter placed in tight
Rome until mid 1617,-^ to return only for short groups round the edges of the vault - the
periods of time ; and Guercino's years in the whole an unsuccessful attempt at illusionistic
Holy City were confined to the reign of Gregory unification. Along the walls there are eight
XV, from 162 to 1623. 1 scenes illustrating the consequences of the
From about 1606 onwards these masters were Fall. The patron was the Marchese Vincenzo
responsible for a series of large and important Giustiniani.-^
cycles of frescoes. Their activity in this field is 1609- 1 1 : Chapel of the Annunciation, Quirinal
an impressive testimony to their rapidly rising Palace. The whole decorated by Reni and his
star. A feeling for the situation is best conveyed Bolognese assistants, see p. 33.
by listing in chronological sequence the major 1 6 10, 1612; Cappella Paolina, S. Maria Mag-
cycles executed by the whole group during the giore. Reni is responsible mainly for single
crucial twelve years 1606-18. figures of saints.
1612 14: Choir, S. Maria della Pace. Albani
1606-7: Palazzo Mattei di Giove, Rome. Three completes the mariological programme begun
rooms with ceiling frescoes in the south-west in the sixteenth century.
sector of the piano nubile, by Albani : Isaac 16 1 3- 14: Casino dell'Aurora, Palazzo Rospi-
blessing Jacob, Jacob and Rachel, and Jacob's gliosi, Rome. The Aurora ceiling painted by
Dream.-' Reni for Cardinal Scipione Borghese [32J.
1608: Sala delle Nozze Aldobrandini, Vatican. 1613-14: S. Luigi de'Francesi, Rome. Dome-
Reni's Stories ofSamson (repainted).-^ nichino's scenes from the Life of St Cecilia
1608: Sala delle Dame, Vatican. Reni's Trans- [29].^«
BIBLOSARTE
8o •
1615: Palazzo Mattel di Giove, Rome. Lan- ation, was dropped and, at the most classical
franco (Joseph interpreting Dreams znA Joseph moment between 1613 and 1615, the qiiadro
and Potiphar's Wife).-' These frescoes are riportato appears isolated on the flat centre of
inspired by Raphael's Logge. the vault. Thus, Guido's .Aurora was framed
c. 16 1 5 and later: Palazzo Costaguti, Rome. with stuccoes, leaving the surrounding area en-
Domenichino: The Chariot oj Apollo in the tirely white. The principle was perhaps followed
centre of the ceiling of the large hall, set in a in the Palazzo Mattei and certainly in the Rape
Tassi quadratiira.^" Lanfranco: the ceiling of Dejanira ceiling in the Palazzo Costaguti,
with Polyphemus and Galatea (destroyed, probably the only room which survives undis-
replica in the Doria Gallery); the ceiling with turbed from the period around 1615. These
Justice and Peace TprohzbXy 1624" (quadraturci examples are evidence that in the second decade
by Tassi.''); the third ceiling with Nesstis and of the century the Bolognese artists were
Deianeira, previously given to Lanfranco, is inclining towards an extreme form of classicism.
now attributed to Sisto Badalocchio.'- The It is, of course, Domenichino in whose work
ceiling with Guercino's Armida carrying off this development is most obvious, and it typifies
Rinaldo, once again in a Tassi quadratura, the general trend that his St Cecilia frescoes of
was painted between 1621 and 1623. Mola's 16 1 3- 14 are far more rigidly classical than his
and Romanelli's frescoes belong to a later previous work.
phase. Corresponding to the requirements of deco-
1616: S. Agostino, Rome. Lanfranco's decor- rum, his Scourging of St Andrew of 1608 takes
ation of the Chapel of St Augustine.
''
place on a Roman piazza ; the carefully prepared
c. 1616 Pajazzo Verospi (now Credito Italiano),
: stage is closed by the wall and columns of a
Corso, Rome. Albani : ceiling of the hall with temple placed parallel to the picture plane, and
Apollo and the Seasons. The artist's Carrac- its rigidity contrasts with the somewhat freer
cesque style has become more decidedly arrangement of the ancient city and landscape
Raphaelesque, and reliance on the Cupid and in the left background. In order to safeguard
'^
Psyche cycle in the Farnesina is evident. the foreground scene against visual interference
1616-17: Sala de' Corazzieri, Quirinal Palace. from the crowd assembled under the temple
For Lanfranco's contribution to the frieze of portico, Domenichino introduced an unusual
this large hall, see p. 33. device; disregarding the laws of Renaissance
1616-18: Stanza di Apollo, Villa Belvedere perspective, he made these figures unduly small,
(Aldobrandini), Frascati. Eight frescoes with much smaller than they ought to be where they
myth of Apollo, painted by
scenes of the stand. The principal actors are divided into two
Domenichino and pupils at the instance of carefully composed groups, the one surrounding
Monsignor Agucchi for Cardinal Pietro the figure of the saint, the other consisting of the
Aldobrandini (now National Gallery, Lon- astonished and frightened spectators. Firmly
don).^5 constructed though these groups are, there is a
certain looseness in the composition and, par-

All these frescoes are closely connected by ticularly in the onlookers, a distinct lack of
characteristics of style. Not only are most of the definition. In the St Cecilia frescoes the depth
ceiling decorations painted as quadri riportati, of the stage has shrunk and the scenes are closed
but they are also more severely classical than the [29]. The figures have grown in size and im-
Farnese Gallery. .Annibale's rich and complex portance; each is clearly individualized and
framework, reminiscent of Mannerist decor- expresses its mood by studied gestures. Many
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO'S FOLLOWERS AND THE CARRACCI SCHOOL 8l
2C). Domenichino:
St Cecilia before the Judge, 1613 14. Fresco.
Rome, S. Liiigi de Francesi
figures are directly derived from classical Statues, pendentives, where a strong Correggiesque
archaeological elements are more conscien- note is added to the reminiscences of Raphael
tiously introduced, and the spirit of Raphael and Michelangelo. It may be supposed that
permeates the work to an even greater extent."' Domenichino wished to outshine his rival Lan-
But at the same time Domenichino has seen tranco, who to the former's anguish was given
all this through the eyes of Annibalc. the commission for the dome. A development
At this moment Domenichino was probably towards the Baroque will also be noticed in the
acknowledged as the leading Rome,

artist in celebrated scenes from the life of St Andrew in
and the circle of his friend Agucchi must have the apse of the church (c. 1623-6). While the
regarded the St Cecilia frescoes as the apogee single incidents are still strictly separated by
of painting. One would have expected Dome- ornamented ribs, the stage is widened and on it
nichino to pursue the same course which move in greater depth than formerly,
the figures
accorded so well with Agucchi's and his own some of them in beautiful co-ordination with
theoretical position. ^^ History, however, is the rich landscape setting. In addition, borrow-
never logical and so, after his performance in S. ings from Lodovico Carracci make their appear-
Luigi de' Francesi, we find Domenichino begin- ance,*' another indication of Domenichino's
ning to turn in a different direction. In his most drifting away from the orthodox classicism of
important commission of the next decade, the ten years before.
choir and pendentives of S. .\ndrea della Vallc 63 1 Domenichino left Rome for Naples,
'''*
In 1
( 1 622, not 1 seemed

624,-8),^^ this arch-classicist where he was under contract to execute the
to be tempted by the new Baroque trend. This pendentives and dome of the Chapel of S. Gen-
is clearly visible in the Evangelists on the naro in the cathedral. Here he built on the
BIBLOSARTE
82 •
tendencies already apparent in the pcndentives Annibale's more severe approach. By allying
of S. Andrea and amplified them to such an the pastoral and the grand, Domenichino
extent that these frescoes appear as an almost created a landscape style which was to have an
complete break with his earlier manner. He important influence on the early work of Claude.
filled the spherical spaces to their extremities The art of Albani follows a more limited
with a mass of turgid, gesticulating figures course. Like Domenichino he had started as a
which at the same time seem to have become pupil in Calvaert's schooP^ and later removed
petrified. The principal interest of these paint- to the Carracci. At first vacillating between
ings lies in their counter-reformatory content, dependence on Lodovico (e.g. Repentance of St
which Emile Male has recounted but ; it cannot Peter, Oratorio S. Colombano, Bologna, 1598)
be denied that Domenichino's powers, mea- and on Annibale (
Virgin and Saints, Bologna,
sured by the standard of his most perfect and Pinacoteca, 1 599), his early work already shows
harmonious achievements, were on the de- a somewhat slight and lyrical quality which
cline/" Nor was his attempt to catch up with later on was to become the keynote of his man-
the spirit of a new age successful. The hostility ner. It is therefore not at all surprising that in
he met with in the course of executing his work Rome he was particularly captivated by Raphael
in Naples and which may have contributed to (Palazzo Verospi frescoes) without abandoning,
his failure is well known ; however, after his however, his connexion with Lodovico, as one
dramatic flight north in 1634 he returned once of his ceilings in the Palazzo Mattei shows.^'^
more to Naples, but left the work in the chapel Although he worked for Reni in the chapel of
unfinished at his death in 1 64 1 the Quirinal Palace, he remained in these years
Domenichino's reputation has always re- essentially devoted to Domenichino's type of
mained high with the adherents of the classical classicism, but lacked the latter's precision and
doctrine, and during the eighteenth century he unfailing sense of style. Even before returning
is often classed second only to Raphael. But this
reputation was not based only on his work as a
30. Francesco Albani
fresco-painter. Oil-paintings such as the Vatican Earth, one of a series of The Four Elements,
Last Communion of St Jerome of 1614 or the 1626-8. Turin. Pinacoteca
Borghese Hunt of Diana^^ of 1617, done for
Cardinal Pietro Aldobrandini but acquired by

^?i^?
force by Scipione Borghese, reveal him as a
more refined colourist than his frescoes would
lead one to expect. These two works, painted
during his best period, show the breadth of his
range. The St Jerome, more carefully organized
and more boldly accentuated than his model,
Agostino Carracci's masterpiece, has never
failed to carry conviction by its sincerity and
depth of religious feeling.'- Coming from
Domenichino's frescoes, one may note with
surprise the idyllic mood in the Diana, but that
he was capable of it is attested by a number of
pure landscapes which he painted. '^
These, and
particularly the later ones, show a relaxing of
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO'S FOLLOWERS AND THE CARRACCl SCHOOL 83
to Bologna his special gift led him towards light- balance by contrappostal attitudes and gestures.
hearted and appealing representations of myth Moreover, Reni's essential unconcern for pri-
and allegory in landscape settings'" of the sort mary requirements is exposed by the irrational
that is perhaps best exemplified by the Four behaviour of the executioners: they seem to act
Elements in Turin, painted in 1626-8 [30]. In automatically without concentration on their
his later years Albani became involved in theo- task.
retical speculations of a strictly classical charac- Reni's first great fresco, the St AnJreir led to
ter. Although he had a relatively strong moment Alartyrdom, is in telling contrast to the static
in the early 1630s {Annunciation, S. Bartolom- quality of Domenichino's fresco on the wall
meo, Bologna, 1633), during the last period his opposite. The figure of the saint, forming part
large canvases, many of which have little more of a procession from left to right which moves
than a provincial interest, often combine in- in an arch curving towards the front of the
fluences from Reni with an empty and boring picture, is caught in a moment of time as he
symmetry of arrangement. adores the Cross visible on the far-away hill.
Guido Reni was an infinitely more subtle There is, however, a lack of dramatic concen-
colourist than Domenichino. In retrospect it tration and a diffusion in the composition w hich,
would appear that his vision and range far sur- while allowing the eye to rest with pleasure on
passed those of his Bolognese contemporaries. certain passages of superb painting, distracts
His fame was obscured by the large mass of from the story itself. How lucidly organized, by
standardized sentimental pictures coming from contrast, is the Domenichino! And yet one has
his studio during the last ten years of his life, only to compare the figure of the henchman
the majority the product of assistants. It is only seen from the back in both frescoes to realize
fairly recently, and particularly through the Reni's superior pictorial handling. The classi-
Reni Exhibition of 1954, that the high qualities cism of Reni is in fact far freer and more imagi-
of his original work have revealed him once native than that of Domenichino. In addition,
again as one of the greatest figures of Seicento Guido was capable of adjusting his style to suit
painting. the subject-matter instead of conforming to a

Guido was less dependent on Annibale than rigid pattern. This may be indicated by men-
the other Bolognese artists, and from the begin- tioning some works created during the same
ning of his stay in Rome he received commissions important years of his life.
of his own. Between 1604 and 1605 he painted In the Music-making Angels of the S. Silvia
the Crucifixion of St Peter (Vatican) in Caravag- Chapel in S. Gregorio Magno, and still more in
gio's manner. That even Reni, despite having the denser crowds of angels in the dome of the
gone through Lodovico's school at Bologna, Quirinal Chapel, Reni has rendered the intan-
would for a while be drawn into the powerful gible beauty and golden light which belong to
orbit of Caravaggio^^ might almost have been the nature of angels. A few years later he painted
foreseen; but although the picture shows an the dramatic Massacre ofthe Innocents (Bologna,
extraordinary understanding of his dramatic Pinacoteca).^'* Violence, of which one would
realism and lighting and that at a time before have thought the artist incapable, is rampant.
the Cariivaggisti had come into their own ~ the But the spirit of Raphael and of the ancient
basis of Reni's art was classical and his approach Niobids combine to purge this subtly con-
to painting far removed from Caravaggio's. The structed canvas of any impression of real horror.
picture is composed in the form ot the tradi- In the Samson (Bologna, Pinacoteca) [31]^" he
tional classical pyramid and firmly woven into mitigated the melancholy aftermath of the
BIBLOSARTE
84 •
THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY UAROQUE
bloodthirsty scene by the extraordinary figure

^^yrz^:^^
'
i^f^VT/'ffl of the hero, standing alone in the twilit land-

scape in a pose vaguely reminiscent of Mannerist
figures, as if moving to the muffled sound of
music, with no weight to his body. Triumph
and desolation are simultaneously conveyed by
the contrast of the brilliant warm-golden hue of
the elegant nude and the cold tones of the corpses
huddled on the field. I'he monumental Papal
Portrait, probably painted a decade later,^" now
at Corsham Court, is a serious interpretation
of character in the Raphael tradition, showing a
depth of psychological penetration which is
surprising after a picture like the Massacre,

where the expressions of all the faces are vari-
ations on the same theme. Finally, Reni trans-
mutes in the Aurora [32]^' a statuesque ideal of

bodily perfection and beauty by the alchemy of
his glowing and transparent light effects, weld-
31 (lop). Guido Reni: The Triumph of Samson, ing figures adapted from classical and Renais-
c. 1620. Bdlogna, Pinacoteca sance art into a graceful and flowing conception.
As early as 16 10 it seemed that Reni would
32 (above). Guido Reni: Aurora,
161 3- 14. Fresco.
emerge as the leading artist in Rome. The road
Rome, Palazzo Rospigliosi, Casino dell' Aurora to supreme eminence was open to him, not least
because of his favoured position in the house-
hold of Cardinal Scipionc Borghcse, through
whose good offices he had been given the lion's
share of recent papal commissions. But he
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO'S FOLLOWERS AND THE CARRACCI SCHOOL •
85
himself buried these hopes when in 1614 he Atalanta and Hippomencs (Prado) of the early
decided to return to Bologna, leaving Dome- 1 620s. The eurhythmic composition, the con-
nichino in command of the situation. The centration on graceful line, and the peculiar
change of domicile had repercussions on his balance between naturalism and classicizing
style rather than on his productivity. One idealization of the figures, all reveal this work
masterpiece followed the other in quick suc- as an epitome of Reni's art. He has discarded
cession. Among them are the great Madonna his warm palette, and the irrational lighting of
della Pietd of 161 6 (Bologna, Pinacoteca), which the picture is worked out in cool colours. The
with its peculiar symmetrical and com-
hieratic remaining years of his Bolognese activity, during
position could never have been painted in Rome, which he developed this new colour scheme
and the Assumption in S. Ambrogio, Genoa, together with a thorough readjustment of
begun same year, in which evident remini-
in the general principles, belong to another chapter.
scences of Lodovico and Annibale have been Reni's influence, particularly in his later
overlaid with a more vivid Venetian looseness years, was strongest in Bologna, from where it
and bravura [33]. This rich and varied phase of spread. Lanfranco, on the other hand, after
Reni's activitv reaches its conclusion with the having been overshadowed by Domenichino
during the first two decades of the century,
Guido Reni: The Assumption of the Virgin, eventually gained in stature at the expense of his
33.
161 6- 17. Genoa. S.Amhmgin rival, and in the twenties secured his position as
the foremost painter in Rome. Born at Parma

in 1582, he first worked there, together with
Sisto Badalocchio, under Agostino Carracci,

and it was after Agostino's death in 1602 that
both artists joined Annibale in the Eternal City.

From the beginning Lanfranco was the antipode
of Domenichino. Their enmity was surely the
result of their artistic incompatibility; for Lan-
franco,coming from Correggio's town, had
adopted a characteristically Parmese palette
and always advocated a painterly freedom in
contrast to Domenichino's rigid technique. In

fact the old antithesis between colour and design,
which for a moment Annibale had resolved,
was here resurrected once again.
In his early Roman years we find Lanfranco
engaged on all the more important cycles of
frescoes by the Bolognese group, often, how-
ever, in a minor capacity. Beginning perhaps as
Annibale's assistant in the Farnese Gallery, he
had a share in the frescoes in the S. Diego
Chapel, in S. Gregorio Magno, the Quirinal
Palace, and even in the Cappella Paolina in S.
Maria Maggiore. Of the first cycle painted by
Lanfranco on his own in about 1605 in the
BIBLOSARTE
86 •
THE PERIOD OK TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
Camera degli Ercmiti of the Palazzo Farnesc, style. The change may be observed in the Pia-
three paintings detached from the wall survive cenza Si Luke of 161 1. It appears there that
in the neighbouring church of S. Maria della Caravaggio's monumental Roman style helped
Morte.''- This work shows him already follow- to usher in Lanfranco's new manner. .S7 Luke
ing a comparatively free painterly course, re- combines motifs from Caravaggio's two Si
markably untouched by the gravity of Annibale's Matthews for the altar of the Contarelli Chapel;
Roman manner. But it was his stay from the a graceful angel in Lodovico's manner is added,
end of 1610 to 16 12 in his home-town Parma and the whole is bathed in Lanfranco's new
that brought inherent tendencies to sudden Parmese tonality. After his return to Rome he
maturity. Probably through contact with the gradually discarded the traditional vocabulary,
late stvle of Bartolommeo Schedoni"' he devel- and in a daring composition such as the Vienna
oped towards a monumental and dynamic Baro- Virgin with St James and St Anthony Abbot of
que manner with strong chiaroscuro tendencies. about 1615-20'^ his new idiom appears fully
It was the renewed experience of the original developed.

Correggio and of Correggio seen through Lanfranco's ascendancy over Domenichino
Schedoni's Seicento eyes that turned Lanfranco began with the frescoes in S. Agostino (1616)
into the champion of the rising High Baroque and was sealed with the huge ceiling fresco in
the Villa Borghese of 1624-5 [34]-^^ "^n enor-

mous illusionist cornice is carried by flamboyant
34. Giovanni Lanfranco: The Gods of Olympus
(repainted) and Personifications of Rivers, 1624-5.
stone-coloured caryatids between which is seen
Detail of ceilins; fresco. Rome, I ilia Borghese the open sky. This framework, grandiose and at
BIBLOSARTE
35- Giovanni Lanfranco; The Virgin in Glory, 1625-7. Fresco. Rome, S. Andrea della Valle, dome
BIBLOSARTE
the same time easy, reveals a decorative talent ot of his time. His Virgin with Saints of 1616
the highest order. But although there is a Baro- (Brussels Museum), the Martyrdom of St Peter
que loosening here, the dependence on the of 1618 (Modena), the Prodi^âl Son of 1618-19
Farnese ceiling cannot be overlooked : the (Vienna), and the Louvre St Francis and St
quadratura yields on the ceiling to the large Benedict, the Elijah fed by Ravens (London,
qiiadro ripnrtato depicting the Gods of Olym- Mahon Collection), and particularly the St
pus. Compared with the Farnese Gallery, the William receiving the Habit (Bologna, Pina-
simplification and concentration on a few great coteca), all of 1620, show a progression towards
accents are as striking as the shift of visual Baroque movement, the merging of figures with
import from the quadra riportato to the light and their surroundings, form-dissolving light ef-
airy quadratura with the accessory scenes. fects, and glowing and warm colours. In addi-
Traditional quadratura of the type practised by tion, contrapposto attitudes become increasingly
Tassi was reserved for architecture only. By forceful, and there is an intensity of expression
making use of the figures as an inherent part of which is often carried far beyond the capacity
his scheme Lanfranco revealed a more playful of Lodovico, for whose early style Guercino
and fantastic inventiveness than his predeces- felt the greatest admiration.'"
sors, excellently suited to the villa of the eminent When Guercino appeared in Rome in 1621,
patron who required light-hearted grandeur. it seemed a foregone conclusion that his pic-
The next important step in Lanfranco's torial, rather violently Baroque manner would
career, the painting of the dome of S. Andrea create a deep impression and hasten a change
della Valle, 1625-7,^*' opens up a new phase of which the prevailing classical taste would be
Baroque painting [35]. Correggiesque illu- incapable of resisting. Between 1621 and 1623
sionism of the grandest scale was here intro- he executed, above all, the frescoes in the Casino
duced into Roman church decoration, and it Ludovisi for the Cardinale nipote oiGregory XV
was this that spelt the real end to the predomin- [36]. The boldly foreshortened Aurora charging
ance of the classicism of the second decade. through the sky which opens above Tassi's
A similar step had been taken a few years quadratura architecture is the very antithesis of
before by Guercino in the decoration of palaces. Guido's fresco in the Casino Rospigliosi. .\t
One should not forget that this artist belonged either end the figures of Day and Night,
to a slightly younger generation; thus already emotional and personal interpretations with
in his earliest known work, carried out in his something of the quality of cabinet painting,
birthplace. Cento, he reveals a breaking away foster the mood evoked by the coming of light.
from the Carraccesque figure conception. There is here an extraordinary freedom of
Although these frescoes of 1614 in the Casa handling, almost sketch-like in effect, which
Provenzale are derived from those by the Car- forms a dehberate contrast to the hard lines of
racci in the Palazzo Fava, Bologna, they contrast the architecture and must at the time have
with their model in their flickering effect of light appeared as a reversal of the traditional solidity
which goes a long way to dissolve cubic form. of the fresco technique. This work, however,
These atmospheric qualities, which to a certain which might have assured Guercino a perman-
extent Guercino shared with Lanfranco, were ent place in the front rank of Roman painters,
developed more fully during the next ten years. had for the artist an unexpected consequence.
Between 16 16 and his visit to Rome in 1621 Under the influence of the Roman atmosphere,
Guercino painted a series of powerful altarpieces which was charged with personal and theoreti-
which entitle him to rank among the first artists cal complexities, his confidence began to ebb.
BIBLOSARTE
CARAVAGGIO S FOLLOWERS AND THE CARRACCI SCHOOL
36. Guercino: Aurora, 1621-3. Fresco.

Rome, Casina Ludiivisi
Already in the great Burial and Reception into more easily appreciated classicism. But in the
Heaven of St Petromlla of 1622-3 (Rome, very picture where this is first manifest, the
Capitoline Museum) there is a faint beginning idea of lowering the body of the saint into the
of an abandonment of Baroque tendencies. The open sepulchre in which the beholder seems to
figures are less vigorous and more distinctly stand has a directness of appeal unthinkable
defined, the rich palette is toned down, and the without the experience of Caravaggio.""' Thus a
composition more classically balanced

itself is painterly Baroque style, an echo of Caravaggio,
than in the pre-Roman works. ^"^
It is a curious and a foretaste of Baroque-Classicism combine
historical paradox that Guercino who, it is not at this crucial phase of Guercino's career. The
too much to say, sowed the seeds in Rome of the aftermath, in the painter's home-town, Cento,
great High Baroque decorations, should at this must be mentioned later on and in a different
precise moment have begun to turn towards a context.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 5
PAINTING OUTSIDE ROME
The Italian city-states and provincial centres painters in Europe, became a stagnant back-
looked back to an old tradition of local schools water. Wherever Florentines or Florentine-
of painting. These schools lived on into the influenced artists worked at the beginning of the
seventeenth century, preserving some of their seventeenth century, it spelled a hindrance to a
native characteristics. In contrast to the previous free development of painting. Thirdly, Barocci
'
two centuries, however, their importance was (1528 or later- 16 1 2),- whose place is in a history
slight compared with Rome's dominating posi- of sixteenth-century painting, has to be men-
tion. It is true they produced painters of con- tioned. All that can be said of him here is that
siderable distinction, but it was only in Rome he always adhered to the ideal of North Italian
that these masters could rise to the level of colour and fused an emotionalized interpre-
metropolitan artists. It seems a safe guess that tation of Correggio with Mannerist figures and
the Bolognese who followed Annibale Carracci Mannerist compositions. Whenever artists at
to Rome would have remained provincial if they the turn of the century tried to exchange rational
had stayed at home. Late Mannerist design for irrational Baroque
Before discussing the contributions of the colour, Barocci's imposing work was one of the
local schools, the leading trends may once again chief sources to which they turned. x'Vmong his
(see p. 27) be surveyed. About 1600, Italian direct followers in the Marches the names of
painters could draw inspiration from, and fall Andrea Lilli (1555-1610),' Alessandro Vitale
back upon, three principal manners. First, the (1580- 1 660), and Antonio Viviani (1560- 1620)
diflferent facets of Venetian and North Italian may be noted. His influence spread to the
colourism: the warm, glowing and light palette Emilian masters, to Rome, Florence, Milan,
of Veronese, the loaded brush-stroke of the late and above all to Siena, where Ventura Salimbeni
Titian, Tintoretto's dramatic flickering chiaro- (c. 1 567- 1630) and Francesco Vanni (1563-
scuro, and Correggio's sfumato. Venetian 'im- 1610)^ adopted his manner at certain phases of
pressionist' technique was surely the most their careers.
important factor in bringing about the new x'\s the century advanced beyond the first
Baroque painting. Its influence is invariably a decade three more trends became prominent,
sign of progressive tendencies, and it is hardly the impact of which was to be felt sooner or later
necessary to point out that European painting throughout Italy and across her frontiers,
remained permanently indebted to Venice, namely the classicism of Annibale Carracci's

down to the French Impressionists. Secondly, school, Caravaggism, and Rubens's northern
there was the anti-painterly style of the Floren- Baroque, the last resulting mainly from the
tine Late Mannerists, a style of easy routine, wedding of Flemish realism and Venetian
sapped of vitaUty, which remained nevertheless colourism. This marriage, accomplished by a
in vogue far into the seventeenth century. But great genius, was extraordinarily fertile and had
this style contained no promise for the future. a lasting influence above all in northern Italy.
Florence, which for more than a hundred years At the end of the sixteenth and the beginning
had produced or educated the most progressive of the seventeenth centuries provincial painters
BIBLOSARTE
92 •
could not yet have recourse to the new trends second decade of the seventeenth century that
which were then in the making. But provincial these artists emerge as the authors of a series of
centres were in a state of ferment. Everywhere powerful and vigorous masterpieces. Neverthe-
in Italy artists were seeking a new approach to less their production is essentially provincial.
painting. This situation is not only cognate to Neither academic in the sense of the prevalent
Barocci's Urbino, Cerano's and Procaccini's Domenichino type of classicism nor fettered to
Milan, Bernardo Strozzi's Genoa, Bonone's Caravaggismo, their work is to a certain extent
Ferrara, and Schedoni's Modena, but even to an antithesis to contemporary art in Rome. The
Cigoli's Florence, and may be characterized as culmination of this typically Bolognese manner
an attempt to break away from Mannerist con- occurs about fifteen years after .^nnibale's
ventions. On all sides are seen a new emotional departure to Rome, when the powers of Lodo-
vigour and a liberation from formulas of com- vico, both as painter and as head of the Academy,
position and colour.^ Since the majority of these were on the wane. In the ten years between 16 10
artists belonged to the Carracci generation, and 1620, above all, the artists of the Carracci
much of their work was painted before 1 600. They school fulfilled the promise of their training;
were, of course, reared in the Late Mannerist but on the return of Guido Reni to Bologna,
tradition, and from this, despite their protest they relinquished one by one their individuality
against it, they never entirely emancipated them- to this much superior painter.
selves. It was only in Bologna, due mainly to the If Mastelletta was the most original of this
pioneering of the Carracci 'academy', that at the group of artists, the most highly talented were
beginning of the Seicento a coherent school undoubtedly Cavedoni and Tiarini. After a
arose which hardly shows traces of a transitional brief Florentine phase in his early youth" the
style. As regards the other provincial towns, it is latter returned to Bologna, where he soon
by and large more appropriate to talk of a tran- developed a characteristic style of his own. His
sitional manner brought about by the efforts of masterpiece, St Dominic resuscitating a Child, a
individual and often isolated masters, some of many-figured picture of huge dimensions,
whose names have just been mentioned. The painted in 1614-15* for S. Domenico, Bologna,
special position in the Venice of Lys and Fetti is dramatically lit and composed [37]. Since he
will be discussed at the end of this chapter, was hardly impeded by theoretical considera-
while the lonely figure of Caracciolo may more tions, Httle is to be found here of the classicism
conveniently be added to the names of the later practised at this moment by his compatriots in
Neapolitan painters (see p. 356). Rome. While the solidit}' of his figures and their
studied gestures reveal his education in the
Carracci school, his 'painterly' approach to his
BOLOGNA AND NEIGHBOURING CITIES
subject proves him a close follower of Lodovico,
The foremost names of Bolognese artists who on whom he also relies for certain figures and
did not follow Annibale to Rome are Alessandro the unco-ordinated back-drop of the antique
Tiarini (1577- 1668), Giovanni Andrea Don- temple and column. During the next years he
ducci, called Mastelletta (1575- 1655), Leonello intensified this manner in compositions with
Spada (1576-1622), and, in addition, Giacomo sombre and somewhat coarse figures of impres-
Cavedoni from Sassuolo (1577- 1660).'' They sive gravity. Characteristic examples are the
all begin by adopting different aspects of the Pieta (Bologna, Pinacoteca) of 161 7, and St
Carracci teaching, on occasion coloured by Martin resuscitating the Widow's Son in S.
Caravaggio's influence. It is, however, in the Stefano, Bologna, of about the same period.
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING OUTSIDE ROME •
93
37. Alessandro Tiarini: 38. Giacomo Cavedoni

St Dominic resuscitating a Child, 1614-15. The Virgin and Child with SS. A16 and Petronius,
Bologna, S. Domentco 1 6 14. Bologna. Ptnacoteca
According to Malvasia's report he was deeply decade a sense for a quietly expressive mood
impressed by Caravaggio, and a version of the which he renders with a looser and more paint-
latter's Incredulity of St Thomas, at the time in erly technique. If his reliance on Lodovico
Bologna, was gleefully copied by him. In the Carracci is the dominant feature of his work, a
twenties Tiarini uses a lighter range of colours; Correggiesque note probably reaches him
his style becomes more rhetorical and less in- through Schedoni, with whom he has certain
tense, and simultaneously an interest in Vero- affinities - as can be seen in the frescoes of 1 612-
nese and Pordenone is noticeable. His latest 14 in S. Paolo, Bologna. In his masterpiece, the
work, under the influence of Domenichino and Virgin and Child in Glory with SS. Aid and
above all Reni, hardly bears testimony to his Petronius of 16 14 (Bologna, Pinacoteca) [38],
promising beginnings. his glowing palette shows him directly depend-
Cavedoni lacks the dramatic power of Tia- ent on sixteenth-century Venetian painting.
rini's early style, but he displays in the second This is surely one of the most commanding
BIBLOSARTE
94 • THF. PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
pictures produced at Bologna during the period. this would appear slightly less conspicuous than
Cavedoni never again achieved such full- his Bolognese nickname of scimmia del Cara-
blooded mastery. vaggio ('Caravaggio's ape') might lead one to
It seems difficult to discard Malvasia's cir- suppose, the epithet was doubtless acquired by
cumstantial report that Spada accompanied virtue of his liberal use of black and his realistic
Caravaggio His early manner is close
to Malta.' and detailed rendering of close-up figures in
to Calvaert's Mannerism (Abraham and MeUhi- genre scenes (Musical Party, Maisons Laffitte)
sedek, Bologna, c. 1605). In 1607 he was still in or in more blood-thirst)- contexts (the Catn and
his home-town, as is proved by the fresco of Abel in Naples or the Hay to Calvary in Parma).
The Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes in the His use of Caravaggio's art, however, is always
Ospedale degli Esposti. There is no trace here moderated by a substantial acknowledgement
of Caravaggio's influence, and it is Lodovico, as of the instruction of the Carracci academy. But
in Spada's later pictures, who is uppermost in he seems to have regarded Caravaggism as
the artist's mind. Only in the course of the unsuited to monumental tasks, for there is no
second decade do we find him subordinating trace of it in Tlie Burning of heretical Books of
himself to Caravaggio, and although nowadays 1616 in S. Domenico, Bologna, where the
39. Mastelletta : The Rest on the Flight into Egypt,

c. 1620. Bologna, Pinacoteca
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING OUTSIDE RON4E 95
packed and sharply

tightly lit figures before a and Carlo Bonone (1569- 1632). The former
columned architecture fall in with the style belongs essentially to the late sixteenth century,
commonly practised at Bologna during these but in his small landscapes with their sacred or
years. In his late period Spada worked mainly in profane themes he combines the spirited tech-
Reggio and Parma for Ranuccio Farnese, and nique of Venetian painting and the colour of
hisMarriage of St Catherine (Parma) of 1621 Jacopo Bassano with the tradition of Dosso
shows that under the influence of Correggio his Dossi. He thus becomes an important link with
style becomes more mellow and that his Cara- early seventeenth-century landscape painters,
vaggism was no more than a passing phase. and his influence on an Emilian master like
Together with Mastelletta, Pietro Faccini Mastelletta is probably greater than is at present
must be mentioned. Both these unorthodox realized. In Carlo Bonone Ferrara possessed an
artists are totally unexpected in the Bolognese early Seicento painter who in his best period
setting. Faccini, a painter of rare talents who after 16 10 shows a close aflfinitv to Schedoni.
had been brought up in the Mannerist tradition,
died in 1602 at the early age of forty. In the 40. Carlo Bonone The Guardian Angel,
: 1610.
1 590s he followed the Carracci lead, but in his Ferrara, Pinacuteca
very last years there was a radical change to-

wards an extraordinarily free and delicate man-
ner, to the formation of which Niccolo dell'
Abate, Correggio, and Barocci seem to have

contributed. His Virgin and Saints in Bologna
is evidence of the new manner which is fully
developed in the self-portrait (Florence, Uffizi),
possibly dating from the year of his death. This

curious disintegration of Mannerist and Carrac-
cesque formulas gives to his last works an
almost eighteenth-century flavour. Mastelletta
painted on the largest scale in a maniera furbesca
(Malvasia), and the two huge scenes in S.
Domenico, Bologna, reveal that in 161 3-15 he

was not bound by any doctrinal ties. His chief
interest for the modern observer lies in his
small and delicate landscapes in which the in-

fluence of Scarsellino as well as Niccolo dell'
Abate may be discovered. '° They are in a dark
key, and the insubstantial, brightly-lit figures
emerging from their shadowy surroundings
contribute to give to these pictures an ethereal
effect [39]. The most imaginative and poetical
artist of his generation in Bologna remained, as
might be expected, an isolated figure, and even

today his work is almost unknown."
At the same period Ferrara can claim two
artists of distinction, Scarsellino'- (i 551 -1620)
BIBLOSARTE
q6 •
THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARI.Y BAROQUE
Though not discarding the local tradition shows him not surprisingly returning to a
stemming from Dossi, nor neglecting what he typically Ferrarese Late Mannerism.
had learned from Veronese, he fully absorbed Bartolommeo Schedoni (1578 1615)" is in
the new tendencies coming from Lodovico his latest phase certainly an artist of greater
Carracci [40]. In his fresco in the apse of S. calibre. He was bom in Modena and worked
Maria in Vado, depicting the Glorification of the mostly at Parma, where he died. His frescoes in
Name ofGod{i()\-;~zo), he based himself upon the town-hall at Modena of 1606 7 are still
Correggio without, however, going so far to- predominantly Mannerist in their dependence
wards Baroque unification as Lanfranco did in on Niccolo dell'Abate, although his style is
Rome. Parallel to events in the neighbouring already more flowing. But beginning in about
Bologna, his decline begins during the twenties. 1 6 10 there is an almost complete break with this
In his two dated works in the Modena Gallery, early manner. Pictures of considerable origin-
The Miracle of the Well (1624-6) and the Holy ality such as the Christian Charity of 161 1 in
Family with Saints (1626), he displays a provin- Naples [41], the Three Maries at the Sepulchre
cial eclecticism by following in the one case of 1 6 14, and the Deposition of the same period,
Guercino and in the other Veronese. His last both in Parma, and the unfinished St Sebastian
picture, The Marriage at Cana (Ferrara) of 1632, attended by the Holy Women (Naples) prove that
it is Correggio who has provided the main inspi-
ration for this new style. It is marked both by an
41. Bartolommeo Schedoni: Christian Charity, 161 1. intensity and peculiar aloofness of expression
Naples, Mtiseo Nazioiuile and by an emotional use of areas of bright
yellows and blues which have an almost metallic
surface quality. His colour scheme, however, is
far removed from that of the Mannerists, for he
limits his scale to a few tones of striking bril-
liance. The treatment of themes with low-class

types as in pictures like the Charity probably
resulted from the experience of Caravaggio or
his followers. It is a pointer in the same direction
that Schedoni often placed his figures before a
neutral background. Yet how different from

Caravaggio is the result! In Schedoni's case
there is a strange contrast between the dark
ground and the figures which shine like precious
jewels.'^
It appears from this survey that the Emilian

masters owed more to Lodovico than to any
other single personality, but it is equally evident
that the style of the outsize canvases by artists
like Tiarini, Spada, and Mastelletta, with the

many narrative incidents, the massive figures,
and the studied academic poses, did not join
the broad stream of the further development.

Only of Schedoni, the master less obviously
BIBLOSARTE
97
connected with the Carracci tradition, can it be Sarto and Pontormo, but the manner which he
said that he had a lasting influence, through the developed in the second and third decades of
impression he made on the youthful Lanfranco. the new century a peculiar compound of the
is
Mannerism and a rich, precise,

older Florentine
and sophisticated colour scheme in which
FLORENCE AND SIENA
yellow predominates. Venturi was reminded
It has already been indicated that the role of before a picture such as the Susanna of 1600
Florence in the history of Seicento painting is (Vienna) of the palette later developed by Zur-
disappointingly but not unexpectedly limited. baran, and similar colouristic qualities may also
Not a single artist of really great stature was be found in his rare and attractive still lifes,"
produced there at this period. To a greater or the arrangement of which is dependent on the
lesser extent Florentines remained tied to their northern tradition.
tradition of draughtsmanship, and their at- By far the most eminent Florentine artist of
tempts to adjust themselves to the use of North this generation, however, is Ludovico Cardi,
Italian colour were more often than not half- called II Cigoli (1559-1613). An architect of
hearted and inconsistent. Furthermore, neither repute and a close friend of Galilei,'^ he went
the emotionalism of Barocci nor the drama and further on the road to a true Baroque style than
impetuosity of Lanfranco and the young Guer-

cino were suitable to Tuscan doctrine and tem-
perament. Bernardino Poccetti's (1548- 161 2)
42. Cigoli: The Ecstasy of St Francis, 1596.
sober and measured narrations (Chiostro di S.
Florence, S. Marco, Museum
Marco, 1602) remained the accepted style, and
artists like Domenico Cresti, called Passignano
(1558/60-1638), were faithful to this manner

far into the seventeenth century. Passignano
did, however, make concessions to Venetian
colour, and his pictures tend to show a richer
and warmer palette than those of his contem-

poraries. Similarly, Santi di Tito (1536- 1603)
softened his style towards the end of his career,
but his paintings, though often simple and
appealing, lacked vigour and tension and were
never destined to transmit new life. This style
was continued anachronistically by Tito's faith-
ful pupil Agostino Ciampelli (c. 1568- 1630, not

c. 1575-1642).'^ It is likely that the Veronese
Jacopo Ligozzi (1547- 1626),"' who spent most
of his life in Florence, was instrumental in im-
posing northern chromatic precepts upon the
artists in the city of his choice.
A painter of considerable charm, who de-

serves special mention, is Jacopo Chimenti da
Empoli (1551/4-1640). He began in Poccetti's
studio with a marked bias towards .Andrea del
BIBLOSARTE
any of his Florentine contemporaries. In the who have been mentioned. Rutilio Manetti
beginning he accepted the Mannerism of his (157 1 -1639), Vanni's pupil, was also not un-
teacher, Alessandro Allori. At a comparatively affected by Barocci's manner. But only with his
early date he changed under the influence of conversion to Caravaggism in his Death of the
Barocci (Baldinucci). In his Martyrdom of Si Blessed Antonio Patrizt of 1616 (S. Agostino,
Stephen of 1597 (Florence, Accademia) Vero- Monticiano) does he emerge as an artist of
nese's influence is clearly noticeable, while one distinction. In the following years his vigorous
of his most advanced works, the Last Supper of genre scenes are reminiscent of Manfredi and
1 591 (Empoli, Collegiata), reveals him as Valentin or even the northern Caravaggisti.
colouristically, but not formally, dependent on From the beginning of the thirties there is a
Tintoretto. The clarity, directness, and sim- falling off in quality, for example in the St
plicity of interpretation of the event show him Eligius of 1 63 1 at Siena; in his latest production,
almost on a level with the works of the Carracci to a great extent executed with the help of
at the same moment. In some of his later works, pupils, the energy displayed during the previous
like the Ecce Homo (Palazzo Pitti), a typically fifteen years is exhausted.-'
Seicento immediacy of appeal will be found; in The popular Florentine narrative style of the
others, like his famous Ecstasies of St Francis Poccetti-Passignano type, which was adopted
[42], he gives vent to the new emotionalism. by Manetti early in his career, was a success not
Nevertheless, he hardly ever fully succeeded in only in Rome but also in the North, particularly
casting off his Florentine heritage. He went to in Liguria and Lombardy. However, the use to
Rome in 1604, returning to Florence only for which it was put was not everywhere the same.
brief intervals. His largest Roman work, the While in Genoa it was imported directly, with-
frescoes in the dome of the Cappella Paolina in out variation, in Milan it was blended with new
S. Maria Maggiore (1610-13), are, in spite of tendencies in an effort to produce a distinctly
spatial unification, less progressive than they 'native' manner.
may at first appear. In his last frescoes (1611-
12), those of Cupid and Psyche from the Log-
getta Rospigliosi (now Museo di Roma), he
accepted the Carraccesque idiom to such an Seicento painting in Milan developed under
extent that they were once attributed to Lan- the shadow of the great counter-reformer St
franco as well as to Annibale himself. Charles Borromeo (d. 1584), who was discussed
Even the best of Cigoli's followers, Cristofano in the first chapter. His spirit of devotion was
Allori (1577- 1 621) and the Fleming Giovanni kept alive by his nephew Archbishop Federico
Biliverti (1576- 1644), adhere to a transitional Borromeo. It was he who in 1602 commissioned
style. ^^ More important than these masters is a cycle of paintings to honour St Charles's
their exact contemporary Matteo Rosselli ( 1 578- memory. These large canvases depicting scenes
1650), a pupil of Passignano. He owed his from his life were increased in 16 10, the year of
position, however, not to his intrinsic qualities St Charles's canonization, to over forty to
as a painter but to the fact that he was the head include portrayals of his miracles (the whole
of a school which was attended by practically cycle in Milan Cathedral). Many of these
all the younger Florentine artists. -° pictures were due to the three foremost Milan-
Siena at this period had at least one painter ese painters of the early Seicento, Giulio Cesare
worth recording apart from the Barocci fol- Procaccini (1574- 1625),-- Giovanni Battista
lowers Ventura Salimbeni and Francesco Vanni, Crespi, called Cerano (t. 1575- 1632), and Pier
BIBLOSARTE
9Q
Francesco Mazzucchelli, called Morazzone

(1573-1626),-' and a study of their work gives
the measure of Milanese 'history painting' at
this period : influences from Venice (Veronese,
Pordenone) and from Florentine, Emilian
(Tibaldi), and northern Mannerism (e.g. Spran-
ger) have been superimposed upon a local
foundation devolving from Gaudenzio Ferrari.

To a lesser degree than Genoa, Milan at this
historical moment was the focus of cross-

currents from south, east, and north. But this
Milanese art is marked by an extraordinary
intensity which has deep roots in the spirit of
popular devotion epitomized in the pilgrimage
churches of the Sacri Monti of Lombardy. (See
also illustrations 221, 222.)
Cerano, born at Novara, was the most com-

prehensive talent of the Milanese group. Archi-
tect, sculptor, writer, and engraver apart from
his principal calling as painter, he became in
43. Cerano: The Virgin of the Rosary, 1615.
1 62 1 the first Director of Federico Borromeo's
Milan, Brera
newly founded Academy. In fact his relation to
the Borromeo family dates back to about 1 590, Marco, Milan, and although no straight develop-
and he remained in close contact with them to ment of his style can possibly be construed, he
the end of his life: no wonder, therefore, that he yet produced during the second decade compo-
had the lion's share in the St Charles Borromeo sitions of such impressive simplicity as the
cycle. Despite his long stay in Rome (1586-95), Madonna del Rosario in the Brera [43] and the
he shows, characteristically, in his early work a Virgin and Child with St Bruno and St Charles
strong attachment to Gaudenzio,-^ Tibaldi, and in the Certosa, Pa via, both of about 161 5, in
Barocci as well as to Flemish and even older which he humanized the religious experience
Tuscan Mannerists {Archangel Michael, Milan, by falling back on the older Milanese tradition.
Museo di Castello).-^ But he soon worked out a Few pictures are known of Cerano's latest
Mannerist formula of his own {Franciscan period. In 1629 he was appointed head of the
Saints, 1600, Berlin, destroyed) which is as far statuary works of Milan Cathedral, and from
removed from the formalism of international this time date the impressively compact mono-
Mannerism around 1600 as from the palpability chrome modelli for the sculpture over the doors
of the rising Baroque. An often agonizing ten- of the fa9ade (Museo delFOpera, Cathedral)
sion and an almost morbid mysticism inform which were translated into flaccid marble reliefs
many of his canvases, and the silver-grey light by Andrea Biffi, G. P. Lasagni, and Gaspare
and clear scale of tones for which he is famed Vismara.-"
lend support to the spiritual quality of his work. Like Cerano, Morazzone had been early in
Although he never superseded his mystic Man- his life in Rome {c. 1592-8), and some of his
nerism, as may be seen in one of his greatest work in the Eternal City can still be seen in situ
works, the Baptism of St Augustine of 1618 in S. (frescoes in S. Silvestro in Capite). But Moraz-
BIBLOSARTE
44- Morazzone: Ecce Homo Chapel, 1609-13. Frescoes. Varallo, Sacro Alonte
BIBLOSARTE
lOI
zone's style was even more radically formed collaborators. The more gifted brother of the
than Cerano's on Gaudenzio Ferrari. Back elder Camillo {c. 1560- 1629), Giulio Cesare
home, he made his debut as a fresco painter in had moved with his family from Bologna to
the Cappella del Rosario in S. Vittore at Varese Milan in about 1590; but if any traces of his
(1599 and 1 61 5- 17). Large frescoes followed at Bolognese upbringing are revealed in his work,
Rho {c. 1602-4) and in the 'Ascent to Calvary' they point to the older Bolognese Mannerists
Chapel of the Sacro Monte, Varallo (1605). In rather than to an influence from the side of the
the frescoes of the 'Flagellation' Chapel of the Carracci. In Milan he began as a sculptor with
Sacro Monte near Varese (1608-9) ^nd the 'Ecce the reliefs for the facade of SS. Nazaro e Celso
Homo' Chapel at Varallo (1609-13) [44] Moraz- (1597-1601),^° and a statuesque quality is
zone's characteristic style is fully developed. In evident in his paintings during the first two
1614 he finished the frescoes of the 'Condem- decades. Apart from his contacts with Moraz-
nation to Death' Chapel at Varallo, and between zone and Cerano, the important stages of his
1 6 16 and 1620 he executed those of the 'Por- career are indicated by his renewed interest in
ziuncola' Chapel of the Sacro Monte at Orta.-' sculpture after 1610, by his stay in Modena
It is at once evident that Morazzone, like his between 1613 and 1616, where he painted the
contemporary Antonio d'Enrico, called Tanzio Circumcision (Galleria Estense), and his sojourn
da Varallo (1574/80-1635), was thoroughly at Genoa in 1618. x'\fter Modena he was at the
steeped in the tradition of these collective mercy of Correggio and his Parmese followers.
enterprises, in which the spirit of the medieval
miracle plays was revived and to the decoration
of which a whole army of artists and artisans
contributed between the sixteenth and eigh-
teenth centuries.-" Morazzone's reputation as a
fresco painter, solidly founded on his achieve-
ments in the Sanctuaries, opened other great
opportunities for him. In 1620 he painted a
chapel in S. Gaudenzio at Novara and in 1625,
shortly before his death, he began the decor-
ation of the dome of Piacenza Cathedral, the
greater part of which was carried out by Guer-
cino. Morazzone as a master of the grand decor-
ative fresco went further than his Milanese
contemporaries in promoting the type of popu-
lar realism that was part and parcel of the art of
the Sanctuaries. But that the intentions of
Morazzone, Cerano, and Procaccini lay not far
apart is proved by the famous 'three-master-

picture', the Martyrdom of SS. Rufina and
Seconda in the Brera of about 1620.-''
The S. Rufina painted by Giulio Cesare Pro-

caccini in the lower right half of this work
carries the signature of a precious manner and a
45. Giulio Cesare Procaccini:
bigoted piety very different from those of his St Mary Magdalen, c. 16 16. Milan. Brera
BIBLOSARTE
46. Antonio d'Enrico, il Tanzio: David, c. 1620. I'arallo. Pmacoteca
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING OUTSIDE ROME 103
above all Parmigianino, as his Marriage of Si Chiesa della Pace, Milan,*- show him returning
Catherine (Brera) and the Mary Magdalen to the local traditions, to Cerano and the \'ene-
(Brera) [45] prove. Genoa brought him in con- tians; nevertheless, Caravaggismo seems to have
tact with Rubens, and the repercussions on his kept a hold on him, as later pictures attest,
style will easily be detected in such works as the among them the obsessed-looking David with
Deposition of the Fassati Collection, Milan, and the enormous polished sword and the almost
the Judith and Hulufernes of the Museo del obscene head of Goliath (Varallo, Pinacoteca)
Castello. [46] and the most extraordinary Battle of
A word must be said about Tanzio, the most Sennacherib (1627-9, S. Gaudenzio, Novara;
temperamental, tense, and violent of this group bozzetto in the Museo Civico), where an un-
of Milanese artists. It is now fairly certain that compromising realism is transmuted into a
he was in Rome some time between 1610 and ghostlike drama with frightfully distorted figures
161 5, and the impact of Caravaggtsmo is im- which seem petrified into permanence. '"
mediately felt in the Circumcision at Fara San To the names of these artists should be added
Martino (parish church) and the Virgin with that of the younger Daniele Crespi {c. 1598-
Saints in the Collegiata at Pescocostanzo 1630), a prodigious worker who derived mainly
(Abruzzi), works which appear deliberately from Cerano and Procaccini, but whose first
archaizing and deliberately crude.'' The im- recorded work shows him assisting Guglielmo
portant frescoes at Varallo as well as those in the Caccia, called II Moncalvo {c. 1565-1625),'^ in
47. Daniele Crespi: St Charles Borromeo at Supper,

(". 1628. Milan, Chiesa delta Passione
BIBLOSARTE
104 ' TH^- PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
the frescoes otthe dome of S. VittOre at Milan. Seicento, andamong his followers must be
In his best works Daniele combined severe numbered Lazzaro Tavarone(i 556-1 64 i),Bat-
rcahsm and parsimonious handhng of pictorial tista Castello (1547- 1637), and his brother
means with a sincerity of expression fully in Bernardo (1557- 1629). But it was not these
sympathy with the religious climate at Milan. much sought-after, tame Mannerists who
His famous St Charles Borrotneu at Supper brought about the flowering of seventeenth-
(Chiesa della Passione, Milan, c. 1628) [47] century Genoese art. Genoa grew to impor-
comes nearer to the spirit of the austere devotion tance as a meeting place of artists from many
of the saint than almost any other painting of difterent quarters. There was a Tuscan group
the period and is, moreover, expressed without to which the Sienese Pietro Sorri (1556- 1622),
recourse to the customary religious and compo- Francesco Vanni, and Ventura Salimbeni be-
sitional props from which the three principal longed. Aurelio Lomi (1556- 1622) from Pisa
promoters of the early .Milanese Seicento were was in Genoa between 1597 and 1604, and Gio-
never entirely able to detach themselves. The vanni Battista Paggi (1554- 1627), a Genoese
question has been raised if Daniele was indebted who had worked in Florence with Cigoli,
to Zurbaran's contemporary work. Whether or brought back the latter's manner to his home-
not the answer is in the affirmative, he certainly town. In accordance with their training and
was impressed by Rubens and Van Dyck, as is tradition these artists represent on the whole a
revealed in his principal work, the cycle of rather reactionary element. More vital was the
frescoes in the Certosa at Garegnano, Milan contact with the progressive Milanese school,
(1629). A similar cycle painted in the Certosa and the impact of Giulio Cesare Procaccini,
of Pa via in the year of his death may be regarded working in Genoa in 16 18, was certainly great.
as an anti-climax. Daniele's career was prema- Of equal and even greater importance for the
turely interrupted by the plague of 1630. This future of Genoese painting were the Flemings.
event, immortalized by Manzoni, spelled to all They had long regarded Genoa as a suitable
intents and purposes the end of the first and place to try their fortunes, and works by artists
greatest phase of Milanese Seicento painting. such as Pieter Aertsen were already collected
there in the late sixteenth century. Snyders was
probably in Genoa in 1608, and later Cornelius
GENOA
de Wael (1592- 1667) became an honorary
While the most important period of Milanese citizen and leader of the Flemish colony.'^
painting was over by about 1630, a local Seicento Their genre and animal pictures form an impor-
school began in Genoa somewhat later but tant link with the greater figure of G. Benedetto
flourished for a hundred years. During the Castiglione, and in this context Jan Roos
seventeenth century the old maritime republic (Italianized: Giovanni Rosa) should at least be
had an immensely rich ruling class who made mentioned. But the names of all these Flemings
their money for the most part by world-wide are dwarfed by that of Rubens, whose stay in
banking manipulations; and the international the city in 1607 {Circumcision, S. .\mbrogio)
character of their enterprises is also reflected in and dispatch, in 1620, of the Miracle of St
the artistic field. It is true that at the end of the Ignatius (S. Ambrogio) were as decisive as Van
previous century Genoa had possessed in Luca Dyck's sojourns in 1621-2 and 1626-7. Cara-
Cambiaso (1527-85) a great native artist. vaggio, in Genoa for a short while in 1605, left,
Capable of working on the largest scale, his it seems, no deep impression at that mo-
influence remained a vital force far into the ment. Caravaggism gained a foothold, however,
BIBLOSARTE
through Orazio Gentileschi and Vouet, who 1638), Domenico Fiasella, called II Sarzana
were in Genoa at the beginning of the twenties. (1589-1669), Luciano Borzone (1590-1645),
Finally it should not be forgotten that the and Gioacchino .\ssereto (1600-49) runs to a
Genoese appreciated the art of Barocci and of certain extent parallel. They begin traditionally
the Bolognese. The former's Crucifixion for the enough: Fiasella and Strozzi deriving from
cathedral was painted in 1595; and pictures by Lomi, Paggi, and Sorri; Ansaldo from the
Domenichino, Albani, Reni,'" and others reach- mediocre Orazio Cambiaso, Luca's son; and
ed Genoa at an early moment. The impression Assereto from Ansaldo. Towards the twenties
Velasquez made in Genoa at the time of his these artists show the influence of the Milanese
visit in 1629 seems worth investigating. It can, school, and only Fiasella, who had worked in
therefore, be seen that in the first decades of the Rome from 1607 to 1617, is really swayed by
seventeenth century Genoa was in active con- the Caravaggisti.^'' In the course of the third
tact with all the major artistic trends, Italian decade they all attempt to cast away the last
and foreign. vestiges of Mannerism and turn towards a freer,
The development of the early seventeenth- naturalistic manner, largely under the influence
century native Genoese painters Bernardo of Rubens and Van Dyck. It should, however,
Strozzi (1581-1644), Andrea Ansaldo (1584- be said that, lacking monographic treatment,
48. Gioacchino Assereto: The Supper at Emmaus, after 1630. Genoa, Private Colleclion
BIBLOSARTE
neither Borzone nor Ansaldo and Fiasella are tried not unsuccessfully to recapture something
clearly defined personalities; it would seem of the spirit of Titian's early period; Palma
that the prolific Fiasella, who lived longest and Giovane, basing himself on a mixture of the
was much in fashion with the Genoese aristo- late Titian and Tintoretto, was the most fertile
cracy, must be regarded as the least interesting and sought-after but at the same time the most
and original of this group of artists. By contrast monotonous of the three.'" Strangely enough,
Assereto, through Longhi's basic study, has these masters had little understanding for the
become for us an artistic personality with clear potentialities of the loaded brush-stroke. .\s a
contours."* In his work after 1630, for example rule their canvases are colouristically dull,
in the Genoa Martyrdom of Si Bartholomew or lacking entirely the exciting surface qualities of
the Genoa Supper at Emmaus [48], he achieved the great sixteenth-century painters.^' Deeply
a unification of composition and a complete under the influence of these facile artists, their
freedom of handling which places him almost contemporaries in the Terra Ferma, in Verona,
on a level with Strozzi in his Venetian period. Bergamo, and Brescia, bear witness to the popu-
The genius of this generation, surpassing all larity of what had by then become a moribund
his contemporaries, was Bernardo Strozzi. His style. It was, in fact, the degeneration of the
early style, from his 'Tuscan' beginnings to his great Venetian tradition in Venice itself, to-
vacillations between Veronese, Caravaggio, and gether with the rise of Rome as the centre of
the Flemings, is not yet sufficiently clear [235]. *" progressive art, that determined the pattern of
In 1598 he became a Capuchin monk, but in seventeenth-century painting for the whole of
1610 he was allowed to leave the monastery. Italy.
Between 1614 and 1621 he acted as an engineer In 1630 probably few Venetians realized that
in his home-town and from 1623 to 1625 he they had had two young artists in their midst
painted the frescoes in the Palazzo Carpanetto who had aroused painting from its 'eclectic
at San Pier d'Arena. Imprisoned by his Order, slumber'. They were neither Venetian by birth,
he went after his release in 1630 to Venice, nor were they ever entrusted with important
where he lived until his death in 1644. Discus- commissions in the city in which they had
sion of his work may be postponed, since his settled. Giovanni Lys came to Italy in about
great Venetian period belongs to a later chapter. 1620, and by 162 1 was in Venice. In the same
year Domenico Fetti had his first taste of
Venice. Both artists excelled in cabinet pictures
VENICE
and both died young. They each developed a
In the smaller centres of northern Italy a Late manner in which the spirited brush-stroke was
Mannerist style prevailed practically through- of over-riding importance, and by this means
out the first half of the seventeenth century. they re-invigorated Venetian colour and became
This was primarily due to the influential posi- the exponents of the most advanced tendencies.
tion of Venice, where the leading roles were They are the real heirs to the Venetian colouris-
played by three eclectic namely Jacopo
artists, tic tradition; with their rich, warm, and light
Negretti, called Palma Giovane (1544- 1628), palette and their laden brush-work they are as
Domenico Tintoretto (1560- 1635), and Ales- far removed from the tenebroso of Caravaggio
sandro Varotari, called Padovanino (1588- as from the classicism of the Bolognese. Lys
1648). Domenico Tintoretto continued his was born in Oldenburg in North Germany in
father's manner with a strong dash of Bassani about 1597, and Fetti in Rome in 1589. Fetti
influence; Padovanino in his better pictures died at the age of thirty-four in 1623; Lys was
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING OUTSIDE ROME • IO7
even younger when he was carried off by the

Venetian plague of 1629-30. Their aeuvres are
therefore limited, and their influence, although
considerable - particularly on Strozzi should
not be overestimated.
Fetti's first master was Cigoli, after the latter
came to Rome in 1604; but although their

association remained close until 161 3, little evi-
dence of Cigoli's transitional style can be dis-

covered in Fetti's work. In fact in Rome Fetti
must have felt the influence, if not of Cara-

v-iggio himself, at any rate of those followers
such as Borgianni and Saraceni who were more

in sympathy with Venetian colour.Not much
is known about Fetti's Roman period, but it
would have been in this circle that he developed

his taste for the popular genre. At the same time
he must have been deeply impressed by the
art of Rubens, whose transparent red and blue
flesh tones he adopted. When in 161 3 he went
to Mantua as Court Painter to Duke Ferdi-
nando, he again found himself under the shadow
49. Domenico Fetti: The Good Samaritan, c. 1622.
of Rubens, but while working there, he became Nevp York, Metropolitan Museum
increasingly dependent on Venetian art, parti-
cularly that of Titian and Tintoretto. Fetti was trating parables set in homely surroundings,
not a master capable of working on a large must have attracted the same public as the
scale, and to a certain extent the official paint- Bambocciate in Rome, and the numerous repeti-
ings he had to execute in the ducal service must tions of the same subjects from the artist's own
have been antipathetic to him. Apart from the hand attest their popularity. ^^ It was in these
fresco of the Trinity in the apse of the cathedral, pictures with their loose and pasty surfaces
now attributed to Ippolito Andreasi (1548- punctuated by rapid strokes of the brush, giving
1608),^- the most massive of these commissions an effêct of vibrating light, that Fetti imparted
was the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes (Man- a recognizably seventeenth-century character
tua, Palazzo Ducale) where the intricate com- to the pictorial tradition of Venice. A decisively
position with its manifold large figures falls new stage in the history of art is reached at this
below the high standard shown in many point.

passages of painting. Fetti's early work is rather Although Fetti himself went a long way to-
dark, but slowly his palette lightened, while he wards discarding the established conventions
intensified the surface pattern by working with of picture-making, it was Lys who took a step
complementary local colours.^' It was only after beyond Fetti : his work opens up a vista on the
his removal to Venice in 1622^^ and during the future of European painting. Lys had started
brief remainder of his life that he was able to his career in about 161 5 in Antwerp and Haar-
devote himself entirely to small easel pictures lem, where he came into contact with the circles
[49]. These little works, many of them illus- of local painters, in particular Hals and Jor-
BIBLOSARTE
I08 • THE PERIOD Ol TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
daens. In Venice he formed a friendship with about 1625, since despite its softness it is still
Fetti and, after the latter's death, with the comparatively firm in its structure. On the
Frenchman Nicolas Regnier (c. 1590- 1667), a other hand later pictures like the Ecstasy of St
follower of Caravaggio in Rome who moved to Pr//// (Berlin) or the Vision of St Jerome (Venice,
Venice in 1627. Only one of Lys's pictures is S. Nicolo da Tolentino) [50] show a looseness
dated, namely the Christ on the Mount of Olives and freedom and a painterly disintegration of
(Zurich, private collection), and the date has form which call to mind even the works of
been read both as 1628 and 1629. For the rest the Guardi [355].''^
it would appear that the longer he stayed away

from Holland the more he dissociated himself
CONCLUSION
from his Northern upbringing. Not only did he
exclude from his repertory the rather rustic The reader may well ask what the over-all
northern types, but he also tended towards an picture is that emerges from this rapid survey.
ever-increasing turbulence and freedom of Almost all the artists mentioned in this and the
handling. His development during his few previous chapters were born between 1560 and
Venetian years must have been astonishingly 1590. Most of them began their training with a
rapid. Such a picture as the Fall of Phaeton in Late Mannerist and retained throughout their
the Denis Mahon Collection, London, ^'^
with lives Mannerist traces to a greater or lesser
its velvety texture and an intensity which may degree. Only the youngest, born after 1590,
be compared with Rubens, must date from who were here included because, like Lys and
Fetti, they died at an early age, grew up in a
50. Giovanni Lys: The Vision of St Jerome, c. 1628. post-Mannerist atmosphere or were capable of
Venice, S. Nicolo da Totentino discarding the Mannerist heritage entirely. The
majority matured after 1600 and painted their
principal works after 1610. What creates a
common bond between all these provincial
masters is a spirit of deep and sincere devotion.
Viewed in this light, a Tiarini, a Schedoni, a
Cerano, and a Cigoli belong more closely to-

gether than is generally realized. On this level
it counts very little whether the one clings
longer or more persistently to Mannerist con-
ventions than the other, for they are all equally
divorced by a deep rift from the facile inter-
national Mannerism of the late Cinquecento,

and they all return in one way or another to the
great Renaissance masters and the first genera-
tion of Mannerists in their search for guidance
to a truly emotional art. It would, therefore, be
as wrong to underestimate the revolutionary
character of their style and to regard it simply,
as is often done, as a specific type of Late
Mannerism as it would be to stress too much
BIBLOSARTE
its continuity into the Baroque of the mid solemnity, mental excitation, and eflfervescence
century. The beginnings of the style date back could not be maintained for long. To explore
to Lodovico Carracci of the early nineties and further the possibilities which were open to
to Cigoli of the same period. It finds its most artists roughly from the beginning of Urban
intense expression in Caravaggio's work around VIITs reign onwards will be the task of the
1600; by and large it is the idiom of Cara- Second Part. But meanwhile the reader may
vaggisti like Orazio Gentileschi, Saraceni, and compare the change of religious temper from
Borgianni, and of the Emilian and Milanese an early, 'Mannerist', to a late, 'Baroque',
masters, mainly during the second decade; and, Strozzi [235, 236], a telling experience which
as has been shown again and again in these may be repeated a hundred times with artists
pages, it slowly comes to an end in the course of of the generation with which we were here
the third decade. concerned.
It is important to notice that this art is If it is at all possible to associate any one style
strongest, or even arises, in the provinces at a or manner with the spirit of the great reformers,
moment when the temper began to change in one would not hesitate to single out this art
Rome. This is revealed not only in the Farnese between about 1590 and 1625/30, and whether
Gallery but also in Annibale's religious work or not this will be agreed to, one thing is certain,
after 1600, where studied severity replaces emo- that the period under review carries its terms
tional tension. In the provinces the enormous of 'Late Mannerism' or 'Transitional Style' or
intensity of this style, the compound of gravity, 'Early Baroque' on\y fante de mietix.
BIBLOSARTE
51. Carlo Maderno: Rome, S. Susanna, 1597- 1603
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 6
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE
ARCHITECTURE based on an almost mathematically lucid pro-

gressive concentration of bays, orders, and
Rome: Carlo Maderno (7556-/629^
decoration towards the centre. The triple pro-
In the first chapter the broad pattern was jection of the wall is co-ordinated with the
sketched of the architectural position in Rome number of bays, which are firmly framed by
during the early years of the seventeenth cen- orders; the width of the bays increases towards
tury. The revolutionary character of Maderno's the centre and the wall surface is gradually
work has already been indicated. It was he who eliminated in a process reversing the thickening
broke with the prevailing severe taste and re- of the wall - from the Manneristically framed
placed the refined classicism of an Ottavio cartouches to the niches with figures and the
Mascherino and a Flaminio Ponzio by a forceful, entrance door which fills the entire central bay.
manly, and vigorous style, which once again, The upper tier under the simple triangular
after several generations, had considerable pediment is conceived as a lighter realization
sculptural and chiaroscuro qualities. Like so of the lower tier, with pilasters corresponding
many masons and architects, Maderno came to the half- and three-quarter-columns below.
from the North; he was born in 1556 at Capo- In this fa9ade North Italian and indigenous
lago on the Lake of Lugano, went to Rome Roman traditions are perfectly blended.^ Ma-
before Sixtus V's pontificate, and together with derno imparted a clearly directed, dynamic
his four brothers acquired Roman citizenship movement to the structure horizontally as well
in 1588.^ He began work in a subordinate capa- as vertically, in spite of the fact that it is built
city under his uncle, Domenico Fontana. After up of individual units. Neither in his facade of
the latter's departure for Naples he was on his St Peter's nor in that of S. Andrea della Valle -
own, and before 1600 he had made a name for in its present form mainly the work of Carlo
himself But his early period and, in particular, Rainaldi (p. 283) - did Maderno achieve an
his relationship to Francesco da Volterra re- equal degree of intense dynamic life or of logical
mains to be clarified. integration. Nor did he find much scope to
The year 1603 must be regarded as a turning develop his individuality in the interiors of S.
point in Maderno's career; he was appointed Maria della Vittoria and S. Andrea della Valle.
'Architect to St Peter's' and finished the facade But the dome of the latter church - the largest
of S. Susanna [51].-^ To the cognoscenti this in Rome after that of St Peter's - shows
fa9ade must have been as much of a revelation Maderno's genius at its best. Obviously derived
as Annibale Carracci's Farnese Gallery or Cara- from Michelangelo's dome, it is of majestic
vaggio's religious imagery. In fact, with this simplicity. Compared with the dome of St
single work, Maderno's most outstanding per- Peter's Maderno raised the height of the drum
formance, architecture drew abreast of the at the expense of the vault and increased the
revolutionary events in painting. In contrast to area that was to be reserved for the windows,
so many Mannerist buildings, the principle and these changes foreshadow the later Baroque
governing this structure is easy to follow : it is development.
BIBLOSARTE
Long periods of his working life were spent memoranda and drawings, and a large amount
in the service of St Peter's, where he was faced of documents which allow the construction to
with the unenviable task of having to interfere be followed very closely indeed.** The unassail-
with Michelangelo's intentions. The design of able data are quickly reported. In 1625 Cardinal
the nave, which presented immense difficulties,' Francesco Barberini bought from .\lessandro
proves that he planned with circumspection Sforza Santafiora, Duke of Segni, the palace at
and tact, desirous to clash as little as was pos- the 'Quattro Fontane'. A year later Cardinal
sible under the circumstances with the legacy Francesco presented the palace to his brother
of the great master. But, of course, the nave Taddeo. Pope Urban VIII commissioned Ma-
marred for ever the view of the dome from the derno to redesign the existing palace and to
square, with consequences which had a sequel enlarge it. The first payment for the new found-
down to our own days (p. 195). For the design ations dates from October 1628. Maderno died
of the fa9ade [1,112, 257] he was tied more fully on 30 January 1629, and the Pope appointed
than is generally realized by Michelangelo's Bernini his successor. To all intents and pur-
system of the choir and transepts (which he had poses the palace was completed in 1633, but
to continue along the exterior of the nave) and, minor work dragged on until 1638. It is clear
moreover, by the ritual requirement of the from these data that Bernini (who was assisted
large Benediction Loggia above the portico. by Borromini) was responsible for almost the
The proportions of the original design are entire work of execution.
impaired as a result of the papal decision of Maderno's design survives in a drawing at
1612, after the actual facade was finished, to the Uffizi which shows a long front of fifteen
add towers, of which only the substructures - model of the Palazzo
bays, fashioned after the
the last bay at each end - were built [109]. These Farnese, and an inscription explains that the
appear now to form part of the fa9ade. Looked design was to serve for all four sides of the
at without these bays, the often criticized re- palace. In fact, with some not unimportant
lation of width to height in the fa9ade is entirely alterations, it was used for the present north
satisfactory. Maderno's failure to erect the and east wings." At this stage, in other words,
towers was to have repercussions which will be Maderno made a scheme that by and large
reported in a later chapter'' (p. 190). corresponded to the traditional Roman palace,
As a designer of palaces Maderno is best consisting of a block with four equal sides and an
represented by the Palazzo Mattel, begun in arcaded courtyard. But there is no certainty
1598 and finished in 1616." The noble, austere that this was Maderno's last project. In the
brick facade shows him in the grip of the strong present palace, the plan of which may be likened
local tradition. In the courtyard he made subtle to an H [52], the traditional courtyard is aban-
use of ancient busts, statues, and reliefs, and doned and replaced by a deep forecourt. The
the connexion with such Mannerist fronts as main fa9ade consists of seven bays of arcades in
those of the villas Medici and Borghese is three storeys, linked to the entirely different
evident. But the four-flight staircase decorated system of the projecting wings by a transitional,
with refined stuccoes is an innovation in Rome. slightly receding bay at each side [53]. Who
It remains more thoroughly the
to scrutinize was responsible for the change from the tradi-
major problem of Maderno's career, his part in tional block form to the new plan ?
the designing of the Palazzo Barberini [52, 53]. At first sight, it would appear that nothing
The history of the palace is to a certain extent like this had been built before in Rome and,
still obscure, in spite of much literary evidence. moreover, qua palace, the structure remained
BIBLOSARTE
500 KT
52 (left). Rome, Palazzo Barberini, 1628-33.

Plan adapted from a drawing by N. Tessin
showing the palace before rebuilding off. 1670
53. Carlo Maderno and Gianlorenzo Bernini:

Rome, Palazzo Barberini,
1628-33. Centre of fa9ade
BIBLOSARTE
isolated in the Roman setting it had no suc- it its grand Baroque character and places it in
cession. Psychologically it is intelligible that a class of its own. It is even questionable whether
one prefers to associate the change ot plan with Bernini, given a free hand, would have been
the young genius who took over from Maderno satisfied with designing three arcaded tiers of
rather than with the aged master. Yet neither almost equal value.
the external nor the internal evidence goes to On the other hand, it is certain that adjust-
support this. In fact, there is the irrevocable ments of Maderno's design outside as well as
document in Vienna (Albertina) of an un- inside were made after Bernini had taken over.
finished elevation of half the facade (drawn for The celebrated windows of the third tier, set in
Maderno by Borromini) which, apart from surrounds with feigned perspective, are,how-
minor differences, corresponds with the execu- ever, Maderno's. The device, used by Maderno
tion. If one regards the palace, as one should, on at least one other occasion,'- made it possible
as a monumentalized 'villa suburbana', the to reduce the area of the window-openings;
plan loses a good deal of its revolutionary this was necessary for reasons of internal ar-
character, and to attribute it to Maderno will rangement. One may assume that even the en-
then no longer surprise us. richment of the orders - engaged columns in the
The old Sforza palace which Maderno had to second tier, pilasters coupled with two half-
incorporate into his design rose on elevated pilasters in the third tier - occurred while Mader-
ground high above the ruins of an ancient no was still alive. Another external feature is
temple."' The palace overlooked the Piazza Bar- worth mentioning. The ground floor and piano
berini but could never form one of its sides. Nor nohile of the long wings are articulated by fram-
was it possible to align the west front of the new ing bands, a device constantly employed by Late
palace with the Strada Felice (the present Via Mannerist architects and also by Maderno."
Sistina). In other words, whatever the new Although in a rather untraditional manner,
design, it could not be organically related to the Borromini often returned to it. It is therefore
nearest thoroughfares. A block-shaped palace not at all unlikely that it was Borromini's idea to
with arcaded courtyard cannot, however, be articulate the bare walls of Maderno's design in
dissociated from an intimate relationship with this way. To what extent the internal organi-
the street front. It was, therefore, almost a zation deviates from Maderno is difficult to
foregone conclusion that the block-shape would determine.'^ As far as the details are concerned
have to be abandoned and replaced by the type we are on fairly firm ground, and Bernini's as
which became traditional for the 'villa subur- well as Borromini's contribution to the design of
bana' from Peruzzi's Farnesina on and which doors will be discussed later (p. 198). But the
only recently Vasanzio had used for the Villa large staircase with the four flights ascending
Borghese [8]. In addition the arcaded centre along the square open well, traditionally ascribed
between containing bays and projecting wings to Bernini, may well be Maderno's. It is as new
was familiar from such buildings as Masche- as the deep portico, the enormous hall of the
rino's cortile of the Quirinal Palace and the piano nohile lying at right angles to the front,
garden front of the Villa Mondragone" [9]. and the inter-connected oval hall at its back.
There is, therefore, no valid reason why Ma- One is tempted to believe that Bernini assisted
derno should not be credited with the final by Borromini had here a freer hand than on the
design of the Palazzo Barberini : all its elements exterior, but at present these problems are still
were ready at hand, and it is the magnificent in abeyance and may never be satisfactorily
scale rather than the design as such that gives solved.
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE • II5
By the time Maderno died, he had directed part to the style of Domenico Fontana and the
Roman architecture into entirely new channels. elder Martino in Rome. Just as his great
Longhi
He had authoritatively rejected the facile aca- theoretical work, the Idea deW Architettura
demic Mannerism which had belonged to his L'uiversale of 16 15, with its hieratic structure
first impressions in Rome, and although not a and its codification of classical rules, concluded
revolutionary like Borromini, he left behind, an old era rather than opened a new one, so his
largely guided by Michelangelo, monumental architecture was the strongest barrier against a
work of such solidity, seriousness, and sub- turn towards Baroque principles in all the
stance that it was equally respected by the great territories belonging to Venice. One should
antipodes Bernini and Borromini.'^ compare Sansovino's Palazzo Corner (1532)
with Scamozzi's Palazzo Contarini dagli Scrigni
of 1609'" in order to realize fully that the latter's
Architecture outside Rome
academic and linear classicism is, as far as plastic
In the North of Italy the architectural history volume and chiaroscuro are concerned, a deli-
of the second half of the sixteenth century is berate stepping back to a pre-Sansovinesque
dominated by a number of great masters. The position. Moreover, in many respects Sca-
names of Palladio, Scamozzi, Sanmicheli, Ga- mozzi's architecture must be regarded as a
leazzo Alessi, Luca Cambiaso, Pellegrino Ti- revision of his teacher Palladio by way of revert-
baldi, and Ascanio Vittozzi come at once to ing to Serlio's conceptions. Their calculated
mind. By contrast, the first quarter of the seven- intellectualism makes Scamozzi's buildings pre-
teenth century cannot boast of names of the cursors of eighteenth-century Neo-classicism.
same rank, with the one exception of F.M. His special brand of frigid classicism, a tradi-
Ricchino. On the whole, what has been said tional note of Venetian art, was not lost upon
about Rome also apphes to the rest of Italy : the his countrymen and left its mark for a long time
reaction against the more extravagant applica- to come.^' But in the next generation the rising
tion of Mannerist principles, which had gene- genius of Baldassare Longhena superseded the
rally set in towards the end of the sixteenth brittle, linear style of his master and reasserted
century, led to a hardening of style, so that we the more vital, exuberant, imaginative, and
are often faced in the early years of the new painterly facet of the Venetian tradition.
century with a severe form of classicism, which, Even where Scamozzi's influence did not
however, was perfectly in keeping with the penetrate in the terra ferma, architects turned
exigencies of the counter-reformatory church. in the same Thus Domenico Curtoni,
direction.
On the other hand, the North Italian architects Sanmicheli's nephew and pupil, began in 1609
of this period also transformed their rich local the impressive Palazzo della Gran Guardia at
tradition more imaginatively than the Romans. Verona, where he applied most rigidly the pre-
The work of Binago, Magenta, and Ricchino is cepts of his teacher, ridding them of any Man-
infinitely more interesting than most of what nerist recollections."*
Rome had to offer, and it was to a large extent Milan, in particular, became at the turn of the
they who prepared the stylistic position of the century the stronghold of an uncompromising
High Baroque. classicism. It was probably St Charles Bor-
In Venice Vincenzo Scamozzi (1552-1616) romeo's austere spirit rather than his counter-
remained the leading master after the turn of reformatory guide to architects, the only book
the century. It is immediately apparent that his of its kind,^" that provided the keynote for the
dry Late Mannerism is the Venetian counter- masters in his and his nephew's service. The
BIBLOSARTE
Il6 THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
54. Fabio Mangone: Milan, Colkiiui t
(Archivio di Stato), first courtyard, begun 1608
Milanese Fabio Mangone (1587- 1629), a pupil Lelio Buzzi had begun. The facade of the origi-
of Alessandro Bisnati, was the man after Cardi- nal entrance is as characteristic of his rigorous
nal Federico's heart. As a sign of his apprecia- classicism as is the large courtyard of the
tion he appointed him in 1620 Professor of Collegio Elvetico (now Archivio di Stato) [54]
Architecture to the newly founded Accademia with its long rows of Doric and Ionic columns
Ambrosiana. Throughout the seventeenth cen- in two tiers under straight entablatures, begun
tury the cathedral still remained the focus of in 1 608.-° His facade of S. Maria Podone (begun
Milanese artistic life, and every artist and archi- 1626) with a columned portico set into a larger
tect tried there to climb the ladder to distinction. temple motif points to a knowledge of Palladio's
Mangone achieved this goal; in 1617 he suc- church fa9ades, which he transformed and sub-
ceeded Bisnati as Architect to the Cathedral mitted to an even sterner classical discipline.
and remained in charge until his death in 1629. Thus Milanese architects revert via Palladio to
Assisted by Ricchino, the portals were executed ancient architecture in search of symbols which
by him during this period (with Cerano in charge would be en rapport with the prevailing harsh
of the rich decoration, p. 99), but his severe spirit of reform in the city.-'
design of the whole fa9ade remained on paper. A different note was introduced into Milanese
Mangone's earlier activity was connected with architecture by Lorenzo Binago (called Biffi,
the (much rebuilt) Ambrosiana (161 1), which 1554- 1629),-- a Barnabite monk, who built S.
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE • II7
Alessandro, one of Milan's most important

churches (begun 1601, still unfinished in 1661).
Mangone's architecture is strictly Milanese,
setting the seal, as it were, on Pellegrino Ti-
baldi's academic Mannerism. Binago, by con-
trast, created a work that has its place in an all-
Italian context. Like a number of other great
churches of this period, the design of S. Ales-
sandro is dependent on the Bramante-Michel-
angelo scheme for St Peter's.-' In order to be
able to assess the peculiarities of Binago's work,
some of the major buildings of this group may
be reviewed. In chronological sequence they
are: the Gesii Nuovo at Naples (Giuseppe
Valeriano, S.J., 1584); S. Ambrogio at Genoa
(also G. Valeriano, 1587);-^ S. Alessandro at
Milan; S. Maria della Sanita, Naples (Fra

Nuvolo, 1602); the Duomo Nuovo at Brescia
(G.B. Lantana, 1604); and S. Carlo ai Catinari
in Rome (Rosato Rosati, 1612). All these build-
ings are interrelated; all of them have a square
or rectangular outside shape and only one fa9ade
(instead of four) ; and all of them link the centra-
lized plan of St Peter's with an emphasis on the 55. Lorenzo Binago: Milan, S. Alessandro,
longitudinal axis: the Gesii Nuovo by adding a begun 1 60 1. Plan
pair of satellite spaces to the west and east ends,
S. Ambrogio by adding a smaller satellite unit Jules Hardouin Mansart's dome of the Invalides
to the west and extending the east end; the in Paris.
Duomo Nuovo at Brescia and S. Carlo ai The joining of two centraUzed designs in one
Catinari by prolonging the choir, the latter, plan had a long pedigree. In a sense, the prob-
moreover, by using oval-shaped spaces along lem was already inherent in Brunelleschi's Old
the main axis, S. Maria della Sanita by enrich- Sacristy of S. Lorenzo; but it was only in the
ing the design by a pair of sateUite units to each North Italian circle of Bramante that the fully
of the four arms; S. Alessandro, finally, by developed type emerged in the form of a co-
adding a smaller centralized group with saucer ordination of two entirely homogeneous centra-
dome to the east [55]. S. Alessandro, therefore, lized domed spaces of different size,-"" an
is in a way the most interesting of this series of arrangement, incidentally, which had the sup-
large churches. It contains another important port of classical authority.-'' Binago's S. Ales-
feature: the arches of the crossing rest on free- sandro represents an important step towards a
standing columns. Binago himself recommend- merging of two previously separate units now :
ed that these be used with discretion. The motif the far arm of the large Greek-cross unit also
was immediately taken up by Lantana in the belongs to the smaller domed space. In addi-
Duomo Nuovo at Brescia and had a consider- tion, the spacious vaulting between the two
able following in Italy and abroad, down to centralized groups makes their separation im-
BIBLOSARTE
Il8 •
possible. Thus the unification of two centralized and 1638, Ricchino himself held this highest
groups results in a longitudinal design of richly office to which a Milanese architect could aspire.
varied character. In 1607 he designed his first independent

It is at once evident that this form of spatial building, the church of S. Giuseppe, which was
integration was a step forward into new terri- at once a masterpiece of the first rank.-** The
tory, full of fascinating possibilities. For a plan [56 1 consists of an extremely simple com-
number of reasons one may regard the whole bination of two Greek-cross units. The large
group of churches here mentioned as Late congregational space is a Greek cross with
Mannerist, not least because of the peculiar
vacillation between centralization and axial
direction. It is precisely in this respect that

Binago's innovation must be regarded as revo-
lutionary, for he decisively subordinated centra-
lized contraction to axial expansion. The future
lay in this direction. On the other hand, the
derivations from the centralized plan of St
Peter's found little following during the seven-
teenth century, and it was only in the eighteenth
century that they saw a limited revival,-' prob-

ably because of their Late Mannerist qualities.
The next step beyond S. Alessandro was
taken by Francesco Maria Ricchino (1584-
1658), through whom Milanese architecture
entered anew phase. It was he, a contemporary
of Mangone, who threw the classicist conven-
tions of the reigning taste overboard and did for
Milan what Carlo Maderno did for Rome. Al-

though almost a generation younger than
Maderno, his principal works, like Maderno's,
fall into the first three decades of the century.
Ricchino's work has never been properly
studied, but it would seem that, when one day
the balance sheet can be drawn up, the prize for
being the most imaginative and most richly
endowed Italian architect of the early seven-
teenth century will go to Ricchino rather than

Maderno. Beginning work under Binago, he
was sent by his patron. Cardinal Federico Bor-
romeo, to Rome to finish his education. After
his return in 1603 he submitted his first design

for the facade of the cathedral. In 1605 he was
capomastro, a subordinate officer under Aurelio
56 and 57. Francesco Maria Ricchino:
Trezzi, who was Architect to the Cathedral in Milan, S. Giuseppe, begun 1607.
1598 and 1604-5. Much later, between 1631 Section and plan (above) and facade (opposite)
BIBLOSARTE
N
BIBLOSARTE
120 • THt PERIOD OF TRANSITION AND THE EARLY BAROQUE
dwarfed arms and bevelled pillars which open could not achieve a proper dynamic relationship
into coretti above niches and are framed with between inside and outside, a problem that was
three-quarter columns; four high arches carry solved only by the architects of the High Baro-
the ring above which the dome rises. The small que. As to the first point, the facade of S.
square sanctuary has low chapels instead of the Giuseppe has no real precursors in Milan or
cross arms. Not only does the same composite anywhere in the North. On the other hand,
order unify the two spaces, but also the high Ricchino was impressed by the facade of S.
arch between them seems to belong to the con- Susanna, but he replaced Maderno's stepwise
gregational room as well as to the sanctuary. arrangement of enclosed bays by one in which
Binago's lesson of S. Alessandro was not lost. the vertical links take prominence, in such a
Ricchino employed here a similar method of way that the whole front can and should be seen
welding together the two centralized spaces, as composed of two high aedicules, one set into
which disclose their ultimate derivation from the other. The result is very different from
Bramante even after their thorough transforma- Maderno's: for instead of 'reading', as it were,
tion. This type of plan, the seventeenth-century the accretion of motifs in the facade in a temporal
version of a long native tradition, contained process, his new 'aedicule front' offers an instan-
infinite possibilities, and it is impossible to taneous impression of unity in both dimensions.
indicate here its tremendous success. Suffice It was the aedicule facade that was to become
it to say that the new fusion of simple centralized the most popular type of church fa9ade during
units with all its consequences of spatial enrich- the Baroque age.'"
ment and scenic effects was constantly repeated Fate has dealt roughly with most of Ricchino's
and, mainly in Northern Italy, revised and buildings. He was, above all, a builder of
further developed but Ricchino had essentially
; churches, and most of them have been des-
solved the problem. troyed;" many are only known through his
S. Giuseppe was finished in 1616; the fa9ade, designs;'- some have been modernized or re-
however, was not completed until 1629-30, built, while others were carried out by pupils
although it was probably designed at a much (S. Maria alia Porta, executed by Francesco
earlier date-'* [57]. It represents a new departure Castelli and Giuseppe Quadrio). In addition,
in two respects: Ricchino attempted to give the there was his interesting occasional work" which
facade a unity hitherto unknown and at the same needs, like the rest, further investigation. In his
time to co-ordinate it with the entire structure of later centralized buildings he preferred the oval
the church. As regards the latter point, the and, as far as can be judged at present, he went
problem had never been squarely faced. By and through the whole gamut of possible designs.
large the Italian church fa9ade was an external Of the buildings that remain standing, five may
embellishment, designed for the view from the cursorily be mentioned : the large courtyard of
street and rather independent of the structure the Ospedale Maggiore (1625-49), impressive
lying behind it. Ricchino determined the height in size, but created in collaboration with G. B.
of the lower tier by the height of the square body Pessina, Fabio Mangone, and the painter G. B.
of the church and that of the upper tier by the Crespi, and therefore less characteristic of him
octagonal superstructure; at the same time, he than the grand aedicule fa9ade of the monu-
carried the order of the facade over into the rest mental entrance to the Hospital; the palaces
of the structure, as far as it is visible from the Annoni (1631) and Durini (designed 1648),
street. Despite this significant integration of the which look back by way of Meda's Palazzo
'show-front' with the whole building, Ricchino Visconti (1598) to Bassi's Palazzo Spinola;'^ the
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE • 121
58. Francesco Maria Ricchino: Milan, Collegio Elvetico (Archivio di Stato). Facade, designed 1627
Palazzo di Brera (1651-86), built as a Jesuit Bernasconi from Varese correspond to the
College, with the finest Milanese courtyard severe classicism practised in Milan at the
which, having arches on double columns in two beginning of the seventeenth century. To the
tiers, marks, after the severe phase, a return to modern visitor there is a peculiar contrast
Alessi's Palazzo Marino;'^ and finally, the between the classicizing chastity of the archi-
fa9ade of the Collegio Elvetico, designed in 1 627, tecture and the popular realism of the tableaux
a work of great vigour which has, moreover, the vivants inside the chapels. If anywhere, the
distinction of being an early, perhaps the earliest, lesson can here be learned that these are two
concave palazzo facade of the Baroque [58]. complementary facets of counter-reformatory
With Ricchino's death we have already over- art.
stepped the chronological limits of this chapter. In the Duomo Nuovo Brescia has an early
Nobody of his stature remained in Milan to Seicento work of imposing dimensions (p. 1 17).
carry on the work he had so promisingly But just as so often in medieval times, the execu-
accomplished. tion of the project went beyond the resources of
Mention has been made of the Sanctuary at a small city. After the competition of 1595 the
Varese near Milan which Cardinal Federico design by Lantana (i 581 -1627) was finally
Borromeo had very much at heart. The archi- chosen in 1603. The next year saw the laying of
tectural work began in 1604 and was carried out the foundation stone, but as late as 1727 only
through most of the century. "' As one would the choir was roofed. Until 1745 there was a
expect, the fifteen chapels designed by Giuseppe renewed period of activity due to the initiative
BIBLOSARTE
of Cardinal Antonio Maria Querini. The Mich- in the nave.'" By virtue of this motif, the nave
elangelesque dome, however, was erected after appears isolated from the domed area. In addi-
1 82 1 by Luigi Cagnola, who introduced changes tion, the large central chapels with arches rising
'"
in the original design. to the whole height of the vaulting of the nave
To the names of the two able Barnabite archi- look like a transverse axis and strengthen the
tects Rosato Rosati and Lorenzo Binago, work- impression that the nave is centred upon itself.
ing at the beginning of the Seicento, that of In fact, on entering the church one may well
Giovanni Magenta (1565-1635)'^ must be believe oneself to be in a Greek-cross unit
added. He was the strongest talent at Bologna (without dome), to which is added a second,
during the first quarter of the century. A man of domed unit.Whether one may or may not want
great intellectual power, engineer, mathemati- to find in Magenta's ambiguous design a Late
cian, and theoretician, he even became in 161 Mannerist element, it is certain that he imagina-
General of his Order. In 1605 he designed on a tively transmuted North Italian conceptions.
vast scale the cathedral of S. Pietro at Bologna, Early Baroque in its massiveness, S. Salvatore
accomplishing the difficult union with Dome- was destined to exercise an important influence
nico Tibaldi's choir (1575), which he left un- on the planning of longitudinal churches.
touched. The design differs from St Peter's and Magenta's church of S. Paolo, begun in 1606,
the great Roman congregational churches in the shows that he was even capable of enlivening
alternating high and low arches leading into the the traditional Gesu type, to which Roman
aisles. With its brilliant light and the eighteenth- architects of this period did not really find an
century coretti, added by Alfonso Torreggiani alternative. By making space for confessionals
(1765), the church looks much later than it is. with coretti above them between the high arches
The execution lay in the hands of Floriano leading into the chapels, he created, more
Ambrosini and Nicolo Donati. While they effectively than in the cathedral, a lively rhythm
changed to a certain extent Magenta's pro- along the nave, reminiscent of Borromini's later
ject,'" the latter is fully responsible for the large handling of the same problem in S. Giovanni
church of S. Salvatore, designed in 1605 and in Laterano.
erected by T. Martelli between 161 3 and 1623 Parma, flourishing under her Farnese princes,
[59]. Inspired by the large halls of Roman ther- had in Giovan Battista Aleotti (1546- 1636) and
mae. Magenta here monumentalized the North his pupil Giovan Battista Magnani (1571-
Italian tradition of using free-standing columns 1653)^' Early Baroque architects. The former,
assisted by Magnani, built the impressively
simple hexagon of S. Maria del Quartiere ( 1 604-
59. Giovanni Magenta
19),^- the exterior of which is an early example
Bologna, S. Salvatore, 1605 23. Plan
of the pagoda-like build-up of geometrical
shapes taken up and developed later by Guarino
Guarini (Chapter 17, Note 12). Aleotti was for
twenty-two years in the service of Alfonso

d'Este at Ferrara, where he erected, among
others, the imposing fa9ade of the University
(1610), together with Alessandro Balbi, the

architect of the Madonna della Ghiara at Reggio
Emilia (1597-1619), a building dependent on
the plan of St Peter's though less distinguished
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE 123
than the series of buildings mentioned above. Nuova (now Via Garibaldi), begun by him in
In Ferrara Aleotti also made his debut as an 1
551.''^ But to his contemporary Rocco Lurago
architect of theatres/' an activity that was must be given pride of place for having recog-
crowned by his Teatro Farnese, built at Parma nized the architectural potentialities which the
between 16 18 and 1628. The Farnese theatre, steeply rising ground of Genoa offered. His
exceeding in size and magnificence any other Palazzo Doria Tursi in Via Garibaldi (begun
before it, superbly blends Palladio's and Sca- 1568) shows for the first time the long vista
mozzi's archaeological experiments with the from the vestibule through the cortile to the
progressive tendencies evolved in Florence/^ staircase ascending at the far end. Bartolomeo
The wide-open, rectangular proscenium-arch Bianco (before 1590-1657), Genoa's greatest
together with the revolutionary U-shaped form Baroque architect,^'' followed the lead of the
of the auditorium contained the seeds of the Palazzo Doria Tursi. His most accomplished
spectacular development of the seventeenth- structure is the present University, built as a
century theatre. Heavily damaged during the Jesuit College (planned 1630)'' along the Via
last war, it has now been largely rebuilt. Balbi (the street which he began in 1606 and
Genoa's great period of architectural deve- opened in 16 18); it presents an ensemble of
lopment is the second half of the sixteenth incomparable splendour [60, 61]. For the first
century. It was Galeazzo Alessi who created time he unified architecturally the vestibule and
the Genoese palazzo type along the Strada courtyard, in spite of their different levels; in
60.Bartolomeo Bianco;
Genoa, University, planned 1630. Courtyard
BIBLOSARTE
6i. Bartolomeo Bianco: Genoa, University, planned 1630. Section and plan
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE •
125
the cortile he introduced two tiers of lofty ar- Thus the Florence of the early seventeenth
cades resting on twin columns ;^^ and at the far century developed her own brand of a classiciz-
end he carried the staircase, dividing twice, to ing Mannerism, and this was by and large in
the whole height of the building. Fully aware keeping with the all-Italian position. But Flor-
of the coherence of the whole design, the eye of ence never had a Maderno or a Ricchino, a
the beholder is easily led from level to level, four Bianco or Longhena; she remained to all intents
in all. The exterior contrasts with the earlier and purposes anti-Baroque and hardly ever
Genoese palazzo tradition by the relative sim- broke wholly with the tenets of the early seven-
plicity of the design without, however, breaking teenth-century style. The names of the main
away from the use of idiomatic Genoese motifs.^'- practitioners at the beginning of the seven-
Compared with the University, Bianco's teenth century are Giovanni de' Medici (d.
Palazzi Durazzo-Pallavicini (Via Balbi i, begun 1621),^^ Cosimo I's natural son, who supervised
1619) and Balbi-Senarega (Via Balbi 4, after the large architectural undertakings during
1620) are almost an anticlimax. While the latter Ferdinand Fs reign (1587-1609); Lodovico
wasfinishedby Pier Antonio Corradi( 161 3-83), CigoH (i 559-1613), the painter (pp. 97-8) and
the former was considerably altered in the architect,^- Maderno's unsuccessful competitor
course of the eighteenth century by Andrea for St Peter's, the builder of the choir of S.
Tagliafichi (1729- 18 11), who built the grand Felicita, of a number of palaces, and according
staircase. Apart from the balconies and the to Baldinucci also of the austere though uncon-
cornices resting on large brackets, both palaces ventional courtyard of Buontalenti's Palazzo
are entirely bare of decoration. This is usually Nonfinito; and Giulio Parigi (1571-1635) and
mentioned as characteristic of Bianco's austere his son Alfonso (i6oo-f. 1656),'' famous as
manner. It is, however, much more likely that theatrical designers of the Medici court, who
these fronts were to be painted with illusionist imparted a scenographic quality to the Isolotto
architectural detail (such as window surrounds, and the theatre in the BoboH gardens. Giulio
niches, etc.) and figures in keeping with a late exerted a distinct influence on his pupil Callot
sixteenth-century Genoese fashion.^" and also on Agostino Tassi, whose scenic paint-
In contrast to the north of Italy, the contri- ings reveal his early training. ^^ Finally, Matteo
bution of Tuscan architects to the rise of Nigetti ( 1 560- 1 649),^' Buontalenti's pupil, must
Baroque architecture is rather limited. One is be added, whose stature as an architect has long
inclined to think that Buontalenti's ample and been overestimated. His contribution to the
rich decorative manner might have formed a Cappella dei Principi is less original than has
starting point for the emergence of a proper been believed, nor has he any share in the final
Seicento style. Yet Ammanati's precise Late design of S. Gaetano, for which Gherardo Sil-
Mannerism and, perhaps to a larger extent, vani alone is responsible (p. 301).^* His manner
Dosio's austere classicism corresponded more may best be judged from his fa9ade of the
fully to the latent aspirations of the Florentines. Chiesa di Ognissanti (1635-7). Here, after forty
It is hardly an overstatement to say that towards years, he revived with certain adjustments''" the
1600 an academic classicizing reaction against academic Mannerism of Giovanni de' Medici's
Buontalenti set in. Nevertheless, Buontalenti's fa9ade of S. Stefano dei Cavalieri at Pisa (1593).
decorative vocabulary was never entirely for- In order to assess the sluggish path of the
gotten; one finds it here, there, and everywhere Florentine development, one may compare the
till the late eighteenth century, and even archi- Ognissanti facade with that of Ascanio Vittozzi's
tects outside Florence were inspired by it. Chiesa del Corpus Domini at Turin, where it
BIBLOSARTE
126 •
can be seen how by 1607 the theme of S. to fruition. After a competition among the most
Stefano was handled in a vigorously sculptural distinguished Florentine artists, Giovanni de'
Early Baroque manner. Medici together with his collaborator, Ales-
During the first half of the seventeenth cen- sandro Pieroni, and Matteo Nigetti prepared
tury the erection of the huge octagonal funeral the model which was revised by Buontalenti
chapel (Cappella dei Principi) absorbed the (1603-4). I he latter was in charge of the build-
interest and exhausted the treasury of the ing until his death in 1608, when Nigetti con-
Medici court. Lavishly incrusted with coloured tinued as clerk of works for the next forty
marbles and precious stones, the chapel, lying years. ^** If in spite of such activity the chapel
on the main axis of S. Lorenzo, was to offer a remained a torso for a long time to come, it yet
glittering viewpoint from the entrance of the epitomizes Medici ambition of the early seven-
church. Since the wall between the church and teenth century. In the interior the flat decorative
the chapel remained standing, this scenic effect, quality takes precedence over the structural
essentially Baroque and wholly in keeping with organization, and by Roman standards of the
the Medicean love of pageantry and the stage, time the exterior [62] must have been judged
was never obtained. As early as 1561 Cosimo I as a shapeless pile. Rather sober and dry in
had planned a funeral chapel, but it was only detail, the large drum and dome do not seem to
Grand Duke Ferdinand I who brought the idea tally with their substructure. Windows of differ-
ent sizes and in different planes are squeezed
62. Giovanni de' Medici, Alessandro Pieroni, in between the massive and ill-articulated 'but-
Matteo Nigetti, Bernardo Buontalenti Florence,:
tresses'. There is, in fact, no end to the obvious
S. Lorenzo, Cappella dei Principi, begun 1603
incongruities which manifest a stubborn adhe-
rence to the outmoded principles of Mannerism.
Naples saw in the last two decades of the
sixteenth century a considerable intensification
of architectural activity, due to the enthusiasm
of two viceroys. Lacking native talents, archi-
tects had to be called from abroad. Giovan
Antonio Dosio (d. 1609) and Domenico Fon-
tana (d. 1607) settled there for good. The former
left Florence in isSg;^'' the latter, running into
difficulties after Sixtus V's death, made Naples
his home in 1592, where as 'Royal Engineer'
he found tasks on the largest scale, among them

the construction of the Royal Palace (1600 2).
Thus Florentine and Roman classicism were

assimilated in the southern kingdom. A new
phase of Neapolitan architecture is linked to
the name of Fra Francesco Grimaldi (1543-
161 3), a Theatine monk who came from
Calabria."" His first important building, S.
Paolo Maggiore (1581/3-1603), erected over

the ancient temple of Castor and Pollux, proves
him an architect of uncommon ability. In spite
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE •
127
of certain provincialisms, the design of S. Paolo Naples had a flourishing school of architects.
has breadth and a sonorous quality that may By that time the great master of the next genera-
well be called Early Baroque. The wide nave tion, Cosimo Fanzago, was already working.
with alternating high and low arches, opening But it was then that Rome asserted her ascen-
respectively into domed and vaulted parts of dancy, and Naples as well as the cities of the
the (later) aisles, is reminiscent of Magenta's North, which had contributed so much to the
work in Bologna and more imaginative than rise of the new style, were relegated once again
Roman church designs of the period. In 1585 to the role of provincial centres.
Grimaldi was called to Rome, where he had a
share in the erection of S. Andrea della Valle.

He must have had the reputation of being the SCULPTURE
leading Theatine architect. Among his post-
Rome
Roman buildings, S. Maria della Sapienza (be-
gun 16 14, with facade by Fanzago) returns, We have seen in the first chapter that sculpture
more sophisticated, to the rhythmic articulation in Rome had reached a low-water mark during
of S. Paolo, while S. Maria degli Angeli (1600- the period under review. By and large the work
10), the Cappella del Tesoro, which adjoins the executed in the Chapel of Paul V in S. Maria
cathedral and is itself the size of a church (1608- Maggiore during the second decade of the
after 1613), and SS. Apostoli (planned c. 1610, seventeenth century was still tied to the Late
executed 1626-32) are all thoroughly Roman in Mannerist standards set in Sixtus V's Chapel,
character and succeed by their scale and the and none of the sculptors of the Carracci genera-
vigorous quality of the design. tion - Cristoforo Stati,*"' Silla da Viggiii, Am-
Next to Grimaldi, Giovan Giacomo Con- di brogio Bonvicino, Paolo Sanquirico, Nicolo
forto (d. 1 631) and the Dominican Fra Nuvolo Cordier, Ippolito Buzio - showed a way out of
(Giuseppe Donzelli) should be mentioned. the impasse in which sculpture found itself
Conforto began under Dosio, was after the landed. Among this group there was hardly an
latter's death architect of S. Martino until 1623, indication that the tired and facile formalistic
and built, apart from the campanile of the routine would so soon be broken by the rise of
Chiesa del Carmine (1622, finished by Fra a young genius, Bernini, who was then already
Nuvolo, 163 1 ), three Latin-cross churches (S. beginning to produce his juvenilia. It cannot
Severo al Pendino, S. Agostino degli Scalzi, be denied that the older masters also created
1603-10, and S. Teresa, 1602-12). A more solid work. In particular, some of Buzio's, Cor-
fascinating figure is Fra Nuvolo. He began his dier's, and Valsoldo's statues and busts have
career with S. Maria di Costantinopoli (late undeniably high qualities, but that does not
sixteenth century), where he faced the dome impair the assessment of the general position.
with majolica, thus inaugurating the charac- In a varying degree, they all translated the
teristic Neapolitan type of colourful decoration. models they followed into a tame and frigid
His S. Maria della Sanita (1602-13) has been style. This is true for Buzio's Sansovinesque
mentioned (p. 117); his S. Sebastiano, with a St James off. 1615(8. Giacomo degli Incurabili)
very high dome, and S. Carlo Arena (1631),

all' as well as for Cordier's Luisa Deti Aldobrandini
both elliptical, are uncommonly interesting and {c. 1605, Aldobrandini Chapel, S. Maria sopra
progressive. Minerva), which goes back to Guglielmo della
These brief hints indicate that by the end of Porta,"- and for Valsoldo's St Jerome (f. 1612,
the first quarter of the seventeenth century S. .Maria Maggiore), so clearly dependent on
BIBLOSARTE
Alessandro Vittoria. If one adds the tradition 63 ( helom). Stefano .Maderno: Hercules and Cacus,
of the style of Flemish relief one has accounted, ('. 1610. Dresden, Alheriinum
it would seem, for the primary sources of in-

64 (right ). Pietro Bernini: St John the Baptist,
spiration of these sculptors.
16x4-15. Rome. S. Andrea delta I'alle
Four other artists, also engaged on the Chapel
of Paul V, have not yet been discussed, namely 65 (far right ). Camillo .Mariani:
St Catherine of .-Mexandria,
Stefano Maderno, Pietro Bernini, Camillo
1600. Rome, S. Bernardo alle Terme
Mariani, and, above all, Francesco Mochi,
though it is they who had a considerable share
in the revitalization of Roman sculpture after
1600. Stefano Maderno from Bissone in Lom-
bardy (1576- 1636) appeared in Rome at the
end of the sixteenth century. He soon made a
name for himself with the marble statue of St

Cecilia (in S. Cecilia, 1600) which depicts ac-
cording to a persistent legend the body of the
youthful saint exactly in the position in which
it was found in 1599.^'' The sentimental flavour
of this story apart, which helped to secure for
Maderno his loftv' place in the history of sculp-
ture, the statue is imbued with a truly moving

simplicity, and many later statues of recumbent
martyr saints followed this model. His later
monumental work in marble for Roman chur-

ches is not particularly distinguished;''^ but in
his small terracotta models, bronzes, and (rare)
marbles (Ca d'Oro, Venice; Palermo; Dresden

London; Oxford; etc.),''^ which derive from
famous antiques, he combines a carefully studied
classicism with solid realistic observations [63].
This was the artistic climate in which Bernini's
early work was to rise.
As the father of the great Gianlorenzo, Pietro

Bernini (1562- 1629) commands special inter- In Rome he changed to a more boisterous
est.*^ His career unfolds in three stages: the manner, no doubt through contact with Mariani
early years in Florence and Rome, the twenty- and Mochi, and produced work in which he
odd years in Naples (1584- 1605/6), and the combined the new Early Baroque hrio with a
last decades in Rome, mainly in the service of painterly approach which is not strange to find
Paul V. The Neapolitan setting held no surprise in the pupil of Antonio Tempesta {Assiimpttoii
for a Florence-trained sculptor, and during the of the Virgin, Baptistery, S. Maria Maggiore,
full years of his sojourn he adjusted himself 1607-10; Coronation of Clement I III, Cappella
without reservation to the pietistic climate of Paolina, S. Maria Maggiore, 1612-13). But the
the southern metropolis, notable in the work of bodies of his figures lack structure and seem
Naccherino, with whom he also collaborated. boneless, and the texture of his Roman work is
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE [29
soft and flaccid [64]. All this is still typically Camillo Mariani's (1565?- 161 1) work was
Late Mannerist, and indeed between his slo- of greater consequence in revitalizing Roman
venly treatment of the marble and the firm and sculpture."" He was born in Vicenza and had
precise chiselling found in the early work of in the studio of the Rubini the inestimable
his son there is an almost unbridgeable gulf. advantage of going through the discipline of
Nor is the dash to be observed in his Roman Alessandro Vittoria's school. Shortly after his
work purposeful and clearly defined. He prefers arrival in Rome he executed his masterpieces,
to represent unstable attitudes which baffle the the eight simple and noble monumental stucco
beholder: his Si John in S. Andrea della Valle figures of saints in S. Bernardo alle Terme
is rendered in a state between sitting, getting (1600), in which the Venetian nuance is obvious
up and hurrying away. for anyone to see [65]; but it is strengthened by
BIBLOSARTE
130 •
a new urgency and a fine psychological penetra-

tion which make these works stand out a mile
from the average contemporary production and
ally them to the intensity of the transitional
style in painting in which we found crystallized
the true spirit of the great reformers.
Mariani was also the strongest single factor
in shaping the style of Francesco Mochi ( 1 580-
1654).'''* Born at Montevarchi near Florence,
Mochi had his early training with the Late
Mannerist painter Santi di Tito before studying
under Mariani in Rome. His first independent
work of importance, the large marble figures
of the Annunciation at Orvieto (1603-8), show
mixture the components of his
in a fascinating
Tuscan and realistic North Italian

style: linear
Mannerism. Mochi knew how to blend these

elements into a manner of immense vitality;
the Annunciation is like a fanfare raising sculp-

ture from its slumber [66]. It is clearly more
than a coincidence that on Roman soil the new
invigorating impetus appears in the three arts
almost simultaneously: Mochi's Annunciation
is informed by a bold spirit, freshness, and
energy similar to Caravaggio's Roman grand
manner (1597- 1606), Annibale's Farnese ceil-
ing (1597- 1 604), and Maderno's S. Susanna

(1597-1603). From 1612 to 1629 Mochi stayed
with brief interruptions at Piacenza in the ser-
vice of Ranuccio Farnese and created there the
first dynamic equestrian statues of the Baroque,
breaking decisively with the tradition of Gio-
vanni Bologna's school. The first of the two
monuments, that of Ranuccio Farnese (1612-
20), is to a certain extent still linked to the past,
while the later, Alessandro Farnese's (1620-5),
breaks entirely new ground [67]. Imbued with
a magnificent sweep, the old problem of unify-
66 (above). Francesco Mochi: ing rider and horse is here solved in an un-
The Virgin of" the Annunciation, 1603-8. precedented way. Never before, moreover, had
Orvieto, Museo dell' Opera
the figure of the rider held its own so emphati-
cally against the bulk of the horse's body.
67 (opposite). Francesco Mochi:
Alessandro Farnese, After his return to Rome he executed his
1620-5. Bronze. Ptacenza, Piazza Cavalli most spectacular work, the giant marble statue
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
of St Veronica (St Peter's, 1629-40), which (1634-^-. 1650), the Taddaeus at Orvieto (1641-
seems to rush out of its niche driven by un- 4),and the St Peter and St Paul of the Porta del
controllable agony. In this work Mochi already Popolo (1638-52), are not only an unexpected
reveals a peculiar nervous vehemence and strain. anachronism, but are also very unequal in
A stranger in the changed Roman climate, out- quality. Always alone among his contem-
classed by Bernini's genius and disappointed, poraries, first the sole voice of uninhibited pro-
he protested in vain against the prevalent tide gress, then the sole prophet of bleak despair,
of taste. Frustrated, he renounced everything he was utterly out of tune with his time. His
he had stood for and returned to a severe form Baroque works antedate those of the young
of Mannerism. His later statues, such as the Bernini,whose superiority he refused to ac-
Christ [68] and St John from the Ponte Molle knowledge - and it was this that broke him.^'
68. Francesco Mochi Christ, from the Baptism,

:
after 1634. Rome, formerly Ponte Molle
pBff" J
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURL AND SCULPTURt 133
finished a number of works left in various stages Madrid (1634-40) [69]," is basically akin to
of execution at the latter's death.'- Deeply Giovanni Bologna's equestrian monuments with
steeped in Giovanni Bologna's manner, he the customary trotting horse. The idea of repre-
began work on his own. His most celebrated senting the horse in a transitory position on its
figures are the four bronze slaves at the base hindlegs - from then on de rigueur for monu-
of Bandini's monument to Ferdinand I de' ments of sovereigns - was forced upon Tacca
Medici at Livorno (1615-24)."' Such figures by Duke Olivarez, who had a Spanish painting
of subdued captives, of classical derivation, sent to Florence to serve as model.''' But Tacca's
played an important part in the symbolic equestrian statue remains reserved and im-
Renaissance representations of triumphs,'^ and mobile and is composed for the silhouette. It
we know them in Florentine sculpture from lacks the Baroque momentum of Francesco
Bertoldo's battle-relief and Michelangelo's tomb
of Julius II down to Giovanni Bologna's (des- 69. Pietro Tacca: Philip IV, 1634-40.
troyed) equestrian monument of Henry IV of Madrid. Plaza dc Oncnlc
France. Here too, as in the case of Tacca's

work, the four chained captives at the corners
of the base were a polite metaphor rather than
a conceit laden with deep symbolism. Two of
these captives, for which Francavilla was res-
ponsible, have survived ; by comparison Tacca's
figures show a fresh realism^'' and a broadness of
design which seem, indeed, to inaugurate a
new era. But one should not be misled. These
captives not only recall the attitudes imposed
on models in life drawing classes, but their
complicated movement, the ornamental rhythm
and linear quality of their silhouettes are still
deeply indebted to the Mannerist tradition, and

even older Florentine Mannerists such as the
engraver Caraglio come to mind. Later works
by Tacca confirm this view. The famous foun-
tains in the Piazza Annunziata at Florence,
originally made for Livorno in 1627, with their
thin crossing jets of water, the over-emphasis
on detail (which presupposes inspection from
a near standpoint and not, as so often in the
Baroque, from far away), the virtuosity of Mochi's Alessandro Farnese and Bernini's
execution, and the decorative elegance of mon- Constantine.
strous formations are as close to the spirit of In Giovanni Bologna's wake, Florentine Man-
Late Mannerism as the over-simplified gilt nerist sculpture of the fin-de-siecle had, even
bronze statues of Ferdinand I and Cosimo II more than Florentine painting of the period,
de' Medici in the Cappella dei Principi in S. an international success from the Low Countries
Lorenzo (1627-34)."'^' Even his last great work, to Sicily. Also Neapolitan sculpture at the turn
the Philip IV of Spain on the rearing horse in of the century was essentially Florentine Man-
BIBLOSARTE
nerist in character. Two artists, above all, were limited degree, in the Certosa of Pavia that
responsible for this trend Pietro Bernini,: whom sculptors could find rewarding employment.
we found leaving Naples for Rome in 1605/6, Thus the academic Late Mannerist tradition of
and Michelangelo Naccherino, a pupil of Gio- Pellegrino Tibaldi and the younger Brambilla
vanni Bologna, who was the strongest power in was continued by the latter's pupil Andrea Biffi
Naples for almost fifty years, from his arrival (d. 1 631) and others, and by Biffi's pupils
in 1573 till his death in 1622. He never aban- Gaspare Vismara (d. 165 1) and Gian Pietro
doned his intimate ties with Florentine Man- Lasagni (d. 1658), the leading masters, who
nerism, but owed more to the older generation perpetuated the stylistic position of about 1600
of Bandinelli, Vincenzo Danti, Vincenzo de' until after the middle of the seventeenth cen-
Rossi, and even to Donatello than to his tury. Even an artist like Dionigi Bussola (1612-
teacher, whom he accused of irreligiosity."' In 87), whose dates correspond almost exactly with
the pietistic climate of the Spanish dominion those of the romanized Lombard Ercole Ferrata
his figures are often imbued with a wholly un- (P- 307)1 did not radically change the position**'
Florentine religious mood and a mystic sensi- in spite of his training in Rome before 1645. It
bility, eloquent testimonies of the spirit of the seems hardly possible to talk of a Milanese High
Counter-Reformation. Characteristic examples Baroque school, and we may therefore anticipate
are his tombs of Fabrizio Pignatelli in S. Maria later events by mentioning Giovan Battista De
dei Pellegrini (1590- 1609), Vincenzo Carafa in Maestri, called Volpino, who executed about
SS. Severino e Sosio (161 1), and Annibale a dozen statues for the cathedral between 1650
Cesareo in S. Maria della Pazienza (1613). In all and 1680. During the seventeenth and eigh-
these tombs the deceased is represented stand- teenth centuries more than 1 50 sculptors worked
ing or kneeling, one hand pressed against the in the cathedral studio. Art historians have
chest in devotional fervour.**" Naccherino antici- scarcely begun to sift this material, and one may
pated here a type of sepulchral monument that well ask whether such an undertaking would
was to become of vital importance in the differ- not be love's labour lost.
ent atmosphere of Rome during the 1630s Like Bologna and Venice, Genoa hardly had
and 1 640s. an autonomous school of sculptors during the
The contribution of Lombardy to the history first half of the seventeenth century. Production
of the Baroque consists to a considerable extent was partly under the influence of Lombard
in the constant stream of stonemasons, sculp- academic Mannerism, partly derived from
tors, and architects to Rome, where they Michelangelo's pupil Montorsoli. The far-
settled. In Milan itself seventeenth- as well as reaching impact of Florentine sculpture at this
eighteenth-century sculpture is disappointing. moment may be judged from the fact that
The reasons are difficult to assess. They may lie Francesco Camilliani's and Naccherino's foun-
in the permanent drain on talents, in the petri- tain in the Piazza Pretoria at Palermo, Nacche-
fying influence of the Ambrosian Academy, or rino's and Pietro Bernini's Fontana Medina at
in the bureaucracy which had developed in the Naples, and Taddeo Carloni's (1543-1613)
works of the cathedral. For generations the weak Neptune fountain of the Palazzo Doria
great sculptural tasks were connected with the at Genoa - all depend on Montorsoli's Orion
cathedral, and it was onlv there and, to a more fountain at Messina.**'
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
> .*^
^<«*
BIBLOSARTE
PART TWO
THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE

CHAPTER 7
INTRODUCTION
The Second Part of this book, with the generic would be wrong to see either Urban's reign or
title 'The Age of the High Baroque', comprises those of his successors simply in terms of an in-
many different artistic tendencies; but the creasing secularization. On the contrary, Urban
period receives its imprint from the over- VIII confirmed the decrees of the Council of
powering figure of Bernini, who for more than Trent, and not only maintained the peace with
half a century dominated Italian artistic life at the Jesuits but regarded them as his foremost
the focal point, Rome. His success was made allies in consolidating the results of the Counter-
possible because he had the good fortune to Reformation. The words with which he regi-
serve five popes who showed the highest regard stered the memory of St Ignatius in the Roman
for his genius. martyrology are characteristic of his attitude:
The new era begins with the pontificate of 'On the 31 July is celebrated in Rome the feast
Urban VIII (1623-44), whose strong but re- of St Ignatius, Confessor, Founder of the
fined features survive in a number of magnifi- Society of Jesus, illustrious for his holiness, his
cent busts by Bernini [70]. Quite different from miracles, and his zeal in propagating the
the austere popes of the Counter-Reformation, Catholic religion throughout the world.'- It is
Urban saw himself as a Julius II re-born. In equally characteristic that the Pamphili Pope
his early youth he had written poems in Latin Innocent X, Urban's successor (1644-55), was
and Italian modelled on Horace and Catullus.' attended on his death-bed by none but the
As pope he revived the humanist interest in general of the Jesuit Order, Padre Oliva, who
learning and surrounded himself with a circle was also on intimate terms with Bernini.
of poets and scholars, and superficially his court Once again, therefore, the question asked in
assumed something of the freedom and gran- the first chapter of this book arises during the
deur of his Renaissance forerunners. But it new period ; did the Jesuits and, for that matter,
any other of the vigorous new Orders such as
the Carmelites and Theatines take an active
part in shaping not only their own but also the
70.Gianlorenzo Bernini
Bust of Urban VIII, 1640-2. Bronze. Detail. papal art policy? No one can doubt that a
Spoleto, Cathedral considerable change occurred in artistic inter-
BIBLOSARTE
138 •
pretation of religious experience; but it was soul in the state of contemplation led, in the
not a change in one direction. The bow stretches view of traditional ecclesiasticism, to the exalta-
from an appealing worldliness [236] to tender tion of an empty consciousness and conse-
sensibility [169], to sentimental and mawkish quently to immoral apathy. In contrast to
devotion,' bigoted piety [207], and mystic ela- 'classical' mysticism, quietism was theological
tion [78, 79] - sufficient evidence that we face rather than metaphysical, obscurantism rather
the artists' reactions to the protean temper of than enlightenment, an escapist form of devo-
the age rather than a deliberate policy. In actual tion produced at will rather than a spontaneous
fact, religious institutions accepted whatever condition of sublime union with God.
was in the power of the artists to offer. It seems not far-fetched to conclude that the
mentality which informed probabilism and
quietism found an echo in religious imagery.
Seicento Devotion and Religions Imagery
Much that strikes the modern observer as hypo-
One must probe into the religious tendencies critical piety in Seicento pictures stems no
which developed in the course of the seven- doubt from the general attitude towards confes-
teenth century in order to gain an understanding sion and devotion at the time of the Catholic
of the character and diversity of religious Restoration.
imagery.^ During the first half of the century, It must also be emphasized that in the course
casuistry and, in its wake, the various forms of the seventeenth century the Order of the
of probabilism became the widely accepted Jesuits itself went through a characteristic meta-
patterns of theological thought and conviction, morphosis: under the generals Muzio Vitel-
principles to which the masses of the faithful leschi (1615-45), Vincenzo Caraffa (1645-9),
reacted by laxit}' of morals.'' It would be difficult and Giovan Paolo Oliva, mundane interests in
to assert that morality sank to a lower level than wealth, luxury, and political intrigue, and a
ever before; what took on a new and morally frivolity in the interpretation of the vows re-
perilous aspect was that the Church now not placed the original zealous and austere spirit
only connived at, but even supported, individual of the Order. Moreover, the Catholic Restora-
decisions of convenience at variance with the tion had led to a consolidation of doctrine and
letter and the spirit of dogmatic religion. This authority, expressed by the glamour of the High
was the hard core of probabilism. To be sure, Baroque papal court, which vied with those of
in the second half of the century probabilism the absolute monarchies. As a result of such
lost ground, but a public figure such as Padre developments one finds, broadly speaking, that
Oliva, General of the Jesuits from 1664 to inside the Church the anti-aesthetic approach
1 68 1, gave it his full support. to art of the period of the militant Counter-
At the same time quietism, a new form of Reformation was now replaced by an aesthetic
mysticism, swept through Spain, France, and appreciation of artistic quality. This readiness
Italy. Its chief prophet was the Spanish priest to discriminate, which began under Pope Paul
Miguel de Molinos (d. 1697), whose Guida V, coincided in the pontificates of Urban VIII,
spirituale, published in 1675, took Rome by Innocent X, and Alexander VII (1655-67) with
storm.'' Molinos, it is true, ended his life in the maturity of the great Baroque individualists,
prison; yet quietism had come to stay. Catholic Bernini, Cortona, Borromini, Sacchi, and .Al-
historians describe it as a perversion of the gardi, who received full official recognition.
mystical doctrine of interior quiet. Molinos's The turn to aestheticism in official religious
'soft and savoury sleep of nothingness' of the circles is one of the distinguishing marks of the
BIBLOSARTE
INTRODUCTION 139
new era. Even if the arts remained an important late manner, in particular, reveals an intense
weapon in the post-counter-reformatory ar- spirituality at variance with the laxity of official
senal, they had no longer the sole function to devotion. I have pointed out that Bernini had
instruct and edify, but also to delight. Every close contacts with the Jesuits (p. 24) and regu-
official pronouncement bears this out, begin- larly practised St Ignatius's Spiritual Exercises.
ning with Urban VIITs well-known words, While the Exercises owed their unparalleled
which he supposedly addressed to Bernini after success to the vivid appeal they made to the
ascending the papal throne. 'It is your great senses, which is also a hall-mark of Bernini's
good luck, Cavaliere,' he is reported to have work, their practical psychology, centred in the
said, 'to see Matteo Barberini pope; but we are deliberate evocation of images, was essentially
even luckier in that the Cavaliere Bernini lives non-physical.
at the time of Our pontificate' - an unam- To what extent Bernini himself and others
biguous homage to artistic eminence. To what were captivated by quietist mysticism is a ques-
length aesthetic appreciation was carried be- tion that would need further investigation. Italy
comes apparent from some highly interesting produced no great mystics during the seven-
documents which, though rather late, yet teenth century, but there seems to have existed
characterize the new attitude. A controversy a popular undercurrent which kept the mystic
arose between the Jesuits and the sculptor tradition alive. It is more than likely that
Legros regarding the placing of his statue of the Bernini had studied the writings of Dionysius
Blessed Stanislas Kostka in S. Andrea al Quiri- the Areopagite,** and we have his own word for
nale, Rome.' The Jesuits rejected the artist's it that the Imitation of Christ, written by the
request to move the statue from the little room late medieval mystic Thomas a Kempis (1380-
of the Novitiate into one of the chapels of the 1471), was his favourite book, from which he
church, advancing the argument, among others, used to read a chapter every night." It is in this
that there would be no relationship between directipn, I believe, that one has to look in order
the size of the figure and that of the chapel and, to explain the alliance in many High Baroque
in addition, that the figure would interfere with works between Jesuit psycho-therapeutic di-
the uniformity of the church, a principle on rectness and non-Jesuit mysticism.
which Bernini, the architect, had insisted and

which Prince Camillo Pamphili, the patron,
Rhetoric and Baroque Procedure
had fully accepted.
The course taken by Seicento devotion, the Ecstasies and raptures are the psycho-physical
'secularization' of the Jesuit Order and the conditions which designate the culmination of
papal court, the aesthetic aspirations in clerical mystical activity. .At many periods artists endea-
circles - all this would seem to militate against voured to render not only these conditions
a resurgence of mysticism in art. Yet it hap- themselves but also the visions experienced in
pened, as is evidenced by a number of Roman that exalted state of perception. What distin-
sculptures and paintings roughly between 1650 guishes the Baroque from earlier periods and
and 1680, from Bernini's St Teresa [85] to even the High from the Early Baroque is that
Gaulli's frescoes in the Gesii [213]. The same the beholder is stimulated to participate actively
tendency is to be found outside Rome; as proof in the supra-natural manifestations of the
may be mentioned only the late paintings ot mystic art rather than to look at it 'from outside'.
Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione or the works This is meant in a very specific sense, for it is
of Mattia Preti's middle period [245]. Bernini's evident that in many works from about 1640
BIBLOSARTE
140 • THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
on a dual vision is implied, since the method of echo common opinions. Similarly, the Baroque
representation suggests that the entire image artist responded to the affective behaviour of
of a saint and his vision is the spectator's supra- the public and developed a rhetorical technique
natural experience. Bernini's St Teresa, shown that assured easy communication. Thus the
in rapture, seems to be suspended in mid-air artists of this period made use of narrative con-
[84, 85], and this can only appear as reality by ventions and a rhetorical language of gestures
virtue of the implied visionary state of mind of and expression that often strike the modern
the beholder. Or to give a later example: in observer as hackneyed, insincere, dishonest, or
Pozzo's ceiling of S. Ignazio [217] 'illumina- hypocritical."
tion' is granted to the saint in ecstasy, but to On the other side of the balance sheet are the
see the heavens open with the saint and his growing awareness of personal style and the
disciples riding on clouds - that is due to revela- role assigned to inspiration and imagination and
tion granted to the spectator."^ Scarcely known consequently the value put on the sketch, the
to the Early Baroque, the dual vision was often bozzetto, and the first rough idea, unchecked
pressed home with all the resources of illu- by the encumbrances of execution. These new
sionism during the High Baroque and supported values, often uncommitted to current rhetorical
by drama, light, expression, and gesture. Noth- usage, were to attain prominence later.
ing was left undone to draw the beholder into
the orbit of the work of art. Miracles, wondrous

Patronage
events, supra-natural phenomena are given an
air of verisimilitude; the improbable and un- Nothing could be more misleading than to
likely is rendered plausible, indeed convincing. label - as has been done'^ - the art of the entire
Representations of dual visions are extreme Baroque period as the art of the Counter-
cases of an attempt to captivate the spectator Reformation. The austere popes of the late
through an appeal to the emotions. It is worth- sixteenth century and the great counter-refor-
while seeking a common denominator for this matory saints would have been horrified by
approach so obvious in a prominent class of the sensuous and exuberant art of Bernini's age
High Baroque religious imagery. The technique and would also have been out of sympathy with
of these artists is that of persuasion at any price. the art policy of the popes of the Catholic
Persuasion is the central axiom of classical Restoration. It was mainly due to Urban VIII
rhetoric. In an illuminating paper G. C. .-Vrgan^^ Barberini (1623-44), Innocent X PamphiU
has therefore rightly stressed the strong in- (1644-55), and Alexander VII Chigi (1655-67),
fluence of Aristotle's Rhetoric on Baroque pro- and their families that Rome was given a new
cedure. Aristotle devotes the entire second book face, an appearance of festive splendour which
of his Rhetoric to the rendering of the emotions changed the character of the city for good. In
because they are the basic human stuff through order to assess this transformation, one need
which persuasion is effected. The transmission only compare the gloomy 'counter-reformatory'
of emotive experience was the main object ot palazzo type, exemplified by Domenico Fon-
Baroque religious imagery, even in the works tana's Lateran palace and the family palace ot
of such Baroque classicists as Andrea Sacchi.'- the Borghese Pope Paul V, with such exhila-
With his technique of persuasion the artist rating structures as the Palazzo Barberini [53]
appeals to a public that wants to be persuaded. and the Palazzo Chigi-Odescalchi [107], or the
In rhetoric, Aristotle asserts, the principles of sombre church fa9ades of the late sixteenth and
persuasion, in order to be persuasive, must early seventeenth centuries with the imagina-
BIBLOSARTE
INTRODUCTION • I41
tive and sparkling creations of a slightly later possible, for instance, to list a series of frescoes
period, such as S. Andrea al Quirinale [105], between 1630 and 1650 comparable to those of
S. Agnese Martina e Luca [145], and
[129], SS. the years 1606-18 (p. 79).
S. Maria della Pace [147]; one need only think The High Baroque popes sums
lavished vast
of Bernini's fountains [92], of the elation experi- on their private undertakings: Urban VIII on
enced by generation after generation on the the Palazzo Barberini and Innocent X on the
Piazza del Popolo [181], the Piazzas Navona 'Pamphili Centre', the Piazza Navona with the
and Campitelli, and, above all, of the jubilant family palace and S. Agnese." But their primary
grandeur pervading the Piazza of St Peter's objective, enhancing the glamour and prestige
[112,113]. These prominent examples give an of the papal court, remained St Peter's, and it
idea of the character and extent of papal was the magnitude of this task that depleted
patronage during the period under review. They their resources. Immediately after Urban's ac-
also indicate that from Urban VIII's reign on cession Bernini began work on the Baldacchino
the most important building tasks were handed [86] and was soon to be engaged on the re-
on to the most distinguished architects, in organization of the whole area under the dome
contrast to the lack of discrimination often to as well as on the pope's tomb [83]. Regarding
be found in the earlier period; further, that the the pictorial decoration of the basilica, Urban's
patrons sympathetically accepted personal idio- policy was less clear-sighted. Although Andrea
syncrasies of style and the determination of Sacchi began to paint in 1625 and was kept busy
artists and architects to solve each problem on for the next ten years, at first the pope also fell
its own merits. In contrast to the equalizing back on older Florentine painters like Ciampelli
tendencies of the earlier phase, the variety of and Passignano; Baglione too and even the aged
manner now becomes almost unbelievable, not and entirely outmoded Cavaliere d'Arpino re-
only between architect and architect and not ceived commissions for paintings. But apart
only between the early and late works of one from Sacchi's, the main burden lay on Lan-
master, but even between one master's works franco's and Cortona's shoulders. Other dis-
of the same years (cf. illustration 105 with 98 tinguished artists such as Domenichino, Valen-
and 119 with 137). Strong-willed individualists tin, Poussin, and Vouet had their share and, in
make their entry. addition, the very young Pellegrini, Camassei,
If all this be true, some popular misunder- and Romanelli, who held out hopes of great
standings should yet be corrected. Contrary to achievement but in the light of hisjory must
general opinion, most of the new churches built be regarded as failures."' In any case, during
in Rome during this period were small, even Urban's pontificate the work of decoration in
very small, in size; the need for large congrega- St Peter's never stopped, and almost every year
tional churches was satisfied at an earlier period. saw the beginning of a new enterprise. The
Many of the finest structures of the Roman tempo slackened under Innocent X, but Alex-
High Baroque, and precisely those which had ander VII once again pursued the continuation
also the greatest influence inside and outside of the work with the utmost energy. Under him
Italy, are monumental only in appearance, not the two most prodigious contributions, the
in scale. Moreover, compared with the exten- Cathedra of St Peter [87] and the Piazza, took
sion and diversity of papal, ecclesiastical, and shape.
aristocratic patronage under Paul V, artistic Compared with St Peter's, the patronage be-
enterprises under the following popes were stowed on the two papal palaces, the Vatican
considerably more limited. It would not be and the Quirinal, was negligible. In the Vatican
BIBLOSARTE
142 •
Urban had rooms painted by Abbatini and glory of faith and sacrifice are given expression,
Romanelli, and although the latter's frescoes and these highly charged symbols impress hem- t
in the Sala della Contessa Matilda'" (1637 42) selves on the beholder's eye and mind through
are not devoid of charm, it is obvious that they their intense and impetuous visual language.''
cannot vie with the monumental works of these Yet-, while this cycle of monumental works
years. On the whole, it can be stated that during seemed to propound Rome's final victory, the
this period the less distinguished commissions authority of the Holy See had already begun to
were in the hands of minor artists. This does wane. The Peace of Westphalia (1648), ending
not apply, however, to the one major operation the Thirty Years War in Europe, made it evi-
in the Quirinal palace, the decoration of the dent that henceforth the powers would settle
Gallery, accomplished in Alexander's reign by their quarrels without papal intercession. More-
all available talents under Pietro da Cortona's over, in the course of the century 'the authority
supervision (p. 330). of the Holy See' - in Ranke's words - 'changed
The outstanding achievement of the entire inevitably, if gradually, from monarchic abso-
epoch remains Bernini's work in and around lutism to the deliberative methods of constitu-
St Peter's, executed over a period of almost tional aristocracy'. Not unexpectedly, therefore,
two generations. Though undertaken without after the age of Bernini, Cortona, and Borromini
a premeditated comprehensive programme on Rome could no longer maintain her unchal-
the part of the popes, this work embodies the lenged artistic supremacy, .\lthough Rome
spirit of the Catholic Restoration and, implicitly, preserved much of her old vitality, a centrifugal
that of the High Baroque more fully than any shift of gravity towards the north and south
other complex of works of art in Rome, Italy, may be observed in the latter part of the seven-
or Europe.'* In ever new manifestations the teenth century: Venice, Genoa, Piedmont, and
perpetuity and triumph of the Church, the Naples began to take the leading roles.
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 8
GIANLOREXZO BERNINI
I 598-1 680
INTRODUCTION Cardinal Scipione Borghese's attention was

drawn to the young prodigy and that he, a mere
Few data are needed to outline the life's story lad of nineteen, entered the orbit of the most
of the greatest genius of the Italian Baroque. lavish patron of the period. Until 1624 he re-
Bernini was born at Naples on 7 December mained in the service of the cardinal, creating,
1598, the son of a Neapolitan mother and a with brief interruptions, the statues and groups
Florentine father. We have seen that his father which are still in the Villa Borghese. .\fter
Pietro was a sculptor of more than average Urban VIII's accession to the papal throne,
talent and that he moved with his family to his pre-eminent position in the artistic life of
Rome in about 1605. Until his death seventy- Rome was secured. Soon the most important
five years later Gianlorenzo left the citv only enterprises were concentrated in his hands, and
once for any length of time, when he followed from 1624 to the end of his days he was almost
in 1665, at the height of his reputation, Louis exclusively engaged on religious works. In
XIV's call to Paris. With brief interruptions his February 1629, after Maderno's death, he was
career led from success to success, and for appointed 'Architect to St Peter's' and, al-
more than fifty years, willingly or unwillingly, though his activity in that church began as early
Roman artists had to bow to his eminence. Only as 1624 with the commission of the Baldacchino
Michelangelo before him was held in similar [86], the majority of his sculptural, decorative,
esteem by the popes, the great, and the artists and architectural contribution lay between 1630
of his time. Like Michelangelo he regarded and his death.
sculpture as his calling and was, at the same In the earlv 1620s he was one of the most
time, architect, painter, and poet; like Michel- sought-after portrait sculptors, but with the
angelo he was a born craftsman and marble was accretion of monumental tasks on an unprece-
his real element; like Michelangelo he was dented scale, less and less time was left him for
capable of almost superhuman concentration distractions of this kind. In the later 1620s and
and single-mindedness in pursuing a given task. in the thirties he had to employ the help of
But unlike the terrible and lonely giant of the assistants for such minor commissions, and
sixteenth century, he was a man of infinite from the last thirty-five years of his life hardly
charm, a brilliant and witty talker, fond of half a dozen portrait busts exist by his hand.
conviviality, aristocratic in demeanour, a good The most extensive works - tombs, statues,
husband and father, a first-rate organizer, en- chapels, churches, fountains, monuments, and
dowed with an unparalleled talent for creating the Square of St Peter's - crowd into the three
rapidly and with ease. pontificates of Urban VIII, Innocent X, and
His father's activity in Paul V's Chapel in S. Alexander VII. Although he was active to the
Maria Maggiore determined the beginning of verv end, it was only during the last years that
his career. It was thus that the pope's and commissions thinned out. From all we can
BIBLOSARTE
144 " rui- AGK OK THt HUiH BAROQUE
gather, this was due to the general dearth of 7 Gianlorenzo Bernini

1 .
dechne of his Aeneas and .^nchises, 1618-19.

artistic activity rather than to a
Rome. Calleria Bur^hese
creative capacity in old age. His work as a
painter was mainly confined to the 1620s; later

he hardly touched a brush and preferred using
professional painters to express his ideas. .Most
of his important architectural designs, on the
other hand, belong to the later years of his life,
particularly to the period of .-Mexander VI Ts

reign.'
SCULPTURE
Slylislic Development
It is not quite easy in Bernini's case to ascertain

with precision caesuras in the development of
his style. The reason is simple: for about fifty
years he worked simultaneously on a number

of great enterprises and many of them were
carried out over long periods, while changes
and alterations were incorporated as long as the
progress of the work permitted. Thus he needed

nine years to finish the Baldacchino, ten years
for the Longinus, thirteen for the Cathedra, and
almost twenty for the tomb of Urban VIII.
Nevertheless, his approach to sculpture under-
went considerable transformations which can
be associated, by and large, w ith definite periods
of his life.
To the earliest group of works, datable be-

tween 1 6 1 5 and 1 6 1 7, belong the Goal Amalthea
with the Infant Jupiter and a Satyr (Borghese
Gallery), the St Lawrence (Florence, Contini
Bonacossi Collection) and the St Sebastian
(Lugano, Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection), and
in addition the Santoni- and \ igevano busts
(S. Prassede and S. Maria sopra Minerva,
Rome). All these works show, in spite of their
Mannerist ties, an extraordinary freedom, an
energv and perfection of surface treatment
which lift them far above the mass of mediocre
contemporary productions. The next phase be-
gins with the Aeneas and Am /uses of 161 8- 19
[71], the first monumental group for Cardinal
BIBLOSARTE
Scipione Borghese. A work of this size required 72. Gianlorenzo Bernini: David, 1623.
considerable discipline, and we see the young Rome, Gallena Biir^hese
Bernini - probably advised by his father - re-
turning to a composition more decidedly Man-

nerist than any of his previous sculptures. The
screw-like build-up of the bodies has a well-
established Mannerist pedigree (figura serpen-
tinata), also to be found in the father's work,
while the precision, vigour, and firmness of
the execution clearly represent an advance be-
yond the earliest phase. The next statues, fol-
lowing in rapid succession, demonstrate an
amazing process of emancipation which is hard-
ly equalled in the whole history of sculpture.
One may follow this from the Neptune and
Triton, made to crown a fishpond in Cardinal
Montalto's garden (1620, now Victoria and

Albert Museum), to the Rape of Proserpina
(162 1 -2), the David {162^) [72], and the Apollo
and Daphne (1622-5, all for Scipione Borghese,
Borghese Gallery, Rome). A new type of sculp-
ture had emerged. Hellenistic antiquity and
Annibale Carracci's Farnese ceiling were the
essential guides to Bernini's revolutionary con-
ceptions.' Some of the new principles may be

summarized : all these figures show a transitory
moment, the climax of an action, and the be-

holder is drawn into their orbit by a variety of
devices. Their immediacy and near-to-life
quality are supported by the realism of detail

and the differentiation of texture which make
the dramatic incident all the more impressive.
One need only compare Bernini's David with
statues of David of previous centuries, such as
Donatello's or Michelangelo's, to realize the
decisive break with the past : instead of a self-
contained piece of sculpture, a figure striding
through space almost menacingly engages the
observer.
With the St Bibiana (1624-6, S. Bibiana,
Rome) [73] begins the long series of religious
statues which required a change of spirit, if not
of sculptural principles. Here for the first time
Bernini expressed in sculpture the typically
BIBLOSARTE
I4(> THE AGK Ol- Tilt IllCill UAROQUE
sevcntccnth-century sensibility so well known step in the conquest of the body by the drama-
from Rcni's paintings. Here also tor the first tically conceived drapery is the monumental
time the fall ol the drapery seems to support, Loni(inus (1629-38, St Peter's) [74J. Three
and to participate in, the mental attitude of the strands of folds radiate from a nodal point under
figure. Later, he increasingly regarded garments the left arm towards the large vertical cataract
and draperies as a means to sustain a spiritual of drapery, leading the eye in a subtle way to
concept by an abstract play of folds and cre- the stone image of the Holy Lance, a relic of
vasses, of light and shade. The next decisive which is preserved in the crypt under the statue.
Thus the body of St Longinus is almost smo-
thered under the weight of the mantle, which
seems to follow its own laws.
A parallel development will be found in Ber-
nini's busts. Those of the 1620s are pensive
and calm, with a simple silhouette and plastic,
firm folds of draperies. A long series of these
'static' but psychologically penetrating busts
survives from the small head of Paul V (1618,
Borghese Gallery) [75] to the busts of Gregory
XV, of Cardinal Escoubleau de Sourdis (S.
Bruno, Bordeaux), of Monsignor Pedro de Foix
Montoya (S. Maria di Monserrato, Rome), to
the early busts of Urban VHI and that of
Francesco Barberini (Washington, National
Gallery, Kress Collection), to name only the
most important ones. The bust of Scipione
Borghese of 1632 (Rome, Borghese Gallery)
[76], by contrast, has a dynamic quality;^ the
head is shown in momentary movement, the

lively eye seems to fix the beholder, and the
mouth half-open, as if speaking, engages him
in conversation. Similarly dynamic is the ar-
rangement of the drapery, on which the lights
play and flicker and which therefore seems in

permanent movement.
Thus, with this bust and the statue of Lon-
ginus a new phase begins in Bernini's work. If
one wants to attach to them a terminological
label, they may be called 'High Baroque'. The
new importance conferred upon the drapery as
a prominent factor in supporting the emotional
impact of the work will be found during the
same years in paintings by Cortona or Lan-
73. Gianlorcnzo Bernini: St Bibiana, 1624 6. franco, and even in those of an artist like Reni.
Rome, S. Bihiana One may compare the Virgin in Reni's Assump-
BIBLOSARTE
74- Gianlorenzo Bernini: St Longinus, 1629-38. Rome, St Peter's
BIBLOSARTE
14^ •
75- Gianlorenzo Bernini: Bust of Pope Paul V, 1618. Rome, Gallena Bargliese
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI •
149
Gianlorenzo Bernini: Bust of Cardinal Scipione Borghese, 1632. Rome, Galleria Borghese
BIBLOSARTE
76.
150 •
TiiK ac;e of the iiinii baroque
ttoti in Genoa ot" 1616-17 [},},] with that of his years, too, he placed for the first time a monu-
Maddinia of I he Rosary of 1630- 1 (Bologna, mentalized rustic fountain into the centre of a
Finacotcca); only the latter shows passages of square (Four Rivers I'ountain, Piazza N'avona,
heavy self-contained drapery similar to the ver- 1648 51) [93], radically revised the classical
tical fall of Longinus's mantle. concept of beauty (Truth Unveiled, 1646-52,
But Bernini did not immediately pursue the Borghese Gallery), found a new solution for
newly opened path. On the contrary, during the old problem of the truncated chest in busts
the 1630s there was a brief pause, a classical (Francis I d'Este, 1650-1, Estense Gallery,
recession, probably not uninfluenced by the Modena), and designed the new type of the
increasing pressure from the camp of the more Baroque equestrian monument (Constantine,
emphatic upholders of the classical doctrine.
To this phase belong, among others, the tomb

of the Countess Matilda in St Peter's (1633 7) 77. Gianlorenzo Bernini:
St .Mary Magdalen,
and the large relief of the Pane Ores Meas inside
1661-3. Siena, Cathedral, Cappella Chigi
the portico over the central door of the basilica
(1633-46); in addition, the head of the Medusa
(1636?, Rome, Palazzo dei Conservatori) and
some portrait busts, above all those of Paolo
Giordano !•'
Orsini, Duke of Bracciano (Castle,
Bracciano), and of Thomas Baker (1638, Vic-
toria and Albert Museum); finally, some of
Bernini's weakest works, such as the Memorial
Inscription for Urban VIII in S. Maria in
.\raceli (1634) and the JVlemorial Statue of

Urban VIII in the Palazzo dei Conservatori
(1635-40). The contribution of assistants in the
execution of all these works varies, and none
can lay claim to complete authenticity.
What may be called Bernini's middle period,
the years from about 1640 to the mid fifties,
must be regarded as the most important and

most creative of his whole career. It was during
these years that the final design of the tomb of
Urban VIII took shape (begun 1628, but carried
out mainly between 1639 and 1647, St Peter's)
[83], that he developed a revolutionary type of
funeral monument (Maria Raggi, 1643, S. Maria
sopra Minerva), and most decisive - conceived
the idea of unifying all the arts to one over-
whelming effect while at the same time dis-
covering the potentialities of concealed and
directed light (Raimondi Chapel, S. Pietro in
Montorio, c. 1642 6, and Cornaro Chapel, S.
Maria dellaVittoria, 1645-52) [84]. Duringthese
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI 151
begun 1654, but not finished until 1668, Scala from the Daniel (1655-7, Chigi Chapel, S.
Regia, Vatican) [82]. It is impossible to over- Maria del Popolo) to the Mary Magdalen in
estimate the significance of the ideas incor- Siena Cathedral (166 1-3) [77], further to the
porated in these works, not only for the Roman Angels at the sides of the Chair of the Cathedra
setting but for the next hundred years of Italian (cast in 1665) and the Angels for the Ponte S.
and, indeed, European art. Angelo (1668-71, S. Andrea delle Fratte [78,
The transition to his latest manner may be 79] and Ponte S. Angelo)' with their ethereal
observed in the works from the early sixties bodies and extremely elongated extremities.
onwards. With the one exception of the Hahak- And parallel with this 'gothicizing' tendency
kuk (1655-61, S. Maria del Popolo) [80], all the treatment of garments becomes increasingly
78. Gianlorenzo Bernini 79. Gianlorenzo Bernini:

The Angel with the Crown of Thorns, 1668 71. The Angel with the Superscription, 1668-71
Rome, S. Andrea delle Fratte Rome, S. Andrea delle Fratte
his later figures show the over-long and slender impetuous, turbulent, and sophisticated. They
limbs which he first gave to the Truth Unveiled. lose more and more the character of real material
One may follow the development towards the and must be viewed as abstract patterns capable
conception of more and more attenuated bodies of conveying to the beholder a feeling of
BIBLOSARTE
Ii;2 •
passionate spirituality. In the case of the Mary Bernini's turn, in his later years, to an austere
MuiiJiikn, for instance, the sweep and counter- and, one is tempted to say, classical framework
sweep of two ropes of tightly twisted folds for his compositions shows that he was not
cutting across the body sublimely express the independent of the prevalent tendencies of the
saint's agony and suspense. Similarly, the grief period. But in his case it is just the contrast
of the Ponte S. Angelo Angels over Christ's between violently strained plastic ma.sses and
Passion is reflected in difterent ways in their axial control which gives his late work an un-
wind-blown draperies. The Crown of Thorns equalled dramatic and ecstatic quality.
held by one of them is echoed by the powerful,
wavy arc of the drapery which defies all at-
Sculpture with One and Many Views
tempts at rational By contrast, the
explanation.
more delicate and tender mood of the Angel It is one of the strange and ineradicable mis-
with the Superscription is expressed and sus- apprehensions, due, it seems, to Heinrich
tained by the drapery crumpled into nervous Woelfflin's magnetic influence, that Baroque
folds which roll up restlessly at the lower end. sculpture presents many points of view.^ The
In the early seventies. Bernini drew the last contrary is the case, and nobody has made this
consequences. One may study the change from clearer than the greatest Baroque artist -
Constantine's horse to the similar horse of the Bernini himself. Many readers may, however,
equestrian monument of Louis XIV (1669-77, immediately recall the Borghese Gallery statues
Versailles), or even from the authentic bozzetto, and groups which, standing free in the centre
to be dated 1670 (Borghese Gallery), to the of the rooms, invite the beholder to go round
execution of the actual work, which was nearing them and inspect them from every side. It is
completion in 1673, ^^^ ^^ î'l t)e found that usually forgotten that their present position is
between the model and the marble there was a of fairly recent date and that each of these works
further and last advance in the dynamic orna- was originally placed against a wall. Right from
mentalization of form. The garments of the the beginning Bernini 'anchored' his statues
bronze angels on the altar of the Cappella del firmly to their surroundings and with advancing
Sacramento (St Peter's, 1673-4) show this ten- years found new and characteristic devices to
dency developed to its utmost limit. Parallel assure that they would be viewed from pre-
with this went an inclination to replace the selected points.
diagonals, so prominent during the middle It is, of course. Renaissance statuary that
period, by horizontals and verticals, to play with comes to mind when we think of sculpture
meandering curves or to break angular folds conceived for one main aspect. Most Renais-
abruptly, and to deepen crevices and furrows. sance figures leave not a shadow of doubt about
Nobody can overlook the change from the the principal view, since by and large they are
Ecstasy of St Teresa (1645-52) [85] to the worked like reliefs with bodies and extremities
Blessed Lodovica Albert out (1674, S. Francesco extending without overlappings in an ideal for-
a Ripa) [81] or from the portrait bust of Francis ward plane. Quite diflierent are Bernini's figures:
I (1650-1) to that of Louis XIV (1665, Ver- they extend in depth and often display complex
sailles) [91]. In his latest bust - that of Gabriele arrangements of contrasting spatial planes and
Fonseca {c. 1668-75, S. Lorenzo in Lucina) movements. The difference may be studied in
[203] - it is evident how strongly these com- the Chigi Chapel of S. Maria del Popolo, where
positional devices support the emotional tension Bernini designed his Hahahkuh [80] as a
expressed in the head. counterpart to Lorenzetti's Raflaelesque^«//i///.
BIBLOSARTE
In contradistinction to the latter's relief-like

character, Bernini's figure, or rather group,
does not offer a coherent 'relief-plane', but
emphatically projects and recedes in the third
dimension. In addition to the contrappostal

arrangement of Habakkuk's legs, torso, and
head and the pointing arm cutting across the
body, there is the angel turned into the niche.
And it is just when we see Habakkuk in the
frontal view that the angel appears most fore-

shortened. But viewing the group as a whole,
we note that the angel's action (his gripping
the prophet by a lock of hair and pointing across
the room, in the direction of Daniel's niche) is
fully defined from the exact central position

facing the niche, and it is only from this stand-
point that all the parts, such as the combined
play of the legs and arms of the two figures,
can be seen as a meaningful pattern.' In order
to perceive the body and arms of the angel fully
extended, the beholder has to step far to the
right ; but then Habakkuk's pose and movement

are no longer co-ordinated, nor does the whole
group present an integrated, coherent view.
Thus, once the beholder relinquishes the prin-
cipal aspect, new views may appear in his field
of vision, yet they are always partial ones which

reveal details otherwise hidden, without, how-
ever, contributing to a clarification of the
overall design.
The result of this analysis may safely be
generalized ; we are, in fact, concerned with an
problem Baroque sculpture.
» essential in It ap-
pears then that Bernini's statues are conceived
in depth and that the sensation of their spatial
organization should and will always be realized,

but that they are nevertheless composed as
images for a single principal viewpoint. One
must even go a step further in order to get this
problem into proper focus. Bernini's figures
not only move freely in depth but seem to belong
to the same space in which the beholder lives.
80. Gianlorenzo Bernini:
The Prophet Habakkuk, 1655-61. Differing from Renaissance statuary, his figures
Rome, S. Maria del Popolo, Cappella Chigi need the continuum of space surrounding them
BIBLOSARTE
154 THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
and without it they would lose their raisoti practice and gave a group of several figures an
d'etre. Thus the David aims his stone at an infinite number of equally valid viewpoints.
imaginary Goliath who must be assumed to be The propagation of multiple viewpoints in
somewhere in space near the beholder; the sculpture came in the wake of deep spiritual
Bibiana is shown in mute communication with change, for the socially elevated sculptor of the
God the Father, who, painted on the vault sixteenth century, refusing to be a mere crafts-
above her, spreads his arms as if to receive her man, thought in terms of small models of wax
into the empyrean ot saints; Lnniiinus looks up or clay. Thus he created, unimpeded by the
to the heavenly light tailing in from the dome material restrictions of the block. The Renais-
of St Peter's; Hahakkiik points to the imaginary sance conception of sculpture as the art of
labourers in the field while the angel of God is working in stone ('the art of subtracting') began
about to remove him to Daniel's den across the to be turned into the art of working in clay and
space in which the spectator stands. The new wax ('modelling', which is done by adding - for
conceptual position may now be stated more Michelangelo a painterly occupation), and this
pointedly: Bernini's statues breathe, as it were, sixteenth-century revolution ultimately led to

the same air as the beholder, are so 'real' that the decay of sculpture in the nineteenth century.
they even share the space continuum with him, Although Bernini could not accept the many
and yet remain picture-like works of art in a views of Mannerist statuary because they would
specific and limited sense; for although they interfere with his carefully planned subject-
stimulate the beholder to circulate, they re- object (beholder-work) relationship and, more- 1
quire the correct viewpoint not only to reveal over, would prevent the perception at a glance
their space-absorbing and space-penetrating of one centre of energy and one climax of action,
qualities, but also to grasp fully the meaning of he did not return to the Renaissance limitations
the action or theme represented. To be sure, it dictated by the block-form, since he wanted to
is Bernini's persistent rendering of a transitory wed his statues to the surrounding space. By
moment that makes the one-view aspect un- combining the single viewpoint of Renaissance
avoidable: the climax of an action can be wholly statues with the freedom achieved by the Man-
revealed from one viewpoint alone. nerists, Bernini laid the foundation for his new.
While Bernini accepts on a new sophisticated Baroque, conception of sculpture.
level the Renaissance principle of sculpture Only on rare occasions did he conceive works
with one view, he also incorporates in his work for multiple viewpoints. This happened when
essential features of Mannerist statuary, namely the conditions under which his works were to be
complex relationships, broken contours, and seen were beyond his control. Such is the case
protruding extremities. He takes advantage, in of the angels for the Ponte S. Angelo, which had
other words, of the Mannerist freedom from to have a variety of viewpoints for the people
the limitations imposed by the stone. Many of crossing the bridge. These angels clearly present
his figures and groups consist of more than one three equally favourable views - from the left,
block, his Lotijiinus for instance of no less than the right, and the centre; but they do not offer
five. Mannerist practitioners and theorists, in the coherent views either in pure profile or from the
first place Benvenuto Cellini, discussed whether back, for these aspects are invisible to the
a piece of sculpture should have one or many passers-by.
views. Their verdict was a foregone conclusion. During his middle period Bernini brought
Giovanni Bologna in his Rape of the Sahines new and most important ideas to bear upon the
(1579-83) showed how to translate theory into problem of defined viewpoints. He placed the
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI • 155
group of 5/ Teresa and the Angel in a deep niche inside the portico of St Peter's and from the
under a protective architectural canopy [84, 85], nave of S. Francesco a Ripa respectively [8 1 , 82].
and this makes it virtually impossible to see the Indeed, the carefully contrived framing devices
work unless the beholder stands in the nave of almost force upon the spectator the correct
the church exactly on the central axis of the viewing position.
Cornaro Chapel. Enshrined by the framing lines In spite of their tableau vivant character, all
of the architecture, the group has an essentially these works are still \igorously three-dimen-
pictorial character ; one may liken it to a tableau sional and vigorously 'alive'; they are neither
vivant. The same is true of later designs when- reliefs nor relegated to a limited space. They
ever circumstances permitted. The Cathedra act on a stage which is of potentially unlimited
was conceived like an enormous colourful extension. They still share, therefore, our space
picture framed by the columns of the Baldac- continuum, but at the same time they are far
chino [86]. Similarly, the pictorial concepts of removed from us: they are strange, visionary,
the Constantine and the Blessed Lodovica are unapproachable - like apparitions from another
revealed onlv when thev are looked at from world.
81. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Altieri Chapel 82. Gianlorenzo Bernini:

with the Blessed Lodovica Albertoni, 1674. Constantine, seen from the portico, 165468.
Rome, S. Francesco a Ripa Rome, St Peter's
BIBLOSARTE
83. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Tomb of Urban VIII, 1628 47. Bronze and marble. Rome, St Peter's
BIBLOSARTE
Colour and Light Death, and the papal statue, i.e. all the parts
directly concerned with the deceased. Unlike
It is evident that Bernini's pictorial approach to these with their magic colour and light effects,
sculpture cannot be dissociated from two other the white marble allegories of Charity and
aspects, colour and light, which require special Justice have manifestly a this-worldly quality.
attention. It is these figures with their human reactions
Polychrome marble sculpture is rather ex- and their sensual and appealing surface texture
ceptional in the history of European art. The that form a transition between the beholder and
link with the uncoloured marbles of ancient the papal statue, which by its sombre colour
Rome was never entirely broken, and it is alone seems far removed from our sphere of life.
characteristic that in Florence, for instance, More complex are the colour relationships in
'
polychromy was almost exclusively reserved for Bernini's later work. The Cornaro Chapel is, of
popular works made of cheap materials. But course, the most perfect example [84, 85]. In
during the late sixteenth century it became the lowest, the human zone, the beholder is
fashionable in Rome and elsewhere to combine faced with a colour harmony of warm and
white marble heads with coloured busts, in glowing tones in red, green, and yellow. St
imitation of a trend in late antique sculpture. Teresa's vision, the focal point of the whole
The naturalistic element implicit in such works composition, is dramatically accentuated by the
never had any attraction for Bernini. The use of contrast between the dark framing columns and
composite or polychrome materials would have the highly polished whiteness of the group.
interfered with his unified conception of bust or Other stimuli are brought into play to emphasize
figure. In his Diary the Sieur de Chantelou the unusual character of the event which shows
informs us that Bernini regarded it as the a seraph piercing her heart with the fiery arrow
sculptor's most difficult task to produce the of divine love, symbol of the saint's mystical
impression and effect of colour by means of the union with Christ. The vision takes place in an
white marble alone. But in a different sense imaginary realm on a large cloud, magically
polychromy was extremely important to him. suspended in mid-air before an iridescent
He needed polychrome settings and the alliance alabaster background. Moreover, concealed
of bronze and marble figures as much for the and directed light is used in support of the
articulation, emphasis, and differentiation of dramatic climax to which the beholder becomes
meaning as for the unrealistic pictorial impres- a witness. The light falls through a window of
sion of his large compositions. It may be argued yellow glass hidden behind the pediment and is
that he followed an established vogue. ^ To a materialized, as it were, in the golden rays

certain extent this is true. Yet in his hands poly- encompassing the group.'
chromy became a device of subtlety hitherto It is often observed that Bernini drew here on
unknown. his experience as stage designer. Although this
Bernini's tomb of Urban VIII [83] certainly is probably correct, it distracts from the real
follows the polychrome pattern of the older problem. For this art is no less and no more
counterpart, Guglielmo della Porta's tomb of 'theatrical' than a Late Gothic altarpiece repeat-
Paul III. But in Bernini's work the white and ing a scene from a mystery play, frozen into
dark areas are much more carefully balanced permanence. In another chapter the symbolic
and communicate a distinct meaning. The religious connotations of light have been dis-
whole central portion is of dark, partly gilded cussed (p. 55). Bernini's approach to the prob-
bronze: the sarcophagus, the life-like figure of lem of light is in a clearly defined pictorial
BIBLOSARTE
158 •
THK A(iK. OV Till IllCill BAROQUE
84 ( above j. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Cornaro Chapel. Eighteenth-century painting. Schmenn. Museum
BIBLOSARTE
85. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Ecstasy of St Teresa, 1645-52. Rome, S. Mana delta I illona, Coniaro Chapel
//
"^,
/
^""'-^
BIBLOSARTE
l6o •
tradition of which the examples in Baroque In spite of the pictorial character of the design
painting are legion. The directed heavenly light, as a whole, Bernini differentiated here as in
as used by Bernini, sanctifies the objects and other cases between various degrees of reality.
persons struck by it and singles them out as The members of the Cornaro family seem to be
recipients of divine Grace. The golden rays alive like ourselves. They belong to our space
along which the light seems to travel have yet and our world. The supra-natural event of
another meaning. By contrast to the calm, Teresa's vision is raised to a sphere of its own,
diffused light of the Renaissance, this directed removed from that of the beholder mainly by
light seems fleeting, transient, impermanent. virtue of the isolating canopy and the heavenly
Impermanence is its very essence. Directed light.'" Finally, much less tangible is' the un-
light, therefore, supports the beholder's sensa- fathomable infinity of the luminous empyrean.
tion of the transience of the scene represented The beholder is drawn into this web of relation-
we realize that the moment of divine 'illumina- ships and becomes a witness to the mysterious
tion' passes as it comes. With his directed light hierarchy ascending from man to saint and
Bernini had found a way of bringing home to Godhead.
the faithful an intensified experience of the In all the large works from the middle period
supra-natural. on, directed and often concealed light plays an
No sculptor before Bernini had attempted to overwhelmingly important part in producing
use real light in this way. Here in the ambient a convincing impression of miracle and vision.
air of a chapel he did what painters tried to do Bernini solved the problem first in the Rai-
in their pictures. If it is accepted that he trans- mondi Chapel in S. Pietro in Montorio {c.
lated back into the three dimensions of real life 1642-6). Standing in the dim fight of the chapel,
the illusion of reality rendered by painters in the spectator looks into the altar-recess and
two dimensions, an important insight into the sees, brightly lit as if by magic, the Ecstasy of St
specific character of his pictorial approach to Francis, Francesco Baratta's relief. Later, Ber-
sculpture has been won. His love for chromatic nini used essentially similar devices not only
settings now becomes fully intelligible. A work for the Cornaro Chapel and for the Cathedra,
like the Cornaro Chapel was conceived in terms but also for the Constantine, the Blessed Lodovica
of an enormous picture. Albertoni, and, on a much larger scale, in the
This is true of the chapel as a whole. Higher church of S. Andrea al Quirinale [104].
up the colour scheme lightens and on the vault- At the same time, colour symphonies become
ing the painted sky opens. Angels have pushed increasingly opulent and impressive. Witness
aside the clouds so that the heavenly light the tomb of Maria Raggi (1643, S. Maria sopra
issuing from the Holy Dove can reach the zone Minerva) with its sombre harmony of black,
in which the mortals live. The figure of the yellow, and gold; or the wind-swept colourful
seraph, brother of the angels painted in the stucco curtain behind the Constantine, a motif
clouds, has descended on the beams of light. that has not one but four different functions as :
Along the side walls of the chapel, above the a forcible support of the Emperor's movement,
doors, appear the members of the Cornaro as a device to relate the monument to the size of
family kneeling behind prie-dieus and discuss- the niche, as the traditional 'emblem' of royalty,
ing the miracle that takes place on the altar. and as a fantastic pictorial element. Witness the
They live in an illusionist architecture which jasper palls which he used only in such late
looks like an extension of the space in which the works as the Lodovica Albertoni and the tomb
beholder moves. of Alexander VII; or the altar in the Chapel of
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI l6l
the Blessed Sacrament in St Peter's (1673-4), ample. We have seen how the painted sky, the
where coloured marbles, gilt bronze, and lapis sculptured group, and the real and feigned
lazuli combine into a picture of sublime beauty architecture are firmly interlocked. Thus, only
which expresses symbolically the immaterial if we view the whole are the parts fully intelli-
perfection of the angelic world and the radiance gible. This is also true of Bernini's primarily
of God. architectural works, as will be shown later in

With his revolutionary approach to colour this chapter. The creation of new species and the
and light, Bernini opened a development of fusion of all the arts enhance the beholder's
immeasurable consequences. It is not suffici- emotional participation: when all the barriers
ently realized that the pictorial concepts of the are down, life and art, real existence and appari-
mature Bernini furnish the basis not only for tion, melt into one.
many later Roman and North Italian works, In the Cathedra of St Peter in the apse of the
but above all for the Austrian and German basilica (1656-66) [86, 87], Bernini's most com-
Baroque. Even the colour and light orgies of the plex and, due to its place and symbolic import,
Asam brothers add nothing essentially new to most significant work, the various points here
the repertory created by Bernini. made may be fully studied. We noted before
how the whole was conceived like a picturesque
fata morgana to be seen from a distance through
The Transcending uf Traditional Modes
the columns of the Baldacchino. Only from a
Bernini's way of conceiving his large works in near standpoint is it possible to discern the
pictorial terms had a further revolutionary re- subtle interplay of multicoloured marble, gilt
sult : the traditional separation of the arts into bronze, and stucco, all bathed in the yellow
clearly defined species or categories became light spreading from the centre of the angelic
obsolete and even nonsensical. What is the Glory. No difterentiation into species is pos-
group of 5/ Teresa and the Angel? Is it sculpture sible : the window as well as the transitions from
in the round or is it a relief? Neither term is flat to full relief and then to free-standing figures
applicable. On the one hand, the group cannot penetrating far into space make up an indivisible
be dissociated from the aedicule, the back- whole. The beholder finds himself in a world
ground, and the rays of light on the other,

; it has which he shares with saints and angels, and he
no relief-ground in the proper sense of the word, feels magically drawn into the orbit of the work.
nor is it framed as a relief should be. In other What is image, what is reality The very border- .'
words, Bernini created a species for which no line between the one and the other seems to be
term exists in our vocabulary. obliterated. And yet, in spite of the vast scale
Moreover, even the borderline between paint- and spatial extension, the composition is most
ing, sculpture, and architecture becomes fluid. carefully arranged and balanced. The colour
Whenever given the opportunity, Bernini let scheme lightens progressively from the marble
his imagery flow from a unified concept which pedestals to the bronze throne with gilt decor-
makes any dissection impossible. His own time ations and the golden angels of the Glory." The
was fully aware of this. In the words of Bernini's gilded rays spread their protecting fingers over
biographer, Filippo Baldinucci, was 'common
it the whole width of the work and enhance, at the
knowledge that he was the first who undertook same time, the visual concentration on the
to unite architecture, sculpture and painting in symbolic focus, the area of the throne. Move-
such a way that they together make a beautiful ments and gestures, even in different spatial
whole'. The Cornaro Chapel is the supreme ex- layers, are intimately related. Thus the nervous
BIBLOSARTE
l62 •
86. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Baldacchino, 1624-33. Bronze. Rome,

St Peter':
BIBLOSARTE
163
87. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Cathedra of St Peter, 1656-66. Bronze, marble, and stucco. Rome, St Peter'.
BIBLOSARTE
lft4 THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
to break down intellectual fences and concede

to him what we willingly do before a Gonzalez
or a Giacometti or a .Moore.
\'ew Iconographical Types
No less important and influential than Bernini's
new artistic principles and, naturally, insepar-

able from them were the changes he brought
about over a wide choice of subjects. Only
detailed studies would re\eal the full range of
his innovations. Although deeply conscious of,
and indebted to, tradition, he approached every

new task with a fresh and independent mind
and developed it in a new direction. He became
the greatest creator of iconographical types of
the Italian Baroque and his conception of the
saint, of tombs, the equestrian statue, of
portraiture and fountains remained unchal-
lenged for a hundred years.
The tomb Urban VIII [83] established
of
the new type monument. Looking
of the papal
back via Guglielmo della Porta's tomb of Paul
III to Michelangelo's Medici Tombs, Bernini
achieved an ideal balance between a commemor-
ative and a ceremonial monument,' and ''
it is this
concept that many later sculptors endeavoured

to follow with more or less success (p. 440). In
the late tomb of Alexander VII (1671-8) [89],
Gianlorenzo Bernini;
Bernini stressed the contrast between the im-
Detail from the Cathedra of St Peter [cf. 87]
permanence of life (Death with hour-glass) and
the unperturbed faith of the praying pope. But
and eloquent hands of St Ambrose and St this idea, which corresponded so well with
Athanasius, shown on illustration 88, appear Bernini's own convictions on the threshold of
like contrapuntal expressions of the same theme. death, was too personal to find much following.
Bernini's new and unorthodox way of step- When it was taken up during the eighteenth
ping across traditional boundaries and harness- century, the concept had changed: Death was
ing all the arts into one overwhelming effect no longer checked by the certainty of salvation
baffles many spectators. Even those who rise in through faith and held nothing but terror for
defence of similar phenomena in the case of those whom he threatens with permanent
modern art cannot forgive Bernini for having extinction.'^
transgressed the established modes of artistic At the beginning of the 1640s Bernini brought
expression.'- It is clear that his imagery will a completely new^ approach to the problem of
capture our imagination only if we are prepared smaller funeral monuments with his designs of
BIBLOSARTE
Gianlorenzo Bernini: Tomb of Alexander VII, 1671-8. Rome, Si Peter's
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
167
the Valtrini and Merenda memorials, both modern portraiture in sculpture. All the barriers
executed by studio hands, '^ and the tomb of have fallen: here is a woman of the people,
Maria Raggi, a work of the highest quahty. He neither beautified nor heroized, and 'contact'
rejected the isolating architectural framework; with her is direct and instantaneous. In his busts
and in the Valtrini and Raggi tombs a relief- of King Charles I (destroyed),"' Francis I of
portrait of the deceased is carried by Death and Este, and Louis XIV [91], by contrast, Bernini
by putti respectively. It was three generations created the official Baroque type of the absolute
later, in the Age of Enlightenment, that this sovereign. His intentions and procedure can be
type finally supplanted that with the deceased fully derived from the diary entries of the Sieur
in an attitude of devotion (p. 444). de Chantelou.'' He approached such busts
Equally momentous in his contribution to with the idea of conveying nobility, pride,
the history of portraiture. The Scipiaiie Borghese heroism, and majesty. In this he was so success-
of 1632 (p. 146) may safely be regarded as the ful that no Baroque sculptor could ever forget
first High Baroque portrait bust. From the mid Bernini's visual rendering of these abstract
thirties dates one of the most remarkable por- notions. Similarly, he gave the Baroque equest-
trait busts of the whole history of art, that of rian statue with the rearing horse a heroic quality
Costanza Buouarelli (Florence, Bargello) [90]. and invested it with drama and dynamic move-
It is Bernini's only private portrait bust and is ment not only in his Constantme but also in the
therefore done without the deliberate stylization ill-starred monument of Louis XIV which
of the other works of this period. One may well stands now, transformed into a Marcus Curtius,
believe that the stormy love aflair Bernini had near the 'Bassin des Suisses' in the gardens of
with this fierce and sensual woman was the talk Versailles.
of the town. What is historically so important Even more radical than all these innovations
about this work is that it opens the history of was Bernini's contribution to the history of the
90 (opposite). Gianlorenzo Bernini:

Bust of Costanza Buonarelli, c. 1635.
Florence, Bargello
91 (right). Gianlorenzo Bernini:

Bust of Louis XIV,
1665. Versailles, Castle
BIBLOSARTE
l68 • THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
Baroque fountain. A tradition of fountains with Moro in Piazza Navona (1653-5), where Bernini
figures existed in F"lorence rather than Rome, used the same constituent elements: maritime
and it was this tradition that Bernini took up divinity, shell, and dolphin. But these elements
and revolutionized. His early Neptune and are now animated by dramatic action; we wit-
Triton for the Villa Montalto (1620, now ness a transitory moment in the contest between
Victoria and Albert Museum) is evidence of the the 'Moro' and his prey. Entirely different
link with P^lorentine fountains."* With his considerations had to be taken into account for
Triton Fountain in the Piazza Barberini (1642- the design of the large fountain in the centre of
3)'" [92] he broke entirely with the older formal the same Piazza [93]. Bernini had to erect a
treatment. Far removed from the decorative monument sufficiently large to emphasize
elegance of Florentine fountains, this massive effêctively the centre of the long square without
structure confronts the beholder with a sculp- disturbing its unity. At the same time the
tural entity as integral as a natural growth. Sea- fountain had to be related to the fa9ade of S.
god, shell, and fish are welded into an organic Agnese without competing with it. A 'natural'
whole, and nobody can fail to be captivated by rock,-" washed by ample springs, pierced by
the fairy-tale atmosphere of such a creation. openings in the long and short axes and crowned
All recollection of symmetry and architectural by the huge Egyptian needle: barrier and hnk,
structure has disappeared in the Fontana del accompaniment to the towers and contrast ex- ;
92. Gianlorenzo Bernini: 93. Gianlorenzo Bernini:

Triton Fountain, 1642-3. Travertine. The Four Rivers Fountain, 1648-51.
Rome, Piazza Barberini Travertine and marble. Rome, Piazza Navona
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI l(
pansive and varied near the ground and soaring transformation. He represented both Bibiana
upwards hard, unitorm, and thin; fountain and and Longinus at the moment of their supreme
monument improvisation and symbol of super-
; tests, the former devoutly accepting her martyr-
human permanency - these seeming contra- dom and the latter in the emotional act of con-
dictions point to the ingenious answer Bernini version, exclaiming while looking up at the
found to his problem. Cross: 'Truly this was the Son of God.'-' Simi-
The number of fountains created by Bernini larly, the Vision of St Teresa strictly adheres to
is comparatively small. But their effect was all the saint's meticulous description of the event
the greater. Contemporaries were fascinated which must be regarded as the acme of her Hfe;
not only by his new, truly poetical use of realistic for it was this particular vision that played a
motives like rock, shell, and natural growth, but decisive part in the acts of her canonization.
also by his revolutionary handling of the water Even from the story of Daniel and Habakkuk,
itself. For he replaced the traditional thin jets told in 'Bel and the Dragon' (which forms part
by an exuberant and powerful harnessing of the of the Greek Book of Daniel), Bernini selected
elements. It was the continuous movement of the culminating moment to which reference has
the rushing and murmuring water that helped already been made (pp. 52-3). In all these cases
1
to fulfil one of Bernini's most cherished dreams Bernini gave a visual interpretation of the most
to create real movement and pulsating life. fertile dramatic moment. Thesameis trueof the
Constantine, for this is not simply an equestrian
The Rule oj the 'Concetto"

monument representing the first Christian
emperor, but a dramatic history-piece illustra-
After the foregoing pages it hardly needs stress- ting a precise event of his life : the historically
ing that an impressionist and aesthetic appreci- and emotionally decisive moment of conversion
ation or stylistic approach cannot do justice to in face of the miraculous appearance of the
Bernini's real intentions. It must never be Cross. --

forgotten that Bernini's ideas of what constitutes But the concetto was not necessarily tied to
a satisfactory solution of a given task were factual historical events. A 'poetical' concetto
dependent on humanist art theory. According contained no less intrinsic historical truth if
to this theory, which allied painting and sculp- chosen with proper discrimination. This applies
ture to poetry, a work of art must be informed to such works as the fountains, the equestrian
by a literary theme, a characteristic and ingeni- statue of Louis XIV, and the Cathedra. It is a
ous concetto which is applicable only to the fatal error to believe that Louis XIV on horse-
particular case in hand. For Bernini the concetto back was devised as a purely dynastic monu-
was really synonymous with a grasp of the essen- ment. He was to appear on top of a high rock, a
tial meaning of his subject; it was never, as so second Hercules who has reached the summit of
often in seventeenth-century art, a cleverly the steep mountain of Virtue [94].-' Thus this
contrived embroidery. Moreover the concept work too is a dynamic history-piece. It is an

he chooses for representation is always the allegorical equestrian statue, but as usual with
moment of dramatic climax. This is true already Bernini, allegory is implied, not made explicit.
for his early mythological and religious works The naturalistic rock, the fiery horse, and the
created in the service of Cardinal Scipione heroic rider together express in dramatic visual
Borghese. terms the poetic allegorical content. In a similar
Thus David shown at the split-second of
is way, a complex concetto is woven into the design
the fateful shot and Daphne at the instant of of the Four Rivers Fountain. The personifica-
BIBLOSARTE
lyO 1111. ACil. 1)1 rUl. II I (ill liAROQUt
conceit is well expressed in a contemporary

poem : 'The Egyptian obelisk, symbol of the
rays of Sol, is brought by the elephant to the
Seventh Alexander as a gift. Is not the animal

wise.' Wisdom hath given to the World solely
thee, O Seventh Alexander, consequently thou

hast the gifts o( Soiy^ In this case, the inscrip-
tions, pregnant with emblematical meaning, are

prominently displayed on the pedestal and
form an integral part of the composition.
Finally the Cathedra Petri, which confirms
by its arrangement and design in dramatic
visual terms the fundamental dogma of the
primacy of papacy. The venerable wooden stool
of St Peter is encased in the gorgeous bronze
throne which hovers on clouds high above the
ground. At its sides, on a lower level, appear the
greatest Latin and Greek Fathers who sup-
ported Rome's claim to universality. On the
chair-back is a relief of Christ handing the Keys
to St Peter; and above the chair putti carry the
papal symbols, tiara and keys. Lastly, high up

in the centre of the angelic Glory is the trans-
Monument of Louis XIV. Wash drawing, 1673.
Bassano, Aiuseo Civico
parent image of the Holy Dove.-'' Thus one
above the other there appear symbols of Christ's
entrusting the office of Vicar to St Peter; of
tions of the Four Rivers, symbolizing the four papal power and of divine guidance, protection,
;
parts of the world, and the dove. Innocent X's and inspiration - the whole, with the precious
emblem which crowns the obelisk, the tradi- relic at its centre, a materialized vision, which
tional symbol of divine light and eternity, pro- exhibits the eternal truth of Catholic dogma for
claim the all-embracing power of the Church all to see.-'

under the leadership of the reigning Pamphili
pope. A further layer of meaning is hinted at by
Pf'urking Procedure
the reference, manifest in the whole arrange-
ment, to the Rivers of Paradise at the foot of the Enough has been said to discard the idea, all too
mountain on which the Cross stands. -^^
This often voiced, that Bernini's magical transmuta-
monument of Catholic triumph and victory, tions of reality are the result of a creative fantasy
therefore, also contains the idea of the salvation run amok. Nothing could be farther from the
of mankind under the sign of the Cross. truth. In fact, in addition to Bernini's own
A monument like the Elephant carrying the statements and a wealth of documents, sufficient
Obelisk, erected in the Piazza S. Maria sopra drawings and bozzetti are preserved to allow
Minerva between 1666 and 1667, must also be more than a glimpse of his mind at work. His
understood as a glorification of the reigning procedure cannot be dissociated from his con-
pope, Alexander VII. Its typically Baroque victions, his belief in the time-honoured tenets
BIBLOSARTE
of decorum and historical truth, in the classical equestrian monument should be dressed all'
doctrine that nature was imperfect, and in the atittca and partly covered by idealized mantles,
unchallengeable authority of ancient art. wildly fluttering in the wind.
While preparing a work he closely attended Concern with such problems never barred
to the requirements of decorum and historical him from taking classical and preferably Hel-
truth. He would also be relentlessly critical lenistic works as his guide in developing a theme.
when he found a breach of these basic demands. Early in his career the finished work often re-
He expressed astonishment, for instance, that mained close to the antique model. The Apollo
in his Adoration of the Alagi the learned Poussin, of the Apollo and Daphne group does not depart
for whom he had almost unreserved admiration, far from the Belvedere Apollo nor the David
had given to the Kings the appearance of from the Borghese warrior. Even the head of the
ordinary people. Chantelou and Lebrun de- Longinus is obviously styled after a Hellenistic
fended Poussin, but Bernini insisted that one model, the Borghese Centaur, now in the
must follow the text of the Gospels where it was Louvre. In late works too the classical model is
written that they were Kings. In the case of the sometimes discernible. The face of Louis XIV's
Constantine one can check how far he went in bust is manifestly similar to that of Alexander
pursuance of historical truth. An excerpt in his the Great on coins, and Bernini himself sup-
own hand, now in the Bibliotheque Nationale plied the information that Alexander portraits,
in Paris,-"* shows that he consulted the source the accepted prototype of royalty, were before
which contained a description of Constantine's his mind's eye when working on the king's bust.
physiognomy, namely Nicephorus's much-used But as he advanced in age, Bernini transformed
thirteenth-century Hist or iu ecclesiastic a, of his classical models to an ever greater degree.
which modern printed editions existed. The Nobody looking at his figure of Daniel can
relevant passage describes Constantine as hav- possibly guess that his point of departure was
ing had an aquiline nose and a rather insignifi- the father from the Laocoon group. In this case,
cant thin beard. In an extant preparatory however, the development can be followed from
drawing-' Bernini made what may be called a the copy after that figure through a number of
portrait study of the emperor's features which preparatory drawings to the final realization in
served as basis for the execution. marble.^" While working from the life-model,
Often historical truth and decorum, the Bernini had in the beginning the classical figure
appropriate and the becoming, merge into one. at the back of his mind, but was carried farther
Such is the case when he makes St Bibiana and away from its spirit step by step. In accordance
the Countess Matilda wear sandals, while the with his theoretical views, he began rationally
Discalced Carmelite Teresa appears barefoot; and objectively, using a venerated antique work
or when he is meticulous about the correct dress not until his idea developed did he give way to
of historical and contemporary personages and imaginative and subjective impulses. When he
reserves idealized attires for biblical and mytho- worked himself into that state of frenzy in
logical figures and personifications. In certain which he regarded himself as the tool of God's
cases, however, the demands of decorum have grace, he created in rapid succession numberless
to supersede those of historical fact. Louis XIV sketches and clay models, twenty-two in all in
never walked about in classical armour and the case of the Longinus. ^^
sandals. But the dignity and nobility - in a word, In front of a very late work such as the ecstatic
the decorum - of the imperial theme required Angel holding the Superscription the conclu-
that Constantine as well as the Louis of the sion seems unavoidable that he had ceased to
BIBLOSARTE
1-J2 THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
use classical antiquity as a cathartic agent. And work presents an unbroken stylistic unity and
yet the body under the agitated folds of the the assistants were no more than so many hands
drapery derives from the so-called Antinous in multiplying his own. It was only when the con-
the Vatican, a figure that was studied with trol slackened that dissonant elements crept in.
devotion in the classical circle of Algardi, Du- It would appear logical, therefore, to divide
quesnoy, and Poussin. Bernini referred to it in his production into works designed by him and
his address to the Paris Academy in these executed by his hand;^^ those to a greater or
words: 'In my early youth I drew a great deal lesser degree carried out by him ;
*'
others where
from classical figures; and when I was in diffi- he firmly held the reins but actively contributed
culties with my first statue, I turned to the little or nothing to the execution;*'' and finally
Antinous as to the oracle.' His reUance on this those from which he dissociated himself after a
figure, even for the late Angel, is strikingly few preliminary sketches.^*' The decision as to
evident in a preparatory drawing showing the which of these categories a work belongs has
Angel in the nude.*- But the proportions of the to be made from case to case, more often than
figure, like those of the finished marble, differ not on the basis of documents. But in the present
considerably from the classical model. Slim, context the problem had to be stated rather
with extremely long legs and a head small in than solved.
comparison with the rest of the body, the nude
recalls Gothic figures. The process of ecstatic
PAINTING
spiritualization began during an early stage of
the preparatory- work. Bernini's activity as a painter has attracted
It is, of course, necessary to differentiate much attention in recent years,*" but in spite
between Bernini's authentic works and those of considerable efforts the problem still baffles
executed by studio hands. This is, however, the critics. A large measure of agreement exists
no easy task. From the early 1620s onwards about the part painting played in his life's
the increase of commissions in size and numbers work, although the riddle has not been solved
forced him to rely more and more on the help as to what happened to the more than 1 50 pic-
of assistants. For that reason a precise division tures mentioned in Baldinucci's Life of Bernini,
between his own works and those of the studio a figure which Domenico Bernini, in the bio-
is hardly possible. There is, indeed, an indeter- graphy of his father, raised to over two hundred.
minable area between wholly authentic works Whatever the correct number, a bare dozen
and those for which Bernini is hardly respon- pictures of this large oeuvre have so far come to
sible. Stylistic integration depended less on light. It is impossible to assume that most of
Bernini's handling the hammer and chisel these works have been lost for ever, and the
himself than on the degree of his preparatory discovery a short while ago of two indubitable
work and the subsequent control exercised by originals in English collections*" indicates that
his master mind. His personal contribution to many more are probably hidden under wrong
the execution of works like the Baldacchino or names. But their present anonymity conclu-
the tomb of Urban VIII was still considerable. sively proves one thing, namely that painting
Later, he often made only the sketches and for Bernini was a sideline, an occupation, as
small models. The tomb of Alexander VII, for Baldinucci expressed it, to which he attended
instance, is the work of many hands and the for pleasure only. He never accepted any com-
division of labour, revealed by the documents, missions of importance, he never signed any
anticipates that of the industrial age. Yet the of his paintings, and to all appearances treated
BIBLOSARTE
the whole matter Hghtly - hence the anonymity. approach to painting from the middle period
It seems therefore not chance that half the onwards can be fully gauged. From that time
number of pictures now known are self-por- on he employed painters, mainly of minor
traits, intimate studies of his own person under- stature, as willing tools of his ideas. The first
taken in leisure hours and not destined for a whom he drew into his orbit was Carlo Pelle-
patron. grini (1605-49), a native of Carrara. ^^ He may
Covering a period of almost thirty years, have started under Sacchi and was certainly
these self-portraits give a reliable insight into influenced by him. But in 1635 he painted the
his stylistic idiosyncrasies and development as Conversion of St Paul (Church of the Propa-
a painter. They are all done with short, vigorous ganda Fide) and between 1636 and 1640 the
brush-strokes which model the forms and reveal Martyrdom of St Maurice (for St Peter's, later
the hand of the born sculptor. This characteristic Museo Petriano), certainly both from Bernini's
dash of handling goes with a neglect of detail, sketches. These works show borrowings from
sketchy impromptu treatment of accessories Pietro da Cortona and Poussin, to whose light
such as dress, and spontaneit}' of expression. and luminous colour scale they are also clearly
Most of his portraits, sculptured, painted, and indebted. Moreover, the composition of the
drawn, show a similar turn of the head, the Conversion owes not a little both to Sacchi and,
alert look and the mouth half-open as if about unexpectedly, to Lodovico Carracci. The Mar-
to speak. In his early paintings dating from the tyrdom of St Maurice is the more Berninesque
1 620s he seems to have been subject to the of the two works. The master's mind is revealed
sobering influence of Andrea Sacchi.'" Later, as much by the highly dramatic composition,
about 1630, he turned towards a blond, lumi- which shows three stages of martyrdom suc-
nous palette, probably under the impression of cinctly rendered on a narrow foreground stage,
Poussin's St Erasmus of 1629 (painted for St as by certain devices such as showing a trun-
Peter's, now Vatican Gallery) - thus falling in cated martyr's head next to that of St Maurice
with the strong wave of Venetian colourism who is still alive or the parallel arrangement of
which surged over Rome in those years.^" Later arms which act in opposite directions.
^^
again, paintings like the self-portraits in the Even before Pellegrini's death Bernini availed
Prado and the Borghese Gallery^' show darker himself of the services of Guido Ubaldo Abba-
colours and more unified tone values, and this tini (1600/5-56) from Citta di Castello, who
^-
must have been due to Velasquez's influence. began under the Cavaliere d'Arpino, but later,
In fact some of Bernini's pictures of the 1640s according to Passeri, submitted to his new
are superficially so similar to those of the great master like a slave. His principal works for
Spaniard that they were attributed to him. Bernini are the frescoes on the vault of the
Most of the surviving pictures date from the Cappella Raimondi, executed in collaboration
twenties and thirties. And this for good reasons. with the classicizing Giovanni Francesco Roma-
The more the commissions accumulated, the nelH (p. 321), the badly preserved frescoes on
less time he had for such recreations as painting. the vault of the Cappella Pio in S. Agostino,
No picture is known from the last decades of his dating from c. 1644, and lastly those on the
Hfe. But at this period he enjoyed producing vault of the Cornaro Chapel.^'' In spite of his
pictorial compositions, w hich he created rapidly rather weak decorative talent, he perfectly suited
with pen and ink.^' Bernini's purpose. And as a participant in the
Thus while Bernini's own work as a painter execution of some of Bernini's grand schemes
remains somewhat mysterious, his conceptual he was certainly more important than Pellegrini.
BIBLOSARTE
174 THE AGE OF THE HKiU BAROQUE
It was on the vault of the Cappella Pio that His greatest work, the frescoes in the Gesu
Bernini first mixed fresco and stucco: the {1672-83) [213], must be regarded as the fullest
painted angels rest on stucco clouds. Passeri exposition of Bernini's revolutionary concep-
was aware of the importance of this new de- tion of painting. Here the principle of com-
parture and described it in the following words: bining fresco and painted stucco and of super-
'he employed a new deceptive artifice and by imposing painted parts on the architecture has
means of certain parts in relief actually made been given its monumental form. In addition,
true what was supposed to be mere illusion'." the sculptural interpretation of his figures, their
In the Cappella Cornaro he carried the principle movements and draperies, and the urgency and
a step further. Not only did he use the mixture intensity of their activities reveal the spirit of
of fresco and stucco once again, now on a more the late Bernini.
lavish scale, but here the paintings of the vault The Gesu frescoes are also the major Roman
penetrate far into the architecture. After what monument for a new departure in the organiza-
I have said about the elimination of traditional tion of large ceiling decorations. The effect of
'modes' (p. i6i), it is only to be expected that these frescoes relies on the juxtaposition of
Bernini would also transgress the established extensive dark and light areas rather than on the
limitations of painting. Seeking a conceptual compositional arrangement of single figures. In
explanation of this phenomenon, it might be the frescoes of the nave the eye is led stepwise
argued that, as sculpture for him was a kind of from the darkest to the lightest area, the un-
pictorial art in three dimensions, painting was a fathomable depth of the sky, where the Name
sculptural art projected on to a surface; and of Christ appears amid shining rays. Bernini
transitions from sculpture into painting and recommended the method of working with
vice versa were therefore equally justified. large coherent units'"" and employed it himself
It is important to realize that this approach in works like the Cathedra. The method did not
is as far removed from Pietro da Cortona's only satisfy his desire to create overwhelming
superimpositions and overlappings as from the effects and dramatic emphasis, but also ap-
illusionism of the quadraturisti (pp. 65-6). In peared most conducive to communicating his
spite of the dazzling richness of the former's mystic conception of divine light and his intense
designs, his definition of sculptured and painted spiritualization of religious themes. Bernini's
areas always remains clear and decisive and no two important ideas, developed from his middle
mixing of realities is ever intended. The quad- period onwards, of breaking through the frame
ratura painters, on the other hand, aimed at an of the painting and of embedding masses of
illusionist expansion of real space; but the figures in unified areas of colour found an
borderline between illusion and reahty is not enthusiastic following in the northern Baroque.
objectively abolished, it is only masked by the
subjective skill of the painter. ARCHITECTURE
Never again did Bernini have an opportunity
Ecclesiastical Buildings
to hand over fresco work to a painter in any of
his large enterprises.^*^ Yet his new ideas were The year 1624 is of particular importance in
absorbed by Giovan Battista GauUi, called the history of Baroque architecture; it was then
Baciccio, an artist ofmuch greater calibre than that Bernini's career as an architect began with
his previous collaborators. He came from Genoa the commissions for the facade of S. Bibiana
to Rome before 1660 and was soon taken up and the Baldacchino in St Peter's. It can hardly
^''
by Bernini and deeply influenced by his ideas. be denied that the little church of S. Bibiana
BIBLOSARTE
175
opens a new chapter of the Baroque in all three niche. Thus the aedicule is superimposed over
arts: it harbours Bernini's first official religious a smaller system, the continuity of which ap-
statue and Cortona's first important fresco cycle. pears to be unbroken. The interpenetration of
The design of the facade""' is not divorced from small and large orders was a Mannerist device,
tradition. But instead of developing further the familiar to Bernini not only from such buildings
type of Roman church fa(;ade which had led to as Michelangelo's Capitoline palaces, but also
Maderno's S. Susanna, Bernini placed a palace- from the church facades of Palladio, an architect
like storey over an open loggia [95] - essentially whose work he never ceased to study. All the
same, Bernini's first essay in architectural de-

sign constitutes a new, bold, and individualist
departure which none of the architects who
later used the palace type of church fa9ade
dared to imitate.
The Baldacchino in St Peter's (1624-33) [86]
gave Bernini his first and at once greatest oppor-
tunity of displaying his unparalleled genius for
combining an architectural structure with monu-
mental sculpture.'- It was a brilliant idea to
repeat in the giant columns of the Baldacchino

the shape of the late antique twisted columns
which - sanctified by age and their use in the
old Basilica of St Peter's - were now to serve as
aedicules above the balconies of the pillars of

the dome.''* Thus the twisted bronze columns
of the Baldacchino find a fourfold echo, and
not only give proof of the continuity of tradition,
but by their giant size also express symbolically
the change from the simplicity of the early
95. Gianlorenzo Bernini Roniu, : S. Bibiana, 1624-6 Christians to the splendour of the counter-
reformatory Church, implying the victory of
the principle of the facade of St Peter's. In some Christianity over the pagan world. Moreover,
modest early seventeenth-century facades of their shape helped to solve the formal problem
this type such as S. Sebastiano [7] the palace inherent in the gigantic Baldacchino. Its size
character is almost scrupulously preserved. By is carefully related to the architecture of the

comparison S. Bibiana shows an important new church; but instead of creating a dangerous
feature: the central bay of the ground-floor rivalry, the dark bronze corkscrew columns
arcades projects slightly, and above it, framing establish a dramatic contrast to the straight
a deep niche, is an impressive aedicule motif fluted pilasters of the piers as well as to the
which breaks through the skyline of the ad- other white marble structural members of the
joining bays. In this way the centre of the building. Finally, and above all, only giant
fa9ade has been given forceful emphasis. It columns of this peculiar shape could be placed
should be noticed that the cornice of the side- free into space without carrying a 'normal'
bays seems to run on under the pilasters of the superstructure. The columns are topped by
aedicule and then to turn into the depth of the four large angels behind which rise the huge
BIBLOSARTE
scrolls of the crowning motif. Their S-shaped moved). .Moreover, the derivations in .Austria
lines appear like a buoyant continuation ot the and Germany are legion; and even in France
screw-like upward tendencies of the columns. the type was widely accepted atter the well-
The scrolls meet under a vigorously curved known lighter version with six columns on a
entablature which is surmounted by the Cross circular plan had been built over the high
above the golden orb."* altar of the \ al-de-Grace in Paris."'
Every part of this dynamic structure is ac- Not until he was almost sixty years old had
companied and supported by sculpture, and it Bernini a chance of showing his skill as a de-
may be noticed that with increasing distance signer of churches. His three churches at Castel-
from the ground the sculptural element is given gandolfo and Ariccia and S. Andrea al Quirinale
ever greater freedom: starting from the Bar- in Rome rose almost simultaneously. In spite
berini coat of arms contained by the panels ot of their small size, they are of great importance
the pedestals; on to the laurel branches, creep- not only for their intrinsic qualities but also
ing up the columns, with putti nestling in because of their extraordinary influence. Mo-
them;" and further to the angels who hold dern critics tend to misinterpret them by stress-
garlands like ropes, with which to keep - so it ing their traditional rather than their revolu-
seems - the scrolls in position without effort. tionary aspect. Arguing from a purely aesthetic
In this area, high above the ground, sculpture or pragmatic point of view, they tacitly imply
in the round plays a vital part. Here, in the that the same set of forms and motifs always
open spaces between the scrolls, are the putti expresses the same meaning. It is too often
with the symbols of papal power, here are the overlooked that the architecture of the past w as
energetically curved palm branches which give
O 50 FT
tension to the movement of the scrolls and,
finally, the realistic Barberini bees, fittingly the
uppermost sculptural feature, which look as if
they carry the orb. Critics have often disap-

proved of the realistic hangings which join the
columns instead of the traditional entablature.
But it is precisely this unorthodox element
which gives the Baldacchino its particular mean-
ing as a monumental canopy raised in all eternity
over the tomb of St Peter, reminiscent of the
real canopy held over the living pope when he
is carried in state through the basilica.
Bernini's bold departure from the traditional
form ot baldacchinos in the past often temple-
like architectural structures^*' - had an im-
mediate and lasting etTect. Among the many
repetitions and imitations^' may be mentioned 96 and 97. Gianlorenzo Bernini:
those in S. Lorenzo at Spello, erected as early Castelgandolfo, S. Tomaso di Villanova, 1658-61.
Plan and view into dome
as 1632, in the cathedrals at Atri, Fohgno, and
Trent and, much later, those in the abbey
church San Benigno, Piedmont (1770-6) and

at
in S. Angelo at Perugia (1773, recently re-
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI
a language of visual signs and symbols which Bernini erected his three churches over the
architects used in a specific context, and the three most familiar centralized plans, the Greek
same grammar of architectural forms may there- cross, the circle, and the oval. The earliest of
fore serve entirely different purposes and con- them, the church at Castelgandolfo, built be-
vey vastly different ideas. This should be tween 1658 and 1 66 1,''' is a simple Greek cross
remembered during the following discussion. [96], reminiscent of such perfect Renaissance
BIBLOSARTE
178 •
THE AGt OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
churches as GiuHano da Sangallo's Madonna seem to continue behind the reliefs, the latter
delle Career! at Prato. And as in this latter appear to hover in the wide expanse of the dome.
church, the ratios are of utmost simpHcity, the Whenever Bernini had previously decorated
depth of the arms of the cross, for instance, niches or semi-domes, he had followed the
being half their width. But compared with Re- tradition, sanctioned by Michelangelo, of using
naissance churches the height has been con- ribs and, in the neutral areas between them,
siderably increased'" and the dome has been decorative roundels.'- In Castclgandolfb Ber-
given absolute predominance. The exterior is nini retained the ribs and combined them with
very restrained, in keeping with the modest coffers. The classical element of the coffers
character of the papal summer retreat to which seems to indicate an evenly distributed thrust
the church belongs. Flat Tuscan double pilasters (Pantheon), while the 'medieval', buttress-Hke
decorate the fa9ade, and only minor features system of ribs divides the dome into active
reveal the late date, such as the heavy door carriers and passive panels. The union of these
pediment and, in the zone of the capitals, the contrasting types of domical organization was
uninterrupted moulding which links the front not Bernini's own invention. He took up an
and the arms of the church. Above the crossing idea first developed by Pietro da Cortona (p.
rises the elegant ribbed dome which is evidently 236) and, after thoroughly classicizing it, em-
derived from that of St Peter's. But in contrast ployed it from Castelgandolfo onwards for all
to the great model, the drum here consists of a his later vaultings and domes.'"' It was this
low and unadorned cylinder, not unlike that of Berninesque type of dome with ribs and coffers
Raphael's S. Eligio degli Orefici in Rome, and ull'antica that was followed on countless occa-
is moreover set off against the dome by the sions after 1660 by architects in Italy as well as
prominent ring of the cornice. Every part of the rest of Europe.''^
this building is clearly defined, absolutely lucid, S. Tomaso at Castelgandolfo is perhaps the
and submitted to a classical discipline. least distinguished of Bernini's three churches
The same spirit of austerity prevails in the in so far as the two others exhibit his specific
interior up to the sharply chiselled ring above approach to architecture more fully. The story
the arches. But in the zone of the vaulting Ber- of the new Ariccia dates back to 20 July 1661,
nini abandoned his self-imposed moderation when Cardinal Flavio, Don Mario, and Don
[97]. Spirited putti, supporting large medal- Agostini Chigi acquired the little township near
lions, are seated on the broken pediments over Castelgandolfo from Giulio Savelli, Prince of
the windows of the drum. These pediments, Albano. Here stood the old palace of the Savelli.
breaking into the dome, soften the division be- Soon it was decided not only to modernize the
tween drum and vault. Realistic garlands form palace,'" but also to erect a church opposite its
links between the putti, and the lively and entrance. Bernini was commissioned in 1662,
flexible girdle thus created appears like a pointed and two years later the church was finished
reversal of the pure geometry of the ring under [q8-ioi].''^' Its basic form consists of a cylinder
the drum. This formal contrast between rigidity crowned by a hemispherical dome with a broad
and freedom is paralleled by the antithesis be- lantern. An arched portico of pure, classical
tween the monumental Roman lettering of the design is placed in front of the rotunda [98],
inscription, praising the virtues of St Thomas counterbalanced at the far end by the sacristy
of Villanova to whom the church is dedicated, which juts out from the circle but is not per-
and the eloquent reliefs which render eight ceived by the approaching visitor. Here also
important events of his life.'' Since the coffers are the two bell-towers of which only the tops
BIBLOSARTE
1)8 and 99. Gianlorenzo Bernini
Ariccia,
S. Maria dell'Assunzione,
1662-4. Exterior and plan
BIBLOSARTE
l8o •
rub AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
are visible from the square. In order to under- 100 and loi. Gianloren/.o Bernini:
S. Maria dcirAssunzionc, 1662-4.
.'\riccia,
stand Bernini's guiding idea, reference must
Engraving of section and view into dome
be made to another project.
From 1637 onwards Bernini was engaged on
plans for ridding the Pantheon of later dis-
figuring additions; he also intended to systema-
tize the square in front of the ancient building,
but most of his ideas remained on paper.''
Surviving sketches show that he interpreted the
exterior of the 'original' Pantheon as the union
of the two basic forms of vaulted cylinder and
portico, and it is this combination of two simple
geometric shapes, stripped of all accessories,
that he realized in the church at Ariccia [99].

Straight colonnades flank the church, and these,
together with the portico and the walls, which
grip like arms around the body of the church,
enhance the cylindrical and monolithic quality
of the rotunda.
The interior too shows unexpected relations
to the Pantheon [100]. There are three chapels
of equal size on each side, while the entrance
and the altar niche are a fraction larger, so that
an almost unnoticeable axial direction exists.
But the impression prevails of eight consecutive
niches separated by tall Corinthian pilasters,
which carry the unbroken circle of the entab-
lature. As Andrea Palladio had done before in ginal Pantheon which is remarkably close to the
the little church at Maser, so here Bernini interior of Ariccia.'""^
reduced the design to the two fundamental But in the zone of the dome [loi], which
forms of the cylinder and hemisphere, and, as again shows the combination of coflers and ribs,
in Maser, the Corinthian order is as high as the we find a realistic decoration similar to that at
cylinder itself. In contrast, however, to Pal- Castelgandolfo: stucco putti and angels sit on
ladio's rhythmic alternation of open and closed scrolls, holding free-hanging garlands which
bays, Bernini gave an uninterrupted sequence swing from rib to rib.What do these life-like
of openings. The structural chastity of Ariccia figures signify? The church is dedicated to the
was due to an attempt at recreating an imaginary Virgin (S. Maria dell'Assunzione) and, accord-
Pantheon of the venerable Republican era. Ber- ing to the legend, rejoicing angels strew flowers
nini believed that the ancient building had on the day of her Assumption. The celestial
originally been one of heroic simplicity and messengers are seated under the 'dome of
grandeur. Much later. Carlo Fontana, who in heaven' into which the ascending Virgin will be
about 1660 worked as Bernini's assistant, pub- received; the mystery is adumbrated in the
lished a reconstruction of the supposedly ori- Assumption painted on the wall behind the
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI
altar.''" Since the jubilant angels, superior beings less than the setting for a stirring mystery re-
who dwell in a zone inaccessible to the faithful, vealed to the faithful by sculptural decoration.
are treated with extreme realism, they conjure In spite of their close formal links with Renais-
up full and breathing life. Thus whenever he sance and ancient architecture, these churches
enters the church the worshipper participates have been given an entirely non-classical mean-
in the 'mystery in action'. As in Castelgandolfo, ing. Obviously, Bernini saw no contradiction
the dedication of the church gives rise to a between classical architecture and Baroque
dramatic-historical interpretation; the entire sculpture - a contradiction usually emphasized
church is submitted to, and dominated by, this by modern critics who fail to understand the
particular event, and the whole interior has subjective and particular quality with which
become its stage. seemingly objective and timeless classical forms
By and large, the Renaissance church had have been endowed.
been conceived as a monumental shrine, where By far the most important of the three
man, separated from everyday life, was able to churches is S. .\ndrea al Quirinale, commis-
communicate with God. In Bernini's churches, sioned by Cardinal Camillo Pamphili for the
by contrast, the architecture is no more and no novices of the Jesuit Order [102-5]. Building
BIBLOSARTE
|82 •
THE AGE OF THE UlUII UAROQUE
began simultaneously with the church at Castel- 102. Gianlorenzo Bernini:

- the foundation stone was laid on
Rome, S. Andrea al Qiiirinale, 1658-70. Plan
gandolfo
3 November 1658 but it took much longer to
complete this richly decorated church.'" An-
tonio Raggi's stuccoes were carried out between
1662 and 1665, while other parts of the decora-
tion dragged on until 1670. The particular
character of the site on which most of the con-

vent was standing induced Bernini to choose
an oval ground-plan with the transverse axis
longer than the main axis between entrance
and This in itself was not without prece-
altar.
dent. There was Fornovo's S. Maria dell'

Annunziata at Parma ( 566),' and Bernini him-
1
'
self had used the type much earlier in the little
church in the old Palazzo di Propaganda Fide
(1634, later replaced by Borromini's structure).

What is new in S. Andrea, however, is that
pilasters instead of open chapels stand at both

ends of the transverse axis. As a result, the oval cut deep into the coffered parts of the dome.
is closed at the most critical points where other- Bright light streams in from the lantern, in
wise, from a viewpoint near the entrance, the which sculptured cherubs' heads and the Dove
eye would wander off from the main room into of the Holy Ghost seem to await the ascending
undefined subsidiary spaces. Bernini's novel saint. All the chapels are considerably darker
solution permits, indeed compels, the spec- than the congregational room, so that its uni-
tator's glance to sweep round the uninterrupted formity is doubly assured. In addition, there is
sequence of giant pilasters, crowned by the a subtle differentiation in the lighting of the
massive ring of the entablature, until it meets chapels: the large ones flanking the transverse
the columned aedicule in front of the altar axis have a diffused light, while the four sub-
recess [103, 104]. And here, in the concave sidiary ones in the diagonal axes are cast in deep
opening of the pediment, St Andrew soars up shadow. Thus the aedicule is adjoined by dark
to heaven on a cloud. All the lines of the archi- areas which dramatically enhance the radiance
tecture culminate in, and converge upon, this of light in the altar chapel.
piece of sculpture. More arrestingly than in the In S. Andrea Bernini solved the intractable
other churches the beholder's attention is ab- problem of directions inherent in centralized
sorbed by the dramatic event, which owes its planning in a manner which only Palladio had
suggestive power to the way in which it domi- attempted before the Baroque age.'- By means
nates the severe lines of the architecture. of the aedicule, which is an ingenious adaptation
columned screen -
Colour and light assist the miraculous ascen- of the Palladian device of the
sion. Below, in the human sphere, the church a unique occurrence in Rome - he created a
glows with precious multicoloured dark marble. barrier against, as well as a vital link with, the
Above, in the heavenly sphere of the dome, the altar chapel. He thus preserved and even em-
colours are white and gold. The oval space is phasized the homogeneity of the oval form and,
evenly lit by windows between the ribs which at the same time, succeeded in giving predomi-
BIBLOSARTE
183
nance to the altar. Translated into psychological
terms, the church has two spiritual centres: the

oval space, where the congregation participates
in the miracle of the saint's salvation; and the
carefully separated altar-recess, inaccessible to
the laity, where the mystery is consummated.
Here the beholder sees like an apparition the
band of angelic messengers bathed in visionary
golden light bearing aloft the picture of the

martyred saint,'' ^ assured of his heavenly reward
for faith unbroken by suffering.
It hardly seems necessary to reaffirm obser-

vations made in the first part of this chapter:
here the whole church is subject to a coherent

literary theme which informs every part of it,
including the ring of figures above the windows

which consists of putti carrying garlands and
martyrs' palms, and nude fishermen who handle
nets, oars, shells, and reeds - symbolic com-
panions of the fisherman Andrew. Through its
specific connexion with sculpture, the archi-

tecture itself serves to make the dramatic
concetto a vital experience.
For the exterior of S. Andrea, Bernini made

use of the lesson he had learned from Francesco
da Volterra's S. Giacomo degli IncurabiH."^ In
both churches the dome is enclosed in a cylin-
drical shell, and in both cases the thrust is taken
up by large scrolls which fulfil the function of
Gothic buttresses. But this is as far as the
influence of S. Giacomo goes. In the case of S.

Andrea, the scrolls rest upon the strong oval
ring which encases the chapels. Its cornice
seems to run on under the giant Corinthian
pilasters of the fa9ade and sweeps forward into
the semicircular portico where it is supported
by two Ionic columns. The portico [105], sur-
mounted between scrolls by the free-standing
Pamphili coat of arms of exuberant decorative
design, is the only relieving note in an otherwise
extremely austere facade. Yet this airy porch
103 and 104. Gianlorenzo Bernini;
must not simply be regarded as an exhilarating
Rome, S. Andrea al Quirinale, 1658-70.
Engraving of section feature inviting the passers-by to enter; it is
and view towards the altar also a dynamic element of vital importance in
BIBLOSARTE
the piazza.''' They focus attention on the facâde.

But more than this: since they grip firmly into
the 'joints' where the oval body of the church
and the aedicule meet, their concave sweep
reverses the convex ring of the oval and re-
inforces the dynamic qualit\ of the whole
structure.
Genetically speaking, the facade of S. Andrea
is related to that of S. Bibiana. It might almost
be said that what Bernini did was to isolate and
monumentalize the revolutionary central fea-
ture of S. Bibiana and to connect it with the

motif of the portico with free-standing columns
which Pietro da Cortona had first introduced
in S. Maria della Pace [147]. And yet this fa9ade
is highly original. In order to assess its novel
character I may refer to the Early Baroque
facade of S. Giacomo degh Incurabili."' Here
the facade is orthodox, deriving from Roman
Latin-cross churches, so that on entering this
oval church one is aware that the exterior and
the interior are not co-ordinated. In the case of
S. Andrea al Quirinale nobody would expect
to enter a Latin-cross church. Bernini suc-
Rome, S. Andrea al Quirinale, 1658-70
ceeded in expressing in the facade the specific
character of the church behind it : exterior and

the complex organization of the building. The interior form an entirely homogeneous entity.
aedicule motif framing the portico is taken up

inside, on the same axis, by the aedicule framing Secular Buildings
the altar recess. But there is a reversal in the
direction of movement: while in the exterior Bernini's activity in the field of domestic archi-
the cornice over the oval body of the church tecture was neither extensive nor without ad-
seems to move towards the approaching visitor versity. In the Palazzo Barberini, his earhest
and to come to rest in the portico, the point work, his contribution was confined to adjust-
nearest to him, in the interior the movement is ments of Carlo Maderno's design and to deco-
in the opposite direction and is halted at the rative features of the interior such as the door
point farthest away from the entrance. In addi- surrounds.'" The fa9ade of the Collegio di
tion, the isolated altar-room answers in reverse Propaganda Fide facing the Piazza di Spagna
to the projecting portico, and this is expressive was an able modernization of an old palace
of their different functions, the latter inviting, front (1642-4), but he acted only as consulting
the former excluding the faithful. Thus outside architect. '"^
His share in the design of the Palazzo
and inside appear like 'positive' and 'negative' Ducale at Modena and the execution of the
realizations of the same theme. A word must Palazzo del Quirinale - a work of many brains
be added about the two quadrant walls forming and hands - is relatively small. '"
A number of
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI • 185

Rome, Palazzo di Montecitorio, begun 1650
designs remained on paper,*^" while some minor Bernini designed the Palazzo Ludovisi, now
works survive the decoration of the Porta del
: Palazzo di Montecitorio [106], in 1650 for the
Popolo on the side of the Piazza, occasioned by family of Pope Innocent X.*' In 1655, at the
the entry into Rome of Queen Christina of Pope's death, little was standing of the vast
Sweden (1655); additions to the hospital of S. palace, and it was not until forty years later, in
Spirito (1664-6) of which at least a gateway in 1694, that Carlo Fontana resumed construction
the Via Penitenzieri close to the Square of St for Innocent XII. Although Fontana introduced
Peter's survives;*' the renovation of the papal some rather pedantic academic features, Ber-
palace at Castelgandolfo (1660); and finally an nini's fa9ade was sufficiently advanced to pre-
'industrial' work, the arsenal in the harbour of vent any flagrant distortion of his intentions.**^
Civitavecchia (1658-63), consisting of three The entire length of twenty-five windows is
large halls of impressive austerity.**^ Setting all subdivided into separate units of 3-6-7-6-3
this aside, only three works of major importance bays which meet at obtuse angles so that the
remain to claim our attention, each with an ill- whole front looks as if it were erected over a
starred history of its own, namely the Palazzo convex plan. Slight projections of the units at
Ludovisi in Piazza Montecitorio, the Palazzo eitherend and the centre are important vehicles
Chigi in Piazza SS. Apostoli, and the projects of organization. Each unit is framed by giant
for the Louvre. pilasters comprising the two principal storeys,
BIBLOSARTE
l86 •
THE AGE OF THE MIUH BAROQUE
107. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Ronic, l'.ila//(i C.hii;i-()d''scalchi, begun 1664. With N. Salvi's additions, 1745
to which the ground floor with the naturaHstic take up the entire open space. This finely
rock formations under the farthest pilasters and balanced fa9ade was disturbed in 1745 when
window sills serves as a base. Apart from these the palace was acquired by the Odescalchi.
attempts at articulation, the palace is essentially Nicola Salvi and his assistant Luigi Vanvitelli
tied to the Roman tradition deriving from the doubled the central part, which now has sixteen
Palazzo Farnese. pilasters instead of eight and two entrance doors
In the summer of 1664, not long before his instead of one. The present front is much too
journey to Paris, Bernini designed the palace long in relation to its height and, standing be-
which Cardinal Flavio Chigi had purchased in tween asymmetrical wings, no longer bears wit-
1 66 1 from the Colonna family [107].'*^ The ness to Bernini's immaculate sense of propor-
volte-face here is hardly foreshadowed in the tion and scale. This, however, does not pre-
facade of the Palazzo Ludovisi. Bernini placed judice the revolutionary importance of Bernini's
a richly articulated central part of seven bays design, which constitutes a decisive break with
between simple rusticated receding wings of the traditional Roman palace front. The older
three bays each. More decidedly than in the type, with no vertical articulation, has long rows
Palazzo Ludovisi, the ground floor functions of windows horizontally united by means of
as a base for the two upper storeys with their continuous string courses. Precedents for the
giant composite pilasters which stand so close use of the colossal order in palace facades
that the window tabernacles of the piano nohtle existed. In Michelangelo's Capitoline Palaces
BIBLOSARTE
and Palladio's Palazzo Valmarana at Vicenza jects to Colbert, in whose hands as 'Surintendant
the colossal order rises from the ground. On the des Batiments' rested all proceedings connected
other hand, a few buildings in Rome before with the Louvre.
Bernini have a colossal order over the ground Although Bernini always worked on the
floor, and in Northern Italy the type is not whole area of the carre, the focus of his design
rare.'*'' But when all is said and done, such was, of course, the east fa9ade. The first project
comparisons throw into relief rather than of June 1664, contemporary with the design of
diminish Bernini's achievement. The relation the Palazzo Chigi-Odescalchi, is unexpected
of the ground floor to the two upper tiers; the by any standards [108].^' He created an open
fine gradation from simple window-frames to rectangle with two projecting wings of four
elaborate, heavy tabernacle frames in the piano bays each, between which he placed a long
nobile - deriving from the Palazzo Farnese - to colonnade consisting of a convex centre be-
the light and playful window surrounds of the tween two concave arms. The convex part of
second storey ; the rich composite order of the the colonnade follows the shape of the oval
pilasters; the powerful cornice with rhythmi- vestibule, above which is a grand oval hall going
cally arranged brackets crowned by an open through two storeys. Its second storey with
balustrade which was meant to carry statuary; circular windows, articulated by double pilasters
the juxtaposition of the highly organized central and decorated with French lilies standing out
part with the rustic wings; and, lastly, the against the sky-line, rises above the uniform
strong accentuation of the entrance with its cornice of the whole front. In this facade
free-standing Tuscan columns, balcony and Bernini followed up the theme of the Palazzo
window above it, the whole unit being again
dependent on the Palazzo Farnese all this was
here combined in a design of authentic nobility 108. Gianlorenzo Bernini:
and grandeur. Bernini had found the formula First project for the Louvre, 1664. Plan
for the aristocratic Baroque palace. And its
immense influence extends far beyond the

borders of Italy.'*"
Bernini's third great enterprise, the Louvre,

turned out to be his saddest disappointment.
In the spring of 1665 Louis XIV invited him
to come to Paris and suggest on the spot how
to complete the great Louvre carre of which the
west and south wings and half of the north wing
were standing. '^'^
The east wing with the main
front was still to be built. Great were the expec-
tations on all sides when Bernini arrived in
Paris on 2 June of that year. But his five months'

stay there ended in dismal failure. The reasons
for it were many, personal as well as national.
And yet his projects might possibly have been

accepted had they answered the purpose for
which they were made. Before he travelled to
France, he had already sent two different pro-
BIBLOSARTE
Barbcrini, an arcadcd centre framed b) serene Farnese, Bernini retained much plain wall-space
wings, and applied to it theme of Roman
the above the windows of the piano nobile as well as
church facades with a convex centre between the traditional string course under the windows
concave arms (S. Maria della Pace, S. Andrea of the top storey. Instead of arranging the order
al Quirinale). But for the details of the colon- as a simple consecutive sequence, he concen-
nade he turned to the festive architecture of trated four half-columns in the central area, a
northern Italy and combined the colossal order device to emphasize the entrance.^'' This palace
of Palladio's Loggia del Capitano at Vicenza was to rise like a powerful fortress from the
with the two-storeyed arcade of Sansovino's 'natural' rock;"^ this concept too was, in a way,
Library at Venice."" The result was a palace anticipated in the Palazzo di Montecitorio.
design which has an entirely un-Roman airy Bernini's third east fa9ade was the answer to
quality, and though it remained on paper it previous criticism voiced by Colbert. But in
seems to have had considerable influence on the spite of vital changes from one project to the
development of eighteenth-century structures. next, Bernini clung with the stubbornness only
The second project, dispatched from Rome to be found in a genius averse to any compro-
in February 1665 and preserved in a drawing at mise to all the features which he regarded as
Stockholm,"' has a giant order applied to the essential for a royal residence although they
wall above a rusticated ground floor. One may were contrary to French taste and traditions.
regard this as a novel application of the Palazzo He retained the unifying cornice, the unbroken
Chigi-Odescalchi design, but for the wide skyline, and the flat roof; to him a facade was a
sweep of the concave centre part Bernini was whole to which the parts were subordinated; it
probably indebted to an unexecuted project by could never be the agglomeration of different

Pietro da Cortona for the Piazza Colonna in structural units to which the French were
Rome.^- The third project designed in Paris accustomed. Moreover, in compliance with
survives in the engravings by Marot which were southern conceptions of decorum he insisted, in
carried out under Bernini's watchful eyes. He spite of Colbert's repeated protests, on trans-
now returned to the more conventional Roman ferring the King's suite from the quiet south
palazzo type, and in the process of re-designing front, facing the river, to the east wing, the most
the east front he lost in originality what he stately but also the most noisy part of the
gained in monumental appearance.''^ He was building."'' Among his other unacceptable pro-
still faced with the typically Italian problem of posals was the idea of surrounding the carre
harmonizing length and height in this front of with arcades after the fashion of Italian court-
prodigious extension; he therefore subdivided yards; such arcades were not only unsuitable in
the traditional block shape into five distinct that they excluded the light from the rooms be-
units, thus developing the scheme first evolved hind, but they also seemed aesthetically repul-
in the Palazzo Montecitorio. The central pro- sive to the French."' Finally, he never abandoned
jection showing the ideal ratio of i :2 (height to the typically Italian staircases in the four corners
length, without the basement which was to of the carre, placed there in order not to inter-
disappear behind the moat) is emphasized not rupt the alignment of rooms, and their dispo-
only by its size of eleven bays but also by virtue sition as well as their enclosure by badly lit
of its decoration with giant half-columns. This wells appeared contrary to common sense to the
motif is taken up in the giant pilasters of the French, who had solved the problem of easy
wings, while the receding sections have no orders communication between vestibule, staircase
at all. Following the example of the Palazzo hall, and living rooms."**
BIBLOSARTE
GIANLORENZO BERNINI
When Bernini returned to Italy he had not graphical and liturgical problems, and only his
given up hope that his plans would be carried supreme authority in artistic matters backed by
out. The French architects were bitterly anta- the unfailing support of Pope Alexander VII
gonistic. Colbert was irresolute, but the king could overcome intrigues and envious oppo-
had taken a liking to the great Italian and sup- sition"'- and bring this task to a successful
ported him. Actually, the foundation stone of conclusion [i, 112, 113, 250]. Among a vast
Bernini's Louvre was laid three days before his number of issues to be considered, particular
departure from Paris. Back in Rome, he worked importance was attached to two ritual ones
out a new project, the fourth, in which he made right from the start. At Easter and on a few
the one concession of reducing the much other occasions the pope blesses the people of
criticized height of the piano no/nle."'^ In May Rome from the Benediction Loggia above the
1666 he sent his assistant, Mattia de' Rossi, to central entrance to the church. It is a blessing
Paris to supervise the execution. But mean- symbolically extended to the whole world : it is
while the king's interest had shifted to Versailles, given urbi et orhi. The piazza, therefore, had not
and that was the signal for Colbert to abandon only to hold the maximum number of people,
Bernini's plans. while the Loggia had to be visible to as many as
By this decision Paris was saved the doubtful possible, but the form of the square itself had to
honour of having within its walls the most suggest the all-embracing character of the
monumental Roman palazzo ever designed. function. Another ceremony to be taken into
Splendid though Bernini's project was, the account was the papal blessing given to pilgrims
enormous, austere pile would forever have from a window of the private papal apartment
stood out as an alien growth in the serene situated in Domenico Fontana's palace on the
atmosphere of Paris. In Rome, the cube of the north side of the piazza. Other hardly less vital
Palazzo Farnese, the ancestor of Bernini's considerations pertained to the papal palace. Its
design, may be likened to the solo in a choir. In old entrance in the north-west corner of the
Paris, Bernini's overpowering Louvre would piazza could not be shifted and yet it had to be
have no resonance : it would have cast an almost integrated into the architecture of the whole.""
sombre spell over the gaiety of the city.'"" The basilica itself required an approach on the
grandest scale in keeping with its prominence
The Piazza ofSt Peter's

among the churches of the Catholic world. In
addition, covered ways of some kind were
While he was in Paris, Bernini's greatest work, needed for processions and in particular for the
the Square of St Peter's, was still rising. But by solemn ceremonies of Corpus Domini; they
that time all the hurdles had been taken and, were also necessary as protection against sun
moreover, Bernini had a reliable studio with a and rain, for pedestrians as well as for coaches.
long and firmly established tradition to look Bernini began in the summer of 656 1 with the
after his interests. His 'office' supplied, of design of a trapezoid piazza enclosed by the
course, no more than physical help towards the traditional type of palace fronts over round-
accomplishment of one of the most complex headed arcades. This scheme was soon aban-
enterprises in the history of Italian architec- doned for a variety of reasons, not the least
ture."" Bernini alone was responsible for this because it was of paramount importance to
work which has always been universally ad- achieve greatest monumentality with as little
mired, he alone had the genius and resource- height as possible. A palazzo front with arcades
fulness to find a way through a tangle of topo- would have been higher than the present colon-
BIBLOSARTE
igo • THE AGt OF THt HIGH BAROQUE
nades without attaining equal grandeur. So by A number of attempts were made in the post-
March 1657 the first project was superseded by Maderno period to remedy this fault, '"^ before
one with arcades of free-standing columns Urban VIII took the fateful decision in 1636 of
forming a large oval piazza; soon after, in the accepting Bernini's grand design of high towers
summer of the same year, Bernini replaced the of three tiers.""' Of these only the southern one
arcades by colonnades of free-standing columns was built, but owing to technical difficulties and
with a straight entablature above the columns. personal intrigues construction was interrupted
Only such a colonnade was devoid of any associ- in 1 64 1, and finally in 1646 the tower was al-
ations with palace fronts and therefore com- together dismantled. Since the idea of erecting
plied with the ceremonial character of the towers ever again over the present substructures
square more fully than an arcaded scheme with had to be abandoned, Bernini submitted during
its reminiscences of domestic architecture. On Innocent X's pontificate new schemes for a
ritualistic as well as artistic grounds the enclo- radical solution of the old problem."^' By en-
sure of the piazza had to be kept as low as tirely separating the towers from the fagade
possible. A high enclosure would have inter- [no], he made them structurally safe, at the
fered with the visibility of the papal blessing same time created a rich and varied grouping,
given from the palace window. Moreover, a and gave the facade itself carefully balanced pro-
comparatively low one was also needed in order portions. His proposals would have involved
to 'correct' the unsatisfactory impression made considerable structural changes and had there-
by the proportions of the fagade of St Peter's. fore little chance of success. When engaged on
This requires a word of explanation. The the designs for the piazza, Bernini was once
substructures of Maderno's towers, standing again faced with the intractable problem of the
without the intended superstructures,"'^ look fa9ade. Although he also made an unsuccessful
now as if they were parts of the fa9ade, and this attempt at reviving Michelangelo's tetrastyle
accounts for its excessive length [cf. i and 109]. portico,"'** which would have broken up the
log. Carlo Maderno:

RrTRMTODMlA rAM'05t>S'f*lA13liK.\ DFI 1 \ (HlbSA
Dl S PIETRO^DI KO^^MA IN VATICANO Rome, St Peter's. Fafade.
i^^^^
^ AN <,r«UAP*mrATI. !IC<».I»«. Dl-K-V,
M. Greuter's engraving, 1613
n no
Rome,
Drawing,
(opposite). Gianlorenzo Bernini:
St Peter's. Facade with free-standing towers.
c. 1650. Rome, Vatican Library
BIBLOSARTE
I
BIBLOSARTE
III. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, Vatican Palace, Scala Regia, 1663 6
BIBLOSARTE
r
uniform 'wall' of the facade, he now had to use palace. Continuing the corridor, the new cere-
optical devices rather than structural changes as monial staircase, the Scala Regia [iiij, begins
a means to rectify the appearance of the build- at the level of the portico of the church. Here the
ing. He evoked the impression of greater height problems seemed overwhelming. For his new
in the facade by joining to it his long and re- staircase he had to make use of the existing
latively low corridors which continue the order north wall and the old upper landing and return
and skyline of the colonnades.'"" The heavy and flight.'" By placing a columnar order within
massive Doric columns of the colonnades and the 'tunnel' of the main flight and by ingeniously
the high and by comparison slender Corinthian manipulating it, he counteracted the conver-
columns of the facade form a deliberate con- gence of the walls towards the upper landing
trast. And Bernini chose the unorthodox com- and created the impression of an ample and
bination of Doric columns with Ionic entabla- festive staircase.
ture "" not only in order to unify the piazza There was no alternative to the piazza retta,
horizontally but also to accentuate the vertical and only beyond it was it possible to widen the
tendencies in the facade. square. The choice of the oval for the main
For topographical and other reasons Bernini piazza suggested itself by a variety of consider-
was forced to design the so-called piazza retta ations. Above all the majestic repose of the
in front of the church. The length and slant of widely embracing arms of the colonnades was
the northern corridor, and implicitly the form for Bernini expressive of the dignity and gran-
of the piazza retta, were determined by the deur here required [112, 113]. Moreover, this
position of the old and venerable entrance to the form contained a specific concetto. Bernini him-

Rome, The Piazza of St Peter's. Detail
BIBLOSARTE
1 13. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, The Piazza of St Peter's, begun 1656. Aerial view
BIBLOSARTE I
self compared the colonnades to the motherly ing a room, take a few steps forward and unless
arms of the Church 'which embrace Catholics to he made allowance for this they would not be
reinforce their belief, heretics to re-unite them able to embrace the shape in its entirety. In S.
with the Church, and agnostics to enlighten .\ndrea al Quirinale he had given a practical
them with the true faith'. exposition of this idea and he now intended to
Until the beginning of 1667 Bernini intended apply it once again to the design of the Piazza of
to close the piazza at the far end opposite the St Peter's. In both cases the beholder was to be
basilica by a short arm continuing exactly the enabled to let his glance sweep round the full
architecture of the long arms. This proves oval of the enclosure, in the church to come to
conclusively that for him the square was a kind rest at the aedicule before the altar and in the
of forecourt to the church, comparable to an piazza at the fa9ade of St Peter's. Small or large,
immensely extended atrium. The 'third arm' interior or exterior, a comprehensive and unim-
which was never built would have stressed a paired view of the whole structure belongs to
problem that cannot escape visitors to the piazza. Bernini's dynamic conception of architecture,
From a near viewpoint the drum of Michel- which is equally far removed from the static
angelo's dome, designed for a centralized build- approach of the Renaissance as from the scenic
ing, disappears behind Maderno's long nave pursuits of northern Italy and the Late Baroque.
and even the visibilit}' of the dome is affected. The 'third arm', this important link between
Like Maderno before him,"- Bernini was well the two long colonnades, remained on paper for
aware of the fact that no remedy to this problem ever, owing to the death of Alexander VII in
could possibly be found. In developing his 1667. The recent pulling down of the spina (the
scheme for the piazza, he therefore chose to houses between the Borgo Nuovo and Borgo
disregard this matter altogether rather than to Vecchio), already contemplated by Bernini's
attempt an unsatisfactory compromise solution. pupil Carlo Fontana and, in his wake, by other
Early in 1667 construction of the piazza was far eighteenth- and nineteenth-century archi-
enough advanced to begin the 'third arm'. It tects,"^ has created a wide roadway from the
was then that Bernini decided to move the 'third river to the piazza. This has solved one prob-
arm' from the perimeter of the oval back into lem, and only one, namely that of a full view of
the Piazza Rusticucci,"' the square at one time the drum and dome from the distance; may it
existing at the west end of the Borghi (that is, be recalled that they were always visible in all
the two streets leading from the Tiber towards their glory from the Ponte S. Angelo, in olden
the church). He was led to this last-minute days the only access to the precincts of St Peter's.
change of plan certainly less by any consider- To this fictitious gain has been sacrificed Ber-
ation for the visibility of the dome than by the nini's idea of the enclosed piazza and, with no
idea of creating a modest ante-piazza to the oval. hope of redress, the scale between the access to
By thus forming a kind of counterpart to the the square and the square itself has been re-
piazza retta, the whole design would have versed. Formerly the narrow Borgo streets
approached symmetry. In addition, the visitor opened into the wide expanse of the piazza, a
who entered the piazza under the 'third arm' dramatic contrast which intensified the be-
would have been able to embrace the entire holder's surprise and feeling of elation.
perimeter of the oval. It may be recalled that in The most ingenious, most revolutionary, and
centralized buildings Bernini demanded a deep at the same time most influential feature of
entrance because experience shows - so he told Bernini's piazza is the self-contained, free-
the Sieur de Chantelou - that people, on enter- standing colonnade."^ Arcades with orders of
BIBLOSARTE
iy6 •
rut AGt OK Till II I (ill HAROQUE
the type familiar from the Colosseum, used on sky between the columns. No other Italian
innumerable occasions from the fifteenth cen- structure of the post-Renaissance period shows
tury onwards, always contain a suggestion of a an equally deep affinity with Greece. It is our
pierced wall and consequently of flatness. preconceived ideas about Bernini that dim our
Bernini's isolated columns with straight en- vision and prevent us from seeing that this
tablature, by contrast, are immensely sculptural Hellenic quality of the piazza could only be
elements. When crossing the piazza, our ever- produced by the greatest Baroque artist, who
changing view of the columns standing four was a sculptor at heart.
deep"" seems to reveal a forest of individual As happens with most new and vital ideas,
units; and the unison of all these clearly defined after initial sharp attacks the colonnades became
statuesque shapes produces a sensation of of immense consequence for the further history
irresistible mass and power. One experiences of architecture. Examples of their influence
almost physically that each column displaces or from Naples to Greenwich and Leningrad need
absorbs some of the infinitude of space, and this not be enumerated. The aftermath can be fol-
impression is strengthened by the glimpses of lowed up for more than two and a half centuries.
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 9
FRANCESCO BORROMINI
1599-1667
Among the great figures of the Roman High of his life working mainly in St Peter's on coats
Baroque the name of Francesco Borromini of arms, decorative putti, festoons, and balus-
stands in a category of its own. His architecture trades. His name is also connected with some of
inaugurates a new departure. Whatever their the finest wrought-iron railings in the basilica.-
innovations, Bernini, Cortona, Rainaldi, Longhi Moreover, the aged Maderno, who recognized
and the rest never challenged the essence of the the talent of his young relation, used him as an
Renaissance tradition. Not so Borromini, in architectural draughtsman for St Peter's, the
spite of the many ways in which his work is Palazzo Barberini, and the church and dome of
linked to ancient and sixteenth-century archi- S. Andrea della Valle.* Borromini willingly
tecture. It was clearly felt by his contemporaries submitted. to the older man, and the lasting
that he introduced a new and disturbing veneration in w^hich he held him is revealed by
approach to old problems. When Bernini talked the fact that in his will he expressed the wish to
in Paris about Borromini, all agreed, according be buried in Maderno's tomb.
to the Sieur de Chantelou, that his architecture After Maderno's death in January 1629 a new
was extravagant and in striking contrast to situation arose. Bernini took over as Architect
normal procedure; whereas the design of a to St Peter's and the Palazzo Barberini, and
building, it was argued, usually depended on Borromini had to work under him. Documents
the proportions of the human body, Borromini permit Borromini's position to be defined:
had broken with this tradition and erected between 1631 and 1633 he received substantial
fantastic ('chimerical') structures. In other payments for full-scale drawings of the scrolls
words, these critics maintained that Borromini of the Baldacchino and for the supervision of
had thrown overboard the classical anthropo- their execution, and in 1631 he was also officially
morphic conception of architecture which since functioning as 'assistant to the architect' of the
Brunelleschi's days had been implicitly accepted. Palazzo Barberini. The Borrominesque charac-
This extraordinary man, who from all reports ter of the scrolls as well as certain details in the
was mentally unbalanced and voluntarily ended palazzo indicate that Bernini conceded a notable
his life in a fit of despair, came into his own freedom of action to his subordinate, and it
remarkably The son of the architect

late. would therefore appear that Bernini rather than
Giovanni Domenico Castelli, he was born in Maderno paved the way for Borromini's im-
1599 at Bissone on the Lake of Lugano near the minent emergence as an architect in his own
birthplace of his kinsman Maderno.' After a right. But their relationship had the making of a
brief stay in Milan, he seems to have arrived in long-lasting conflict. Fate brought two giants
Rome in about 1620. Much as the artisans who together whose characters were as diflerent as
for hundreds of years had travelled south from were their approaches to architecture; Bernini
that part of Italy, he began as a stone-carver, - man of the world, expansive and brilliant -
and in this capacity spent more than a decade like his Renaissance peers regarded painting
BIBLOSARTE
iy8 IHK ACit Ol rut. IIKill UAROQLt
At present it does not seem possible to sepa-

rate with any degree of finality Borromini's
active contribution to the Palazzo Barberini.
I lis manner is evident, above all, in the
personal
top-floorwindow of the recessed bay adjoining
the arcaded centre [114]. The derivation from
Maderno's windows in the attic of the facade of
St Peter's is obvious, but the undulating 'ears'
with festoons fastened to them as well as the
segmental capping with endings turned out-
ward at an angle of 45 degrees are characteristic
of Borromini's dynamic interpretation of detail.
Here that Promethean force which imparts an
unaccountable tension to every shape and form
is already noticeable.
Original drawings for the doors of the great
hall help to assess the relationship between
Borromini and Bernini.^ There was certainly a
give and take on both sides, but on the whole it
would appear that Borromini's new interpreta-

tion of the architectural detail made a strong
114. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Palazzo Barberini, impression on Bernini who, at this phase and for
facade. Window next to the arcaded centre, c. 1630 a short while later, tried to reconcile his own
anthropomorphic with Borromini's 'bizarre'
and sculpture as adequate preparation for interpretation of architecture. Although the

architecture Borromini - neurotic and recluse -
;
work on the Palazzo Barberini dragged on until
came to achitecture as a trained specialist, a 1638, the major part was finished in 1633. From
builder and first-rate technician. Almost exact then on the two men parted for good. It was then
contemporaries, the one was already immensely that Borromini set out on his own.
successful, the first artist in Rome, entrusted
with most enviable commissions, while the 6". Carlo alle Qjiattru Fontane
other still lacked official recognition at the age of
thirty. Bernini, of course, used Borromini's His opportunity came in 1634, when the Pro-
expert knowledge to the full. He had no reason curator General of the Spanish Discalced
for professional jealousy, from which, incident- Trinitarians commissioned him to build the
ally, he always remained free. For Borromini, monastery of S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, a
however, these years must have been a degrad- couple of hundred yards from the Palazzo
ing experience which always rankled with him, Barberini. Borromini first built the dormitory,
and when in 1645 the affair of Bernini's towers the refectory (now sacristy), and the cloisters,^
of St Peter's led to a crisis, it was he who came and the layout proved him a master in the
forward as Bernini's most dangerous critic and rational exploitation of the scanty potentialities
adversary. His guns were directed against of the small and irregularly cut site [115]. In
technical inefficiency, the very point where - he 1638 the foundation stone of the little church
knew - Bernini was most vulnerable. itself was laid. Except for the fa9ade, it was
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINI • iy()
115. Francesco Borromini

Rome, S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, 1638-41. Plan
finished in May 1641 and consecrated in 1646 diamond pattern of two equilateral triangles
[117]. Next to Cortona's SS. Martina e Luca, with a common base along the transverse axis of
which went up during the very same years, it the building; the undulating perimeter of the
must be regarded as one of the 'incunabula' of plan follows this rhomboid geometry with great
the Roman High Baroque and deserves the precision.
closest attention. It is of the greatest importance to realize that
The cloisters, a structure of admirable sim- in S. Carlo and in later buildings Borromini
plicity, contain features which anticipate the founded his designs on geometric units. By
basic 'orchestration' in the church, such as the abnegating the classical principle of planning in
ring of rhythmically arranged, immensely effec- terms of modules, i.e. in terms of the multipli-
tive columns forming an elongated octagon, the cation and division of a basic arithmetical unit
uniform cornice binding together the columns, (usually the diameter of the column), Borro-
and the replacement of corners by convex mini renounced, indeed, a central position of
curvatures which prevent caesuras in the con- anthropomorphic architecture. In order to make
tinuity of movement. clearer the difference of procedure, one might
A number of projects in the Albertina, Vienna, state, perhaps too pointedly, that in the one
have always been - as we now know incorrectly case the overall plan and its divisions are evolved
- referred to the planning of the church ever by adding module to module, and in the other
since E. Hempel published them in 1924." The by dividing a coherent geometric configuration
geometric conception of the final project is a into geometric sub-units. Borromini's geomet-
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINI • 201
ric approach to planning was essentially medi- rhythm is created by the high arches and the
eval, and one wonders how much of the old segmental pediments above the pictures. These
mason's tradition had reached him before he elements seem to tie together each group of
went to Rome. For hundreds of years Lom- three bays in the main axes. The reading, again
bardy had been the cradle of Italian masons, from the entrance bay, would therefore be:
and it is quite possible that in the masons' yards |bAb|c|b.'\'b|c|bAb| etc. Where then are the
medieval building practices were handed on real caesuras in this building? In the overlap-
from generation to generation. Borromini's ping triads of bays there is certainly a suggestion
stubborn adherence to the rule of triangulation of Mannerist complexity. However, instead of
seems to support the point.' strengthening the inherent situation of conflict,
In Borromini's plan of S. Carlo extraordinary as the Mannerists would have done, Borromini
importance is given to the sculptural element of counteracted it by two devices: first, the power-
the columns [ii6, 117]. They are grouped in ful entablature serves, in spite of its movement,
fours with larger intervals on the longitudinal as a firm horizontal barrier which the eye fol-
and transverse axes. While the triads of undulat- lows easily and uninterruptedly all round the
ing bays in the diagonals are unified by the wall perimeter of the church; and secondly, the
treatment - niches and continuous mouldings - columns themselves, which by their very nature
the dark gilt-framed pictures in the main axes have no direction, may be seen as a continuous
seem to create effective caesuras. Thus, starting accentuation of the undulating walls. It is pre-
from the entrance bay, rhythm of the follow-
a cisely the predominant bulk of the columns
ing order exists: A|bcb| A'|bcb| A| etc. But inside the small area of this church that helps to
this is clearly not the whole truth. A different unify its complex shape. The overlapping triads
may be regarded as the 'background rhythm'
116 and 117 (below). Francesco Borromini:
(left) which makes for the never-tiring richness and
Rome, S. Carlo
alle Quattro Fontane, 1638-41. fascination of the disposition; or, to use a simile,
Section and view towards high altar they may be likened to the warp and woof of the
wall texture. In musical terms the arrangement
may be compared to the structure of a fugue.
What kind of dome could be erected over the
undulating body of the church? To place the
vault directly on to it in accordance with the
method known from circular and oval plans
(Pantheon type) would have been a possibility
which Borromini, however, excluded at this
stage of his development. Instead he inserted a

transitional area with pendentives which al-
lowed him to design an oval dome of unbroken

curvilinear shape [118]. He used, in other
words, the transitional device necessary in plans
with square or rectangular crossings. The four
bays under the pendentives ('c') fulfil, therefore,
the function of piers in the crossings of Greek-
cross plans. And, in actual fact, in the zone of
the pendentives Borromini incorporated an in-
BIBLOSARTE
ii8. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, 1638-41. Dome
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINI •
203
teresting reference to the cross-arms. The shal- manipulating three generically different struc-
low transverse niches as well as the deeper tures in such a way that they appear merged
entrance and altar recesses are decorated with into an infinitely suggestive whole. With this
coffers which diminish rapidly in size, not only bold step Borromini opened up entirely new
suggesting, theoretically, a depth greater than vistas which were further explored later in the
the actual one, but also containing an illusionist century in Piedmont and northern Europe
hint at the arms of the Greek cross. Yet this rather than in Rome.
sophisticated device was meant to be conceptu- The extraordinary character of Borromini's
ally rather than visually effective. Above the creation was immediately recognized. Upon the
pendentives is the firm ring on which the oval completion of the church the Procurator Gene-
dome rests. The dome itself is decorated with a ral wrote that 'in the opinion of everybody
maze of deeply incised coffers of octagonal, nothing similar with regard to artistic merit,
hexagonal, and cross shapes.** They produce an caprice, excellence and singularity can be found
exciting honeycomb impression, and the crystal- anywhere in the world. This is testified by
line sharpness of these simple geometric forms members of diffêrent nations who, on their
is as far removed from the classical type of arrival in Rome, try to procure plans of the
coffêrs in Bernini's buildings [97] as from the church. We have been asked for them by Ger-
smooth and curvilinear ones in those by Cor- mans, Flemings, Frenchmen, Italians, Spani-
tona [144]. The coffêrs decrease considerably ards and even Indians . .
.' The report also con-
in size towards the lantern, so that here again an tains an adroit characterization of the buildings
illusionist device has been incorporated into 'Everything' - it says - 'is arranged in such
the design. Light streams in not only from above manner that one part supplements the other and
through the lantern but also from below through that the spectator is stimulated to let his eye
windows in the fillings of the coffêrs, partly wander about ceaselessly.'
hidden from view behind the sharply chiselled The fa9ade [119, 120] was not erected during
ornamental ring of stylized leaves which crowns the early building period. It was Borromini's
the cornice. The idea of these windows can be last work, begun in 1665 and completed in 1667,
traced back to a similar, but typically Mannerist, though the sculptural decoration was not
arrangement in an oval church published by finished until 1682. Although Borromini's
Serlio in his Fifth Book. Thus the dome in its whole career as an architect lies between the
shining whiteness and its even light without building of the church and of the facade, the
deep shadows seems to hover immaterially discussion of the latter cannot be separated from
above the massive and compact forms of the that of the former. The system of articulation,
space in which the beholder moves. combining a small and a giant order, derives
Borromini reconciled in this church three from Michelangelo's Capitoline Palaces and the
diff"erent structural types: the undulating lower fa9ade of St Peter's where Borromini had
zone, the pedigree of which points back to such started work as a scarpelHno almost fift}' years
late antique plans as the domed hall of the before. But he employed this Michelangelesque
Piazza d'Oro in Hadrian's Villa near Tivoli; the system in an entirely new way. By repeating it in
intermediate zone of the pendentives deriving two tiers of almost equal importance, he acted
from the Greek-cross plan and the oval dome
; against the spirit in which the system had been
which, according to tradition, should rise over a invented, namely to unify a front throughout
plan of the same shape. Nowadays it is difficult its whole height. Moreover, this determined
to appreciate fully the audacity and freedom in repetition was devised to serve a specific, highly
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINI 205
original concept; in spite of the coherent articu- echoed. Finally, instead of the niche with the
lation, the upper tier embodies an almost com- figure of St Charles, the upper tier has a medal-
plete reversal of the lower one. The facade lion loosely attached to the wall. The principle
consists of three bays; below, the two concave underlying the design is that of diversity and
outside bays and the convex centre bay are tied even polarity inside a unifying theme, and it
together by the strong, unbroken, undulating will be noticed that the same principle ties the
entablature; above, the three bays are concave facade to the interior of the church. For the
and the entablature is deployed in three separate fa9ade is clearly a different realization of the
segments. In addition, the oval medallion car- triad of bays which is used for the 'instrumentali-
ried by angels and capped by the onion-shaped zation' of the interior.
crowning element nullifies the efiect of the The compactness of this facade, with its mini-
entablature as a horizontal barrier. Below, the mum of wall-space, closely set with columns,
small columns of the outside bays frame a wall sculpture, and plastic decoration where the eye
with small oval windows and serve as support is nowhere allowed to rest for long, is typical
for niches with statues ; above, the small columns of the High Baroque. Borromini also included
frame niches and support enclosed wall panels a visionary element, characteristic of his late
in other words, the open and closed parts have style. Above the entrance there are herms
been reversed. The opening of the door in the ending in very large, lively cherubs' heads,
central bay is answered above by the 'sculptural' whose wings form a protecting arch for the
and projecting element of the oval 'box' in figure of St Charles Borromeo in the niche
which the convex movement of the facade is [120]. In other parts of the fa9ade, too, realistic
I iQ (opposite). Francesco Borromini:

Rome, S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane.
Facade, 1665-7
120 (right ). Detail of illustration 119,

with Antonio Raggi's
statue of St Charles Borromeo
BIBLOSARTE
206 •
sculptural detail supports functional architec- Before Borromini's S. Ivo, the star-hexagon
tural forms. This strange fusion of architecture was almost entirely excluded from Renaissance
and sculpture, the growth of which can be fol- and post-Renaissance planning. It may have
lowed over a long period, is utterly opposed to occurred in antiquity," but apart from a sketch
the manner of Bernini, who could never divorce by Peruzzi in the Uffizi and Vittozzi's SS.
sculpture from narrative connotations and Trinita at Turin (begun 1598) it would be
therefore never surrendered it to architecture. difficult to name Italian precedents. Even the
simple hexagon was hardly used. The reason
is not difficult to guess. In contrast to the
S. Ivu delta Sapienza
square, the octagon, and dodecagon, where
Almost immediately after the completion of S. equal sides confront each other in the two main
Carlo alle Quattro Fontane Borromini was given axes, in the hexagon one axis goes through two
a great opportunity further to develop his ideas sides, the other through two angles. It is there-
on ecclesiastical architecture. He began the fore evident that in plans derived from the
church of the Roman Archiginnasio (later the hexagon the parts can never conform, and herein
University), S. Ivo, in 1642; by 1650 most of
the structure was finished. The decoration
dragged on until 1660. As early as 1632 when 121. Francesco Borromini:
work in the Palazzo Barberini was still in pro- Rome, S. Ivo della Sapienza, 1642 50. Plan
gress, Bernini had recommended Borromini as
architect to the Sapienza.'* He began by con-

tinuing the older south wing of the palace. The
two great doors of the east wing on Piazza S.
Eustachio, his most important exterior contri-

bution, were executed much later, during Alex-
ander VIFs pontificate.
The church was to be erected at the east end
of Giacomo della Porta's long, arcaded cortile
[125]. For its plan Borromini returned once

again to the basic geometry of the equilateral
triangle [121]. But this time the triangles inter-
penetrate in such a way that they form a regular
star-hexagon. The points of interpenetration
lie on the perimeter of a circle, and by drawing
straight lines from point to point a regular
hexagon is formed. The semicircular recesses
replacing the angles of one triangle are deter-
mined by circles with a radius of half a side of
the hexagon, while the convex endings of the
other triangle result from circles with the same
radius and their centres in the points of the tri-
angle.^" Thus recesses of a concave shape and

recesses with slanting walls and convex endings
alternate and face each other across the space.
BIBLOSARTE
122. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Ivo della Sapienza, 1642-50. Interior
BIBLOSARTE
208 •
THE AGE OF THE HKiH BAROQUE
lies an clement of unrest or even conflict. But in fact, the star shape of the plan, each segment
it must be said at once that the complexities opening at its base into a large window. More-
inherent in hexagonal or star-hexagonal plan- over, the vertical lines of the pilasters are carried
ning were skilfully avoided by Borromini. His on in the gilded mouldings of the dome which
method was no less than revolutionary. Instead repeat and accentuate the tripartite division
of creating, in accordance with tradition, a into bays below [124]. In spite of the strong
hexagonal main space with lower satellite spaces horizontal barrier of the entablature, the vertical
placed in the angles of the triangles, he en- tendencies have a terrific momentum. As the
compassed the perimeter with an uninterrupted variously shaped sectors of the dome ascend,
sequence of giant pilasters impelling the spec- contrasts are gradually reduced until the move-
tator to register the unity and homogeneity of ment comes to rest under the lantern in the
the entire area of the church [122). This sensa- pure form of the circle, which is decorated with
tion is powerfully supported by the sharply de-
fined crowning entablature which reveals the
star form of the ground-plan in all its clarity
[124]. The basic approach is, therefore, close
to that in S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane; and

once again a sophisticated 'background-rhythm'
constantly stimulates the beholder's curiosity.
Each recess is articulated by three bays, two
identical small ones framing a large one ('A C A'
and 'A' B A") [123]. But these alternating triads
- equal in value though entirely different in
spatial deployment - are not treated as separate
or separable entities, for the two small bays

across each corner (A A' or A' A) are so much
alike that they counteract any tendency to per-
ceiving real caesuras. Moreover, two other over-
lapping rhythms are also implied. The con-
tinuous string courses at half-height are inter-
rupted by the central bay of the semicircular

altar recess (C),'- while the continuous string
123. Francesco Borromini:
course under the capitals is not carried on Rome, S. Ivo della Sapienza, 1642 50. Plan
across the convex bays (B). Thus two alternative
groups of five bays may be seen as 'super-units', twelve large stars. In this reduction of multi-
either A A' B A' A or A' A C A A'. It may there- plicity to unity, of differentiation and variety to
fore be said that the articulation contains three the simplicity of the circle, consists a good deal
interlocking themes with the intervals placed of the fascination of this church. Geometrical
at any of the three possible points: the large succinctness and inexhaustible imagination,
round-headed bays 'C, the convex bays 'B', technical skill and religious symbolism have
or at the angles between the small bays 'A A". rarely found such a reconciliation. One can
In contrast to S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, trace the movement downward from the chas-
the dome caps the body of the church without tity of forms in the heavenly zone to the in-
a transitional structural feature. It continues. creasing complexity of the earthly zone. The
BIBLOSARTE
I
124. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Ivo della Sapienza, 1642-50. Dome
BIBLOSARTE
210 • THt ACit OF THE IllUtl BAROQUE
decorative elements of the dome the vertical enhances the impression of vitality and tension.
rows of stars, the papal coat of arms above Secondly, above the drum is a stepped pyramid,
alternating windows, the cherubs under the divided by buttress-like ribs which transfer the
lantern - have a fantastic, unreal, and exciting thrust on to the reinforced meeting-point of
quality and speak at the same time a clear two sectors of the drum ; thirdly, the pyramid
emblematical language." is crowned by a lantern with double columns
In continuing the shape of the ground-plan and concave recessions between them. The
into the vaulting Borromini accepted the prin- similarity to the little temple at Baalbek cannot
ciple normally applied to circular and oval be overlooked and has, indeed, often been
churches. Yet neither for the particular form stressed.''' Above these three zones - which in
of the dome nor for the decoration was there a spite of their entirely different character are
contemporary precedent. In one way or another welded together by the strong structural 'con-
the customary type of the Baroque dome fol- ductors' - rises a fourth element, the spiral,
lowed the example set by Michelangelo's dome monolithic and sculptural, not corresponding
of St Peter's. In none of the great Roman domes to any interior feature or continuing directly
was the vaulted surface broken up into differ- the external movement. Yet it seems to bind
ently shaped units. But Borromini had classical together the several fields of energy which,
antiquity on his side he had surely studied such
; united, soar up in a spatial movement along the
buildings as the Serapeum of Hadrian's Villa spiral and are released into the lofty iron cusp.
near Tivoli.'^ The dome of S. Ivo found no It is futile to speculate on the exact prototypes
sequel in Rome. Again it was in Piedmont that for the spiral feature. Borromini may have deve-
Borromini's ideas fell on fertile ground. loped impressions of imperialRoman columns
The exterior of S. Ivo presented an unusual or may have had some unexpected knowledge
task, since the main entrance had to be placed of a ziggurat, the Babylonian-Assyrian temple
at the far end of Giacomo della Porta's court- towers of which a late derivation survives in the
yard. Borromini used Porta's hemicycle with great mosque at Sam'arra.''' In any case, it can
closed arcades in two tiers for the fa9ade of the hardly be doubted that this element has an
church; above it towers one of the strangest emblematic meaning, the precise nature of
domes ever invented [125]. In principle Borro- which has not yet been rediscovered.
mini followed the North Italian tradition of S. Ivo must be regarded as Borromini's
encasing the dome rather than exhibiting its masterpiece, where his style reached its zenith
rising curve as had been customary in central and where he played all the registers at his
Italy since Brunelleschi's dome of Florence command. By comparison, his earlier and later
Cathedral. He handled this tradition, however, buildings, ecclesiastical as well as domestic,

in a new and entirely personal manner. His often suffer through the fact that they are either
domed structure consists of four different parts unfinished or that he was inhibited by com-
first, a high, hexagonal drum of immense weight plexities of site and the necessity to comply
which counters by its convex projection the with existing structures.
concave recession of the church fa9ade on the In contrast to Bernini, who conceived archi-
cortile. The division of each of the six equal tecture as the stage for a dramatic event ex-
convex sectors into two small bays and a large pressed through sculpture, the drama in S. Ivo
one prepares for the triads in the recesses of is inherent in the dynamic architectural con-
the interior. At the points where two convex ception itself: in the way that the motifs unfold,
sectors meet the order is strengthened; this expand, and contract ; in the way that movement
BIBLOSARTE
125. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Ivo della Sapienza, 1642-50. View from the courtyard
BIBLOSARTE
212 THE AtiE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
surges upwards and comes to rest. Ever since secutive columns of the old church inside one
Baldinucci's days it has been maintained that broad pillar, by framing each pillar with a
there is an affinity to Gothic structures in colossal order of pilasters throughout the whole
Borromini's work. There is certainly truth in height of the nave, and by placing a tabernacle
the observation. His interest in the cathedral niche of coloured marble for statuary into the
at Milan is well known, and the system of face of each pillar where originally an opening
buttresses in S. Ivo proves that he found inspira- between two columns had been [ 1 26 ]. The alter-
tion in the northern medieval rather than the nation of pillars and open arches created a basic
contemporary Roman tradition. Remarkably rhythm well known since Bramante's and even
medieval features may be noticed in his detail, Alberti's days. Borromini, however, not only
such as the angular intersection of mouldings carried it across the corners of the entrance wall,
over the doors inside S. Ivo or the pedestal ot thereby transforming the nave into an enclosed
the holy water stoup in the Oratory of S. Filippo space, but introduced another rhythm which
Neri. Even more interesting is his partiality for reverses the primary one. The spectator per-
the squinch, so common in the Romanesque ceives simultaneously the continuous sequence
and Gothic architecture of northern Italy before of the high bays of the pillars and the low arches
the Byzantine pendentive replaced it in the age (A b A b A . . .) as well as that of the low taber-
of the Renaissance. But he used the squinch nacles and the high arches (a BaBa . . .). More-
as a transitional element between the wall and over, this second rhythm has an important
the vault only in minor structures, such as the chromatic and spatial quality, for the cream-
old sacristy of S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane, coloured arches - 'openings' of the wall - are
or in certain rooms of the Palazzo Falconieri contrasted by the dark-coloured tabernacles,
and of the Collegio di Propaganda Fide. His which break through the plane of the wall and
resuscitation of the squinch was again to find a project into the nave.
sequel in Piedmont rather than Rome. It has recently been ascertained'" that Borro-
mini intended to vault the nave. The present
arrangement, which preserved Daniele da Vol-
5. Giovanni in Laterano, S. Agnese, S. Andrea
terra's heavy wooden ceiling (1564-72), must
delle Fratte, and Minor Ecclesiastical Works
be regarded as provisional, but after the Holy
While S. Ivo was in course of construction three Year there was no hope of continuing this costly
large works were entrusted to Borromini: the enterprise. The articulation of the nave would
reconstruction of S. Giovanni in Laterano, the have found its logical continuation in the vault,
continuation of Rainaldi's S. Agnese in Piazza which always formed an integral part of Borro-
Navona, and the exterior of S. Andrea delle mini's structures. If the execution of his scheme
Fratte. A thorough restoration of S. Giovanni thus remained a fragment, he was yet given
had become necessary since the Early Christian ample scope for displaying his skill as a deco-
basilica was in danger of collapse. Borromini's rator. The naturalistic palm branches in the
work was begun in May 1646 and finished by sunken panels of the pilasters of the aisles, the
October 1649, in time for the Holy Year.'" His lively floral ornament of the oval frames in the
task was extremely difficult because Innocent X clerestory, the putti and cherubim forming part
insisted on preserving the venerable basilica. of the architectural design as in Late Gothic
How could one produce a modern Baroque churches, and, above all, the re-arrangement
building under these circumstances?'" Borro- in the new aisles during Alexander VII's pon-
mini solved his problem by encasing two con- tificate of the old tombs and monuments of
BIBLOSARTE
213
126. Francesco Borromini

Rome, S. Giovanni in Laterano. Nave, 1 646-9
popes, cardinals, and bishops - all this shows cap in S. Agnese in Piazza Navona was of a
an inexhaustible wealth of original ideas and an different nature. Pope Innocent X wanted to
uninhibited imagination. Although contem- turn the square on which his family palace was
poraries regarded the settings of these monu- situated into the grandest in Rome; it was to be
ments as a veritable storehouse of capriccios,-" dominated by the new church of S. Agnese to
they are far from unsuitable for the purpose for replace an older one close to the palace. Carlo
which they were designed - on the contrary, Rainaldi, in collaboration with his father Giro-
each of the venerable relics of the past is placed lamo, had been commissioned to build the new
into its own kind of treasure-chest, beautifully structure, the foundation stone of which was
adapted to its peculiar character. It is typical of laid on 15 August 1652." The Rainaldis de-
Borromini's manner that in these decorations signed a Greek-cross plan with short arms and
realistic features and floral and vegetable motifs pillars of the crossing with broad bevels which
of dewy freshness merge with the sharp and were opened into large niches framed by re-
crystalline architectural forms.-' cessed columns. While the idea of the pillars
If in S. Giovanni in Laterano Borromini had with niches derived from St Peter's, the model
to renounce completion of his design, the handi- for the recessed columns was Cortona's SS.
BIBLOSARTE
127 (left) and 128 (opposite).
Francesco Borromini
Rome,
S. Agnese in Piazza Navona,
begun by Girolamo
and Carlo Rainaldi in 1652.
Section and plan, and interior
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINI • 215
Martina e Luca. The building went up in accor- crossing, therefore, appears to the eye as a
dance with this design, but soon criticism was regular octagon; this is accentuated by the
voiced, particularly as regards the planned stair- sculptural element of the all but free-standing
case, which extended too far into the piazza. A columns [128]. Colour contrasts sustain this
crisis became unavoidable, the Rainaldis were impression, for the body of the church is white
dismissed, and on 7 August 1653 Borromini (with the exception of the high altar), while the
was appointed in their place. columns are of red marble. Moreover, an intense
To all intents and purposes he had to continue verticalism is suggested by virtue of the pro-
building in accordance with the Rainaldi plan, jecting entablature above the columns, unifying
for the pillars of the crossing were standing to the arch with the supporting columns; and the
the height of the niches. Yet by seemingly minor high attic above the entablature, which appears
alterations he changed the character of the de- under the crossing like a pedestal to the arch,-^
sign. Above all, he abolished the recesses pre- increases the vertical movement. It will now
pared for the columns and bevelled the pillars be seen that the octagonal space - also echoed
so that the columns look as if they were detached in the design of the floor - is encompassed by
from the wall [127].-' By this device the be- the coherent rhythm of the alternating low bays
holder is made to believe that the pillars and of the pillars framed by pilasters and the high
the cross arms have almost equal width. The 'bavs' of the cross-arms framed bv the columns.
BIBLOSARTE
I2g. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Agnese in Piazza Navona.
Fa(;ade, 1653-5, completed 1666 by other hands
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINI "
217
By giving the cross-arms a length much greater gely enough, the exterior looks more Borro-
than that intended by Rainaldi, Borromini minesque than the interior. For in the interior
created a piquant tension between them and the the rich gilt stuccoes, the large marble reliefs - a
central area. Thus a characteristically Borro- veritable school of Roman High Baroque sculp-
minesque structure was erected over Rainaldi's ture - Gaulli's and Giro Ferri's frescoes in the
traditional plan. Nor did the latter envisage a pendentives and dome : all this tends to conceal
building of exceptionally high and slender de- the Borrominesque quality of the structure. ^'^
sign. Borromini further amplified the vertical Completion dragged on for many years. The
tendencies by incorporating into his design an towers went up in 1666; interior stuccoes were
extraordinarily high drum and an elevated curve still being paid for in 1670, and the frescoes of
for the dome - which obviously adds to the the dome were not finished until the end of the
importance of the area under the crossing [127]. century.
Rainaldi, by contrast, had planned to blend a In defiance of the limitations imposed upon
low drum with a broad, rather unwieldy dome. Borromini, S. Agnese occupies a unique posi-
In spite of the difficulties which Borromini tion in the history of Baroque architecture. The
had to face in the interior, he accomplished an church must be regarded as the High Baroque
almost incredible transformation of Rainaldi's revision of the centralized plan for St Peter's.
project. In the handling of the exterior [129] he The dome of S. Agnese has a distinct place in
was less handicapped. The little that was stand- a long line of domes dependent on Michel-
ing of Rainaldi's facade was pulled down. By angelo's creation (p. 422). From the late six-
abandoning the vestibule planned by the latter, teenth century onwards may be observed a
he could set the facade further back from the progressive reduction of mass and weight, a
square and design it over a concave plan. In heightening of the drum at the expense of the
Rainaldi's project the insipid crowning features vault, and a growing elegance of the sky-line.
at both ends of the fa9ade were entirely over- All this reached a kind of finality in the dome
shadowed by the weight of the dome. Borromini of S. Agnese. Moreover, from a viewpoint oppo-
extended the width of the facade into the area site the entrance the dome seems to form part
of the adjoining palaces, thus creating space of the fa9ade, dominates it, and is firmly con-
for freely rising towers of impressive height. nected with it, since the double columns at both
But he was prevented from completing the sides of the entrance are continued in the
execution of his design. After Innocent X's pilasters of the drum and the ribs of the vault.
death on 7 January 1655, building activity Circumstances prevented the dome of St Peter's
stopped. Soon difficulties arose between Borro- from appearing between two framing towers.
mini and Prince Camillo PamphiH, and two The idea found fulfilment in S. Agnese; here
years later Carlo Rainaldi in turn replaced Bor- dome and towers form a grand unit, perfectly
romini. Assisted by Giovanni Maria Baratta balanced in scale. Never before had it been
and Antonio del Grande, Carlo proceeded to possible for a beholder to view at a glance such
alter those parts which had not been finished: a rich and varied group of towers and dome
the interior decoration, the lantern of the dome, while at the same time experiencing the spell
the towers, and the facade above the entabla- of the intense spatial suggestions: he feels him-
ture. The high attic over the fa9ade, the tri- self drawn into the cavity of the facade, above
angular pediment in the centre, and certain which looms the concave mass of the drum.
simplifications in the design of the towers are Nobody can overlook the fact that Borromini,
contrarv to Borromini's intentions.-^ But, stran- although he employed the traditional grammar
BIBLOSARTE
2l8 •
of motifs, repeated here the spatial reversal of

the facade of S. Ivo.
Probably in the same year, 1653, in which
he took over S. Agnese from Rainaldi, Borro-
mini was commissioned by the Marchese Paolo
Bufalo to finish the church of S. Andrea delle
Fratte which Gaspare Guerra had begun in
1605. Although Borromini was engaged on this
work until 1665, he had to abandon it in a
fragmentary state. The transept, dome, and

choir which he added to the conventional in-
terior reveal little of his personal style. Much
more important is his contribution to the un-
finished exterior [130]. It is his extraordinary
dome and tower, designed to be seen as one

descends from Via Capo le Case, that give the
otherwise insignificant church a unique dis-
tinction. Similar to S. Ivo, the curve of the dome
is encompassed by a drumlike casing. But here
four widely projecting buttresses jut out dia-
gonally from the actual body of the 'drum'. In
this way four equal faces are created, each con-
sisting of a large convex bay of the 'drum' and
narrower concave bays of the buttresses. The
plan of each face is therefore similar to the
lower tier of the facade of S. Carlo alle Quattro
Fontane. Once again Borromini worked with
spatial evolutions of rhythmic triads, and once
again a monumental order of composite columns
placed at the salient points ensures the unbroken
coherence of the design. This extraordinary
structure was to be crowned by a lantern -
which unfortunately remained on paper - with
concave recesses above the convex walls under-
neath. Without this lantern the spatial intentions
embodied in Borromini's design cannot be
fully gauged.-^
The tower, rising in the north-east corner

next to the choir, was conceived as a deliberate
contrast to the dome. Its three tiers form com-
pletely separate units. While the lowest is solid
and square with diagonally-projecting columned

130. Francesco Borromini:
Rome, S. Andrea delle Fratte. corners, the second is open and circular and
Tower and dome, 1653-65 follows the model of ancient monopteral
BIBLOSARTE
219
temples. By topping this feature with a dispro- fied version of S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane.'-
portionately heavy balustrade the circular But above the cornice the comparison does not
movement is given an emphatic, compelling hold. Here there is a low clerestory and a coved
quality. In the third tier the circular form is vault divided by ribs, linking a pair of columns
broken up into double herms with deep concave
131. Francesco Borromini; Rome,
recesses between them - a new and more in-
S. Maria dei Sette Dolori, begun 1642- Interior
tensely modelled version of the lantern of S. Ivo.
While full-blooded cherubs function as carya-
tids, their wings enfold the stems of the herms.

At this late stage of his development Borromini
liked to soften the precise lines of architecture
by the swelHng forms of sculpture, and the

cherub-herm, an invention of his far removed
from any classical models, fascinated him in this
context.-** The uppermost element of the tower

consists of four inverted scrolls of beautiful
elasticity ; on them a crown with sharply pointed
spikes balances precariously: the whole a
triumph of complex spatial relationships and a
bizarre concetto by which the top of the tower is
wedded to the sky and the air. Thus the flexible

but homogeneous massive bulk of the dome is a
foil for the small scale of the tower with its
emphasis on minute detail (capitals of the mono-

pteros!) and its radical division into contrasting
shapes.-''
Among Borromini's lesser ecclesiastical works

two churches may be singled out for special con-
sideration: S. Maria dei Sette Dolori and the
Church of the Collegio di Propaganda Fide. In
both cases the church lies at right angles to the
fa9ade, and both churches are erected over across the room.*' This arrangement contained
simple rectangular plans with bevelled or potentialities which were later further developed
rounded corners. S. Maria dei Sette Dolori was in the church of the Propaganda Fide.
begun in 1642-3 and left unfinished in 1646.'"' In 1646 Borromini was appointed architect to
The exterior is an impressive mass of raw bricks the Collegio di Propaganda Fide. But it was not
and only the rather weak portal was executed in until 1662 that the church behind the west
stone, but not from Borromini's design. The front of the palace was in course of construction.
interior is articulated by an imposing sequence Two years later it was finished, with the excep-
of columns arranged in triads between the tion of the decoration.*^ At first Borromini
larger intervals of the two main axes, which are planned to preserve the oval church built by
bridged by arches rising from the uninterrupted Bernini in 1634. When it was decided to en-
cornice [131].^' In spite of the difference in plan, large it, he significantly preferred the simple
S. Maria dei Sette Dolori is in a sense a simpli- hall type in analogy to S. Maria dei Sette Dolori
BIBLOSARTE
132. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Collegio di Propaganda Fide. Church, 1662-4
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMINl • 221
133. Francesco Borromini: Rome,

CoUegio di Propaganda Fide. Vaulting of the church
and the even earlier Oratory of St Philip Neri. continued through the isolated pieces of the
But the changes in design are equally illumi- entablature into the coved vaulting and is taken
nating. The clerestory of S. Maria dei Sette up by the ribs, which link the centres of the long
Dolori was similar to that of the Oratory. By walls with the four corners diagonally across
contrast, the church of the Propaganda Fide em- the ceiling [133]. Thus an unbroken system
bodies a radical revision of those earlier struc- closely ties together all parts of the building in
tures [132]. The articulation consists here of a all directions. The coherent 'skeleton'-structure
large and small order, derived from the Capito- has become all-important - hardly any walls
line palaces. The large pilasters accentuate the remain between the tall pilasters! - and to it
division of the perimeter of the church into even the dome has been sacrificed. The oval
alternating wide and narrow bays, while the project, which would have required a dome,
cornice of the large order and the entablature of could not have embodied a similar system. No
the small order on which the windows rest post-Renaissance building in Italy had come so
function as elements unifying the entire space close to Gothic structural principles. For thirtj'
horizontally. Different from S. Maria dei Sette years Borromini had been groping in this
Dolori, the verticalism of the large order is direction. The church of the Propaganda Fide
BIBLOSARTE
was, indeed, a new and exciting solution, and the placing of the oratory itself in the western
its compelling simplicity and logic fittingly con- (left) half of the main wing. Many refinements
clude Borromini's activit}' in the field of were introduced there by Borromini, but it must
ecclesiastical architecture.'" suffice to mention that, contrary to Maruscelli's
intentions, he created for the eye, rather than in

actual fact, a central axis to the entire front
The Oratory of St Philip Neri
The brethren of the Congregation of St Philip

Neri had for a considerable time planned to
build an oratory next to their church of S. Maria
in Vallicella. In conjunction with this idea,
plans ripened to include in the building pro-
gramme a refectory, a sacristy, living quarters for
the members of the Congregation, and a large
library. This considerable programme was, in
fact, not very different from that of a large

monastery. The Congregation finally opened a
competition which Borromini won in May 1637

against, among others, Paolo Maruscelli, the
architect of the Congregation. Borromini re-
placed him forthwith and held the office for the
next thirteen years. Building activity was rapid
in 1640 the oratory was in use; in 1641 the
refectory was finished, between 1642 and 1643
the library above the oratory was built and
between 1644 and 1650 the north-west front
with the clock-tower overlooking the Piazza
deirOrologio.^'' Thus the building of the oratory
coincided with that of S. Carlo alle Quattro
Fontane. But although the work for the Orato-
rians was infinitely more important than that of 134. Francesco Borromini; Rome,
the little church, as regards compactness and Oratory of St Philip Neri. Facade, 1637-40
vitality the former cannot compete with the

latter. This verdict does not, of course, refer to between S. Maria in Vallicella and the Via
the brilliant fagade of the oratory [134], nor do de' Filippini [135]. The organization of this
we overlook the fact that many new and ingeni- front is entirely independent of the dispositions
ous ideas were brought to fruition in the build- behind it. The central entrance does not lead
ings of the monastery. straight into the oratory which lies at right angles
Maruscelli, before Borromini, had already to it and extends beyond the elaborate part of
solved an intricate problem : he had designed a the fa9ade, nor is the plan of the whole area
coherent layout for the whole area with long symmetrical in depth, as a glance at the facade
axes and a clear and logical disposition of the might suggest.
sacristy and the courtyards. Borrommi accepted Although the fa9ade is reminiscent of that of a
the essentials of this plan, which also included church, its rows of domestic windows seem to
BIBLOSARTE
135- Francesco Borromini: Rome, Oratory of St Philip Neri and Monastery, begun 1637. Plan
BIBLOSARTE
contradict this impression. This somewhat the frieze of the entablature; and to the win-
hybrid character indicates that Borromini de- dows of the second tier, which have ample space
liberately designed it as an 'overture' for the over and under them."*
oratory as much as for the whole monastery. By The interior of the oratory, carefully adapted
request of the Congregation the fa9ade was not to the needs of the Congregation, is articulated
faced in stone so that it would not compete with by half-columns on the altar wall and a compli-
the adjoining church of S. Maria in Vallicella. cated rhythm of pilasters along the other three
Borromini, therefore, developed a new and walls.*" Michelangelo's Capitoline palaces evi-
extremely subtle brick technique of classical dently ga\ e rise to the use of the giant order of
ancestry, a technique which allowed for finest pilasters in the two courtyards. It is worth re-
gradations and absolute precision of detail. The calling that Palladio had introduced a giant
main portion of the fa9ade consists of five bays, order in the corttle of the Palazzo Porto-
closely set with pilasters, arranged over a con- CoUeoni at Vicenza (1552); but, although
cave plan. But the central bay of the lower tier Borromini's simple and great forms seem super-
is curved outward, while that of the upper tier ficially close to Palladio's classicism, the ultimate
opens into a niche of considerable depth. intentions of the two masters are utterly
Crowning the facade rises the mighty pediment different. Palladio is always concerned with
which, for the first time, combines curvilinear intrinsically plastic architectural members in
and angular movement. The segmental part their own right, while Borromini stresses the
answers the rising line of the cornice above the integral character of a coherent dynamic system.
bays, which are attached like wings to the main Thus in Borromini's courtyards the large
body of the facade, and the change of movement, pilasters would appear to screen an uninter-
comparable to an interrupted S-curve, echoes, rupted sequence of buttresses. This interpreta-
as it were, the contrasting spatial movement of tion is supported by the treatment of the
the central bays in the elevation. The form of corners.
the pediment is further conditioned by the Renaissance architects had more often than
vertical tendencies in the fa9ade. Once that has not evaded facing squarely a problem which was
been noticed, one will also find it compellingly inherent in the use of the classical grammar of
logical that the important centre and the forms. The half-pilasters, quarter-pilasters, and
accompanying bays are not capped by a uniform other expedients, which abruptly break the
pediment. The latter, in addition to suggesting continuity of articulation in the corners of
a differentiated triple rhythm, also pulls to- Renaissance buildings, must be regarded as
gether the three inner bays, which are segregated naive compromise solutions. Mannerist archi-
from the outer bays by a slight projection and an tects who fully understood the problem not in-
additional half-pilaster. Without breaking up frequently carried on the wall decoration across
the unity of the five bays, a triad of bays is yet the corners, thereby neutralizing the latter and
singled out, and the pediment reinforces the at the same time producing a deliberate am-
indications contained in the fa9ade itself. The biguitv' between the uninterrupted decoration
treatment of detail further enriches the com- and the change in the direction of the walls.
plexities of the general arrangement. Attention Borromini abolished the cause for compromise
may be drawn to the niches below, which cast or ambiguity by eliminating the corners them-
deep shadows and give the wall depth and selves. By rounding them oft, he made the unity
volume; to the windows above them, which of the space-enclosing structural elements, and
with their pediments press energetically against implicitly of the space itself, apparent. In the
BIBLOSARTE
225
two courtyards of the Filippini he applied to an tended a mid-sixteenth-century front from

external space the same principle that Palladio seven to eleven bays.^-" He framed the facade
I had used in a comparatively embryonic manner with huge herms ending in falcons' heads, an
in the interior of the Redentore/" This new emblematic conceit which had no precedent.
solution soon became the property of the whole He added new wings on the rear facing the
of Europe. river and provided decoration for porch and
In contrast to the elaborate south facade, vestibule. But his most signal contribution is
Borromini used very simple motifs for the long the twelve ceilings with their elaborate floral
western and northern fronts of the convent: ornament,^' and, overlooking the courtyard,
band-like string courses divide the storeys and the Palladian loggia, equally remarkable for its
large horizontal and vertical grooves replace derivation and for its deviation from Palladio's
the cornices and corners/' From then on this Basilica at Vicenza.^^ The U-shaped river front,
type of design became generally accepted for dominated by the loggia, gives proof of the
utilitarian purposes in cases where no elaborate versatility of Borromini's extraordinary genius
decoration was required. [136]. His problem consisted in welding old
and new parts together into a new unit of a
Domestic Buildings
specifically Borrominesque character. He solved
it by progressively increasing the height of the
Between about 1635 and the end of his career four storeys in defiance of long established
Borromini had a hand in a great number of rules and by reversing the traditional gradation
domestic buildings of importance, though it of the orders. The ground floor is subdivided
must be said that no palace was entirely carried by simple broad bands; in the next storey the
out by him. At the beginning stands his work same motif is given stronger relief; the third
in the Palazzo Spada, where he was responsible storey has Ionic pilasters; and above these are
for the erection of the garden wall, for various the recessed columns of the loggia. Thus instead
decorative parts inside the palace and, above all, of diminishing from the ground floor upwards,
for the well-known illusionist colonnade which the wall divisions grow in importance and plas-
appears to be very long, but is, in fact, extremely ticity. Only in the context of the whole facade is
short. The idea seems to be derived from the the unconventional and anti-classical quality of
stage (Teatro Ohmpico). But one should not the loggia motif fully revealed.
forget that it also had a respectable Renaissance Between 1646 and 1647 Borromini helped in
pedigree. Bramante applied the same illusionist an advisory capacit}^ the aged Girolamo Rai-
principle to his choir of S. Maria presso S. naldi, whom Innocent X had commissioned to
Satiro at Milan, which must have belonged to build the extensive Palazzo Pamphili in Piazza
Borromini's earliest impressions.^- The con- Navona. Borromini had a tangible influence on
cept of the Spada colonnade is, therefore, the design, although his own plan was not
neither characteristically Baroque nor is it of accepted for execution.'^ He alone was, how-
more than marginal interest in Borromini's ever, responsible for the decoration of the large
work. To over-emphasize its significance, as is salone and the building of the gallery to the
often done by those who regard the Baroque right of S. Agnese, on a site which originally
mainly as a style concerned with optical illusion, formed part of the Palazzo Mellini. Inside the
leads entirely astray. gallery, to which Pietro da Cortona contributed
Between 1646 and 1649 followed the work for the frescoes from the Aetieid, are to be found
the Palazzo Falconieri, where Borromini ex- some of the most characteristic and brilliant
BIBLOSARTE
136. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Palazzo Falconieri, 1646-9. River front
BIBLOSARTE
FRANCESCO BORROMIM •
227
door surrounds of Borromini's later style. Of his death in 1667. At that time the Jesuits were
his designs for the palace of Count Ambrogio at the zenith of their power, and a centre in
Carpegna near the Fontana Trevi very little keeping with the world-wide importance of the
was executed/'' but a series of daring plans Order was an urgent requirement. They owned
survive which anticipate the eighteenth-century the vast site between Via Capo le Case, Via Due
development of the Italian palazzo. Borromini Macelli, and Piazza di Spagna, which, though
took up all the major problems where they were large enough for all their needs, was so badly
left in the Palazzo Barberini and carried them cut that no regular architectural development
much further, such as the axial alignment of was possible. Moreover, some fairly recent
the various parts of the building, the connexion buildings were already standing, among them
of a grand vestibule with the staircase hall, and Bernini's modernization of the old facade facing
the merging of vestibule and oval courtyard. Piazza di Spagna and his oval church which
The latest drawing of the series shows two was, however, as we have seen, replaced by
flights of stairs ascending along the perimeter of Borromini. As early as 7 May 1647 Borromini
the oval courtyard and meeting on a common submitted a development plan for the whole
landing - a bold idea, heretofore unknown in site; but little happened in the course of the
Italy, which was taken up and executed by next thirteen years. It is known that Borromini
Guarini in the Palazzo Carignano at Turin.^" gave the main facade in front of the church its
Between 1659 and 1661 Borromini was con- final shape in 1662, and the other much simpler
cerned with the systematization of two libraries, fa9ades also show characteristics of his latest
the Biblioteca Angelica adjoining Piazza S. manner. The execution of the major part of the
Agostino and the Biblioteca Alessandrina in palace would therefore seem to have taken place
the north wing of the Sapienza. Of the plans in the last years of his hfe. Part of the palace was
for the former hardly anything was carried reserved for administrative purposes, another
out, but the latter survives as Borromini had large part contained the cells for the alumni.
designed it. The great hall of the library is three But very little of Borromini's interior arrange-
storeys high, and the book-cases form a con- ment and decoration survives; in fact, apart
stituent part of the architecture. This was a from the church, only one original room seems
new and important idea, which he had not yet to have been preserved.
conceived when he built the library above the All the more important are the fa9ades. The
Oratory of St Philip Xeri about twenty years most elaborate portion rises in the narrow Via
earlier. It was precisely this new conception di Propaganda where its oppressive weight pro-
which made the Biblioteca Alessandrina the duces an almost nightmarish eflect [137, 138].
prototype of the great eighteenth-century lib- Borromini's problem was here similar to that
raries. of the oratory, for the fa9ade was to serve the

dual purpose of church and palace. Once again
the long axis of the church lies parallel with the
The Collegio di Propaganda Fide
street and extends beyond the highly decorated
Borromini's last great palace, surpassing any- part of the facade, but in contrast to the oratory
thing he did in that class with the exception of this front has a definite, though entirely un-
the convent of the Oratorians, was the Collegio usual, palace character. Its seven bays are arti-
di Propaganda Fide. His activity for the Jesuits culated by a giant order of pilasters which rise
spread over the long period of twenty-one years, from the ground to the sharply-projecting cor-
from his appointment as architect in 1646 to nice.^'* Everything here is unorthodox: the
BIBLOSARTE
137. Francesco Borromini: 138. Francesco Borromini:

Rome, CoUegio di Propaganda Fide. Rome, Collegio di Propaganda Fide.
Facade, 1662 Centre bay, 1662
capitals are reduced to a few parallel grooves, window frames is not dictated simply by a
the cornice is without a frieze, and the pro- desire for picturesque variet}' but consists like
jecting pair of brackets over the capitals seem a fugue of theme, answer, and variations. The
to belong to the latter rather than to the cornice. theme is given in the door and window pedi-
The central bay recedes over a segmental plan ments of the central bay the ; identical windows
[138], and the contrast between the straight of the first, third, fifth, and seventh bays are
lines of the fa9ade and the inward curve is sur- variations of the door motif while the identical
prising and alarming. No less startling is the second and sixth windows answer the central
juxtaposition of the austere lower tier and the window, also spatially. In the windows of the
piano nobile with its extremely rich window attic above the cornice*^ the theme of the piano
decoration. The windows rise without transition nubile is repeated in another key the : first, third,
from the energetically drawn string course and fifth, and seventh windows are simpler varia-
seem to be compressed into the narrow space tions of the second and sixth below, and the
between the giant pilasters. windows in the even bays of the attic vary those
It is here that the active life in the wall itself in the uneven ones underneath. Finally, in the
is revealed. All the window frames curve in- undulating pediment of the fourth attic window
wards with the exception of the central one the two movements are reconciled. By such
which, being convex, reverses the concave means Borromini created a palazzo front which
shape of the whole bay. The movement of the has neither precursors nor successors.
BIBLOSARTE
229
In the south-western and southern fa9ades To summarize Borromini's life-long endea-

only the ground-floor arrangement and the vour, it may be said that he never tired in his
division of the storeys was continued, which attempt to mould space and mass by means of
assured the unity of the entire design. Other- the evolution and transformation of key motifs.
wise Borromini contrasted these fronts with He subordinated each structure down to the
the intensely articulated main fa9ade. There is minutest detail to a dominating geometrical
no division into bays by orders, nor are the concept, which led him away from the Renais-
windows decorated. But their sequence is inter- sance method of planning
in terms of mass and
rupted at regular intervals by strong vertical modules towards an emphasis on the func-
accentuations. At these points Borromini united tionally, dynamically, and rhythmically decisive
the main and mezzanine windows of the piano 'skeleton'. This brought him close to the struc-
nohile under one large frame, creating a window tural principles of the Gothic style and enabled
which goes through the entire height of the tier. him, at the same time, to incorporate into his
The boldly projecting angular pediment seems work what suited his purpose: Mannerist fea-
to cut into the string course of the next storey, tures of the immediate past, many ideas from
where the framework of the window with its Michelangelo's architecture and that of Hel-
gently curved pediment and concave recession lenism, both equally admired by him, and even
shows a characteristic reversal of mood. severely classical elements which he found in
A comparison of the fa9ades of the Oratory Palladio. Being an Italian, Borromini could not
and the Collegio illustrates the deep change deny altogether the anthropomorphic basis of
between Borromini's early and late style. Gone architecture. This becomes increasingly ap-
is a mass of detail, gone the subtle gradations of parent during his advancing years from the
wall surface and mouldings and the almost joyful stress he laid on the blending of architecture
display of a great variety of motifs. However, and sculpture. Nevertheless, the antagonism
the impression of mass and weight has grown between him and Bernini remained unbridge-
immensely the windows now seem
; to dig them- able. It was in Bernini's circle that he was
selves into the depth of the wall. And yet the reproached for having destroyed the accepted
basic approach hardly differed. conventions of good architecture.
BIBLOSARTE
I
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 10
PIETRO DA CORTONA
I 596-1 669
INTRODUCTION His copy of Raphael's Galatea^ impressed Mar-

cello Sacchetti so much that he took to the
The genius of Pietro Berrettini, usually called young artist who, from 1623 onwards, belonged
Pietro da Cortona, was second only to that of to the Sacchetti household. It was in the service
Bernini. Like him he was architect, painter, of the Sacchetti family that Cortona gave early
decorator, and designer of tombs and sculpture proof of his genius as painter and architect. In
although not a sculptor himself. His achieve- the Palazzo Sacchetti he also met the Cavaliere
ments in all these fields must be ranked among Marino, fresh from Paris,' and Cardinal Fran-
the most outstanding of the seventeenth cen- cesco Barberini, Urban VIII's nephew, who
tury. Bernini and Borromini have been given became his lifelong patron; through him he
back the position of eminence which is their due. obtained his early important commission as a
Not so Cortona. When this book first appeared fresco painter in S. Bibiana. At the same time
in 1958 no critical modern biography had been he was taken on by Cassiano del Pozzo, the
devoted to him; G. Briganti's work' has now learned secretary to Cardinal Francesco Bar-
at least partially satisfied this need. To be sure, berini, who employed in these years a number
Cortona's is the third name of the great trio of of young and promising artists for his collection
Roman High Baroque artists, and his work of copies of all the remains of antiquity.'' Thus
represents a new and entirely personal aspect Cortona was over twenty-six years old when his
of the style. contact with the 'right' circle carried him
An almost exact contemporary of Bernini quickly to success and prominence. As to his
and Borromini, he was born at Cortona on early development, relatively little has so far
I November 1 596 of a family of artisans. He come to light.' More discoveries will be made
probably studied under his father, a stone- in the future, but it will remain a fact of some
mason, before being apprenticed to the un- significance that, whereas we can follow the
distinguished Florentine painter Andrea Com- unfolding of Bernini's talent year by year from
modi,- with whom he went to Rome in 161 his precocious beginnings, in Cortona we are
or 1613. He stayed on after Commodi's return almost suddenly faced with a distinctly indivi-
to Florence in 16 14 and changed over to the dual manner in painting and, even more
studio of the equally unimportant Florentine astonishingly, in architecture, though his train-
painter Baccio Ciarpi.^ According to his bio- ing in this field can have been only rather
grapher Passeri he studied Raphael and the superficial.
"^
antique with great devotion during these years; From about the mid twenties his career can
while this is, of course, true of every seven- be fully gauged. From then until his death he
teenth-century artist, in Cortona's case such had large architectural and pictorial commis-
training has more than usual relevance since he sions simultaneously in hand - he being the
could not profit very much from his teachers. only seventeenth-century artist capable of such
BIBLOSARTE
nil. AGl. (M Tilt I1U.II 13AKOQLt
a tour de force. During the 1630s, with SS. tower and protected by four fortress-like corner
Martina e Luca rising [145) and the Barberini projections. The type of the building follows
ceiling in progress [153J, he reached the zenith a long-established tradition, but the interest
of his artistic power and fame, and his colleagues here lies in the pictorial decoration rather than
acknowledged his distinction by electing him in the architecture. The Villa del Pigneto on
principe of the Accademia di San Luca for four the other hand commands particular attention
3 ears (1634-8). Between 1640 and 1647 he because of its architecture [139, 140]. Unfortu-
stayed in Florence painting and decorating four nately little survives to bear witness to its
rooms of the Palazzo Pitti, but the architectural original splendour." Nor is anything certain
projects of this period remained on paper. Back known about its date and building history. The
in Rome, his most extensive fresco commission, patron was either Cardinal Giulio or .Marchese
the decoration of the Chiesa Nuova [157], Marcello Sacchetti;'- the former received the
occupied him intermittently for almost twenty purple in 1626,^ the latter died in 1636 (not
years. During one of the intervals he painted 1629). There is, therefore, room for the com-
the gallery of the Palazzo Pamphili in Piazza mission during the decade 1626-36. For stylistic
Navona (1651-4); the erection of the facade of reasons a date not earlier than the late twenties
S.Maria della Pace is contemporaneous w ith the seems indicated.''

frescoes in the apse of the Chiesa Nuova, that The ground floor of the building [140] with
of the facade of S. Maria in Via Lata with the its symmetrical arrangement of rooms reveals
frescoes of the pendentives, that of the dome a thorough study of Palladio's plans, but the
of S. Carlo al Corso follows three years after the idea of the monumental niche in the central
frescoes of the nave. Even if it were correct, as structure, which is raised high above the low
has more than once been maintained, that the wings, derives from the Belvedere in the
quality of his late frescoes shows a marked Vatican. It is even possible that Cortona was
decline,'' the same is certainly not true of his impressed at that early date by the ruins of the
late architectural works. In any case, his archi- classical tempJe at Praeneste (Palestrina) near
tectural and pictorial conceptions show a parallel Rome, of which he undertook a reconstruction
development, away from the exuberant style in 1636.'^ In any case, the large screened niches
of the 1630s towards a sober, relatively classi- of the side fronts - a motif which has no pedigree
cizing idiom to which he aspired more and in post-Renaissance architecture - can hardly
more from the 1650s onwards. have been conceived without the study of plans
of Roman baths. While the arrangement of
terraces with fountains and grottoes is reminis-
ARCHITECTURE
cent of earlier villas such as the Villa .Îdo-
The Early Works brandini at Frascati, the complicated system of
staircases with sham flights recalls Buontalenti's
Before he began the church of SS. Martina e Florentine Mannerism. If one can draw con-
Luca, Cortona executed the so-called Villa del clusions from the ground-plan, essentially Man-
Pigneto near Rome for the Sacchetti and pos- nerist must also have been the contrast between
sibly also the villa at Castel Fusano, now Chigi the austere entrance front and the over-
property. The latter was built and decorated decorated garden front, a contrast well known
between 1626 and 1630.'" It is a simple three- from buildings like the Villa Medici on the
storeyed structure measuring 70 by 52 feet, Pincio. Although small in size and derived from
rather rustic in appearance, crowned with a a variety of sources, the building was a landmark
BIBLOSARTE
-I 1-
« I
139 and 140. Pietro da Cortona: Rome (vicinity). Villa del Pigneto, before 1630. Destroyed.
Engraving, and plan drawn by P. L. Ghezzi. Londnv, Sir Anlhauy Bliiiil
BIBLOSARTE
^34 nil, Acii oi lilt HIGH baroque
in the development of the Baroque villa. The corner of the palace was built to his design
magnificent silhouette, the grand staircases built [141]."' It would be a matter of absorbing
up in tiers so as to emphasize the dominating interest to know something about Cortona's
central feature, and above all the advancing and project for the palace. In earlier editions of this
receding curves which tie together staircase, book I illustrated the plan of a palace which I
terrace, and building - all this was taken up and had come across on the London art market in
further developed by succeeding generations the 1930s and which I immediately diagnosed
of architects. as by Cortona's hand. In 1969 I discussed this
It is an indication of Cortona's growing repu- plan at considerable length before a group of
tation that on Maderno's death in 1629 he took specialists, and the critical tenor of my col-
part in the planning of the Palazzo Barberini. leagues induced me to remove the illustration
His project seems to have found the pope's from this edition. But since I still believe in the
approval, but the high cost prevented its accep- correctness of my original conclusions, some
tance. '"" Although Bernini was appointed archi- remarks about that plan are in place. It repre-
tect of the palace, Cortona was not altogether sents only the ground floor containing a web
excluded. The theatre adjoining the north-west of octagonal rooms (apparently meant to be
141. Pietro da Cortona: Rome,

Palazzo Barberini. Entrance to the theatre, c. 1640
BIBLOSARTE
PIETRO DA CORTONA •
235
used as store-rooms), the walls of which were begun painting the great Salone of the Barberini
to serve as substructures to the rooms above.'' Palace when the reconstruction of the church
In spite of the obvious difficulties of location, of SS. Martina e Luca at the foot of the Capitol
the colossal dimensions of the plan make it tell to him. This work requires an analysis.
almost certain that it refers to the Palazzo Bar-
berini. Cortona wanted to return to the tradi-
SS. Martina e Luca
tional Roman block-shape; his design is a
square of 285 by 285 feet as against the 262 feet In July 1634 Cortona was granted permission
of the present fa9ade.''~* Even the scanty evidence to rebuild, at his own cost and according to his
of this plan reveals four rather exciting features: plans, the crypt of the church of the Academy
the palace would have had bevelled corners of St Luke, in order to provide a tomb for him-
framed by columns; the main axes open into self.-" During the excavations, in October of
large rectangular vestibules articulated by co- that year, the body of S. Martina was discovered.
lumns; two vestibules give direct access to the This brought an entirely new situation. Cardinal
adjoining staircase halls; finally, the double Francesco Barberini took charge of the under-
columns of the courtyard would have been taking and in January 1635 ordered the re-
carried on across the corners in an unbroken building of the entire church.-' By about 1644
sequence. The idea of integrating vestibule and the new church was vaulted, and its completion
staircase hall, hardly possible without a know- in 1650 is recorded in an inscription in the
-'-
ledge of French designs, was new for Italy. interior.
Also the principal staircase with two opposite Cortona chose a Greek-cross design with
flights ascending from the main landing has apsidal endings [142-5]. The longitudinal axis
no parallel in Rome at this time. Moreover, the is slightly longer than the transverse axis.-'
arrangement of the courtyard anticipates Borro- This difference in the length of the arms, signifi-
mini's in the nearby monastery of S. Carlo alle cant though it seems in the plan, is hardly per-
Quattro Fontane, while the plan of the vesti- ceptible to the visitor who enters the church.
bules was taken up by Borromini in S. Maria His first sensation is that of the complete break-
dei Sette Dolori and the church of the Propa- ing up of the unified wall surface, and his atten-
ganda Fide. The most astonishing element, tion is entirely absorbed by it. But this is not
however, is the kind of structural grid system simply a painterly arrangement, designed to
that controls every dimension of the plan. seduce and dazzle the eye, as many would have
In 1633 Cortona won his first recognition as it who want to interpret the Baroque as nothing
a designer of festival decoration: for the more than a theatrical and picturesque style.
Quarantore of that year he transformed the The wall so often no more than an inert division
interior of the church of S. Lorenzo in Damaso between inside and outside has here tremendous
into a rich colonnaded setting with niches and plasticity, while the interplay of wall and orders
gilded statues of saints.'' Cortona was a born is carried through with a rigorous logic. The
'decorator', and it is therefore all the more to wall itself has been 'sliced up' into three alter-
be regretted that none of his occasional works nating planes. The innermost plane, that
seems to have come down to us in drawings or nearest to the beholder, recurs in the segmental
engravings. It was not until his thirty-eighth ends of the four arms, that is, at those important
year, the year of his election as Principe of the points where altars are placed and the eye re-
Academy of St Luke, that he received his first quires a clear and solid boundary. The plane
big architectural commission. He had hardly furthest away appears in the adjoining bays
BIBLOSARTE
2^6 • TUF. AGF. OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
behind screening columns. The intermediate

plane is established in the bays next toyhe
crossing. Similarly varied is the arrangement of
the order: the pilasters occupy a plane before
the columns, and the columns under the dome
and in the apses are differently related to the
wall. But all round the church pilasters and

columns are homogeneous members of the same
Ionic order. The overwhelming impression of
unity in spite of the 'in' and 'out' movement of
the wall and the variety in the placing of the
order makes a uniform 'reading' of the centra-
lized plan not only logically possible but visually
imperative. Thus Cortona solved the problem

of axial direction inherent in centralized plan-
ning by means entirely different from those
employed by Bernini. It is also characteristic
that at this period Cortona, unlike Bernini, re-

jected the use of colour. The church is entirely
white, a neutrality which seems essential for the
full impact of this richly laden, immensely
plastic disposition of wall and order.
By contrast to the severe forms of the archi-
tecture below, the vaultings of the apses above
the entablature are copiously decorated. The
entire surface is plastically moulded and hardly
an inch of the confining wall is allowed to
appear. And yet the idea of working with vary-
ing wall planes is transposed into the concept
of using overlapping decorative elements. The
windows between the ribs are framed by stilted
arches; over these arches a second frame of

disproportionately large consoles is laid which
support broken segmental pediments. Simi-
larly, the system of ribs in the dome is super-
imposed upon the coffers. It is now apparent
that the use here of what would previously have
been considered two mutually exclusive me-
thods of dome articulation is characteristic of
Cortona's style in this church. We have seen (p.
178) that this idea was soon taken up by seven-

teenth- and eighteenth-century architects.
142. Pietro da C-ortona: Rome, Despite the new plastic-dynamic interpreta-

SS. Martina e Luca, 1635 50. Section and plan tion of the old Greek-cross plan, Cortona's
BIBLOSARTE
237
wealth of decoration in the upper parts of the

church, figure sculpture is almost entirely ex-
cluded and indeed never plays a conspicuous
part in Cortona's architecture. His decoration
combines two different trends of Florentine
Mannerism: the hard and angular forms of the

Ammanati-Dosio idiom with the smooth, soft,
and almost voluptuous elements derived from
Buontalenti. It is the merging of these two
traditions that gives the detail of Cortona's
work its specific flavour. Florentine Mannerism,
however, does not provide the whole answer to
the problem of Cortona's style as a decorator,
for the vigorous plasticity and the compact
crowding of a great variety of different motifs -
such as in the panels of the vaultings of the

apses - denote not only a Roman and Baroque,
but above all a highly personal transformation
143. Pietro da Cortona:
of his source material. This style of decoration
Rome, SS. Martina e Luca, 1635 50. Interior
was first evolved by Cortona not in his archi-
tecture but in his painting. He translated into
style is deeply rooted in the Tuscan tradition. three-dimensional form the lush density of
Even such a motif as the free-standing columns pictorial decoration to be found in the Salone
which screen the recessed walls in the arms ot of the Palazzo Barberini [153]. The similarity
the cross is typically Florentine. Its origin, of between painted and plastic decoration is ex-
course, is Roman, but in antiquity the columns tremely close, even in details. For instance, the
screen off deep chapels from the main space combination of heads in shells and rich octa-
(Pantheon). When this motif was applied in the gonal coffêrs above the windows of the apses,
Baptistery of Florence, the walls were brought so striking a feature of the decoration of SS.
up close behind the columns, whereby the latter Martina e Luca, also appears at nodal points of
lost their specifically space-defining quality. It the painted system of the Barberini ceiling. But,
is this Florentine version with its obvious am- having pointed out the close connexion between
biguity that attracted Mannerist Florentine his architectural and painted decoration, one
architects (Michelangelo,-* Ammanati, etc.), must emphasize once again that in his built
and it is this version of the classical motif that architecture Cortona eliminates the figure ele-
was revived by Cortona. Similar solutions recur ments which form so integral a part of his
in some of his other structures, most promi- painted architecture. No stronger contrast to
nently on the drum of the dome of S. Carlo al Bernini's conception of architecture could be
Corso [150], one of his latest works (1668), imagined. For Bernini the very meaning of his
where the screening columns correspond closely classically conceived architecture was epito-
to those inside SS. Martina e Luca. mized in realistic sculpture. Such sculpture
.\n analysis of the decoration of SS. Martina would have obscured the wealth and com-
e Luca supplies most striking evidence of plexity of Cortona's work. His decorative eff"er-
Cortona's Florentine roots. In' spite of the vescence reaches its culmination in SS. Martina
BIBLOSARTE
144A and B. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, SS. Martina e Luca, 1635-50. Dome, interior and (opposite) exterior
BIBLOSARTE
239
e Luca with the entirely unprecedented, wildly emphasized at the expense of the curved sil-
undulating forms of the dome coffering [144A]. houette of the dome itself With this Cortona
The very personal design of these coffers found anticipates a development which, though differ-
no imitators, and it was only after Bernini had ently expressed, was to come into its own in
restored Cortona's coffers to their classical the second half of the century.
shape that their use in combination with a ribbed The facade of SS. Martina e Luca represents
vault was generally accepted. another break with tradition [145]. The two-
The undulation of Cortona's coffers is coun- storeyed main body of the facade is gently
tered by the severe angularity of the pediments curved, following the precedent of the Villa
of the windows in the drum which intrude into Sacchetti (though the curve is here inwards).
the zone of the dome. On the exterior of the Strongly projecting piers faced with double
dome a similar phenomenon can be observed pilasters seem to have compressed the wall be-
[144B]. Here the austere window frames of the tween them, so that the curvature appears to
drum are topped by a sequence of soft, curved be the result of a permanently active squeeze.
decorative forms at the base of the vaulting, and At precisely this period Borromini designed his
concave fa9ade for the Oratory of St Philip
Neri. In view of their differences of approach,
however, the two architects may have arrived
independently at designing these curved fronts.
The peculiarity of the facade of SS. Martina e
Luca lies not only in its curvature but also in
that the orders have no framing function and
do not divide the curved wall into clearly de-
fined bays. In the lower tier, the columns seem
to have been pressed into the soft and almost
doughy mass of the wall, while in the upper
tier sharply cut pilasters stand before the wall
in clear relief This principle of contrasting soft
and hard features, which occurred in other

parts of the building, is reversed in the pro-
jecting central bays: in the upper tier framing
columns are sunk into the wall, whereas in the
lower tier rigid pilaster-Hke formations top the
door. It would be easy to describe at much
greater length the almost incredibly rich varia-
tions on the same theme, but it must suffice to
note that specifically Florentine Mannerist traits

are very strong in the subtle reversal of archi-
tectural motifs and in the overlapping and
interpenetration of elements as well as in the
these forms are taken up in the lantern by use of decorative features. This is true despite
scrolls of distinctly Mannerist derivation. The the carefully framed realistic palm and flower
exterior of the dome is also highly original in panels. Moreover, the type of the facade with
that the drum and the foot of the vaulting are two equally developed storeys and strongly
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
PIETRO DA CORTONA • 241
145. Pietro da Cortona emphasized framing features has its roots in the
Rome, SS. Martina e Luca, 1635 50. Facâde Florentine rather than in the Roman tradition.-^
Quite unHke any earlier church facade, this
prepares the beholder for an understanding of
the internal structure, for the wall treatment and
articulation of the interior are here unfolded in
a different key.-" Cortona thinks in terms of the
pliability of the plastic mass of walls: it is
through this that he achieves the dynamic co-

ordination of exterior and interior. To him
belongs the honour of having erected the first of
the great, highly personal and entirely homo-
geneous churches of the High Baroque.-'
5. Maria delta Pace, S. Maria in Via Lata,

Projects, and Aiinur Works
Cortona's further development as an architect

shows the progressive exclusion of Mannerist
elements and a turning towards Roman sim-
plicity, grandeur, and massiveness even though
the basic tendencies of his approach to archi-
tecture remain unchanged. This is apparent in
his modernization of S. Maria della Pace, car-
ried out between 1656 and 1657 [146, 147].--
The new fa9ade, placed in front of the Quattro-

cento church, together with the systematization
of the small piazza is of much greater impor-
tance than the changes in the interior.-" Al-

though regularly laid-out piazzas had a long
tradition in Italy, Cortona's design inaugurates
a new departure, for he applied the experience

of the theatre to town-planning: the church
appears like the stage, the piazza like the audi-
torium, and the flanking houses like the boxes.
It is the logical corollary of such a conception
that the approaches from the side of the church
are through a kind of stage doors, which hide
the roads for the view from the piazza.'"
The convex upper tier of the fa9ade, firmly
framed by projecting piers, repeats the motif
of the facade of SS. Martina e Luca. But in the
scheme of S. Maria della Pace this tier repre-
sents onlv a middle field between the boldly
BIBLOSARTE
242
projecting semicircular portico and the large

concave wings which grip like arms round the
front, in a much farther removed from the
zone
spectator/' The interplay of convex and con-
cave forms in the same building, foreshadowed
in a modest way in Cortona's Villa Sacchetti,
is a typically Roman High Baroque theme
which also fascinated Borromini and Bernini.
S. Maria della Pace contains many influential
ideas. The portico is one of Cortona's most

fertile inventions. By projecting far into the
small piazza and absorbing much space there,
a powerful plastic and at the same time chroma-
tically effective motif is created that mediates
between outside and inside.'- Bernini incor-
porated it into the fa9ade of S. Andrea al
Quirinale, and it recurs constantly in subsequent

European architecture. The detail of the por-
tico, too, had immediate repercussions. As early

as 1657 Bernini made an intermediary project
with double columns for the colonnades of St
Peter's ;^^ and his final choice of a Doric order
with Ionic entablature was here anticipated by
Cortona. ^^ The crowning feature of the facade
of S. Maria della Pace is a large triangular pedi-
ment encasing a segmental one. Such devices

had been used for more than a hundred years
from Michelangelo's Biblioteca Laurenziana
onwards. With the exception, however, of Mar-
tino Longhi's fa9ade of SS. Vincenzo ed Ana-
stasio (p. 287), the motif does not occur in Rome
at this particular time. Encased pediments are
a regular feature of the North Italian type of the
aedicule fa9ade [57], and to a certain extent
Cortona must have been influenced by it. But
he goes essentially his own way by working with
a pliable wall and by employing once again
architectural orders as an invigorating rather
than a space-(or bay-)defining motif. Moreover,
the 'screwhead' shape of the segmental pedi-
ment which breaks through the entablature so
as to create room for Alexander VII's coat of
Rome, S. Maria della Pace, 1656-7. arms adds to the unorthodox and even eccentric
'''
Plan of church and piazza quality of the facade.
BIBLOSARTE
147- Pietro da Cortona: Rome, S. Maria della Pace, 1656-7. Facade
BIBLOSARTE
148 and 149. Pietro da Cortona:

Rome, S. Maria in Via Lata. Facade, 1658-62,
and interior of portico
In his next work, the fa9ade of S. Maria in pediment into which, as at S. Maria della Pace,
Via Lata, built between 1658 and 1662,^'^ Cor- a segmental feature has been inserted. Here,
tona carried simplification and monumentality however, it is not a second smaller pediment,
a decisive step further [148, 149]. The classi- but an arch connecting the two halves of the
cizing tendencies already apparent in the sober broken straight entablature. The motif is well
Doric of S. Maria della Pace are strengthened, known from Hellenistic and Roman Imperial
while the complexity of SS. Martina e Luca architecture (Termessus, Baalbek, Spalato, S.
seems to have been reduced to the crystalline Lorenzo in Milan) and, although it was used in
clarity of a few great motifs. It is obvious that a somewhat different form in medieval as well
the alignment of the street did not warrant a as Renaissance buildings (e.g. Alberti's S. Sebas-
curved fa9ade. Nevertheless, there are con- tiano at Mantua), it is here so close to the late
nexions between Cortona's early and late work classical prototypes that it must have been de-
for, like SS. Martina e Luca, the fa9ade of S. rived from them rather than from later sources.^"
Maria in Via Lata consists of two full storeys, While thus the classical pedigree of the motif
but, reversing the earlier system, the central must be acknowledged, neither Cortona's Tus-
portion is wide open and is flanked by receding can origin nor the continuity of his style is
bays instead of projecting piers. The main part, obscured. The design of the interior of the
which opens below into a portico and above portico is proof of this [149]. With its coflfered
into a loggia, is unified by a large triangular barrel vault carried by two rows of columns, one
BIBLOSARTE
PIETRO DA CORTONA 245
of which screens the wall of the church, it clearly and in this place unique, version of the motif of
reveals its derivation from the vestibule of the screening columns. Structurally, the buttresses
sacristy in S. Spirito at Florence (Giuliano da faced with pilasters and the adjoining columns
Sangallo and Cronaca, begun 1489). But in form a unit (i.e.: bab|bab|bab| . . .), but aesthe-
contrast to the Quattrocento model, the wall tically rhythm of the buttresses predomi-
the
screened by the columns seems to run on be- nates and seems accompanied by that of the
hind the apsidal endings, and so does the barrel open, screened bays (i.e.: a|b-b|a|b b|a|. . .).
vault. Cortona thus produces the illusion that A comparison of this dome with that of SS.
the apses have been placed in a larger room, the Martina e Luca makes amply clear the long
extent of which is hidden from the beholder. road Cortona had travelled in the course of a
Only the cornice provides a structural link generation, from complexity tinged by Man-
between the columns and the niches of the nerism to serene classical magnificence. Similar
apses. The comparison of Cortona's solution qualities may be found in two minor \Vorks of
with that of S. Spirito is extraordinarily illumi- the latest period, the Cappella Gavotti in S.
nating, for the 'naive' Renaissance architect Nicolo da Tolentino, begun in 1668, and the
ignored the fact that a screen of columns placed altar of St Francis Xavier in the Gesii, executed
in front of an inside wall must produce an after the master's death.'"
awkward problem at the corners. Cortona, by

contrast, being heir to the analytical awareness
gained in the Mannerist period, was able to Rome, S. Carlo al Corso. Dome, begun 1668
segregate, as it were, the constituent elements
of the Renaissance structure and reassemble
them in a new synthesis. Unlike Mannerist
architects, who insisted on exposing the am-
biguity inherent in many Renaissance buildings,
he set out to resolve any prevarication by a
radical procedure: each of the three component
parts - the screen of columns, the apses, and the
barrel vault - has its own fully defined structural
raison d'etre. There is hardly a more revealing
example in the history of architecture of the
different approaches to a closely related task
by a Renaissance and a Baroque architect. But

only a master of Cortona's perspicacity and
calibre could produce this result; it is rooted
in his old love for superimpositions (to wit, the
vaults of the apses upon the barrel vault), and
even he himself would not have been capable
of such penetrating analysis at the period of SS.
Martina e Luca, a time when he had not en-
tirely freed himself from Mannerism.
Cortona's major late architectural work is
the dome of S. Carlo al Corso, which has been

mentioned [150].^"^ Its drum shows a brilliant.
BIBLOSARTE
24^) THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
What would have been one of Cortona's most the ruins of Praeneste makes itself more clearly
important ecclesiastical works, the Chiesa felt than in any of his other projects. He incor-
Nuova (S. Firenzc) at Florence, remained a porated into his designs free-standing colon-
project. At the end of 1645 his model was nades and a lofty 'belvedere', corresponding by
finished. But as early as January 1646 there and large to his reconstruction of the classical
seem to have been dissensions, for Cortona ruins made in 1636 for Cardinal Francesco
writes to his friend and patron Cassiano del Barberini and first published in Suarez's work
Pozzo that he was never lucky in matters con- on the ruins of Palestrina in 1655.^'' The prints
cerning architecture.*' The affair dragged on probably influenced Bernini in his choice of
until late in 1666, when his plans were finally colonnades for the Square of St Peter's. More-
shelved. A number of drawings, now in the over, the free-standing belvedere as a focusing
Uffizi, permit us to get at least a fair idea of point on high ground was frequently used in
Cortona's intentions.^' Equally, all his major northern Europe, particularly for gardens. If in
projects for secular buildings remained un- such cases architects were no longer aware of
executed, while the Villa del Pigneto and the the debt owed to Cortona's reconstruction of
house which he built for himself late in life in Praeneste, on occasion its direct influence can
the Via della Pedacchia no longer exist. ^- yet be traced, .^n impressive example is the
Three of his grand projects should be men- eighteenth-century Castello at Villadeati in
tioned, namely the plans for the alterations and Piedmont with its sequence of terraces and its
additions to the Palazzo Pitti at Florence, the crowning colonnaded belvedere.^' Cortona him-
designs for a Palazzo Chigi in the Piazza self drew on his reconstruction for the designs
Colonna, Rome, and the plans for the Louvre. of the Palazzo Chigi, which Alexander VII
As regards the Louvre, he competed with Ber- wanted to have erected when he planned to
nini, who again superseded him as he had transform the Piazza Colonna, on which the
thirty-five years before in the work at the older family palace was situated, into the first
Palazzo Barberini. Cortona's Louvre project square in Rome. The most brilliant of the pro-
has recently been traced." It always was in the jects, preserved in the Vatican Library, '^ shows,
Cabinet des Dessins of the Louvre, but refor the first time, a powerful giant order of
mained unrecognized because it makes impor- columns screening a concave wall above a rusti-
tant concessions to French taste and is the least cated ground floor from which the waters of the
'cortonesque' of his architectural designs. The Fontana Trevi were to emerge. The repercus-
biased Ciro Ferri was certainly not correct sions of this design can still be felt in Bouchar-
when he maintained that Bernini had plagia- don's Fontaine de Crenelle in Paris (1739-45).
rized his competitor's plan.^^ The moderniza- Cortona once wrote despondently that he re-
tion of the fafade of the Palazzo Pitti was plan- garded architecture only as a pastime.^' Can we
ned between 1640 and 1647, when Cortona believe him ? It seems impossible to say whether
painted his ceiHngs inside the palace.''' His he was primarily painter or architect. As a
most notable contribution, however, would painter his real gift lay in the effective manipula-
have been a theatre in the garden, for which tion of large-scale ensembles which are insepar-
several sketches are preserved. It was to rise able from their settings. One cannot, therefore,
high above curves and colonnaded terraces on think of the painter without the architect in the
the axis of the palace and would have formed a same person. The study of Cortona as a painter
monumental unit with the courtyard. It is in should not be divorced from the study of Cor-
these designs that Cortona's preoccupation with tona as a decorator of interiors.
BIBLOSARTE
247
PAINTING AND DECORATION The figures have grown in volume and their
immensely strong tactile values make them ap-
The Early Works
pear real and tangible. Thus breathing life seems
to replace the studied classicism of Domeni-
Until recently it has been thought that Cor- chino's work. There is also a broadening of
tona's first frescoes were those in S. Bibiana.''" touch and a freer play of light and shade which,
The discovery of frescoes by his hand in the incidentally, is in keeping with the general
Villa Muti at Frascati and in the Palazzo Mattei development of the 1620s. Contrary to Domeni-
makes a revision necessary. The Frascati fres- chino's loose, frieze-like composition, in which
coes, powerful though crude and weakly de- every figure appears in statuesque isolation and
signed, reveal the hand of the beginner,"' while is given almost equal significance, Cortona
in the frescoes of the gallery of the Palazzo creates a diagonal surge into depth, a gradation
Mattei, executed between May 1622 and Dec- in the importance of figures, and a highly
ember 1623, Cortona's style appears fully deve- dramatic focus. One diagonal is made up of the
loped.^- He painted here four scenes from the dramatis personae, St Bibiana and St Rufina,
story of Solomon. They show his sense for who press forward against the picture plane;
drama, his characteristic manner of composi- the other is formed by the group of priestesses,
tion, his love for archaeological detail, and his unruffled bystanders recalling the chorus in the
soliditv' and claritv' in the conception of the classical drama. The result of all this is a virile,
main protagonists. Single figures as well as bold, and poignant style which is closer in spirit
whole scenes seem to herald his later work, and to Annibale's Farnese ceiling than to Domeni-
the panel with the Death of Joab looks like an chino's manner and possesses qualities similar
anticipation of the Iron Age painted in the to Bernini's sculpture of these years.
Palazzo Pitti in 1637. And yet although the Yet Cortona's point of departure was not in
style is formed, or rather in the process of being fact very different from that of Domenichino.
formed, it lacks vigour and assurance, and the The figures, as well as the accessories like the
full-bloodedness of his mature manner. Inter- sacrificial tripod and the statue of Jupiter in
esting though these frescoes are as the first the background, meticulously follow ancient
major performance of a great master, by con- models. Cortona's antiquarian taste was nur-
trast to Bernini's work at the age of twenty-five tured and determined by his early intense study
they do not reveal the hot breath of genius : it after the antique^' and the scientific copying of
was only in the frescoes in S. Bibiana, executed classical works for Cassiano del Pozzo, whom
between 1624 and 1626, that Cortona created he began to serve at about this time. It is often
a new historical style in painting. not realized that throughout his whole career
The responsibility for the pictorial decora- and even during his most Baroque phase, Cor-
tion was in the hands of the old-fashioned tona shared the erudite seventeenth-century
Mannerist Agostino Ciampelli, and Cortona's approach to antiquity. Thus, although there is
contribution consisted mainly of the three fres- a world of difference between Domenichino's
coes with scenes from the life of the saint above rigid classicism of 1 6 1 5 and Cortona's 'Baroque'
the left-hand arches of the nave. One of these classicism of 1625, the latter's work is essentially
scenes, St Bibiana refuses to sacrifice to Idols closer to the Carracci-Domenichino current

[151], may be chosen to assess the change which than it is to the bold illusionism of Lanfranco,
has taken place during the intervening decade which asserted itself on the largest scale pre-
since Domenichino's St Cecilia frescoes [29]. cisely at this moment.
BIBLOSARTE
151- Pietro da Cortona: St Bibiana refuses to sacrifice to Idols, 1A24 6. Fresco. Rnme. S. Bihiaiia
BIBLOSARTE
PIETRO DA CORTONA 24Q
In these early years Cortona was employed sible locality they would long have been given a
primarily by the Sacchetti family.''^ The major place of honour in the development of Italian
work in the service of Marchese Marcello was landscape painting. The principal decoration
the decoration of the Villa at Castel Fusano was reserved for the gallery on the second floor,
(1626-9), 3nd this time the direction was in and Marchese Marcello himself worked out the
Cortona's hands. It is known that a number of programme for the cycle of mythological-his-
artists worked under him, among them Domeni- torical-allegorical frescoes. On entering the
chino's pupil Andrea Camassei (1602-49)" and, gallery, one is immediately aware that Cortona
above all, Andrea Sacchi^'' - a fact of particular depends to a large extent on the Farnese ceiling,
interest, since their opinions on art as well as a clear indication that in these years he was still
their practice soon differed so radically. The tied to the Bolognese tradition. ^^
Castel Fusano frescoes are in a poor state and During the same period he painted for the
largely repainted, but the chapel with Cortona's Sacchetti a series of large pictures (now in the
Adoration of the Shepherds over the altar is well Capitoline Museum) illustrating mythology and
preserved. Here all around the walls are bril- ancient history. The latest of these. The Rape
liantly painted landscapes with small figures of the Sabine Women of 1629 [152], a pendant
<;•.
depicting the life of Christ; evidently derived to the earlier Sacrifice ofPolyxena,^^ shows him
from Domenichino, their painterly freedom is amplifying the tendencies of the S. Bibiana
an unexpected revelation, and in a more acces- frescoes. Once again an elaborately contrived

The Rape of the Sabine Women, c. 1629.
Rome, Capitoliiie Museum
BIBLOSARTE
250 •
antique setting is used as a stage for the drama, sin lends a moral weight to his canvases of
and details such as armour and dress are studied which Cortona was incapable, Guercino is
with a close regard for 'historical truth'. The superior as a colourist. But none of them
scene is none the less permeated by a sense of matches his fiery temperament, his wealth of
Venetian romanticism, and indeed in its colour ideas in organizing a canvas on the largest scale,
the painting owes much to Venice.'''' Three his verve in rendering incidents, and his great
carefully considered groups close to the ob- gift as a narrator. These virtues predestined
server are the main components of the composi- him to become the first fresco painter in Rome
tion. The one on the right is clearly dependent and lead this branch of painting to a sudden
on Bernini's Rape of Proserpina, while that in and unparalleled climax.
the centre seems to be indebted to poses known
from the stage. Despite the loose handling of The Gran Salone of the Palazzo Barberini
the brush, these powerful groups produce al-
most the sensation of sculpture in the round. The years 1633-9 mark the turning point in
They are skilfully balanced on a central axis Cortona's career, and in retrospect they must
and yet they suggest a strong surge from right be regarded as one of the most important
to left; this movement, stabilized by the three caesuras in the history of Baroque painting.
architectural motifs, is simultaneously counter- During these years he carried out the ceiling of
acted in the middle distance by the sequence of the Gran Salone in the Palazzo Barberini, a
gestures starting from the figure of Neptune work of vast dimensions and a staggering per-
and passing through Romulus to the centurion, formance by any standards [153].'" There was
who seems to be about to intervene on behalf when he paid a visit to
an interruption in 1637
of old age and virginity in their contest with Florence and Venice. The Venetian painter
brute force. Furthermore, these figures adroitly Marco Boschini reports that, after his return,
fill the gaps between the main groups in the Cortona removed part of what he had done in
foreground. It will be noticed how subtly the order to apply the lessons learnt in Titian's and
earlier frieze composition of the Domenichino Veronese's city. Whether this is correct or not,
type of classicism has been transformed. A the Venetian note is certainly very prominent.
dynamic flow of movement and counter-move- But we have reached the cross-roads of Baroque
ment is integrated with a stable and organized ceiling painting, and one source of inspiration,
distribution of groups and figures. The Rape of decisive as it may be, cannot account for the
the Sabine Women impressed following genera- conception of this work.
tions almost more than any other of Cortona's Following the tradition of quadratura paint-
canvases, and its effect can be seen, for instance, ing (p. 65), Cortona created an illusionistic
in works by Giacinto Gimignani and Luca architectural framework which he partly con-
Giordano. Nevertheless the richness of its com- cealed beneath a wealth of garland-bearers,
positional devices, typical of the Baroque trend shells, masks, and dolphins - all painted in
in the years around 1630, still owes a debt to simulated stucco. At this juncture two points
Annibale's Farnese ceiling and in particular to should be noted that, : in contrast to the ortho-
his Triumph of Bacchus [20]. dox quadratura, the architectural framework
The Rape of the Sabine Women shows both here is not meant to expand the actual shape of
Cortona's strength as a painter and his weak- the vault; and that the feigned stuccoes take up
ness. Among his Roman contemporaries, Sac- and transform a local Roman tradition. But it
chi's characters are far more convincing, Pous- was real stucco decoration that was fashionable
BIBLOSARTE
153- Pietro da Cortona: Glorification of Urban VIIFs Reign, 1633-9. Fresco.
Rome. Palazzo Barherini, Gran Salone
BIBLOSARTE
252 •
in Rome trom Raphael's Logge onwards and Moreover, he devised the middle field in the
became increasingly abundant in the course of typically Venetian mode ofsotto in su, in analogy
the sixteenth century. to Veronese's Triumph of Venice in the Palazzo
The framework divides the whole ceiling into Ducale, and for colour too he relied to a large
five separate areas, each showing a painted extent on Veronese.
scene in its own right. Although something of All these diverse elements are united in a
the character of the quadra nportato can thus breathtaking and dynamic composition which
in fact still be sensed,''' Cortona has created at overwhelms the beholder. At first sight throngs
the same time a coherent 'open' space. The of figures seem to swirl above his head and to
illusion is a dual one: the same sky unites the threaten him with their bulk. But soon the
various scenes behind the painted stucco frame- elaborate arrangement makes itself felt, and
work, while on the other hand figures and attention is guided through the chiaroscuro
clouds superimposed on it seem to hover within and the complex formal relationships to the
the vault just above the beholder. In other cynosure of the composition, the luminous
words, it is the existence of the framework that aureole surrounding the figure of Divine Provi-
makes it possible to perceive both the illusionist dence, which is also the centre of meaning. It
widening and the illusionist contraction of was to Francesco Bracciolini (1566- 1645), court
objective space. poet from Pistoia, a minor star of the sophis-
It is worth recalling that Mannerist ceiling ticated literary circle gathered round the pope,
and wall decoration in Central Italy was con- that the programme of the ceiling was due.
cerned primarily with figures illusionistically Although his text has not yet been discovered,
intruding into, but not extending, the space of it is clear that he had devised an intricate story
the beholder.'"- By contrast the architectural in terms of allegory, mythology, and emblematic
constructions of the quadratura painters aim conceits."^ Divine Providence, elevated high
first and foremost at a precisely defined exten- on clouds above Time and Space (Chronos and
sion of space. A diametrically opposed method, the Fates), requests Immortality with com-
namely the suggestion of an unlimited space manding gesture to add the stellar crown to the
continuum, was applied by Correggio to the Barberini bees. These magnificent insects
decoration of domes. Finally, the double illu- (themselves emblems of Divine Providence)
sion, where figures may appear in painted space are flying in the formation of the Barberini
behind and in front of a feigned architecture, coat of arms. They are surrounded by a laurel
has also a long history, mainly in Northern wreath held by the three theological Virtues so
Italy, from Mantegna's Camera degli Sposi as to form a cartouche. The laurel is another
onwards. Barberini emblem and also another symbol of
Cortona, it will now be seen, followed basi- Immortality. A putto in the top left corner
cally the North Italian tradition descending extends the poet's crown - an allusion to Urban's
from Mantegna through Veronese, but he literary gifts. When decoded, the visually per-
changed and amplified it by making use of the suasive conceit tells us that Urban, the poet-
local stucco tradition, by applying to the frame- pope, chosen by Divine Providence and himself
work quadratura foreshortening, and by em- the voice of Divine Providence, is worthy of
ploying and transforming Mannerist conven- immortality. The four scenes along the cove,
tions of figure projection in front of the archi- accessory to the central one, are like a running
tecture. At the same time, he showed an aware- commentary on the temporal work of the pope.
ness of the Correggiesque space continuum. They illustrate in the traditional allegorical-
BIBLOSARTE
253
mythological style his courageous fight against hangings; duplication, triplication, and super-
heresy (Pallas destroying Insolence and Pride impositions of architectural and decorative ele-
in the shape of the Giants), his piety which ments; cartouches with sprawling borders in-
overcomes lust and intemperance (Silenus and congruously linked with lions' heads» and with
satyrs), his justice (Hercules driving out the palmettes, cornucopias, and inverted shells
Harpies), and his prudence which guarantees [155] - a seemingly illogical joining, inter-
the blessings of peace (Temple of Janus). This locking, associating of motif with motif Un-
summary barely indicates the richness of inci- rivalled is the agglomeration of plastic forms
dents compressed into these scenes. Never and their ebullient energy. The quintessence of
again did Cortona achieve, or aspire to, an equal the Baroque, it would appear - and in a sense
density and poignancy of motifs animated by an this may be agreed to. There is, however, an-
equally tempestuous passion. ''^ other side to these decorations. Cortona care-
fully observed the inviolability of the frames of
the ceiling frescoes; the character of the decora-
The Frescoes of the Palazzo Pitti
tions implies renunciation of illusionism ; upon
and the Late Work
analysis it becomes evident that the decoration
When passing through Florence in 1637, Cor- is placed before the architecture and not fused
tona had been persuaded by the Grand Duke with it, that each element of the design is so
Ferdinand II to stay for a while and paint for clearly defined and self-contained that the
him a small room (Camera della Stufa) with figures could be taken out of their settings with-
representations of the Four Ages."^ A charac- out leaving 'holes'; that, finally, the colour
teristic sign of the time : there was no painter scheme of pure white and pure gold aims at
in Florence who could have vied with Pietro da stark and decisive contrasts. Thus the classi-
Cortona. In 1640 he returned for fully seven cizing note is undoubtedly strong in the gamut
years, first to finish the 'Ages' and then to of these High Baroque decorations. The details,
execute the large ceilings of the grand-ducal too, open interesting perspectives: reminis-
apartment in rooms named after the planets cences of Michelangelo (corner figures, Sala di
Venus, Jupiter, Mars, Apollo, and Saturn."*' Marte [154]) appear next to Rubenesque tritons
The programme, written by Francesco Rondi- (Sala di Giove [155]) and chaste classical female
nelli, may be regarded as a kind of astro- caryatids (Sala di Giove); Buontalenti-like
mythological calendar to the life and accom- superimpositions (Sala di Apollo [156], and
plishments of Cosimo I [154].'" Events take Sala di Venere) next to panels with trophies
place, therefore, in the sky rather than on earth, derived straight from antiquity (Sala di Marte).
giving Cortona a chance to exploit in the ceiling In a word, the basis for Cortona's decorative
frescoes the painterly potentialities of the airy repertory is extremely broad, and yet the strange
realm. But it is the return to real stucco decora- balance between effervescence and classical dis-
tions** and their particular handling that gua- cipline remains unchanged.
rantee these rooms a special place in the annals To a certain extent these decorations epito-
of the Baroque. mize Cortona's work in SS. Martina e Luca

The wealth of these decorations baffles accu- and the Palazzo Barberini, with which they are
rate description. One meets the entire repertory linked in many ways. But his earlier work as a
figures and caryatids, white stuccoes on gilt decorator cannot account for the new relation-
ground or gilded ones on white ground; ship between the plastic decorations and the
wreaths, trophies, cornucopias, shells, and illusionist paintings [154] contained in heavy
BIBLOSARTE
254 THE AGE OF THE HKiH BAROQUE
BIBLOSARTE
255
154 (opposite). Pietro da Cortona: Florence, Palazzo Pitti, Sala di Marte, 1646. Ceiling. Fresco
155 (above). Pietro da Cortona: Florence, Palazzo Pitti, Sala di Giove, 1643 5. Stuccoes
BIBLOSARTE
256 • THF. AGE OF TIIK, IIKill BAROQUK
frames. The explanation is provided by Cor- immediately engaged upon his most extensive
tona's experience of Venice. C.inquecento ceil- ecclesiastical undertaking, the frescoes in S.
ings such as that of the Sala delle Qiiattro Porte Maria in Vallicella. After the execution of the
in the Palace of the Doges show essentially the frescoes of the dome (1647 51) there was an
same combination of stucco and painting. Here interruption until 1655, and in the intervening
were the models which he translated into his years he painted for Pope Innocent X the ceiling
personal luscious Seicento manner. It is the of the long gallery in the Palazzo Pamphili in
union of dignity and stateliness, of the festive, Piazza Navona (1651-4),"" only recently (1646)
swagger, and grand, that predestined Cortona's built by Borromini. Here Cortona designed a
manner to be internationally accepted as the rich monochrome system creating an undulat-

official decorative style of aristocratic and prin- ing framework for the main scenes with the
cely dwellings. The 'style Louis XIV' owes life and apotheosis of .Aeneas. A work of infinite
more to the decorations of the Palazzo Pitti than charm, the problem of changing viewpoints has
to any other single source."'' here been approached and solved with un-
Returning to Rome in 1647 without having equalled mastery. His palette has become even
finished the work in the Palazzo Pitti, Cortona more transparent and luminous than in the last
1 56. Pietro da Cortona Florence,

:
Palazzo Pitti, Sala di .Apollo, 1647. Stuccoes
BIBLOSARTE
i^^r
157. Pietro da Cortona:The Trinity in Glory (dome), 1647-51,

and The Assumption
BIBLOSARTE
of the Virgin (apse), 1655-60. Frescoes. Rome, S. Maria in Vallicella
>^8 •
THt AGE OF THK HKiH BAROQUE

Xenophon's Sacrifice to Diana, after 1653.
Rome, Palazzo Barherini (formerly)
ceilings of the Palazzo Pitti. Delicate blues, pale not attempt to transplant into the church his
pinks, violet, and yellow prevail, foreshadowing secular type of decoration; nor did he employ
the tone values used by Luca Giordano and the illusionistic wizardry used in the Bernini-
during the eighteenth century. While this work Gaulli circle and by the qiiadraturisti. Faithful
easily reveals the study of antiquity, Raphael, to his old convictions, he insisted on a clear
and Veronese, the frescoes of S. Maria in Valli- division between the painted and the decorative
cella look back to Lanfranco and Correggio areas.
[157]; whereas the sophistication, elegance, deli- Compared with his great fresco cycles, his
cacy, and decorative profuseness of the Pam- easel pictures are of secondary importance. But
phili ceiling appeal to the refined taste of the if they alone had survived, he would still rank
few, the work in the church speaks to the masses as one of the leading figures of the High Baro-
by its broad sweep, its dazzling multitude of que. Pictures like the Virgin and Saints in S.
figures and powerful accentuation. Once again, Agostino, Cortona (1626 8), and in the Brera
these frescoes form an ensemble of mesmerizing {c. 1 631), Ananias healing St Paul (S. Maria
splendour with their setting, the criss-cross of della Concezione, Rome, c. 1631), Jacob and
heavy, gilded coffers, the richly ornamented Lahan ( 1 Remus {c. 643),
630s) and Romulus and 1
frames (in the nave), and the white stucco both in the Louvre, and the Martyrdom of St
figures - all designed by Cortona. But he did Lawrence (S. Lorenzo in Miranda, Rome, 1646),
BIBLOSARTE
259
with their brilliant painterly qualities, their Women [152] the classical and archaeological
careful Renaissance-like grouping, their power- paraphernalia have grown in importance at the
fully conceived main protagonists, and their expense of the figures. The meticulous observ-
concentration on the dramatic focus, belong to ance of classical decorum shows Cortona in step
the highest class of 'history painting' in which with the late Poussin. But unlike the latter, who
the most coveted traditions of Raphael, Cor- aimed at extreme simplicity and concentration,
reggio, and Annibale Carracci find their legi- Cortona tended to become diffuse, epic, and
timate continuation. The Sacrifice to Diana pastoral, and to this extent such pictures prepare
(after 1653, formerly Barberini Gallery, present the new stylistic position of the Late Baroque.
whereabouts unknown) [ 1 58] may serve to illus- At the same time, he toned down the fortissimo
trate Cortona's late manner. True to the alle- of his early manner, and with the insistence on
gorical-mythological mode of thinking, Xeno- predominant verticals, the firm framing of the
phon's sacrifice after his happy return from the composition, and the arrangement of figures
East {Anabasis V, iii) was meant to celebrate the in parallel layers, he confirmed that the period
homecoming of the Barberini after their exile. of the exuberant High Baroque was a thing of
Compared with the early Rape of the Sabine the past.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER I I
'HIGH BAROQUE CLASSICISM':
SACCHI, ALGARDI, AND DUCIUESNOY
The foregoing chapters have been devoted to Sacchi.- Reared in Rome, he was trained by
the three great masters of the High Baroque. Albani, first in his native city, later at Bologna;
Older artists, mainly Guercino and Lanfranco, but from about 1621 he was back in Rome for
had decisively contributed in the 1620s to the good. In contrast to the dynamic Baroque
Baroque surge, to which the Bolognese classi- artists a slow producer, critical of himself, bent
cism of the second decade had to yield. Although on theorizing, he was by temperament and
the authority of all these masters was tremen- training predisposed to embrace the classical
dous, it remained by no means unchallenged; gospel. Yet his earliest large altarpiece, the
the voices of moderation, rationalism, and Virgin and Child appearing to St Isidore (after
partisanship with the classical cause were not 1622, S. Isidoro), is still much indebted to
drowned for long. In the new men formed
1630s Lodovico Carracci. Probably less than three
a powerful phalanx. They knew how to fight years later he painted the St Gregory and the
and even win their battles. The most distin- Miracle of the Corporal (1625-7, Vatican Pina-
guished artists of this group are the Frenchman coteca) [159], which reveals a mature and great
Poussin, the Roman painter Andrea Sacchi, and master. With its rich and warm colours painted
two sculptors, the Bolognese Alessandro Al- in a light key and its splendid loose handling,
gardi and the Fleming Francesco Duquesnoy. this work may be regarded as the first master-
What they stand for is not a straight continua- new manner. The story, taken from
piece of the
tion of Bolognese classicism, but a revised ver- Paulus Diaconus, illustrates how the cloth with
sion, tinged by the influence of the great masters which the chalice had been cleaned is pierced
and, in painting, by a new impact of Venetian with a dagger by the pope and begins to bleed.
colourism which was shared by the leading The stranger who had doubted its magic
'Baroque' artists, Lanfranco, Cortona, and Ber- amazed and con-
quality sinks on to his knee,
nini. Compared with the Early Baroque classic- vinced. His two companions echo his wonder-
ism, the new classicism was first rather boisterous ment, but the pope and his deacons are un-
and painterly; it has a physiognomy of its own, perturbed. Sacchi had learned his lesson from
and it is this style that by rights may be termed Raphael's Mass of Bolsena and rendered the
'High Baroque classicism'. story in similar psychological terms: the calm-
ness of those firm in their faith is contrasted to
the excitement of the uninitiated. A minimum
ANDREA SACCHI (1599-1661)
of figures, six in all, invites detailed scrutiny
For Poussin's development and the principles and enhances the effect of the silent drama.
he believed in, the reader must be referred to The organization of the canvas with its pro-
SirAnthony Blunt's masterly presentation.' minent triangle of three figures is essentially
The Italian leader of the movement was classical. But there is no central axis, and the
BIBLOSARTE
262
i5t) (heloir). Andrea Sacchi:

St Gregory and the Miracle of the Corporal, 1625 7
Rome. Vatican Pinacoteca
160 (right). Andrea Sacchi

The Vision of St Romuald,
Rome, Vatican Pinacoteca
cross of spatial diagonals allies the design to Castel Fusano (1627-9). At that time their
advanced compositional tendencies. Moreover ideological and artistic differences must have
the tight grouping of massive figures and the begun to clash. A few years later Sacchi had
emphatic pull exercised by those turned into moved far from the position of the St Gregory,
the picture belong to the Baroque repertory. as is proved by his best-known work, the Vision
The St Gregory is exactly contemporary with of St Romuald^ (Vatican Pinacoteca) [160]. Here
Cortona's Bibiana frescoes [151], and it is evi- under the shadow of a magnificent tree, the
dent that at this moment the antagonism be- saint is telling the brethren his dream about the
tween the two artists, though latent, has not ladder leading to heaven on which the deceased
yet come into the open - on the contrary, both members of the Order ascend to Paradise. The
works reveal similar intense qualities and clearly choice and rendering of the subject are charac-
form a 'common front' if compared with works teristic for Sacchi: instead of employing the
of the older Bolognese or the Caravaggisti. Baroque language of rhetoric, he creates real
We have seen that shortly after the St Gregory drama in terms of intense introspection in the
Sacchi worked with and under Cortona at faces and attitudes, and the soft Venetian gold
BIBLOSARTE
SACCHI, ALGARDI, AND DUQUESNOY •
263
tone permeating this symphony in white is in was the model that he tried to emulate. He re-
perfect harmony with the pensive and deeply nounced illusionism and painted the scene as
serious frame of mind of the hstening monks. if it were a qtiadro nportato ~ an easel-painting.
Within Sacchi's range, the St Gregory is by But he did not return to the position of Bolo-
comparison 'loud' and trenchant colouristically, gnese classicism, for the fresco is not framed and
compositionally, and psychologically. The Ba- the entire ceiling has become its stage. Although
roque massiveness of the figures has now been the affinities with Domenichino cannot be over-
considerably reduced; in addition they are looked, the light and loose handling is much
moved away from the picture plane and face closer to Lanfranco.
the beholder. All his later work is painted in a
similar low key and with a similar attention to
The Controversy between Sacchi and Cortona
psychological penetration and concentration on
bare essentials. In the 1640s he went a step Cortona's and Sacchi's vastly diflerent inter-
further beyond the St Romiiald. The principal pretations of great allegorical frescoes reflect,
work of this period, the eight canvases illus- of course, differences of principles and convic-
trating the Life of the Baptist painted for the tions, which were voiced in the discussions of
lantern of S. Giovanni in Fonte (164 19),^ the Accademia di S. Luca during these years."
shows that he wanted to strip his style of even The controversy centred round the old problem,
the slightest embroidery. Trained on Raphael, whether few or many figures should be used in
he reached a degree of classical simplicity that illustrating a historical theme. The partisans of
is the precise Italian counterpart to Poussin's classical art theory had good reasons to advocate
development of these years.'' compositions with few figures. According to
Sacchi's and Cortona's ways parted seriously this theory, the story in a picture should be
during their work in the Palazzo Barberini. \s rendered in terms of expression, gesture, and
Cardinal Antonio Barberini's protege, Sacchi movement. These are the means at the painter's
was given the task of painting on the ceiling of disposal to express the 'ideas in man's mind' -
one room Divine JfV^ô/H (1629-33)" [161], illus- which Leonardo regarded as the principal con-
trating the apocryphal text from the Wisdom of cern of the good painter. It is only in composi-
Solomon (6:22); 'If therefore ye delight in tions with few figures (Alberti admits nine or
thrones and sceptres, ye princes of peoples, ten) that each figure can be assigned a distinct
honour wisdom, that ye may reign for ever.' part by virtue of its expression, gesture, and
Possibly finished in the year in which Cortona movement, and can thus contribute a charac-
began his Divine Providence, the two works, teristic feature to the whole. In a crowded
with their implicit allegorical references to the composition, single figures are evidently de-
Barberini Pope, supplement each other as far prived of individuality and particularized mean-
as the theme is concerned. But how different ing.
from Cortona's is Sacchi's approach to his task Another aspect supported these conclusions.
Divine Wisdom enthroned over the world is Since painters had always borrowed their terms
surrounded by eleven female personifications of reference from poetry (stimulated by Ho-
symbolizing her qualities in accordance with race's 'ut pictura poesis')," they maintained that
the text. Sacchi represented the scene with the a picture must be 'read' like a poem or tragedy,
minimum number of figures in tranquil poses; where not only does each person have his clearly
they convey their sublime role by their being circumscribed function, but where the Aris-
rather than by their acting. Raphael's Parnassus totelian unities also pertain.
BIBLOSARTE
i6i. Andrea Sacchi: La Divina Sapienza, 1629-33. Fresco. Rome, Palazza Barhenni
BIBLOSARTE
SACCHI, ALGARDI, AND DUQLESNOV •
2b^
Pietro da Cortona fully accepted the tradi- and the rendering of the affetti,^- gestures and
tional assumption that the familiar concepts of expression. He advocated natural movement
poetical theory apply to painting. But he pleaded and turned against the obscurantism produced
for paintings with many figures, thus departing by rhetorical embroidery and every kind of
from classical theory. He compared the struc- excess, such as the overdoing of draperies. In
ture of painted plots to that of the epic. Like an the letter to Albani, concerned with similar
epic, a painting must have a main theme and problems, he laments with extremely sharp
many episodes. These are vital, he maintained, words the neglect of propriety and decorum
in order to give the painting magnificence, to which has caused the decay of the art of painting.
link up groups, and to facilitate the division into Albani, in his answer, strikes a new note by
compelling areas of light and shade. The epi- deriding the choice of tavern scenes and similar
sodes in painting may be compared to the low subjects, for which he makes the northern
chorus in ancient tragedy, and, like the chorus, artists responsible. Against their degrading of
they must be subordinate to the principal high principles, he upholds the ideals of
theme. Sacchi, by contrast, insisted unequivo- Raphael, xMichelangelo, and .\nnibale Carracci.' ^
cally that painting must vie with tragedy: the Albani's targets were, of course, the Bam-
fewer figures the better; simplicity and unity boccianti. Sacchi's controversy with Cortona,
are of the essence." It is now clear that both by contrast, was on the level of 'high art'. Equal
masters made the theoretical position which is speaking to equal, and the differences are
they defended explicit in their work. fought out in the lofty atmosphere of the
If we can here follow the formation or rather .\cademy. The theoretical rift, though, and its
consolidation of two opposing camps, it is also practical consequences are clear enough. It did
evident that Cortona never dreamed of throwing not, however, prevent Cortona from frequent-
overboard the whole intellectual framework of ing the circle of artists who were opposed to
classical art theory. Like Bernini, he subscribed his views. We are not astonished to find that
to its basic tenets but modified them in a parti- Cortona, in the Treatise^' which he published
cular direction. On the other hand, the circle together with the Jesuit Ottonelli in 1652, up-
round Poussin, Sacchi, Algardi, and Duquesnoy held the traditional ideals of propriety and
was a strong party which would never waive its decorum and also insisted on the moral function
convictions. His French rationalism and discip- of art. But side by side with this appears the
line carried Poussin even further than Sacchi; concept of Art as pure form without an extrane-
as early as the end of the 1620s he endeavoured ous raison d'etre. Thus the Baroque antithesis
to emulate ancient tragedy by reducing the (iocere-delectare^^ makes its entry into the theory
Massacre of the Innocetits (Chantilly) to a single of art, and the hedonistic principle of delight
dramatic group. The stiffening of the theo- as the purpose of painting comes into its own.
retical position may be assessed by comparing In keeping with this, Cortona's art has an out-
Poussin's Massacre with Reni's, of 161 1. spoken sensual quality, while Sacchi, classicist
Sacchi himself further clarified his theoretical and moralist like Poussin, refrains more and
standpoint in the studio talk given at about this more from appealing to the senses.
time to his pupil Francesco Lauri (1610-35),'" There is no doubt that Sacchi and his circle
and later in a letter written on 28 October 165 won the day. Not only did he and his confreres
to his teacher, Francesco Albani. '

' In the former pursue relentlessly the aim of cleansing their
document he reiterated the basic repertory of art of Baroque reminiscences, but they extended
the classical theory by concentrating on decorum their influence to Cortona's pupils, such as
BIBLOSARTE
266 •
THF. AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
Francesco Romanelli and Giacinto Gimignani up by his pupil Carlo Maratti, who handed on
(1611-81), and made possible in the 1640s the the classical gospel to the eighteenth century
ascendancy in Rome of archaizing painters Hke and ultimately to Mengs and to Winckelmann,
Sassoferrato (1609-85) and Giovan Domcnico the real father of Neo-classicism and passionate
Cerrini (1609-81). Even the great Baroque enemy of all things Baroque. Pietro da Cortona,
masters were touched by their ideas, and Ber- on the other hand, must be regarded as the
nini himself, after his abortive classicizing phase ancestor of the hedonistic trend which led via
of the 1630S, found a new approach to this Luca Giordano to the masters of the French
problem in his old age. The classical wave and Italian Rococo."
surged far beyond the confines of the artistic
capital and threatened to quell a free develop-

ALESSANDRO ALGARDI (1598-1654)^'
ment in such vigorous art centres as Bologna.
Moreover the classical point of view received No sculptor of the seventeenth century bears
literary support, not dogmatically perhaps, from comparison with Bernini. Indeed, in the second
the painter and biographer of artists Giovanni quarter of the century there existed in Rome,
Battista Passeri, the friend of Algardi and apart from his studio, only two independent
Sacchi, and most determinedly from Giovanni studios of some importance those of Algardi
:
Bellori (1615-96), the learned antiquarian, the and Duquesnoy. The latter was a solitary char-
intimate of Poussin and Duquesnoy, and the acter; with the exception of the statue of St
mouthpiece and universally acclaimed pro- Andrew in St Peter's, he never had a large
moter of the classical cause. commission, he never had a devoted pupil, and
Even if it is correct that Monsignor Agucchi his considerable influence was exercised through
(p. 39) anticipated Bellori's ideas, the old battles the objective qualities of his work rather than
were fought on new fronts. While Agucchi had through the fascination of his personality."^
turned against Caravaggio's 'naturalism' and The case of Algardi is different. For a short
the maniera painters, Sacchi, Bellori and the time his studio had some similarity to that of
rest sustained the classic-idealistic theory against Bernini. During the last fifteen years of his life
the Baroque masters and the Bamboccianti, the he had to cope with numerous and extensive
painters of the lower genre. In the light of this commissions; and, after Bernini's, his reputa-
fact, we may once again confirm that 'Baroque tion as a sculptor had no equal between about
classicism' dates from the beginning of the 1635 and his death in 1654. At the beginning
1 630s. Before that time no serious collision took of Innocent X's reign (1644 ft".), at a time when
place. It was only from the seventeenth century the greater man was temporarily out of favour,
on that there existed real dissenters, and, there- he even stepped into Bernini's place.
fore, classicism had to dig in. While at the Algardi, coming from Bologna where he had
beginning of the century there was a large frequented the Academy of the aged Lodovico
degree of theoretical flexibility, the attitude of Carracci and studied sculpture with the medi-
the defenders of classicism had to become, and ocre Giulio Cesare Conventi (1577- 1640),
became, less tractable after 1630; and as the reached Rome in 1625 after a stay of some years
century advanced the breach between the op- at Mantua. He came with a recommendation
posing camps widened until in the wake of from the Duke of Mantua to Cardinal Lodovico
Poussin the French Academy turned the clas- Ludovisi, himself a Bolognese and the owner
sical creed into a pedantic doctrine. The Italians of a celebrated collection of ancient sculpture,'"
proved more supple. Sacchi's position was taken and established contact with his Bolognese
BIBLOSARTE
SACCHI ALGARDI, AND DUQUESNOY •
267
compatriots, above all with Domenichino. Car- 162. Alessandro Algardi:

dinal Ludovisi entrusted him with the restora- St Mary Magdalen, c. 1628. Stucco.
Rume, S. Silvcstra a! Qîiinnale
tion of antique statues,-" while Domenichino
negotiated tor him his first Roman commission
of some importance: the statues of Mary
Magdalen [162] and St John the Evangelist for
the Cappella Bandini in S. Sih estro al Quirinale
{c. 1628). These data indicate the components

of his style, which derived from the classically
tempered realism of the Carracci Academy,
the close study of, and constant work with,
ancient statuary, and his association with men
like Domenichino, the staunch upholder of the
classical disegno. As one would expect, for the
rest of his life Algardi belonged to the younger
circle of artists with classical inclinations; and
Poussin, Duquesnoy, and Sacchi were among
his friends.
Yet in spite of the difference of talent and

temperament, education and artistic principles,
x'Mgardi was immediately fascinated by Bernini

witness his figure of Mary Magdalen [162], the
style of which is half-way between the subjec-
tivism of Bernini's Btbiatia and the classicism
of Duquesnoy's Susanna [168]. In fact Algardi
remained to a certain extent dependent on his
great rival. This is also apparent in his early
portrait busts; that of Cardinal Giovanni Garzia

Millini (d. 1629) in S. Maria del Popolo is un-
thinkable without Bernini's Be/larmine, while
that of Monsignor Odoardo Santarelli in S.
Maria Maggiore, probably belonging to x\l-
gardi's earliest productions in this field, follows

closely Bernini's Montuya.
Nevertheless, Bernini's and Algardi's ap-
proach to portraiture differed considerably. A
comparison between Bernini's Scipione Bor-
ghese of 1632 [76] and Algardi's perhaps earlier
Cardinal Laudivlo Zaciiua in the Staatliche
Museen, Berlin [163],-' makes this abundantly
clear. In contrast to the transitory moment
chosen by Bernini, Algardi represents his sitter,
with his mouth closed, in a state of permanence

and tranquil existence. Scipione Borghese seems
BIBLOSARTE
163. Alessandro Algardi: 164. Alessandro Algardi

Bust of Cardinal Laudivio Zacchia, i626(?). Bust of Camillo (?) Pamphili, after 1644.
Berlin, Staatliche Miiseen Rome, Palazzo Dona
to converse with us, while Algardi's cardinal Algardi's genius for the sober representation
remains static, immobile for ever. Even the of character has always been admired. The
most meticulous attention to detail, down to number of portrait busts by his hand is con-
wrinkles and warts, and the most able treatment siderable, and it seems that many of them were
of skin, hair, and fur does not help to give such done during his first years in Rome. In any
portraits Bernini's dynamic vitality. Compared case, it would appear that already in the course
with Bernini, who never loses sight of the whole of the 1 630s Algardi had begun to move awav
to which every part is subordinated, Algardi's from his intense realism. Abandoning the warm
busts look like aggregates of an infinite number and vivid treatment of the surface and the subtle
of careful observations made before the sitter. diflFerentiation of texture, he replaced the fresh-
All forms and shapes are trenchant and precise ness of the early works by a noble aloofness in
and retain their individuality: this is a decisive his later busts. One of the finest of that period,
aspect of Algardi's 'realist classicism'. But for the stylish Pamphili prince (after 1644, Rome,
solidity and seriousness his portraits are un- Palazzo Doria) [164], exhibits this classicism to
equalled the mere bulk of any of his early busts
; perfection.-' Thus, not unlike Sacchi, Algardi
brings the sitter physiologically close to us, and steers towards a more determined classicality.
in this weightiness consists the High Baroque In 1629 Algardi's reputation was not yet
community of spirit not only with Bernini but sufficiently established for him to be considered
also with Cortona and the early Sacchi.-- for one of the four monumental statues under
BIBLOSARTE
SACCHI, ALGARDI, AND DUQUESNOY • 269
the dome of St Peter's. He was in his fortieth

year when the first great commission, the tomb
of Leo XI, fell to him; and it was not until 1640
that he was offered another monumental task:
the over-life-size statue of St Philip Neri in S.

Maria in Vallicella, in which he followed closely
the example set by Guido Reni in the same
church. Then, under Innocent X, the commis-
sions came in quick succession.-' Between 1649
and 1650 he executed the memorial statue of
Innocent X in bronze as a counterpart to Ber-
nini's earlier statue of Urban VIII (Palazzo dei
Conservatori). Once again Algardi was im-
pressed by Bernini; but instead of suppressing
detailed characterization as Bernini had done,
his pope has been rendered with minutest care
and is, indeed, a great masterpiece of por-
traiture. Yet for all its intimate qualities the
statue lacks the visionary power of its counter-
part. Algardi did not accept the hieratic fron-
tality of Bernini's Lrhaii; he turned his statue

in a more benevolent attitude towards the left; 165. .\lessandro Algardi:
Tomb of Leo XI, 1634-44.
he considerably toned down the great diagonal
Rome, St Peter's
of the papal cope, and transformed an energetic
and commanding gesture into one of restraint
and halting movement. He weakened the power structural parts to a minimum. At the same
of the blessing arm by the linear and decorative time, the absolute preponderance of the figures
folds of the mantle, while Bernini enhanced the suited his classicizing stylistic tendencies. Al-
poignancy of benediction by pushing the arm gardi also supplied a narrative relief,-'' for which
forcefully forward into the beholder's space. there was no room in the dynamic design of the
The execution of Leo XI's tomb [165], ex- Urban tomb. But during his classical phase
tending over many years,-^ ran parallel with Bernini did introduce a relief on the sarco-
that of Bernini's tomb of Urban VIII. But phagus of the Countess Matilda monument in
Algardi, beginning six years after Bernini, must St Peter's (begun 1633), and slightly later on
have been familiar with Bernini's design. Leo's the tombs of the Raimondi Chapel in S. Pietro
tomb is, in fact, the first papal tomb dependent in Montorio.-' Algardi made use of this device,
on that of Urban VIII. All the salient features and his debt to the Matilda monument is borne
recur: the pyramidal arrangement of three out by the fact that he fitted his narrative bio-
figures, the blessing pope above the sarco- graphical relief into a similar trapezoid shape.
phagus, and the allegories standing next to it If the compositional elements of Leo XI's
in a zone before the papal figure. Algardi had tomb were thus derived from Bernini, Algardi
to plan for an unsatisfactory position in one of departed from him most decisively in other
the narrow passages of the left aisle of St Peter's. respects. The tomb consists entirely of white
Bound by spatial restrictions, he reduced the Carrara marble. Algardi avoided the use of
BIBLOSARTE
270
i66. Alessandro Algardi: colour as emphatically as Bernini accepted it.
The Meeting of Pope Leo I and Attila, 1646-53. Instead of a warm rendering of the skin and a
Rome, St Peter's
luminous sparkle of the surface such as are
found in Bernini's Urban tomb, Algardi's

evenly-worked marbles have a cool, neutralized
surface which is particularly evident in the head

of the allegory of Courage. Instead of the tran-
sitory moment represented in Bernini's alle-
gories, we find a permanent condition in those
of Algardi. In fact, Algardi asserts his classical
convictions in all and every respect, but I am
far from suggesting that the result is a truly
classical work. It is as far or even farther re-
moved from Canova's classicism as Sacchi's

paintings are from those of Mengs. Under the
shadow of Bernini's overpowering genius, Al-
gardi never even attempted to follow Sacchi
the whole way. His tomb of Leo XI is a true
monument of High Baroque classicism.

In contrast to this papal tomb, Algardi created
a new Baroque species in his largest work, the
relief representing the Meeting of Leo and Attila
(1646-53, St Peter's) [166].-'' The historical
event of the year .a.d. 452 was always regarded

as a symbol of the miraculous salvation of the
Church from overwhelming danger, and it was
only appropriate to give this scene pride of
place in St Peter's. Much indebted to Raphael's
example, Algardi's interpretation of the event
is simple and convincing. As in Raphael's fresco,
only pope and king perceive the miraculous
apparition of the Apostles; the followers on
both sides are still unaware of it. The rigidly
maintained triple division of the left half, right
half, and the upper zone results from the story,
the protagonists of which dominate the scene.

Once the traditional reserve towards this relief
has been overcome, one cannot but admire its
compositional logic and psychological clarity.
Its unusual size of nearly 25 feet height has

often led to the fallacious belief that its style,
too, has no forerunners; but in fact the history
of the illusionistic relief dates back to the early

days of the Renaissance, to Donatello and
BIBLOSARTE
SACCHI, ALGARDI, AND DUQUESNOY •
271
Ghiberti. In contrast, however, to the rilieio It would not be difficult to show that this
scacciato of the Renaissance, Algardi desisted diff'erence between Bernini's and Algardi's ap-
from creating a coherent optical space and used proach cannot be explained by the hazards or
mainly gradations in the projection of figures demands inherent in different commissions.
to produce the illusion of depth. The flatter the While Bernini seeks to eliminate the very differ-
relief grows, the more the figures seem to recede ence between painting, relief, and free-stand-
into the distance, while the more they stand ing sculpture, Algardi meticulously preserves
out, the nearer they are to us. Those in the most the essential character of each species.
forward layer of the relief are completely three- His interpretation of a free-standing group
dimensional and furnish transitions between can best be studied in his Decapitation of St
artistic and real space; the problem of spatial Paul (1641-7, Bologna, S. Paolo) [167].-' The
organization is thus turned into one of psycho- two figures of the executioner and tht saint are
logical import and emotional participation. placed within a framing semicircle of columns
After Algardi had created this prototype, behind the main altar. Entirely isolated, each
such reliefs were preferred to paintings when- figure shows an uninterrupted silhouette and
ever circumstances permitted it. This was pro- preserves its block-like quality. It would have
bably due to the fact that a relief is a species been contrary to Algardi's principles to detract
half-way, as it were, between pictorial illusion from the clarity of these figures by placing them
and reality, for the bodies have real volume, against a sculptured or 'picturesque' back-
there is real depth, and there is a gradual transi- ground. This is particularly revealing in view
tion between the beholder's space and that of of the fact that he was stimulated by pictorial
the relief More eflectively than illusionist paint-
167. Aiessandro Algardi:
ing, the painterly relief satisfied the Baroque The Decapitation of St Paul, 1641-7.
desire to efface the boundaries between life and Bologna, S. Paolo
art, spectator and figure. Only periods which

demand self-sufficiency of the work of art will
protest against such figures as the Attila, who
seems to hurry out of the relief into our space;
for people of the Baroque era it was precisely
this motif that allowed them fully to participate
in Attila's excitement in the presence of the

miracle. But now it is important to realize why
it was Algardi rather than Bernini who brought
into being the pictorial relief of the Baroque.
In Bernini's work, reliefs are of relatively
little consequence; it seems that they did not
satisfy his desire for spatial interpenetration of
sculpture and life. A relief is, after all, framed

like a picture, and consequently the illusion it
creates cannot be complete. If we recall Ber-

nini's handling of plastic masses which invade
real space without Hmiting frames (p. 161), Al-
gardi's Attila appears by comparison temperate,
controlled, and relegated to the sphere of art.
BIBLOSARTE
impressions: it was Sacchi's Murlyrdam oj St 168 and i6y. Francesco Duquesnoy:

St Susanna, 1629 33, with detail (opposite).
Longinus at Castelgandolfo that had a formative
Rome, S. Alarm di Lorelo
influence on his conception.*"
The Attila rehef was Algardi's most impor-
tant legacy to posterity." While a work like the
Decapitation of St Paul with its Sacchesque
gravity, simplicity, and psychological penetra-
tion illustrates excellently his partisanship with
the classical cause, the more 'official' relief
shows that, confronted with a truly monumental

task, Algardi was prepared to compromise
and to attempt a reconciliation between the
leading trend of Bernini's grand manner and
the sobriety of classicism - between the impet-
uous art of a genius and his own more limited
talents.
FRANCESCO DUQUESNOY (1597-1643)
Duquesnoy was probably a greater artist than

Algardi; in any case, he was less prepared to
compromise.*- Born in Brussels in 1597, the
son of the sculptor Jerome Duquesnoy, he came
to Rome in 16 18 and stayed there until shortly
before his premature death in 1643.** He was

so thoroughly acclimatized that even the dis-
cerning eye will hardly discover anything nor-
thern in his art. Soon Duquesnoy was a leading
figure in the circle of the classicists; after Pous-

sin's arrival in Rome he shared a house with
him, and he was on intimate terms with Sacchi.
He also soon belonged to the group of artists
who worked for Cassiano del Pozzo's corpus of

classical antiquity (p. 231). But ten years went
by before he became a well-known figure in the
artistic life Rome. Between 1627 and 1628

of
Bernini employed him on the sculptural decora-
tion of the Baldacchino.*^ His reputation estab-
lished, he was chosen to execute the St Andrew,
one of the four giant statues under the dome of
St Peter's. And in 1629 he received the com-
mission for his most famous work, the statue
of St Susanna in the choir of S. Maria di Loreto
[168, 169]."
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
hoT a study of Duqucsnoy, one should first Susanna strictly follows the laws of gravity; in
turn to this celebrated figure. Susanna originally contrast to the individual characterization of
held the martyr's palm in her right hand; with Bibiana's dress, Susanna is shown in the time-
the left she is making a timid gesture towards less attire of classical antiquity. Duquesnoy ab-
the altar, while her face is turned in the direction stained from any indication of time and space;
of the congregation. " Bellori, a devoted admirer a simple slab, instead of a rock with vegetation,
of Duquesnoy's art, maintained that it was forms the base of the statue. It was not the
impossible to achieve a more perfect synthesis individual fate of a saint, but the objective state
of the study of nature and the idea of antiquity. of sainthood which he desired to portray. Con-
Duquesnoy, he relates, worked for years from sequently, he represented his .saint in a state
the model, while the ancient statue of Urania of mental and physical repose instead of select-
on the Capitol was always before his mind's eye. ing a transitory moment as Bernini had done.
The stance and the fall of the drapery are, He gave shape to an ideal norm with the same
indeed, close to the Urania and other similar compelling logic with which Bernini had charac-
ancient figures. The contour of the statue is terized a fleeting instant and a fluctuating move-
clear and uninterrupted and the .studied cdh- ment. No light is playing on the surface, the
Irapposto is utterly convincing: the leg on which forms are firm, clear, and unchangeable, and
the weight of the body rests, the free-standing any departure from such objectivity is carefully
leg, the sloping line of the shoulders, the gentle avoided. ^^ The face of Susanna is shown with
turn of the head - all this is beautifully balanced her mouth closed and her eyes gazing into space
and supported by the fall of dress and mantle. with the blank eyeballs of Roman statues;
The folds are gathered together on the slightly whereas Bernini made it a point to incise the
protruding right hip, and it was precisely the iris and pupil, which gives the look direction
classically poised treatment of the drapery that and individual expression. Behind these two
evoked the greatest enthusiasm at the time. contrasting interpretations of saints lie the two
Bellori regarded the Susanna as the canon of different approaches: the Baroque and the clas-
themodern draped figure of a saint. This judge- sical, a subjective as opposed to an objective
ment was perfectly justified, since there is hardly conception, dynamic intensity as opposed to
any other work in the history of sculpture, not rational discipline. The similarity of Sacchi's
excluding Bernini's most important statues, and Duquesnoy's developments is more than
that had an effect as lasting as Duquesnoy's mere coincidence; both turn over a new leaf in
Susanna. 1629, the one with the Divine Wisdom, after
A comparison between the Susanna and Ber- having worked under Cortona at Castel Fusano,
nini's Bibiana of five years earlier [73] makes the other with the Susanna, after having worked
the limpid and temperate simplicity of the under Bernini in St Peter's.
Susanna all the more obvious, particularly if So far I have treated the Susanna and Bibiana
one considers that the Bibiana was well known as basically antagonistic, but this is not the
to Duquesnoy, and that even he could not en- whole story. Nobody with any knowledge of
tirely dismiss her existence from his thoughts. the history of sculpture would fail to date the
Coming from the Susanna, one finds the stance Susanna in the seventeenth century. Sacchi's
of Bernini's figure ill-defined and the mantle and Algardi's works have shown that this
obscuring rather than underlining the structure 'Baroque classicism' reveals symptoms charac-
of the body. In contrast to the wilfully arranged teristic of the period. The head of the Susanna
fall of the folds in the Bibiana, the mantle of the displays a lyrical and delicate sweetness (Bellori
BIBLOSARTE
SACCHl, ALGARDl, AND DUQUhSNOY •
275
called it 'un aria dolce di grazia purissima')
such as is found neither in classical antiquity

nor in the adored models ot Raphael and his
circle; but we do find the same sort of expression

in paintings of the period, such as the almost
exactly contemporary frescoes by Domcnichino
in the choir of S. Andrea della \alle; and con-
versely, echoes of the head of the Susannu arc
frequent in Sacchi's pictures. This essentially
seventeenth-century sensibility and the stronger
sensations of ecstasy and \ision do not diflcr
intrinsically, but only in degree. The blending
of classical purity of form with the expression
of seventeenth-century susceptibility had an
immense appeal for contemporaries, a tact which
is borne out by the many replicas of the head
of Susanna.^* Moreover, a direct line leads from
here to the often sentimental prettiness of the
'classicist Rococo''' of which Filippo della
Valle's Temperance [306] may ser\e as an ex-

ample. Not only has the head of the Susanna a
distinctly seventeenth-century flavour the por- :
170. Francesco rûquesnoy : St Andrew,

ous and soft treatment of the surface, of skin,
i(i2i)-40. Rome. St Peter's
hair, and dress, which seems to impart warm
life to the statue - a life that is completely lack-
ing in most of the ancient models known to the while the ample cloak endows him with Baroque
seventeenth century - is typical of the spirit of mass and weight. Duquesnoy's eminence, how-
the Baroque. Finally, with the subtle relations ever, lay in the handling of works of smaller
between the statue, the altar, and the congre- dimensions, and this monumental statue lacks
gation, Duquesnoy enlarged the spiritual rele- the convincing oneness which in those very
vance of his figure beyond its material boun- years he was able to give to his St Susanna.
daries. Thus he advanced some steps along the The statuesque body of the figure contrasts with
path which Bernini followed to the end. the emotional expression of the head; and the
The case of the Susanna is closely paralleled transference of the heroic Jupiter type to the
by Duquesnoy's St Andrew {1629-40) [170].^" Christian saint is as unsatisfactory as the

The stance of the figure and the fall of the Baroque diagonal going through shoulders and
drapery are of almost academic classicality, arms is petty and feeble.
adapted from ancient statues of Jupiter. A com- During his first Roman years Duquesnoy
parison with Bernini's Longlnus [74J illustrates had earned his living mainly by small sculpture
emphatically the deep chasm that divides the in bronze and ivory, by wooden reliquaries, and
two artists. But even this figure is not self- bv restoring ancient marbles. Nor are many of
sufficient, for St .\ndrew turns with pleading his later works in marble of large size; neither
gesture and devotional expression towards the the tomb of Andrien \'ryburch of ibzq [172]
heavenly light streaming in from the dome. nor that of Ferdinand van den Eynde of 1633-
BIBLOSARTE
40 1 17 1
J,
both in S. Maria dcll'Anima, nor 171. Francesco Duquesnoy:
the earlier tomb of Bernardo Guilelmi (S. Tomb of Ferdinand van den Eynde, '6.S3-40.
Rome, S. Alaria dell' Anima
Lorenzo fuori Ic Mura)," in which he followed
fairly closely Bernini's Montoya bust. An end-
less number of small reliefs and statuettes in
bronze, ivory, wax, and terracotta representing
mythological, bacchic, and religious subjects
continued to come from his studio to the end
of his life; and it was on these little works of
highest perfection that his reputation was main-
ly based. Artists and collectors valued them
very highly and regarded them as equal to anti-
quity itself; and original models and casts after
such works belonged to the ordinary equipment
'-
of artists' studios.
Duquesnoy's special interest was focused on

representations of the putto [172, 173]. He
really gave something of the soul of children and
modelled their bodies so round, soft, and deli-
cate that they seem to be alive and to breathe;

the subtle transitions between one form and
another and the tenderness of the surface can
be as little reproduced as the quivering sfumalo
of Correggio's palette. It was Duquesnoy's con-

ception ot the bambino that became a general
European property and, consciously or un-
consciously, most later representations of small
children are indebted to him. But Duquesnoy's
rendering of the putto was not static, and this is
reflected in the differences of opinion about

the Vryburch and van den Eynde tombs. Some
critics regarded only the one, some only the
other as original. The truth seems to be that the
putti of both monuments are entirely by the
hand of the master; but while the Vryburch
monument, the earlier of the two, shows a type
close to Titian, those of the van den Eynde
monument are evidently indebted to Rubens.^
Even if Bellori and Passed had not related it,
it would be impossible to overlook how care-

fully Duquesnoy had studied Titian. We know
from the sources that he was fascinated by
Titian's Children's Bacchanal, now in the Prado,
at that time in the collection of Cardinal
BIBLOSARTE
172. Francesco Duquesnoy: 173. Francesco Duquesnoy:
A Putto from the Andrien Vryburch Tomb, 1621). A Putto, after 1630. Bronze.
Rome, S. Alarta dell'Amma London, Victoria and Albert Aluseum
BIBLOSARTE
174. Francesco Duquesnoy: Putto Frieze,

1640-2. Terracotta model for SS. Apostoli (Naples).
Formerly Berlin. Deutsches Museum
Ludovisi - a fascination which he shared with example being the relief with singing putti on
Poussin. The putti of the Vryburch monument Borromini's altar of the Cappella Filomarino
comply closely with Italian standards of beauty in SS. Apostoli, Naples [174].^"
and show a comparatively firm treatment of the It appears that Duquesnoy returned to his
skin, while those of the van den Eynde tomb native Flemish realism, which had lain dor-
have the fat bellies and soft flexibility of children mant under the impact of the Italian experience,
by Rubens. There are other works which testify and that he imparted it above all to his putti - in
to Duquesnoy's intimate study of Titian, and other words when he was not concerned with
I would date these, analogous to Poussin's work on a large scale, and therefore felt free
Venetian period, in the early years, before or from the ideological Hmitations of the classical
about 1630." On the other hand Flemish charac- doctrine. He thus inaugurated a specific Baroque
teristicsbecome more prominent towards the type, the influence of which not even Bernini
end of Duquesnoy's career, the most important and his circle could escape.^''
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER I 2
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS
OF THE HIGH BAROQ_UE
Each of the three great masters of the High imbibed North Italian architectural concep-
Baroque, Bernini, Borromini, and Pietro da tions during his long stays at Bologna, Parma,
Cortona, created an idiom in his own right. Piacenza, and Modena.' In Rome we find him
Since many or even most of their buildings as the 'Architect to the City' (1602) working on
were erected after 1650, their influence, on the a large number of commissions,- and even when
whole, did not make itself felt until the later Innocent X appointed him 'papal architect' at
seventeenth century and extended far into the the advanced age of seventy-four (1644) and
eighteenth century. The decisive factor of the entrusted him with the design of the Palazzo
new situation due to their activity lies in that, Pamphili in Piazza Navona,^ he appeared un-
for the time being, Rome became the centre ot burdened by his years - and almost untouched
every advanced movement. And as so often in by modern stylistic developments. Together
similar circumstances, minor stars with a dis- with his son. Carlo, he later shouldered the
tinctly personal manner arose in the wake of great task of the planning of S. Agnese. But by
the great masters. It is with their work in Rome then - he was eighty-two - the initiative seems
that we must first be concerned. The following to have slipped into Carlo's hands. The large
survey is necessarily rather cursory, and only design of the exterior of S. Agnese in the Alber-
buildings which in the author's view have more tina, Vienna, showing a heavy and clumsy dome
than ephemeral significance can be mentioned. and an unsatisfactory fa9ade derived from Ma-
derno's St Peter's, must be attributed to the
son rather than to the father.^ It illustrates,
ROME
however, the extent to which Carlo accepted
Carlo Rain a Id i
an outmoded fashion.
By far the most important architect in Rome His time came after his father's death in
after the great trio was the slightly younger 1655. Soon he wasmovinginto the limelight and
Carlo Rainaldi ( 1 6 1 1 -9 1 ). He commands parti- developed a typically Roman grand manner,
cular interest not only because his name is though without ever ridding himself of the
connected with some of the most notable archi- paternal heritage. It is mainly three works, exe-
tectural tasks of the century, but also because cuted during the 1660s and 1670s - S. Maria in
he achieved a unique symbiosis of Mannerist Campitelli, the facade of S. Andrea della Valle,
and High Baroque stylistic features. Some of and the churches in the Piazza del Popolo - that
his buildings are, moreover, more North Italian warrant a more thorough discussion.
in character than those of any other architect In 1660 Pope Alexander VII decided to re-
working in Rome at that time. This was cer- place the old church in the Piazza Campizucchi
tainly the result of his long collaboration with by a new, magnificent structure of large dimen-
his father, Girolamo, who, born in Rome in sions.^ Two years later medals showing Rai-
1570 and a pupil of Domenico Fontana, had naldi's design were buried in the foundations.
BIBLOSARTE
28o •
This design, a grand revision ot the project tor new building was to be erected [175]. The eleva-
S. Agnese, had common with the pre-
little in room followed closely, but not
tion of the oval
sent building: a dominating dome was to rise entirely, Bernini's S. .\ndrea al Qiiirinale, for
above a concave ta(;ade framed by powerful the strong emphasis on the transverse axis a
projecting piers. The deri\ ation from Cortona's Mannerist motif was derived from Francesco
facade of SS. Martina e Luca is evident. Since da Volterra's S. Giacomo degh Incurabili, and
this scheme was much too ambitious. Carlo so was the shape of the dome, closed at the apex
next designed a two-storeyed facade behind and with lunettes cutting deep into the vaulting.
which the dome, considerably reduced in size, I have singled out this plan for a close scrutiny
was to disappear. While he retained from SS. because the combining of the most recent High
Martina e Luca the concept of the convex Baroque achievements of Cortona and Bernini
facade between piers, he drew on another of modified by a deliberate return to a Mannerist
Cortona's buildings, namely S. Maria in Via structure is typical of Rainaldi. In the final
Lata, for the portico in two storeys.'' At this design, whichw as still further reduced, Rainaldi
stage the plan consisted of a large oval for the exchanged the oval room with its low dome for
congregation and an architecturally isolated, a nave, and this required a straight fa9ade. The
circular domed sanctuary for the miraculous building was begun early in 1663 and finished
picture of the Virgin in honour of which the by the middle of 1667 [176-8].
175. Carlo Rainaldi: Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli.

ProiLLt. i(>'i2. S. Maria in Campitelli
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS OF THE HIGH BAROQUE • 281
The final plan contains a number of exciting and has only pilasters; but an arrangement of
features which are adumbrated in the oval columns identical to that of the chapels, an
scheme. The longitudinal nave, to which the identical accentuation of bays, and the same
domed sanctuary is again attached, opens in type of gilded decoration recur at the near and
the centre into large chapels placed between far ends of the sanctuary. Thus there are most
smaller chapels. It will be recalled that this type telling visual relations between the large chapels
of plan has a distinctly North Italian pedigree. and the sanctuary, and the eye can easily wander
Notable among such churches is Magenta's S. from the impressive barriers of the transverse
Salvatore at Bologna (1605 23) [59], which was axis along the main direction to the sanctuary
rising when Girolamo Rainaldi began to erect [176]. Moreover the bright light streaming into
S. Lucia in the same city. In S. Salvatore too the sanctuary from the dome immediately at-
the transverse axis is strongly emphasized by tracts attention. It appears that in this church
means of chapels which open to the full height the Mannerist conflict of axial directions has
of the nave. In S. Maria in Campitelli these been resolved and subordinated to the unifying
chapels have been given still more prominence High Baroque tendencies of direction deter-
bv virtue of their decoration with free-standing mined by mass (columns) and light. Details,
columns and by the gilded decorations of the such as door and balcony surrounds and the
arches. Bv contrast, the nave is uniformly white curved pilasters standing in the corners of the
176. Carlo Rainaldi:

Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli, 1663-7. Interior
BIBLOSARTE
282 •
domed part, owe not a little to Borromini. But in the North. In the year in which Rainaldi's
itwould be a mistake to believe that there is church was finished Lanfranchi began to build
anything Borrominesquc in the basic concep- S. Rocco in Turin, where free-standing columns
tion ot the structure. arranged like those of S. Maria in Campitelli
What singles out this building and gives it a were given a similar scenic function. Moreover,
unique place among the High Baroque churches the 'false' Greek cross with an added domed
of Rome is its scenic quality, produced by the chapel remained common in the North through-
manner in which the eye is conducted from the out the eighteenth century.^
'cross-arm' to the sanctuary and into depth An interesting combination of North Italian
from column to column. This approach was at and Roman tendencies will also be found in
home in northern Italy (p. 122), but in Rome the the facade of S. Maria in CampitelH [178]. The
scenic character of the architecture of S. Maria main characteristics of this front are the two
in Campitelli anticipates the development of aedicules, one set into the other and both going
the Late Baroque. Thus we find in this extra- through the two storeys. This type, which I
ordinary building North Italian planning coup- have called before 'aedicule facade' (p. 120), had
led with Roman gravity and Mannerist retro- no tradition in Rome; it was, however, common
gressions turned into progressive tendencies. in the North of Italy and only needed the
The plan of S. Maria in CampitelH had no thorough Romanization brought about by Rai-
sequel in Rome. On the other hand, one need naldi to become generally acceptable. Preceded
not search long to come across similar structures by his father's attempt in the design of S. Lucia
177. Carlo Rainaldi: 178. Carlo Rainaldi:

Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli, 1663 7. Plan Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli, 1663-7. Facjade
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS 01" THE HIGH BAROQUE •
283
at Bologna, Carlo knew how to blend the aedi-

cule facade with the typically Roman increase
in the volume of the orders from pilasters to
half-columns and free-standing columns. The

Roman High Baroque quality^ is clearly ex-
pressed in the powerful projections of the pedi-
ments, the heavy and great forms, and the
ample use of columns. Characteristically Ro-
man, too, are the farthest bays, which derive
from the Capitoline palaces ;* and the motif of
the two recessed columns in the bays between
the outer and inner aedicule stems from Cor-
tona's SS. Martina e Luca. Rainaldi's trans-
plantation of the North Italian aedicule facade
to Rome led to its most mature and most effec-
tive realization. None of the highly individual

church fa9ades by Cortona, Bernini, and Borro-
mini lent itself freely to imitation. But Rainaldi's
aedicule conception in Roman High Baroque
dress was easily applicable to the longitudinal
type of churches and was, therefore, constantly 179. Carlo Maderno and Carlo Rainaldi:
repeated and re-adapted to specific conditions." Rome, S. Andrea deila Valle. Facade, 1624 g, i66i
Almost exactly contemporary with S. Maria

in CampiteUi runs Rainaldi's execution of one
of the great church facades in Rome, that of S. naldi's design, and since there is proof that
Andrea della Valle [179]. Here, however, he Carlo Fontana was Rainaldi's assistant during
had not a free hand. The facade was begun in 1 66 1 and 1662," it must have been he who was
1624 from a design of Carlo Maderno. When responsible for all these modifications. The pre-
the latter died, it remained unfinished with only sent fa9ade of S. Andrea della Valle, therefore,
the pedestals of the order standing. Rainaldi is a High Baroque alteration of a Maderno
not only turned Maderno's design into an aedi- design by Carlo Rainaldi, whose design in its
cule facade but also managed by a stress on turn was 'purified' and stripped of its ambi-
mass, weight, and verticalism to bring to bear guities by Carlo Fontana.
upon the older project the stylistic tendencies Concurrently with S. Maria in CampiteUi
of the mid seventeenth century. The facade and the fa9ade of S. Andrea della Valle ran the
which we see today does not, however, entirely work of S. Maria di Monte Santo and S. Maria
correspond to Rainaldi's intentions.'" As com- de' Miracoli in the Piazza del Popolo [180, 181].
pared with his design, the present facade shows Here the architect had to show his skill as a
a greater severity in the treatment of detail, a town-planner. His task consisted of creating an
simplification of niche and door surrounds, an impressive piazza which would greet the tra-
isolation of decoration and sculpture from the veller on entering Rome by the Porta del
structural parts, and a change in the proportions Popolo. From the Piazza del Popolo three main
of the upper tier. All these alterations go in one streets radiate between the Pincio and the Tiber,
and the same direction: thev classicize Rai- each of them leading into the heart of the city.
BIBLOSARTE
284 rUF. AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
The decisive points were the two front eleva- S. Maria de' Miracoli, Rainaldi produced the
tions, facing the piazza between these streets. impression from the square of identity of size
At these points Rainaldi planned two sym- and shape.'- On 15 July 1662 the foundation
metrical churches with large and impressive stone of the left-hand church, S. Maria di
domes as focusing-features from the Porta del Monte Santo, was laid. After an interruption in
Popolo. But since the sites were unequal in 1673 building activity was continued from a
size, thesymmetry which was here essential project by Bernini, and Carlo Fontana, as acting
was not easily attained. By choosing an oval architect, completed the church by the Holy
dome for the narrower site of S. Maria di Monte Year 1675. Rainaldi himself remained in charge
Santo and a circular dome for the larger one of of S. Maria de' Miracoli, which was executed
BIBLOSARTE
285
i8o (opposite). Rome, Piazza del Popolo, from G. B. Nolli's plan, 1748
181 (below). Carlo Rainaldi and Gianlorenzo Bernini:

Rome, Piazza del Popolo. S. Maria di Monte Santo and S. Maria de' Miracoli, 1662 79
between 1675 and 1679, again with Fontana's Much more important than the interiors are
The interior of S. Maria di Monte
assistance." the exteriors of these churches. The fa9ades
Santo shows, of course, none of Rainaldi's with their classically poised porticoes, which
idiosyncrasies. At S. Maria de' Miracoli on the already appear in the foundation medal of 1662,
other hand Rainaldi worked once again with a seem to contradict in many respects the pecu-
strong accentuation of the transverse axis but liarities of Rainaldi's style. In fact, no reasonable
counteracted it by emphasizing at the same doubt is possible that he was influenced by his
time the homogeneity' of the circular space. He youthful assistant, Carlo Fontana, through
wedded Mannerist ambiguity to the High Ba- whom he became familiar with Bernini's ap-
roque desire for spatial unification. proach to architecture.'^ When working for
BIBLOSARTE
286 •
Bernini on the plans of the Square of St Peter's, the older chapels of Sixtus V and Paul V and
Fontana must also have been involved in Ber- the medieval apse between them into a grand
nini's project of 1659 (which remained on design (1673), forming an impressive view-
paper) to erect a four-columned portico in front point from a great distance. It is informative to
of Maderno's facade of the basilica. This idea of compare Bernini's project of i66g with Rai-
the classical temple was realized in the churches naldi's executed front. Bernini wanted to screen
in the Piazza del Popolo.'^ But the Berninesque the apse with an open portico; his design em-
appearance of these porticoes has an even more bodied a structural organization of the utmost
tangible reason, for it was precisely here that sculptural expressiveness, while in Rainaldi's
Bernini altered Rainaldi's design in 1673. R^'" somewhat straggling front the apse stands out
naldi wanted to place the pediments of the from the thin and unconvincing wall of the
porticoes against a high attic. For him a pedi- high attic.
ment was always an element of linear emphasis. In the early 1670s Rainaldi was also respon-
Bernini abolished Rainaldi's attic, so that, in sible for the fa9ade and the interior decoration
accordance with his own style, the free-standing of Gesu e Maria (p. 315). In addition, during
pediment regained its full classical plasticity. the 1 670s and 1680s he had a hand in a great
Moreover, Bernini probably had a formative many smaller enterprises, such as chapels in
influence on the solution of Rainaldi's most S. Lorenzo in Lucina, S. Maria in Araceli, S.
pressing problem. Bernini always had the be- Carlo ai Catinari, the design of tombs and
holder foremost in mind and the optical im- altars, and the completion of older churches."'
pression a structure would make on him from But his star was waning. Although Rainaldi's
a given viewpoint. One wonders, therefore, principal works belong to the 1660s, he repre-
whether Rainaldi would ever have devised the sents a slightly later phase of the Roman High
pseudo-symmetrical arrangement of these chur- Baroque than the three great masters. In fact
ches without the impact of Bernini's approach Cortona's and Borromini's careers came to an
to architecture. In any case, it is worth noting end in that decade, while Rainaldi worked on
that Rainaldi began planning the two churches for almost another generation. His life-long
as corresponding 'false' Greek crosses. This attachment to Mannerist principles, his trans-
would have made absolutely symmetrical struc- plantation to Rome of North Italian concep-
tures possible, but at the expense of the size of tions of planning, his scenic use of the free-
the domes. However, the final design marks a standing column, his borrowings from Bernini,
new and important departure from the enclosed Cortona, and Borromini - all this is blended in
piazza, for the churches not only create a monu- a distinctly individual manner which, however,
mental front on the piazza but also crown the never carries the conviction of any of the cogent
wedge-shaped sites, unifying and emphasizing High Baroque architectural systems.
the ends of long street fronts. The breaking-in
of the streets into the piazza, or rather the
Martina Loiighi the Younger,
weaving into one of street and square, was a
Vincenzo delta Greca, Antonio del Grande,
new town-planning device - foreign to the
and Giovan Antonio de' Rossi
High Baroque, and heralding a new age.
With the exception of the exterior of the apse Next to Rainaldi there were four approximately
of S. Maria Maggiore no work fell to Rainaldi contemporary architects of some distinction
in any way comparable with those that have working in Rome, whose names are given in the
been discussed. In S. Maria Maggiore he united title to this section. Apart from Giovan Antonio
BIBLOSARTE
i82. Martino Longhi the Younger: Rome, SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio. Facâde, 1646 30
BIBLOSARTE
de' Rossi, none ot them has many buildings to central segmental pediment from which a com-
his credit. Martino Longhi (1602-60), the son pressed shell juts out energetically: instead of
of Onorio and grandson of the elder Martino, capping the inner pair of columns, it crowns
belonged to an old family of architects who had the angularly broken tablet (with the inscrip-
come to Rome from Viggiu. His reputation is tion) which is superimposed on the entablature
mainly based on one work of outstanding merit, above the door. It will be noticed that the
the fa9ade of SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio in the projections at the level of the entablature cor-
Piazza di Trevi, built for Cardinal Mazarin respond in number, but not in structure either
between 1646 and 1650 [182].'" This front, to the projections of the upper tier or to those
thickly set with columns, is superficially similar of the triad of columns. But Longhi created
to that of S. Maria in Campitelli, but the simi- the optical impression that the two lower pedi-
larity consists in High Baroque massiveness ments top the outer and inner pairs of columns.-'
rather than in any actual interdependence. To This rather cumbersome analysis has shown
be sure, SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio is in a class that the relationship between the pediments
of its own and is as little derived from earlier and the columns is as inconsistent as that be-
models as the facades of SS. Martina e Luca or tween the lower and upper triad, and in this
S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane. The principal inconsistency may very well lie part of the
feature of the fa9ade is three free-standing peculiar attraction of the facade. Seen geneti-
columns at each side of the central bay, forming cally, Longhi employed Mannerist devices but
a closely connected triad which is repeated in subordinated them to an overwhelmingly High
both tiers. This repetition, together with the Baroque effect of grandeur and mass. The
slight stepping forward of the columns towards character of the decoration reveals similar ten-
the centre, gives the motif its brio and power.'" dencies, for Longhi combined Berninesque
The freedom which the columns have here at- free-moving, realistic sculpture with the rigid,
tained is evidenced by the fact that their move- hard, and tactually indifferent motifs of Man-
ment is not dependent on, or caused by, a nerism. It appears, therefore, that Longhi, like
gradation of the wall, and their impression of Carlo Rainaldi, did not entirely eliminate Man-
energetic strength is reinforced by the accumu- nerist ambiguities, and this view is strengthened
lation of massive pediments. It is further re- by a study of his modernization of S. .\driano
inforced by the large caesuras between the (1656), where in the crossing two free-standing
triads and the outer columns in the lower tier.'" columns matched two pilasters as supports of
But the logical arrangement of the articulation the oval dome.-- The construction of S. Carlo
was obscured in more than one place. The al Corso, one of the largest churches in Rome,
farthest columns and the third columns of the begun by his father Onorio, occupied Martino
lower triad frame empty wall space, and that for several decades. It is fair to assume that the
two such columns should be regarded com- as plan with an ambulatory, quite unique for
plementary is emphasized by the unbroken Rome, depends on northern models. But the
entablature that unites them. Moreover in the history of S. Carlo is extremely involved, and
lower tier, in contrast to the upper one, no since Cortona rather than Martino was respon-
structural link exists between the third columns sible for the decoration, hardly any trace of the
of the triads.-" Such a link, however, is provided latter's personal style can now be discovered.-'
for the second columns by the broken pediment, Vincenzo della Greca,-^ who came to Rome
the two segments of which are connected by from Palermo, deserves a brief note tor his
decorative sculpture. More problematical is the work in SS. Domenico e Sisto. The flat, re-
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS OF THE HIGH BAROQUE •
zSi)
actionary facade, always attributed to him but even returned to the Late Mannerist arrange-
in reality designed by Nicola Turriani in 1628,-' ment of Giacomo della Porta's Palazzo Chigi
would not be worth mentioning were it not for in the Piazza Colonna, and also truly .Mannerist
its superb position on high ground, of which is the portal with its frame of pilasters super-
Vincenzo della Greca made the most by devising imposed on quoins. More progressive are the
an imaginative staircase (1654) which ascends in details of the window-frames of the second
two elegant, curved flights to the height of the storey and some door-surrounds inside the
entrance. The idea was probably derived from palace, where Borromini's dynamic life of forms
Cortona's Villa del Pigneto, but it was here that has been toned down to a peculiar staccato
a Roman architect built for the first time a movement. The most interesting feature is per-
Baroque staircase in an urban setting a prelude haps the vestibule, impressively spacious and
to Specchi's Port of the Ripetta and to the ample and with a treatment of detail of almost
grand spectacle of De Sanctis's Spanish Stairs. puritanical sobriety.-"'
Although more eminent than Vincenzo della Giovan Antonio de' Rossi (1616-95), ^ con-
Greca, Antonio del Grande,-' a Roman by birth temporary of Carlo Rainaldi, produced some
whose activity is documented between 1647 and works that might be described as transitional
1671, also has nothing to show that could com- between the High and the Late Baroque. This
pare with Longhi's SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio. is less obvious in his ecclesiastical than his
Most of his work is domestic, done in the service secular buildings. Some of his ecclesiastical
of the Colonna and Pamphih families. His work belongs to the finest flower of a slightly
monumental Carceri Nuovi (1652-8) in Via softened High Baroque in which the influence
Giulia owe not a little of their eflect to Borro- of each of the three great masters can easily be
mini's influence, as the deeply grooved cornice detected. We may single out the interesting
proves. In his great gallery of the Palazzo Colon- Cappella Lancellotti in S. Giovanni in Late-
na, of impressive dimensions and the largest in rano,'" built on an oval plan with projecting
Rome, begun in 1654, and vaulted in 1665, he columns - the whole clearly a Baroque re-
took up the theme of Borromini's gallery of the interpretation of Michelangelo's design of the
Palazzo Pamphili in the Piazza Navona. At both Cappella Sforza in S. Maria Maggiore. The
ends of the gallery he screened off adjoining masterpiece of his mature style is S. Maria in
rooms by free-standing columns, an idea that Campo Marzo (1682-5),^' an impressive Greek
may have come to him from Bernini's S. Andrea cross with oval dome but without drum. The
al Quirinale, then rising.-' His most important way the bulk of the apse closes the view from
work is that part of the Palazzo Doria-Pamphili the Via della Maddalena is devised in the best
which faces the Piazza del Collegio Romano tradition of the Roman High Baroque. Still
(1659-61).-" But the large fa9ade contains no later he built the oval chapel in the Palazzo
new or important ideas. It follows Girolamo Monte di Pieta, a little jewel resplendent with
Rainaldi's design for the Palazzo Pamphili in coloured marble incrustation and amply deco-
the Piazza Navona in that the central bays are rated with reliefs, statues, and stuccoes.'- But
articulated by orders in two tiers resulting in of the High Baroque density of space- and
an additive system which lacks the High Ba- wall-treatment little remains.
roque emphasis on the piano nohile. The rest Among Rossi's palaces, two require special
of the facade, outside the central bays, is in the mention: the Palazzo .Altieri in the Piazza del
tradition of Roman palazzo fronts; but with the Gesii and the Palazzo D'.Aste-Bonaparte over-
unequal rhythm of the windows the architect looking the Piazza Venezia. The first is his
BIBLOSARTE
Zqo THE AGF. OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
most extensive if not his most accomplished palace is essentially a revision of the traditional
work. Begun by Cardinal Giovan Battista Altieri Roman type. Only the Borrominesque rounded-
in 1650, the palace was probably finished at off corners and the chaste, unorthodox order in
the time ot the latter's death in 1654. After the three tiers, retaining the four facades, are mildly
accession to the papal throne of the Altieri Pope progressive; all the motifs, including the elegant
Clement X an enlargement became necessary, curved pediments of the windows, are rather
which Rossi carried out between 1670 and unpretentious. Reserve and an immaculate
1676.'^ The new parts towards the Piazza sense of proportion are the virtues of this style.
Venezia continue the earlier scheme but re- Rossi's intelligent blending of Cortonesque and
main architecturally unobtrusive, so that the Borrominesque decorative detail and its trans-
older palace stands out unimpaired as the prin- formation into a comparatively light and plea-
cipal building. Although the interior rather than sant personal idiom such as we see it in the
the traditional facade deserves attention, Rossi's pediments of the Palazzo D'Aste and on many
skill in solving his difficult task shows that we occasions predestined him to play an impor-
are dealing with a resourceful architect. The tant part in the development of eighteenth-
Palazzo D'Aste-Bonaparte [183] is perhaps the century architecture. It is not by chance that
most accomplished example of his mature man- Alessandro Specchi's Palazzo de Carolis (now
ner. ^^ Designed as a free-standing block, the Banco di Roma)" and Tommaso de Marchis's
Palazzo Millini-Cagiati,^" both on the Corso,
vary Rossi's Palazzo D'Aste but little. A further
183. Giovan Antonio de' Rossi: study would show that the style of his many
Rome, Palazzo D'Aste-Bonaparte, 1658- smaller palaces some of which have been
pulled down in recent years determined the
character of innumerable houses of the aristo-
cracy and wealthy bourgeoisie of eighteenth-
century Rome.''
ARCHITECTURE OUTSIDE ROME

During the roughly fifty years between 1630
and 1680 the architectural panorama in the rest
of Italy is on the whole less interesting than one

might be prepared to expect. Venice, it is true,
had a great architect. But Lombardy, after the
and varied Borromeo era, had little to offer;

full
Genoa was exhausted by the plague of 1657;

Turin, under her progressive rulers, was only
beginning to develop into an important archi-
tectural centre. To be sure, Ricchino carried on
at Milan and Bianco at Genoa till after 1650,
but the climax of their activity lay earlier in the
century. When all is said and done, there remain

only three High Baroque architects of more than
average rank outside Rome: Longhena in Ve-
BIBLOSARTE
291
nice, Gherardo Silvani in Florence, and Cosimo we are not on Roman soil. These figures, seem-
Fanzago in Naples. Of these, Longhena seems ingly bending under a heavy load, are the Bar-
to me by far the greatest. In addition, there is oque descendants of Leone Leoni's Mannerist
Guarino Guarini, who must be regarded in atlanteson the facade of the Palazzo degli
many respects as a master of the High Baroque Omenoni at Milan and must be regarded as an
although he belongs to a slightly later genera- important link with the use of the same motif
tion. There is,however, good reason not to in the Austrian and German Baroque. A similar
separate his work from the survey of later mixture of Roman and North Italian ideas is
Piedmontese architecture (p. 403). to be found in Giovan Battista Bergonzoni's
During this period churches, palaces, and (1629-92) S. Maria della Vita, which belongs
villas of intrinsic merit rose in great numbers to the end of the period under discussion. The
all over the country, but historically speaking main body of the church was built between
many of these buildings are 'provincial', since 1686 and 1688, while the oval dome was not
they not only rely on Roman precedent or assis- erected until a century later.*" The derivation
tance but are also often retardataire by Roman from S. Agnese in Piazza Navona is evident in
standards. The Palazzo Ducale at Modena, one tne elevation rather than in the plan [184].
of the largest palaces in Italy, may serve as an While the latter is actually a rectangle with
example. Attributed to the mediocre Bartolo- bevelled corners and shallow transverse chapels,
meo Avanzini {c. 1608-58),"* it is certain that the elevation is treated like a Greek cross, with
at the beginning, between 1631 and 1634, Giro- the arches under the dome resting on projecting
lamo Rainaldi had a leading hand in the plan-
ning; the present palace shows, in fact, a distinct
184. Giovan Battista Bergonzoni:
affinity with Rainaldi's Palazzo Pamphili in the Bologna, S. Maria della Vita, begun 1686. Plan
Piazza Navona. In 1651 Avanzini's design,
based on that of Rainaldi, was submitted to the
criticism of Bernini, Cortona, and Borromini,

and Bernini, stopping atModena in 1665 on
his return from Paris, made further sugges-
tions. Later (1681) Guarini directed the execu-
tion. Ideas of all these masters, and particularly
of Bernini, were certainly incorporated, but it
v\
\\
is doubtful whether the history of the building
s
can ever be fully disentangled.
Bologna, always an important centre of the
arts and always a melting-pot of Central and
North Italian conceptions, provides another
aspect of the situation. Between 1638 and 1658
Bartolomeo Provagha (d. 1672), the architect
of the magnificent Porta Galliera (1661), built
the Palazzo Davia-Bargellini with an austere
and monumental fa9ade, rather unusual for
Bologna, but close to Roman palazzo types.
Only the two free-moving, massive atlantes that
carry the balcony above the entrance show that
BIBLOSARTE
Zi)2 Till. AUh OF Till- UlUll BAROQtt
columns/" A square choir with dome is joined as an ex voto. Longhena won a competition
to the oval main room, and it is this that tallies against .Antonio Fracao and Zambattista Ruber-
with the North Italian type of plan which tini, who had suggested a Latin-cross plan, and,
Ricchino had fully developed in S. Giuseppe at as a memorandum by his hand shows, he was
Milan. Yet in contrast to this church, built half w ell aware and immensely proud of the novelty
a century earlier, the congregational room and of his design. Construction began on 6 Septem-
the choir are here firmly interlocked, for the ber 1 63 1 , and after more than twent} years the
arch as well as the supporting columns belong bulk of the structure was standing though the
to both spaces: they have exactly corresponding consecration did not take place until 1687, five
counterparts at the far end of the choir. Gaetano years after the architect's death. Venice is
Gandolfi and Serafino Barozzi, by painting be- nowadays unthinkable without the picturesque
tween 1776 and 1779 a domed room which ex- silhouette of this church, which dominates the
tends, so it seems, behind the choir, stressed entrance to the Canal Grande; but it would be
only the scenic qualitv contained in the archi- wrong to insist too much on the picturesqueness
tecture itself. of the building, as is usually done, while for-
It was the long established interest of Bolo- getting that this is in ever}- respect one of the
gnese quadratura painters in ever more daring most interesting and subtle structures of the
illusions that found a response in the architects entire seventeenth century. No further creden-
at the end of the century. The staircase hall of tials are, therefore, needed for a detailed
the Palazzo Cloetta-Fantuzzi (1680) by Paolo analysis.
CanaH (1618-80) is a case in point. Two broad The salient feature of the plan is a regular
flights open above into arcades and are lit from octagon surrounded by an ambulatory [185].
both sides under the painted ceiling - a sceno- This seems to be unique in Renaissance and
graphic spectacle which owed nothing to Rome. post-Renaissance architecture, but the type is
A new era was dawning, and later Bolognese of Late Antique ancestry- (S. Costanza, Rome)
architects found here a model that they followed and is common in medieval, particularly Byzan-
and developed in the grand staircase designs ot tine, buildings (S. Vitale, Ravenna). Longhena
the eighteenth century (p. 391). The staircase reverted to these early sources only for the plan
in the Palazzo Cloetta illustrates a volte-face and not for the elevation. The latter is a free
from Rome to Venice. It is a tribute to the adaptation of a well-known North Italian type
genius of Longhena, who was to have a pro- derived from Bramante,^* S. Maria della Salute
found influence on North Italian architecture. differing from the Renaissance models mainly
in the decorative interpretation of the columns.
Instead of continuing the columns of the octa-
Baldassare Longhena {i^g8-i682)
gon into the architecture of the drum, we find
Longhena's span of life corresponds almost a large figure topping the projecting entablature
exactly to that of Bernini, and unquestionably of each column. It is these iconographically
he is the only Venetian architect of the seven- important figures of prophets that turn each
teenth century- who comes close in stature to the column into an isolated unit and at the same
great Romans.^' He left one capital work, S. time emphasize the enclosed centralized cha-
Maria della Salute [185-9], which occupied him racter of the main room. The idea may have
in the midst of his vast activity for most of his come to Longhena from the famous woodcut
working life.^- During the plague of 1630 the in Colonna's Hypnerotomachia Polifili, which
Republic deliberated the erection of a church show s precisely this motif in a section through
BIBLOSARTE
185. Baldassare Longhena:
Venice, S. Maria della Salute,
begun 1 63 1.
Section and plan
BIBLOSARTE
294 ' T"H''- '^f'F. OF TFÊ HIGH BAROQUE
a centralized domed building with ambulatory. to the Palladian tradition with which he was
But the Hyptterotomachia, well known to every linked in a hundred direct and indirect ways.
Venetian, can of course have determined only From Palladio derives the colouristic treat-
the conceptual direction, not the actual archi- ment: grey stone for the structural parts and
tectural planning. For it Longhena used, as whitewash for the walls and fillings. But it
we have seen. Late Antique, medieval and Bra- should be remembered that this was not Pal-
mantesque ideas and wedded them, moreover. ladio's speciahty; it had, in fact, a medieval
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS OF THE HIGH BAROQUE 295
pedigree, was taken up and systematized by rentine procedure, where colour invariably sus-
Brunelleschi, and after him used by most archi- tains a coherent metrical system, Longhena's
tects who were connected with the classical colour scheme is not logical ; colour for him was
Florentine tradition. The architects of the Ro- an optical device which enabled him to support
man Baroque never employed this method of or suppress elements of the composition, there-
differentiation, the isolating effect of which by directing the beholder's vision.
would have interfered with the dynamic rhythms Many details of the Salute are also Palladian,
of their buildings. In contrast, however, to Flo- such as the orders, the columns placed on high
186 and 187. Baldassare Longhena: pedestals (see S. Giorgio Maggiore), and the
Venice, S. Maria della Salute, begun 163 1. segmental windows with mullions in the chapels
View towards the chapels (opposile)
from Roman thermae and
[186], a type derived
and view towards the high altar (above)
introduced by Palladio into ecclesiastical archi-
tecture (S. Giorgio, II Redentore). All these
elements combine to give the Salute the severe
and chaste appearance of a Palladian structure.
BIBLOSARTE
"rirt!;**!? '!'!'":
BIBLOSARTE
297
But it can be shown that Palladio's influence chapels by normal w indows in two tiers. "' Shape
was even more vital. and detail of the sanctuary depend on the Re-
One of Longhena's chief problems consisted dentore, where Palladio had performed a similar
in preserving the octagonal form outside with- change of system between the nave and the
out sacrificing clarity and lucidity inside. By centralized portion.
the seemingly simple device of making the sides A third room, the rectangular choir, is sepa-
of two consecutive pillars parallel to each other, rated from the sanctuary by an arch resting
he succeeded in giving the optically important on pairs of free-standing columns, between
units of the ambulatory and the chapels regular which rises the huge, picturesque high altar.
geometrical shapes/^ entirely in the spirit of Inside the choir the architectural system changes
the Renaissance. The full meaning of this again: two small orders of pilasters are placed
organization is revealed only when one stands one above the other. At the far end of the choir
in the ideal and real centre of the octagon [187]. three small arches appear in the field of vision.^'
Looking from this point in any direction, the Longhena, one is tempted to conclude, simply
spectator will find that entirely homogeneous grouped together isolated spatial units in a
'pictures' always appear in the field of vision.^'' Renaissance-like manner. But this would mean
Longhena's passionate interest in determining opening the door to a serious misinterpretation,
the beholder's field of vision is surely one of the for in actual fact he found a way of unifying
factors which made him choose the proble- these entities by creating scenic connexions
matical octagon with ambulatory rather than between them.
one of the traditional Renaissance designs over From the entrance of the church the columns
a centralized plan. It cannot be emphasized and arch framing the high altar lie in the field
too strongly that no other type of plan allows of vision - it is important that only this motif
only carefully integrated views to be seen ; here and no more is visible - and the beholder is
the eye is not given a chance to wander off and directed to the spiritual centre of the church
make conquests of its own. through a sequence of arches, one behind the
It would seem that the centralization of the other: from the octagon to the ambulatory and
octagon could not have been carried any the altar and, concluding the vista, to the arched
further. Moreover, the sanctuary, which is wall of the choir. Thus, in spite of the Renais-
reached over a few steps, appears only loosely sance-like isolation of spatial entities and in
connected with the octagon. Following the spite of the carefully calculated centralization
North Italian Renaissance tradition of centra- of the octagon, there is a scenic progression
lized plans (Bramante's S. Maria di Canepa- along the longitudinal axis. It is often said that
nova), main room and sanctuary form almost Baroque architecture owes a great deal to the
independent units. For the two large apses of contemporary stage. As regards Roman High
the domed sanctuary Longhcna employed a Baroque architecture, it is correct only with
system entirely different from that of the octa- considerable qualifications, for an architecture
gon: he used giant pilasters instead of columns aiming at dynamic spatial effêcts is intrinsically
and replaced the mullioned windows of the non-scenic. Quite different Longhena: in his
case a specific relation to the stage does exist.
In S. Maria della Salute clearly defined pros-
pects appear one behind the other like wings
188. Baldassare Longhena: on a stage. Instead of inviting the eye - as the

Venice, S. Maria della Salute, begun 1631 Roman Baroque architects did - to glide along
BIBLOSARTE
298 •
the walls and savour a spatial continuum, Lon-

ghena constantly determines the vistas across
the spaces.
It is apparent that the judicious grouping of
self-contained units rather than the Roman con-
cept of dynamic spatial unification was the pre-
condition for a strictly scenographic architec-
ture. This also explains why the Late Baroque
in spite, or just because, of its classicizing ten-
dencies was essentially a scenographic style,
even in Rome.^^
In unifying separate spaces by optical devices,
Longhena once again followed Palladio's lead.
The hall-like nave and the centralized domed
part of the Redentore - entirely separate entities
are knit together optically for the view from
the entrance,^' and it was this principle of scenic
integration that Longhena developed much

further. Thus, based on Palladio, Longhena
had worked out an alternative to the Roman
Baroque. His Venetian Baroque was, in fact,
the only high-class alternative Italy had to offer.

It is not sufficiently realized that in their search
for new values many architects of the late seven-
teenth century turned from Rome to Venice
and embraced Longhena's scenographic con-
cepts.
Like the interior, the picturesque exterior of
S. Maria della Salute was the result of sober
deliberations [188]. The thrust of the large

dome is diverted on to pairs of buttresses (the
scrolls) which rest on the arches of the ambula-
tory. The side walls of the chapels (aligned with
these arches) are therefore abutments to the
dome. It is often maintained that Longhena's
Salute follows closely a design engraved by
Labacco in 1558. This opinion, however, cannot
be accepted without reservation.''" Even if Lon-
ghena was attracted by the large scrolls in
Labacco's engraving, he entirely transformed

them and invented the imaginative decorative
1 89. Baldassare Longhena:
which introduce a luxuriant note into
spirals
Venice, S. Maria della Salute, begun 163 1.
his otherwise austere design. View into the dome
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS OF THE H I (i H BAROQUE 299
The large dome of the Salute has an inner Rome, Longhena has created in the Salute an
[189] and outer vault, the outer one consisting organic whole of outside and inside, a fact which
of lead over wood, in keeping with Venetian an impressionist approach to this kind of build-
custom (including Palladio). While the principal ing tends to obscure. '-
dome ultimately derives from that of St Peter s,''' Centralized buildings with ambulatories re-
the subsidiary dome with its stilted form over a main exceedingly rare in Italy, even after Lon-
simple circular brick drum and framed by two ghena's great masterpiece was there for anybody
campanili follows the Byzantine-Venetian tradi- to see and study. The only other important
tion. The grouping together of a main and a church of this type. Carlo Fontana's Jesuit Sanc-
subsidiary dome fits well into the Venetian cim- tuary at Loyola in Spain, could not, however,
hiente - the domes of S. Marco are quite near - have been designed without the model of S.
but never before had the silhouette been so Maria della Salute.''' Thus a Late .Antique plan,
boldly enriched by the use of entirely different common in Byzantine architecture, revised in
types of domes and drums in one and the same seventeenth-century Venice, was taken up by a
building. No less important than the aspect of Roman architect and transplanted to Spain.
the domes from a distance is the near view of Longhena's other works in Venice and on the
the lower zone from the Canal Grande. From terra fermii can hardly vie with his magnum opus.
here the chapels right and left of the main This is true of his two other large churches, the
entrance are conspicuous. They are therefore early cathedral at Chioggia (1624-47)''' ^nd S.
elaborately treated like little church facades in Maria degli Scalzi in Venice (begun 1656);^'
their own right; in fact they are clever adapta- the latter, a simple hall structure with large
tions of the small front of Palladio's Chiesa central chapels, stimulated a considerable num-
delle Zitelle. Their small order is taken up in ber of later church plans. As characteristic for
the gigantic triumphal arch motif of the main one facet of his late style we may mention the
entrance. It is this motif that sets the seal on immensely rich fa9ade of the little Chiesa del-
the entire composition. rOspedaletto near SS. Giovanni e Paolo (1670-
The central arch with the framing columns 8),'^" where the structure seems submerged
corresponds exactly to the interior arches of under glittering sculptural decoration. In his
the octagon, so that the theme is given before many palaces we find him slowly turning away
one enters the church. In addition, the small from the dry classicism of his teacher Scamozzi^'
order also repeats the one inside, and the niches and evolving a typically Venetian High Baroque
for statues in two tiers conform to the windows manner by a premeditated regression to San-
in the sanctuary. And more than this : the facade sovino's High Renaissance palaces. The formula
is, in fact, devised like a scenae frons, and with of rusticated ground floor, ample use of columns
the central door thrown wide open, as shown in the upper storeys, and a far-reaching dis-
in a contemporary engraving, the consecutive solution of wall surface suited him perfectly.
sequence of arches inside the church, contained His final triumph of sculptural accentuation.
by the triumphal arch, conjures up a proper Baroque monumentality, and luminous rich-
stage setting. It can hardly be doubted that the ness will be found in the celebrated Palazzi
scenae frons of Palladio's Teatro Olimpico had Rezzonico and Pesaro [190],'*" which fully ex-
a decisive formative influence on Longhena's pose his debt to Sansovino's Palazzo Corner
thought. In a sense entirely different from Cor- and, to a lesser extent, Sanmicheli's Palazzo
tona's, Borromini's, and Bernini's churches in Grimani. Thus, measured by Roman standards
I BIBLOSARTE
300 • THE AGE OF THE lIKill BAROQUE
190. Baldassare Longhena;

Venice, Palazzo Pesaro, 1652/9-1710
of the 1 660s, these splendid palaces must be that in 1633 Grand Duke Ferdinand II planned
regarded as retrogressive. On the other hand, to execute Dosio's model of 1 587 for the fa9ade
in the staircase hall of the monastery of S. of the cathedral. The members of the Accademia
Giorgio Maggiore (1643-5) [iQiJi where two del Disegno opposed this idea - not because
parallel flights ascend along the walls to a com- they regarded Dosio's project as too tame, but
mon landing, Longhena once rgain proved his because, in their view, he had not sufficiently
consummate skill as a master of scenic archi- taken into account the older parts of the cathe-
tecture. This staircase hall is far in advance of dral. They produced a counter-project which,
its time; it made a deep impression on archi- in contrast to the classical dignity of Dosio's
tects, particularly in northern Italy, and was model, suffers from a breaking down of their
taken up and developed north of the Alps. design into many petty motifs. At the same
moment, in 1635, Gherardo Silvani,who had
grand-ducal support, made a model of his own
Florence and Naples: Silvani and Fanzago
(lUuseo deirOpera, Florence) which was in fact
It is characteristic of the situation in Florence an improvement on the Academy project. In his
after the first quarter of the seventeenth century design Silvani combined mildly Baroque deco-
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHlTEt rURAL CLRKtNTS Ol Tilt HIGH UAROQUE •
jOI
191. Baldassarc Longhena: Venice,

Monastery of S. Giorgio Maggiore. Staircase, 1643-5
rative features with neo-Gothic elements bor- In spite of such conservative and antiquarian
rowed from Giotto's Campanile. Yet the weaker tendencies, Gherardo Silvani (1579 1673)'''
and more conformist Academy model was gave Florence and other Tuscan cities (Vol-
chosen. Execution, however, never went be- terra, Prato, Pisa, etc.) buildings of considerable
yond the initial stages.^" distinction. For over fifty years he was in full
It is clear that in the antiquarian climate of command of the situation; he had an extra-
Florence there was no room for a free Baroque ordinary capacity for work, and the list of his
development. The enlargement of the Palazzo creations is very long. His best known ecclesi-
Pitti is another case in point. In two campaigns, astical work is S. Gaetano, in the construction
the first starting in 1620 and the second in 1631, of which Nigetti is traditionally given too great
Giulio Parigi enlarged the palace from its origi- a share."- The impressive facade [192] comes
nal six bays to its present width of twenty-five closer to a High Baroque design than any other
bays. His simple device of repeating the building in Florence. But one should not be
Quattrocento parts was preferred to Pietro da misled by the use of a massive pediment, by
Cortona's vigorous designs for the remodelling the bold projections, and the accumulation of
of the entire palace front. "" sculpturally conceived architectural forms in
BIBLOSARTE
302 Till: AGK OF rilK HKiH BAROgi !•-
buildings.'"' The wide nave with three chapels

to each side separated by pillars with niches for
statues above them owes its effect to the sophisti-
cated colour scheme: the white reliefs on the

pillars and the white statues above them,'"' sil-
houetted against the blue-grey pietra serena

architecture, combine to give an impression of
aristocratic restraint. Nothing could be further
removed from contemporary Roman buildings
such as Borromini's S. CarHno.
Silvani's palaces, with their unadorned plaster
fronts, simple string courses, and overhanging
wooden roofs are Tuscan counterparts to the
severe Roman palace type such as Maderno's

Palazzo Mattei (e.g. Palazzi Covoni, 1623, and
Fenzi, 1634). Only the central axis is given
emphasis by a projecting balcony with a richly
designed balustrade and, in the case of the
Palazzo Fenzi, by the superb portal with Raffaele
Curradi's Harpies.''^
Seicento architecture at Naples would seem
at the farthest remove from that of Florence,
for Naples under her Spanish rulers with their
native love for the plateresque witnessed the
rise of a decorative style of dazzling richness
and most intense polychromy produced by in-
192. Gherardo Silvani:
laid coloured marbles.'"' But to see the Tuscan
Florence, S. Gaetano. Facade, 1645
and the Neapolitan Seicento in terms of abso-
lute contrasts is somewhat misleading; struc-
comparatively narrow spaces: the structure it- turally, the architecture of Naples is much
self, based on a simple rhythm of pilasters (the closer to that of Florence than to that of Rome
double pilasters framing the central bay are this is revealed by such an important work as
repeated in the upper tier), takes up the theme Cosimo Fanzago's large chiostro of the Certosa
of Giovanni de' Medici's cathedral model of of S. Martino (1623-31)*'' with its elegant ar-
1587, and while the three doors under their cades which would not be out of place in
aedicule frames are derived from Dosio, other fifteenth-century Florence. Fanzago's range is,
features point to an influence of Buontalenti's however, very wide. One need only step inside
cathedral model. A good deal of the decoration, from the courtyard to come face to face with
in fact, consists of an ebullient reworking of his exuberant decorative Baroque [193], show-
Buontalenti motifs. But much of the decoration ing his characteristic Neapolitan style fully
belongs to the late seventeenth century, and it developed.
is this that gives the facade its flickering Late In Fanzago (i 591 -1678)'"* Naples had a Bar-
Baroque quality. The interior shows the noble oque master who must be ranked very high, if
reserve typical of the best Florentine Seicento not always for the quality, at least for the ver-
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURAL CURRENTS OF THE HIGH BAROQUE 303
satility of his talent. Longevity, an incredible sculptor - in 1612 he calls himself 'maestro di
stamina, facility of production, and inexhaus- scultura di marmo' - he makes his debut as an
tible reserves of energy these are some of the architect probably in 16 17 with the design of S.
characteristics of this tough generation. Bernini Giuseppe dei Vecchi a S. Potito (finished 1669).
died aged eighty-two, Longhena eighty-four, It is here that he first planned a Greek-cross
church, a scheme to which he returned in one
form or another in most of his later churches.'"''
But since he stressed the main axis, the centrali-
zation of these plans is usually not complete.

Although he thus carried over into the High
Baroque an essentially Mannerist conflict (p.
118), his high domes produce a new and decisive
concentration. Only S. Maria Egiziaca (1651-
17 1 7) [194J is a true Greek cross and departs
altogether from the more traditional plans of
his other churches. The plan of this, Fanzago's
finest church, is so close to that of S. Agnese in
Rome that a connexion must be assumed. In
addition, the design of the dome seems to be
derived from Bernini's S. .\ndrea al Quirinale
and the convex portico from other Roman
models. But if the date 1651 is correct, Fanzago
would have anticipated later Roman concep-
tions. Since building proceeded very slowly,
one would prefer to believe that he adjusted his
design after having become acquainted with the
193. Cosimo Fanzago: most recent Roman events. However, the ex-
Naples, S. Martino. Cloisters, detail, 1630
treme economy in detail and the emphasis laid
on structural parts by painting them slightly off-

Fanzago eighty-seven, and Silvani ninety-six. white (polychromy is reserved for the high altar)
In Rome, Venice, Florence, and Naples artistic help to produce an imposing effect of simplicity,
events till the last quarter of the seventeenth which is entirely un-Roman.
century were largely determined by these artists. The phenomenon that Fanzago was capable of
But Fanzago's position can be compared only such a design is revealing, for it shows that orna-
with that of Bernini, for like the greater man ment was for him, in Alberti's phrase, 'some-
he too was a master of all-round performance, thing added and fastened on, rather than proper
being architect, sculptor, decorator, and even and innate'. It is precisely this that makes one
painter. Unlike Bernini, however, who had to aware of the deep gulf between Fanzago's and
struggle all his life against the competition of Borromini's architecture although certain of
first-rate artists, Fanzago's supremacy at Naples Fanzago's decorative features [193] are reminis-
seems to have been almost unchallenged. He cent of the great Roman master. None of
was bom in October 1591 at Clusone near Ber- Fanzago's designs betray dynamic concepts of
gamo, and settled as early as 1608 in Naples, planning'" on the contrary, he is tied to certain
where he lived with an uncle. Trained as a academic patterns, and a search for a con-
BIBLOSARTE
304 •
Tin; A(iF. OK THI HKill liAROQLt
tinuous development from project to project

will therefore be disappointing. This is, how-
ever, not true so far as his facades for churches
and palaces are concerned; for they provided

large scope for a display of imaginative com-
binations. Here it is easy to follow the change
from the severe classicism of the portico of the
Chiesa dellWscensione (1622), still dependent
on Domenico Fontana, to the rich facade of
S. Maria della Sapienza (1638-41),^' which in
spite of complexities remains classically acade-

mic, and further to the facade of S. Giuseppe
degli Scalzi with its decorative profusion and
accumulation of incongruous elements - an
early example of a Late Baroque composition,
if the traditional date 1660 is correct. Taking
also into account such strange compound crea-
tions as the Guglia di S. Gennaro (1631-60)
with its surprising mixture of Mannerist and
Baroque features, or the vast Palazzo Donn'
Anna (1642-4),"- bristling with personal though
perhaps provincial re-interpretations of tradi-
tional motifs (never finished, and left a ruin
after the earthquake of 1688), or the decorative
abundance of the powerful portal of the Palazzo
Maddaloni - one will find that Fanzago mas-
tered in the long course of his immensely
active life the whole gamut of Seicento possi-
bilities from Early Baroque classicism to the
pictorial effervescence of the Late Baroque."
While the prevailing inter-Italian classicism of

the first quarter of the seventeenth century had
an impersonal quality, the architectural trends
of the next fiftv^ years are as many as there are
names of great architects. It will be granted

that in spite of the numerous cross-currents,
Rainaldi's, Longhena's, Silvani's, and Fan-
zago's buildings have as much or as little in
common as those of a Bernini and a Borromini.

Nevertheless, the generic term 'High Baroque'
194. Cosimo Fanzago:
Naples, S. Maria Egiziaca, 165 1- 17 17. retains its value, if only to circumscribe the age
Section and plan of the great individualistic creators.
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 13
TRENDS IN HIGH BAROQ.UE SCULPTURE
ROME in Florence with Pietro Tacca, settled in Rome

together with his compatriot Francesco Baratta,
The First Generation
and soon attracted Bernini's attention. When,
High Baroque sculpture came into its own with in 1629, the commissions for the four giant
the full expansion of Bernini's studio. This, statues in the pillars of St Peter's were placed,
however, did not happen until the mid 1640s, Bernini recommended him in preference to
when Bernini had to face the gigantic task of Finelli. This virtually spelt the end of Finelli's
decorating the pilasters and chapels of St career in Rome; and although he was not with-
Peter's.' The building up of the studio began, out work' (mainly due to the good offices of
of course, at a much earlier date. It was the Pietro da Cortona) he soon went back to Naples,
Baldacchino [86] that first required extensive where he built up a large practice' in spite of
help by other hands. In addition to the old Cosimo Fanzago's attempts to get rid of the
Stefano Maderno, some promising sculptors of dangerous rival. While in Naples Finelli main-
Bernini's own generation found employment tained contact with Rome; and it was from
here his brother Luigi, Stefano Speranza,
: Du- Naples that he sent to Rome the tomb of
quesnoy, Giuhano Finelli, Andrea Bolgi, and Cardinal Domenico Ginnasi, to which we shall
the younger Giacomo Antonio Fancelli. Not return later. In his youth, Finelli had thoroughly
much need be said about Luigi Bernini; he al- absorbed Bernini's grand manner. In Naples
ways remained a devoted amanuensis of his he progressively lost his sense for the finesse
great brother, supported him in a number of and subtlety of texture ; his style became hard
enterprises (mainly in St Peter's), and never and coarse. This cannot be regarded simply as a
showed a personal style.- Nor shall I discuss degeneration into provincialism of a talented
Stefano Speranza. Bernini used him over a artist removed from the spiritual centre, Rome;
number of years and his only doubtful claim to it is after all what happened mutatis mutandis to
fame is the weak and retrogressive relief on the the work of a great many artists during the
sarcophagus of the Matilda monument. Finelli 1 630s and 40s, but in most cases the 'petrifac-
and Bolgi on the other hand were, after the tion' lay in the direction of a strengthened
great masters, the most distinguished sculptors classicism. After his return to Rome at the end
of this generation. of his life, Finelli went even further in the same
Giuliano Finelli (1601-57) arrived in Rome direction. Like Mochi in his last phase, he en-
in 1622 and was immediately taken on by Ber- tirely lost interest in pleasing, warm, or sensuous
nini as his first studio hand.' He did not come surface qualities."
direct from his home town Carrara, but from While Finelli worked fast in Naples, execut-
Naples, where he had studied sculpture under ing considerable commissions, the sluggish
Naccherino. Finelli's association with Bernini Bolgi, the driest among Bernini's proteges, spent
lasted only a few years; in 1626 another Carra- the better part of ten years on his statue of St
rese, Andrea Bolgi (1605-56), who had worked Helena (1629-39) [195]' Its classicizing cool-
BIBLOSARTE
1653 Bolgi went to Naples, and some of his

work there shows a rather forced attempt to
emulate Bernini's vigorous Baroque of the mid
century.'
Among the remaining sculptors of this gene-
ration has been mentioned the unstable Fran-
cesco Baratta {c. 1590- 1666), author of the
relief above the altar in the Cappella Raimondi,
S. Pietro in Montorio, and of one of the giant
figures (Rio della Plata) on the Four Rivers
Fountain in the Piazza Navona. Finally, Nicolo
Menghini {c. 1610-65) should be recorded; he
worked for Bernini in St Peter's during the
1640s and restored classical statues in the Pa-
lazzo Barberini. His name survives as the artist
of the unsatisfactory figure of S. Martina (1635)
under the high altar of SS. Martina e Luca, one
of the many recumbent statues of martyrs de-
pendent on Stefano Maderno's St Cecilia.^"
This survey has shown that, apart from Ber-

nini, Algardi, and Duquesnoy, in the second
quarter of the seventeenth century the number
195. Andrea Bolgi: St Helena, 1629-39. of gifted sculptors in Rome was small. Of course,
Rome, Si Peter's
it must not be forgotten that the aged Mochi
lived and worked throughout this period, and
ness, its boring precision and slow linear rhythm that Stefano Maderno died only in 1636. It is
would seem to run counter to Bernini's dynamic apparent that for the greatest task of the second
conception of mass, of which an echo may be quarter, the giant statues in the pillars under
felt in the great sweep of the mantle. One might the dome of St Peter's, Bernini, Duquesnoy,
therefore rashly conclude that Bernini and Bolgi and Mochi were the obvious choice; for the
had parted company. On the contrary, however, fourth figure the choice lay between Finelli and
Bolgi's style shows remarkable affinities to Ber- Bolgi, no better masters being at hand since
nini's work at this period. The St Helena is in Algardi's reputation had not yet been suffi-
fact so close to Bernini's Countess Matilda ciently established. This situation changed con-
(1633-7) that the latter has often been ascribed siderably about the middle of the century. The
to Bolgi. We have seen (p. 150) that during the next generation was rich in talent, though there
1 630s Bernini himself made concessions to the was none who approached in quality and impor-
classical ideals held by the Poussin-Sacchi tance the pathfinders of the High Baroque.
circle. It is therefore understandable that at this
period he regarded Bolgi as one of his most
The Second Generation
reliable assistants.'" He still employed him in
St Peter's throughout the 1640s; but by then a .\mong the many young sculptors working in
new generation had arisen which responded 1650, there are three or four who stand out
enthusiastically to Bernini's new ideas. Before either bv the intrinsic merits of their work or
BIBLOSARTE
TRENDS IN HIGH BAROQUE SCULPTURE •
307
196. iMelchiorre Caffa: The Ecstasy of St Catherine, 1Q7. Melchiorre Caffa: St Thomas ot \ illanova
finished 1667. distributing Alms, 1661.

Rome, S. Caterma da Siena a Monte Magnanapoli Terracotta model. La Valletta, .Museum
as heads of large studios. Their names are Ercole relief of 5/ Eustace in the Lion's Den (S. Agnese
Ferrata (1610-86), the oldest of this group, in Piazza Navona), and the recumbent figure of
Antonio Raggi (1624-86), and Domenico Guidi St Rosa in S. Domingo at Lima, Peru.'- These
(1625-1701). The fourth sculptor who should works, all of considerable size, were executed
here be mentioned is Ferrata's pupil Mel- concurrently over a number of years; but it
chiorre Caffa. Born in Malta as late as 1635, seems that only the St Catherine was entirely
Cafta really belongs to a Late Baroque genera- finished by Caffa himself before his death." The
tion. But he was extremely precocious and died saint, in mystic exaltation, is carried heaven-
at the early age of thirty-two (in 1667)" - too wards on clouds supported by angels. Higher up
young to carry the style over into its new phase. the sky opens (i.e., in the lantern), and a crowd
Without any doubt, he was the most gifted of of angels and putti play in the heavenly Hght,
the younger sculptors, and nobody came as out of which the Trinity floats down in a radiant
close as he did to the exalted style of Bernini's glorv to receive the saint. The thaumaturgic
later period. The principal works which he exe- character of the mystery has been emphasized
cuted in the short span of less than ten years are by contrasting the white marble of the saint and
quickly mentioned; they are the Ecstasy of St her angelic companions with the multicoloured
Catherine in the choir of S. Caterina da Siena marble background
a Monte Magnanapoli [196], St Thomas ofVil- It seems certain that the whole dhoir was to
lanova distributing Alms (S. Agostino) [197], the form a grand unit comprising reliefs along the
BIBLOSARTE
side walls, which death prevented him from fathers of the Cathedra, and the 'Charity' to the
executing.'^ Caffa utilized fully the ideas of corresponding group on the tomb of Urban
Bernini's Cornaro Chapel and, indeed, no other VIII.'" But once again these figures display a
work is so close in spirit to the St Teresa. There hypersensitive spirituality, in comparison with
is, however, a significant difference between which Bernini's works appear solid, firm and
master and disciple: an almost morbid sensi- virile.
bility emanates from the relief of St Catherine, Apart from technical skill, Caffa could have
and this can never be said of any of Bernini's learned little from his infinitely less subtle
works. This difference seems to be one of teacher, Ercole Ferrata, who was bom at Pel-
generation rather than of personal temperament, sotto, near Como, and worked at Naples"' and
for the younger artist was able to use freely those -Aquila before settling in Rome. What has
formulas of expression which the older one had survived of his early work is provincial and of
to create. little interest. He was already middle-aged when
The Ecstasy of St Catherine belongs to the we find him in Rome, working under Bernini on
new Berninesque category of a pictorial group the marble decoration of the pillars of St Peter's
attached to the wall. In his St Thomas of (1647). Contran,- to a persistent tradition, he
Villanova Cafta produced a free-standing group cannot have executed one of the allegories for
which is closely integrated with the entire Algardi's tomb of Leo XI, nor is it certain that
scheme of the chapel. The work forms the centre he collaborated on the Attila By 1653 his relief.
of a large sculptured 'altarpiece', the wings of reputation was such that Bernini entrusted him
which consist of reliefs by Andrea Bergondi with the most important figure on the tomb of
{c. 1760) showing scenes from the life of the Cardinal Pimentel in S. Maria sopra Minerva -
saint. Unlike Algardi's Beheading of St Paul that of the Cardinal himself. Ferrata was given
[167], where two isolated figures are deployed preference here over the younger Antonio
in the same plane, Caffa's composition not only Raggi and the less distinguished Giovan Anto-
ties together very closely the saint and the woman nio Mari, each of whom executed one of the
receiving alms, but by placing the latter outside allegories in full relief.^' A year or two later he
the central niche and turning her towards the had the main share in continuing, after Algardi's
saint, he has made her function as a link between death, the latter's work for S. Nicolo da Tolen-
real life and the fictitious world of art. Instead of tino, to which Guidi and Francesco Baratta also
adoring a cult image, the poor who pray here are contributed. During the following fifteen years
stimulated to identify themselves with the Bernini showed his appreciation of Ferrata's
recipient of the alms and to participate in the skill by employing him on a number of great
charitable work of the Church 'in action'. But undertakings;'" in spite of such close contacts,
the female figure is not an anonymous woman of however, Ferrata never fully absorbed Bernini's
the people - by an act of poetical identification dynamic style but tended towards a classicism of
of the donor with the recipient, she appears Algardian derivation.
herself in the traditional role of Charity. For the Characteristic works by Ferrata are in S.
composition of his group Caffa followed a .\gnese in Piazza Navona, where one can study
pictorial model, namely Romanelli's painting of the different manners of the four masters with
the same scene in the Convent of S. Agostino. whom we are at present concerned. Ferrata's
The figures, by contrast, take their cue from free-standing statue of St Agnes on the Pyre
Bernini, as the very attractive terracotta model (1660) [198] recalls in certain respects Duques-
[197] shows: the saint is indebted to the church nov's St Susanna, for here too the dress is
BIBLOSARTE
TRENDS IN HIGH BAROQUE SCULPTURE 309
Ercole Ferrata tgq. Ercole Ferrata: The Stoning of S. Emerenziana,

St Agnes on the Pyre, 1660. begun 1660 (finished by Leonardo Retti,
Rome, S. Agnese in Piazza Navona 1689-1709). Rome. S. Agnese in Piazza Navona
relatively unruffled and supports the structure alien to the form and spirit of the statue and is
of the body, while the head derives as much a revealing pointer to the derivative qualit}' of
from Duquesnoy as from classical Niobids. Ferrata's art.
But no artist working in 1660 in Bernini's orbit The study of a relief, the large Stoning ofS.
could return to Duquesnoy's classical purity' of Emerenziana in the same church (begun 1660)
1630. Following the example of Bernini's [199J, leads to similar conclusions. In accord-
statues of saints, Ferrata represented a tran- ance with current classical theory (p. 263)
sitory moment; we witness a dramatic climax: Ferrata composed his work with a minimum
the power of her prayer makes the saint im- number of figures, each clearly diflerentiated by
mune against the leaping flames. The gesture action, gesture, and expression. The clean and
of the extended arms, the painterly treatment of simple tripartite arrangement with the attackers
the fire, the wind-swept gown - all these create on the right, the frightened people on the left,
a formal and emotional unrest, strongly con- and the saint isolated in the centre seems to
trasting with the purist tendencies of the 1630s. result from a dogmatic application of Algardi's
Along the left side of the figure will be noticed principles. While the type of the saint again
an autonomous piece of drapery, which Ferrata shows a close study of Duquesnoy's Susanna,
borrowed from Bernini's Longinus. The motif and while certain figures are evidently inspired
is only a weak echo of the original; it remains bv the Attila relief, Ferrata reverts for the
BIBLOSARTE
310 • THE AGE or THE HIGH BAROQUE
figures of the attackers to the most classical of

Baroque painters, Domenichino, whose Stoning
of St Stephen (now at Chantilly) must have been
known to him.'' 'i"he reader may have noticed
that the sculptural principles displayed in the
upper half of the relief contrast with those of the
lower half The figures - particularly that of the
huge shapeless angel not only have different

proportions, small heads and elongated bodies,
but masses of picturesque drapery conceal the
structure of the bodies, and the diffuse silhou-
ettes entirely lack Ferrata's clarity and pre-
cision. It is evident that Ferrata was not respon-
sible for this part of the relief; after his death it
was handed over to Leonardo Retti,-" who

finished it between 1689 and 1709, and only in
this year were the two parts of the rehef joined.

Retti, Ferrata's pupil, worked many years under
Raggi; thus the stylistic difference in the two
halves of the Emerenziana relief is characteristic
200. Antonio Raggi:
of the two different tendencies represented by
The Death of St Cecilia, 1660-7. Detail.
Ferrata and Raggi and even more of the Rome, S. Agiiese in Piazza Navona
chronological change from theHigh Baroque to
the picturesque and discursive manner of the deserve special mention: the relief with the
Late Baroque. Death of St Cecilia in S. Agnese (1660 7)
In certain respects, Antonio Raggi represents [200], the large Baptism of Christ on the high
the opposite pole to Ferrata. If Ferrata is the altar of S. Giovanni dei Fiorentini {c. 1665), the
Algardi, Raggi is the Bernini of the second vast cycle of stucco decorations in the clerestory
generation. Fourteen years younger than Fer- of the nave and transept of the Gesii (1669-83)
rata, he also was bom in the region of Como, at [201], the relief and statues of the Cappella
Vico Morcote; in contrast to Ferrata, he went to Ginetti in S. Andrea della Valle (1671-5), and
Rome in early youth and joined Algardi's finally, at the beginning of the 1680s, the
studio. Little is known of his activity under Gastaldi monument and the decoration of the
Algardi-' and, like Ferrata, we meet him first in high altar in S. Maria de' Miracoli.
1647 engaged under Bernini on the decoration It is difficult to give an adequate idea of the
of the pilasters of St Peter's. Subsequently he high quality of Raggi's sculpture without illus-
became Bernini's most intimate and most pro- trating many details.-'' His genius was particu-
lific pupil, and with the exception of Caffa there larly suited to work in stucco, and the marble
was nobody who so fully absorbed the master's relief in S. Agnese is perhaps not his most
grand manner. In addition to his extensive engaging performance. But it commands special
activity under Bernini over a period of thirty interest for a number of reasons. Originally,
years,— Raggi carried on independent work ot Giuseppe Peroni {c. 1626-63), o"^ of the closest
great importance, among which the following collaborators of Algardi, was commissioned
BIBLOSARTE
with the reUef (1660). Peroni died when the full-
scale model was finished. Raggi, who was asked

to take over, appears not to have entirely
discarded Peroni's preparatory work; the left
half of the relief in particular, with the standing

figure of Pope Urban (who was present when
the martyr saint died surrounded by Christians)
and his kneeling attendant, corresponds closely
to Algardi's Attila relief Here, too, we find the
division in the centre, and the differentiation

between the calm faith of the pope and the
emotional crowd on the right. This is as far as
Algardi's influence goes. Raggi's individual
manner is apparent in the extremely elongated
proportions of the figures, their slender build
and elegant movements,-^ as well as in the fall
of the draperies, which betray a nervous and

restless temperament. This restlessness is also
noticeable in the grouping of the figures. Unlike

Ferrata, Raggi rejected the lesson to be learned
201. Antonio Raggi:
from Domenichino, whose classically poised
Allegorical Figures, 1669-83.
fresco of the same subject in S. Luigi dei Fran- Rome. Gesii. clerestory of nave
cesi is not much farther than a stone's throw
from S. Agnese. Compared with the lucid dis- prevent a commission's being transferred from
position of Ferrata's Emerenziana relief, the the follower of one master to that of the other.
figures in Raggi's work appear crowded together In his later work, especially in his stuccoes,
in complicated, almost confused groups which Raggi vielded wholly to the mystical late style of
reveal his disregard for the classical dogma of Bernini, and this phase in his development is
clarity expressed through a minimum number best studied in the Gesii [201]. According to
of figures. On the other hand, the beautiful angel contemporary sources, GauUi, the painter of
with the martyr's palm, thoroughly Berninesque the frescoes, was also responsible for the design
and obviously derived from the contemporary of the stuccoes. Whether this is entirely or only
glory of angels on the Cathedra, shows the partly true, Raggi's stuccoes are a perfect sculp-
sweetness and tenderness of feeling charac- tural parallel to Gaulli's intense response to
teristic of Raggi's art. These qualities, perhaps Bernini's fervent, spiritualized late manner.
less obvious in other parts of the relief, can be The tempestuous movement and rapture of
observed in a great number of his works and Raggi's jubilant putti on clouds, set into panels
often seem like anticipations of the lighter above the cornice of the nave and transept,
charms of the eighteenth century. The story of must be understood as reactions to the main
Raggi's St Cecilia relief illustrates the futility of subject of the ceiling - the fresco of the Adora-
attempting a rigid separation of the Berninesque tion of the Name of Jesus. As types, these putti
from the .\lgardesque current; at the time such owe not a little to Duquesnoy, but no greater
contrasts were not of sufficient consequence to contrast to the soothing composure of the latter's
BIBLOSARTE
312 •
creations could be imagined. Higher up, flank- his career really began when, at the age of
ing the windows, are allegories-* of monu- twenty-two, he fled to Rome at the time of
mental size, wildly gesticulating or in attitudes Masaniello's revolt and joined the studio of
of deep devotion and contemplation, clad in Algardi. There he remained as a favourite pupil
draperies that seem to follow their own laws, until the latter's death in 1654, after which he
wind-blown, rearing, twisting, and zigzagging established an independent studio and evolved
across the figures. Although many of them a rule-of-thumb method for quick success. He
disclose a real understanding of the late Bernini, surrounded himself with a staff" of mere crafts-
it will be found that others must be regarded men, and with their help he was able to work
as an anticlimax, since virtuosity replaces spiri- more quickly and more cheaply than the pro-
tuality. In other words, in this cycle of figures fessori whom he despised. By such methods,
the decorative quality of the Late Baroque Guidi managed to pour out a stream of works,
appears side by side with the purposeful ten- not only for Rome and the rest of Italy,-' but
sion of the High Baroque. also for Germany, France, Spain, and Malta.
With the exception of the sculptural decora- His early works, such as the monument to
tion of St Peter's, which was carried out by Natale Rondinini in S. Maria del Popolo (1657),
many hands over a period of 1 50 years, there is are dry versions of Algardi's prototypes. During
no other Baroque sculptural cycle in Rome that the 1 650s and 60s he still shows interest in solid
bears comparison with Raggi's, executed in the and careful execution, but his productions dur-
short span of little more than a decade. In order ing the last quarter of the century display, with
to accomplish this tour de force, Raggi had to few exceptions, an unpleasant crudeness and
use assistants on an extensive scale, and this rigidity. His figures become stocky and are
may account for the differences in quality. The criss-crossed by angularly broken masses of
allegories on the right-hand side of the nave drapery. It was he who was mainly responsible
are on the whole weaker than the ones on the for the change from the Roman High Baroque
left; they seem to be by Leonardo Retti, whose to the new Late Baroque idiom - a change well
large share in the decoration of the Gesii is well illustrated in his large relief over the altar of the
attested. Other collaborators were Michele Cappella Monte di Pieta (1667-76) [202]. In
Maglia (right transept) and the worthy Paolo this work, Algardi's painterly relief style has
Naldini, who was thoroughly trained in Ber- been submitted to an interesting transforma-
nini's studio and was mentioned by Bernini tion. Compared with other works by Guidi,
himself as the best sculptor in Rome after the composition, rising in a great curve from
Antonio Raggi.-'' the kneeling Magdalen at the right bottom cor-
Ferrata and Raggi stand for rival trends with- ner to the figure of God the Father at the top, is
out being antagonists. The case of Domenico not without merits; but there is no discrimina-
Guidi is different. It is characteristic of him tion between the degrees of spiritual importance
that he never went through Bernini's school; of the holy personages, nor are the single figures
and he was probably the only important artist sufficiently articulated to enable the beholder
of his generation whose services were rarely to follow their movements with confidence and
sought by Bernini. In addition, he did not often ease, or even to decide whether drapery belongs
participate in common undertakings with Fer- to one figure or to another. And no longer are
rata and Raggi but concentrated on building the superhuman and the human sphere sepa-
up a large clientele of his own. Bom in Carrara, rated. The plane of the relief is covered by
he followed his uncle Giuliano FineUi to Naples; figures without much qualifying diffêrentiation.
BIBLOSARTE
313
ties between Guidi and Algardi as regards in-
dividual forms and types, the slackened tension

of the former's work is characteristic of a new-
period in which the passion of the High Baroque
has grown cold.The breaking-down of the High
Baroque sense of unity and drama may be ob-
served not only in other works by Guidi but
also, of course, in contemporary productions
in the other arts. Guidi himself played a leading
part in effecting this transition, of which hardly
an indication was to be found in the works of
Ferrata and Raggi.
Tumbs with the Effigy in Prayer
Before turning to the minor masters of this

period, we may single out for special considera-
most common type of the High Baroque
tion the
tomb showing the portrait of the deceased, who

turns in devotional attitude towards the altar.
The best-known tomb of this type is that of the
physician Gabriele Fonseca, one of the most
moving works of the late Bernini {c. 1668-75,
S. Lorenzo in Lucina) [203]. Fonseca's fervent
devotion and spiritual surrender are called forth
202. Domenico Guidi by the mystery of the Annunciation, painted

Lamentation over the Body of Christ, 1667-76. above the altar; thus an intangible bond be-
Rome, Cappella Monte di Pieta tween Fonseca and the altar bridges the space
in which the beholder moves. This idea first
resulting in a flickering farrago of plastic form. occurs in tombs of the fifteenth century, and
Algardi had worked back into depth starting from then on may be found in Spain, France,
from the principal figures, which stand out al- Germany, and the Low Countries.-* With the
most three-dimensionally and thus hold the exception of Spanish Naples, however, the type
interest of the spectator. Guidi, by contrast, was rare in Italy, and it was not until well into
gave most of the figures equal relief projections, the sixteenth century that the bust with praying
leading to a neutralization of the dramatic focus. hands turned towards the altar began to appear
It is mainly this change from a painterly, illu- in Rome. The series starts with the impressive
sionistic rehef conception to a 'picturesque' Elena Savelli by Giacomo del Duca in S. Gio-
one, reminiscent of Late Antique sarcophagi, vanni in Laterano ( 1 570)-' and leads on, before
that accounts for the unaccentuated distribution the end of the century, to such works as Val-
of sculptural form over the surface. soldo's simple and sturdy Cardinal Giovan
Looking back from the new position, Algardi's Girolamo Albani in S. Maria del Popolo ( 1 59 )?°
Attila relief seems to have a powerful, dynamic Bernini first took up the type in his early bust
quality. And although there are always close of Cardinal Bellarmine (1622, Gesii), whose
BIBLOSARTE
V9
BIBLOSARTE
315
half open as if murmuring a prayer. Thus while listen, prepare themselves for prayer, or are
the stone image of the dead appears in the absorbed in colloquy about the eucharistic
attitude of everlasting adoration, a transient miracle on the altar [205]; proceeding towards
moment in his relationship with the Divine has the altar, he finds himself face to face with
been caught. This was the end of the develop-
ment, and in future the type could only be
varied. Bernini's Fonseca complied with it, and
numberless busts in Roman chapels testify to a
trend of devout piet)' during the Catholic Res-
toration. Such works began to become rarer,
however, with the slackening of religious fer-
vour at the end of the seventeenth century.

Before this happened the theme was ex-
tended, and in Gesu e Maria an entire church
instead of a chapel became the field of action
for the deceased. Giorgio Bolognetti, Bishop
of Rieti, commissioned the work. He financed
the splendid decoration and had the whole
church turned into a kind of mausoleum for
members of his family. Carlo Rainaldi unified
the entire space not only architecturally but

also colouristically; its black, brown, and red-
dish marbles, interrupted by the flicker of the 205. Francesco Aprile: Model for the tombs
of Pietro and Francesco Bolognetti, after 1675.
white figures, form perhaps the last sonorous
London, Victoria and Alherl Museum
High Baroque colour symphony.^' Sculpture
was assigned a place on the two pairs of broad
pillars above the confessionals; the pillars near Bishop Giorgio Bolognetti, the donor, kneeling
the entrance contain double tombs with lively in silent prayer, and with the Maltese knight
gesticulating half-figures behind prie-dieus, Francesco Mario, who sinks upon his knee with
while behind those nearer the altar kneel single gestures of profound devotion. But if one com-
full-size figures. All these portrayals of the pares these figures by Michele Maglia, Fran-
Bolognetti turn their attention to the gorgeous cesco Aprile, and Francesco Cavallini with Ber-
altar with Giacinto Brandi's Coronation of the nini's Fonseca, one cannot overlook that they
Virgin. The statues are placed before a small- carry considerably less conviction, and that the
scale, columned architecture suggesting the most excited of them, Francesco Mario, the
opening into imaginary spaces, and above them, one closest in style to the late Bernini, appears
like heavenly protectors, are large stucco figures almost melodramatic in his reverential exube-
of saints in simple niches. As in Bernini's Cap- rance.'^ The spatial conceptions of the High
pella Cornaro there are here no sarcophagi, and Baroque found in this church a triumphant
hardly anything is reminiscent of death: the realization, but the religious feeling which had
illusion was to be as complete as possible. The carried them began to flag.
six deceased are represented in finely differen- The connexion across space between figures
tiated stages of religious enthusiasm. Near the and the altar, as developed during the Roman
entrance the visitor meets those who look and High Baroque, weaves together art and life and
BIBLOSARTE
3l6 • THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
effaces the most powerful boundary of all, the carry medallions with reliefs of St Stephen and
one that separates hfe from death. Nowhere else St Ranieri. The convincing spirituality of these
can one pinpoint so clearly the paradoxical figures and the free transitions between sculp-
situation of the Baroque age : it is the dead who ture and space make this work a legitimate
invite the living to join in their prayers, and descendant of Bernini's Cornaro Chapel.
while the dead seem alive and the living emo- Maglia often collaborated with Francesco
tionally prepared to accept the elimination of Cavallini, an able decorator who was the third
the borderline between fiction and reality, they chief contributor to the sculptural decoration
yet remain always conscious that commemo- of Gesii e Maria. The over-life-size stucco
rative portraits greet them from the walls. statues of saints in S. Carlo al Corso (1678-82)
were his largest commission; these are uneven
in quality and on the whole show close affinities
Minor Masters of the later Seventeenth Century
with Raggi's turbulent style. Cavallini, how-
Two of the artists responsible for the Bolognetti ever, came neither from Ferrata nor Raggi: he
monuments, Aprile and Maglia, were Ferrata's wasa pupil of Cosimo Fancelli (1620.^-88), the
pupils. There were no sculptors of importance more important brother of Giacomo Antonio
in Guidi's studio ;^5 nor was Raggi the head of (161 9-71) whom we saw employed, in spite of
a school.* The opposite is true of Ferrata: as his youth, on the Baldacchino. After beginning
well as Caffa, Retti, and the artists just men- his career under Bernini in St Peter's, Cosimo
tioned, Filippo Carcani, Giuseppe Mazzuoli, attached himself to Pietro da Cortona; and
Lorenzo Ottoni, the Florentine Giovan Battista wherever we find the latter working as architect
Foggini, the Milanese Giuseppe Rusnati, and and decorator, Cosimo Fancelli is sure to be
even Camillo Rusconi were among his pupils.^' near at hand. Thus there is decorative sculpture
But Ferrata was not a great enough artist to by him in SS. Martina e Luca (1648-50), S.
give his school a personal stamp; most of the Maria della Pace (1656), S. Maria in Via Lata
work turned out by his studio consisted of (r. 1660), S. Carlo al Corso (after 1665), in the
variations of the Berninesque idiom. The major- Cappella Gavotti in S. Nicolo da Tolentino
ity of his pupils belong to a later generation, (1668), and on the vaulting of the Chiesa Nuova
and a word about them will therefore be re- (1662-5). After Cortona's death he still took
served for another chapter. Francesco Aprile part in a variet\' of important tasks, and since
died young, in 1685,^'* so that it fell to his he was one of the most distinguished sculptors
teacher Ferrata to finish his masterpiece, the in Rome Bernini transferred to him the execu-
recumbent statue of St Anastasia under the tion of an angel for the Ponte S. Angelo. This
high altar of the church of that name, a statue angel (1668-9) [206] shows, in the somewhat
in which the type of Maderno's St Cecilia was voluptuous forms and the type of the head,
translated into the forms of Bernini's late man- how indebted Fancelli was to Cortona while at
ner. Maglia, whose earliest known works date the same time he paid tribute to the current
from about 1672, adhered more closely to the Berninesque manner. Uneven in his work, he
manner of his master. His principal work is the often attempted to reconcile Cortona's and Ber-
decoration of the beautiful chapel in S. Maria nini's manners with an emphatic simplicity of
in Araceli dedicated to St Peter of Alcantara forms which he shared with Ferrata, his col-
(1682-4),'' where above the altar the ecstatic laborator on more than one occasion. It is often
saint hovers in the air before a vision of the difficult, therefore, to distinguish between their
Cross, while on the side walls life-size angels work.^"
BIBLOSARTE
beauty: the recumbent St Sebastian in S. Sebas-

tiano tuori le Mura - yet another version of
Maderno's St Cecilia tyf)e - a statue derived
from Michelangelo's Dying Slave in the Louvre
and imbued with an exquisite Hellenistic fla-
vour. Girolamo Lucenti (1627-92) began as a

pupil of Algardi, whose influence is still trace-
able in the relatively unemotional angel on the
Ponte S. Angelo. His tomb of Cardinal Giro-
lamo Gastaldi (1685-6) in the choir of S. Maria
de' MiracoH shows him as a weak imitator of
Raggi's manner; while the bronze statue of
Philip IV of Spain, under the portico of S. Maria
Maggiore, dating from the last years of Lu-
centi's life, is hardly a shadow of the one planned
by Bernini in 1667.^'
Looking back for a moment from the statues

on the Ponte S. Angelo to those placed forty
years earlier under the dome of St Peter's, we

realize that, in contrast to the earlier highly
personal and subjective performance, we are

faced with the work of epigones among whom
Bernini appears like a solitary' giant. His intense
High Baroque did not only have an equalizing
influence on most of these masters of the
younger generation but also reduced their capa-
2o(). Cosimo Fancelli city for individual expression, and perhaps even
The Angel with the Sudary, 1668-9. their desire to attain it.
Rome, Potite S. Angelo
Bernini's Studio
The angels on the Ponte S. Angelo enable
and the Position of Sculptors in Rome
the student to assess the position of Roman
sculpture in the year 1670. Bernini naturally The last remark indicates that for good or evil
employed the sculptors with the highest repu- Bernini's influence on the sculptors in Rome
tation and those of whom he was particularly during the second half of the seventeenth cen-
fond. As well as the angels for which he was tury cannot be overestimated. After Algardi's
himself responsible, we find - as we should death in 1654 there was, in fact, nobody
expect - angels by Ferrata, Raggi, and Guidi; seriously to challenge his authority. I cannot
there are those by his closest circle, Lazzaro attempt here to reconstruct the organization and
Morelli, Giulio Cartari, and Paolo Naldini; working of the studio. Suffice it to say that it
finally there is the angel by Cosimo Fancelli, became the attraction for artists from all over
and there are others by Antonio Giorgetti and Europe, and such sculptors as the Englishman
Girolamo Lucenti. ^^ Gioseppe" Giorgetti,^- An- Nicholas Stone the younger, the Frenchman
tonio's brother, left one masterpiece of great Puget,^^ and the German Permoser laid there
BIBLOSARTE
3l8 •
the foundation for their future work. Nearer It was to a large extent due to Bernini's im-
home, year by year a stream of masons and mense authority that the profession of a sculptor
sculptors, particularly from the North of Italy, had become financially rewarding. To be sure,
went to Rome, stimulated less by the idea of towards the middle of the seventeenth century
acquiring there a great style than by the hope of there was an unparalleled boom for sculptors,
getting a share in the gigantic commissions the and yet in spite of the years of prosperity the
Church had to ofl'er. More often than not they proletariat of artists remained large in Rome.
were utterly disappointed, and sculptors were In 1656 one hundred and eleven artists lived in
lucky if they found a corner for themselves in the borough of Campo Marzio, and no less than
Bernini's vast organization or in one of the fifty-three of them - i.e. almost 50 per cent -
studios more or less dependent on him. Willy- were registered as poor.^^ But quality was so
nilly they had to submit to the established highly valued that the top class of sculptors,
hierarchy. and above all Bernini, were paid star salaries,
The fate of the competent Lazzaro Morelli even by modern standards. As early as 1633 an
(1608-Q0) may be quoted as one example of original statue by Bernini was estimated as being
many. He came to Rome from Ascoli, but in worth between four and five thousand scudi.^**
spite of excellent letters of introduction every- In 1 65 1 Francis I of Este paid as much as 3,000
thing seemed to go wrong, and his biographer, scudi for his portrait bust. This was, of course,
Pascoli,makes him exclaim bitterly 'How much : exceptional, even for Bernini. In 1634 Algardi
better it have been for me to stay at home,

would signed his contract for the tomb of Leo XI with
where I did not and could not earn very much, a fee of 2,550 scudi, but at the time the tomb was
but where, eventually, I would have taken first finished, eighteen years later, when both the
place amon-gst my colleagues.' In the end, craving for sculpture and Algardi's reputation
Morelli shared the fate of so many others in were at a climax, he was granted an additional
becoming almost entirely dependent on Bernini 1,000 scudi. Such prices were not maintained
for work. In fact Bernini must have regarded from the late seventeenth century onwards. A
him as one of his most reliable studio hands, for good comparison is offered by the 7,000 scudi
he allotted to him tasks of great responsibility Bernini was paid in 1671 for his Const an tine as
in the work on the Piazza of St Peter's,^^ the against the 4,000 scudi Cornacchini received in
Cathedra, and the tomb of Alexander VII. 1725 for its counterpart, the equestrian statue
xMorelli maintained contact with his native town of Charlemagne.^''
and became on his part the head of a school
through which Bernini's manner spread in the

SCULPTURE OUTSIDE ROME
Marches.^'' This is the typical constellation: it
was by direct transmission rather than by the It has already become apparent that not much
independent initiative of other masters that the need be said about the development of sculp-
style was disseminated throughout Italy and ture outside Rome. With Rome's supremacy
Europe. Since, as I mentioned at the beginning incontestably established, Roman sculptors
of this chapter, the great extension of the studio catered for the need of patrons all over Italy.
did not take place until the later 1640s, it will be Naples, vigorously active, had room even for
apparent that Bernini's Baroque was taken up Finelli and Bolgi. But as a rule figures and busts
in the rest of Italy not until the second half and, were sent from Rome. Bernini provided work
as a rule, only during the last quarter of the for Spoleto, Siena, Modena, Venice, and Savona
century. (school piece); Algardi for Genoa, Piacenza,
BIBLOSARTE
IRtNDS IN IIIUH BAROQLK SCULPTL'RE •
319
Parma, Bologna, Perugia, and Valletta (Malta). the reliefs at S. Agnese in Piazza Navona. The
Not Florentines or Sienese but Cafta, Ferrata, Roman High Baroque had made its entrj' into
and Raggi gave Siena Cathedral monumental Florence.
Seicento sculpture. Later, Giuseppe Mazzuoli, Earlier than any other Italian city, Naples
born near Siena, inundated Siena with Berni- assimilated Roman High Baroque sculpture
nesque statuary. Ferrata also worked for Venice, through the activity of Giuliano Finelli; and in
Modena, and Naples; Raggi for Milan, Sas- the Lombard Cosimo P'anzago (p. 302) Naples
suolo, and Loreto; Naldini for Orvieto and had an autonomous Baroque sculptor. He be-
Todi. There is no need to prolong this list. gan with works of late Mannerist classicism
It was not until late in the century that (161 5-16, St Ignatius at Catanzaro; 1620, tomb
flourishing local schools sprang up in centres of Michele Gentile, Cathedral, Barletta) and
like Bologna, Genoa, and Venice. Apart from developed even before Finelli's arrival towards
Milan with her conservative cathedral school of a High Baroque style [193], certainly not with-
sculptors, a continuity was maintained only in out contacts with events in Rome. Yet in con-
Florence and Naples, due in each city mainly to trast to the true High Baroque masters in Rome,
the activitv' of one artist. Florentine sculpture the versatile Fanzago was capable of using side
did not enter a High Baroque phase even with by side two idioms which would seem mutually
Pietro Tacca's son, Ferdinando (1619-86), who exclusive: the Tuscan Renaissance comes to
remained Tuscan through and through. His life in the chaste Immacolata of the Cappella
bronze relief of the Martyrdom of Si Stephen in Reale (1640-6) while the Roman Baroque in-
S. Stefano, Florence (1656), points back via forms a figure like the Jeremiah (1646, Cappella
Francavilla and Giovanni Bologna to the S. Ignazio, Gesu Nuovo) with its masses of
illusionism of Ghiberti's Porta del Paradiso, brittle folds, its luminous surface and strong
while his fountain of the Bacchino at Prato contrapposto movement.''- Although by training
(1665, now Museum), with the figure crowning a sculptor and mainly active as an architect,
the shaft and basin like a monument, is not Fanzago's most lasting achievement was prob-
developed far beyond Giovanni Bologna's ably in the field of semi-decorative art, such as
prototypes in the Boboli Gardens. Compelling his fountains and pulpits, his splendid bronze
Baroque unification of parts remained foreign gates in S Martino and the Cappella del Tesoro,
.
to Florentine artists. But the little bronze and his many polychrome altars, where he
Bacchus on top of the fountain has High Baro- wedded flourishing sculptural ornament to in-
que softness and roundness although one cannot laid marble work. As early as the 630s this man-
1
overlook the faint family likeness to Verroc- ner was fully developed (1635, high altar, SS.
chio's putti. All too often the bronze relief of the Severino e Sosio, Naples), and there is reason to
Crucifixion in the Palazzo Pitti has been beheve that it had considerable repercussions in
attributed to Pietro Tacca,'" revealing an the rest of Italy. ^^ Even the decorative style of an
erroneous assessment of what was possible in architect like Juvarra seems to owe a great deal
Florence around 1640. As K. Lankheit has to Fanzago, and the question to what extent the
shown, the rehef dates from 1675-7 ^"d '^ by roots of the Rococo ornament can be traced back
G. B. Foggini."' He at last exchanged the Flo- to Fanzago, directly or indirectly, would need
rentine for the Roman relief style of the type ot further careful investigation.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 14
HIGH BAROQ.UE PAINTING AND ITS AFTERMATH
Domenichino; G. F. Romanelli {c. 1610-62),

Giacinto Gimignani (i 611 -81), and Paolo
Baroque Classicism ; Archaizing Classicism
Gismondi((. 161 2-<. 1685), to name only a few,
Crypto-Romanticism
from Pietro da Cortona.' But Sacchi lined up
The preceding discussion of the Cortona- all these painters behind him. It is characteristic
Sacchi controversy supplies the background to that in the 1640s Camassei and Gimignani
the development of painting in Rome during worked for him in the Baptistery of the Lateran,
most of the second and third quarters of the where also the young Maratti painted from the
seventeenth century. Painters had to side with master's cartoons. Camassei, who disappointed
one of the two opposing camps the general trend: the high hopes of his Barberini patrons, had a
of their decision has already been indicated. typicalcareer; after his beginnings under
At the beginning of this period Rome har- Domenichino, he painted under Cortona in
boured two immensely vigorous Baroque fres- Castel Fusano, only to be associated with Sacchi
coes of singular importance, those by Lanfranco towards the end of his brief life. With few
in the dome of S. Andrea della Valle and by exceptions his work is archaistic, like that of the
Cortona in the Gran Salone of the Palazzo whole group. In fact, Sassoferrato's stereotyped
Barberini. One would have thought that these pictures of the Virgin and Child appeared so
masterpieces would immediately have led to a anachronistic that he was long taken for a fol-
revolution in taste, even among the artists of lower of Raphael. Cozza is the most interesting
second rank, and there cannot be any doubt and Romanelli the best-known of these practi-
about the impression they made. But Lan- tioners who had their great moment in the
franco soon left Rome and settled for about decade before the mid century. While Cozza
twelve years in Naples (1634-46), where he deserves being resuscitated from semi-obscurity
continued his dense and dramatic Baroque (see below),- little need be said about Romanelli's
manner in a number of large fresco cycles career. Trained under Domenichino, he be-
(P- 357)- When he returned to Rome (1646), came Cortona's assistant on the Barberini
shortly before his death, the climate had con- ceiling, was permanently patronized by the
siderably changed, mainly due to the ascendancy Barberini, and was given commissions of con-
of Andrea Sacchi. Between 1640 and 1647 siderable size which he executed not without
Cortona too was absent from Rome, and this decorative skill. It was he who introduced a
meant that Sacchi remained in full command of watered-down and classicized version of Cor-
the situation. tona's manner into Paris, where his mythologi-
It is for this reason that among the rank and cal, allegorical, and historical frescoes in the
file of artists born between 1600 and 1620 the gallery of the Hotel Mazarin (1646-7)' and in
pattern of development varies but little. Andrea several rooms of the Louvre (1655-7) reveal a
Camassei (1602-48/9), Francesco Cozza (1605- facile routine, which is equally apparent in his
82), Sassoferrato (1609-85), and Giovanni Roman work of these years (frecoes, Palazzo
Domenico Cerrini (1609-81) stem mainly from Lante, 1653).
BIBLOSARTE
At the beginning of the 1630s these artists absolute purity. Nazarene or Pre-Raphaelite
were still too young to contribute independently paintings come to mind: this archaism seems to
to important commissions. Only the oldest of have a radical and therefore revolutionary
them, Camassei, was allowed a share in the most quality. Even a man of a different calibre, the
interesting enterprise of this period, the decor- young Mattia Preti (1613-99), in spite of his
ation with paintings of S. Maria della Con- originality and vigour, paints the frescoes in the
cezione (163 1-8), undertaken on the initiative apse of S. Andrea della Valle in 1650- i essen-
of Cardinal Antonio Barberini, the pope's tially in the manner of Domenichino.
brother. Here the older generation was given It is true that all these painters reflect as well
pride of place: Reni, Domenichino, and Lan- as ossify in their work a development towards
franco (two pictures)^ painted mature master- which Poussin, Sacchi, Algardi, and even Cor-
pieces; the Florentine Mannerist Baccio Ciarpi, tona tended, a development that had wide
Cortona's teacher, contributed a picture as repercussions and links up with international
well as Alessandro Turchi {1578-1648) from Late Baroque classicism. Seen in proper per-
Verona, who had made Rome his home and, spective as an offshoot of Roman High Baroque
after an early Caravaggesque phase, had moved classicism, this group of painters is therefore
far tow ards Bolognese classicism. Of the younger neither as anachronistic nor as revolutionary^ as
masters, in addition to Camassei, only Sacchi it might appear.
(two) and Cortona were commissioned. All in
all, the church offers an excellent cross-section
207. Giovanni Battista Salvi, il Sassoferrato
of the various trends of monumental easel The Virgin of the Annunciation, c. 1640-50. Detail.
painting in the 1630s: the old Bolognese Caspena (Rieli). S. Mana Niiova
classicism next to Sacchi's Baroque classicism

and Reni's elegant and sublime late manner
next to Lanfranco's and Cortona's full-blooded
versions of the Baroque. The keynote of the
latter's Ananias healing St Paul of Blindness
(c. 1 631) consists, rather typically, in a satu-
ration of Raphaelesque reminiscences with
Venetian colourism.
The reversal of values during the next decade,
the return to a dry and archaizing Bolognese
manner, the emphasis on design, and the almost
complete turning away from Venetian colour
will be found in such works as Sassoferrato's
Madonna del Rosariii{\b^T„S. Sabina), Cerrini's
Holy Family with St Agnes and St Catherine
(1642, S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane), Gimi-
gnani's frescoes in S. Carlo ai Catinari (1641),
and Romanelli's Presentation in the Temple
(1638-42, S. Maria degU Angeli, from St
Peter's).^ One of the most extraordinary paint-
ings of these years [207] illustrates this trend in
BIBLOSARTE
HIGH BAROQUE PAINTING AND ITS AFTERMATH •
323
In the meantime, the lower genre, the so-

called Bambocciate (p. 77), to which Pieter van
Laer had given rise, found scores of partisans.
These 'Bamboccianti' had become a powerful
coterie even before the 1640s; apart from
Michelangelo Cerquozzi (1602-60), Viviano
Codazzi (161 1, not 1604, -72), and a few others,''
they were however mainly northerners, among
them Jan Miel, Jan Asselyn, Andries Both,
Karel Dujardin, and Johannes Lingelbach. As
early as 1623 the Dutch organized themselves
in the Schildersbent,' a guild which guarded
their interests but was at the same time a centre
of Bohemian life in Rome. Just like their lives,
their pictures, minute and intimate records of

Roman street life, always in the cabinet format,
seem unprincipled when compared with official
painting in Rome. In their work these Bamboc-
208. Michelangelo Cerquozzi and Viviano Codazzi

Roman Ruins, c. 1650.
Rome, Pallavictni Colleclion
BIBLOSARTE
209. Pier Francesco Mola: Joseph making himself known to his Brethren, 1657. Fresco.
Rome, Palazzo del Qjtirinale, Gallery
Quirinal Palace (1657) [209],'- reveals the In Testa's case the same conflict between an
specific problem of this group of artists. Even innate romanticism and the classical theories
here the landscape plays a predominant part, which he professed, takes on tragic proportions,
but the organization of the painting with a for his brief career - he died at the age of about
figure composition as much indebted to Raphael fort>' - probably ended by suicide." Bom at
as to Cortona exposes a tendency towards re- Lucca, he was in Rome before 1630, began
conciliation with the prevailing classicism of the studying with Domenichino, later worked with
period. Cortona, and became one of the main coUabo-
BIBLOSARTE
325
rators of Cassiano del Pozzo (p. 231) in the Naples, he began under his brother-in-law,
1 630s and was thus drawn into Poussin's orbit. Francesco Fracanzano, but soon exchanged him
He was also closely associated with Mola. for .\niello Falcone. From the latter stems his
Passeri describes him as an extreme melan- interest in the battle-piece.'' He was in Rome
cholic, bent on philosophical speculations, who first in 1635, was back at Naples in 1637, and
found that work in black-and-white was more returned to Rome two years later. His Satire
suitable than painting to express his fantastic against Bernini during the Carnival of 1639
mythological and symbolic conceptions. His made the leading Roman artist a formidable
etchings [210]'^ have an abstruse emblematic enemy, and so, once aâin, Rosa left this time
210. Pietro Testa:

Allegory of Reason, 1640-50. Etching
quality and a poetical charm only matched by for Florence, where he nursed his genius for
his Genoese contemporary, Giovanni Benedetto over eight years, writing poems and satires,
Castiglione [238]. It was Passeri's opinion that composing music, acting, and painting. His
Testa outdistanced every painter by the variety house became the centre of a sophisticated
and nobilitv' of his ideas and the sublimity of his circle (Accademia dei Percossi). In 1649 he
inventions. finally settled in Rome and now stayed till his
The most unorthodox and extravagant of this death in 1673. A man of brilliant talent, but a
group was certainly Salvator Rosa. Bom in rebel in perpetuity,'" remorseless in his criti-
BIBLOSARTE
cism ot" society, obsessed by a pre-romantic eenth century saw in Salvator's and Claude's
egotistic conception of genius, he took ofTence at landscapes the quintessential contrast between
being acclaimed as a painter of landscapes, the sublime and the beautiful. In Sir Joshua
marines, and battle-pieces. But it is on his Reynolds's words, Claude conducts us 'to the
achievement in this field rather than on his tranquillity of Arcadian scenes and fairy land'.
211. Salvator Rosa: Landscape with the Finding of Moses, c. 1650.

Detroii , Instiliiie of Art
great historical compositions that his post- while Rosa's style possesses 'the power of in-
humous fame rests.'' True to the Italian theo- spiring sentiments of grandeur and sublimity'.
retical approach (p. 43), he regarded these Yet it must be emphasized that the romantic
'minor' genres as a frivolous pastime. On the quality of Rosa's landscapes is superimposed
other hand, they gave him the chance of letting on a classical structure, a recipe of 'landscape
his hot temper run amok. Setting out from the making' which he shares with the classicists.
Flemish landscape tradition of Paul and Mat- The example of illustration 211"* shows the
theus Brill, many of his landscapes have their repoussoir trunk and tree left and right in the
skies dark and laden, storms twist and turn the foreground, the classical division into three
trees, melancholy lies over the crags and cliffs, distances, the careful balancing of light and dark
buildings crumble into ruins, and banditti areas. In addition, the arc of the group of figures,
linger waiting for their prey. Painted with a which represent the Finding of Moses, fits
tempestuous brownish and grey palette, these harmoniously into the undulating terrain, is
wild scenes were soon regarded as the opposite 'protected' by the larger arc of the tree, and
to Claude's enchanted elysiums. The eight- given prominence by the silvery storm-clouds of
BIBLOSARTE
HIGH BAROQUE PAINTING AND ITS AFTERMATH 327
the background. Based on accepted formulas, by Rosa's rather dreary and emphatically rhe-
such landscapes were carefully devised in the torical history paintings.Only on occasion did
studio; they are, moreover, 'landscapes of he allow the fantastic and visionary-romantic
thought', because more often than not the elements to gain the upper hand. A case in point
figures belong to mythology or the Bible and tie is the extraordinary Temptation of St Anthony
the genre, sometimes by a tender link, to the
great tradition of Italian painting. The quasi-
212. Salvator Rosa: The Temptation of St .Anthony,
romantic approach to landscape painting was c. 1645-9. Floreihf. Palazzo Pitli
shared to a lesser extent by Mola and Testa and,
while the work of the minor classicists of this
period was soon almost forgotten, Rosa's new
landscape style opened horizons of vast con-
sequences.'"
It was during the very years of the rise of the
'romantic' landscape that Poussin and Claude
developed their formulas of the heroic and ideal
landscape and that landscapes al fresco were
once again admitted to palace and church; and
it is a memorable fact that in the late 1640s and
early 1650s Poussin's brother-in-law, Caspar
Dughet (1615-75), whose early manner - not
uninfluenced by Salvator - may be described
as half-way between the classical and romantic
conception of landscape, painted the cycle of
monumental landscapes with scenes from the
lives of Elijah, Elisha, and St Simon Stock in S.
Martino ai Monti as well as landscape friezes

in the Colonna, Costaguti, and Doria-Pamphili
palaces - thus taking up a tradition for which
Agostino Tassi had been famed in the second which conjures up the spirit of a Jerome Bosch
and third decades of the century.-" At the same [212].-^^
time, the Bolognese Gian Francesco Grimaldi Not many years later - in the i66os - the law
(1606-80), an all-round talent, returned in his was laid down ex cathedra. The prevalent taste
frescoes and cabinet pictures to the older tradi- of the 1 640s and 50s had prepared the climate
tion of Annibale Carracci's classical landscape tor Bellori's Idea, the supreme statement of the
style.^' classic-idealist doctrine, read to the Academy
On the whole, therefore, the lure of classical of St Luke in 1664.-^ This tract, in turn, laid
discipline far outweighed the attractions of the the theoretical foundation for the ascendancy
crypto-romantic movement during the fifth and of Maratti's Late Baroque Classicism. Soon
sixth decades. The 'inferiority complex' from Maratti was acclaimed the first painter in Italy.
which the romantics suffered makes this doubly And yet Salvator and the other romantics, far
clear. How thoroughly they were steeped in the from being out of touch with the spirit of their
current classical theory is demonstrated by own time, struck chords which reverberated
Testa's manuscript treatise on art-- as well as through the whole of Italy.
BIBLOSARTE
328
Ihe Great Fresco Cycles apse of S. Carlo ai Catinari (1646-7), his not
entirely successful parting gift to the world;
It is a memorable fact that none of the High and after February 1650 followed Mattia Preti's
Baroque churches built by Bernini, Cortona, frescoes in the apse of S. Andrea della Valle.
Borromini, and Rainaldi had room for great Excepting the continuation of Cortona's work
Baroque ceiling decoration,-^ the only exception in the Chiesa Nuova during the mid fifties and
being the dome of S. Agnese, and here no mid sixties, nothing of real importance hap-
indication is extant of what Borromini would pened until 1668, when GauUi painted the pen-
have wished to do. All these churches were dentives of S. Agnese (finished 1671). From
designed as architectural entities which would then on the pace quickened. In 1670 Ciro Ferri,
have been interfered with by an illusionistic Cortona's faithful pupil, began the dome of S.
break-through in the region of the dome. A Agnese in the tradition deriving from Lan-
moment's reflection will make it clear how ab- franco's S. Andrea della Valle (finished in 1693,
surd it would be to imagine the domes of S. Ivo, after Ferri's death).-'* Antonio Gherardi's (1644-
SS. Martina e Luca, S. Andrea al Quirinale, or 1 702) remarkable frescoes on eighteen fields of
the vault of S. Maria in Campitelli decorated the ceiling of S. Maria in Trivio - the most
with grandiloquent Baroque frescoes. Only Ber- Venetian work in Rome at this period also
nini admitted illusionist ceiling painting under date from 1670. In 1672 Gaulli began in the
certain conditions (e.g. Cornaro Chapel). High Gesii the most ambitious decoration of the
Baroque ecclesiastical architecture of the first Roman Baroque, which kept him occupied for
order, in other words, had no use for contem- over a decade [213].-' Two years later Giacinto
porary fresco paintings, and this also applies Brandi worked on the large vault of S. Carlo
by and large to the cities outside Rome.-'' It is al Corso and Canuti on that of SS. Domenico e
doubtful whether other than artistic reasons Sisto (1674-5) [216]. Between 1682 and 1686
may account for this situation, for a man like follow Brandi's ceiling frescoes in S. Silvestro
Cortona, who made it impossible for all time in Capite, and immediately after, those in Gesu
to have the dome of SS. Martina e Luca painted, e Maria (1686-7). Filippo Gherardi's Triumph
began in the very same years of its construction of the Name of Mary in S. Pantaleo dates be-
the extensive fresco decoration of the Chiesa tween 1687 and 1690. Padre Pozzo's immense
Nuova. frescoes in S. Ignazio [217] were painted be-
The paradoxical position then is this: High tween 1 69 1 and 1694; after 1700 fall Garzi's
Baroque frescoes were only admitted on the frescoes in S. Caterina da Siena and Calan-
vaults of older churches, where originally none drucci's ceiling in S. Maria dell'Orto (1703)
or certainly not this kind of decoration was and, finally, from 1707 date Gaulli's late fres-
planned, while contemporary architecture offer- coes in SS. Apostoli.*"

ed no room for monumental painting. This re- It appears, therefore, that most of the large
vealing fact must be supplemented by an equally frescoes in Roman churches belong to the last
interesting one, namely that after Lanfranco's thirty years of the seventeenth and the begin-
frescoes in the dome of S. Andrea della Valle, ning of the eighteenth century. Gaulli's work
painted between 1625 and 1627, twenty years in the Gesii and Pozzo's in S. Ignazio, which
went by until another dome was similarly deco- are rightly regarded as the epitome of monu-
rated: that by Cortona Chiesa Nuova
in the mental Baroque painting, were done at a time
(1647-51). At the same moment Lanfranco, when High Baroque architecture and sculpture
back from Naples,-" painted the frescoes in the had long passed their zenith. This situation is
BIBLOSARTE
213- Giovan Battista Gaulli: Adoration of the jName of Jesus, 1674-9. Fresco. Rome. Genii, ceiling of nave
BIBLOSARTE
330 • THE AGE OF THE HlCiH BAROQUE
not entirely paralleled as regards the decoration and massiveness of each single figure were
of palaces. But in the thirty years between about abandoned and replaced by a flickering dotting
1640 and 1670 only three major enterprises are of the entire ceiling with seemingly casually
worth mentioning, namely the decoration of the arranged figures so that the eye seeks a focusing
Palazzo Pamphili in Piazza Navona where Ca- or resting point in vain. Compared with Preti's
massei (1648), Giacinto Gimignani (1649),*' Valmontone fresco, even such contrasting per-
Giacinto Brandi, Francesco Allegrini'- (r. 1650), formances as Cortona's and Sacchi's Barberini
Cortona (165 1-4), and Cozza (1667-73) created ceilings [153, 161] have basic features in com-
the most impressive aggregate of friezes and mon. Preti's work, on the other hand, shows
ceilings after the Palazzo Barberini; the great stylistic idiosyncrasies which soon became cur-
Gallery of the Quirinal Palace, the most exten- rent not only in painting but also in the sculpture
sive work of collaboration, dated 1656-7, where, of the Late Baroque.
under Cortona's general direction, G. F. Gri- Cozza was quick in accepting his friend Preti's
maldi (who seems to have had an important new manner; and with the latter's Valmontone
share in the enterprise), the Schor brothers," frescoes almost entirely gone, Cozza's library
Guglielmo and Giacomo Cortese (Courtois), ceiling in the Palazzo Pamphili [214]'" takes on
Lazzaro Baldi, Giro Ferri, Mola [209], Maratti, particular importance. Painted with an ex-
Gaspar Dughet, and some minor Cortonesclu tremely light and luminous palette, the indivi-
appear side by side ;^^ and the cycle of frescoes dual figures remain much indebted to Domeni-
in the Pamphili palace at Valmontone near chino. Thus one is faced here w ith the attractive
Rome,"*^ painted between 1657 and 1661 by and almost unbelievable spectacle of a typically
Mola, Giambattista Tassi ('il Cortonese'), Gu- Late Baroque open sky peopled with masses of
glielmo Cortese, Gaspar Dughet, Cozza, and allegorical figures in a naive classicizing style.
Mattia Preti. In a varying degree elements of Preti's revo-

Once again some of the most sumptuous lution will be found in the decoration of
decorations follow after 1670. Apart from Coz- churches from about 1670 on. A generic des-
za's library ceiling in the Palazzo Pamphili cription has to emphasize two decisive points.
[214], mention must be made of the frescoes in In the grand decorative frescoes of the High
the Palazzo Altieri by Cozza, Canuti,^'' and Baroque, each figure has an immense plastic
Maratti [219] and of Giovanni Coli's and FiHppo vitality, seems close to the beholder, and plays
Gherardi's immense Gallery in the Palazzo a vital part in the whole composition [153]. By
Colonna (1675-8) [218]." And once again, this contrast, the figures of the later series of frescoes
chronological situation also prevails throughout [213, 216, 217] have, as it were, only a collective
Italy. existence; they are dependent on larger units

This survey makes it abundantly clear that and, what is more, get much smaller with the
monumental fresco decorations in Roman feigned distance from the spectator until they
churches belong mainly to the Late Baroque. are lost in the immeasurable height of the
The stylistic change from the High to the Late empyrean. While Cortona's figures seem to act
Baroque can be traced in Preti's fresco of the before the open sky, the figures now people the
Stanza dell'Aria in the Valmontone palace, dated

1661.'** It was here for the first time that the
214. Francesco Cozza:
High Baroque method of using time-honoured Apotheosis of Casa Pamphili, 1667-73. Fresco.
concepts of firm organization and clear, incisive Rome, Palazzo Pamphili
structure as well as of stressing the individuality in Piazza Navona, Library
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
33-2 THE AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
'"f"f>5^ "^\ "" "'-^^^.f
215. Giovan Battista GauUi:

Head of an Angel, after 1679. Fresco. Detail.
Rome, Gesii, apse
sky, they inhabit it as far as the eye can see. And Despite such common features, some of the
secondly, dazzling light envelops them. The monumental fresco decorations are poles apart.
nearer they are to the source of divine illumi- We saw in a previous chapter (p. 174) how
nation, the more ethereal they become. Aerial Gaulli in the Gesii became the mouthpiece of
perspective supports the diminution of figures Bernini's ideas. Before this Genoese artist
in creating the sensation of infinitude. The (1639-1709)^" arrived in Rome he had laid the
Correggio-Lanfranco tradition had, of course, foundation for his style in his native cit\- under
a considerable share in bringing about the new the impression of Van Dyck and Strozzi and,
illusionism. above all, of Correggio during a stay at Parma.
BIBLOSARTE
2i6. Domenico Maria Canuti and Enrico Haffner: Apotheosis of St Dominic, 1674-5. Fresco.
Rome, SS. Domenico e Sisto
BIBLOSARTE
334 T""^ ^'^'^ OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
A brilliant talent, also one of the first portrait 217. Andrea Pozzo:
painters of his time, he was capable of conveying
Allegory of the Missionary Work of the Jesuits,
1 69 1 4. Fresco.
drama in fresco as well as on canvas with a
Rome, S. Ignazio, ceiling of nave
warm and endearing palette. The head of the
Angel of illustration 215, a detail from his fres-
coes in the Gesii, gives a good idea of the loving work in S. Ignazio [217], as elsewhere, he
care of execution, the bravura of handling, the arranged his figures in loosely connected light
free and easy touch, and the flickering light and dark areas - proof that he too had learned
effects produced by the application of fresh his lesson from Gaulli.
impasto. Moreover, by painting the half-open Giovanni Coli (1636-81) and Filippo Ghe-
mouth and the eyes as if seen through a haze - rardi (1643 -1704), two artists from Lucca who
revealing his study of Correggio's sfumato - he always worked together, combined their Vene-
managed to endow such a head with the languid tian training with the study of Cortona's style
spirituality of Bernini's latest manner (see illus- in the gallery of the Palazzo Colonna.^^ The
trations 78 and 79). In his later work his palette Cortonesque framework, executed by G. P.
got paler and the intensity of his style dwindled, Schor between 1665 and 1668, displays an enor-
no doubt under the influence of the prevailing mous accretion of detail, while the strongly
taste of the ^77 de siecle. Venetian central panel [218] dazzles the eye by
The Bolognese Domenico Maria Canuti the almost unbelievable entanglement of figures,
(1626-84), in his time a celebrated fresco pain- keels, and masts, all bathed in flickering light.
ter, had been reared in the tradition of Reni's How far this style is removed from Cortona's
late manner, and came to Rome in 1672. What High Baroque needs no further comment. It is
he saw there was not lost on him, for his drama- also evident that Gaulli's and Coli-Gherardi's
tic Apotheosis of St Doimmc^^ [216] in the open styles have little in common, arising as they do
centre of the ceiling of SS. Domenico e Sisto from diff'erent sources: the one mainly from
discloses his familiarity with the grouping of Bernini's spiritualized later manner, the other
figures and the aerial and light conquests of from the hedonistic Cortonesque -Venetian
Gaulli's Gesii decoration, then in statu na- painterly tradition. On the other hand, com-
scendi.*- But Canuti also introduced a novelty. pared with xMaratti's Palazzo Altieri fresco [2 19],
He framed the entire ceiling by a rich quadrat lira Gaulli and Coli-Gherardi seem to be on the
'design (executed by Enrico Haffner) whereby same side of the fence.
Rome was given a type of scenographic fresco Let the reader be reminded that these three
for which neither Bernini nor Cortona had any contemporary works far outdistanced in impor-
use, but which one may well expect to find in tance any other fresco executed during the
Genoa. 1 670s, and, furthermore, that Gaulli's cycle
The greatest of all quadratura painters. Padre was infinitely more Roman and infinitely stron-
Andrea Pozzo^' (1642- 1709), also took his cue ger than Coli-Gherardi's ceiling. The constel-
from the Bolognese masters. By contrast to the lation that emerged at this historic moment was
decorative profusion of Haffner's design, Poz- simply a struggle for primacy between Gaulli
zo's quadratura is always strictly architectural and Maratti. Forty years after the Cortona-
and in so far old-fashioned; it is only the vir- Sacchi controversy the fronts were once again
schemes - But neither the 'baroque' nor
tuosity and hypertrophic size of his clearly defined.
typical signs of a late phase - that give him his the 'classical' wing was the same. Gaulli's style
special stature. Within the quadratura frame- had a distinctly metaphysical basis; often
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
1 ft.
BIBLOSARTE
337
218. Giovanni Coli and Filippo Gherardi: Baroque classicism of Sacchi's Dnina Sapienza
The Battle of Lepanto, 1675-8.
[161] are closer to each other than either is to
Fresco. Rome, Palazzo Colonna, Gallery
Maratti's Late Baroque Classicism. By com-
parison, Maratti had gone some way towards a
reconciliation of the two opposing trends, the
mystical and stirring in its appeal, it may have Baroque and the classical. In every sense he
derived its strength from the forces lying behind steered an agreeable middle course. His paint-
Bernini's late manner: the current revival of ings contain no riddles, nothing to puzzle the
pseudo-dionysiac mysticism^^ as well as the beholder, nothing to stir violent emotions. His
growing popularity of Molinos's quietism. A glib handling of the current allegorical lan-
knowledge of the intervening history of painting guage, the impersonal generalizations with
makes it evident that the odds weighed heavily which his work abounds, admission of just the
against Gaulli. Just as the close followers of right dose of festive splendour - all this pre-
Bernini in sculpture had not a ghost of a chance destined his grand manner to become the ac-
in the face of Late Baroque rationalism which cepted court style in Louis XIV's Europe. Ma-
was backed by the strong French party, so also ratti was not an artist given to speculation and
in painting: GauUi's mystical Late Baroque theory.^** Somewhat paradoxically, it was his
soon burnt itself out in the cool breeze blow ing pragmatic approach by virtue of which he came
from Maratti's classicist camp.^** up to the hybrid theoretical expectations of his
friend Bellori who, like Agucchi before him,
wanted the artist's tdea to result from the em-
Carlo Maratti ( 162^-i/ij)
pirical selection of beautiful parts rather than
A study of Maratti's Altieri ceiling [219] plainly from an a priori concept of beauty.^''
shows that he wanted to restore the autonomous All this sounds perhaps scathing, yet it must
character of the painted area: once again the be admitted that Maratti was an artist of extra-
fresco is clearly and simply framed. ^^ He also ordinary ability. Born at Cammerino (Marches)
wished to reinstate the autonomy of the indivi- in 1625, he appeared as a boy of twelve in
dual figure; he returned to the classical principle Andrea Sacchi's studio. .As early as 1650 his
of composing with few figures and to an even, reputation was firmly established with the Sac-
light palette which invites attention to focus chesque Adoration of I lie Shepherds in S. Giu-
on the plastically conceived figure, its attitude seppe dei Falegnami. From then on Maratti's
and gestures; he almost relinquished the sot to career was a continuous triumph, and, indeed,
in sii but, characteristically, did not revive the one monumental masterpiece after another left
austere qiiadro riportato of the Early Baroque his studio. Nor was he entirely partial to the
classicism. Moreover, the figures themselves are manner of Sacchi and the other classicists. The
more Baroque and less Raphaelesque than he paintings of the 1650s reveal the impact of
may have believed them to be, and the compo- Lanfranco's Baroque; he admitted influences
sition lacks poignancy and incisive accents. It from Cortona and Bernini and even had some
undulates over the picture plane, and the first sympathy with the mystic trend of the second
impression is one of a perplexing mass of sodden half of the century. What impressed his con-
form. The closeness of this style to Domenico temporaries most was that he re-established a
Guidi's in sculpture is striking. feeling for the dignitv' of the human figure seen
It is also revealing that the Early Baroque in great, simple, plastic forms and rendered
classicism of Reni's Aurora [32] and the High with a sincerity and moral conviction without
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
moment [220]. As early as the

parallel at that
mid seventies neither Gaulli nor the Cortona

succession was left with a serious chance, and
by the end of the century Rome had to all intents
and purposes surrendered to Maratti's manner.
At his death in 17 13 his pupils were in full
command of the situation.^"
PAINTING OUTSIDE ROME
During the period under review the contribu-

tion of Tuscany, Lombardy, and Piedmont was
rather modest. Apart from Reni's late manner,
even Bologna had little to offer that would
compare with the great first quarter of the cen-
tury. Venice slowly began to recover, while the
schools of Genoa and Naples emerged as the

most productive and interesting, next to Rome.
A bird's-eye view of the entire panorama
reveals that neither the classical nor the crypto-
romantic trend was peculiar to Rome. In fact,
the Roman constellation is closely paralleled in
other centres. With Reni in an unchallenged
I position at Bologna, his late manner became
the inescapable law during the 1630s. His influ-
ence extended far beyond the confines of his
native city, bringing about, w herever it was felt,
a soft, feeble, sentimental, and rather structure-

^ less classicism. One can maintain that there was
almost an inverse ratio between Reni's success
on the one hand and Cortona's and Lanfranco's
on the other. Soon Reni's Baroque classicism
filtered through to the North and South of
Italy. In xMilan Francesco del Cairo (1607-65),'''
who began in Morazzone's manner [221, 222],
formed his style in the later 1640s on Reni and
Venice, and his work became languid, thin, and
classical. His contemporary. Carlo Francesco
219 (opposite). Carlo Maratti: Nuvolone, called 'il Panfilo' {1608-61?), had a
The Triumph of Clemency, after 1673. Fresco. similar development dependent on Reni, which
;
Rome, Palazzo Allien, Great Hall earned him the epithet 'Guido lombardo', he
exchanged his early leuehroso manner for a light
220 (above) Carlo Maratti
.
Virgin and Child with St Francis and St James, tonality. In Florence, too, Reni's influence is
1687. Rome, S. Maria di Montesanto evident; in Furini's work, superimposed on the
BIBLOSARTE
221. Morazzone: St Francis in Ecstasy, 1615. 222. Francesco del Cairo: St Francis in Ecstasy,
Milan, Brer a c. 1630. Milan, Mtiseo del Castello Sforzesco
native tradition, it led to a highly sophisticated, By and large, the classical reaction, which
over-refined style. On the other hand, probably lies broadly speaking between 1630 and 1660,
impressed by Poussin's classicism, from the spells a falling off of quality. This does not, of
1 640s on an artist like Carpioni in Venice found course, apply to the two great leaders, Sacchi
a way out of the local academic eclecticism in Rome and Reni at Bologna, nor to the posi-
through elegant classicizing stylizations. The tion in Venice and Florence, where Baroque
classical detente of the 1640s and 50s is particu- classicism was to some extent a regenerative
larly striking in Naples. During their late phase agent; yet it is certainly true of the first genera-
such artists as Battistello, Ribera, and Stanzioni tion of Carracci pupils at Bologna (p. 92 ff .) ; it is
turned towards Bolognese classicism, while true of Guercino's manner in the last thirty
Mattia Preti embraced the fashion in his early years of his life, when he was open to Renins
period, only to break away from it some time influence and produced works with a strong
later. Sicily, finally, had an artist of distinction classical bias, many of which have no more than
in Pietro Novelli, called 'il Monrealese' (1603- a limited interest; and it is, above all, true of
47), who abandoned his early Caravaggesque Naples, where the elan of the early Ribera fizzles
tenebroso in the early 1630s, not uninfluenced out during the fourth and fifth decades into a
by Van Dyck's visit to Palermo (1624) and rather feeble academic manner.
under the impact of a journey to Naples and On the other side of the fence were some
Rome (1631-2).''- artists of a slightly younger generation (most
BIBLOSARTE
341
of them born between 161 5 and 1625), who the unification of the picture plane by means
reacted vigorously against the prevalent Bar- of an even distribution of colour and light. These
oque classicism. The principal names to be painterly tendencies, mentioned in a previous
mentioned are Maffei from Vicenza, the Floren- chapter (p. 261) and nowhere more evident
tine iMazzoni, and the Genoese Langetti, all than in Reni's late manner [223], distinguish
working in Venice and the terra ferma ; Valerio High Baroque classicism from the classicism of
Genoa; Mattia
Castello in Preti and the early the first quarter of the century. Although worlds
Luca Giordano in Naples. In one way or an- apart, it is these painterly tendencies that form
other these and other artists revitalized Cara- the common denominator between the Baroque
vaggio's heritage but theirs was a
; new painterly
,
classicists and the neo-Caravag^tsti. In all other
High Baroque Caravaggism [229, 230, 237, respects they differed most seriously.
245], the Caravaggism that was handed on to To the comparatively light palette of the
Magnasco and Crespi and through them to Baroque classicists the neo-Caravaggisti op-
Piazzetta and the young Tiepolo. posed a strong chiaroscuro; to the relatively
There is, however, an important area where smooth handling of paint, a pittura di tocco
these Baroque individualists and the Baroque (stroke) and di macchia (spot) - work with the
classicists meet. For the lightening of the palette, loaded brush and sketchy juxtapositions of small
the most characteristic mark of those masters areas of colour; to the harmonious scale of
who turned Baroque classicists, was not simply tones, unexpected colour contrasts; to the clas-
a tactical reversal of their earlier tenehroso sical types of beauty, subjective deviations; to
manner; it had a distinctly positive aim, namely the tedium of balanced compositions, unac-
countable vagaries to the ; facile rhetorical reper-
tory, violent movement, drama, and even a new
223. Guido Reni: Girl with a Wreath, c. 1635.
Rome, Capttoline Museum
mysticism. Even though this generic list of
contrasts may be too epigrammatic, it helps to
clarify the entangled position of the second and
third quarters of the century.
No doubt Salvator Rosa's crypto-romanti-
cism had partisans up and down the peninsula.
But allegiance to one trend or the other also
changed; some artists were torn between them.
Giovan Benedetto Castiglione seems the most
remarkable example.
Bi)logna, Florence, Venice, and Lombard)'
After this introduction, the Reni succession at

Bologna need not detain us: Francesco Gessi
(1588- 1649), Giovan Giacomo Sementi (1580-
1636), Giovanni .Andrea Sirani (1610-70) and
his daughter Elisabetta (1638-65), or Luca
Ferrari from Reggio (1605-54) ^ho trans-
planted his master's manner to Padua and
Modena. These mediocre talents transformed
BIBLOSARTE
342 •
THt AGE OF THE HIGH BAROQUE
224. Simone Cantarini:

Portrait of Guido Reni,
the positive qualities of Reni's late 'classicism' logna only two artists stand out, namely Simone
[223P': the unorthodox simplicity of his inven- Cantarini (1612-48)''^ and Guido Cagnacci
tions into compositions of boring pedantry; his (1601-63) ;" the former for having left a number
refined silvery tonality into a frigid scale of light of carefully constructed, serene, and strong
tones; his vibrant tenderness into sentimen- works, in which Carraccesque elements are
tality; and his late 'sketchy' manner with its combined with those from Cavedoni and the
directness of appeal was neither understood nor early Reni to form a distinctly personal style,
followed. Among the Reni succession in Bo- well illustrated by the moving portrait of his
BIBLOSARTE
343
aged teacher [224]; the latter, who sought his This tradition was handed on through Girolamo
fortune in Vienna (<. 1(157) and became court Curti, called il Dentone (1570-1632), to Angelo
painter to Emperor Leopold I, tor breaking Michele Colonna (1600-87) and Agostino Mi-
away from the orthodox Baroque classicists and telli (1609-60). These two artists joined forces
creating some works of great poignancy in and for a time almost monopolized qiiaJratura
strange violet and bluish tones. On the whole, painting, working together at Parma, Florence
the Bolognese remained faithful to their clas- I225], Genoa, Rome, and even Madrid, where
225. Angelo Michele Colonna and Agostino Mitclli; Qjnulraiura trescocs, 1(141
Florence. Palazzo Pitli, Museo degli Araetili, third room
sical tradition, guarded, during the second half Mitelli died. Their rich scenographic views,
of the century, by the three caposcuole, Reni's foreshadowing the Late Baroque by virtue of
pupil, Domenico Maria Canuti (p. 334); Canta- the complexin of motifs, form a decorative
rini's pupil, Lorenzo Pasinelli (i 629-1700);'"' court style in its own right rather than a mere
and Albani's pupil. Carlo Cignani, to whom I framework for figure painters. They educated a
have to return in a later chapter. large school, and since Mitelli claimed to have
At the same time, Bologna continued to be invented quadrattira with more than one vanish-
the acknowledged centre of quadrat iira painting. ing point,'' it is he who must be credited with
BIBLOSARTE
344
having laid the foundation for the rich eight-

eenth-century development of this speciality.
Very different from the Bolognese was the
Florentine position.*" Matteo Rosselli, who has
been mentioned (p. 98), made sure that the
typically Florentine qualities of elegant design
and bright local colour remained for a time
unchallenged. He educated the foremost artists
of the next generation, among whom may be

mentioned Giovanni Mannozzi, called Gio-
vanni da San Giovanni (1592- 1636), Francesco
Furini (c. 1600-46), Lorenzo Lippi (1606-65),
Baldassare Franceschini, called Volterrano
( 1 6x1 -89), and Jacopo Vignali (1592- 1664)*'*
and his pupil Carlo Dolci (1616-86). These
artists responded in various ways to the rarefied
atmosphere of the Florentine court.

Furini, above all, influenced by Reni, pro-
duced paintings of a morbid sensuality [226].
The ultramarine flesh-tones together with his

sfumato give his pictures a sweetish, sickly fla-
vour, but nobody can deny that he had a special
gift for rendering the melodious calligraphy of

the female body, thus disclosing his attachment
to the Mannerist tradition. Giovanni da San
Giovanni had a more healthy temperament.
An artist capable of handling very large fresco
commissions, even the experience of Rome
(fresco in the apse of SS. Quattro Coronati,
1623) did not rid him of Florentine idiosyn-

crasies. Although his light touch, translucent
226. Francesco Furini : Faith, 1635-
colours, and the ease and brilliance of his pro-
Florence, Palazzo Pitli
duction make him one of the most attractive
Florentine painters of the Seicento, the re-
tardataire character of his art'" is shown by the
fresco cycle in the Sala degli .Argenti of the
Palazzo Pitti (1635), glorifying Lorenzo de'
Medici's concern for art and philosophy, a work,

incidentally, that was finished after Giovanni's
death by Furini, Ottavio Vannini, and Fran-
cesco Montelatici, called Cecco Bravo (1607-
61)."' The comparison with Cortona's work in
Rome and Florence reveals Giovanni's pro-
vincialism.'-
BIBLOSARTE
Giovanni da San Giovanni had been dead tor

some years when Cortona settled in Florence,
and Furini died before he left. But a number of
other artists were thrown by the
oft' their course
study of Cortona's grand manner. Voltcrrano's
case is characteristic. He had begun as Giovanni
da San Giovanni's assistant in the Palazzo Pitti
(1635-6) and painted his frescoes in the Villa
Petraia (1637-46)" in the same manner, but

changed to a Cortonesque style in the Sala delle
Allegoric of the Palazzo Pitti (r. 1652), a style

which with modifications he maintained in his
later work (e.g. the frescoes in the dome of the
SS. Annunziata, 1676-80/3). A similar course

was taken by Gio\anni Martinelli (active be-
tween 1635 and 1668), while Furini's pupil
Simone Pignoni (1611-98)''^ made few con-
cessions to the new vogue. It was mainly Giro
Ferri (1634-89), Cortona's closest follower, who
ensured the continuity of the Cortona succes-
sion in Florence. Ferri made it his home in
1659-65 in order, above all, to complete the

Palazzo Pitti frescoes which his master had left
unfinished when he returned to Rome in 1647.*''
Carlo Dolci's art, the Florentine counterpart

to that of Sassoferrato in Rome, deserves a
special note because the languid devoutness
expressed by his half-figures of Virgins and

iMagdalens must be regarded as the fullest reali-
zation of one side of Late Baroque mentality.

^ These cabinet pictures, painted with the greatest
227. Carlo Dolci: Portrait of Fra Ainolfo de' Bardi,
care in a slick miniature technique, enjoyed a
1632. Florence, Palazzo Pittt
great reputation in his time, and contemporaries
admired what appears to the modern spectator
a false and even repulsive note of piety. A real
prodigy, Dolci at the age of sixteen painted the

excellent portrait of Ainolfo de' Bardi [227].
But it was not only his own vow to devote his
life to religious imagery, in acceptance of Cardi-
nal Paleotti's theoretical demand,'''' that pre-

vented him from making headway as a portrait
painter. He had no chance against the im-
mensely successful Fleming Justus Sustermans
(1597- 1 681), court painter in Florence from
k BIBLOSARTE
346
228. Giulio Carpioni: Bacchanal, before 1650. Culumbta, South Carolina, Museum oj Art
1620 on and a master of the official international of which his style changed under the impact of
style of portraiture which developed in the wake Rembrandt and the Dutch landscapists. He
of Van Dyck. must rank as one of the greatest Italian etchers,
Finally, Stefano della Bella (1610-64)*"' ni"st but he was a typical master of the petite muniere,
be mentioned, whose place is really outside his more than a thousand etchings, often peopled
the tissue of Florentine Seicento art. The with tiny figures, being concerned with all as-
teacher of his choice was Callot; magically pects of popular life. The influence of his work
attracted by the latter's etchings, della Bella on the further course of Italian genre painting
preserved in his work something of their spirited was probably greater than is at present realized.
elegance. His best and most productive period The development in Venice'" shows certain
was the ten years in Paris, 1639-49, if" i^he course parallels to that in Florence, in spite of the
BIBLOSARTE
exquisite work of the great triad Fetti, Lys, and

Strozzi, who brought entirely new painterly
values to bear on the Venetian scene between
1 62 1 and 1644, the year of Strozzi's death.
What Matteo Rosselli had been for Florence,
Padovanino was for Venice. Most painters of
the second and third quarter of the century
stemmed from him; they carried over his aca-
demic eclecticism into a refined and often lan-
guid Seicentesque idiom. Girolamo Forabosco
from Padua (1604 5-79), distinguished as a por-
Muttoni, called della Vec-
trait painter, Pietro
chia*'" (1605-78), Giulio Carpioni'" (1613-79),

who worked mainly at Vicenza, and the feeble
Pietro Liberi (1614-87) represent different
facets of this somewhat superficial manner. The

Paima Vecchio character of Forabosco's por-
traits, Vecchia's neo-Giorgionesque paintings,
and Carpioni's Poussinesque Bacchanals would
seem to be nuances of the same classicizing
vogue [228]."'
Like Cortona's appearance in Florence, Luca

Giordano's stay in Venice in 1653 had a revo-
lutionizing effêct on local artists. Riberesque in
his early phase, Giordano brought to Venice a
NeapoHtan version of Caravaggio's 'naturalism'

and tenebroso. This dramatic manner found im-
mediate response in the work of the Genoese
Giambattista Langetti'- (1625-76), who pro-
bably began under Assereto, then worked in
Rome under Cortona,"' and appeared in Venice
towards the mid century. His work is distin-
guished by violent chiaroscuro applied with a
loaded brush [229]. Langetti's manner was fol-

lowed, above all, by the German Johan Karl
Loth (1632-98), who had settled in Venice after
1655,'^ and by his competitor Antonio Zanchi
from Este (i 631 -1722). Further, Pietro Negri,

Zanchi's pupil, the Genoese Francesco Rosa,
and Antonio Carneo (1637-92) from FriuH'^
should be mentioned in this context.
But long before Luca Giordano's first visit
229. Giambattista Langetti:
to Venice two 'foreigners', both artists ot ex- .Magdalen under the Cross, after 1650.
ceptional calibre, revolted against the tacile Venice, Palazzu Rezzomcojrom Le Terese
BIBLOSARTE
230. Francesco Maffei; Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, c\ 1650. Verona, Museo di Caslelveahiu
academic practices: Francesco Maflfei^^ from Oratories delle Zitelle and of S. Nicola da
Vicenza {c. 1600-60) and the Florentine Sebas- Tolentino (Vicenza). The ghostly Parable of the
tiano Mazzoni'^ (161 1-78). Soon after 1620 Workers tn the Vineyard (Verona, Museo di
Maffei liberated himself from the fetters of Castelvecchio) [230] exemplifies his late man-
current Mannerism. The study of Jacopo Bas- ner, showing in addition how he transformed
sano, of Tintoretto and Veronese, and, above his debt to Domenico Fetti. The younger
all, of such Mannerists as Parmigianino and Mazzoni, the only artist of this generation who
Bellange led to his characteristic manner, which took the teachings of Fetti and Strozzi to heart,
was fully developed in the Glorification of was surely impressed by Maffei's work. His
Gaspare Zane (1644, Vicenza, Museum). Paint- brilliant and free brushwork, to be found as early
ing with a nervous and rapid brush, he delighted as 1 649 in the paintings in S. Benedetto (Venice),
in exhibiting sophisticated dissonances. Much and, slightly later, in the most remarkable
of his work has an uncouth and almost macabre Annunciation [231], makes him a real forerunner
quality, a refreshingly unorthodox style which of the Venetian Settecento. Another Florentine,
may best be studied in such late works as the Mazzoni 's contemporary Cecco Bravo, shows
Glorification of the Inquisitor Alvise Foscarini a similar unconventional handling of paint
(1652, Vicenza, Museum) and those in the [232].
BIBLOSARTE
349
231. Sebastiano Mazzoni: Annunciation, 1650. 232. Cecco Bravo: Apollo and Daphne, c. 1650.
Venice, Accademia Ravenna, Pinacoteca
With Giovanni Coli and Filippo Gherardi tonio Bellucci (1654- 1727),''' who spent his best
echoes of the Roman grand manner reached years abroad, and many others"*" should here
Venice, but the strongest impact came once be named. But neither Maffei nor the tenebrosi
again from Luca Giordano, whose pictures in were forgotten. Thus Celesti as well as Bellucci
S. Maria della Salute and other churches, were indebted to Maffei, while Antonio Moli-
painted in the late 1660s and the 1670s, show nari"" (1665-1727), working in Zanchi's manner
the light palette of his mature style, derived and revealing Giordano's influence, also opened
mainly from impressions of Veronese. The stage the way to Piazzetta's tenehroso style [233].
was set for the artists born between about 1635 In conclusion it must be said that, with the
and They accepted Giordano's neo-

1660. exception of Langetti, Mazzoni, and Maffei,
Venetian manner to a greater or lesser extent few of these painters fully relinquished the facile
and helped to prepare the way for the great decorative manner of a Forabosco and a Liberi,
luminous art of the eighteenth century. Andrea nor were they capable of a new and coherent
Celesti"'' (1637-r. 171 1), whose masterpieces vision - in spite of the fact that some of them
are in the parish church at Desenzano (Lake lived far into the eighteenth century.
Garda); Federico Cervelli from Milan (active While Venice and the terra ferma were teem-
1674-f. 1700), Sebastiano Ricci's teacher; An- ing with painters to whom magnificent oppor-
BIBLOSARTE
233. Antonio Molinari:

Fight of Centaurs and Lapiths, c. i(
Venice, Palazzo Rezzonico
tunities were offered, Milan's decline after the contemporary of Evaristo Baschenis (1607 ?-77)
Borromeo era was irrevocable. Apart from and helps an understanding of the ambience in
Francesco del Cairo, who has been mentioned, which the latter's art flourished. Probably Italy's
there were no painters of real rank. Carlo Fran- greatest still-life painter, Baschenis, as is well
cesco Nuvolone (1608-61), to whom reference known, concentrated on one speciality, the
has also been made, a minor master, a brother pictorial rendering of musical instruments.
of the even weaker Giuseppe (1619-1703), had What him was the warm tonalitv' of
attracted
the most flourishing school.*^- Giovanni Ghisolfi the polished wood as much as the complex
(1623-83) contributed little to the art of his stereometry of the shapes. By means of a dry,
native city. At the age of seventeen he went to almost 'photographic' reahsm he thus produced
Rome, where he made his fortune as Italy's first abstract-cubist designs in which highly sophis-
painter of views with fanciful ruins (p. 498). ticated space definitions are supported by the
The Lombard tradition of the unadorned contrast and superimposition of flat, bulging,
rendering of painstakingly observed facts was smooth, broken, or meandering forms [234].
kept alive in Bergamo rather than Milan. Only These truly monumental creations, so foreign
recently have these qualities become apparent to northern still-life painters, have, of course,
in Carlo Ceresa's (1609-79)**^ portraits, painted their intellectual focus in Caravaggio's 'realistic
in an austere 'Spanish taste'. Ceresa was a stylization' of the Italian still life (p. 43).
BIBLOSARTE
351
234. Evaristo Baschenis:

Still life, after 1650.
Brussels, Musee des Beaux Arts
they received as much as they gave. Strozzi is
a case in point. After his early 'dark' period with
The beginning of the seventeenth century strong chiaroscuro effects [235], not indepen-
opened up rich possibilities for Genoese pain- dent of the early seventeenth-century Lombard
ters. A vigorous native school developed which masters, his palette lightened w hile he was still
flourished unbroken into the eighteenth century in Genoa; his colours became rich, warm,
in spite of the disastrous plague of 1657. It is glowing, and succulent, and the flesh tones
a sign of the innate strength of the Genoese ruddy. The impression the great Venetian
school that it also survived the loss of its greatest masters, above all Veronese, made upon him
Seicento painters; Bernardo Strozzi went to after his removal to Venice in 1630 should not
Venice, Castiglione spent most of his working be underestimated [236], but the sketchy touch,
life outside Genoa, and GauUi settled in Rome. the bravura of the brush-stroke, and the lu-
While at the dawn of the century Genoa had minosity of his paint he owed to Fetti and Lys.
been a melting pot of various foreign trends, In contrast, however, to the 'modernity' of
after 1630 her artists influenced artistic events these masters - Fetti's petite mamere with its
in Venice and Rome. emotional intricacies and Lys's romantic ex-

To be sure, these masters belong to the broad travagances - Strozzi remained essentially tied
stream of the intra-Italian development and to the tradition of the grand manner with its
BIBLOSARTE
235. Bernardo Strozzi: 236. Bernardo Strozzi

St Augustine washing Christ's Feet, c. 1620-5. David, (. 1635.
Genoa, Accademia Ligustica Vterhouten, Van Beuningen Collection
focus on rhetorical figure compositions."^ On artistic climate at Genoa - reveals echoes of

the other hand, the painterly, festive, and dy- Tuscan Mannerism as well as of Caravaggism,
namic qualities of his Genoese-Venetian man- of Rubens and Van Dyck as well as Velasquez
ner destined him to become the third in the who was in Genoa in 1629 and 1649. Unequal
triad of 'foreign' artists who rekindled the spirit in quality, towards the end of his career he
of great painting in Venice. ridded himself of academic encumbrances and

The influence exercised by Strozzi in Genoa produced works of considerable depth of ex-
can hardly be overestimated. Only recently it pression in a free and painterly style.'"'
has been shown how strongly Giovanni Andrea Whether or not this happened under the
de Ferrari {1598- 1669) leant on him.**^ This influence of his pupil Valerio Castello (1624-
prolific artist was himself the head of a large 59), son of Bernardo, is difficult to decide."
studio through which, among others, Giovanni Valerio had also gone through Fiasella's school
Bernardo Carbone, Valerio Castello, and Casti- but soon set out on conquests of his own.
glione passed. Ferrari's work - true to the special Impressed by Correggio, Van Dyck, and Ru-
BIBLOSARTE
237. Valerio Castello:

Rape of the Sabines, c. 1655.
Genoa. Coll. Dm a Nicola de Ferrari
bens, he produced a few masterpieces of extra- of Van Dyck an 'aristocratic' Baroque much
ordinary intensity during a career of hardly to the taste of the Genoese nobility, mainly
more than ten years. A real painter, he loved kept alive in the portraits of Giovanni Bernardo
violent contrasts and fiery, scintillating hues; Carbone (1614-83) and to a certain extent in
he is dramatic, sophisticated, and spontaneous those of Gaulli; secondly, also of Flemish

at the same time. A work like the rapid oil derivation, the rustic genre which triumphed
sketch for the Rape of the Sabines [237 J, dating in Castiglione; and finally, the great decorative
from his last years, clearly prepares the way Baroque fresco, for which Luca Cambiaso had
for Magnasco. Under Castello was trained the prepared the ground.
gifted Bartolomeo Biscaino who died during Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione, called il
the plague of 1657 at the age of twenty-five.'*'* Grechetto (before i6io?-65), ran through al-
As the century advanced three different trends most the whole gamut of stylistic possibilities in
can be clearly differentiated, all developing on the course of his astonishing career."*' .Attracted
the foundations of the past : first, in the wake early by the Flemish animal genre, he seems to
BIBLOSARTE
have studied with Sinibaldo Scorza (1589-

1631), who in turn depended on such Flemings
as Jan Roos ( 1 591 ~ 1638), Snyders's pupil, active
in Genoa from 16 14 on. At the same time a
passionate student of Rubens and Van Dyck,
he was also the first Italian to discover Rem-
brandt's etchings - as early as about 1630 -
which means that Caravaggism reached him in
the northern transformation. Rembrandt re-

mained a permanent stimulus throughout his
life. A stay in Rome for more than a decade from

1634 on led him to appreciate Poussin's as well
as Bernini's art. In these years he evolved his
fluent technique of brush drawings in oil on

paper and invented the monotype technique.
Back in Genoa in 1645, he painted such monu-
mental Baroque works as the St Bernard adoring
Christ on the Cross (S. Maria della Cella) and
St James driving the Moors from Spain (S.
Giacomo della Marina). Slightly later he treated
philosophical subjects in a picturesque mood

[238] which shows him close to the Testa Rosa
current in Rome. His appointment as court
painter at Mantua in 1648 brought him in con- 238. Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione:
tact with the art of Fetti, whose freedom of The Genius of Castiglione, 1648. Etching
touch was soon reflected in his work. At the end

of his career he produced ecstatic compositions
of great intensity, reminiscent of Bernini's style animal genre, while his grand manner had a
of these years. Perhaps more clearly than any formative influence on the younger generation
other artist Castiglione exposes the particular of great decorative painters.
problems which assailed his generation, for The protagonists of the older Genoese fresco
throughout his life he was torn between a style are the brothers Giovanni Andrea (1590-
philosophical scepticism and an ecstatic sur- 1630) and Giovanni Battista (1592- 1677) Car-
render. lone," who belong to that fertile Lombard
Being equally at home in the rustic genre and family which had great decorators among its
the grand manner - history, mythology, and members for three centuries. The later fresco
religious imagery - a brilliant draughtsman and style is mainly represented by Domenico

engraver, he influenced artists as distant in time Piola'- (1628- 1 703) and Gregorio de Ferrari''^
and as different in style as Tiepolo and Frago- (1647- 1 726). It is they, above all, who brought
nard. Nearer home, his rustic and bucolic about the glorious climax of this art at Genoa.
manner found followers in his son Francesco In their mature works both artists influenced
(d. 17 1 6), who succeeded him as court painter each other, but the younger man proved to be
at Mantua; Anton Maria Vassallo'"' (active
in the stronger master. The essential character of
c. 1640-60); and inanumberof speciaHstsof the their later style derives from a wedding of Pietro
BIBLOSARTE
355
239. Gregorio de Ferrari : Decorative Frescoes,

1684. Detail.
Genoa, Palazzo Balhi-Groppallo, Sala delle Rovine
da Cortona's grand manner with Bolognese one of his masterpieces on canvas, illustrates
quadratura'^^ and of Castiglione's verve with this style at its best. Still tied by a tender link to
Correggio's sfumato - resulting in an immensely Bernini's late manner, the languor and sensi-
rich, festive, and luminous manner with a strong bility of expression, the suppleness of the bodies,
emphasis on the ebullient decorative element the great musical curve of the composition, the
-
[239]. The early Piola leant heavily on Casti- sweetness and elegant rhythms of the angels
glione, Strozzi, and Valerio Castello. It has been all this presages the art of the Rococo. A man-
suggested that he turned to his Cortonesque ner similarly delicate and refined was practised
manner under the influence of Giovanni Maria by Bartolomeo Guidobono (1654- 1709) who
Bottalla, Cortona's assistant on the Barberini again had made Correggio his special study. He
ceiling, who died, however, in 1644, the year he spent almost thirtj- years of his life at the court
returned to his native Genoa. The Correggi- of Duke Vittorio Amedeo in Turin.
esque note of the style was due to Gregorio de
Ferrari who had spent four years at Parma
Naples
(1669-73), ^n experience that contributed to
the formation of the proto-Rococo character of When Caravaggio came to work in Naples in
Gregorio's art. His Death of St Scolaslica [240], 1606-7, '^he Mannerists were in full command
BIBLOSARTE
240. Gregorio de Ferrari: 241. Giovanni Battista Caracciolo:

Death of St Scolastica, c. 1700. Liberation of St Peter, 1608-Q.
Genoa, S. Stefano Naples, Chiesa del Monte della AUsencordia
of the situation, and he never swayed artists church, is not only a monument of orthodox
like Fabrizio Santafede (r. 1560- 1634), Gian Caravaggism, but its specific qualities, the hard
Bernardino Azzolino {c. 1572- 1645), Gerolamo contrasts, the compositional austerity and mute
Imparato (i 550-1 621), and Belisario Corenzio intensity' reveal a talent of the first rank. Yet the
{c. 1 560- 1 643) from their course they continued
; pattern of Baroque painting in Naples was deter-
their outmoded conventions, largely indebted mined neither by Caracciolo's early manner nor
to the Cavaliere d'Arpino, through the first half by him alone.
of the seventeenth century. The only exception He had a younger rival in the Spaniard Jusepe
to the rule was Giovanni Battista Caracciolo, de Ribera (i 591 -1652)'*" who, after journeys
called Battistello {c. 1570- 1637), ''^
the solitary through Italy, settled in Naples in 16 16 and
founder of the 'modern' Neapolitan school who, soon painted Caravaggesque pictures utterly
in opposition to the Mannerists, developed his different from those by Caracciolo. While the
new manner based on the deeply felt experience latter hardened and stiffened the more flexible
of Caravaggio. His Liberation of St Peter in the style of the master in an attempt at rendering
Chiesa del Monte della Misericordia [241], internalized drama, the former loosened and
painted two or three years (1608-9) after Cara- externalized what he had learned from Cara-
vaggio's Seven Works of Mercy in the same vaggio by an aggressive and vulgar realism and a
BIBLOSARTE
HIGH BAROQUE PAINTING AND ITS AITtRMATH •
357
painterly chiaroscuro with flickering Hght ef-

fects. Ribera found a powerful patron in the
Duke of Osuna, the Viceroy of Naples, who
appointed him court painter, and later viceroys
and Neapolitan nobles were equally attracted by

his art. It is an interesting phenomenon that
Ribera's passionate and violent pictures satisfied
the taste of the Neapolitan court society. What
attracted them was probably the essentially
Spanish sensual surface quality of Ribera's
realism - his permanent contribution to Euro-
pean Seicento painting.""
From about 1630 on Naples was drawn into
the main stream of Baroque painting owing to
the considerable contributions made by painters

coming from Rome. It is mainly three different
trends that were acclimatized in Naples:
Domenichino's Baroque classicism, Lanfranco's
intense High Baroque, and the discursive Cara-
vaggism of the second generation."'* Domeni-
chino's somewhat disappointing activit)' in
Naples has been discussed in a previous chapter

(pp. 81-2). Lanfranco was more successful; he
242. Artemisia Gentileschi:
settled in Naples in 1633 for thirteen extremely
Judith slaying Holofernes, c. 1620.
active years during which he created, among Florence, Uffizi
others, four large fresco cycles: the dome of the
Gesii Nuovo (1635-7, only the pendentives pre-
served), the nave and choir of the Certosa of S. Arcangelo a Segno'*"^ from Rome in 1623 and,
Martino (1637-8), the entire decoration of SS. more important, through .\rtemisia Gentileschi
Apostoli (1638-46), and finally the dome of the (1593-r. 1652), Orazio's daughter, who was
Cappella di S. Gennaro in the cathedral (1641- bom in Rome, spent some years in Florence
3), where he vied with the pendentives painted (1614-20) - which were not without influence
by his arch-enemy Domenichino. Despite the on the formation of her style - and settled in
hostility of the Neapolitan artists, Domenichino Naples in 1630. to leave this city only for a brief
was an immediate success; the dynamic orches- visit to her father in London (1638-9). An artist
tra of Lanfranco's Correggiesque illusionism, by of a high calibre and fierce temperament, she
contrast, appealed above all to the masters of the showed an inclination for gruesome scenes
second half of the century"" and made possible painted in lively translucent tones and with a
the grand decorative phase of Neapolitan meticulous attention to detail [242]. This almost
painting which began with Mattia Preti and romantic form of Caravaggism impressed the
rose to international importance with Luca Neapolitans as much or even more'"' than
Giordano and Solimena. Contact with the Vouet's decorative Baroque manner, which
younger Caravaggesque trend was made hardly revealed his early infatuation with
through Vouet, who sent the Circumcision in S. Caravaggio.
BIBLOSARTE
Long before Domenichino's conning to

Naples, Caracciolo had turned to pre-Manncrist
and Bologncse models, possibly stimulated by
impressions he received during a hypothetical
journey to Rome. In any case, his later work
from the end of the second decade on, in the
Certosa of S. Martino, in S. Maria la Nova, S.
Diego airOspedaletto, and elsewhere shows the

strong impact of Bolognese classicism. Equally,
Ribera's early fire subsided in the 1630s, his
realism mellowed, his compositions became dry
and classicizing, and the chiaroscuro made way
for a light palette with cool silvery tones. '"^
Although Neapolitan artists stuck tenaciously

to the various facets ofCaravaggism - epito-
mized by the names of Caracciolo, Ribera, and
Artemisia Gentileschi the swing towards
Bolognese classicism from the mid 1630s on is a
general phenomenon. It may be observed with

minor masters such as Francesco Guarino
(1611-54)^°^ whose early Riberesque manner
was followed by classicizing academic works, or
Pacecco (Francesco) de Rosa (1607-56), a
determined purist, the Sassoferrato of Naples,
for whom Domenichino was specially import-

ant. Such purist tendencies may also be found 243. Massimo Stanzioni: Virgin with
in the paintings of Charles Mellin ('Carlo SS. John the Evangelist and Andrea Corsini,
c. 1640. Naples, S. Paolo Maggwre
Lorenese', 1597- 1649), a Frenchman from
Nancy, who lived and died in Rome, but worked
in Naples in 1643-7,'"^ as well as in those of
Giovanni Andrea Coppola (1597-r. 1659) who refined, somewhat tame and nerveless qualit}' of
practised his art in distant Apulia. his art, characteristic of the second quarter of
A much greater artist than all these, the most the century, will be apparent if his Virgin with
important caposcuola of the mid century, Mas- SS. John the Evangelist and Andrea Corsini
simo Stanzioni (1586- 1656), turned in a similar [243] is compared with an equally characteristic
direction. His early development is still un- work of the second decade such as Cavedoni's
clear;'"^ but his Caravaggism is allied to that of Virgin with SS. Alo and Petronius [38]. Stan-
Vouet, Saraceni, and Artemisia rather than to zioni's painting also shows the Neapolitan
that of Caracciolo and Ribera. In his best works, blending of Caravaggism and Bolognese clas-
belonging to the decade 1635-45, he displays a sicism. At the end of his career the Bolognese
distinct sense for subtle chromatic values, note, increasingly noticeable from the late 1630s
melodious lines, gracefully built figures, and on,""' quelled the subtle qualities of his earlier
mellow and lyrical expressions. Stanzioni was manner (see the very late Consecration of St
famed as the 'Neapolitan Guido Reni'; and the Ignatius, Naples, Palazzo Reale).
BIBLOSARTE
359
mid century died before they reached maturity.

Their sophisticated art hardly contained the
germs to generate a strong new style.
Other painters had a share in the rich life of

the Neapolitan school during the three decades
after 1630. The more important names should
at least be mentioned: Andrea Vaccaro (1604,
not 1598, -1670),""' who found a rather vulgar
formula of combining second-hand Caravag-
gism with Bolognese classicism (Reni, Domeni-
chino), was a popular success at his time, but a
master of the second rank; the Riberesque
Cesare (c. 1605-53) ^nd Francesco (1612-f. 56)
Fracanzano, sons of Alessandro, the younger
brother being an artist of considerable
calibre;'"" Aniello Falcone (1607-56), the spe-
cialist in luminous battle-pieces 'without a
hero',""' and his pupils Andrea de Leone (1610,
not 1596, -1685)'" and Domenico Gargiulo,
called Micco Spadaro (1612-75), ^ho under
Callot's influence produced the typically Nea-
politan topographical genre peopled with great
numbers of small figures. In addition, reference
must be made to the well known 'Monsu
Desiderio' a 'pseudonym' covering at least
244. Bernardo Cavallino: three different artists, as recent research has

The Immacolata, c. 1650. revealed."- The major figure of this trio,
Milan, Brer a
Fran9ois Nome, was bom at Metz in 1593,
came to Rome in 1602, settled at Naples not
later than 16 10 and seems to have spent the rest
Stanzioni mediates between the art of the of his life there (the year of his death is un-
older generation and that of his pupil, Bernardo known). His bizarre and ghostlike paintings of
CavalHno (1616, not 1622, -56).'°^ A Caravag- architecture, often crumbling and fantastic,
gista strongly influenced by Artemisia, Caval- belong to the world of Late Mannerism rather
lino gave his best in cabinet pictures. His work than to that of the Seicento, and the suggestion
is in a category of its own; a great colourist, his made by R. Causa that his style is ultimately
tenderness, elegance, gracefulness, and delicacy derived from the stage settings of Buontalenti
are without parallel at this moment [244]. Yet and Giulio Parigi has much to recommend it.
mutatis mutandis such contemporaries as Furini The second artist, Didier Barra,"' also from
in Florence and Valerio Castello in Genoa Metz, left his native city about 1608 and fol-
represent a similar stylistic phase. It is interest- lowed his compatriot to Naples, where he was
ing to note that the giants of the Baroque epoch still active in 1647. In contrast to Nome he was
with their massive energy lived to a ripe old a faithful recorder of views, while the third -
age (p. 303), while these effeminate artists of the hitherto anonvmous - artist imitated Nome's
BIBLOSARTE
3()0 rut AGt OK THt H Id H BAROQLfc
work. Unduly boosted in our own days, tently in Venice'"' but returned to Rome in
'Monsu Desiderio'-Nomc was in fact a minor 1641 2, 1650- 1, and once again, 1660-1. It was
figure, but it was he who opened up a taste in during the fifth decade that Sacchi, Domeni-
Naples for the weird type of cabinet picture and chino, and Reni attracted him ;"' the frescoes in
thus helped to prepare Micco Spadaro's micro- S. Biagio at Modena, executed between 1653
cosmic views as well as Salvator's romantic and 1656, still reveal that influence."" In the
battle-pieces. mature works created during his Neapolitan

All the Neapolitan painters so far mentioned period (1656-60) he wedded reminiscences of
belong essentially to the first half of the century. Battistello, Ribera, and Guercino with those of
The social upheaval caused by Masaniello's Tintoretto and Veronese nor was he impervious
;
revolt in 1647 also resulted in some artists to Luca Giordano's early work. The result was
leaving the city;"^ but more serious was the a powerful dramatic style sui generis, the
great plague of 1656 during which many of them apocalyptic quality- of which is well illustrated
died. Pacecco de Rosa, Falcone, and, above all, by the bozzetto [245] for one of the frescoes,
Massimo Stanzioni and Cavallino were among now lost, painted as an ex-voto on the citv' gates
the victims. The year of the plague may there-
fore be regarded as an important turning-point. 245. Mattia Preti: The Plague of 1656.
.\aples. Mitseo Nazwnale
The character of Neapolitan painting in the
second half of the century differs indeed con-
siderably from that of the first half. The change
is mainly due to two masters of the first rank,
Mattia Preti from Calabria ('Cavalier Calabrese'

1613-99) and Luca Giordano (1634-1705).
Although belonging to two different genera-
tions, they are similar in that both show in their
work an immense vigour, an innate power and

dynamic quality almost without parallel in Italy
or elsewhere at this moment. They are also
similar in that their art received lasting stimuli

from Venetian colourism as well as from the
Roman grand manner. Moreover, it was with
them that Neapolitan painting assumed an
intra-Italian and even international status. In
other respects they differ most decisively Preti, :
grave, problematical, dramatic, a moralist, and

throughout his life a Carazaggista, is a man
typical of the Seicento, while Giordano, in all
and everything the antithesis, truly belongs to
the eighteenth century. It is for this reason that
more about him will be said later (p. 462).
Preti's career took him up and down the

peninsula. .\s early as 1630 he was in Rome
painting, it seems, Caravaggesque pictures;"^

between 1640 and 1646 he stayed intermit-
BIBLOSARTE
HIGH BAROQLE PAIMINU AND ITS Al- IhR.VlATH jf)!
during the plague of 1656. In 1661 Preti went cation it is still too early to say.'-" Porpora's
to Malta where he stayed, with brief interrup- most pupils, Giovan Battista
distinguished
tions,"" to the end of his life. His major work Ruoppolo (1629, not 1620, -93) and Giuseppe
there was the decoration of the immense vault Recco (1634-95),'-' both much better known
of S. Giovanni at Valletta (166 1-6) with frescoes than their teacher, continued the tradition to
in which Venetian luminosity prevails. But the end of the century. The name of Giovan
never again did Preti rise to the dramatic height Battista Recco, probably Giuseppe's elder
of his Neapolitan period. brother, has to be added to theirs. A recently
His contemporaries Luca Forte (active c. discovered painting (signed and dated 1654)
1640-70) and Paolo Porpora (1617-73) open of exceptional quality stimulated a tentative re-
the long line of Neapolitan still-life painters by construction of Giovan Battista's ceuvre.^--
their sumptuous Caravaggesque flower-pieces, Ruoppolo is famed for his vigorous, succulent,
and a few pictures have now also been ascribed and ample flower-pieces [246], monumental
to Porpora's teacher, Giuseppe Recco's father like Preti's paintings in the grand manner and
Giacomo (1603-54) " ^'t^h how much justifi- thus utterlv different from Flemish still lifes
246. Giovanni Battista Ruoppolo; Still life, late seventeenth century. Naples. Musen di S. Mariino
BIBLOSARTE
}h2 rut AGt OF Till. HIGH baroque
with which, however, he must have been con- Lombard quality of austerity and immobility.
versant.'-* Giuseppe Recco's temperament was Intimate and noble rather than extrovert and
less exuberant. His speciaHt}- was fish-pieces, grand, they seem to presage the age of Chardin.'
painted with impeccable taste and an incom- No such painter arose in Rome, and this is
parable sense for tone values. Dominici reports indicative of the future course of events. In the
that in his youth Recco spent some time in last analysis it was the memory of Caravaggio's
Milan working with a famous still-life painter. conquests, always treasured in Naples in con-
On this slender evidence art historians have trast to Rome, that made possible the remark-
concluded that he was trained by Baschenis. able ascendancy and varietv' of the Neapolitan
True or not, Recco's still lifes often have a school.
BIBLOSARTE
PART THREE
LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO

CHAPTER I
5
INTRODUCTION
After the death of Alexander VII (1667) papal (1730-40) saw teeming activit}^ on a monu-
patronage in Rome rapidly declined, and even mental scale. It was under these popes that many
the aged Bernini was starved of official com- of the finest and most cherished Roman works
missions. On the other hand, it was precisely at saw the light of day, such as the Spanish Stairs,
this moment, during the last quarter of the the facade of S. Giovanni in Laterano, and the
seventeenth and the beginning of the eigh- Fontana Trevi. Moreover, foreigners streamed
teenth centuries, that the Jesuits and other to Rome in greater numbers than ever before,
Orders as well as private patrons gave painters and artists from all over Europe were still
unequalled opportunities. Yet Maratti's inter- magically drawn to the Eternal City. But the
national Late Baroque in painting, the fashion- character of these pilgrimages slowly changed.
able style of the day, had as little power to Artists no longer came attracted by the lure of
electrify and galvanize and to lead on to new splendid opportunities as they did in the days of
ventures as Carlo Fontana's parallel manner in Bernini and Pietro da Cortona; more and more
architecture. In fact, Rome's artistic supremacy they came only to study antiquity at the fountain
was seriously challenged not only by much more head.
stirring events in the north and south of Italy, To a certain extent the French .Academy in
but above all by the artistic renaissance in Rome, founded as early as 1666, anticipated
France, which followed in the wake of the this development, and in the eighteenth century
amassing of power and wealth under Louis the students of the Academy were almost en-
XIV's centralized autocracy. The time was tirely concerned with the copying of ancient
close at hand when Paris rather than Rome statuary. With the growth of French influence
came to be regarded as the most dynamic art in all spheres of life, political, social, and artistic,
centre of the western world. the classicizing milieu of the Academy developed
None the less the Roman Baroque had an into a powerful force in Rome's artistic life;
unexpectedly brilliant exodus. Under the .\lbani and it was due to this centre of French art and
Pope Clement XI (1700-21) Rome began to culture on Roman soil that countless French
rally, and the pontificates of Benedict XIII artists were able, often successfully, to compete
Orsini (1724-30) and Clement XII Corsini for commissions with native artists.
BIBLOSARTE
364 LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
The popes themselves nourished the growing There was, to be sure, a strong nostalgic and
antiquarian spirit.' Preservation and restoration romantic element in the eighteenth-century
of the remains of antiquity now became their fascination with the ancient world. Nowhere is
serious concern. From the mid sixteenth cen- this more evident than in the work of Giovanni
tury on antique statues had left Rome in con- Battista Piranesi (1720-78), who, coming from
siderable numbers.- This trade assumed such Venice, where he had studied perspective and
proportions that Innocent XI (1676-89) pro- stage design, settled permanently in Rome in
hibited further export, and Clement XI's 1745.^ The drama and poetry of his etchings of
edicts of 1 701 and 1704 confirmed this policy. Roman ruins {Le Antichita romane, 1756) have
Clement XI also inaugurated a new museologi- no equal, even at this time when other artists of
cal programme by planning the Galleria Lapi- considerable merit were attracted by similar
daria and the Museum of Early Christian subjects, stimulated, more than ever before, by
Antiquities in the Vatican. Clement XII (1730- a public desirous to behold the picturesque
40) and Benedict XIV (1740-58) followed in his remains, true and imaginary, of Roman great-
footsteps; under them the Museo Capitolino ness. Although Piranesi was deeply in sym-
took shape, the first public museum of ancient pathy with the new tendencies, a devoted
art. In keeping with the trend of the time, the partisan of Roman pre-eminence and a belliger-
learned Benedict XIV opened four Academies ent advocate of the great variety in Roman art
in Rome, one of them devoted to Roman anti- and architecture,^ his vision, procedure, and
quities. Clement XIII (1758-69) set the seal on technique ally him to the Late Baroque masters.
this whole movement in 1763 by appointing Yet he never tampered with the archaeological
Winckelmann, the father of classical archaeo- correctness of his views in spite of his play with
logy, director general of Roman antiquities, an scale - contrasting his small, bizarre figures de-
office, incidentally, first established by Paul III rived from Salvator to the colossal size of the
in 1534. Finally, it was in 1772, during Clement ruins - or in spite of the warm glow of Venetian
XIV's pontificate (1769 74), that construction light pervading his etchings and of the boldness
began of the present Vatican museum, the of his compositions, in which, true to the Baro-
largest collection of antiquities in the world. que tradition, telling diagonals prevail. It is the
Archaeological enthusiasm was also guiding Baroque picturesqueness of these plates, so
the greatest patron of his day. Cardinal Ales- different from the dry precision of Neo-classical
sandro Albani, when he planned his villa outside topographical views, that determined for many
Porta Salaria.' Built Hterally as a receptacle for generations the popular conception of ancient
his unequalled collection of ancient statues (now Rome.
mainly in Munich), the villa, erected by Carlo Piranesi's vedute of ancient Rome no less than
Marchionni between 1746 and 1763, was yet those of the contemporary city (
Vedute di Roma,
intended as a place to be lived in - an imperial published from 1748 on) reveal the trained
villa suburhana rather than a museum. The stage designer, whose early and most famous
Cardinal's friend and protege Winckelmann series of plates, the Career! d'ltivetizione, first
helped to assemble the ancient treasures; and it issued in 1745 and re-etched in 1760 i, are
was on the ceiling of the sumptuous great gal- romantic phantasmagorias derived from Baro-
lery that Anton Raphael Mengs, the admired que opera sets [247]. The Career! and the
apostle of Neo-classicism, painted his Parnassus, Vedute, with their oblique perspectives which
vying, as his circle believed, with ancient add a new dimension of drama and spatial ex-
murals. pansion, reveal the influence of Ferdinando
BIBLOSARTE
247- Giovanni Battista Piranesi: Plate from the Careen, 1745. Etching
BIBLOSARTE
366 •
Bibiena's 'invention' ot the siena per antiolo operations may be gathered from Pozzo's work
(Chapter Note 47) [335]. Thus in the vedute
19, Perspectiva pictorum et anhileclorum (Rome,
Piranesi wedded two traditions which seem i6()3) which was to serve the theatre and the
mutually exclusive: that of the Baroque stage Church alike. Statistical facts illuminate the
with that of topographical renderings of an growing obsession with the theatre during the
'architectural landscape'. Piranesi's case, how- Late Baroque period: in 1678, for instance, 130
ever, was far from unique, for in the course of comedies were represented on private stages in
the eighteenth century ideas and conceptions Rome alone.** In the early eighteenth century the
of the stage designer invaded many sectors of theatre had even greater importance; it was
the other arts.*" certainly as significant for the creation of visual
It should be recalled that during most of the conventions and patterns as cinema and tele-
seventeenth century the influence of the stage vision are in the twentieth century."
on painting and architecture was more limited If in the new era it is pertinent to talk of the
than is usually believed. It is, of course, true ascendancy of the stage designer over the
that effects first developed for the stage were painter (often, of course, one and the same
also used in works of a permanent character." person), the ascendancy of the painters over the
But the basic High Baroque concept of the unifi- sculptors seems equally characteristic. There is
cation of real and artistic space, that illusionism circumstantial documentary evidence that on
which blurs the borderline between image and many occasions painters were called upon to
reality, is not by its very nature a 'theatrical' make designs for the sculptors to work from - a
device. It may be argued that the theatre and situation utterly unthinkable in Bernini's circle.
the art of the seventeenth century developed in Only a few examples can here be given. Maratti
the same direction, for in both cases an emotion- seems to have had a hand in the work of many
ally stirring and often overwhelming chain of sculptors. He was a close friend and constant
seemingly true impressions was to induce the adviser of Paolo Naldini; he made designs for
beholder to forget his everyday existence and to four allegorical statues in S. Maria in Cosme-
participate in the pictorial 'reality' before his din,^" for Monnot's tomb of Pope Innocent XI,
eyes. Yet Roman fresco painting from Cortona's and for the monumental statues to be placed in
Barberini ceiling to Gaulli's work in the Gesu Borromini's tabernacle niches in the nave of S.
shows as little direct impact from the theatre as Giovanni in Laterano.'^ Gaulli is credited with
Borromini's architecture. In another chapter I the designs of Raggi's rich stucco decorations
have attempted to demonstrate that the Vene- in the Gesii.'- The Genoese painter Pietro
tian Baldassare Longhena, by contrast, owed Bianchi, who Rome, maintained close
settled in
decisive impulses to the stage and that it was he contacts with the sculptors Pietro Bracci, Gio-
who laid the foundation for the scenographic vanni Battista Maini, Filippo della Valle, Fran-
architecture of the eighteenth century. Simi- cesco Queirolo, and others and supplied them
larly, in the history of Late Baroque painting with sketches, as his biographer relates in
from Padre Pozzo to Tiepolo stage requisites detail.'' The new custom appears also to have
such as the proscenium arch, the curtain, the spread outside Rome, to mention only the Nea-
quadratura backdrop, and the painted 'actors' politan Solimena who helped the sculptor
stepping out of the painted wings play an im- Lorenzo Vaccaro with designs.'^ This whole
portant and often overwhelming part. To what trend, which of course came to an end with the
extent painting in the grand manner and stage dawn of Neo-classicism, was not in the first
design were then regarded as basically identical place the result of the inability of sculptors to
BIBLOSARTE
INTRODUCTION •
367
cope with their own problems. It was, to a .'\11 this required a high degree of sophisti-
certain extent in any case, connected with a re- cation on the part of the public. The rapid
valuation of the sketch as such, a question which sketches no less than the works of the masters of
must be discussed in a wider context. the loaded brush made hitherto unknown claims
In the age of the Renaissance, drawing be- on sensibilit\- and understanding, for it surely
came the basis for the experimental and scien- needs more acti\c collaboration on the part of
tific approach to nature. But drawing remained the spectator to 'decipher' a Magnasco than a
a means to an end, and the end was the finished Domenichino or a Bolognese academician. The
painting. The latter was prepared by many eighteenth-century virtuoso was the answer.
stages, from the first sketches and studies from Keyed up to a purely aesthetic approach, he
nature to the carefully executed final design and could savour the peculiar qualities and charac-
cartoon. As early as the sixteenth century artists teristics of each master; he would be steeped in
began to feel that this laborious process maimed the study of individual manner and style and
the freshness and vitality of the first thought. find in the drawing, the sketch, and the boz-
Vasari, writing in 1550, made the memorable zetto equal or even greater merits than in the
observation that 'many painters . . . achieve in finished product. Behind this new appreciation
the first sketch of their work, as though guided lay not only the pending emergence of aesthetics
by a sort of fire of inspiration ... a certain as a philosophical discipline of sensory experi-
measure of boldness; but afterwards, in finish- ence, but above all the concept of the uniqueness
ing it, the boldness vanishes.' So, an academic of genius. The new interpretation of genius
Mannerist arose as the mouthpiece of anti- made its entry from about the middle of the
academic spontaneity of creation. Throughout seventeenth century on, and comparative
the seventeenth and even the eighteenth century changes in the artist as a type were not long
the Renaissance method of careful preparation, delayed. But the early eighteenth-century artist
fully re-instated by Annibale Carracci, remained was not the genius of the romantic age who
the foundation of academic training, but a revolted against reason and rule in favour of
number of progressive artists, although never feeling, naivete, and creation in sublime soli-
working on canvas alia prima (possibly with the tude. By contrast, the Late Baroque artist was a
exception of Caravaggio), attempted to preserve man of the world, rational and immensely versa-
something of the brio of spontaneous creation, tile, who produced rapidly and with the greatest
with the result that the finish itself became ease; and since he felt himself part of a living
sketchy. During the eighteenth century, from tradition, he had no compunction in using the
Magnasco to Guardi, the masters working with heritage of the past as a storehouse from which
a free, rapid brush-stroke assumed steadily to choose at will. Juvarra and Tiepolo are the
greater importance and foreshadowed the posi- supreme examples.
tion of romantic painters like Delacroix, for But now it is highly significant that none of
whom the first flash of the idea was 'pure ex- the new terms of reference arising during the
pression' and 'truth issuing from the soul'. It is Late Baroque were of Italian origin. .Aesthetics
in the context of this development that the as an autonomous discipline was a German
painter's sketch as well as the sculptor's boz- accomplishment;'" the nature of genius was
zetto were conceded the status of works of art defined in England; and it was the Englishman
in their own right, and even the first ideas of Jonathan Richardson who laid down the rules of
architects, such as the brilliant 'notes' by the 'science of connoisseurship'.'" Nor had
Juvarra, were looked upon in the same way. Italy a collector of drawings of the calibre and
BIBLOSARTE
368 •
discriminating taste of the I'renchman Mariette. theory. Not only Roman, but Italian supremacy
The theory of art, that old domain of Italian had seen its day. France and, as the century
thought, lay barren. In the eighteenth century advanced, England assumed the leading roles.
the relationship between Italy and the other It is all the more surprising that never before
nations was for the first time reversed : English had Italian art attracted so many foreigners.
and French treatises appeared in Italian trans- The treasures of Italy seemed now to belong to
lations. While in England the whole structure the whole of Europe and nobody could boast a
of classical art theory was attacked and replaced gentleman's education without having studied
by subjective criteria of sensibility, Conte them. It is equally surprising that never before
Francesco Algarotti (1712-64),'' at this period were Italian artists a similar international suc-
the foremost Italian critic but in fact no more cess. In an unparalleled spurt they carried the
than an able vulgarizer, dished up all the old torch as far as Lisbon, London, and St Peters-
premises, precepts, and maxims of the classical burg just before it was extinguished.
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER l6
ARCHITECTURE
introduction: late baroque tecture without any aesthetic blinkers from

classicism and rococo measured drawings of the Pantheon to Brunel-
leschi, Sanmicheli, the Palazzo Farnese, Ber-
An authoritative history of Italian eighteenth- nini, and Borromini, among many others. This
century architecture cannot yet be written. attitude is nowadays usually condemned as
Many of the monuments are not at all or only wicked, academic and eclectic, and, to be sure,
insufficiently published; the dating of many it cannot be dissociated from the intellectualism
buildings is controversial or vague; the build- of the academies and their steadily growing
ings without architects and the names of archi- influence. Hesitatingly, however, I have to pro-
tects without buildings abound. It has been nounce once more the all-too-obvious common-
pointed out that in one corner of Italy, the place that ever}' artist and architect in so far as
province of Treviso alone, about 2,000 palaces, he works with a traditional grammar and with
churches, and oratories were built in the course traditional formulas is an 'eclectic' by the very
of the century. Nobody has seriously attempted nature of his activity. It is the mixture and the
to sift this enormous material, and it is only interpretation of this common 'language' (and,
recently that a number of major architects have naturally, also the reaction against it) on which
been made the subject of individual studies.' not only the personal style and its quality but
Any attempt at a coherent vision of the period also the evolution of new concepts depend. The
would therefore appear premature. And yet it longer a homogeneous artistic culture lasts -
seems that certain conclusions of a general and to all intents and purposes the Italian
nature may safely be drawn. Renaissance in its broadest sense spanned an

From the end of the seventeenth century epoch of more than 350 years - the larger is, of
onwards architects looked back to a dual tradi- course, the serviceable repertory. How did the
tion. There was close at hand and still fresh architects from the late seventeenth century
before everybody's eyes the great work of the onwards handle it.^
Roman seventeenth-century masters, which de- No patent answer can be given, and this
cisively altered the course of architecture and characterizes the situation. On the one hand,
formed a large reservoir of new ideas and con- there are those, typical of a w aning epoch, who
cepts. There was, moreover, the older tradition, reach positions of eminence by skilfully mani-
that of the Cinquecento, and behind it that of pulating the repertory without adding to it a
classical antiquity itself It is at once evident great many original ideas, and among their
that from the end of the seventeenth century number Carlo Fontana, Ferdinando Fuga, and
onwards the repertory from which an architect Luigi Vanvitclli must be counted. Then there
was able to choose had almost no limits, and it are those who fully master the repertory, choose
is a sign of the new period that architects were here and there according to circumstances, and
fully aware of this and regarded it as an asset. yet mould it in a new and exciting way. The
Juvarra is a case in point. His studies ranged greatest among these revolutionary traditional-
over the whole field of ancient and Italian archi- ists is certainly Filippo Juvarra. Finally there
BIBLOSARTE
370 •
is the band of masters, possibly smaller in again became the prevalent style. In the process
numbers, who contract the repertory, follow of revaluation Carlo Fontana must be assigned
one distinct line, and arrive at unexpected and a leading part. Venice with Tirali and Massari
surprising solutions. They are still the least soon followed, and various facets of a classi-
known and often not the most active architects cizing architecture remained the accepted cur-
of the period; thus the names of Filippo Raguz- rent until they merged into the broad stream
zini, Gabriele Valvassori, Ferdinando Sanfelice, of Neo-classicism. But by comparison with the
and Bernardo Vittone, to mention some of the architecture of Neo-classicism the classical
most important, convey very little even to the architecture of pre-Neo-classicism appears
student of Italian architecture. varied and rich and full of unorthodox inci-
Admittedly our division is far too rigid, for dents. We may therefore talk with some justi-
architects may at different periods of their fication of 'Late Baroque Classicism', and it
careers or in individual works tend towards would be a contradiction in terms to circum-

one side or the other. But on the whole one may scribe this style by the generic epithet 'academic'.
safely postulate that the first two groups drew The process of transition from 'Late Baroque
on the store of classical forms and ideas rather Classicism' to Neo-classicism can often be
than on the Borrominesque current, without, intimately followed, and before the monuments
however, excluding a temperate admixture from themselves there is not a shadow of doubt when
the latter. The last group, by contrast, found its to apply the terminological division.
inspiration directly or indirectly mainly in Bor- What differentiates Late Baroque Classicism
romini. When discussing Bernini's and Cor- from all previous classical trends is, first, its
tona's architecture, I tried to assess the specific immense versatility,- and to this I have already
quality of their 'classicism'. Architects could alluded. In Rome, Turin, and Naples it may
follow their lead without accepting the dynamic be flexible enough to admit a good deal of
vigour of their work. Dotti's draining of Cor- Borrominesque and pseudo-Borrominesque de-
tona's style in the Madonna di S. Luca near coration; even Late Mannerist elements, such
Bologna is as characteristic as Vanvitelli's foras undifferentiated framing wall strips, often
malization of Bernini's S. Andrea al Quirinale belong to the repertory. One of the strangest
in the Chiesa dei PP. delle Missioni at Naples cases is Morte in
the facade of S. Maria della
(c. 1760). The classicism that emerged often Rome, where Fuga weds Ammanati's Man-
replaced the wholeness of vision of the great nerist facade of S. Giovanni Evangelista (Flo-
masters by a method of adding motif to motif, rence) with the aedicule fa9ade stemming from
each clearly separable from the other (p. 373); Carlo Rainaldi. Venice, by contrast, steers clear
to this extent it is permissible to talk of 'academic of any such adventures and returns straight to
classicism', but we shall see that the term Scamozzi, Palladio, and beyond, to classical
should be used with caution. antiquity. The second feature characteristic of
A rather severe classicism was the leading the style is its deliberate scenic quality, which
style in Italy between about 1580 and 1625. is not only aimed at by men born many years
After that date a tame classicizing architecture apart, hke Fontana, Juvarra, and Vanvitelli, but
(e.g. S. Anastasia and Villa Doria-Pamphili in also by the masters of the non-classical trend,
Rome; cathedral at Spoleto) was practised by as a glance at Raguzzini's Piazza S. Ignazio
some minor masters parallel to the work of the proves. Finally, both classicists and non-clas-
giants of the High Baroque. Towards the end sicists favour a similar kind of colour scheme
of the century a new form of classicism once broken colours light in tone, blues, yellows,
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE 371
pinks, and much white - in a word typically architects who brought about the anti-classical
eighteenth-century colours, and in Carlo Fon- vogue were born between 1680 and 1700, the
tana's work the turning away from the warm, majority in the nineties, just like the sculptors
full, and succulent colours of the High Baroque and painters with similar tendencies. From
may be observed. Thus, on a broad front the about 1725 on and for the next twenty-five years
classical and non-classical currents have essen- these masters had an ample share in the produc-
tial quahties in common. tion of important buildings. Next to Rome, the
In the over-all picture of eighteenth-century chief centres are Naples, Sicily, and Piedmont;
architecture Late Baroque Classicism appears but other cities can also boast a number of
to have the lead. But one should not under- unorthodox Rococo designs, of which we may
estimate the importance of the other trend, here remember Gianantonio Veneroni's majes-
which may safely be styled 'Italian Rococo' - tic Palazzo Mezzabarba at Pavia (1728-30), so
not only because of the free and imaginative similar to Valvassori's Palazzo Doria-Pamphili,'
decoration and the relinquishing of the orders the extravagant Palazzo Stanga at Cremona
as a rigid system of accentuation, but mainly [248],' and the fayade of S. Bartolomeo at
because of the rich play with elegant curvilinear Modena (1727) which recalls works of the
shapes and spatial complexities. Most of the southern German Baroque.'^
248. Cremona, Palazzo Stanga,

early eighteenth century
BIBLOSARTE
372 •
By and large it may be said that the official academic subject during the seventeenth cen-
style of the Church and the courts was Late tury by Frenchmen like M. Durand and F.
Baroque Classicism and that the Italian version Blondel." When in the course of the eighteenth
ot the Rococo found tenacious admirers among century it was taken up again by the Italians
the aristocracy and the rich bourgeoisie. In Derizet (a Frenchman by birth), Ricciolini,
Rome, in particular, numerous palaces of un- Galiani, F. M. Preti, G. F. Cristiani, Bertotti-
known authorship were built" which form a Scamozzi, and others, it had the stereotyped
distinct and coherent group by virtue of their rigidity given to it by the French. Canonical
elegant window-frames and by the fact that the proportions can, of course, be applied only
windows in dif}erent tiers are interconnected; where divisions are emphatic, unambiguous,
so that for the first time in its history the Roman and easily readable - in a word, in a rational, i.e.
palace shows a primarily vertical accentuation classical architectural system. The age of reason
accomplished not by the solid element of the was dawning, and to it also belongs the second
orders but by the lights. concept in question. The Frenchman de Corde-
There cannot be any doubt that the rocaille moy (1651 -1722) had first preached in his
decoration which one finds in Northern Italy Nouveau Traite o( I'job that truth and simplicity
rather than Rome derives from France, whence must dictate an architect's approach to his
the Rococo conquered Europe. Yet it would be subject and that the purpose of a building must
wrong to believe that France had an important be expressed in all clarit}' by its architecture -
formative influence on the style as a whole. intellectual requirements behind which one can
The Italian Rococo has many facets and cannot sense the rational concept of a 'functional'
be summed up by an easy formula; but far from architecture.** Antique in origin, the principle
being foreign transplantations, all the major of the correspondence between the purpose of
works of the style, such as the Spanish Stairs a building and the character of its architecture
in Rome or Vittone's churches in Piedmont, are had always been a cornerstone of Italian archi-
firmly grounded in the Italian tradition and tectural theory; nothing else is adumbrated by
have little in common with French buildings of the demand of 'decorum'. But now, interpreted
the period. It is not so strange, however, that as simplicity and naturalness, the concept had
it was the other, the classical current that often implicitly a strong anti-Baroque and anti-
took its cue from France; for French classicism, Rococo bias. The new ideas found an energetic
filtered through a process of stringent rationali- advocate in the Venetian Padre Carlo Lodoli
zation, gave the world the models of stately (1690-1761);" he in turn prepared the ground
imperial architecture. And from Juvarra's Pa- not only for the influential works of the French
lazzo iMadama in Turin to Vanvitelli's palace Abbe Laugier but also for the neo-classical
at Caserta the French note makes itself strongly philosophy of Francesco Milizia, who, by des-
felt. cribing Borromini's followers as 'a delirious
It was also in France that two theoretical sect', determined the pattern of thought for
concepts, Italian in origin, were taken up and more than a hundred years.
developed which, when handed back to Italy, Venetian architects returned to pure classical
became instrumental in undermining the rela- principles at a remarkably early date, probably
tive freedom of both the Late Baroque Clas- owing to an intellectual climate that led to the
sicism and the Italian Rococo. One of these, rise of Lodoli, the prophet of rationalism.'"
proportion in architecture, which had always This helps to explain what would otherwise
fascinated the Italians, was turned into an look like a strange paradox. Venice, where in
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
373
the eighteenth century gaiety had a permanent CampiteUi (originally at the foot of the Capitol
home, the city of festivals and carnivals as well but now reassembled on Piazza Capizucchi).
as of polite society, the only Italian centre where His manner is fully formed in the facade of S.
the feminine element dominated - Venice Marcello al Corso (1682-3) [249], probably his
seemed predestined for a broad Rococo culture, most successful work, which impressed the
and her painters fulfil our expectations. But in younger generation of architects very much.
contrast to most other Italian cities, Venice had This facade must be regarded as a milestone
no Rococo architecture. In the pri\ acy of the on the way to Late Baroque Classicism; it is,
palace, however, the Venetians admitted Rococo in fact, separated by a deep gulf from the great
decoration. It is there that one finds rocaille High Baroque fa9ades, despite the use of such
ornament of a daintiness and delicacy probably devices as the concave curvature and the illu-
without parallel in Italy." sionist niche of the upper tier. Here everything
It is in keeping with the political constellation is unequivocal, proper, easily readable. Like
that, next to Rome, the two Italian kingdoms, Maderno at the beginning of the century, Fon-
Naples in the South and Sardinia in the North, tana works again with wall projections dividing
absorbed most of the great architects of the the whole front into single bays framed by
period and offered them tasks worthy of their orders. But by contrast to Maderno, every
skill. While we can, therefore, discuss sum- member of the order has its precise complement
marily the rest of Italy, these three centres (thus a full pilaster appears at the inside of each
require a closer inspection. By far the most outer bay below, behind the column, corres-
interesting architectural events, however, took ponding to the pilaster at the corner), and this
place in the Piedmontese realm of the Kings is one of the reasons why the facade is essentially
of Sardinia; for this reason a special chapter will static in spite of the accumulation of columns
be devoted to architecture in Piedmont. in the centre. By contrast to Maderno, too, the
wall projection corresponds exactly to the dia-
ROME meter of the columns, so that the encased

column forms an isolated motif, clearly sepa-
Carlo Fontana ( 1638-IJ14)
rated from the double columns of the central
Carlo Fontana, born in 1638'- near Como, in bay. The aedicule framing this bay is, as it were,
Rome before 1655, was the man on whose easily detachable, and behind the pairs of free-
shoulders fell the mantle of the great High standing columns are double pilasters which
Baroque architects. He began his career in the have their precise counterpart in the upper tier.
later 1650s as an architectural draughtsman and Thus the orders in both tiers repeat, which
clerk of works to Cortona, Rainaldi, and Bernini. is, however, obscured by the screening aedicule.
We have often come across his name in these It is precisely the 'detachability' of the aedicule
pages. His suave and genial manners and his motif that gives its superstructure - the broken
easy talentmade him an ideal collaborator, and pediment with the empty frame'^ between the
one soon finds him playing the role of mediator segments - its scenic quality. The principle
between the masters whom he served. Bernini here employed corresponds to that of theatrical
employed him for about ten years on many ot wings which are equally unconnected, a prin-
his major undertakings, and it was he who had ciple, as we have noted before (p. 297), that is
the strongest formative influence on Fontana's foreign to Roman High Baroque structures but
style. Before 1665, he came into his own with inherent in Late Baroque Classicism. Essentially
the interesting little church of S. Biagio in different both from the Early and the High
BIBLOSARTE
249- Carlo Fontana: Rome, S. Marcello. Facade, 1682-3. Detail
the Piazza of St Peter's, Rome, 1694

250 (right). Carlo Fontana: Project for the completion of
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
375
Baroque, the conception of the facade of S. Peter's (1692-8), and the Cappella Albani in S.
Marcello provides a key to Fontana's archi- Sebastiano (1705) may be mentioned. In these
tecture as well as to many other Late Baroque smaller works, which hark back to the rich
classicist buildings. polychrome tradition of the Roman High Bar-
A study of Fontana's largest ecclesiastical oque,'' he gave his best. An endless number of
ensemble, the Jesuit church and college at designs for tombs (among them those of Cle-
Loyola in Spain, reveals the limitations of his ment XI and Innocent XII),'" altars, fountains,
talent. The layout as a whole in the wide hilly festival decorations, and even statues came from
landscape is impressive enough but the church,
; his studio, and it is probably not too much to
designed over a circular plan with ambulatory say that at the turn of the century there was
(p. 299), lacks the finesse of Longhena's Salute, hardly any major undertaking in Rome without
among others, because the shape of the pillars his name attached to it. His eminence was
is determined by the radii of the circle, which publicly acknowledged by his election as Prin-
makes trapezoid units in the ambulatory un- cipe of the Academy of St Luke in 1686 and,
avoidable.'^ In many respects the design echoes again, for the eight years 1692- 1700 - a mark
current Roman conceptions; the high drum of esteem without precedent. As a town-planner
derives from that of S. Maria de' Miracoli on he indulged in somewhat fantastic schemes on
the Piazza del Popolo,'^ while the facade is a paper, such as the building of a large semi-
classicizing adaptation of Rainaldi's unexecuted circular piazza in front of the Palazzo Ludovisi
plan of 1662 for S. Maria in Campitelli. Other (later Montecitorio, which he finished with
features,'*' besides the idea of the ambulatory, classicizing alterations of Bernini's design) or
point to a study of S. Maria della Salute. Even the destruction of the Vatican Borghi, finally
if Fontana cannot be made responsible for the carried out in Mussolini's Rome. \ second, less
details, this gathering together of diverse ideas ambitious project for the completion of the
into a design of dubious merit is characteristic Piazza of St Peter's [250] elaborates Bernini's
for the leading master of the new era. idea of erecting a clock-tower outside the main
Apart from some undistinguished palaces, oval, set back into the Piazza Rusticucci. But
he built many chapels in Roman churches, ot in contrast to Bernini's decision to make this
which the Cappella Ginetti in S. Andrea della building part and parcel of the Piazza (p. 195),
Valle (1671), the Cappella Cibo in S. Maria del Fontana intended to remove it so far from the
Popolo (1683-7), the Baptismal Chapel in St oval that the beholder, on entering the 'fore-
500 FT
150 M
BIBLOSARTE
37<> LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
court', would have seen the main area as a later (1691). Both chapels are daring essays in
separate entity. The near and far ends of the a strange type of picturesque architecture, trans-
arms of the colonnades, moreover, would have lations of (juudratiiru painting into three dimen-
appeared in his field of vision like isolated wings sions (Gherardi himself was also a painter),
on a stage - a model example of how, by seem- based on a close study of Bernini's use of light
ingly slight changes, a dynamic High Baroque and on his experiments in unifying architecture
structure could be transformed into a sceno- and realistic sculpture. In the S. Cecilia
graphic Late Baroque work.'' Theatrical in a Chapel,-' moreover, Gherardi fell back upon
different sense would have been Fontana's the Guarinesque idea of the truncated dome
planned transformation of the Colosseum into through which one looks into another differently
a forum for a centraHzed church. A telling shaped and brilliantly lit space. It is the variety
symbol of the supersession of the crumbled and quantity of motifs, freely distributed over
pagan world by Christianity, the ancient ruins the broken wall surfaces, that stamp the chapel
would have formed sombre wings to the centre as a work of the Late Baroque.
of the stage on which the house of God was
to stand.
The Eighteenth Century
As an engineer, Fontana was concerned with
the regulation and maintenance of water-ways Carlo Fontana had a large number of pupils
and pipe-lines and, above all, with an investiga- and collaborators, most of whom can safely be
tion into the security of the dome of St Peter's. left unrecorded. Mention may be made of his
He supported many of his schemes and enter- son Francesco (1668- 1708), whose death pre-
prises with erudite and lavishly produced pub- ceded that of the father. He is the architect of
lications, of which the Templum Vaticanum of the large but uninspired church of SS. Apostoli
1694 must be given pride of place. Numberless ( 1 702-24). Carlo's nephew, Girolamo, designed
drawings and many hundred pages of manu- the academic two-tower fa9ade of the cathedral
script survive as a monument to his indefatigable at Frascati (1697 1700, towers later); in spite
industry.-" It was this man, methodical and of its traditional scheme it is typical for this
ambitious and without the genius of the great phase of the Late Baroque by virtue of its slow
masters of the earlier generation, who brought rhythm and an accumulation of trifling motifs.
about in Rome the turn to a classicizing, book- Among Carlo's other pupils, three names stand
ish, and academic manner in architecture. out, that of the worthy Giovan Battista Contini
Nevertheless his influence was enormous, and (1641-1723),-- who erected a number of tasteful
such different masters as Juvarra in Italy, chapels in Rome but had to find work mainly
Poppelmann and Johann Lucas von Hilde- outside, e.g. at Montecassino and Ravenna and
brandt in Germany and Austria, and James even in Spain (Cathedral, Saragossa); further,
Gibbs in England looked up to him with those of Carlo Francesco Bizzacheri (1656-
veneration. 1721) and Alessandro Specchi (1668- 1729).
Even at when Carlo Fontana was
the time The former, the architect of the facade of S.
the undisputed arbiter of taste in Rome, the Isidoro {c. 1700-4), would be worth a more
spirit of adventure was not quite extinguished. thorough study ;-"* the latter is a better-defined
Proof of it are Antonio Gherardi's (1644- 1702) personality, known to a wider public through
Avila and Cecilia Chapels, the former in S. his work as an engraver.-^ The Palazzo de
Maria in Trastevere built before 1686, the latter Carolis (1716-22),-^ his largest building, some-
in S. Carlo ai Catinari dating from a few years what anachronistic in 1720, has been mentioned
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTLRE 377
(p. 290). His name is connected with two more 1732-5 .Messandro Galilei: Cappella Corsini, S.
interesting enterprises: the port of the Ripetta Giovanni in Laterano
(1704), formerly opposite S. Girolamo degH 1732-62 Nicola Salvi: Fontana Trevi. .^fter Salvi's
Schiavoni, and the design of the Spanish Stairs. death in 1 75 1 finished by Giuseppe Pannini
The port no longer exists and Francesco de f255l

17.33^6 Galilei: facâde of S. Giovanni in Laterano
Sanctis superseded him as architect of the
[258]
Staircase.-'' But in these designs Specchi broke
1733-5 Carlo de Dominicis: SS. Celso e Giuliano"
with the classicizing repertorj' of his teacher
1 734 Galilei facade of S.
: Giovanni de' Fiorentini^^
and found new scenographic values based on 1735 Giuseppe Sardi(.'): faâdcofS. Maria Mad-
an interplay of gently curved lines. Thus the dalena"
pendulum began to swing back in a direction 1736-41 Antonio Derizet: church of SS. Nome di
which one may associate with the name of Maria in Trajan's Forum"
Borromini. 1736-after 175 1 Fuga: Palazzo Corsini
1741 Manoel Rodrigues dos Santos^'' (and Giu-
At the beginning of the eighteenth century
seppe Sardi): SS. Trinita de' Spagnuoli in
there was a dearth of monumental architectural
Via Condotti
tasks in Rome. While during the seventeenth
1741 Fuga: monumental entrance to the atrium
century Rome had attracted the greatest names,
of S. Cecilia
it is characteristic of the early eighteenth that
1 74 1 -3 Fuga: facade of S. Maria Maggiore
the real genius of the period, Filippo Juvarra, 1 74 1 4 Paolo Ameli Palazzx) Doria-Pamphili, fa9ade
:
left the cit}' in 17 14, to return only on rare towards Via del Plebiscito'"
occasions. The whole first quarter of the new 1 74 1 4 Pietro Passalacqua and Domenico Grego-
:'"
century was comparatively uneventful, and it rini facade and renovation of S. Croce in
looked as if the stagnation of the Fontana era Gerusalemme
would last for ever. But once more Rome re- 1743-63 Carlo Marchionni: Villa Albani^"*
covered to such an extent that she seemed to

reconquer her leading position. For twenty
years, between about 1725 and 1745, talents The new flowering of architecture in Rome
as well as works of sublime beauty crowded is mainly connected with the names of Raguz-
there. A chronological list of the more important zini {c. 1680-1771),'" Valvassori (1683-1761),^"
structures of the period may prove it Galilei (1691-1737),^' De Sanctis (i 693-1 731,
not 1740), Salvi (1697-1751), and Fuga (1699-
1782).^- Each of the first five created one great
1723 Francesco de Sanctis: facade of SS. Trinita masterpiece, namely the Piazza S. Ignazio, the
de' Pellegrini-' facade of the Palazzo Doria-Pamphili, the facade
1723-6 De Sanctis: the Spanish Staircase [251, 252) of S. Giovanni in Laterano, the Spanish Stairs,
1725-6 Filippo Raguzzini: Hospital and Church of and the Fontana Trevi, and only the sixth, Fuga,
S. Gallicano the most profuse talent of the group, secured
1727-8 Raguzzini: Piazza S. Ignazio [253
a number of first-rate commissions for himself.
1728-52 Girolamo Teodoli SS.PietroeMarcellino-'^
:
Our list opens with two major works of the

1730-5 Gabriele Valvassori: Palazzo Doria-Pam-
Roman Rococo, the Spanish Stairs and the
wing towards the Corso [254]
phili,
Piazza S. Ignazio - the one grand, imposing,
1732-7 Ferdinando Fuga: Palazzo della Consulta
[256]^'
fabulous in scale, aristocratic in character, com-
1732-7 Fuga: Chiesa deU'Orazione e Morte, Via parable to the breathtaking fireworks of the
Giuliaô Baroque age; the other intimate, small in size.
BIBLOSARTE
251- Francesco dc Sanctis: Rome,
the Spanish Staircase, project, 1723,
redrawn from the original in the
Ministcre dcs Affaires Ktrangcres, Paris
IJifeô o Altatt <lcl1a Scaliiute..

daâni ctu <lalURutaJi Spwn&.
SctUntc N. rontifjc«A\«aino.
CKiua (UlU Santintmk Trmiti
<U Monti.
: uiUllu»»a » m^Mi[||[iiiiLm»uimJ ll
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHn tC ILRh 379
252. Francesco de Sanctis:

Rome, the Spanish Staircase, 1723-6
and with its simple middle-class dwelling- although Specchi's port (unfortunately no
houses typical of the rising bourgeois civiliza- longer existing) and De Sanctis's staircase are
tion. Also, in the urban setting these works not on the same axis, they look on old town-plans
belong to diametrically opposed traditions. The (e.g. that by G. B. Nolli of 1748) like the over-
Spanish Staircase [251, 252]'*^ is in the line of ture and the finale of a vast scheme exactly equi-
:
succession from Sixtus V's great town-planning distant from the little piazza, a 'nodal point'
schemes focused on long straight avenues and widening out on the main artery, the Corso,
characteristic viewpoints. For seventeenth- they lie at the far ends of straight, narrow streets
century Roman architects the town-planner's which cut the Corso at similar angles.
ruler had far less attraction. But influenced by While the Spanish Staircase is composed for
Carlo Fontana, the early eighteenth century the far as well as the near view the more one
was again smitten with the concept of long per- approaches it the richer and the more capti-
spectives, to which the French of the seventeenth vating are the scenic effects - the enclosed
century had so enthusiastically responded. A Piazza S. Ignazio [253] only offers the near
comprehensive vision unites now the whole view, and on entering it an act of instantaneous
area from the Tiber to the Trinita de' Monti, and perception rather than of progressive revelation
BIBLOSARTE
380 • LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
determines the beholder's mood. The Roman

masters of the seventeenth century preferred
the enclosed court-like piazza to a wide per-
spective and exploited fully the psychological
moment of dazzling fascination which is always
experienced at the unexpected physical close-
ness of monumental architecture. Raguzzini's
piazza is in this tradition. But he performed an
interesting volte-face, for, in contrast to the
square of S. Maria della Pace, it is now the
dwelling houses, arranged like wings on a stage -
and not the (older) church facade - that form

the scenic focus. M
30
What unites the conceptions of the Spanish
Staircase and the Piazza S. Ignazio is the ele- 253 (above). Filippo Raguzzini:
gance of the curvilinear design, ^^ and the same Rome, Piazza S. Ignazio, 1727-8. Plan
spirit may also be found in the playful move-

ment of the window pediments, the balconies 254 (below). Gabriele Valvassori:
Rome, Palazzo Doria-Pamphili, 1730-5. Detail
and balusters of .Valvassori's fa9ade of the
Palazzo Doria-Pamphili [254]. Works like the
255 (above, right). Nicola Salvi:
fa9ade of S. Maria Maddalena or the Fontana Rome, Fontana Trevi, 1732 62
Trevi are in a somewhat different category. In
spite of its flourishing rocaille decoration, the 256 (below, right). Ferdinando Fuga:
former is structurally rather conventional; it Rome, Palazzo della Consulta, 1732-7
contains, however, distinctly Borrominesque

motifs, above all, the dominating central niche,
so close to that of the Villa Falconieri at Frascati.
The Fontana Trevi is not without marginal
Rococo features such as the large rocaille shell
of Neptune, but Salvi's architecture is remark-
ably classical [255].^' Taking up an idea of
Pietro da Cortona, who had first thought of
combining palace front and fountain (p. 246),
Salvi had the courage and vision to wed the

classical triumphal arch with its allegorical and
mythological figures to the palace front. It was
he, too, who filled the larger part of the square
with natural rock formations bathed by the
gushing waters of the fountain. The Rococo
features in the Fontana Trevi are entirely sub-
ordinated to a strong Late Baroque classical
design that is as far from Fontana's formaliza-
tion of Bernini's manner as it is from the puristic
approach of Neo-classicism.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
382 •
LATK BAROQUK AND ROCOCO
The years 173 1-3 are the most varied and that it reveals the impact of English Palladian-
exciting in the history of Rome's eighteenth- ism. It is true that Galilei had spent five years
century architecture. To them belongs the peak in England (1714-19) before he returned to
of the regeneration after the Fontana period. his native Florence. Although at the time of his
Next to Valvassori's Palazzo Doria-Pamphili and departure from London hardly any Neo-
Salvi's Fontana Trevi, Fuga's Palazzo della Con- Palladian building had gone up,^' the fa9ade
sulta was rising in these years [256]. Based on the of S. Giovanni shows a family likeness to cer-
simple rhythm of light frames and darker panels, tain projects by the aged Sir Christopher Wren.
this palace contains a superabundance of indi- In actual fact, however, the facade is firmly
vidual motifs, which to a certain extent are rooted in the Roman tradition, combining,
elegant re-interpretations of Michelangelo's among others, features from IVladerno's fa9ade
Mannerism. Fuga's easy virtuosity resulted at of St Peter's [257, 258] and Michelangelo's
this early phase of his career in an extremely Capitoline palaces; features, incidentally, which
refined style with a note of Tuscan sophistica- belonged to the repertory of all Italian architects
tion, so different from Valvassori's deft bril- of the period and were usually incorporated
liance and Salvi's sense for Roman grandeur. into the highest class of monumental design.
To the same moment belongs Galilei's reticent Thus some of Galilei's competitors worked with
Cappella Corsini, a balanced Greek-cross de- the same vocabulary. What distinguishes his
sign articulated by a uniform Corinthian order facade from its great model, the facade of St
crowned by a simple hemispherical dome with Peter's, is not only its essentially static structure.
classical coffers. Severely classical when com-

pared to the other works of these years, the
257. Carlo Maderno: Rome,
chapel is still far from real Neo-classicism, St Peter's. Fa9ade, 1605 13. Detail
mainly on account of the sculptural decoration
(p. 438) and the subtle colour symphony of its
marbles with pale violets and mottled greens
prevailing. The year 1732 also saw the most
notable architectural event of the period, namely
Galilei's victory in the competition for the
fa9ade of S. Giovanni in Laterano arranged by
Pope Clement XII.
Never before in the history of architecture
had there been such a mammoth competition.^''
Twenty-three architects, anumber of them
non-Romans, took part. The jury under the
chairmanship of Sebastiano Conca, president
of the Academy, was entirely composed of
academicians, and the intrigues were fabulous.
Nevertheless, it was an historic event that
Galilei's model was chosen. It meant the official
placet to a severely classical design at a time

when the prevalent taste was non -classical. But
a good deal that is less than half-truth has been
said about Galilei's work. Critics usually believe
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
383
achieved by a process similar to that described sicism that is intrinsically less revolutionary
in the case of Fontana's S. Marcello, but also than art historians want to make it.
the new relationship between open and closed Once the facade was standing (1736), the
parts. Here the whole front is practically opened impetus of the Roman Rococo was almost
up so that the chiaroscuro becomes most impor- broken as far as monumental structures were
tant; it helps define the orders and entablatures concerned. After Galilei's death in 1737, Fuga's
sharply. The effect of classical discipline and predominant position was never challenged, and
precision is partly due to this pictorial device that alone spelled a development along Late
which is an element of Late Baroque Classicism Baroque classicist lines. Moreover, the vigour
rather than of Neo-classicism. In his facade of manner slowly faded into a some-
of his early
S. Maria Maggiore, Fuga used exactly the same what monotonous form of classicism. I do not
compositional characteristics. Add to all this mean his felicitous design of the taâde of S.
Galilei's magnificent sense of scale, so similar Maria Maggiore; but for this aspect one may
to Maderno's in the fa9ade of St Peter's and compare S. Maria della Morte with his design
much superior to any of his competitors, further for S. Apollinare or the Palazzo della Consulta
the crowning of the fa9ade with the traditional [256] with the Palazzo Cenci Bolognetti (c. 1 745
Baroque figures and the freak design of the see Chapter 8, Note 87) and with the long,
central pedestal with the blessing figure of rather dry front of the Palazzo Corsini. In the
Christ - and it must be admitted that we have coffee house in the Gardens of the Quirinal
before us a severe work of Late Baroque Clas- (174 1 -3) his puristic classicism was already
firmly established, but far from being Neo-
classical, this style was mainly modelled on
258. Alessandro Galilei : Rome,
S. Giovanni in Laterano. Fatâde, 1733 6. Detail
late Cinquecento examples. In 1751 Fuga left
Rome for Naples - an indication how the wind

was blowing - and it was there that he practised
during the last decades of his life. In 1752 he
began the enormous Albergo de' Poveri (length
of the facade c. 1000 feet) and in 1779 the even
larger Granary (destroyed). Shortly before his
death he designed the Chiesa dei Gerolamini

(1780), which shows that up to a point he
remained faithful to the Late Baroque tradition
long after the rise of Neo-classicism.
With Fuga's departure from Rome the brief
and brilliant flowering of Roman eighteenth-

centurv architecture was to all intents and pur-
poses over. Neither Marchionni's Villa .Albani
with its impressive Late Baroque layout^" nor
Piranesi's few picturesque essays in architec-
ture^*^ could retrieve the situation. Contrary to
what is usually said, the Late Baroque lingered
on in Rome until the days of the great Valadier
(1762- 1839), whose work belongs mainly to

Â^î. the nineteenth centurv.
BIBLOSARTE
259- Andrea Tirali: Venice, S. Nicolo da Tolentino. Favade, 1706- 14
BIBLOSARTE
385
26o. Giorgio Massari: Venice, Chiesa dei Gesuati, 1726-43
BIBLOSARTE
NORTHERN ITALY AND FLORENCE be mentioned.^' Rossi, in particular, who built
the richly decorated Baroque Chiesa dei Gesuiti

Longhena's activity in Venice was not in vain.^^' (1715-29),^' prepares in the Palazzo Corner
Although he had no successor of the highest della Regina (begun 1724) the return to a clas-
rank, architects vacillated for a time between sical architecture. The real master of transition
the ebullient plasticity and chiaroscuro of his from one manner to the other is Andrea Tirali
manner and the linear classicism of Scamozzi. (1657- 1 737). Although he designed in 1690 the
This is apparent in the work of Giuseppe Sardi Late Baroque chapel of S. Domenico in SS.
(c. 1621-99), Alessandro Tremignon, and the Giovanni e Paolo and the profuse Valier monu-
younger Domenico Rossi (1657-1737). They ment in the same church (1705-8),'* he turned
may turn Longhena's High Baroque sense for his back on the Baroque tradition in the facades
structure into typically Late Baroque diffused of S. Nicolo da Tolentino [259] and S. Vidal
and flickering pictorial effects, for which only (Vitale). Both fa9ades are Palladian revivals: the
Tremignon's notorious facade of S. Moise need first (1706-14) resuscitates a Vitruvian portico
261. Giorgio Massari:

Venice, Palazzo Grassi-Stucky, 1749 ff.
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
387
in the wake of Palladio's project ol 1579 for Matteo Lucchesi (1705-76) be dissociated from
S. Nicolo,^"* the second (datable 1734)" follows avigorous Late Baroque classicism. It was only
closely S. Giorgio Maggiore. with Tomaso Temanza (1705-89)'" and his
More important than Tirali and probably pupil G. Antonio Selva (1753-1819) that
the greatest Venetian architect of the first half Venetian architecture became a branch of the
of the eighteenth century is Giorgio Massari generalEuropean movement. In S. Maria
(1687-1766).^'' His masterpiece, the Chiesa dei Maddalena (1748-63), Temanza, the friend of
Gesuati (1726-43) [260], has a powerful temple Milizia, produced a corrected version of his
fa9ade derived from the central portion of Pal- teacher's and uncle's design of SS. Simeone e
ladio's S. Giorgio Maggiore, while the interior Giuda: it spelled an uncompromising return
is indebted to Palladio's Redentore, a debt to classical standards.
hardly obscured by the typically eighteenth- In Vicenza Antonio Pizzocaro (i\ 1600 80),
century features. Massari's finest domestic work Carlo Borella, and others kept Scamozzi's clas-
is the majestic Palazzo Grassi-Stucky (1749 fl); sicism alive throughout the seventeenth cen-
its staircase hall with the frescoes formerly
ascribed to Alessandro Longhi^"^ is the grandest
262. Giovanni Antonio Scalfarotto:
in Venice. But the facade, faithful to the
Venice, SS. Simeone e Giuda, 1718-38
characteristics of the Venetian palazzo type, is
almost as sober and flat as Scamozzi's [261 1."
It will be noticed that, in contrast to the
course of Venetian painting, Venetian archi-

tecture of the eighteenth century lived to a large
extent on its tradition,'*'* and this is also true for
its last great practitioner, Giovanni Antonio

Scalfarotto (c. 1690-1764), the architect of SS.
Simeone e Giuda (also called S. Simeone Pic-
colo, 1718-38) [262, 263]. This church, which
greets every visitor to Venice on his arrival, is
clearly based on the Pantheon. But above the

classical portico, to which one ascends over a
staircase modelled on ancient temples, rises a
stilted Byzantine-Venetian dome. The interior
somewhat varies the Pantheon motifs. There is,
however, one decisive change: the congrega-

tional room opens into a domed unit with semi-
circular apses, a formula derived via the Salute
from Palladio. This blending of the Pantheon
with Byzantium and Palladio is what one would
expect to find in eighteenth-century Venice,
and that it really happened is almost too good
to be true.^'
The analysis just made has shown that Scal-

farotto did not yet take the definite step across
the Neo-classical barrier. Nor can his pupil
BIBLOSARTE
263- Giovanni Antonio Scalfarotto
Venice,
SS. Simeone e Giuda, 1718-38.
Section and plan
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE
264. Francesco Maria Preti : Stra,

Villa Pisani, 1735-56
tury.'' The eighteenth century witnessed a windows in the fa9ade. The simple house which
splendid Palladian revival to which such a great Tiepolo built for himself at Zianigo may be
master as Francesco Muttoni (1668- 1747) con- mentioned as an example. This type of house
tributed with sensitive works (Biblioteca Berto- also illustrates the middle-class aspect of eigh-
liana, 1703)'- and which ran its course with teenth-century civilisation, the primary reason
the Palladio scholar and architect Ottavio Ber- for the enormous growth in the number of
totti-Scamozzi (1719-90) and Count Ottone villas at the time. There are infinite transitions
Calderari (1730- 1803).'''' to the princely villas, which vie in magnificence
A word must be added about the villas of the though not in architectural style with Versailles,
terra ferma.''^ Most of the villas of the Venetian such as the Villa Manin at Passariano (1738)
hinterland, numbering at least a thousand, were and the Villa Pisani, which has been mention-
built in the eighteenth century, and although ed.*"^ The latter, built to a design by Francesco
their variety is immense, certain common fea- Maria Preti, possesses in its rich painterly
tures can be found. The splendid Palladian decoration - traditional since Palladio's day - a
tradition of the aristocratic villa all'antica had, veritable museum of the Venetian school, a
of course, an indelible influence, and even in pageantry which culminates in Tiepolo's Glory
the pearl of the Settecento villas, the imposing of the Pisani Family painted on the ceiling of
pile of the Villa Pisani at Stra (1735-56) [264], the great hall.
the Palladian substance is not obscured by Bologna had at least two Late Baroque archi-
Baroque grandeur. A second type, no less im- tects of distinction. Carlo Francesco Dotti
portant than the first, derives from the Venetian (1670- 1 759)'* and Alfonso Torreggiani. Dotti's
palace as regards spatial organization as well masterpiece is the Sancturary of the Madonna
as the typically Venetian grouping of the di S. Luca, on a hill high above the cit}' (1723-
BIBLOSARTE
3Q0 • LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
265. Carlo Francesco Dotti: Bologna, 266. Giambattista Piacentini:

Madonna di S. Luca, 1723-57. Plan Bologna, Palazzo di Giustizia. Staircase hall, 1695
57) [265]. The Baroque age was fond of such telling than the analogies. Dotti convention-
sanctuaries. As widely visible symbols, they alized Cortona's dynamic motifs, returned to
dominate the landscape: they suggest nature's traditional conceptions (e.g. in the form of the
infinitude controlled by men in the service of drum), emphasized the vertical tendencies, and,
God. The architect's task was made particularly by reducing the transverse arms to deep ellipti-
difficult since he had not only to emulate the cal chapels, gave the building a distinct axial
grand forms of nature herself by creating a stir- direction. The attached sanctuary, into which
ring silhouette for the view from afar, but had one looks from the congregational room, owes
also to attract those who would ascend the hill of not a little to Rainaldi's S. Maria in Campitelli.
the sanctuary. This dual problem was solved by Thus adapted to new conditions, the Roman
Dotti in a masterly way. A homogeneous prototypes retain their formative influence.
elliptical shape, encasing a Greek-cross design, Alfonso Torreggiani (d. 1764), the architect
is crowned by the dome - an effective combina- of the charming Oratory of St Philip Neri (1730,
tion of simple geometrical forms to be seen from partly destroyed during the war), led Bolognese
a distance. For the near view he placed before architecture close to a Rococo phase. This is
the approach to the church a varied, richly also apparent in his facade of the Palazzo Mon-
articulated, and undulating building, reminis- tanari (formerly Aldrovandi, 1744-52), which
cent of the work of the the eighteenth-century represents the nearest approach at Bologna to
Bolognese quadrattimti. Less interesting is the Valvassori's style in Rome. Like G. B. Piacen-
interior, where Dotti followed Cortona's SS. tini (staircase, Palazzo di Giustizia, 1
695) [266]'^'
Martina e Luca. But the changes are even more and Francesco Maria Angelini (i 680-1 731:
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
391
50 FT
267.Antonio Arrighi: 268. Cremona, Palazzo Dati.

Cremona, Palazzo Dati. Staircase hall, 1769 Plan; staircase by Antonio Arrighi, 1769
staircases, Palazzo Montanari and Casa Zuc- Lombardy was comparatively unproductive
chini) before him, he was a master of grand during this period.'' In Milan, after the building
scenic staircases. He executed that of the boom of the Borromeo and post-Borromeo era,
Palazzo Davia-Bargellini, designed by Dotti in church building decHned. Next to Bartolomeo
1720 - the impressive stuccoes are by G. Borelli Bolli's (d. 1761) Palazzo Litta (Chapter 16,
- and later those of the Palazzi Malvezzi-De Note 5) with Carlo Giuseppe Merli's impressive
Medici (1725) and the Liceo Musicale (1752), staircase,'- only Giovanni Ruggeri's (d. c. 1743)
where the ornament has a particularly light Palazzo Cusani need be mentioned. Both palaces
touch. The tradition of this type of monu- are very large in size but not as similar as they
mental staircase was continued at Bologna right are usually beheved to be: Ruggeri, the Roman,
to the end of the century, mainly by Dotti's is much more reticent than the Milanese Bolli."
pupil Francesco Tadolini (1723- 1805),'"* and in Like the latter, Marco Bianchi favoured the
other cities near Bologna not a few splendid Rococo in his almost identical facade designs of
examples may also be found.''' A climax is S. Francesco di Paola (1728) and S. Pietro
reached in the largest and most complex of all, Celestino (1735). With Vanvitelli's pupil Giu-
that of the Palazzo Dati at Cremona [267, 268], seppe Piermarini ( 1734- 1 808), the builder of the
attributed to the otherwise unknown architect Scala (1776-9), the period of true Neo-clas-
Antonio Arrighi (1769). Bologna also possesses sicism opens at Milan. '^
in Antonio Bibiena's elegant Teatro Comunale Genoa, by contrast, harbours Late Baroque
(1756-63) one of the finest Baroque theatres in work in unexpected quantity and quality. But,
Italy.'" surprisingly, it still remains almost a terra
BIBLOSARTE
tncoamta. While late seventeenth-century 'natural' English landscape garden which came
palaces, such as the monumental Palazzo Rosso into its own at precisely this moment.
(1671 7) built by Matteo Lagomaggiore for the Florence has some typically Late Baroque
brothers Brignole Sale, are well known, '^ the chapels built by Foggini and decorated by him
eighteenth century has attracted little attention. and his school (p. 447). Among the late palaces
Who knows the names of Antonio Ricca {c. that of Scipione Capponi and the Palazzo Cor-
i688-f. 1748), the architect of S. Torpete sini deserve special mention. The former,
(1730- 1 ); who built the
of Andrea Orsolino, erected in 1705 by Ferdinando Ruggieri (d.
majestic Ospedale di Pammatone (1758 80); 1 741), possibly from a design by Carlo Fontana,
of Gregorio Petondi, to whose genius we owe is a reticent and noble building with a very long
the present Via Cairolo and the rebuilding of front. The large, airy staircase hall is placed,
the Palazzo Balbi with its scenographic stair- according to tradition, in one wing far away from
case, in the same street (1780); of Andrea the entrance. This disposition is as antiquated
Tagliafichi (p. who erected superb villas in
1 25), as the staircase itself with its four flights ascend-
the vicinity of Genoa ? The city is rich in Late ing along the walls (thereby forming a well).
Baroque churches, among which the delightful How different are the imaginative staircase
Oratorio di S. Filippo Neri may be singled out, designs in the cities of the Po valley ! The exten-
and typically eighteenth-century palace designs, sive, sober mass of the Palazzo Corsini, designed
usually anonymous, abound (e.g. the palace at by Pier Francesco Silvani (Note 79 to this
Piazza Scuole Pie 10). But Genoa's main glory chapter) for Marchese Filippo Corsini (d. 1706),
are the interior decorations. The relationship of may not appear very attractive, but the interior
the Genoese nobility to Paris was particularly contains Antonio Maria Ferri's (d. 1716)
close, and French Rococo designs are therefore masterpieces.^'* The monumental staircase {c.
common.^'' Side by side with this foreign import, 1690), richly decorated with stuccoes by Gio-
however, developed an autonomous Genoese vanni Passardi in the manner of Raggi, is
Rococo, dazzling, ebullient, and masculine. The revolutionary for Florence; yet it is a clever
most splendid example of this manner is the adaptation of the new Bolognese type rather
gallery in the Palazzo Carrega-Cataldi (now than the work of an independent talent. Equally
Camera di Commercio, Via Garibaldi) designed unorthodox for Florence is the gran salone with
by Lorenzo de Ferrari, surely one of the most its canopies formed of heavy coupled columns
sublime creations of the entire eighteenth and, above them, the undulating entablature
century." and gallery encompassing the entire hall. Once
Equally autonomous is the development of again Ferri's imagination was fired by foreign
the Genoese villa. The layout of the Villa examples, this time by such Roman works as
Gavotti 1744 for Francesco

at Albissola, built in Borromini's nave of S. Giovanni in Laterano.
Maria della Rovere, Genoa's last Doge, has few The major ecclesiastical Settecento structure
equals: terraces, grand undulating staircases, in Florence is the impressive front of S. Firenze.
and water combine to wed the house to the land- Ruggieri executed the facade to the Chiesa
scape. Staircases and terraces extend from the Nuova (on the left-hand side) in 1715.'' Zanobi
house into the hilly landscape like enormous Filippo del Rosso (1724-98), who had studied
tentacles. Man's work ennobles the landscape with Vanvitelli and Fuga, copied this front
without subduing it; this is as far from the between 1772 and 1775 for the Oratory on the
French method of making the landscape sub- right-hand side and united the two facades by
servient to the will of man as it is from the the palace-like elevation of the monastery. The
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE 393
design of this remarkable front is to a certain tects who were responsible for most of the
extent still tied to Mannerist precepts; thus the monumental buildings in this manner.
inverted segments of pediments, derived from Excepting Sanfelice, little space can be given
Buontalenti, provide a conspicuous crowning to the first group. Solimena's only major archi-
feature. To the end the Florentines remained tectural work is the simple and dignified fa9ade
faithful to their anti-Baroque tradition."" of S. Nicola alia Carita (1707?). Otherwise, his
contribution to architecture consists mainly in
the design of tombs (Prince and Princess of
NAPLES AND SICILY
Piombino, Chiesa deH'Ospedaletto, 1701) and
For no less than two hundred years southern altars (high altar, Cappella del Tesoro, S.
Italy was as a rule misgoverned by Spanish Gennaro, 1706) and, above all, in the influence
viceroys. At the Peace of Utrecht, in 17 13, exercised on his pupils. Nauclerio and Vac-
Philip V of Spain lost his south Italian dominion caro"^- may be passed over in favour of Sanfelice,
for good, but in 1734 his son was crowned King who is the most gifted and most prolific Nea-
in Palermo as Charles III, and for the next sixty- politan architect of the first half of the eigh-
four years until the Napoleonic era the Bourbons teenth century. His work, even more than that
remained in possession of their throne, only to of Vaccaro, is the precise counterpart to Raguz-
return in 18 16 for another uneasy forty-five zini's and Valvassori's buildings in Rome. It is
years. Charles III governed his country by en- spirited, light-hearted, unorthodox, infinitely
lightened despotism until 1759, when he in- imaginative, and ranges from a severe elegance
herited the Spanish crown. It is mainly during to decorative profusion and richness. He pro-
the twenty-five years of his reign that Naples duced with almost incredible ease, and the vast-
and Sicily saw an unprecedented flowering of ness of his oeuvre vies with that of the most pro-
the arts, and to this period belong some of the ductive architects of all time. In this as in other
largest architectural schemes ever devised in respects he recaUs Juvarra; like the latter, he
Italy. Such vast enterprises as the palaces of was also specially gifted as a manipulator of
Capodimonte"*' and Caserta, the Albergo de' perishable decorations,"*' and his sure instinct
Poveri, the Granary, and the theatre of S. Carlo for scenographic effects is one of the most
may be recalled. characteristic traits of his art. His work in
After Fanzago's long and undisputed lead, ecclesiastical architecture began in 1701 (S.
architecture in Naples developed in two stages. Maria delle Periclitanti at Pontecorvo), to be
A specifically Neapohtan group carried archi- followed by innumerable additions, alterations,

tectural design over into the style usually and renovations in Naples and smaller towns. A
associated with the term 'barocchetto'. The particular jewel is the small Chiesa delle Nun-
principal practitioners of this group were pupils ziatelle, probably dating from the mid 1730s,
of the painter Francesco Solimena, who also with a colourful facade which forms a splendid
has some architectural works to his credit. point de vue at the end of a narrow street. The
Among his followers, Giambattista Nauclerio simple polychrome nave with two chapels to
(active 1705-37), Domenico Antonio Vaccaro each side blends perfectly with the lofty vault
(1681-1750), painter, sculptor, and architect, decorated with Francesco de Mura's grandilo-
and Ferdinando Sanfelice (1675 -1750) are the quent fresco of the Assumption. ^^
most important. The second, later phase has a It is as the architect of domestic buildings
more international. Late Baroque classicist that Sanfelice gives his best. One of the most
character; Fuga and Vanvitelli are the archi- distinguished among the long list of palaces
BIBLOSARTE
attributed to him by the biographer of NeapoH- the first, fifth, twelfth, and sixteenth bays (with
tan artists, de Dominici, is the Palazzo Serra the pilasters of the fifth and twelfth bays over
Cassano (1725-6), a long structure on sloping rich portals); bays 2, 3, 4, and 13, 14, 15 are
ground with a front of sixteen bays. The evenly spaced, without orders, while bays 6, 7,
rhythm given to the fa9ade is typical of San- 8, and 9, 10, 11 are grouped together as trios
felice's free handling of the tradition. Giant with a large gap between bays 8 and 9, that is,
pilasters over the rusticated ground floor frame in the centre of the entire fa9ade. The main
glory, however, of this and other palaces by
Sanfelice is the monumental staircase, which
ascends in two parallel flights, each of which
returns, forming a complicated system of
bridges in a large vaulted vestibule.
Sanfelice's ingenuity was focused on staircase
designs [269, 270];**^ in this field he is without

peer. It is impossible to give even the vaguest
idea of the boldness, variety, and complexity
of his designs. In the crowded conditions of
Naples these staircases often seem tucked away
in the most unexpected places, and this adds to
their surprise effect. De Dominici gives the
crown to the staircase of the palace of Bartolomeo

di Majo as the most 'capricious' in the whole of
Naples - and there is no reason to disagree with

him. This staircase ascends in convex flights
269 (above). Ferdinando Sanfelice; Naples, 270. Ferdinando Sanfelice: Naples,

Palazzo Sanfelice, Staircase, 1728 palace in Via Foria. Double staircase and plan
30 M
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE 395
inside a vestibule reminiscent of the plan of mainly in the 1740s, he assumed the role of an
Borromini's S. Carlo alle Quattro Fontane. common in the eighteenth
itinerant architect, so
There is nothing in the rest of Italy to match century. He worked at Pesaro, Macerata,
Sanfelice's scenographic staircases; in addition, Perugia, and Loreto (tower, Santa Casa), made
central and northern Italy took no note of the a design for the facade of Milan Cathedral
unconventional development of staircase de- (1745), and practised in Siena and again in
signs in the South. On the other hand, it has Rome, where the sober monastery of S.
been pointed out that a link exists between some Agostino, the rebuilding of Michelangelo's S.
of Sanfelice's and certain Austrian staircase Maria degli Angeli, and, under Salvi, the
designs.**" And contrary to the previous two lengthening of Bernini's Palazzo Chigi-
centuries, it was the North that influenced Odescalchi (p. 186) are mainly to be recorded.
Naples. At precisely the same time Naples and Charles III summoned him to Naples for the
Piedmont - as will be shown - admit northern express purpose of erecting the royal residence
ideas, and this invites comment to which I shall at Caserta, about 20 miles north of the capital.**
turn in the next chapter. In a sense Caserta is the overwhelmingly im-
Sanfelice and Vaccaro died in the same year, pressive swansong of the Italian Baroque. The
1750. The following year the King called to scale both of the palace with its 1,200 rooms and
Naples the two architects Fuga and Vanvitelli, of the entire layout is immense. For miles the
who, at this historical moment, must have been landscape has been forced into the strait-jacket
regarded as the leading Italian masters, and it of formal gardening - clearly Versailles has been
was to them that he entrusted the largest archi- resuscitated on Italian soil. But it would be
tectural tasks of the eighteenth century in wrong to let the matter rest at that, for into the
Naples. The two architects were almost exact planning has gone the experience of Italian and
contemporaries, but while Fuga had passed the French architects accumulated over a period of
zenith of his creative power, Vanvitelli had still more than a hundred years. The palace is a high,
his most fertile years before him. Fuga's activity regular block of about 600 by 500 feet, with
in Naples has already been briefly mentioned four large courtyards formed by a cross of wings.
(p. 383). It remains to give an account of Van- The Louvre, the Escorial, Inigo Jones's plans
vitelli's career. for Whitehall Palace come to mind; we are
Luigi Vanvitelli (1700-73),*" born in Naples, obviously in this tradition. None of these great
the son of the painter Caspar van Wittel from residences, however, was designed with the
Utrecht, spent his youth in Rome, first studying same compelling logic and the same love for the
painting under his father. He emerged as an absolute geometrical pattern, characteristics
architect of considerable distinction during the which have a long Italian ancestry and reveal, at
Lateran competition, to which he contributed a the same time, Vanvitelli's rationalism and
design. His first period of intense architectural classicism. A similar spirit will be found in the
activity coincided with the building boom in strict organization of the elevations. The entire
Rome (p. 377). Commissioned by Pope Clement structure rises above a high grourfd floor treated
XII, he constructed at Ancona the pentagonal with horizontal bands of sharply cut rustication.
utilitarian lazzaretto, the austerely classical Projecting pavilions, planned to be crowned by
Arco Clementino, began the quay and light- towers in the French tradition and articulated
house, and erected the Gesii (1743-5), which by a giant order, frame each of the long fronts.
foreshadowed the infinitely grander late Chiesa The pavilions are balanced in the centre of the
dell'Annunziata at Naples. In these years. main and garden fronts by a powerful pedi-
BIBLOSARTE
271 and 272. Luigi \ anvitelli; Caserta, former Royal Palace,
begun 1752. Detail of ta9ade and (opposite) plan
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
397
merited temple motif [271]. While the long wall had been reared in the scenographic tradition of
of the principal front remains otherwise austere the Italian Late Baroque, and it was at Gaserta
without articulating features, on the garden that scenographic principles were carried farther
front the giant composite order is carried across than anywhere else. From the vestibule vistas
the entire length, creating a long sequence of open in several directions: courtyards appear on
narrow bays. Apart from certain national idio- the diagonal axes, and, looking straight ahead,
syncrasies, such as the density and plasticity of the visitor's eye is captivated by the vista through
forms and motifs, this style was internationally the immensely long, monumental passage which
in vogue during the second half of the eigh- cuts right through the entire depth of the
teenth century. may be found not only in
It structure [272], and extends at the far end along
France (e.g. G. Gammas' Gapitole, Toulouse, the main avenue into the depth of the garden.
1750-3), but also in England (e.g. Sir William From the octagonal vestibule in the centre
Ghambers's Somerset House, London, 1776- Italy's largest ceremonial staircase ascends at
86) and even in Russia (Kokorinov's Academy right angles. Its rather austere decoration may
of Art, Leningrad, 1765-72). be fashioned after Versailles, but the staircase
But in one important respect Gaserta is hall as such and the staircase [273] with its cen-
different from all similar buildings. Vanvitelli tral flight leading to a broad landing from where
BIBLOSARTE
273. Luigi \ anvitelli: Caserta,

former Rojal Palace, begun 1752. Staircase
two flights turn along the walls and end under a rominesque, Vanvitelli's basic approach spells
screen of three arches - all this has a North a last great triumph for Longhena's principles.
Italian pedigree (Bologna), which ultimately But he emulates all that went before; for from
points back to Longhena's scenographic stair- the return flights of the staircase the beholder
case in S. Giorgio Maggiore [191]. The staircase looks through the screen of arches into stage-
leads into a vaulted octagonal vestibule corres- like scenery beyond, viewing a Piranesi or
ponding to that on the lower level, and from Bibiena phantasmagoria in solid stone. The
there doors open into the state rooms and - scenographic way of planning and seeing ties
opposite the staircase - into the chapel, the Vanvitelli firmly to the Late Baroque, and it is
similarity of which to that of Versailles has in this light that his classicism takes on its
always been pointed out.'*'' Once again, from particular flavour.

the vestibules on both levels vistas open in all The principal ecclesiastical building of Van-
directions, and here Vanvitelli's source of vitelli's immensely active Neapolitan period is
inspiration is evident beyond doubt. These the Chiesa dell' Annunziata (1761-82). Its con-
vestibules, octagons with ambulatories, derive cave facade in two tiers is ultimately dependent
from Longhena's S. Maria della Salute.''° on Carlo Fontana's S. Marcello, and the sceno-
Although many decorative features of the graphic interior with its severely conceived
interior are specifically Roman and even Bor- columnar motif that encompasses the three
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
399
separate units of the church takes its cue from chrome Neapolitan tradition. Moreover, the
Rainaldi's S. Maria in CampitelH."' Among walls of the nave with the even, sonorous
VanviteUi's remaining works may be mentioned rhythm of the colossal Corinthian order usher
the Foro CaroHno (now Piazza Dante, 1757-65). in a new period. And yet even he paid homage to
The large segmental palazzo front articulated by a tradition which he despised : in the interior of
a giant order, reminiscent of Pietro da Cortona the church the attentive observer will discover
(p. 246), is interrupted in the centre by the motifs derived from S. Maria in Campitelli,
dominating motif of the niche, a late retro- while the large dome is, in fact, a memorial to
gression to the Nkchione of the Vatican Belve- Cortona's dome of S. Carlo al Corso."-
dere. But the slow rhythm of this architecture
calls to mind northern counterparts, such as J.
Wood the younger's Royal Crescent at Bath Little can here be said about the charming,
(1767-75), and the similarity - in spite of all volatile, and often abstruse Apulian Baroque,
differences - once again shows to what extent which has some contacts with the Neapolitan
Vanvitelli's style falls into line with the inter- and even Venetian development. It has recently
national classicism of the period. been shown that the often overstated connexions
Finally, a word must be said about Vanvitelli's with the Plateresque and Churrigueresque
uncommon ability- as an architect of utilitarian Spanish Baroque are most tenuous. Examples
structures. This is demonstrated not only by his of this highly decorative local style may be
cavalry barracks 'al ponte Maddalena' (1753-
di found at Barletta, Gravina, Manduria, Oria, Gal-
74), a work of utter simplicity and compelling lipoli, Francavilla Fontana, Galatone, Nardo,
beauty (which seems to have had a considerable and other places. But it has its main home in the
influence on Italian twentieth-century archi- provincial capital, Lecce. For its small size
tecture), but above all by the Acquedotto Lecce can boast an unequalled number of
Caroline (1752-64), the aqueduct of about 25 monumental structures, which form a strikingly
miles length which supplies Naples with water. imposing ensemble.'"

As regards engineering skill as well as the gran- In spite of a building history extending from
deur of the bridges this work vies with Roman the mid sixteenth to the eighteenth century,
structures. More than anything else, such Lecce's Baroque conveys the impression of
works indicate that a new age was dawning. stylistic harmony and uniformity. The reason
The last Neapolitan architect of the eigh- is evident: this style is pure surface decoration,
teenth century deserving attention is Mario often strangely applied to local building con-
Gioffredo (1718-85). Schooled by Solimena, he ventions which, in this remote corner of Italy,
began before 1750 with works still in keeping had an extraordinarily long lease of life. What
with the Neapolitan Baroque. Overshadowed M. S. Briggs wrote in 19 10 (p. 248) is still true
by Fuga and Vanvitelli, Gioffredo has never to-day: 'AH that is unique in Lecce architecture
been given his due. After 1760 he steered may be accounted for by the combination and
determinedly towards a Neo-classical concep- fusion of these three great elements - the new
tion of architecture. His dogmatic treatise Dell' Renaissance spirit slowly percolating to the
Architettiira (1768), of which only the first remote city, the unrivalled relics of the Middle
volume appeared, shows this as clearly as his Ages standing around its gates, and the long rule
masterpiece, the church of Spirito Santo, of Spain.'
completed in 1774. Unlike Vanvitelli, Giof- The strange union of what would seem in-
fredo breaks here for the first time with the poly- compatible is particularly evident in the facade
BIBLOSARTE
400 •
of S. Croce (also called Chiesa dei Celestini), Witness the three-storeyed Quattro Canti at
the most impressive structure at Lecce, where Palermo, monumental buildings on the piazza
elements of the Apulian Romanesque are hap- (created in analogy to the Quattro Fontane in
pily wedded to wildly exuberant Baroque decor- Rome) where the two main arteries of the city
ation. At a first glance this facade appears to be intersect;''^ or the severe Arsenal (Palermo,
uniform, but it was begun before 1582 by 1630), designed by the Palermitan .Mariano
Gabriele Riccardi and finished more than sixty Smiriglio (1569- 1636), painter and architect;
years later (1644) by Cesare Penna (upper tier). Giovanni Vermexio's block-shaped Palazzo
Again, the adjoining monastery (now Prefet- Comunale at Syracuse (1629-33) with a portal
tura) would seem of one piece with the church lifted straight out of Vignola's treatise;"'' or,
its dates, however, lie between 1659 and 1695 finally, Natale Masuccio's imposing Jesuit Col-
and the architect is Giuseppe Zimbalo, who lege and church at Trapani (finished 1636).
built the cathedral (1659-82), S. Agostino With Angelo Italia (1628- 1700), Paolo Amato
(1663), and the magnificent fa9ade of the Chiesa (1633-1714) and his namesake Giacomo Amato
del Rosario (begun 1691). Less bizarre than the (1643- 1 732), Palermitan architecture entered a
window-frames of the monastery, but otherwise new. High Baroque phase.'" In 1682 Paolo
close in character, is the front of the Seminario, .\mato began S. Salvatore, the first Sicilian
erected between 1694 and 1709 by Zimbalo's church over a curvilinear plan. The master-
pupil, Giuseppe Cino. The latter was respon- pieces of the Palermitan Baroque are, however,
sible, among other works, for S. Chiara (1687- Giacomo Amato's fa9ades of the Chiesa della
91), the fa9ade of SS. Nicola e Cataldo (17 16), Pieta (1689, church consecrated in 1723) and of
and the Madonna del Carmine (1711); in these S. Teresa della Kalsa (1686- 1706), both with
buildings a spirit closer to the international powerful orders of columns in two tiers. Gia-
Baroque may be noticed. Before taking leave of como had spent more than ten years in Rome
Lecce, the most eccentric building may be (1673-85) where he had a share in the design of
mentioned, namely Achille Carducci's fa9ade ot the monastery of S. Maria Maddalena. His
S. Matteo, which is covered over and over with work at Palermo leans heavily on Roman pre-
scales. cedent, the facade of the Chiesa della Pieta, for
The Sicilian Baroque would deserve closer instance, following closely that of S. Andrea
attention than it can here be given. "'^ Artists della Valle. Thus by Roman standards this
from the mainland supplied to a large extent belated High Baroque is rather conservative.
pre-Seicento art and architecture in Sicily. This Angelo Italia's masterpiece is the Cappella del
situation changed in the course of the seven- Crocifisso in the cathedral of Monreale, exe-
teenth century, and for more than 150 years cuted between 1688 and 1692, with exuberant
most major building operations in cities large and colourful Hispano-Sicilian stucco decor-
and small were carried out by Sicilians, who, ations. They seem to be on the same level of
incidentally, were almost without exception intensity as the hieratic Byzantine mosaics
priests. Since the eastern towns - Syracuse, which were possibly a source of inspiration to
Catania, and Messina - were devastated in the Baroque architects and decorators.'"*
earthquake of 1693, '^ is only at Palermo that a The stage reached by Giacomo Amato was
continuous development can be followed superseded by Giovanni Biagio Amico from
throughout the seventeenth century. Trapani (1684- 1754), who erected important
During the first half of the new century buildings in his native citv^ as well as in other
building practice was on the whole retardataire. provincial towns and in Palermo. Although his
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE •
401
Late Baroque fa9ade of S. Anna in Palermo large extent destroyed in the earthquake of
(1736)'' with its convex and concave curvatures 1908. Syracuse had an architect of distinction in
is superficially Borrominesque, it is additive in Pompeo Picherali (1668- 1746), who is, how-
conception and lacks the dynamic sweep of ever, wrongly credited with the impressive
similar Roman structures. facade of the cathedral.'"' Magnificent struc-
The glory of eighteenth-century Palermitan tures arose in small towns such as Modica and
architecture are the villas in the vicinity, Ragusa; Noto and Grammichele were entirely
particularly at Bagheria.'"" Some of them have rebuilt on new sites; Noto, in particular, with
extravagant plans and form part of large and its array of monumental structures erected by
complex layouts, such as the villa built by Tom- Paolo Labisi, Rosario Gagliardi (worked 1721-
maso Maria Napoli (1655- 1725) for Francesco 70), and the late, neo-classicist Vincenzo
Ferdinando Gravina, Principe di Palagonio Sinatra,'"^ is matched only by Catania itself
(171 5); the Villa Valguarnera, begun by the The greatest figure of the reconstruction period,
same architect before 17 13; the Villa Partanna, Giovan Battista Vaccarini (1702-68),'"^ turned
erected 1722-8 for Laura La Grua, Principessa Catania into one of the most fascinating eigh-
di Partanna; or the villa of the Principe di teenth-century cities in Europe. Born in
Cattolica (1737?)- The Villa Palagonia is Palermo, he was educated in Rome in Carlo
notorious for the strange 'baroque' whim of its Fontana's studio, but, being a contemporary of
late eighteenth-century proprietor, who had the Roman 'Rococo' architects, his develop-
the entire place decorated with crudely carved ment parallels theirs. A protege of Cardinal
monstrosities - the supreme example of a play Ottoboni, he settled at Catania in 1730 and in
with emblematical Baroque concetti. Goethe in the next two decades brought about a Sicilian
his often-quoted description of the villa coined Rococo by blending the Borrominesque with
the phrase 'Palagonian paroxysm' for what the local tradition. He entirely superseded the
seemed to him the epitome of aberration from popular 'Churrigueresque' style - that effusive
good taste."" manner which owes so much to Spain and of

Like Naples, Palermo abounds in sceno- which Catania has splendid examples in the
graphically effective staircases. The most famous Palazzo Biscari and the Benedictine monas-
of them in the Palazzo Bonagia, designed by tery,'"" the largest in Europe, the impressive
Andrea Giganti (1731-87), forms a picturesque bulk of which dominates the town.
screen between the cortile and the garden. All The list of Vaccarini's works is long and
the large villas can boast extravagant staircase distinguished, from the fa9ade of the cathedral
designs of which V. Ziino has made an illumi- (begun 1730, reminiscent of Juvarra's style),
nating study. Once again, the thought of which shows an interesting play with the posi-
Austrian architecture is never far from one's tion of the orders, and the powerful and extra-
mind before such works. For twenty years from vagantly imaginative design of the Palazzo
17 13 to 1734, the political links between Sicily Municipale (1732) to the large Collegio Cutelli
and Austria were close.'"- I do not find records (1754), where, keeping abreast with the times,
of many Sicilian architects visiting Vienna, but he is well on the road to a new classicism. His
it is known that Tommaso Maria Napoli made most important ecclesiastical work, S. Agata
the journey twice. (begun 1735), has a facade with a deep concave
After the earthquake of 1693 '^he eastern part recession between flanking convex bays - alto-
of the island saw a fabulous reconstruction gether an unexpected transformation of Borro-
period. The Baroque Messina in turn was to a minesque ideas and wholly unorthodox in the
BIBLOSARTE
402 •
detail. Vaccarini's manner was continued in 1730 and 1740, his S. Placido, a refined and
the second half of the eighteenth century by the subtle jewel of classicizing Rococo taste, has
festive art of the Roman Stefano Ittar. If his its nearest parallels in Piedmont. Thus it is in
Chiesa Collegiata, where he combined features the two parts of Italy which are the farthest
from Carlo Fontana's S. Marcello with some removed from each other that the resistance
from the facade of S. Maria Maddalena, could against the cool objectivity of the rising Neo-
almost have been created in Rome between classicism remains strongest.
i
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 17
ARCHITECTURE IN PIEDMONT
THE PRELUDE the city in the direction of the Porta Susina with
Juvarra in charge (begun 17 16). This pro-
The extraordinary part played by Piedmont in gramme was extended later in the eighteenth
the art and architecture of the Seicento and century, and during the twentieth century
Settecento cannot be dissociated from the coun- Turin's great Baroque tradition was continued
try's rapid poHtical development. It began with by one of the most extensive town-planning
the energetic Emanuele Filiberto, who made schemes of modern times.
Turin his capital in 1563. The rebuilding and These few remarks indicate that there was
enlarging of the town gathered momentum an adventurous and vigorous spirit alive in
under his successor Carlo Emanuele I (1580 seventeenth-century Turin.^ Nevertheless, what
1630). For about three generations building Castellamonte and Lanfranchi had to offer was
activit}^ in Turin was mainly in the hands of somewhat provincial in spite of real distinction;
three architects in succession: Ascanio Vittozzi they skilfully combined Roman and North
(1539- 161 5), Carlo di Castellamonte, and his Italian with French aspirations. But in 1666
son Amedeo (d. 1683). Turin was a Roman Guarini appeared on the Turinese stage, with
castrum town, and its chessboard layout sur- consequences of the utmost importance. In fact,
vived the Middle Ages. Carlo Emanuele I pur- in matters of architecture Turin became the
sued with energy the modernization of the most advanced Italian city almost precisely at
whole city, first with Vittozzi and, after the the moment when creative energies in Rome
latter's death, with Carlo Castellamonte as his began to decline. Guarini's settling in Turin
architect. Castellamonte was in charge of all opens the era of the extraordinary flowering of
building activity when in 1620 the ceremonial Piedmontese architecture which lasted for about
foundation of the new town was laid. It was he a hundred years and is epitomized by the names
who was responsible for one of the first coherent of three men of genius: Guarini himself,
street-fronts in Italy (Via Roma) and for the Juvarra, and Vittone.
entirely unified Piazza S. Carlo (1638). While
Central Italian architects hardly ever abandoned
GUARINO GUARINI (1624-83)
the individual palazzo front, the break with that
old-established tradition in Turin suggests a It may be reasonably argued that Guarini's
strong French influence. Under Carlo Emanuele architecture belongs to a late stage of the High
II (1638-75) Amedeo di Castellamonte carried Baroque and that it has certain qualities in
on the enlargement of the town in the direction common with the Roman architecture of the
of the River Po (1673).' Next to the leading mid seventeenth century, such as the full-
architect, Francesco Lanfranchi showed more blooded vigour and the preference for deter-
than ordinary abilit\^ in transforming Turin mined articulation and for strong and effective
after the middle of the seventeenth century into colour schemes. But while nobody will doubt
a great Baroque city.- Under Vittorio Amedeo that his architecture is nearer to that of Borro-
II followed the third great systematization of mini and Cortona than to that of Juvarra, his
BIBLOSARTE
aims transcend those of the Roman masters,

from whom he is separated by a deep gulf There
is considerable justification, therefore, for dis-
cussing his work at this late stage. Guarini was
born at Modena on 17 January 1624.^ In
1639 he entered the Order of the Theatines

and in the same year moved to Rome, where he
studied theology, philosophy, mathematics, and
architecture. At this period the interior of
Borromini's S. Carlino [ 1 1 7] as well as the facade
of the Oratory of St Philip Neri [134] were
finished, and these events were certainly not
lost upon him. Back at Modena in 1647, he
was ordained priest and soon appointed lecturer
in philosophy in the house of his Order. During
these years he began architectural work in a
modest way at S. Vincenzo, the church of the
Theatine Order.'' When in 1655 differences
arose between him and the ducal court, he left
Modena. In 1660 he settled in Messina, teaching
philosophy and mathematics.

It was then that he began his literary career
with a tragi-comedy' and his architectural

career with two important buildings. While his
design of the church of the Padri Somaschi was

never executed, the fa9ade of the SS. Annun-
ziata together with the adjoining Theatine palace
were certainly built. What was standing of his 274. Guarino Guarini Messina, :
work was destroyed in the earthquake of 1908,^* Church of the Somascian Order. Project, i66o(?).
Engraving from Architettura civile, 1737
but his designs are preserved in the plates in his
Architettura civile, posthumously published by

Vittone in 1737. The Annunziata facade, raised and dome, the design shows a hybrid structure
over a concave ground-plan, is strongly influ- consisting of a hexagon with six large windows
enced by traditional Roman church fa9ades and and parabolic ribs spanned between them in
shows a distinct retrogression to Mannerist such a way that a kind of diaphanous dome is
compositional and decorative principles. The created: drum and dome are telescoped into
church of the Padri Somaschi is more revealing; one and the same structural zone. The novelty
its regular hexagonal plan with ambulatory is of this is no less surprising than Guarini's use of
strange enough." Even stranger is the elevation pendentives for the transition of the hexagon
[274], for the transition from the hexagonal into the round, only to return to the hexagon
body of the church to the zone of the dome is again. Crowning the pseudo-dome is another
accomplished by pendentives above which is a hybrid motif, a proper small drum and dome,
circular cornice but not - as one would expect - together exactly as high as the pseudo-dome
a cylindrical drum. Instead of the normal drum and therefore much too large as a lantern.
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE IN PIEDMONT •
405
would probably have remained extravagant

freaks.
In 1662 he was back at Modena, from where

he soon moved to Paris. During his stay there
he built the Theatine church, Sainte-Anne-la-

Royale, and wrote an immensely learned mathe-
matical-philosophical tome, Placita philosopluca
(1665), in which he defended, rather surpris-
ingly at this late date, the geocentric universe
against Copernicus and Galilei. The church
[275], not finished until 1720 with considerable
changes and entirely destroyed in 1823,^° was
erected over a fairly normal Greek-cross plan
with undulating facade, similar to that of S.
Carlo alle Quattro Fontane. Once again Gua-
rini's extravagance is most apparent in the zone
of the vaulting. In this case he built a real drum
above pendentives but crowned it by a dwarf
dome which he decorated with a system of
interlaced double ribs. This dome is topped by
a smaller truncated dome with lantern of tradi-
tional design, to be seen from the floor of the
church through the large octagonal opening of

the dwarf dome.'' Externally the church rose
pagoda-like in five tiers,'- and the encased dwarf
dome with windows reminiscent of bellies of
violins looked like a second drum above the
275. Guarino Guarini: Paris, principal one. Guarini had certainly studied
Sainte-Anne-la-Royale, begun 1662. Destroyed. Borromini's use of bandlike ribs for vaults (p.
Section from Architettura civile, 1737
221), but while the latter introduced this device
in order to tie together a whole structure, no
Reminiscent of centralized churches of the such idea guided the former. On the contrary,
Renaissance, the exterior is identical on all six each of the major units of the church strikes
fronts, and this contrasts with the Roman an entirely new note. Far from being a pro-
Baroque tendency to regard the facade as an vincial 'atomization', it will soon be seen that
essential manifestation of the spatial movement this was a deliberate artistic principle.
and direction of the interior. The ample use of Guarini may have travelled again before
free-standing columns links the building super- settling in Turin. Although this is unrecorded,
ficially to the main current of Baroque archi- he may have gone to Spain and Portugal, where
tecture, but the superimposition of three un- S. Maria della Divina Providenza at Lisbon
related tiers as well as the carpentry-like detail was erected from his design [276].'^ Destroyed
recall - at least in the engraving - Late Man- in the earthquake of 1755, this important church
nerist tabernacles rather than a church. Had is known only from the engravings of the
Guarini stayed on at Messina, his buildings Architettura civile. Like St Mary of Altotting
BIBLOSARTE
406 •
// \ A /''
\ !\ /vt^<:^x
<\\ A /M
//.--V;/ ^;>
276. Guarino Guarini;

Lisbon, S. Maria della Divina Providenza.
Plan from Architettura civile, 1737
in Prague (1679) and S. Filippo in Turin, the S. Filippo Neri, which remained unfinished,
church has a longitudinal plan which derives collapsed, and was finally replaced by Juvarra's
from the traditional North Italian type showing church,'^ he built two great palaces, the Col-
a sequence of domed units; but here the walls legio dei NobiH (1678, now the Academy of
undulate, and the salient points across the nave Science and Art Gallery) and the magnificent
are no longer linked by an arch; they contain Palazzo Carignano (1679),'^ and three centra-
instead, in the zone of the vaulting, windows lized churches: the Cappella della SS. Sindone,
set into lunettes. An intricate and baffling com- S. Lorenzo, and the sanctuary La Consolata.
bination of spatial shapes results which one The latter is the least interesting of these
cannot easily visualize or describe in simple buildings and not much of the present structure
geometrical terms. This architecture required is by Guarini.^'' His two other ecclesiastical
a new kind of mathematics, and Guarini himself works, however, belong to the finest class of
laid the foundation for it by devoting long Italian Seicento architecture.
passages of his treatise to conic sections. Al- After his arrival at Turin, Guarini was ap-
though they must be regarded as essential for pointed architect of the Cappella della SS.
the development of the German and Austrian Sindone, itself the size of a church [277-80].
Baroque, Guarini's longitudinal churches take The House of Savoy possessed one of the holiest
up a place secondary in importance compared relics, the Holy Shroud, which Emanuele Fili-
with his centralized buildings. berto transferred from Chambery to the new
When Carlo Emanuele II of Savoy called capital with the intention of having a church
him to Turin, Guarini had still seventeen years erected for it. But finally it was decided to build
to live, and in these years he erected the struc- a large chapel at the east end of the cathedral
tures for which he is mainly famous. Apart from and in close conjunction with the palace. In
BIBLOSARTE
407
1655 Carlo Emanuele II commissioned Amedeo design. He introduced the convex intrusions of
di Castellamonte, and work was begun in 1657. three circular vestibules into the main space;
When Guarini took over, ten years later, the he entirely changed the meaning of the regular
structure was standing up to the entablature of articulation by creating above the cylinder a
the lower tier.'" The cylindrical space of the zone with pendentives; and he spanned every
chapel was articulated by the regular sequence two bays by a large arch, three in all, and these
of an order of giant pilasters and, placed be- 'enclosed' bays alternate with the 'open' bays
tween them, a smaller order forming the so- in which lie the segmental projections of the
called Palladio motif According to Castella- entrances. All this led to peculiar contradictions.
monte's design, the cylindrical body of the Now the giant pilaster in the centre of each
chapel was probably to continue into a spherical large arch has no function; he crowned it with
dome. Guarini disturbed this perfectly normal a complex ornamental motif The three pen-
dentives open into large circular windows,
corresponding to those set into the arches. Thus,
reversing the division into arches and penden-
277 and 278. Guarino Guarini: Turin,
Cappella SS. Sindone, 1667-90. tives, the sequence of six windows produces a
Plan and section from Architettura civile, 1737 regular rhythm. It is even more puzzling that
BIBLOSARTE
Guarini borrowed the pendentives from the pendentive zone, and even the opening up of
Greek-cross design, adapted them to three the pendentives;"* but even if such influence
instead of four arches - an unheard-of idea will be admitted, it has to be emphasized once
and used them, paradoxically, as a transition again that the aims of the two architects were
between the circular body of the chapel and entirely diflierent. Borromini strove for the
the circular ring of the drum. creation of homogeneous structures which, in
Guarini's name is often coupled with that spite of all their complexities, can be 'read'
of Borromini. It is, indeed, not unlikely that in along the walls without encountering difficulties.
his design of the Sindone chapel Guarini was Guarini, on the other hand, worked with
influenced by Borromini as regards triangular deliberate incongruities and surprising dis-
geometry, the unorthodox insertion of the sonances. One zone of his structures contains
BIBLOSARTE
409
no indication of what the next is going to reveal the summit the dome opens into a twelve-edged
and it is only safe to say that the unlikely and star, at the centre of which there hovers the
improbable are going to happen. The stimuli Holy Dove strongly lit by the twelve oval
to conflict and unrest which his architecture windows of the lantern.
contains link it with the Mannerist tradition, No less remarkable than the interior is the
and on the level of decoration these connexions exterior, where again one unexpected feature
are evident beyond any doubt. He clearly re- follows another [280]. The principal motif in
turns to the doughy forms of Buontalenti and the lower zone is the six large windows of the
his school, but he juxtaposes these forms with drum, united under an undulating cornice.
the crystalline star-hexagons and cross-patterns Above it, without transition and even without
of the arches, the pendentives, and the pave- any intelligible reason (in any case for the
ment, and the different austere, geometrical
shapes placed side by side increase the impres-
sion of unrest.'"
The next zone above the pendentives consists
of a high drum where six large arched openings
alternate with solid pillars which contain Borro-
minesque convex tabernacle niches [279]. With
this unbroken rhythm of pillar and arch the tur-
moil of the lower tiers seems resolved, and one
would expect a spherical dome above this drum.
I Yet once again we are faced with an entirely un-
expected feature, in fact the most extraordinary
of the building. Segmental ribs are spanned
from centre to centre of the six arches, resulting
in a hexagon. By spanning other ribs from the
centre of the first series of ribs and by repeating
this method six times in all, a welter of thirty-six
arches is created, of which three are always on

the same vertical axis. Since each rib has a
vertical spine (bisecting a segmental window),
no less than twelve vertical divisions result,
which are clearly visible outside as the structural
skeleton of the dome [280].

Objectively, Guarini's cone-shaped dome is
not very high; but subjectively, seen from the

floor of the chapel, the diminution of the ribs
appears to be due to perspective foreshortening
so that the dome looks much higher than it is
[279]. This impression is supported by the

judicious use of colour. The contrast between
279 and 280. Guarino Guarini:
the black marble and gilding below and the
Turin, Cappella SS. Sindone, 1667-90.
grey of the dome seems to result from the View into dome (opposite) and
softening of tone values at great distance. At exterior of dome (above)
BIBLOSARTE
beholder who does not know the interior), similar to that in the Cappella della SS. Sindone.
appears the exciting maze of zigzag steps, which Pendentives are placed in the diagonal axes,
are actually the segmental ribs of the dome. and at this level the octagon is transformed into
Finally, there is the serene horizontal motif of a Greek cross with very short arms. The extra-
rings diminishing in size, crowned by the ordinary fact must be clearly grasped that the
pagoda-like structure to which nothing cor- pendentives and arches of the cross are func-
responds inside. tionally divorced entirely from their supports,
It may be noticed that a trinitarian concept which belong, as we have seen, to another
pervades the whole building: witness the tri- spatial entity. How revolutionary Guarini's
angular geometry of the plan, the intrusion of conception is will be realized when one com-
the three satellite structures into the main space pares it with the slightly earlier Greek cross of
with their columns arranged in triads, the S. Agnese in Piazza Navona [128]. Above the
multiples of three in the drum, dome, and pendentive zone there is a gallery with oval
lantern; further the three circular steps and
three-storeyed 'pagoda' of the exterior. The
whole building therefore assumes an emble- 281 and 282. Guarino Guarini:
matical quality: in ever new geometrical reali- Turin, S. Lorenzo, 1668-87.

Plan from Architetliira civile, 1737 (belom) and
zations the all-embracing dogma of the Trinity
view of the interior (opposite)
-°
is reasserted.
Hardly less exciting than the Cappella della
SS. Sindone is the nearby church of S. Loren-
zo.-' Guarini began work on it in 1668; in 1679
the building was standing, but it was not entirely
finished until 1687 [281-3]. The basic form of
the plan is an octagon with the eight sides
curving into the main space. Each of these
sides consists of a 'Palladio motif with a wide
open arch. For this reason it is difficult or
even impossible to perceive the octagon as the
constituent shape of the congregational room.
The eye is led past the arches to the real boun-
dary of the church. Behind the screen of sixteen
red marble columns are niches with statues,
white before a black background and framed
by white pilasters. Thus there exists a certain
continuity of motifs along the boundary, but
they compHcate rather than simplify an under-
standing of the structure; for so many different
units and so many similar motifs are found
side by side and at odd angles that no coherent
vision is possible.-- The strong, uninterrupted
entablature above the arches emphasizes and
clarifies the octagonal shape. But in the next
zone there is an unexpected change of meaning
1f:::»:
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
windows, and between them arc eight piers dome. By this device the diaphanous and
from which the ribs of the vaulting spring. mysterious quality of the dome is considerably
These ribs are arranged in such a way that they enhanced.
form an eight-pointed star and a regular open In the longitudinal axis of the church, the
octagon in the centre. We are thus faced with circular Cappella Maggiore with a simpler rib-
a hybrid feature similar to that planned for the bed dome is added to the congregational room.
Church of the Somascian Fathers at Messina. The chapel is delimited by two Palladio motifs,
And precisely as in the design of that church, one opening into an altar recess with oval
there rises above the central opening a lantern - vaulting, the other into the main space. Thus
consisting ofdrum and dome - just as high as the same Palladio motif which appears as a
the main dome itself Also, outside, the dome convex penetration into the main room forms
has again the appearance of a drum which is the concave boundary of the chapel. In spite
crowned by a second small drum and dome. of such interpenetrations of different spatial
In spite of these similarities, S. Lorenzo is entities, each of the three domed spaces forms
infinitely more complex. Particular reference a separate unit with architectural characteristics
may be made to the insertion of a zone with of its own. With this arrangement Guarini kept
windows between the dome and the lantern. well within the North Italian tradition; more-
These cast their light through an open ring of over the scenic effect produced by the longi-
segments laid round the inner octagon of the tudinal vista links his plan to the tradition lead-
ing from Palladio to Longhena.
We can now summarize a few of the principles
283.Guarino Guarini: Turin, S. Lorenzo, 1668-87. which seem to have guided Guarini. Domes
View into main dome and dome of the presbytery
have pride of place in his system of architecture.
Guarini opened the chapter on vaulting in his
Architettura civile with the remark 'Vaults are

the principal part in architecture', and expressed
surprise that so little had been written about
them.-' What new about Guarini's own
is so
domical structures? The Baroque dome, con-
tinuing and developing the formula of the dome
of St Peter's, was of classical derivation. Al-
though Borromini broke with this tradition,
he too relied on classical prototypes and main-

tained the solidity of the domical surface. It is
this principle that Guarini abandoned. Of

course, the models of his diaphanous domes
were not Roman. The similarity of the dome
of S. Lorenzo to such Hispano-Moresque
structures as the eighth-century dome in the
mosque at Cordova has often been pointed out;

but even if an influence from this side can be
admitted,-^ it is the differences rather than the
similarities that are important. The Hispano-
Moresque domes are not diaphanous, for their
BIBLOSARTE
413
vaults rest on the structural skeleton of the the reversal of accustomed values, the deliberate
ribs. Guarini's domes are infinitely bolder than contradictions in the elevation, the interpene-
any of the Spanish models; he eliminated the tration of different spatial units, the breaking
wall surface between the ribs and perched high up of the coherent wall boundary with the
structures on their points of intersection. resulting difficulty of orientation - all this may
It is clear then that Guarini, far from being be regarded as serving one and the same pur-
an imitator, turned over a new leaf of archi- pose.
tectural history. A passage in the Architettura It would be futile to search in Guarini's

civile seems to reveal his intentions. With a treatise for a single sentence in support of this
perspicacity unknown at that date, he analysed interpretation. And yet the treatise contains
the difference between Roman and Gothic an indirect clue. More than one-third of the
architecture. He maintained that in contrast text is concerned with a new kind of geometry,
to the qualities of strength and solidity aimed namely the plane projection of spherical surfaces
at by Roman architects, Gothic builders wanted and the transformation of plane surfaces of a
their churches to appear structurally weak so given shape into corresponding surfaces of a
that it should seem miraculous how they could different shape. Guarini was perhaps the only
stand at all. Gothic builders - he writes - erected Italian architect who had studied Desargues's
arches 'which seem to hang in the air; com- Projective Geometry,-" first published in Paris
pletely perforated towers crowned by pointed in 1639, which was informed by the modern
pyramids; enormously high windows and vaults conception of infinity.
without the support of walls. The corner of a As a writer-' Guarini sides with seventeenth-
high tower may rest on an arch or a column century rationalism, but for him as a priest-**
or on the apex of a vault. . . . Which of the two the suggestion of infinity by architectural de-
opposing methods, the Roman or the Gothic, vices must have been a pressing religious prob-
is the more wonderful, would be a nice problem lem. We may surmise that it was the balance
for an academic mind.' It does not appear far- between the new rationalism and the modern
fetched to conclude that the idea of his daring mathematical mysticism epitomized in Guarini's
diaphanous domes with their superstructures, work that made his architecture so attractive
which seem to defy all static principles, was to the masters of the Late Baroque in Austria
suggested to Guarini by his study and analysis and southern Germany.
of Gothic architecture. And he also used the
formula of Hispano-Moresque domes to display
FILIPPO JUVARRA (1678-1736)
structural miracles as astonishing as those of
the Gothic builders.-^ When Guarini died in 1683, Juvarra was five
But his domes are more than structural years old. He came to Turin as a fully fledged
freaks. They seem the result of a deep-rooted architect in 17 14, thirty-one years after Gua-
urge to replace the consistent sphere of the rini's death.-' Thus there is no trace of conti-
ancient dome, the symbol of a finite dome of nuity in Piedmontese architecture, nor do Ju-
heaven, by the diaphanous dome with its varra's buildings at Turin show any Guari-
mysterious suggestion of infinity. If this is nesque influence. On the contrary, Juvarra's
correct, not only his domes but also the other conception of architecture was diametrically
essential characteristics of his architecture be- opposed to that of Guarini. And yet there is a
come intelligible. The element of surprise, peculiar link between them, for Juvarra was
the entirely unexpected, the seemingly illogical. born at Messina and grew up with Guarini's
I BIBLOSARTE
414 LATK BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
buildings before his eyes. His father was a mediately raised to a position which had no
silversmith of distinction, and Juvarra's life- equal in Italy. He soon enjoyed a unique inter-
long interest in designing works of applied art national reputation, to be compared only with
and in rich decorative detail probably dates that of Tiepolo a generation later. .'\s early as
back to these years.'" His early training and 171 1 Emperor Joseph I of .Austria had asked
impressions were, however, overshadowed by him for stage designs for the Vienna theatre.
a ten years' stay in Rome (1703/4- 14). He Between 1719 and 1720 he spent a year in
joined Carlo Fontana's studio, and it is reported Portugal planning the palace at Mafra for King
that his teacher advised him to forget what he John V." The year 1720 also saw him in
had learned before. Juvarra followed this advice, London*' and Paris. He dedicated a volume
absorbed Fontana's academic Late Baroque, with drawings to August the Strong of Saxony;
and studied ancient. Renaissance, and con- finally, in 1735, he was given permission to go
temporary architecture with enthusiasm and to Madrid in order to design a royal palace for
impartiality (p. 369). His immense gift as a Philip V.^" In Madrid he suddenly died on
draughtsman, his extraordinary imagination, 31 January 1736.
and his ceaselessly active mind prevented him When Juvarra settled in Turin, he had only
from perpetuating his master's manner. He twenty-two years to live, but what he accom-
gave proof of his great and original talent when plished in this relatively brief span seems almost
in 1708 he entered the service of Cardinal Otto- superhuman. It is impossible to give even a
boni, for whose theatre in the Cancelleria he remote idea of his splendid achievement. Leav-
poured out stage design after stage design of ing aside the work done or planned outside
unmatched boldness." Many hundreds of Turin and its neighbourhood - at Como,
drawings show, moreover, that from as early Mantua, Belluno, Bergamo, Lucca, Chambery,
as 1705 onwards he directed his creative ener- Vercelli, Oropa, and Chieri; leaving aside also
gies towards the most diverse enterprises, such the many important projects for Rome*" and
as the vast plans for the systematization of the omitting the mass of minor and occasional work
area round the Capitol, the designs for the at Turin, there still remains an imposing array
completion of the Palazzo Pubblico at Lucca, '- of buildings, all in or near the Piedmontese
for a palace of the Landgraf of Hesse-Cassel, capital. The list contains five churches*"" apart
and the altars in S. Martino at Naples; in from the facade of S. Cristina (1715-28); four
addition there are designs for innumerable royal residences;*'* four large palaces in town;^"
occasional works like the funeral decorations and finally the entire quarters of Via del Car-
for Emperor Leopold I, King Peter II of mine-Corso Valdocco (1716-28) and Via Mi-
Portugal, and the Dauphin; for coats of arms, lano-Piazza Emanuele Filiberto (1729-33). The
cartouches, tabernacles, lamps, and even book building periods of many of these structures
illustrations. Very little of all this, however, are long and overlap, and it is therefore difficult
was executed. to see a clear development of Juvarra's style. It
Juvarra's great opportunity came in 17 14 would seem more to the point to differentiate
when Vittorio .^medeo II of Savoy (recently between the styles used for diflerent tasks, such
created King of Sicily) asked him to enter his as the richly articulated facade of the royal
service at Messina.^' At the end of the year palace in town, the Palazzo Madama [284], in
we find him at Turin, and with his appointment contrast to the classical simplicity of the royal
as 'First Architect to the King' he was im- hunting 'lodge', Stupinigi [285], or the relative
BIBLOSARTE
415
284. Filippo Juvarra: Turin,

Palazzo Madama, 17 18-21. Fa9ade
sobriety of aristocratic residences. Moreover, determined articulation he creates an essentially

with his absolute mastery of historical and con- Italian palace front. ^' The interior is indepen-
temporary styles, Juvarra, with admirable ease, dent of French sources; it contains one of the
used what he regarded as suitable for the pur- grandest staircase halls in Italy, taking up
pose. Thus when designing the facades of S. almost the whole width of the present facade.
Cristina or S. Andrea at Chieri (1728) he turned It also affords an excellent opportunity for
to Rome, while the Palazzo IVIadama was studying Juvarra's decorative style, which is
fashioned on the model of Versailles. The way entirely his own. It derives from a fusion of
he absorbed and transformed the models from Cortonesque and Borrominesque conceptions;
which he took his cue shows that he was more boldly treated naturalistic motifs appear next
than an immensely gifted practitioner. In this to flat dynamic styHzations; exuberant orna-
respect a comparison of the front of the Palazzo ment next to chaste, almost Neo-classical wall
Madama with the garden front of Versailles is treatment.
most illuminating. It cannot be doubted that While planning Stupinigi, Juvarra wavered
the former is much superior to the latter. In- for a time between the French and the Italian
stead of the petty co-ordination of tiers in Ver- tradition. He considered both the French
sailles, Juvarra's piauu uobile dominates the chateau type with the staircase hall adjoining
design; and by introducing bold accents and a the vestibule and the Italian star-shaped plan.
BIBLOSARTE
4i6
285 (below). Filippo Juvarra: Stupinigi, Castle, 1729-33
286 (opposite). Filippo Juvarra: Stupinigi, Castle, 1729-33. Plan
where corresponding units are grouped round regarded as the most distinguished legatee of
a central core/- He chose the latter type of architectural thought accumulated in Italy in
design [285, 286], extended it to a scale which the course of the previous 300 years. On the
has no parallel in northern Italy, and trans- other hand, he broke away from that tradition
formed it so thoroughly that Stupinigi is really more decisively than any other Italian architect
in a class of its own. since the Renaissance. This may first be demon-
If it is difficult to discern a development of strated by comparing his design of S. Filippo
Juvarra's architecture in the traditional sense, Neri (1715)^* with that of the Chiesa del Car-
an evolution - or even revolution - of certain mine (1732-5) [287, 288].^"' Despite the ample
fundamental spatial conceptions may yet be and airy proportions, the design of S. Filippo
observed. On the one hand, Juvarra must be does not depart from the old tradition which
BIBLOSARTE
417
goes back through Alberti to ancient thermae most important, the wall as a boundary of the
and is epitomized in Palladio's Redentore. The nave has been replaced by a skeleton of high
Chiesa del Carmine also has a wide nave and pillars.
three chapels to each side, but the design has All this is without precedent in Italy. No
been fundamentally changed. Here there are Italian architect of the Renaissance or the
high open galleries above the chapels, creating Baroque had wanted or dared to sacrifice the
the following result: (i) along the nave two coherent enclosure of the wall and to create
arches always appear one above the other, that such immensely high openings resulting in a
of the chapel and that of the gallery; (ii) the shift of importance from the vaulting to the
clerestory is eliminated, and the nave is lit slender supports. This was a thorough reversal
through the windows of the gallery; (iii) and of the Italian tradition, indeed, of the classical
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE IN PIEDMONT 419
287 and 288. Filippo Juvarra Turin, : it was acclimatized in Austria through Andrea
Chiesa del Carmine, 1732-5. Pozzo and Fischer von Erlach^' and was at the
View towards altar (opposite) and section (above)
same time transferred from altars to whole
chapels. It is plausible that this happened first
foundation of Renaissance architecture. Where in the North, ^''

for the simple reason that there
did Juvarra turn for inspiration? High open was no tradition in Italy for churches with
galleries are well known from the architecture galleries. So we see Italian ideas adapted in the
of the Middle Ages, even in Italy (e.g. S. Am- North to the traditional longitudinal nave with
brogio, Milan); but their first monumental galleries, and although the chapel fronts of the
appearance in Renaissance architecture in con- Chiesa del Carmine preser\ e something of the
nexion with the classical barrel vault is to be character of the Italian altar, it seems safe to
found in the cr\ pto-Gothic design of St assume that Juvarra was guided also for this
Michael, Munich (1583 97). The type re- device by German or Austrian examples.
mained common in Germany, and Juvarra was The highest aspirations of Italian architects
doubtless aware of it. For the first time since were always focused on the centralized church
the Renaissance, the North had a vital contri- with dominating dome. True to that tradition,
bution to make to Italian architecture. Juvarra was constantly engaged on fresh solu-
Another point deserves close attention. The tions of the old problems. Characteristically,
chapels of the Chiesa del Carmine are not self- the series begins with an ideal project which
contained units with their own source of light he presented in 1707 to the Accademia di S.
but have oval openings through which light Luca on his election as academician. And typical
streams from the windows of the gallery. The of his Late Baroque \ersatility, he integrates
idea of using hidden light and conducting it in this project the most diverse tendencies
through an opening behind or above an altar without, however, eclipsing the customary
was conceived by Bernini (St Teresa altar); approach to centralized planning.^' The same
BIBLOSARTE
420 • I.ATt BAROQUt AND ROCOCO
applies to his first executed centralized struc- three-quarters of its circular exterior jut out
ture, the church of the Venaria Reale near from the straight line of this building. This side,
Turin (1716-21-28). He combined here the facing the plain of Turin and a glorious range
Greek cross of St Peter's with ideas derived of Alpine peaks, is stone-faced and treated as a
from S. Agnese and also introduced the sceno- coherent unit which conceals the long brick
graphic element of screening columns in ana- fronts of the monastery. The principal ratios
logy to Palladio's Redentore/'* used are of utter simplicity the square portico
:
In the same year in which he was engaged in front of the church has sides corresponding
on this design, he also began his masterpiece, in length exactly to the straight walls adjoining
the Superga, high up on a hill a few miles east the church, a measure which is half that of the
of Turin [289, 290].^" The Superga is by far church's diameter; the body of the church, the
the grandest of the great number of Baroque drum, and the dome are of equal height. Similar
sanctuaries on mountains, of which I have to the Venaria Reale, the ground plan shows
spoken before (p. 390). Again, the church con- large openings in the cross-axes and satellite
tains little that would point into the future, chapels in the diagonals. One tends to read into
but it is the brilliant epitome of current ideas, the plan the bevelled pillars of a Greek cross
brought together in an unexpected way. While with columns in recesses (reminiscent of S.
a part of the church is enclosed by the short Agnese). But the elevation reveals that there
side of an extensive rectangular monastery, is no pendentive zone and that the columns
BIBLOSARTE
289 and 290. Filippo Juvarra:
Superga near Turin, 1717-31
exterior (opposite)
and section and plan (below)
BIBLOSARTE
422 LAIK liAROQLl. ANU KOCOCO
which, in analogy to S. Agncsc, one would therefore, informed the principle of unification,
expect to support the high arches of the Greek- the relationships are utterly difierent. In keep-
cross arms, carry instead the uninterrupted ing with a Baroque tendency which has been
ring of the entablature, on which rests the high discussed (p. 217), Juvarra increased the height
cylinder of the drum. In contrast to many of of the drum and dome at the expense of the
Guarini's structures, in which a pendentive body of the church, and in this respect he went
/one is unexpectedly introduced, here, equally far beyond the position reached in S. Agnese.'^'
unexpectedly, it has been suppressed. But Ju- Indirectly the portico also stems from Michel-
varra's design lacks the quality of contradiction angelo's St Peter's. In 1659 Bernini had tried
which we found in Guarini. Juvarra has com- to revive Michelangelo's idea, and from then
bined in one building the two principal types of on all classically-minded architects placed a
domical structure: the Pantheon type, where portico in front of centralized buildings. The
the dome rises from the cylindrical body, and example of the Pantheon was, of course, close
the Greek-cross type; and these two different at hand, and it is characteristic of Juvarra's
centralized systems remain clearly discernible. classicizing Late Baroque that he took his cue
The body of the church is octagonal, as it from the ancient masterpiece. But he went
should be in a Greek cross with bevelled pillars; even further and endeavoured to improve upon
and the transition from the octagon to the circle it, firstly by integrating his portico with the
is boldly conceived,^" for the circular entab- body of the church, and secondly by reducing
lature is set into the octagon touching it only the number of columns. This enabled him to
in the centre of the four arches. fulfil Vitruvius's demand for a wider central
The decoration of the church owes as much intercolumniation and, moreover, to create a
to Borromini as to Bernini. Borrominesque are light and airy structure, true to eighteenth-
the undulating windows of the drum, while the century aspirations.
combination of ribs and coffers in the dome is It may well be said that this building repre-
close to Bernini's Castelgandolfo. But the colour sents the apogee of a long development: the
scheme with its prevailing light bluish and problems of centralized planning, the double-
yellowish tones has no relationship to the past tower facade, the high drum and dominating
and is typically eighteenth-century. \ small dome, the tetrastyle portico and its wedding to
centralized altar room, attached to the congre- the church all this was carried a step beyond
gational room, is treated as an isolated unit. previous realizations, in a direction which one
Without being attracted by Guarini's pioneer- might expect if the whole evolution were before
ing interpenetration of spatial entities, Juvarra one's mind. Yet there is something un-Italian
returns in this respect to the North Italian about this work. It is mainly the way in which
Renaissance tradition. the monastic buildings have been connected
In the exterior he took up the old problem with the church. One cannot avoid recalling
of the high dome between flanking towers. Al- the large monastic structures north of the .Îps
though the latter are clearly indebted to those such as Weingarten, Einsiedeln, and Melk, the
of S. Agnese, he returned to Michelangelo's dates of which, incidentally, almost correspond
design of St Peter's for the alternating rhythm with that of the Superga. It is hardly possible
of wide and narrow bays in the body of the to doubt that Juvarra was conversant with such
church as well as for the vertical continuation works. And it was precisely the impact of the
of the pilasters into the double columns of the North that also revolutionized his approach to
drum and the ribs of the dome. If Michelangelo, centralized building.
BIBLOSARTE
423
His late centralized church designs were not Once again German buildings provide the
executed.Most important among them are the key to this development. When uninfluenced
many projects tor the new cathedral, dating by German architects never accepted the
Italy,
from 1729, in which essentially he returned to southern drum and dome, not even for their
the grouping of Leonardo's schemes. But this centralized churches. They always preferred
is true only for the plans and not for the eleva- (essentially anti-Renaissance) skeleton struc-
tions. The strangest among the latter [291] tures capped by low vaults." While the late
2QI. Filippo Juvarra;

Sketch for the Duomo Nuovo, Turin, after 1729
shows a skeleton structure with immensely high Juvarra consented to this principle of spatial
piers and arched openings in two tiers between organization, he still adhered to the Italian
them.''- The dome as an independent, domi- articulation of his units and sub-units. No
nating feature has been eliminated. Nor has vaulted structures corresponding to his cathe-
the drum a raisoti d'etre in such a design. It is dral designs will be found in Germany.
now clear that in his late work Juvarra applied In the central hall of Stupinigi Juvarra's new
the same revolutionary principles to the plan- ideas reached the stage of execution [292]. And
ning of both longitudinal and centralized build- in this hall one will also understand why he was
ings. The volte-face expressed in the designs so much attracted by the northern approach to
for the new cathedral corresponds exactly to planning. These skeleton structures, with their
that of the Chiesa del Carmine. uninterrupted vertical sweep and the unification
BIBLOSARTE
4^4 LAIt BAROQLt AND ROCOCO
tese by birth. ''^ Outside Piedmont Vittone is
still little known, and yet he was an architect of

rare ability, full of original ideas and of a
creative capacity equalled only by few of the

greatest masters. His relative obscurity is cer-
tainly due to the fact that most of his buildings
are in small Piedmontese towns, seldom visited
by the student of architecture. He studied in

Rome, where he won a first prize in the Accade-
mia di S. Luca in 1732.^'' Early next year he
returned to Turin, in time to witness the rise of

Juvarra's late works. The Superga had just been
completed, the large hall at Stupinigi was
almost finished, and the Carmine was going up.
It was this architecture that made an indelible
impression upon him."'

Shortly after his return from Rome, the
Theatines who owned Guarini's papers won
Vittone's collaboration in editing the Archi-
tettura civile, which appeared in 1737. In this
292. Filippo Juvarra: way he acquired his exceptional knowledge of

Stupinigi, Castle, 1729-33. Great Hall Guarini's work and ideas; nor did he fail to
learn his lesson from the long chapters on
geometry. On this firm foundation he set out on
of central and subsidiary rooms, have a marked his career as a practising architect,^** and from
scenic quality. In spite of his classical leanings, shortly after Juvarra's death until his own death
Juvarra never ceased to think in terms of the in 1770 we can follow his activity almost year by
resourceful stage designer. year. His few palaces are without particular
When all is said and done, it remains true that distinction. His interest was focused on ecclesi-
Juvarra not only perfected the most treasured of astical architecture, and it is a remarkable fact
Italian architectural ideals, but also abandoned that, with one or two exceptions, his churches -
them. Just because he was the greatest of his and they are many - are centralized buildings or
generation, this surrender is more than a matter derive from centralized planning. One would
of local or provincial import. It adumbrates the therefore presume that as a rule he followed his
end of Italian supremacy in architecture.^^ own counsel and that the clergy of the small
communities for which he worked hardly inter-
fered with his ideas.

BERNARDO VITTONE
His first building, to our knowledge, the little
(1702, not 1704/5-70)
Sanctuary at Vallinotto near Carignano (south
The improbable rarely happens, but it does of Turin), is also one of his most accomplished
happen sometimes. An architect arose in Turin masterpieces [293-5]. ^^ ^"^^ erected between
who reconciled the manner of Guarini with that 1738 and 1739 as a chapel for the agricultural
of Juvarra. His name is Bernardo Vittone, and labourers of a rich Turin banker.'" The exterior
he was, unlike Guarini and Juvarra, a Piedmon- immediately illustrates what has just been
BIBLOSARTE
425
pointed out: it combines features of both If anything, the impression of the "interior
Guarini's and Juvarra's styles. From Guarini's surpasses that of the exterior. All the charac-
specific interpretation of the North Itahan tradi- teristic features of Vittone's style are here
tion derives the pagoda-hke diminution of assembled - it is a climax right at the beginning.
tiers.'" But in contrast to Guarini's High Baro- The plan consists of a regular hexagon with six
que treatment of the wall with pilasters and segmental chapels of equal width spanned by
columns, niches and pediments, ornament and six equal arches [294]. But the treatment of the
statues, we find here walls of utter simplicity, chapels varies; for open chapels alternate with
accentuated only by unobtrusive pilasters and others into which convex coretli have been
plain frames and panels. Obviously this was placed. Since, therefore, non-corresponding
done under the influence of Juvarra's classicist chapels face each other across the room, the
detail such as the exterior of Stupinigi. In spite geometrical simplicity and regularity of the plan
of the utmost economy of detail, the church is not easily grasped."' The glory of this little
makes a gay and cheerful Rococo impression, church is its dome [295]. Following Guarini,
and this is due not only to its brilliant whiteness, Vittone formed its first diaphanous shell of
also to be found in Stupinigi, but above all to Through the large hexagonal
intersecting ribs.
the lively silhouette and the undulating rhythm opening appear three more vaults, one above
of the walls. the other: two solid ones with circular openings.
2Q3 and 294. Bernardo Vittone:

\'allinotto near Carignano, Sanctuary, 1738-9
Exterior, and engraving of
section and plan
BIBLOSARTE
295- Bernardo Vittone: Vallinotto, Sanctuary, view into dome
BIBLOSARTE
ARCHITECTURE IN PIEDMONT 427
diminishing in size, and, capping them, the invisible to the beholder from any point in the
hemisphere of the lantern. church. Precisely the same type of lighting was
The idea of a soHd spherical dome with a used by Guarini in his design of S. Gaetano at
large opening, allowing a view into a second Vicenza. The two forms of concealed lighting
dome, is also Guarini's,'- but the latter never to be found in the Sanctuary derive therefore
combined this type with the diaphanous dome, from Juvarra's Carmine and Guarini's S. Gae-
and neither Guarini nor any other architect tano. Their common source is, of course,
ever produced a dome with three (or, counting Bernini. But while Bernini focuses the con-
the lantern, which forms part of the scheme, cealed light on one particular area, the centre
four) different vaults. The adaptation and fusion of dramatic import, no such climax is intended
of Guarinesque domical structures was for by Vittone. A gay and festive bright light fills
Vittone a means to a different end. It will be the whole space and the differently lit realms
recalled that Guarini always separated the zone of the dome are only gradations of this diffuse
of the dome from the body of the church, true luminosity. Vittone himself made it clear that
to his principle of working with isolated and he wanted the different vaults to be seen as one
contrasting units. Not so Vittone; in his case unified impression of the infinity of heaven.
the ribs of the vaulting are continuations of the On the vaults is painted the hierarchy of angels,
pillars. He even omits the traditional entab- of which Vittone writes in his htruziom diverse:
lature above the arches of the hexagon, thus 'The visitor's glance travels through the spaces
avoiding any break in continuity. Instead, he created by the vaults and enjoys, supported by
introduces a second ring of high arches above the concealed light, the varien of the hierarchy
the arches of the chapels. Thus he creates a which gradually increases' (i.e. towards the
lofry system of arches with which the ribbed spectator).
vaulting forms a logical entity. The second ring The altar in this church stands free between
of arches has a further purpose : it conducts the two pillars through which one looks into a
light from the large windows of the first 'drum' space behind. Thus even Vittone, who always
into the main room and under the ribbed vault. concerned himself with strict centralized plan-
At the same time these windows supply a strong ning, accepted the Palladian tradition of a
skv-light for the chapels, the vaults of which screened-oft space, a tradition with which he
have oval apertures. was conversant through both Juvarra and Gua-
It is evident that the arrangement of the rini. But we have seen (pp. 1 82-3) that this device
arches as well as the lighting of the main room made it possible to preserve the integrity of the
and the chapels derive from Juvarra's Carmine. centralized space and, at the same time, to
We are faced with the extraordinary fact that overcome its limitations. Vittone, in fact, more
the northern nave type with galleries, intro- than once used and varied this motif and
duced by Juvarra into a longitudinal building, thoroughly exploited its scenic possibiHties and
has here been transferred to a centralized struc- mysterious implications.''

ture. No stranger and more imaginative union In a small sanctuary of this character a high
of Guarinesque and Juvarresque conceptions standard of finish cannot be expected. All the
could be imagined. architectural ornaments are rather roughly
While the ribbed dome is lit by a strong painted. The colours used here and in other
indirect light, the second dome has no source churches by Vittone are predominantly light
of light at all. By contrast, the third dome is grey and reddish and greenish tones, in other
directlv lit bv circular windows, but thev are words typical Rococo colours somewhat similar
BIBLOSARTE
428 •
LATt UAROQUt AND ROCOCO
to those usedby Juvarra, but entirely different which correspond exactly to the arches of the
from the heavy and deep High Baroque colour chapels beneath and cut deeply into the lower
contrasts with which Guarini worked. part of the vault. IVluch more closely than at
The church of S. Chiara at Bra of 1742 is Vallinotto, Vittone adjusted the system of Ju-
probably Vittone's most accomplished work varra's Carmine to his centralized plan.''^ Of
[296, 297]. Here four identical segmental chapels the low domical vault Uttle remains, and what
are joined to a circular core. As in the Sanctuary there is seems to hover precariously above the
at Vallinotto, the external elevation follows the head of the beholder. This impression is streng-
basic shape of the plan. S. Chiara is a simple thened by an extraordinary device each of the :
brick structure, and only the top part is white- four sectors of the vault has a window-like
washed, emphasizing the richly undulating opening through which one looks into the
quatrefoil form of the building. Inside, four painted sky with angels and saints in the field
relatively fragile pillars carry the vaulting. The of vision. Sky and figures are painted on the
section [296] immediately recalls Juvarra's de- second shell, which forms the exterior sil-
signs for the new cathedral [291]. But Vittone houette of the dome, and receive direct and
introduced a nuns' gallery with high arches strong light from the nearby windows. And
these windows also serve as sky-lights to the
296. Bernardo Vittone: Bra, S. Chiara, 1742. gallery.

Elevation, section, and plan. Engraving Vittone found in this church a new and un-
expected solution for Guarini's idea of the
diaphanous dome: a fragile man-made shell
seems to separate constructed space from the

realm in which saints and angels dwell [297].
Although structurally insignificant, the dome
is still the spiritual centre of the building. By
means of a transformed Guarinesque concep-
tion, the antichmax of Juvarra's late designs
was here endowed with new meaning.
Also in Vittone's later work hardly any fully
developed dome will be found. This is paralleled

in Austrian and German church building where
the native tradition led to a general acceptance
of low vaults. But Vittone's designs are so
different from those of the North that a direct
contact must be excluded. The stimulus re-
ceived from Juvarra's Chiesa del Carmine, from

the latter's late centralized projects, and the
great hall at Stupinigi, in combination with
ideas derived from Guarini, fully account for
Vittone's strange development. In his later
buildings he found ever new realizations of the

same problem. S. Gaetano at Nice shows the
adaptation of the design of S. Chiara at Bra
to an oval plan. In S. Bernardino at Chieri
BIBLOSARTE
297- Bernardo Vittone: Bra, S. Chiara, 1742. View into dome
BIBLOSARTE
430 •
LATE BAROQUK AND ROCOCO
taken by V ittone in 1 744 in the church of the

Ospizio di Carita at Carignano''' which shows
a new concept brought to full fruition two years
later in the choir of S. Maria di Piazza at Turin
(175 1 -4) [298]. Here he designed a normal
crossing with four arches and pendentives be-
tween them. But instead of separating the zone
of the pendentives from the drum by a circular
ring, he fused pendentives and 'drum' indis-

solubly. This he achieved by hollowing out the
pendentives and giving them a deep concave
shape; in other words, he transformed them
into a kind of inverted squinches. Thus the
medieval squinch, which had been swept away
by the Renaissance and was revived by Borro-
mini in some marginal works (p. 212), found a
strange resuscitation just before the close of a

long epoch. As a result of the new motif it was
possible to arrange the piers of the 'drum' in
the form of an octagon and to let the tall win-
dows between them return to the square of the
crossing there are two windows at right angles
:
above each pendentive. Entirely unorthodox,

Vittone's domical feature, so rich in spatial and
geometrical relations, belongs in a class with
298. Bernardo Vittone: Turin, Guarini's hybrid dome conceptions.
S. Maria di Piazza, part of the church and choir, Vittone availed himself of the infinite pos-
1 75 1 4. Section and plan
sibilities which the inverted squinch offered,
and it is remarkable that no other architect, to

(1740-4) he was handicapped by an existing my knowledge, took up the idea. The maturest
building and was forced to use a more tradi- manifestation of the new concept is to be found
tional form of dome. But he made the dome in S. Croce at Villanova di Mondovi (1755)
appear to hang weightless in space above the [299].'" In this church the square of the crossing
chapels and created diaphanous pendentives consists of very wide and high arches. By widen-
through which fall the rays of the sun. In other ing the 'pendentive-squinch', Vittone found
designs he transformed the dome into a shaft- an entirely new way of transforming the square
like feature. This may be studied in his rela- into a regular octagon. Thus arches, penden-
tively early project for S. Chiara at Alessan- tives, drum, and dome merge imperceptibly
dria:''^ its diaphanous vault owes a very great into an indivisible whole.
deal to Guarini and is, indeed, far removed Towards the end of his life Vittone seems to
from the broad stream of the northern develop- have returned to more conventional designs
ment. (church at Riva di Chieri, begun 1766).'"* This
The next important step, which further phase is reflected in the work of pupils and
widened the gap with northern designs, was followers such as Andrea Rana from Susa, the
BIBLOSARTE
431
299. Bernardo \ ittonc:

Villanova di Mondovi, S. Croce, 1755.
View into vaulting
architect of the impressive Chiesa del Rosario studied it with equal devotion and ingenuity.
at Strambino (1764-81),'"' or Pietro Bonvicini His architecture could be conceived only on
(1741-96), who built S. Michele in Turin the broadest foundation. Through the merging
(1784).'" It was these men, among others, who of Guarini and Juvarra he looked back to the
carried on Vittone's Piedmontese Late Baroque 'bizarre' as well as the 'sober' tradition in Italian
almost to the end of the eighteenth century. architecture - to Borromini on the one hand ; to
When Vittone died, Neo-classicism was con- Carlo Fontana, Bernini, and Palladio on the
quering Europe. In historical perspective his other. He himself differentiated between the
intense Late Baroque may therefore be regarded classical trend and the architecture 'di scherzo
as a provincial backwater. But judged on its e bizzaria', for which he named Borromini and
own merits, his work is of rare distinction. He Guarini. Moreover he incorporated in his work
attacked centralized planning, that old and the scenic qualities of the North Italian Pal-
most urgent problem of Italian architects, with ladian tradition. Finally, Juvarra familiarized
boldness and imagination; and perhaps no him with Germano-Austrian conceptions of
architect before him, not even Leonardo, had planning, and Guarini with a theoretical know-
BIBLOSARTE
ledge ot modern French geometry. It was this research - but for what purpose.' Newton's
knowledge that enabled him to discover the splitting up of white light into the colours of
potentialities of a combination of pendentive the rainbow is for him the supreme confirma-
with squinch, a combination geometrically ex- tion of the old musical theory of proportion.
tremely intricate, used neither by French nor Proportion is the one and all of these treatises,
German eighteenth-century architects. and Vittone's terms of reference are precisely
What little we know about him suggests that those of Renaissance theory. He even inter-
his was an obsessed genius. This is also the sperses his text with musical notations, and by
impression one carries away from reading his squaring his paper he claims to have found an
two treatises, the htruzioni element an of 1760 infallible method of ensuring the application
and the Islnizioni diverse of 1766. The earlier of correct proportions. He concludes the second
treatise is one of the longest ever written, and treatise with a special long paper on music
the later consists to a large extent of appendices which he commissioned from his assistant
to the first. But the published work is only a Giovanni Galletto, whom he never paid for the
small part of his literary production. Large contribution.^'
masses of manuscripts existed which have so Thus in spite of all the formal development
far not been traced. Now the extraordinary during 300 years of Italian architectural history,
thing about his treatises is that basically he has beginning and end meet. .\nd it is also in the
not moved far from .\lberti's position. To be spirit of the Renaissance treatises that Vittone
sure, the language has changed: where Alberti dedicated his first work to the 'Signore Iddio\
wanted to elevate and inform the mind, Vittone to God Himself, and the second to 'Maria
wants to delight. He also incorporates recent Santissima, Madre di Dio'.'^
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER l8
SCULPTURE
Towards the end of the seventeenth century

French influence, particularly on sculptors,
^/rj^mg '^-:ii '^^^sfv^ Î^Ki^^l
increased rapidly. The reason for it seems ob-
vious. After the foundation of the French
Academy in Rome (1666), French sculptors
went to the Eternal City in great numbers, often
not only to study but to stay. But this is only
part of the story. It would appear that Rome
was no longer strong enough to assimilate the
national idiosyncrasies of the Frenchmen. It
may be recalled that during the preceding 150

years hardly any Roman artist had been a
Roman by birth. Bernini was half Tuscan, half

Neapolitan; the Carracci, Domenichino, and
Algardi came from Bologna; Duquesnoy from
Brussels; Caravaggio, Borromini, and a host
of others from Northern Italy; and this list
could be continued indefinitely. Yet since the

days of Bramante, Raphael, and Michelangelo,
Rome had had a most extraordinary formative
influence on artists: they imbibed that specifi-
cally Roman quality which is described by the
word gravitci - a grandeur and severity that
stamp all these artists as typically Roman,
however widely their personal styles may difter.
In Bernini's immediate circle we find Germans
and Frenchmen, but without documentary evi-
dence' it would be entirely impossible to dis-
cover their non-Roman or even non-Italian

origin. Now, at the end of the seventeenth cen-
tury, the position changed. In the works of a
Monnot, a Theodon, a Legros [300], or later of

a Michelangelo Slodtz [313], we sense some-
thing of the typically French biemeance and
linear grace. In spite of these un-Roman
BIBLOSARTE
Support for French influence came Irom the Roman grand manner, and the Baroque exube-
Italians themselves, and in particular from an rance of his group gave little satisfaction after
artist from whom we should expect it least, its arrival in Versailles.
-'
namely Domenico Guidi, the only important It must not be forgotten that the exchange
sculptor ot his generation who was still alive of Academic niceties between Lebrun and
in 1 700. After the deaths of Ferrata and Raggi Guidi took place at a time when Bernini was
in the same year, 1 686, he was generally acknow- still vigorously active. Bernini himself was sur-
ledged as the first sculptor in Rome. In a rounded by friends, old and young, who always
previous chapter we have discussed the some- remained true to the art of their master. Among
what dubious practices of this artist, whose the older men there was Lazzaro Morelli (1608-
workshop supplied the whole of Europe with 90), the faithful collaborator on the Cathedra,
sculpture. His social ambition led him into the the tomb of Alexander VII, and many other
higher regions of official academic art; he was works; among the younger there were Giulio
principe of the Academy of St Luke in 1670 and Cartari, who had accompanied Bernini to Paris,
again in 1675, while Bernini was still alive, and Michele Maglia, Filippo Carcani, and above all
his position put him on an equal footing with Giuseppe Mazzuoli. The last three were actually
Charles Lebrun, the embodiment of the suave Ferrata's pupils, but Bernini employed them
and accomplished professional artist. It was on more than one occasion and particularly for
Guidi who proposed Lebrun for the post of the tomb of Alexander VII. The most impor-
principe of the Academy of St Luke, an honour tant artist of this group was Mazzuoli (1644-
which the latter accepted for 1676 and 1677.
But since he could not leave Paris, it was ar- 301. Giuseppe Mazzuoli: Angels
carrying the Ciborium, c. 1700. Siena. S. Martino
ranged that Charles Errard, the Director of
the French Academy in Rome, should act as
his deputy. Thus a mere decade after Bernini
had made the Paris academicians and courtiers
recoil in fear before Italian genius, the same
academicians were, symbolically at least, the
masters of Rome - due to the initiative of the
unsophisticated Guidi who began as the arch-

enemy of the professori. The academic ties be-
tween Rome and Paris were further stren|:-
thened when the French reciprocated by ap-
pointing Guidi one of the Rectors of the Paris
Academy and by asking him to keep an eye on
the work of the French students in Rome.
Lebrun, moreover, repaid Guidi's compliment
by obtaining for him in 1677 the commission
for a group at Versailles. In accordance with
French custom, Lebrun himself supplied a
drawing from which Guidi was expected to
work. The wheel had turned full circle; never

before had a Roman artist taken his cue from
Paris. Guidi, however, was still steeped in the
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
435
1725),* a slightly older contemporary of the from Montecassino (destroyed) to Rieti, Pesaro,
Frenchmen Theodon, Monnot, and Legros; Ancona, and Mantua.

and it was he rather than anybody else who Filippo Carcani, most of whose work was
kept the Berninesque tradition alive into the carried out in the twenty years between 1670
eighteenth century and entirely by-passed and i6qo, commands particular interest. Im-
fashionable French classicism. Instead of illus- bued with Bernini's late style, he was attracted
trating one of his many monumental works, by Raggi, and it was Carcani, above all, who
we show as illustration 301 a detail of the two carried on Raggi's highly-strung manner - but
angels who carry the ciborium above the main with this diflerence: in Raggi's as well as in
altar in S. Martino at Siena {c. 1700); here the Bernini's late style the structure of the body
spirit of the Cathedra angels is still alive. remained important; one can always sense the
Another of Ferrata's pupils, Lorenzo Ottoni, classical model even if the body is hidden under
one of the most prolific artists of the generation a mass of drapery and even if the drapery con-
born towards the middle of the seventeenth trasts with the stance. Carcani, however, was
century (1648- 1736), remained Berninesque in no longer interested in classical structure. In
his many stucco works but followed the classical his stuccoes, bodies are immensely elongated
French trend in his monumental marbles;' the and fragile, as if they were without bones, while
same observation may be made in the case of draperies laid in masses of parallel folds
some minor artists of the period. Works by envelop them [302]. Some of Carcani's work,
Ottoni found their way to all parts of Italy, particularly the stuccoes in the Cappella Lancel-
lotti in S. Giovanni in Laterano (c. 1685),^ can
302. P'ilippo Carcani: Stucco decoration, c. 1685. only be described as a strange proto-Rococo,
Rome. S. Giovanni in Laterano, Cappella Lancellolti
and the eighteenth-century charm of the sweet
heads of his figures would easily deceive many
a connoisseur. It is surprising that this 'Rococo'
transformation of Bernini's late manner could
be performed, so soon after the latter 's death,
by a sculptor who had worked in close associa-
tion with him. Carcani's proto-Rococo, how-

ever, had no immediate following in Rome.
Despite the continuity of Bernini's late style,
at the close of the century it was the French

who were given the best commissions. They
had the lion's share in the most important
sculptural work of those years, the altar of St
Ignatius in the left transept of the Gesu.'' Con-

fidence in the victory of Catholicism had never
been expressed so \ igorously in sculptural terms
and with so much reliance on overpowering

sensual effects. Unrivalled is the colourful opu-
lence of the altar, its wealth of reliefs and
statues; but a typically Late Baroque diffuse,
picturesque pattern replaces the dynamic unity

of the High Baroque. In this setting one is apt
BIBLOSARTE
436 LATK BAROQUt AND ROCOCO
to overlook the mediocre quality of the over- 303. Camillo Rusconi: St Matthew, 171 ^ 15.
marble groups supplied by the main Rome, S. Giinanni in Lateraiw
life-size
contributors, the Frenchmen Legros and Theo-

don. Next to the Frenchman Monnot, the
Italians Ottoni, Câmetti, Bernardo Ludovisi,'
Angelo de' Rossi, Francesco Moratti, and
Camillo Rusconi were given subsidiary tasks, Parodi, but after his arrival in Rome in 1689
which show, however, more distinction than had turned more and more towards the classi-
the work of their French colleagues. cizing French current. Moratti from Padua was
Rusconi (1658- 1 728), who had first been also Parodi's pupil; he died young, in about
selected for one of the large marble groups but 1720, and his auvre is therefore rather small.
was replaced by his contemporary Legros, re- Though not influenced by Monnot, his Apostle
asserted his position at the beginning of the Simon, next to Mazzuoli's Philip, is the only
next century. To be sure, he was the strongest other Berninesque statue of the whole series.
personalin among Roman sculptors in the first With eight of the twelve statues the work of
quarter of the eighteenth century.^ After an Rusconi, Legros, and Monnot, this survey con-
early and brief 'Rococo' phase (Cardinal Virtues, firms the preponderance of different facets of a
Cappella Ludovisi, S. Ignazio, 1685), deriving Late Baroque classicism, a style anticipated in
like Carcani's style from Raggi rather than from the painting of Carlo Maratti, but exactly
his Roman teacher Ferrata, he reverted, per- paralleled in contemporary architecture.
haps under the influence of his older friend The next generation (born between 1680
Carlo Maratti, to Duquesnoy and Algardi and and 1700) did not pursue wholeheartedly the
also absorbed the teachings of the French powerful Late Baroque for which Rusconi
artists in Rome without, however, discarding stood. Among the many practitioners of that
the Berninesque heritage. The result can be generation four names stand out by virtue of
studied in the heroic Late Baroque classicism the quality and quantity of their production
of his four Apostles for Borromini's tabernacles those of Agostino Cornacchini (1685-after
in S. Giovanni in Laterano (1708-18) [303]. 1754), Giovanni Battista Maini (1690 1752),
They form part of the series of twelve monu- Filippo della Valle, and Pietro Bracci 1 700-73). (
mental marble statues, the largest sculptural Cornacchini, educated in Foggini's studio at
task in Rome during the early eighteenth cen- Florence, came to Rome in 1712 working in a
tury.' These statues provide an opportunity manner which watered down his teacher's
of assessing the prevalent stylistic tendency reminiscences of Ferrata and Guidi. His work
between 1700 and 171 5, and the distribution often has a mawkish flavour, and if he occa-
of commissions is, at the same time, a good sionally aspired to grandeur in the Roman
yardstick for measuring the reputation of con- artistic climate, he became guilty of grave errors
temporary sculptors. Rusconi has pride of place of taste, as is proved by his St Elijah (St Peter's,
with four figures. Legros and Monnot executed 1727) with its borrowings from Michelangelo
two statues each, and only one was assigned to as well as by the equestrian monument of
each of the following: Ottoni, IVlazzuoli, Angelo Charlemagne under the portico of St Peter's
de' Rossi, and Francesco Moratti. Of the two (1720-5), which is nothing but a weak and
latter, Angelo far the more
de' Rossi was by theatrical travesty of its counterpart, Bernini's
distinguished Genoa in 1671,
artist."' Born in Coiistanlitie.^' The less pretentious .Archangels
he had imbibed Bernini's manner under Filippo Michael and Gabriel in the cathedral at Orvieto
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
4.^8 • I.ATF. BAROQliK AND ROCOCO
(172c)) [304 1 show that he could command a he together with Giuseppe Rusconi (1687 1758,
typically cightccnth-ccntury charm, and in such not related to Camillo) who upheld Camillo's
works his manner is close to that of Pietro heroic classicism during the thirties and forties
Bracci. Giovanni Battista Maini,'- coming from of the eighteenth century. Maini's most impor-
Lombardy and, like Rusconi, learning his art tant works are in Galilei's Cappella Corsini in
from Rusnati in Milan, was for a time associated S. Giovanni in Laterano: the bronze statue of
in Rome with his older compatriot, and it was Clement XII (1734), almost a straight classi-
cizing copy after the pope of Bernini's Urban
tomb, and, more characteristic, the monument
to Cardinal Neri Corsini" (1732-5) [305], in
which the Marattesque figure of the Cardinal
recalls Philippe de Champaigne's Richelieu in
the Louvre, while the allegory of Religion is
closely related to that of Rusconi's tomb of

Gregory XIII.
The rich sculptural decoration of the Cap-
pella Corsini is as vital for our understanding
of the position in the 1730s as the Lateran
Apostles were for that of about 1710. No less
than eleven sculptors were employed and at

least six of them were directly or indirectly
indebted to Rusconi.'^ But they tend to trans-
form Rusconi's 'classicist Baroque' into a 'clas-
sicist Rococo' [306], very different from Car-

cani's passionate 'Rococo' of almost fifty years
before. Most characteristic of this style is
perhaps Filippo della Valle's Temperance. Like

Cornacchini, this artist (1698- 1768)''' had gone
through Foggini's school at Florence; in Rome
he attached himself closely to Camillo Rusconi.
He is certainly one of the most attractive and
304 (above). Agostino Cornacchini: poetical sculptors of the Roman eighteenth
The Guardian Angel, 1729. century. But the French note in his work is very
Orvietu, Cathedral
marked, and there cannot be any doubt that
Frenchmen like his contemporary Michel-
305 (right) Giovanni Battista Maini:
Monument to Cardinal Neri Corsini, 1732-5. angelo Slodtz - with whom he collaborated in
Rome, S. Ginvamii in Laterano, Cappella Corsiiu about 1728 in S. Maria della Scala - brought
him in contact with recent events in Paris."'
306 (far right). Filippo della Valle:
His monumental relief of the Annunciation in
Temperance, c. 1735.
Rome, S. Giovanni in Laterano, Cappella Corsini S. Ignazio (1750), a counterpart to the relief
created fifty years earlier by Legros [300!,
illustrates, however, that Filippo della Valle,
for all his engaging and craftsmanlike qualities,
was an epigone: this relief, embodying a late
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
439
version of Algardi's painterly relief style, shows eighteenth-century style. Filippo della Valle
an accretion of subordinate detail not dissimilar and Bracci represent most fully the Rococo
to the manner introduced by Guidi in the first phase in Roman They belonged to
sculpture.
phase of the Late Baroque. the generation of the masters who brought
Finally, there is Pietro Bracci,'' the most about the brief flowering of the Rococo in Ro-
prolific artist of this group. He made a great man architecture. Both artists were, of course,
number of tombs, among them those of the the chief contributors to the sculptural decora-
Popes Benedict XIII [310] and Benedict XIV, tion of the last great collective work of the
and many portrait busts with a fine psycho- Roman Late Baroque, the Fontana Trevi
logical penetration and a masterly vibrating [255].'^ The legend is difficult to kill that only
treatment of the surface. Still dependent on Bernini could have designed the combination
Bernini's idiom, he transformed it into a tender of figures, masses of rock, sculptured vegeta-
and lyrical, though sometimes sentimentalizing. tion, and gushing waters; similarly, he is also
BIBLOSARTE
made responsible for the design of the figures remained, of course, the most important sculp-
themselves. But Bracci's slightly frivolous AV/)- tural task right to the end of the eighteenth
tune, standing like a dancing master on an century. Its history is a touchstone not only for
enormous rocaille shell, is as far removed from assessing the contributions of the leading sculp-
the spirit of Bernini's works as is the picturesque tors, their style, and the quality of their work,
quality of the many rivulets or the artificial union but also for the appreciation of the profound
of formalized basins with natural rock. Never- spiritual development that occurred at this
theless, the Fontana Trevi is the splendid period. Between 1697 and 1704 Pietro Stefano
swansong of an epoch which owed all its vital Monnot erected the tomb of Innocent XI [307]
impulses to one great artist, Bernini. in a niche opposite Algardi's tomb of Leo XI. '^
Features deriving both from Bernini and Al-
gardi are here combined: the tomb of Urban
Typological Changes : Tombs and Allegories
\ III served as model for the polychrome treat-
Instead of pursuing further individual contri- ment, as the dark bronze sarcophagus with large
butions by minor masters, it may be well to scrolls clearly shows; but for the types of the
turn to a few specific problems and discuss from allegories and the narrative relief Monnot fol-
another angle the change that took place from lowed Leo XFs tomb. He placed the relief,
the High to the Late Baroque. The papal tomb however, not on the sarcophagus itself, but on
the pedestal of the papal statue. The insertion
of this pedestal made it necessary to reduce
307. Pietro Stefano Monnot: considerably the size of the papal figure, com-
Tomb of Innocent XI, 1697-1704.
pared with Algardi's. The latter's Leo XI fills
Rome, Si Peter's
the whole niche; the weak and somewhat gaunt
figure of Innocent XI, by contrast, seems rather
too small for its niche. To be sure, one of the
statues is by a great master, the other by a
mediocre follower; but apart from this, the

increased importance of decorative elements at
the expense of the figures illuminates the
stylistic change from the High to the Late
Baroque. Precisely the same observations apply

to Angelo de' Rossi's tomb of .Alexander VIII
in St Peter's (1691-1725), the design of which
closely follows that of Urban VIII; but again
the addition of a high pedestal with a narrative
relief results in figures of considerably shrunken
volume and an undue emphasis on the archi-
tectural and decorative parts.
More interesting than these monuments is
Camillo Rusconi's tomb of Gregory XIII [308],

erected between 17 19 and 1725 in a niche in the
right aisle of St Peter's corresponding to
Monnot's tomb in the left aisle. While being

profoundly indebted to Bernini's conception
BIBLOSARTE
3o8. Camillo Rusconi; Tomb of Gregory XIII, 1719-25. Rome, St Peter's
BIBLOSARTE
442 • LATE BAROQUF. AND ROCOCO
of sculpture, Rusconi blended elements from of the deceased by their presence and actions,
Algardi's Leo XI and Monnot's Innocent XI. 'Courage' here raises a curtain in order to be
The allegories and their position on the scrolls able to study the relief celebrating Gregory's
reveal Monnot's influence; from Algardi derive reform of the calendar. This implies a change
the unrelieved whiteness of the whole monu- in the meaning of allegories, to which we shall
ment, the trapezoid sarcophagus with relief, presently return.

and the idea of placing the seated pope on the The history of papal tombs continues with
sarcophagus without an isolating pedestal. those of Clement XII by Maini and Monaldi
Rusconi's design is, however, not a simple re- in the Cappella Corsini of the Lateran (1734)
petition of the pattern established by Algardi and of Innocent XII by Filippo della Valle in
and modified by Monnot. His monument is St Peter's (1746) [309], the former with a ten-
asymmetrically arranged : the pope does not dency towards classicizing coolness, the latter
sit on the central axis, nor do the allegories showing almost Rococo elegance.-- These monu-
follow the customary heraldic arrangement.-" ments repeat the structure of papal tombs, by
The tomb was evidently composed to be seen then conventionalized from the type created by
as a whole from one side. This is proved not Bernini at the height of the Catholic Restora-
only by the attitude and gesture of the blessing tion as an adequate expression of papal power.
pope and the postures of the allegories, but also In Rusconi's work something of this spirit had
by such details as the direction given to the
realistic dragon, the armorial animal of the

309. Filippo della Valle:
Buoncompagni. Moreover, 'Courage' lifts high
Tomb of Innocent XII, 1746.
a large piece of drapery (the pall that had Rome, St Peter's
covered the sarcophagus, a motif taken from
Bernini's tomb of Alexander VII); viewed from
the left, this creates a dominating diagonal
which links the allegory to the figure of the pope.
Rusconi composed for the side view because

the passage is so narrow that a comprehensive
view on the central axis is not possible. By taking
such issues into consideration and limiting him-
self to one main view, Rusconi had recourse to
principles which we associate with Bernini

rather than Algardi.-' The spirit of Bernini's
High Baroque has also come to life again in the
powerful gesture of the blessing hand which

recalls the attitude of Urban VIII. If this tomb
represents a rare synthesis of the classicizing
and Baroque tendencies of Algardi and Bernini,
successfully accomplished only in what I have
called Rusconi's 'heroic Late Baroque', it yet
exhibits a new departure of great importance.
Whereas in the older tombs allegories were
personal attributes expressing particular virtues
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
443
been kept alive - one might almost say - ana- the altar of the chapel in deep veneration. The
chronistically; for in the course of the seven- type had been anticipated about sixty years
teenth centur} the political influence of the before by Bernini in the tomb of Alexander VII
Papacy had been gradually waning, and this is [89] though it had not been followed in any of
monuments of the period.
reflected in the papal the later papal tombs. But where Bernini's
Already Guidi's Clement IX in S. Maria kneeling pope shows an unshaken confidence,
Maggiore (1675) and Ferrata's Clement X in an almost impersonal and eternal attitude of
St Peter's {c. 1685) had shown a considerably prayer, Bracci portrayed his Benedict XIII as
weakened energy of the blessing gesture and a man ot a less stable constitution, who seems
a shrinking of volume; this process went on, aware of the troubles of the human heart and
though not without interruption, until Filippo the frailty of man's existence. It was left to
della Valle made his Innocent XII a fragile old Canova to carry this development to a logical
man rather than the symbolic head of Chris- conclusion. In his tomb of Clement XIII (1788-
tianity. Shortly before, Pietro Bracci had re- g2) he even discarded the customary Baroque
placed the ritualistic gesture by a purely human allegories.-^ What remains is the unheroic figure
attitude. His Benedict XIII on the tomb in S. of the custodian of Faith lost in deep prayer.
Maria sopra Minerva (1734) [310]-^^ is bare- The series of papal tombs represents the
headed, sinks on one knee, and turns towards most coherent group of Baroque monuments,
the high political character of which did not,
however, admit too many expressions of per-
310. Pietro Bracci and others:
sonal idiosyncrasies either of patron or artist.
Tomb of Benedict XIII,
On the other hand, turning to the tombs of the
1734. Rome, S. Maria sopra Minerva
higher and lower clergy, of aristocracy and
bourgeoisie, we find that the variety of types is
immense. In spite of the kaleidoscopic picture
some significant changes in the broad develop-

ment from the seventeenth to the eighteenth
century can be discovered. The leading motif
in tombs from about 1630 onwards is the figure
of the deceased represented in deep adoration,
turned towards the altar. This type of tomb
lived on into the eighteenth century, but al-
ready in the 1670s and 80s such figures began

to lose their devotional fervour, and during the
eighteenth century they appear more often than
not like fashionable courtiers attending a theat-
rical performance. A comparison between Ber-
nini's Fonseca bust [203] and Bernardo Ca-
metti's-^ bust of Giovan Andrea Giuseppe Muti
in S. Rome (1725) [311], illuminates
Marcello,
the change. On the opposite wall Cametti
represented Muti's much younger and equally
fashionable wife. The whole chapel forms an
BIBLOSARTE
architectural and colouristic unit of a light and

airy character, and the new eighteenth-century
spirit is as perfectly expressed by the graceful
elegance of the worshippers behind their prie-
dieus as was that of the seventeenth centur}' by
mystic devotees in profound contemplation.
Besides the kneeling worshipper, the seven-
teenth century knew the completely different
type of tomb which Bernini introduced in the
Valtrini and Merenda monuments. In the
former, a winged skeleton, seemingly flying
through space, carries a medallion with the
portrait in relief to which it directs the beholder's
attention by a pointing gesture. The tomb,

therefore, contains two diffêrent degrees of
reahty, that of the 'reaF skeleton and that of the
'image' of the departed. We are, as it were, given

to understand that it would be anachronistic to
represent a dead person 'alive' and that his like-
ness can be preserved for us only in a portrayal.

This idea shows a new rational approach to the
conception of funeral monuments, and its
occurrence simultaneously with the type of the

mystical worshipper is more revealing for the
seventeenth-century dichotomy between reason

and faith than would at first appear. It was not,
however, until the end of the seventeenth

century that the medallion type began to gain
prominence, while in the course of the eigh-
teenth century it entirely supplanted the tomb
with the deceased in devotional attitude. At the
end of this process belong tombs like that of
Cardinal Calcagnini by Pietro Bracci, in S.
Andrea delle Fratte (1746) [312], where even

low relief seemed too realistic and so was re-
placed by a painted portrait-'' set in a pyramid

on which a flying figure of Fame writes the
memorial inscription. From about 1600 on-
wards the pyramid,-" the symbol of Eternity,
was used for tombs in ever-increasing numbers
in Rome and Italy, and soon also in the rest of
Europe; but the combination with the painted
311. Bernardo Cametti
Tomb of Giovan Andrea Giuseppe Muti, portrait hardly ever occurred before the early
1725. Rome, S. Marcello eighteenth century. Although in the personifi-
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
445
cation of Fame Bracci employed the traditional

Baroque language of forms, the spirit of such
tombs is very different from that of the High
Baroque. What is expressed through the para-
phernalia of Bracci's monument is the some-
what trite assurance that the memory of the
deceased will be kept alive in all eternity. No
longer ismonument concerned with the
the
union of the soul with God - it is now purely
commemorative, a memorial made for the
living. No longer can the 'dead' worshipper and
the beholder meet in the same reality. The com-
memorative picture is far removed from our
sphere of life, it cannot step out of its frame and
turn in adoration towards the altar. The magic
transformation of time and space was a thing of
the past. We are in the age of reason, and the
new approach to the problem of death, an
approach much closer to our own than to that of
the broad current of the seventeenth century,
admitted neither the High Baroque conception
of space nor the more elaborate type of Baroque
allegory.
Allegory was, of course, not banned from

eighteenth-century monuments, but it under-
went a characteristic change. High Baroque
allegory, for all its realism, was meant to convey
in visual terms notions of general moral signifi-
cance. Though its realism aimed at pressing

home convincingly the timeless message, the
allegory never acted out a scene. This was
precisely the eighteenth-century procedure and
consequentlv allegory lost in symbolical mean-
ing what it gained in actuality. 'Liberty' now
hands a coin to her child-companion, 'Dis-
interestedness' refuses with violent gestures to
accept any of the treasures from an overflowing
cornucopia, or 'Justice' orders the little bearer
of the fasces to carry his load to the place which
seems proper to her. We found even in Rus-
coni's tomb of Gregory XIII [308] that
'Courage' was engaged in an activity which lay

312. Pietro Bracci:
outside her allegorical vocation. When allegory Tomb of Cardinal Carlo Leopoldo Cakagnini,
was turned into genre, a visual mode of express- 1746. Rome, S. Andrea delle Fratte
BIBLOSARTE
44^1 • LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
ing abstract concepts - peculiar to the arts from part of the movement - all this must be valued
ancient times onwards - began to disintegrate. in its own right and not judged with Bernini's
A similar change may be observed in eigh- work before one's mind. Such a figure illus-
teenth-century religious imagery. A poignant trates extremely well the elegant French Rococo
incident replaced, whenever possible, the simple trend in Roman sculpture of the mid eighteenth
rendering of devotion and vision. When Michel- century. Obviously this style was not possible
angelo Slodtz was commissioned to execute the without Bernini's epoch-making achievement,
statue of St Bruno for one of the niches of the but it stands in a similar relation to his work as did
nave of St Peter's (1744) [313],-'' he chose for Giambologna's refined Mannerism to Michel-
representation the saint's dramatic refusal of the angelo's temhilita two hundred years before.
bishop's mitre and staff. Interest in the episode
seems to weaken the supra-personal content.

SCULPTURE OUTSIDE ROME
This does not mean, of course, that Slodtz's
statue lacks quality. The graceful curve of the In contrast to the flowering of Baroque painting
saint's body, the elegant sweep of his cowl, the in many regions of Italy throughout the seven-
precious gesture as well as the putto who forms teenth century, it is peculiar to Baroque sculp-
ture that its wide dissemination in Italy and the
rest of Europe coincides with the waning of the
High Baroque in Rome. It has been mentioned
that no coherent school of High Baroque sculp-
ture existed outside Rome. But from the late
seventeenth century onwards we find hundreds
of names of sculptors and scores of thousands of
plastic works all over Italy. As before, Rome
remained the centre - different from the develop-
ment in the other arts. Every provincial sculp-
tor endeavoured to receive his training there or,
failing that, in the school of a master w ho had

worked in a Rome studio. The artistic pedigree
of most provincial sculptors leads back, directly
or indirectly, to Bernini; he was the ancestor of
the largest school of sculptors that ever existed.
However, no attempt can here be made to give
even a vague impression of the diffusion of the
Berninesque idiom. In fact the details of this
story are, with few exceptions, of no more than

marginal interest.
It characterizes the situation that it remained
customary for commissions of outstanding im-
portance to be placed in Rome. Thus, when
Vittorio Amedeo II wanted to decorate the
Superga with large reliefs, he turned to Rome

313. Michelangelo Slodtz: St Bruno, 1744.
and placed the work with Cornacchini and
Rome, St Peter's Cametti, the former born in Tuscany, the latter
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
447
a Piedmontese, and both at the height of their (d. 1798), who brought about the change to
reputation in about 1730. A Httle earlier, the Neo-classicism in Florence.
monks of Montecassino asked Roman and not We have seen how Late Mannerist traditions
Neapohtan sculptors to carry out their vast in Lombardy lived on virtually into the second
sculptural programme; masters like Ottoni, half of the seventeenth century. With sculptors
Legros and his collaborator Pier Paolo Campi, like Giuseppe Rusnati (d. 1713), the pupil of
Francesco Moratti, and Maini worked for them. Ferrata in Rome and teacher of Camillo Rusconi,
Needless to say, all the memorial statues of the situation had changed. Rusnati's Elijah on
popes for cities of the papal state were carved in the exterior of Milan Cathedral looks like an
Rome, and so were many portrait busts and anticipation of Rusconi's ^7 Matthew in the
tombs commissioned not only from all over Lateran, while Carlo Simonetta (d. 1693)
Italy but also by foreign admirers of Roman seems to have come under the influence of
art.-'" Puget.'" Other slightly younger masters per-
And yet at the end of the seventeenth and the form the transition to the lighter rhythm of the
beginning of the eighteenth century most eighteenth century. This process may have
Italian centres had sculptors who were capable begun with Francesco Zarabatta and can be
of satisfying up-to-date taste. These artists kept
abreast of the stylistic development in Rome.
The most distinguished Florentine sculptor of
the period, Ferrata's pupil Giovanni Battista
Foggini (1652-1737),^" introduced to his native
city a style which combined details reminiscent
of his teacher with the discursive painterly

compositions characteristic of Guidi's work."
If his Cappella Corsini in the Carmine (1677-
91) [3 14] and his Cappella Feroni in SS. Annun-
ziata (169 1 -3) were in Rome, one would regard
them as somewhat exaggerated products of that
rather crude, patchy, crowded, and disorderly
manner which we associate with the first phase
of the Late Baroque. In Florence, however,
these chapels are the high-water mark of Bern i-
nesque sculpture.*- Ferrata also instructed
Massimiliano Soldani (1656, not 58, -1740),
who led the native tradition of working in
bronze to new heights; his rich ceuvre has been
masterly reconstructed by K. Lankheit.'* The
older sculptors of Foggini's school were medi-
ocre talents.*^ The best among his younger
pupils was Giovanni Baratta (1670 1747), a
member of the great family of sculptors from
Carrara; in his painterly Baroque a typically
314. Giovanni Battista Foggini:
Florentine reserve may be detected.*'' It was a The Mass of S. .Andrea Corsini, 1685-91.
pupil of the Roman Maini, Innocenzo Spinazzi Florence, Chiesa del Carmine
BIBLOSARTE
followed to the Late Baroque charm of Carlo and stayed for six years. He had absorbed
Francesco Mellone (d. 1736), to the easy ele- Bernini's and Cortona's style in Rome, and his
gance of Carlo Beretta, and the typically mid- works at Genoa with their Berninesque vigour
eighteenth-century fragility of Elia Vincenzo and fire of expression had a decisive influence
Buzzi.^' But it cannot be maintained that all on the formation of a school of sculptors in that
this has more than strictly limited interest.^** city.'" But even more important was Filippo
A master in his own right was Andrea Fan- Parodi (1630- 1702), Genoa's first and greatest
toni from Rovetta (1659-1734) who worked native Baroque sculptor; he had studied for six
exclusively in the provinces. His wooden con- years with Bernini (1655-61),'" and on his re-
fessional in S. Maria Maggiore, Brescia, as well turn to Genoa met in Puget an artist with
as his celebrated pulpit in S. Martino at Alzano tendencies similar to his own. Some of his works
Maggiore, both richly decorated with statues, of the 1660s and 70s still have a High Baroque
reliefs, and flying putti, have an almost un- flavour. They correspond to the emotional and
Italian Rococo quality and are probably un- sensitive style of Melchiorre Caff a and Raggi
matched by anything produced at the same (see his Ecstasy of St Martha. S. Marta, Genoa,
period in Milan. and St John, S. Maria di Carignano); he often
The impact of the Roman High Baroque first introduced a graceful note ( Virgin and Child, S.
came to Genoa through Algardi's work for the Carlo, Genoa) which occasionally endows his
Cappella Franzoni in S. Carlo. In 1661 the works with an un-Roman, rather French ele-
French sculptor Pierre Puget settled in Genoa gance. Later, in his tomb of Bishop Francesco
Morosini (d. 1678) in S. Nicolo da Tolentino at
315. Filippo Parodi:
Venice, he combines recollections of Bernini
Tomb of Bishop Francesco Morosini, 1678. Detail.
with proto-Rococo features [315] not unlike
Venice, S. Niculo da Tolenlinn
the style of the Roman Filippo Carcani. At the
same time, the picturesque composition of this
tomb is characteristic of the new tendencies of

the Late Baroque.^'
Filippo Parodi was the man of destiny for the
further development of Genoese sculpture.
Among his pupils were Angelo de' Rossi (whom
we found working in Rome), Giacomo Antonio
Ponsonelli (1651-1735) who accompanied him
to Venice and Padua, his son Domenico (1668-
1740), sculptor, painter, and architect, and the
two Schiaffino.^- Bernardo Schiaffino (1678-
1725) and his younger brother Francesco (1689-
1765) gave the style the lighter eighteenth-
century touch of the Rusconi school. In fact,
Francesco went Rome, studied with Rusconi,

to
and after his return to Genoa executed from

the latter's model the celebrated Pluto and Pro-
serpina group of the Palazzo Reale.^' The last
great name of the Genoese school of Baroque

sculptors is Bernardo Schiaffino's pupil Fran-
BIBLOSARTE
3i6. Giuseppe Mazza: St Dominic baptizing, c\ 1720. Venice, SS. Gwiunm l I'.
BIBLOSARTE
450 • LATE BAROQUt AND ROCOCO
cesco Qucirolo {1704 62). But he hardly ever coming down from .Algardi, but it is a classicism
worked in his native city. He soon went to Rome drained of High Baroque vigour. This is fully
where he spent some time in Giuseppe Rusconi's proved by his masterpiece, the six monumental
studio and also had independent commissions bronze reliefs of the Cappella di S. Domenico in
until, in 1752, he was called to Naples to take SS. Giovanni e Paolo, Venice [316].'"
part in the sculptural decoration of the Cappella Baroque sculpture in Venice does not begin
Sansevero. Genoa also had a flourishing school until the middle or second half of the seven-
of woodcarvers/ but ' it was only Anton Maria teenth century, .\lessandro Vittoria (d. 1608),
Maragliano (1664 1739) who raised a popular Tiziano .^spetti (d. 1607), and even Girolamo
tradition to the level of high art. He often Campagna (d. 1623) belong to a history of
worked from designs of his teacher, the painter sixteenth-century sculpture; with them a glor-
Domenico Piola. The style of his many multi- ious development of almost two hundred years
figured pictorial groups is close to that of the comes to an end. Just as in the history of Vene-
Schiaffino he : knew how to combine the expres- tian painting, the continuity was broken, and
sion of ecstatic devotion with true Rococo grace. hardly a bridge exists to later Seicento sculpture.
Sculpture in wood had a home in Piedmont The only name of distinction belonging to the
too. The principal practitioners were Carlo first half of the century is that of Nicolo Rocca-
Giuseppe Plura (1655-1737)^^ and Stefano tagliata (1539- 1636) who, Genoese by birth,
Maria Clemente (1719-94) who continued a was thoroughly acclimatized to Venice; but in
popular Late Baroque far into the eighteenth his many bronzes he adhered faithfully to the
century. In view of the architectural develop- older tradition and even reverted to Jacopo
ment in Turin, it is strange that a local school of Sansovino, in other words to pre-Vittoria ten-
sculptors arose only towards the end of the dencies in Venetian sculpture.^'
period with which we are concerned. Next to Up-to-date ideas reached Venice belatedly
Francesco Ladatte (1706-87),^" who studied in through two different channels: first, through
Paris and was entirely acclimatized to France sculptorscoming from North of the Alps,"" and
but was appointed court sculptor in Turin in secondly through Italians who, for longer or
1745, the most distinguished names are those of shorter periods, resided in Venice. Of the latter,
Giovanni Battista Bernero (1736-96) and of the both the Genoese Filippo Parodi and the Bolo-
brothers Ignazio (1724-93) and Filippo Col- gnese Giuseppe Mazza have been mentioned;
lini;^' but most of their work belongs to the they exerted a strong influence on further events
history of Neo-classicism. in Venice which is not yet sufficiently investi-
Bologna had a first-rate sculptor of Rusconi's gated. The most vigorous among the northern
generation in Giuseppe Mazza (i 653-1 741), artists who settled in Venice was Josse de Corte
who harmoniously fused the general stylistic (1627-79), in Italy called GiustoCort or Lecurt,
tendencies with local traditions. His Late Baro- who was born at Ypres and, after a stay in Rome,
que classicism has nothing of Roman grandeur made Venice his home from 1657 onwards.
and the emotional moderation of his work re- Many of his numerous works are for buildings
veals that he had imbibed the 'academic' atmo- by Longhena, who seems to have preferred him
sphere of Bologna. In his many statues and to any other sculptor. His style may best be
reliefs in stucco, marble, and bronze, to be studied in Longhena's S. Maria della Salute
found not only in his native city but also at where Giusto's rich sculptural decoration of the
Ferrara, Modena, Pesaro, and above all Venice, high altar (1670) [317] perpetuates in marble
he appears to perpetuate the classical current the theme of the dedication of the church:
BIBLOSARTE
317- Josse de Corte ;
The Queen of Heaven expelling the Plague, 1 670. Venue. S. Maria delta Salute, high altar
BIBLOSARTE
'Venice' kneels as a suppliant before the Virgin

who appears on clouds while the horrifying
personification of the 'Plague' takes to flight,
gesticulating wildly. Though the style of this
tableau vivant is characteristically Late Baroque

in the sense which we have indicated in these
pages, the soft surface realism, the almost Gothic

brittleness of the picturesque drapery, and the
weakness in composition give this and others of
his works a distinctly Flemish quality. In a
detail like that of one of the caryatids from the

Morosini monument in S. Clemente all'Isola
(1676), shown as illustration 318, this Flemish

note is very obvious.'*'
De Corte's collaborators and pupils con-
tinued his manner to a certain extent until after
1700. Among them were artists of considerable

merit, such as Francesco Cavrioli from Treviso
(who worked in Venice between 1 645 and 1 685),
Francesco Penso, called Cabianca (1665?-
1737)1" Orazio Marinali (1643-1720)," and
others. These sculptors, together with some
foreigners,^^ were responsible for the rich
sculptural decoration of the exterior of S. Maria

della Salute. Profuse sculptural decoration of
church fa9ades became fashionable from Tre-

mignon's S. Moise on. Giuseppe Sardi's facades
of S. Maria del Giglio (1678-83) and of the
Chiesa degli Scalzi ( 1 672-80) as well as Domeni-
co Rossi's fa9ades of S. Stae and the Chiesa dei
Gesuiti (1714-29; executed by G. B. Fattoretto)
and Massari's Chiesa dei Gesuati (1724-36) are
characteristic examples. For all these commis-
sions the collaboration of many hands was
required. The large Valier monument in SS.
Giovanni e Paolo, designed by Tirali in 1705,
and the fa9ade of S. Stae of 1709 give a good

idea of the position at the beginning of the
eighteenth century. It was mainly sculptors
born in the 1660s who were responsible for the
somewhat bombastic, painterly, and refresh-

ingly unprincipled Late Baroque of these monu-
318. Josse de Corte:
Monument, ments." Most of us no longer have the eye to
Atlas from the Morosini 1676.
see and savour the magnificent scenic spirit that
Venice, S. Clemente all'Isola
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
453
created the tightly intertwined group balancing

precariously free in space upon an enormous
bracket high above the portal of S. Stae.
Twenty years later the situation had changed.
The sculptors born in the i68os and 90s brought
about a refined and serene style parallel to, but
quite independent of, the Filippo della Valle
style in Rome. The transition to the
and Bracci
new manner may be observed in such works as
the Cappella del Rosario in SS. Giovanni e
Paolo (1732) or the facade of the Gesuati
(1736).^'' It was mainly three artists on whom
the change depended. The oldest of them,
Antonio Corradini" (1668- 1752), belongs to
the generation of the well-known Andrea Brus-
(1662- 1 732), who never broke away
tolon^**
from the early phase of the international Late

Baroque. Corradini began in this manner, to
which he still adhered in his monument of
Marshal von der Schulenburg^- in Corfu of
1 7 18. But his allegory of Virginity [319] in S.
Maria Carmine, Venice, of 172 1, shows the

del
new idiom. This style is precious, harking back
not to antiquity but to Alessandro Vittoria - it
is, in other words, a sentimental revival of the

Venetian brand of Late Mannerism. Corradini's
neo-Cinquecentistno even led him back to San-
sovino {Archangel Raphael and Sarah at Udine),
but he combined this archaism with a typically
post-Berninesque virtuosity of marble treat-
ment."" If my analysis is correct, one cannot re-
gard this style as an anticipation of Canova.
A similar development may be observed with
Giovanni Marchiori (1696- 1778) and Gian
Maria Morlaiter (1699-1781)."' Only fairly
recently more than a hundred bozzetti from
Mbrlaiter's studio were discovered : their style,
highly sensitive, ranges from a light imaginative
touch like German Rococo and from what
might be called a sculptural interpretation of
Tiepolo to an elegant classicism comparable to
the early Canova. Marchiori, the pupil of Andrea
319. Antonio Corradini:
Brustolon, developed towards a refined 'clas-
Virginity, 1721.
sicist Rococo' after a neo-Cinquecentesque Venice, S. Maria del Carmine
BIBLOSARTE
454 LATK fJAROQUF. AND ROCOCO
320. Giovanni Marchiori; David, 1743.

Venice, S. Rocco
phase. Although his style seems to contain all
the formal elements of Neo-classicism, it is
again precious and picturesque and not unlike

Serpotta's. This is shown by his figures of St
Ccciha and David [320] in S. Rocco, Venice
(1743). It appears, then, that the general trend

in Venetian sculpture is close to that in Venetian
painting. Also in sculpture is the eighteenth
century more specifically Venetian than the

seventeenth, and this 'home-coming' was
achieved by reviving the local tradition of Vit-
toria and Jacopo Sansovino.
The and notorious monument of the
great
late Neapolitan Baroque is the Cappella San-
severo de' Sangri, called Pietatella, founded in
1590, continued in the seventeenth century,
and decorated for Raimondo del Sangro between
1749 and 1766.'- There were older monuments
in the chapel, but they were entirely eclipsed by
the rich sculptural decoration of the eighteenth
century. At this time the chapel was transformed
into a veritable Valhalla of the del Sangro
family, but the allegorical statues before the
pillars overshadow the medallion portraits of
the dead to such an extent that the beholder is in
doubt as to the primary function of the place.

Nothing is left of the spiritual unity of the great
Roman Baroque churches and chapels, and the
monuments excel by virtue of their technical
bravura rather than through Christian spiritu-

ality. Emphatically Late Baroque in character,
the chaotic and unrelated impression of the

chapel seems closer to the mentality of the nine-
teenth than that of the eighteenth century.
Queirolo and Corradini, the main contributors
to the sculptural decoration, have been men-
tioned. The former is responsible for the group
of the Disingamo [321], representing a personifi-

cation of the human mind in the shape of a
winged angel who liberates a nude man, the
personification of humanity, from the entangle-
BIBLOSARTE
321. Francesco Queirolo: Allegory of 'Deception Unmasked', after 1750. Naples. Cappella Sansevero de' Sangri
BIBLOSARTE
45^ LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
merit ot the symbolically significant net of garden at Versailles. There is, however, an im-
deception. With such a work, which is matched portant difference. Girardon's group stood
only by other tours de force in the same chapel, originally not in a cave of natural rock (executed
we have reached the end of a development. by Hubert Robert, 1778) but under an isolating
While Bernini used realism and surface refine- canopy. The figures in Caserta form part of the
ment to express convincingly the ethics of the landscape. They seem to move freely over the
Catholic Restoration, here the shallow symboli- open rocks; water, hill, woods, rocks, and
cal genre seems to be a pretext for a display of figures combine in a great Arcadian ensemble.
technical bravura. A piece of similar hyper- Superficially it might seem that Bernini's prin-
trophic virtuosity is Corradini's Chastity, where ciples of sculpture had been carried to their
the thin veil through which the body is visible fullest conclusion - that this is not so is due to
as if nude, belies the theme of the figure." The the lack of seriousness and organic integration.
same device was imitated by the prolific Giu- The cascade is nicely terraced, the approach
seppe Sammartino (i720.'-93.') in his Christ laid out with ruler and square, and we cannot
lying under the Shroud (1753).''^ Sammartino's help being very conscious of the artifice which
contemporary Francesco Celebrano (1729- has gone into giving an appearance of reality
1814) executed, among others, the heavy and the groups of Diana and Actaeon are, in fact,
crowded relief of the Pieta over the altar, con- tableaux vivants,'"' and we know we are specta-
cluding the stylistic epoch which began with tors, not participants.
Guidi's relief compositions. Sammartino and A few words must be added about the pictur-
Celebrano had many other notable commissions esque art of making Christmas cribs; they form
which show that they retained their Late Baro- part of an old tradition of popular polychrome
que style right to the end of the eighteenth sculpture and, though they were created in
century. ""^ many Italian towns particularly during the
As in Rome, the last great Baroque achieve- seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Naples
ment of the Neapolitan circle is connected with has pride of place.'" These cribs, often consist-
fountains. Caserta follows the example of Ver- ing of hundreds of small, even tiny, figures,
sailles, and the garden too with its long avenues gaily dressed and placed in painstakingly
and parterres is fashioned after this model, realistic architecture and landscape, are the last
although an English landscape garden was added buoyant descendant from the medieval miracle
at a late date (1782). Even the mythological plays; this truly popular art of vivid narrative
programme of the nineteen fountains, planned power and intense liveliness developed into a
by Vanvitelli from 1752 onwards, is reminiscent great industry requiring the specialized skill of
of Versailles. What was eventually carried out many hands. Even sculptors of repute like
(1776-9) under Luigi's son Carlo is much less Celebrano, Vaccaro, Sammartino, and Matteo
elaborate than the original projects, but the Bottiglieri did not hesitate to work in this modest
fountains which exist surpass in extent and medium. It is significant that there is no antago-
grandeur anything that had been done in Italy nism between the boundless realism of their
before. There are, above all, the multi-figured small figures for cribs and the virtuosity of their
groups of Diana and Actaeon at both sides of the works in marble. Their monumental sculpture
great cascade [322]. These elegant, pseudo- may perhaps appear in a new light if regarded as
classical, white marble figures play out their no more and no less than the sophisticated reali-
roles as if in a pantomime, in a way that immedi- zation of a style which has its roots in an old and
ately recalls Girardon's Apollo group in the popular traditional art.
BIBLOSARTE
322. Luigi Vanvitelli: Caserta, Castle. The great cascade, c. 1776
BIBLOSARTE
45^ • LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
Sicily's one great boast during this period was

the sculptor Giacomo Serpotta (1656-1732), an
exact contemporary of Camillo Rusconi. Ser-
potta appears to us now as an isolated figure, a
meteor in the Sicilian sky. This is probably not

consistent w ith the historical facts. It is true that
after the fifteenth- and sixteenth-century work

of the Gaggini, immigrants from Lombardy,
Sicily had no great sculptors. There were, how-
ever, local schools throughout the seventeenth
century working primarily in wood and stucco,
and masters like Tommaso and Orazio Ferraro,

active at the turn of the sixteenth to the se\ cn-
teenth century, foreshadowed the climax
reached with Serpotta's activity. But that tradi-
tion alone would perhaps not have sufficed to
develop Serpotta's genius. Although a stay in
Rome is not documented, there are sufficient

indications'^ that he spent a few years there in
his youth and so studied sculpture at the
fountain-head. His name first appears in Paler-
mo in 1682 in connexion with the equestrian

statue of Charles II, German Emperor and King
of Spain and Sicily. Of this statue, which was
cast in bronze by Gaspare Romano from Ser-
potta's model and destroyed in 1848, a small
cast survives (Trapani, Museum), which shows

that Serpotta was an artist conversant with
Pietro Tacca's monument of Philip IV in Mad-
rid as well as with Bernini's Constantine. Soon
afterwards, with the decoration of the Oratory
of S. Lorenzo at Palermo (1687 ?-q6?) he in-
augurated that long series of church interiors
where he covered the walls with stucco figures,
and it is for these decorations that he is famed.

The highlights of his later activity- are the
decoration of S. Orsola (i6g6; much ruined and
badly restored); the Chiesa dell'Ospedale dei
Sacerdoti (1698; partly executed by Domenico
Castelli); the Chiesa delle Stimmate {1700, now
Museo Nazionale, Palermo); the Oratories of S.
Cita (begun 1686-8, continued 1717-18, execu- 323. Giacomo Serpotta: Courage, 17 14 17.
tion partly by Domenico Castelli), del Rosario Palentui, S. Ddmeiiiai. Oratuno del Rosario
BIBLOSARTE
SCULPTURE •
459
in S. Domenico (17 14- 17), and di S. Caterina in a peep-show. This, too, is entirely un-Roman
airOlivella {1722-6); and the churches of S. and evidently continues the Lombard tradition
Francesco d'Assisi (1723) and S. Agostino which the Gaggini had brought to Sicily. In the
(1726-8, with the help of pupils). course of his development Serpotta tended to
His figures are often reminiscent of Roman an increase in the realism of his figures, coupled
Baroque sculpture, some of Raggi, others of with a bias towards dressing them in contem-
Ferrata; some are extremely elongated, elegant, porary costume. At the same time the pro-
and nioiivemente; others follow antique proto- grammes of his decorations grew more rather
types so closely that they look almost Neo- than less complicated, and his charming alle-
classical. All of them, however, are imbued gories show that to the end he remained deeply
with a delicacy and fragility, a simple sensual steeped in Baroque cnnceltismo.
charm and grace far removed from the dynamic None of his Sicilian contemporaries comes
power of the Roman High Baroque. Possibly anywhere near equalling his quality, neither
nowhere else has Italian sculpture come so his collaborator Domenico Castelli, whose
close to a true Rococo spirit [323]. Serpotta was figures entirely lack Serpotta's grace, nor his
a great master of the putto; playing, laughing, son Procopio who carried on the paternal tradi-
weeping, flying, and tumbling, they accompany tion ; nor even contemporary masters of some
every one of his decorations, spreading a cheer- merit like Carlo dWprile and Vincenzo di
ful and festive atmosphere. If his individual Messina, although the latter's stuccoes in the
figures show a connexion with Rome, the church of Partanna (1698) reveal something of
context in which they are placed does not. As a Serpotta's spirit. With Serpotta's school the
rule, his principle of organization is simple: particular Sicilian expression of the Late Bar-
the stuccoes - statues, reliefs, and decoration - oque came to an end. Ignazio Marabitti (1710-
seem to cover the walls like creepers, producing 97),'" the last great Sicilian sculptor of the
the effect of a rich and diffused pattern. A part Baroque, closely imitated his master Filippo
of this pattern is often formed by deeply re- della Valle, and maintained this manner to the
ceding reliefs in which tiny figures appear as if end of the century.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER IQ
PAINTING
INTRODUCTION zigzag compositions which are precariously 'an-

chored' along the lower edge of the picture,
The history of Italian eighteenth-century paint- through elegant and elongated types of figures
ing is, above all, the history of Venetian painting. calling to mind the Mannerist Jigura serpen-
Better known than almost any period and school tinata, through the gallant or voluptuous or
discussed in this book, the names of Sebastiano arcadian or even flippant interpretation of their
Ricci and Piazzetta, Canaletto and Guardi, not subjects while all this happened in Venice
to mention the greatest genius, Giambattista during the 1720s and 30s, the leading Roman
Tiepolo, immediately evoke lively associations. and Bolognese masters continued to practise
A fairly thorough treatment of this school alone their feeble Late Baroque far into the eighteenth
would have gone far beyond the space at my dis- century. They believed themselves to be the
posal; nor could I have added to the researches legatees of the great Italian tradition and looked
of such pioneers as G. Fiocco, R. Pallucchini, with scorn upon its perversion. How deeply this
and others, to whose works the reader must be was felt may be gathered from the anti-Rococo
referred for further guidance. The history of cry raised in 1733 by .\ntonio Balestra (1666-
painting of the period is so rich in talents also 1740). Himself trained by Maratti, but practis-
outside Venice - a few of the first and many of ing mainly in Venice, he wrote from a position
the second rank - that any attempt at doing of eminence: 'AH the present evil derives from
them justice within the compass of this book the pernicious habit, generally accepted, of
was from the start condemned to fail. As I have working from the imagination without having
pointed out in the Foreword, I have therefore first learned how to draw after good models
chosen to discuss eighteenth-century painting and compose in accordance with the good
most cursorily. This course, moreover, seemed maxims. No longer does one see young artists
justified because it was then that France and studying the antique; on the contrary, we have
England assumed a leading position ; apart from come to a point where such study is derided
Venetian painting and a few events in other as useless and obnoxious.''
centres, the Italian contribution ceases to be a In Rome and Bologna, however, some artists
major factor in the intra-European development. began to realize that they had followed much
As far as the histor\' of painting is concerned, too long the well-trodden path of the 'good
the seventeenth century was by and large a maxims' which were, in fact, the worn-out
'dark' century. Roughly between 1660 and 1680 formulae of the Late Baroque. Few dared to
a change came about and a trend towards the revolt (G. M. Crespi), others sought salvation
lightening of the palette began, culminating in in a return to the great models of the past, doing
Tiepolo and the Rococo masters of the Venetian precisely what Balestra had despaired of Their
school. While Venice accomplished the transi- proto-Neo-classicism, first noticeable in Rome
tion to Rococo painting through a luminosity from about 1715 on, was far from a clear-cut
derived from a new scale of airy, transparent decision. Nor was the break with the Baroque
colours, through new patterns of undulating or tradition brought about by the new and broader
BIBLOSARTE
462 • LATI, BAROQL'K AND ROCOCO
wave of proto-Neo-classicisni which began in also in Naples that the most vital contribution
the1 740s. Epitomized in the figure of Anton was made to the future course of grand decora-
Raphael Mengs, this Late Baroque classicism ti\e painting. Briefly, the new type of fresco-
tbund an echo throughout the peninsula and painting derived from a fusion of Venetian
even in Venice, where the late manner of artists colourism with Pietro da Clortona's grand man-
like Piazzetta, Amigoni, and Pittoni seems to ner, which on its part owed much of its vitality
reflect some contact with the all-Italian move- to Venice (p. 253 flf). This synthesis of Rome
ment. In the end, disastrous results followed and Venice was accomplished by the prodigious
in the wake of the academic, rationalistic, and Luca Giordano (1634 1705),- who must be
classicizing reform. Not only did it kill the regarded as the quintessence of the new epoch
Baroque tradition, but the perennial tradition although most of his work belongs to the seven-
of Italian painting itself. teenth century. The prototype of the itinerant
The champions of proto-Neo-classicism and artist, he travelled up anddown Italy, worked
Neo-classicism in Italy were primarily con- in Rome, Florence, Venice, and Bergamo, and
cerned with the restoration of the theory and for ten years was court painter in Madrid (1692-
practice of the grand manner, which had out- 1702). The speed with which he produced his
lived its day. The present as well as the future grand improvisations was proverbial ('Luca Fa
lay, however, with those masters whom Balestra Presto'). Perhaps the first virtuoso in the eigh-
had attacked, those who tried more or less teenth-century sense, he considered the whole
successfully to discard the ballast of the grand past an open book to be used for his own
historical style. It was they who committed the purposes. He studied Diirer as well as Lucas
capital sin against the letter and the spirit of the van Leyden, Rubens as well as Rembrandt,
great tradition in that they destroyed clear Ribera as well as Veronese, Titian as well as
contours and plastic form, and implicitly the Raphael, and was capable of painting in any
customary concept of finish. Naturally, they manner he chose. But he never copied, a fact
looked back to their own tradition: the old noticed by his contemporaries (Solimena). He
contrast between Venice and Rome, between played with all traditions rather than being tied
colour and design, also adumbrates the events to one, and his personal manner is always un-
of the eighteenth century. They crowned the mistakable. Whatever he did, his light touch
work of the Seicento masters di tocco, for they and the brio and verve of his performance
painted with short, rapid, and often nervous carry conviction, while his unproblematical and
brush-strokes and obliterated the clear border- joyous interpretation of subjects anticipates the
line between sketch and execution. It seems a spirit of the eighteenth century. Clearly, the
foregone conclusion that this development, purpose of painting for him was delight [324,
which helped Italian painting secure a last spell 330]. In Rome and Venice his influence became
of international importance, took place in Venice extraordinarily strong, and on the international
rather than in the centres where the fetishes of stage the effect of his art can hardly be over-
plastic form and of the classical tradition could estimated. He immensely attracted his Nea-
never be discarded. politan successors by his typically southern
grandiloquent manner and telling rhetoric, qua-
lities one associates with the next fifty years of
NAPLES AND ROME
grand decorative painting in his native city.'
In the seventeenth century Naples had emerged Luca's heir-apparent was Francesco Soli-
as an art centre of primary importance. It was mena (1657- 1747),' who headed the Neapolitan
BIBLOSARTE
324. Luca Giordano: Triumph of Judith, 1704. Fresco. Naples, S. Marlltw, Cappella del Tesoro
BIBLOSARTE
school unchallenged during the first half of the From the latter stem the brownish shadows of
eighteenth century. Next to Luca Giordano his figures - as much a mark of his style as the
and Cortona, Lanfranco and Preti exercised vivid modulation, the flickering patterning of
the most formative influence upon his work. the picture plane, and, in his later work, the
325. Francesco Solimena: The Fall of Simon Magus, 1690. Fresco. Naples, S. Paolo Maggiore
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
465
somewhat pompous elegance of his figures. When he settled in Rome, Giaquinto joined
Although carefully constructed, many of his the studio of an older Neapolitan painter and
multi-figured compositions make the impres- pupil of Solimena, Sebastiano Conca (1679-
sion of an inextricable melee, in line with the 1764),"'" who, after Maratti's and Luti's deaths,
general tendencies of the Late Baroque I325]/
But
by
manner
if one takes the trouble of surveying figure
figure,
is
their studied
evident, and
poses and academic
it is
conventional and even canonical figures and

groups deriving from such acknowledged
easy to distinguish
clas-
W 9M
sical authorities as Annibale Carracci, Domeni-
chino, and even Raphael.'' In studying the
architecture and sculpture of the period we
have found a similar discursive approach to the
past. This rationalistic tendency was nourished

in Solimena's own Academy, which became
the centre of Neapolitan artistic life. Number-
less painters were here educated, foremost
among them Francesco de Mura (1696- 1784),
Corrado Giaquinto (1703-65), and Giuseppe
Bonito (1707-89).' Thelatter, who ended his
career as Director of the Neapolitan Academy,

is now remembered less for his rather dreary
academic grand manner than for his popular
genre pieces (p. 495).
Solimena worked in Naples all his life, and

yet became one of the most influential European
painters; after Maratti's death and before the
rise of Tiepolo's star he had no peer. His repu-
tation secured large commissions abroad for
his pupils. De Mura did his best work as court

painter in Turin (Palazzo Reale, 1741-3). Gia-
quinto spent many years in Rome (1723-53),
and succeeded Amigoni as court painter in
Madrid (1753-61) where he was also appointed
Director of the Academy of San Fernando; he
left Madrid upon the arrival of Mengs.** Gia-
quinto was a more subtle artist than the often
frigid de Mura." Although both used typically
eighteenth-century light and transparent col-
326. Corrado Giaquinto:
ours, only Giaquinto carried Neapolitan paint-
Minerva presenting Spain to Jupiter and Juno.
ing over into a Rococo phase, and some of his
Oil sketch for a ceiling, c. 1751,
work is stylistically and qualitatively a close now in the Palazzo Sanseverino, Rome.
parallel to Boucher's in France [326].'" London. National Gallery
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING 467
327. Sebastiano Conca: Guglielmo Cortese (1627 79), who had begun
The Crowning of St Cecilia, 1725. Fresco. as aCortona pupil" and Gaulli follower, em-
Rome, S. Cecilia
braced the new manner. The oldest of Maratti s
pupils was the Palcrmitan Giacinto Calandrucci
(1646-1707)," the most faithful Giuseppe
Chiari (1654-1727),'^ the most original Giu-
held a position of unequalled eminence. His seppe Passeri (1654- 17 14), the biographer's
ceiling fresco with the Crowning tif St Cecilia nephew; but only the distinguished Benedetto
in S. Cecilia, painted in 1725 [327], gives the Luti from Florence (1666- 1724), a figure of
measure of his achievement and allows an assess- international reputation, renowned also as a
ment of the situation in Rome after the first collector and teacher, accomplished the trans-
quarter of the eighteenth century. This work is formation of the Marattesque into an elegant
clearly in the tradition of Maratti's fresco in the and sweet eighteenth-century style. Maratti's
Palazzo Altieri [219J, but not without a differ- manner was carried over even into the second
ence: here the balanced symmetrical composi- half of the eighteenth century by artists like
tion belies the Baroque paraphernalia, an indica- Agostino Masucci (1692- 1768) and the more
tion of the growing academic mentality. Of considerable Francesco Mancini"' {c. 1700-58)
course, gone for ever are the intensity and and his pupil Stefano Pozzi (1708-68).
spirituality, the hot breath and vigour, the The general verdict on the course of Maratti's
chiaroscuro and mysticism of the Late Baroque succession must be that it ended in a pleasant
moment represented by Gaulli [213] - what but purely conventional art, a soft and feeble
remains is the competent handling of well-worn formahsm without a hope of regeneration. It is
formulae. only to be expected that with the victory of

This had been the position for some time Maratti's international Late Baroque, the old
past: monumental painting in Rome was in contrast of artistic ideals embodied in the names
the hands of facile successors. Giovanni Odazzi of Sacchi and Cortona was a thing of the past.
(1663- 1 731) and Lodovico Mazzanti (d. after In a more limited sense, however, and much
1760) - who also worked at Perugia, Viterbo, less distinctly than in contemporary architec-
and Naples - continued Gaulli's manner, sapped ture, one may discover an antithesis between
of its strength, far into the eighteenth century." the Marattesque manner and a brief Rococo
But the day belonged to versions of Maratti's phase on the one hand and a classicizing Rococo
Late Baroque classicism. The reader will recall trend on the other. But the camps are not
that the ascendancy of Maratti dates from the clearly divided. Benedetto Luti's work is a case
mid 1 670s, which corresponds fairly precisely in point. Next to his monumerttal Roman man-
with Guidi's in sculpture and Carlo Fontana's ner, Francesco Trevisani (1656- 1746),""* who
in architecture. At about this moment artists never forgot his Venetian upbringing under
of the second and third rank changed their man- Antonio Zanchi, produced cabinet pictures in a
ner to fall in with the new fashion. Painters such true Rococo style. Rivalling Sebastiano Conca's
as Giuseppe Ghezzi (i 634-1 721), the father of popularity, Trevisani's 'sweet Madonnas and
the better-known Pier Leone, Lodovico Gimi- porcelainly children' (Waterhouse) found a
gnani (1643-97),'- the son of Giacinto, and the ready market all over Europe. But none of the
rather banal Luigi Garzi (i 638-1 721) may here Romans came closer to a French version of the
be mentioned; and more considerable masters Rococo than Michele Rocca (1670,5-after
like Niccolo Berrettoni (1637-82) and even 1751)"
BIBLOSARTE
468 •
If the Rococo phase forms, as it were, the Batoni (1708 87), by steering more decisively
anti-conventional 'left wing' of Marattesque towards the newly rising ideal of the antique
classicism, a new 'right wing' began to emerge [329].'' In a varying degree, all three artists
for which that insipid manner was too Baroque take up special positions on the borderline
and formalistic. It was mainly three artists who between Rococo and Neo-classicism. These
made heroic attempts at leading Roman paint- masters, and even Batoni in pictures farthest
ing back to a sounder foundation: Marco on the road to Neo-classicism, stuck tenaciously
Benefial (1684- 1764), half French, pupil of the to Late Baroque formulae of composition. Nor
Bolognese Bonaventura Lamberti, by an intense is the lyric, languid, and often sentimental range
study of nature and by returning to the classical of expressions really divorced from contem-
foundations of Raphael and Annibale Carracci porary painting.-"
(his remarkable Transfiguration^* [328] shows It is well known that the more radical turn
to what extent he succeeded); the Frenchman towards a Neo-classical mode of painting was
Pierre Subleyras (1699- 1749), who spent the taken by the romanized Bohemian, Anton
last twenty years of his life in Rome, by intro- Raphael Mengs (1728-79). A mediocre talent,
ducing in his work a noble simplicitj- and but enthusiastically supported by Winckel-
precision of design and expression together mann, the intellectual father of Neo-classicism,
with a limited but carefully considered Hght he was hailed by the whole of Eurof)e as the
scale of tone values; and, finally, Pompeo re-discoverer of a lost truth. The work and
328. Marco Benefial: Transfiguration, c. 1730. 329. Pompeo Batoni: Education of Achilles, 1746.
Vetralla, S. Andrea Florence, Uffizi
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
469
ideas of this moralist and rationalist, who saw FLORENCE AND BOLOGNA
salvation in a denial of Baroque and Rococo
painterly traditions and pleaded for an un- Until well after the middle of the seventeenth
conditional return to principles of design, can- century Florentine painting was provincial but
not here be discussed. Suffice it to say that the had a distinct character of its own. This changed
Baroque allegorical method as well as the pre- later in the century. If the reasons for the loss of
ciosity of Rococo art linger on in Mengs's art, identity cannot be wholly accounted for, one
while elements of his style (such as the choice may at least point out four different events
of clear and bright local colours) may be traced which determined the further course of painting
back to some of his older contemporaries. in Florence: Cortona's work in the Palazzo Pitti
Mengs himself had started under Benefial, yet (1640-7); Luca Giordano's frescoes, executed
was not impervious to the qualities of Soli- between 1682 and 1683, in the dome of the
mena's Baroque. In the last analysis he is as Corsini Chapel (Chiesa del Carmine), in the
much an end as a beginning. Biblioteca Riccardiana, and in the long gallery
He set the seal on that characteristically of the Palazzo Riccardi - the latter a grand alle-
Roman classic-idealistic trend, the tenets of gorical pageant glorifying the reign of the
which were constantly shaped and coloured by Medici dynast) with dazzling elan and strik-
the ever-changing 'Baroque' antithesis. Refer- ingly fresh and vivid colours [330]; the visit in
ence to the three sets of names: Carracci - 1706-7 of Sebastiano Ricci, whose frescoes in
Caravaggio Sacchi ;
- Cortona; Maratti - Gaulli, the Palazzo Marucelli-Fenzi [338] gave Floren-
summarizes the course of events in three con- tines their first sensational experience of modern
secutive generations. In the struggle of artistic Venetian art; and, finally, the influence of
convictions and sentiments the fronts remained Maratti's style as well as of Bolognese classi-
fluid. As the theory hardened (Bellori) in the cism, particularly through the work of the
second half of the seventeenth century, the leading master. Carlo Cignani. The pattern then
practice began to fall out of step (Maratti). is clear enough; there developed in Florence
Late Baroque classicism was on the whole the two different trends, both rather international
weak shadow of a great past. If Mengs saddled in character, the one anti-classical, accepting
the classic-idealistic horse again, he lacked the the Cortonesque Baroque or its thinned-out
genius and strength for a bold ride. Measured Ciro Ferri version and, in turn, Luca Giordano
against his greater forerunners, and even Ma- and Ricci the other
; classical, following Marat-
ratti, he appears a dry pedant; measured against tesque or Bolognese precepts.
the work of a fully-fledged Neo-classicist of The classical trend is most fully represented
real talent like Jacques-Louis David, he seems by the precise and frigid Anton Domenico Gab-
sweet, inert, sentimental. Baroque, and not biani (1652- 1726), the painter dear to the heart
without the affectation of much of the art of Grand Duke Cosimo III and the Florentine
produced on his doorstep. nobility, whose palaces abound in his work.--
The classic-idealistic theory, revived by While Gabbiani was primarily a Maratti fol-
Winckelmann in its most rigorous form, once lower, Giovan Camillo Sagrestani ( 1 660 1 73 1 )r^
again conquered the world from Rome, but came from Cignani, whose slick modelling he
no longer did it have the power to revitalize maintained; this made him as well as his pupil
monumental painting on the soil which had Matteo Bonechi {c. 1672 1726)-^ an easy prey
seen its greatest triumphs in the wake of Raphael to French Rococo influence. In the next gene-
and Michelangelo.-' ration Giovanni Domenico Ferretti (1692-
BIBLOSARTE
470 •
LATK BAKOQUt AND ROCOCO
330.Luca Giordano: Pluto and Proserpina. Oil stud\ tor the Galler\ ol the Palazzo Medici-Riccardi, 1682.
London. D. Mahun Cdlleclion
1768), a profuse decorative talent, carried on might almost have been painted by a contem-
this tradition. Once again he was mainly formed porary Venetian master. Gherardini's worthy
by the Bolognese Cignani and Marcantonio pupil, Sebastiano Galeotti (1676- 1746.'), also
Franceschini and to a certain extent remained formed his style on Cortona, Giordano, and
tied to their Late Baroque classicism.-^ Ricci. He spent more than the last three decades
On the other side of the fence were the of his life as a most successful fresco-painter in
Cortoneschi, who have been mentioned in a Liguria, Lombardy, and Piedmont, practising
previous chapter (Chapter 14, Note 65). The his truly international art.-'
real rebel against the worn-out academic con- If Florence had no longer an organic school
ventions and an own was
artist in a class of his of painting with a physiognomy of its own, she
Alessandro Gherardini (1655-1726),-'' who in could boast at least of competent painters,
his transparent frescoes in S. Maria degli Angeli, though some of the more enterprising ones,
Florence (1709) [331], combined the lessons such as Luti, Batoni, and Galeotti, sought their
learned from Giordano and Sebastiano Ricci. fortunes permanently outside their native town.
To what extent he mastered the new artistic The situation at Bologna was vastly different.-'*
language may also be seen in his principal work, The tradition of the Carracci 'Academy' had
the frescoes in S. Maria degli Angeli (now an extraordinary power of survival, and through
Universita Popolare), Pistoia (after 1 7 1
1 ), which all vicissitudes Bolognese classicism, even in a
- as M. Marangoni pointed out many years ago - provincial and sometimes debased, feeble, and
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
471
331. Alessandro Gherardini: The Dream of St Romuald, 1709. Fresco.

Florence, S. Maria degli Angeli (now Circolo delta Meridiana)
flabby form, continued to be a power which Genoa, Piedmont, Spain, and Germany. His
for good or evil made itself felt inmany other great cycle of frescoes in the church of Corpus
centres. Not only Florentines but also Romans Domini, Bologna (1687 94), illustrates most
and Venetians were convinced that it was only fully this facet of Bolognese painting. Next to
in Bologna that an artist could procure a solid him, Gian Gioseffb dal Sole (1654-1719),^- 'il
training in the perennial principles of good Guido moderno', was a much sought after,
design. Carlo Cignani (1628- 17 19), Albani's dexterous practitioner of this rather sentimental
pupil,was the celebrated guardian of this tradi- kind of Late Baroque classicism.
tion and the head of an immensely active A new situation arose in the next generation
studio.-" The late Reni and a renewed study which reacted in two contrary ways to the
of Correggio contributed to form his fluid and facile conventions of the academicians. One
polished style, which contemporaries admired. group, led by Donato Creti (1671-1749),"
N. Pevsner^" indicated to what extent this ver- Pasinelli's pupil, who at one time tended to-
satile classicism falls in with Late Baroque vvardsRococo (frescoes, Palazzo Pepoli, Bologna,
principles. From Cignani comes, above all, 1708), sought salvation in a sophisticated archa-
Bologna's greatest decorative talent of the Late ism. The Bolognese counterpart to Benefial's
Baroque, Marcantonio Franceschini (1648- manner in Rome, this proto-Neo-classicism
1729),^' the Bolognese Maratti, whose manner with distinct Mannerist overtones is perfectly
was widely diffused through his works in Rome, illustrated by the small picture of illustration
BIBLOSARTE
47-2 LATE BAROQUE AND ROCOCO
332^* which recalls works by such masters as

Primaticcio. To a lesser extent some minor
artists, Aurelio Milani (1675- 1 749),^^ Francesco
Monti (1685 -1 768)/*' and Ercole Graziani
(1688-1765)/' fell in with Creti's radicalism.
332 (above). Donato Creti: Sigismonda(?), c. 1740.

Bologna, Com line
333 (right). Giuseppe Maria Crespi:

/
The Queen of Bohemia
confessing to St John Nepomuc, 1743.
Turin, Pinacoteca
334 (opposite). Giuseppe Maria Crespi:

The Hamlet,
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING 473
The other reaction came from Giuseppe without parallel at this moment. Linked to the
Maria Crespi, called loSpagnuolo (1665- 1747), popular trend, which had had a home in Bologna
the only real genius of the late Bolognese school. since the days of the Carracci (p. 71), he appHed
Rejecting the teachings of his masters Canuti his new vision equally to religious imagery
and Cignani,**^ he found instruction to his taste [333], to contemporary scenes, portraiture, and
in the study of Lodovico Carracci, Mastelletta, genre [334]. Everything he touched is permeated
and, above all, the early Guercino. Moreover, with a depth of sincere feeling, a sensibility
it has been shown^" that he must have had and tenderness which is as far from the ecstasy
direct contacts with Sebastiano Mazzoni (p. of the 'quietists' as it is from the preciosity
348), echoes of whose intense chiaroscuro and and affectation of the academicians. Like his
freedom of touch appear in Crespi's early work. younger contemporary Magnasco, he is an

But Crespi went a decisive step beyond his outsider; like Magnasco, he never abandoned
models. He swept away the last vestiges of his chiaroscuro and remained essentially a Sei-
academic formalism and opened up an im- cento master; but diametrically opposed to him,
mediacy of approach to his subject-matter he chose as his theme the purely human rather
BIBLOSARTE
than the grotesque and demoniacal. And yet of the eighteenth century. Scenographic paint-
both attitudes seem to have the same root, ing and allied practices continued to be Bolo-
characteristic of the Baroque age: the will to gna's most important artistic export. Truly
freedom, which opens the way as much to Late Baroque, the brothers Enrico (1640-
Crespi's unconditional humanism as to Ma- 1702)'^ and Anton Maria (1654 1732) Haffner,
gnasco's chaotic abandonment.^" both pupils of Canuti, amplified and diversified
Canuti had died in 1684, Cignani had gone Colonna's and IVIitelli's more architectural qtiad-
to Forli in 1686, and Pasinelli died in 1700. ratura style ; they form the link with the imagi-
There remained Crespi and, next to him, Gio- native scenographers of the eighteenth century.
van Antonio Burrini (1656-1727),^' who had Anton Maria worked mainly in Genoa in col-
studied with both Canuti and Pasinelli and laboration with G. A. Carlone, Domenico Piola,
became Bologna's representative of an extrovert Gregorio de Ferrari, and others. Enrico assisted
Late Baroque style Zanotti called him
; 'il nostro his teacher till the latter's death in 1684; there-
Cortona e il nostro Giordano'. Although Crespi after he collaborated with Giovan Antonio
opened a school in 1700, few names of his Burrini (Chiesa dei Celestini, Bologna) and,
Bolognese succession are worth recording, apart above all, with Marcantonio Franceschini, for
from his rather trivial son, Luigi Crespi (1709- whom he painted, among others, the Corpus
79), famed as the writer of the lives of con- Domini quadratura. The tradition was kept
temporary Bolognese artists,^- and the Paduan alive by Marcantonio Chiarini (1652- 1730) and
Antonio Gionima (1697-1732).^^ All the greater his pupil Pietro Paltronieri, il Mirandolesi
was his influence on Venetian painters; Piaz- (1673- 1 741), who worked in Venice and also
zetta as well as Bencovich owed much to him. for Pittoni; by Mauro Aldrovandini (1649-80),
Official painting of the Baroque era at Bologna his nephew Tommaso (1653-1736), Cignani's
drew to a close with such able decorators as pupil, and his son Pompeo (1677-1739?), whose
Vittorio Maria Bigari (1692-1776),*^ whose de- pupil Stefano Orlandi ( 1 68 1 1 760) collaborated
lightful scenographic cabinet pictures in the with Bigari, Francesco Monti and others and,
Pinacoteca, Bologna, show him at his best, and together with Gioseftb Orsoni ( 1 69 1 - 1 755), won
with the brothers Ubaldo (1728-81) and Gae- laurels as a stage designer at Lucca and Turin
tano ( 1 734- 1802) Gandolfi and the lesser Dome- by Tiepolo's faithful associate, Girolamo Men-
nico Pedrini (1728- 1800), artists who brought gozzi-Colonna from Ferrara {c. i688-r. 1772),
about the blending of the academic Bolognese his pupils Gianfrancesco Costa (171 1-72) and
tradition with the light and freedom of Tiepolo's Francesco Chiaruttini (1748-96), and many
manner. The Gandolfi were capable of large others."'
and skilfully arranged compositions with a This long list goes to show that the greatest
strong Rococo flavour. But if one measures their dynasty oi'quadraturisti, the Galli, called Bibiena
work against that of the great Venetians, it after their place of origin, arose in a congenial
appears no more than the flotsam of a once artistic climate. Equally distinguished as de-
proud native tradition. After two hundred years signers and organizers of festivals, 'the most
of changing fortunes Bolognese painting had sumptuous that Europe ever witnessed' (Lanzi),
run its course. as stage designers and inventors, as draughts-
Before we leave Bologna, however, a word men of extraordinary scenographic fantasies

must be added about quadrat ura painting, which I335I' 3S painters and theatre architects, four
had its home in Bologna from the late sixteenth members of the family should be singled out,
century on, and remained vigorous to the end the brothers Ferdinando ( 1657- 1 743) and Fran-
BIBLOSARTE
335- Giuseppe Bibiena: Engraving from Architetture c Pn/spettive. Augsburg, 1740
BIBLOSARTE
cesco { 1 659- 1 739), and Ferdinando's sons, Giu- Apart from the Bcrgamasque Fra Galgario and
seppe (1696-1757) and Antonio (1700-74). the 'Bresciano' Ceruti - artists who will be
Ferdinando spent twenty-eight years in the discussed later - these provincial schools need
service of Ranuccio Farnese at Parma as 'pri- not detain us. Nor do the big centres .Milan,
mario pittore e architetto' and in the same Genoa, and Turin require much attention.
capacity- transferred to the imperial court at Piedmont had to rely almost entirely on artists
Vienna in 1 708. While Ferdinando was probably from abroad in order to carry out the consider-
the most profuse genius of the family, Francesco able undertakings which, owing to the accumula-
gave Europe its finest theatres, establishing a tion of power and wealth under the House of
tradition which has not yet seen its end. All the Savoy, were waiting for painters. .\t the end of
courts of Europe sought the services of the the seventeenth centurj' it was mainly Daniel
Bibiena, and Ferdinando's sons held offices at Seiter ( 1 649-1705),^'' born in Vienna but trained
the courts of Vienna, Dresden, Berlin, and that in Venice under J. C. Loth, and the Genoese
of the Elector Palatine.^' Bartolomeo Guidobono (1654 1709) who held

The free play of the imagination as seen in the for many years positions of eminence. Although
drawings of the Bibiena, and the classical tradi- later the Florentine Sebastiano Galeotti and the
tion on which the Bolognese school thrived, fashionable Charles Andre Vanloo from Nice
seem to be incompatible with each other. And (1705-65), Luti's pupil in Rome, had large
yet Ferdinando and Francesco Bibiena came commissions^" and firmly established the inter-
from Cignani's school. The explanation lies in national Late Baroque in Turin, it was really
that the Bolognese always regarded quadratura - Neapolitan and Venetian artists who had the
the basis of the art of the Bibiena - as a science major share - an interesting constellation, for
concerned with the accurate rendering of the the two most vigorous Italian schools vied here
laws of vision. As such, quadratura had first for supremacy. The Neapolitans Conca, Gia-
been the handmaid of the grand manner. But quinto, and de Mura followed calls to Turin,
later a paradoxical situation arose. By the mid and Solimena sent many canvases.^' Yet the
seventeenth century, with Colonna and Mitelli, palm went to the Venetians; Sebastiano and
quadratura had reached the status of an art in its Marco Ricci, Nicola Grassi, and Giambattista
own right. In the course of the eighteenth cen- Pittoni accepted commissions, and Giambattista
tury it was the quadratura artists, culminating in Crosato (1685-1758) and Giuseppe Nogari
the Bibiena family, who held all the trumps of a (1699- 1 763) spent years of their lives there.
truly international art, while the Bolognese Crosato,^- above all, with his charming and
grand manner was increasingly reduced to a ample frescoes in the Castle at Stupinigi, the
provincial shadow existence. Villa Regina, the Palazzo Reale, and a number
of Turin churches helped to transform Pied-
mont into an artistic province of Venice. The
NORTHERN ITALY OUTSIDE VENICE
second-rate Mattia Bortoloni (p. 484) found a
Throughout the eighteenth century the smaller rewarding occupation in the Sanctuary at Vico-
cities of northern Italy had flourishing schools forte di Mondovi where he painted, not without
of painters: Verona above all which, from the skill, the enormous dome (1745-50), a commis-
Middle .\ges on, was always an important sion which illness seems to have prevented
^"^
j
artistic centre, and Bergamo and Brescia, Galeotti from executing. The foremost repre-
^
where local traditions, however, yielded more sentative of what may euphemistically be called
and more to the overbearing Venetian influence. the local school was the court-painter Claudio
BIBLOSARTE
, 336. Alessandro Magnasco The Synagogue,
: c: 1725-30. Cleveland, Museum of An
BIBLOSARTE
478 •
Francesco Beaumont (1694-1766), of French question remains unsolved how much religious
extraction, trained in Rome under Trevisani; fanaticism, how much quietism or criticism or
his facile Rococo manner, a not unattractive farce went into the making of his pictures. The
international court style, can best be studied in reason for this uncertainty of interpretation lies
the Palazzo Reale.^* The most successful in the peculiar unreality of his figures. Ma-
practitioner of the next generation was Vittorio gnasco's personal idiom was inimitable, but his
Amedeo CignaroH (1730 1800), '^^
a member of impromptu way of painting, the sketchy charac-
the well-known Verona family of artists, a slight ter of his canvases, the anguished, rapid brush-
talent, mainly renowned for his landscapes in stroke all this, crowning the pursuits of a
themanner of Zuccarelli. distinct group of Seicento artists (p. 341), had a
Genoese grand decorative painting still flou- most invigorating effect on the development of
rished throughout the first quarter of the painting in the new century, and the Venetians
eighteenth century (p. 354) thereafter
; it was on from Sebastiano and Marco Ricci to Guardi
the decline and handled by successors of minor learned their lesson from him.^"
calibre.'^ Milan's painters perpetuated the inter- Bazzani,^" too, must have studied his work,
national Baroque. '' But two artists must be but, characteristic of the new virtuoso type of
singled out: the Genoese Alessandro Magnasco artist, he is not easily summed up by a formula.
(1667, not 77,-1749), called Lissandrino, and His work vacillates between influences from
the Mantuan Giuseppe Bazzani (1690- 1769). Rubens, Van Dyck, and Fetti, the temperate
Both are solitary figures, tense, strange, mystic,
ecstatic, grotesque, and out of touch with the 337. Giuseppe Bazzani:
triumphal course the Venetian school was taking The Imbecile (fragment?), c. 1740.
Columbia, Lmversily of Missouri,
from the second decade onwards; both delight
Museum of Art and Archaeology
in deformities; both are masters of the rapid,
nervous brush-stroke and of magic light-effects.
Magnasco went early to Milan, where he

worked under Filippo Abbiati (1640- 17 15).
Interrupted only by a stay in Florence (c. 1709
11), he remained in Milan until 1735, when he
finally settled in his native Genoa. The forma-
tion of his style is not easily accounted for. In
any case, Morazzone's Early Baroque mysticism
must have attracted him as much as Callot's
over-sensitive Late Mannerist etchings and

Rosa's tempestuous romantic landscapes. Ma-
gnasco's phantasmagorias [336], that strange
diabolical world which seems the product of a
morbid imagination - the fearsome woods, the

tribunals and tortures, the cruel martyrdoms
and macabre scenes peopled with ghostlike
monks - open up problems of interpretation.
For Lanzi all these were hizarne ; even if one
cannot agree with the distinguished author, the
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
479
climate of Balestra's art, Dorigny's classicism, only at the beginning of the next that Venice far
and Watteau's and Lancret's Rococo grace; and outdistanced Rome, Naples, Bologna, and
many of his canvases call to mind the eccentric Genoa: her European triumph dates from the
world of Francesco Maflei and of his own second decade of the eighteenth century.''
contemporary Bencovich [337). Apart from a
few minor imitators, Bazzani's manner had no

Sebastiano Ricci and Piazzetta
sequel in Italy,"*' though it did appeal to
Austrian Baroque painters.'" This change of fortune is connected with the
name of Sebastiano Ricci (1659 1734), who
began as a pupil of Sebastiano Mazzoni, and
VENICE
then went to Bologna where he imbibed the
Politically and economically Venice had long teachings of the Bolognese school under Gio-
been on the decline. After her sea and mercan- vanni Gioseffo dal Sole; finally he studied at
tile power had dwindled, she became in the Parma and Rome. Thus he had the varied
eighteenth century the meeting-place of Euro- experience typical of the Late Baroque artist; at
pean pleasure-hunters, and, indeed, there was the age of twenty-five he had run through the
no city in Europe which equalled her in pictur- whole gamut ofpossibilities: from the free brush-
esque beauty, stately grandeur, luxury, and vice. stroke of Mazzoni and the polished classicism of
To be sure, the foreigners brought wealth to the Bolognese to Correggio, .\nnibale Carracci,
Venice, equal or perhaps greater wealth than and the great decorative fresco painters in Rome.
the industry of her inhabitants had acquired by His first frescoes, in the dome of S. Bernardino
commerce in previous centuries. It is also true dei Morti in Milan (1695-8), reflect the study of
that with the shift of patronage from the Vene- Cortona and Correggio. He returned to Venice
tian nobility to the rich foreigners - English, in 1700 and worked there for twelve years,
Spanish, French, German, and Russian - interrupted, however, by long journeys to
Venetian art became international in a new Vienna ( 1 701 -3), Bergamo (1704), and Florence
sense; for (to give only a few instances), with (1706-7). There in the frescoes of the Palazzo
Sebastiano and IVlarco Ricci, Pellegrini, Ami- Marucelli he achieved full maturity [338]: the
goni, and Canaletto in London, with Tiepolo in luminous brilliant art of the eighteenth century
Wiirzburg and Madrid, with Rosalba Carriera prepared in the work in S. Marziale, Venice
in Paris and Vienna, with Bernardo Bellotto at (1705), is born. Ricci's new homogeneous style
the courts of Dresden and Warsaw, with lesser was the result of an intelligent rediscovery of
masters like Bartolomeo Nazari at the court of Veronese and the study of Luca Giordano. The
the Emperor Charles VII and Fontebasso and Virgin enthroned with Nine Saints in S. Giorgio
J. B. Lampi at that of St Petersburg, the Vene- Maggiore, Venice (1708), is the chefd'ceuire of
tians appeared as their own ambassadors. But this neo-Cinquecentesque manner, enriched,
how it happened that on the social quicksand however, by a quick and nervous eighteenth-
of Venice there arose the most dynamic school century brush-stroke. In the second decade,
of painters will for ever remain a mystery. which saw Sebastiano in London (1712-16)''-'
We know now that the rise was not so sudden and Paris (1716), his brush-stroke becomes
as it seemed not so many years ago. But in spite more agitated, under the influence, it has been
of the revival of the great native tradition in the claimed, of Magnasco's work. .And this, together
second half of the seventeenth centurv, it was with a renewed studv of Veronese after his
BIBLOSARTE
338. Sebastiano Ricci: Hercules and the Centaur, 1706 7. Fresco. Flmeme, Palazzo Mariicelli
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
481
return to Venice, made him, in the third decade,

change to the scintillating, colourful works,
painted with a light nervous touch, which belong
to the Venetian Rococo. Ricci is the typical
extrovert eighteenth-century virtuoso, and as

such his brilliance may appear somewhat super-
ficial. Roberto Longhi talked about 'his paint-
ings smacking of an able reportage of all Euro-
pean motives'."' But it needed precisely Ricci's
easy and versatile talent to steer Venetian art
back to a new understanding of the great past
and forward towards the synthesis achieved in
Tiepolo's heroic style.
Ricci's antipode, an artist of equal or even

greater talent, was Giovanni Battista Piazzetta
(1683-1754), whose training, life-story, and

convictions as an artist were the antithesis to
everything concerning his older colleague:
instead of the itinerant artist, a man of steady
habits; instead of the brilliant virtuoso, a slow
and patient worker; instead of decorative super-
ficiality, a new depth and intensity of expression
instead of the light and vibrant palette, re-
course to chiaroscuro and plastic form; instead
of new conquests to the end, a slow decline of
creative powers during the last years.
After beginning in Antonio Molinari's studio,

Piazzetta also made the journey to Bologna, but
in order to finish his education under Giuseppe
Maria Crespi. Back in Venice before 17 11, he
never left his native city again. His tenebrosu art
appears formed in the St James led to fits Ahirtyr-
dum (S. Stae, Venice, 17 17) and reaches a climax
in the Virgin appearing to St Phtltp Neri (S.
Maria della Fava, 1725-7) [339], a composition
of terse zigzag lines, built up of plastic bodies
intense with mystic supplication and drama-
tized by a poignant chromatic scale of contrast-
ing warm and cold reddish and brown tones. At

the same moment he painted his only great
decorative work, the ceiling (on canvas) with
the Glvry of St Domtnic in SS. Giovanni e
339. Giovanni Battista Piazzetta
Paolo, twirling in a great sweep from the borders The Virgin appearing to St Philip Neri, 1725-7.
towards the luminous centre. In the 1730s his Venice, S. Maria della Fava
BIBLOSARTE
chiaroscuro lightened under the influence of as Francesco Polazzo {c. 1683-1753),''^ who
Lys and Strozzi, and a pastoral mood replaced began as a Ricci follower but later switched his
the previous tension. This is particularly true of allegiance to Piazzetta. By and large, Tiepolo's
a group of pictures around 1740, of which the development goes the opposite way. But among
Fortune Teller (1740, Accademia, Venice)''^ is the great number of Piazzetta's pupils and fol-
one of the most splendid examples. At that lowers there was, characteristically, none of
moment he was nearest a Rococo phase. major format, whereas mediocrities abound.''"'
But this was also the period when great num- Only a few independent knew how to
artists
bers of studervts began to assemble in his atelier. assimilate Piazzetta's manner more success-
His house became a kind of private academy, fully. Giulia Lama''' should here be mentioned
and in 1750, at the foundation of the Venetian and, above all, Federico Bencovich, who was
Academy, Piazzetta appeared to be the obvious probably born in Dalmatia about 1677 (d.
choice as its first Director. To this late period Gorizia, 1756).''"

belong works increasingly executed with the His first works (Palazzo Foschi, Forli, 1707)
help of pupils, in which a rhetorical shallowness show the influence of his Bolognese teacher.
is supported by an o«/rf' chiaroscuro. Carlo Cignani, whose academic manner he soon
From the mid twenties on Piazzetta showed a abandoned for that of Giuseppe Maria Crespi.
growing interest in paintings of heads and half- Thus Bencovich's chiaroscuro has the same
figures; they were an enormous success with the pedigree as Piazzetta's, to whom he felt naturally
public but at the same time contained the loom- drawn during his Venetian period. Also influ-
ing danger of academic petrifaction. This is also enced by the powerful art of Paolo Pagani,'*'
true of the many finished drawings with which Bencovich created a manner of his own, drama-
Piazzetta flooded the market. In any case, his tic, strange, forceful, agonized, a manner which
interest in the design of heads, plastically but impressed the young Tiepolo as much as the
luminously modelled in black chalk, reveals a Viennese in whose city he spent many years
master who upheld the tradition of disegno ~ and from 1733 on [340].''''"
implicitly of the classical tradition - in a world Sebastiano Ricci also found a following among
that was mainly concerned with the painterly minor masters. But it was not they, Gaspare
loosening of form. Despite his rich, typically Diziani ( 1 689- 1 767), Francesco Migliori ( 1 684-
Settecentesque, chromatic orchestration, the 1734), Gaetano Zompini (1700-78), and the
finest nuances of white, the light dabbing on to more interesting Francesco Fontebasso (170Q-
the canvas of his pinks and emerald greens, 69),'" on whom the victory of the 'light trend'
Piazzetta's attempt to persevere in an essentially depended : this was due to a group of more con-
Seicentesque tenehroso manner was bound to siderable artists and, of course, to Tiepolo.
fail. But his dynamic reform of sound principles
had a salutary effect, and even the young Tie-
Pellegrini, Amtgoni, Piltoni, Balestra
polo profited more from him than from anyone
else. The first three names stand for a festive Rococo
With the antithesis Sebastiano Ricci- art of considerable charm. Antonio Pellegrini
Piazzetta, the Venetian stage in the first decades (1675- 1 741),'' trained by the Milanese Paolo
of the eighteenth century was set for every Pagani, found his bright palette through the
artist to decide between the former's luminous study of Ricci and the late Luca Giordano. His
decorative manner and the latter's rich chro- light-hearted Rococo frescoes, painted with a
matic chiaroscuro. Some artists wavered, such fluid brush, were done in England (1708-13,
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
483
Kimbolton Castle, Castle Howard, etc.), in

Bensberg Castle near Diisseldorf (1713-14), in
Paris (1720, frescoes destroyed), in the Castle at
Mannheim {1736-7), and elsewhere. No less an
international success was the more frivolous
Jacopo Amigoni (1682-1752).'- Bom in Naples,
he must have arrived in Venice already experi-
enced in Solimena's manner, but once again
Giordano and Ricci exercised the most import-
ant formative influence upon him. In 17 17 he
was called to the Bavarian court where he
painted his fresco cycles in Nymphenburg,
Ottobeuren, and Schleissheim. He lived in
England between 1730 and 1739, but only his
frescoes in Moor Park near London survive.

His last years from 1747 on he spent as court
painter in Madrid. His later manner degenerated
into a languid and melodramatic classicizing
Rococo, a trend paralleled in the works of other
artists not only in Italy but also in France and
England."^
Although he does not seem to have left Venice,
Giovanni Battista Pittoni (1687- 1767) has an
important share with Pellegrini and Amigoni
in the international success of the Venetian
Rococo. Beginning under his uncle, the weak
Francesco Pittoni, he first formed his style in
opposition to that of the Piazzetta-Bencovich

circle. In the 1720s and 30s he produced with a
nervous brush light and vibrant Rococo pic-
tures, which reveal his attachment to Sebastiano
Ricci and Tiepolo. A sophisticated colourist, he
shows in his works a fragrant elegance and an
arcadian mood distinctly close in feeling to the
French Rococo.'^ Later, a further lightening of

his palette goes hand in hand with tamer compo-
sitions, not uninfluenced by the general trend
towards Neo-classicism." In Pittoni's early
work there are also suggestions of Roman Late
Baroque influence, and these are due, as R.
Pallucchini has shown, to his contact with

Antonio Balestra (1666-1740),^* from Verona.
340. Federico Bencovich
Madonna del Carmine, c. 17 10.
Balestra, first trained in Venice under Antonio
Bergantino, Parish Church Bellucci, spent several years in Maratti's school
BIBLOSARTE
484
341 (below). Antonio Balestra: Nativity, 1704-5. Venice, S. Zaccana
342 (opposite). Giambettino Cignaroli: The Death of" Rachel, 1770. Venice, Accademia
in Rome (c. 169 1-4), and later divided his time sentimental and moralizing overtones a la
about equally between Venice and Verona. Greuze [342], and therefore the darling of the
Without ever deserting Maratti's Late Baroque bourgeois art-loving public of the time.'"'
classicism, he found, like Ricci, decisive stimuli Cignaroli's art is the North Italian counterpart
in the art of Veronese and the late Giordano. to the trend represented by Benefial and Batoni
His new formula of an equilibrium between the in Rome. In Venice, Pietro Longhi began under
form-preserving academic Roman tradition and Balestra but soon deserted him, while Giuseppe
Venetian tonality prevented him from making Nogari,'" Mattia Bortoloni**" (1695- 1750), An-
concessions to Rococo art [341]. He found a gelo Trevisani^' (1669-1753), and, as I have
large following, mainly among provincial pain- mentioned, the young Pittoni moved in his orbit.
ters; as a distinguished caposcudla Balestra deter-
mined the further course of the Veronese school

Giatnbattista Tiepolo ( i6g6-i/jo)
''
and influenced not a few lesser Venetian artists.
His principal successors at Verona were his All the pictorial events in Venice during the
pupils Pietro Rotari (p. 578) and Giambettino early years of the eighteenth century look in
Cignaroh (1706-70),'' the latter a typical repre- retrospect like a preparation for the coming ot
sentative of the classicizing Rococo with false the great genius, Giambattista Tiepolo.'- From
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING 485
his first work, painted at the age of nineteen the Cathedral and the Archiepiscopal Palace at
(Ospedaletto, Venice), his ascendancy over his Ldine, the masterpiece of his early period and a
older colleagues seemed a foregone conclusion. landmark on the way to his new airy and translu-
His career was meteoric; soon he had risen to cent art. After Udine, his work often took him
the position of peerless eminence which he outside Venice: in 1731 and again in 1740 to
maintained for half a century. From the start Milan where he painted first the ceilings in the
his output was prodigious. He began under the Palazzi Archinto (destroyed during the war) and
retardataire Gregorio Lazzarini but was im- Casati-Dugna and, at the later visit, that in the
mediately attracted by Piazzetta's tenebrosa and Palazzo Clerici.*^ In 1732 and 1733 followed the
the dramatic and bizarre art of Bencovich. These frescoes in the CoUeoni Chapel in Bergamo and
attachments are discernible in his first monu- between 1737 and 1739 the great ceiling with
mental work, the Madonna del Carmela, painted St Dominic instituting the Rosary in the Chiesa
c. 1 72 1 (now Brera, Milan). Piazzettesque re- dei Gesuati, Venice. The next decade led him
miniscences linger on in one of his first frescoes, from triumph to triumph: the great canvases of
the Glory of St Teresa in the Chiesa degli the Scuola dei Carmini (1740-7); one of his
Scalzi, Venice {c. 1725). In 1726 he began his grandest frescoes, the Madonna di Loreto on the
first important fresco cycle outside Venice, in vault of the Chiesa degli Scalzi (1743-4, des-
BIBLOSARTE
486 • LATE BAROQUt AND ROCOCO
troyed during the first war);'*' and, c. 1744-5, cycles, that of the Villa Valmarana, painted at
the superb central saloon of the Palazzo Labia the height of his career. '*' The programme in
with the story of Cleopatra - these are some of the five frescoed rooms is wholly in the tradition
the highlights of this period. of grand history painting, illustrating scenes

A new chapter in his career started at the from Homer (probably in Valerius Maximus's
beginning of the next decade, when he was version) and Virgil, from Ariosto and Tasso.
commissioned to decorate the Kaisersaal and Illustration 343 shows the long wall of the hall
the Grand Staircase of the new Residenz at with the Sacrifice oflphigenta: in the centre the
Wurzburg, the capital of Franconia (December high priest, ready to thrust a butcher's knife
1750-November ivss).**^ This immense task, into Iphigenia's body, and a servant with a
the greatest test yet of his inexhaustible creative platter to receive the sacrificial blood. But the
resources, was followed after his return to Ven- killing does not take place; led by little cupids
ice by the Triumph of Faith on the ceiling of the the deer dispatched by the goddess Diana -
Chiesa della Pieta (1754-5) and the decoration appeased and moved by the girl's innocence -
of a number of villas in the Veneto, among them arrives post-haste on a cloud in order to take
the charming series of frescoes in the Villa Val- Iphigenia's place, and the high priest as well as
marana near Vicenza (1757). Works like the the crowd turn astonished in the direction of
frescoes in the two rooms of the Palazzo Rez- the unexpected sight. Only Agamemnon, Iphi-
zonico, Venice (1758), the Assumption fresco in genia's father, hiding his face in his cloak,*^* is
the Chiesa della Purita at Udine, painted in the still unaware of the miracle.
course of one month in 1759, the Triumph of The scene takes place under a portico, the
Hercules in the Palazzo Canossa at Verona painted frontal columns of which seem to carry
(1761), and the Apotheosis ufthe Pisam Family the actual cornice. With every means at his dis-
in the great hall of the Villa Pisani at Stra (I76I- posal Tiepolo produced the illusion that the
2) occupied him during his last Italian years. In perspective space of the fresco is a continuation
the summer of 1762, following an invitation of real space.**" The illusionist extension of space
from King Charles III, he arrived in Madrid, is carried over to the opposite wall, where the
and it was there that he spent the last eight years portico architecture is repeated as setting for
of his life executing the enormous Apotheosis of Greek warriors watching the events across the
Spain in the Throne Room of the Palace as well room. Moreover, the cloud with the deer seems
as two lesser ceilings,*^" and carrying out a multi- to float far inside the beholder's space. On one
tude of private commissions. It was at the side of the ceiling the goddess herself turns
threshold of death that the aged painter had to with commanding gesture towards the sacrifice,
face his first major defeat. At the instigation of on the other side the wind-gods begin to blow
the powerful Padre Joaquim de Electa, the again, and they blow in the direction of the
King's Confessor, who was a supporter of Greek fleet, lying at anchor behind the portico
Mengs, Tiepolo's seven canvases painted for of the opposite wall. Thus a web of relationships
the church of S. Pascal at Aranjuez were re- is created across the room and from the ceiling
moved and replaced by works of his rival. to both walls, and the beholder's space is made
This survey indicates that Tiepolo was in the to form an integral part of the painted story.
first place a painter in the grand manner, and it With remarkable logic, it is also the imaginary
is in this capacity that he should be judged. In light shining from the painted sky that deter-
order to pinpoint his historical position, I have mines the distribution of light and shade in the
chosen to discuss one of his more modest fresco frescoes.
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING 487
343. Giambattista Tiepolo : Sacrifice of Iphigenia, 1757. Fresco. Vuenza, Villa Valmarana
Similar illusionist effects are operative in the cepts for breaking down the boundary between
Palazzo Labia, where Antony and Cleopatra real and imaginary' space.
seem to step down the painted staircase as if to Nobody has ever been misled by the fictitious
join the crowds in the hall. Although the same reality of the painted world. But just as in the
degree of illusion could rarely be applied, Tie- theatre, the Baroque spectator craved for the
polo revelled in illusionist devices such as the maximum of illusion and was prepared to
motif of the drawn curtains in the Kaisersaal of surrender to it. In contrast, however, to seven-
the Wiirzburg Residenz. It is evident that he teenth-century illusionism, Tiepolo's emphati-
takes his place in the monumental Renaissance- cally rhetorical grand manner is sophisticated
Baroque tradition, and if he revived the kind of and hyperbolical in a typically eighteenth-
illusionism familiar from Veronese and his century sense. Although he uses every means of
school, he needed for his stronger effects the illusion to conjure up a fictitious world, he
support of Bolognese quadratura ; it is well seems himself to smile at the seriousness of the
known that he often employed his faithful attempt. In the hall of the Villa Valmarana and
quadraturista, Mengozzi-Colonna.'"' Behind the in front of many of his secular works John Gay's
illusionist totality at which he aimed lies the epigram comes to mind : 'Life is a jest and all
accumulated experience of monumental Baro- things show it . .

.'.
que art - not only the theorv and practice of the The Villa Valmarana frescoes also reveal the
quadraturisti, but in various ways also that of extent to which Tiepolo abides by the classical
Cortona and Bernini, who had found new con- compositional patterns of monumental paint-
BIBLOSARTE
1l
344 (above). Giambattista Tiepolo: Plate from the Varj Cappricj, published 1749. Etching
345 (opposite). Giambattista Tiepolo: Sketch, pen and wash. New York, Pierponl Morgan Library
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
489
'>^/' r V* ( >^
rv
.•»
'/•
ing. One finds a distinct emphasis on triangles familiar to him, and he did not hesitate to use
and basic diagonals and, while this may not be from the past whatever seemed suitable. True
so obvious in multi-figured works, a close study to the new approach first encountered in Luca
shows that even in these each figure is clearly Giordano, he carried the weight of this massive
defined by a network of significant composi- heritage lightly and displayed his unrivalled
tional relationships."' In the last analysis the virtuosity with unbelievable ease. Without the
figures themselves belong to the perennial reper- least sign of inhibition he turned the accumu-
tory of the Italian grand manner; the links with lated experience of 250 years to his own advant-
Veronese are particularly strong, but even age : but since he was so sure of himself, every
Raphael may be sensed. one of his works is an unimpaired entity, strong
I have stressed Tiepolo's traditionalism so and immensely vigorous. The virile and heroic
much because he is in every sense the last link quality- of his art is apparent even where he
in a long chain. He himself was well aware of the comes closest to French Rococo. Shepherds'
full extent of the tradition. Veronese and Titian, idvlls were not for him; whatever he touched
Raphael and Michelangelo, even Diirer, Rem- had the epic breadth of the grand manner.
brandt, and Rubens and, of course, the whole But Tiepolo was not simply the last great
development of Italian Baroque painting were practitioner of history painting in the classical
BIBLOSARTE
490 •
LATE BAROQUF. AND ROCOCO
tradition - his particular glory and one of the portant respect Tiepolo broke away from cus-
reasons for his European success lies in his tomary procedure. Instead of the finish which
revolutionary palette. His early work was still one associates with fresco technique, he used a
relatively dark, with striking chiaroscuro eftects rapid and vigorous stroke, so that in repro-
and lights flickering over the surface. It was at ductions details of his frescoes often look
this time that Rembrandt had a strong hold on almost like sketches [346]. It is precisely this
him. The Udine frescoes of 1726-7 mark the inimitable brush-stroke that endows his fres-
decisive change: light unifies the work and coes with their intensity, exuberance, and
penetrates into every corner. For the two other freshness.
great magicians of light, Caravaggio and Rem-

brandt, light had always a symbolic quality and
needed darkness as its complement. Tiepolo's
light, by contrast, is the light of day, which
resulted in the transparency and rich tonal
values of all shadows. He created this light by
using a silvery tone which reflects from figures
as well as objects. It is this light that must be
regarded as the crowning achievement of Tie-
polo's art and, in a sense, of the inherent ten-
dencies of Venetian painting. Contrary, how-
ever, to the warm palette of the older Venetian
masters, Tiepolo's palette had to be cool in

order to produce his daylight effect. As a result, V "iv;
his most brilliant accomplishment is his frescoes
rather than his easel-paintings, so that his works

in galleries,
convey a full
splendid as they may be, will never
impression of his genius. This has
r3<%.
to be emphasized, since we tend nowadays to
prefer the intimate oil study, the rapid sketch in
pen and wash, or the spirited etched capriccio
to the rhetoric of the grand manner [344, 345].

All these are, of course, of the highest quality, 346 (above). Giambattista Tiepolo:
Head from 'Rinaldo and Armida', 1757. Fresco.
but, true to tradition, to Tiepolo these were
I'icenza, Villa I alma r ana
trifles to be indulged in as a pastime (unless
they were preparatory studies for monumental
347 (opposite). Gian Domenico Tiepolo:
works).''^ Peasant Women (detail), 1757. Fresco.
the technique ideally i'lcenza. Villa Valmaratia
Fresco-painting is
suited to the grand manner with its requirement

for monumentality, and, except in Venice, the
masterpieces of Italian painting were therefore
executed in this technique. It is like an act of
historical propriety that the last giant of the
grand manner was a Venetian and chose the

fresco as his principal medium. Yet in one im-
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING 491
In the guest-house of the Villa Valmarana a only be the losers: the last great pillar of the
few rooms are decorated with idyllic and topical Baroque tradition and the most celebrated ex-
subjects. The change of programme corres- ponent of academic art had to yield to the pro-
ponds to a change of style for which Gian phetic genius who gave rise to the art of the new
Domenico Tiepolo was responsible. Giam- century.**^
battista's heroic, epic, and mythological scenes
are expressed in the language and grammar of
THE GENRES
the grand manner, while Gian Domenico's
masquerades and village scenes arc inconsistent In the first chapter will be found some remarks
about the so-called 'secularization' of painting
in the seventeenth century and the growth of
various specialities. As the century advanced,
rhe specialists of landscape painting in its
various facets, of battle- and animal-pieces,

popular scenes and genre, of fruit, flower, fish,
and other forms of still-life, and finally of por-

traiture grew considerably in numbers.'*^ This
answered a need, because these artists catered
to a rapidly growing middle-class with new
ideas of domestic comfort. Nevertheless the
Italian position remained vastly different from
that of a Protestant bourgeois civilization such
as Holland's, where the process of specialization

had begun a hundred years earlier. In Italy the
nobility of monumental painting was never

seriously challenged, and it is for this reason
that, with the exception of portraiture, artists
of rank rarely made the concession of delving

into the 'lower' genres; only outsiders like
Crespi were equally at home in religious imagery
and the petite maniere of domestic scenes. It is
with the compositional patterns of the classical for the same reason that for the modern ob-
tradition; the idealization of figures, too, is re- server some of the most exciting and refreshing
placed by an anti-conventional and realistic paintings of the late seventeenth and eighteenth
idiom [347]. This change marks a change of centuries came from the 'unprincipled' spe-
generation. Gian Domenico, born in 1727, cialists. Yet, although much of their work may
died as late as 1804: he buried the grand manner have a greater appeal than the large history-
right under his father's vigilant eye. paintings of the Bolognese or Roman schools,
Five years after the Villa Valmarana frescoes compared with the endless number of practi-
Tiepolo settled in Madrid. Shortly before him, tioners, the real innovators, masters with a
Mengs had come to take up his appointment as vision of their own, are few. It is mainly with
painter to the king. When Tiepolo died, Goya these that I shall deal in the following pages,
was twenty-four years old - a fascinating con- while many worthy artists of minor stature
stellation where Tiepolo as well as Mengs could must be left unmentioned.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
493
Portraiture character that makes the man. His gallery of

Venetian dignitaries, continued without much
Almost all the great Late Baroque artists were change of style till after 1800, shows how little
excellent portrait painters - from Maratti to Venetian Rococo culture yielded to the temper
Batoni and Mengs, from Luca Giordano to of a new age.
Solimena, from Crespi to Tiepolo. It is an On a lesser level portraiture flourished during

interesting aspect that their portraits were, as the period, particularly in Venice and the terra
a rule, painted without theoretical encum- ferma. Rosalba Carriera's (1675- 1758) charm-
brances and therefore often speak to us more ing Rococo pastels come to mind; in her time
directly and more forcefully than their grand these made her one of the most celebrated
manner. Among the specialists in portraiture, artists in Europe. Her visits to Paris (1721) and
two masters of rank may be singled out, Giu- Vienna (1730) were phenomenal successes; in
seppe Ghislandi, called Fra Vittore del Galgario Venice all the nobles of Europe flocked to her
(1655-1743), and Alessandro Longhi (1733- studio. But her work, mellow, fragrant, and
18 1 3). Fra Galgario, born in Bergamo, studied sweet, typically female and a perfect scion of
in Venice under the portrait painter Sebastiano the elegant Rococo civilization of Venice, is
Bombelli (1635- 17 16), thus laying the founda- interesting (in spite of a recent tendency to
tion for his magnificent blending of Venetian boost it)"'' as an episode in the history of taste
colourism with the native tradition of Moroni's rather than for its intrinsic quality.
portraiture. From the latter he learned the

secret of straightforward characterization of the
The Popular and Bourgeois Genre
sitter. It is his ability of unvarnished repre-
sentation of character, to which he knew how In recent years much stir has been made by
to subordinate the pose, the often pompous the masters whom Roberto Longhi called 'pit-
or elegant contemporary dress, and the chro- tori della realta'"' - the masters who take 'life
matic key, that makes him the most distin- as it really is' as their subject and paint it with
guished portrait painter of the Late Baroque unconventional freedom and directness. But
period [348]. as Longhi himself made abundantly clear, this
Alessandro Longhi, whose activity began a happy phrase has meaning only in a meta-
decade after Fra Galgario's long career had phorical sense. The Milan Exhibition of 1953
ended, represents to a certain extent the oppo- showed that an almost abstract Lombard quality
site pole in portrait painting.'^ Trained under unites the portraits of Carlo Ceresa, the still-
his father Pietro and under Giuseppe Nogari lifes of Baschenis, and the popular genre of
(1699- 1 763), a specialist in rather facile char- Ceruti, a 'magic immobility' (Longhi), a sophis-
acter studies, he became the acknowledged ticated convention far removed from a 'naive'
master of Venetian state portraiture - of doges, approach to reality.
senators, and magistrates - rendered with an Giacomo Ceruti, called 'il Pitocchetto', also
infallible sense for tonal nuances; but in his a history and portrait painter, remains, in spite
portraits it is the stately robe rather than the of intense study,'"" something of an enigma.
Active mainly in the second quarter of the
eighteenth century, he left us a depressing gal-
348. Giuseppe Ghislandi:
lery of beggars and idiots, of vagabonds, crip-
Portrait of Isabella Camozzi de' Gherardi, c. 1730.
Costa di Mezzate, Bergamo,
ples, and dumb folk painted sparingly in a dark
Conti Camozzl-Vertosa Colled ion key, but with such descriptive candour that
BIBLOSARTE
349. Giacomo Ceruti: Two Wretches, c. 1730 40.

Brescia, Pinacoteca
the spectre of Surrealism is not far from our that the common man, the anonymous crowd,
minds [349]. The popular genre as such had their doings, behaviour, and psychology at-
fairly wide currency then, so that Ceruti's fas- tracted many painters, among them Giuseppe
cination with the forgotten and lost of humanity Maria Crespi [334], Magnasco, and Piazzetta.
was not altogether unique. But the artists who regarded this genre as
Linked by many strands with the Flemish their special and sometimes only province form
and Dutch masters, imported by them directly a group apart. Gaspare Traversi in Naples,""
and indirectly into Italy, the lower genre appears setting out from Caravaggesque sources, painted
during the seventeenth century in many guises: (between 1732 and 1769) episodes from the life
as animal pictures and rustic scenes in Genoa, of the middle classes with considerable tem-
as Bambocciate in Rome, as market scenes and perament, psychological insight, and a lively
low-class gatherings in Naples, or simply as sense for the farcical and grotesque. Concen-
semi-burlesque types in Annibale Carracci's trating entirely on the mute communication of
Arti di Bologna. Yet it was only from the turn figures often irrationally arranged on the canvas
of the seventeenth to the eighteenth century on [350], his work strikes a truer note than the
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
495
350. Gaspare Traversi: A wounded Man, before 1769.

Venice, Brass Collection
more polite genre scenes of his contemporary pieces are now all but forgotten, sur\ i\ es as the
Giuseppe Bonito (p. 465), who transferred witty caricaturist of hundreds of contemporary
something of the respectabiUty of academic art Roman notables"" - drawn, however, in a
into this sphere. Rome had in Antonio Amorosi stereotyped manner - rather than as the painter
{c. 1660-after 1736) a painter who conceived of genre scenes. Giuseppe Gambarini'"- (1680-
popular genre-scenes on a rather monumental 1725) in Bologna, who always reveals his Bolo-
scale. A revival of a certain amount of Cara- gnese academic background, tends in some of
vaggism together with the reserve and intensity his pictures towards the idyllic Rococo genre.
of his figures are the reason why many of his But it was mainly in Lombardy and the Venetian
pictures went and still go under the names of hinterland that the lower and bourgeois genre,
Spanish artists, even of that of Velasquez. even before Ceruti, had its home with such
Amorosi, along with his contemporar}- Pier minor practitioners as Pietro Bellotto (1625, not
Leone Ghezzi'"" (1674- 1755), was the pupil of 27,-1700), a pupil of Forabosco and painter of
Giuseppe Ghezzi (1634-
the latter's father, meticulously observed heads of old people;
1721). Pier Leone, whose frescoes and altar- Bernardo Keil'"' ('Monsu Bernardo', 1624-87),
BIBLOSARTE
49^ LATE BAROQLE AND ROCOCO
Rembrandt's pupil, working in Italy from 1651 large in Italy this class of painting lacks spon-
on; Pasquale Rossi '"^ called Pasqualino (1641- taneity, that the derivation from, and connexion
1725) from Vicenza, who practised mainly in with, the great formal tradition can often be
Rome and may have influenced Amorosi; An- sensed, and that Italians concentrate on the
tonio Cifrondi (1657- 1730), Franceschini's human figure rather than on the ambience. In
pupil at Bologna, whose paintings are definitely contrast to the painters of northern countries,
related to the Arti di Bologna etchings; and many of the Italian genre painters also practised
Giacomo Francesco Cipper '
'"
called il Todes- the grand manner, or tried and, disappointed,
chini, probably a Tirolese working in the first deserted it. In addition, it can probablv be
half of the eighteenth century in a manner shown that there was a lively exchange between
reminiscent of Ceruti's. These painters delight Naples, Rome, and Lombardy with Bologna
in illustrating homely or gaudy and grotesque taking up a key position; that, in other words,
scenes, and the beholder is entertained by the the painters here named and many others knew
narrative. All this is different in the case of of each others' work. What would seem an im-
Ceruti, where it is the scrupulous 'portrayaF promptu reaction against the formahsm of the
of miser} that has our attention. grand manner and the established conventions
Now Annibale Carracci's Arti di Bologna^'^ of decorum, springing up in a number of centres,
were what may be called the incunabula of was in fact an art with its own formal and
'pure representation' of low-class types, and iconographical conventions - a kind of academic
this tradition was kept alive in Giuseppe Maria routine of 'low art\ far from any improvisation.
Mitelli's ( 1 634- 1 7 1 8) engravings. It would seem It is only when one turns to Pietro Longhi
that Ceruti's art developed against this back- (1702-85) that one is faced with conversation
ground' '
and that his paintings, therefore, re- pieces in the modern, eighteenth-centurv^ sense.
present types rather than portraits and contain At the opposite pole to Ceruti's restricted for-
literary connotations of which the modern mula for the rendering of low-class types,
beholder is unaware. Longhi, the most versatile Italian practitioner
This observation leads to the major problems of the pleasant and unproblematical bourgeois
of the entire class of genre painting. Not 'real genre, is more interested in catching the flavour
fife', but traditions of old - visual as well as of the scene enacted than in the characters of the
literarv recollections - inform the incongruously actors [351]. While working at Bologna under
farcical as well as the imaginan, idyllic genre. Crespi, he came into contact with Gambarini's
Upon closer inspection it appears that the rather polished paintings of well-mannered
choice of subjects was limited. A standardized peasants and washerwomen, an interpretation
set was endlessly repeated, such as the School- of everyday life that struck allied chords. Back
mistress, the Sewing School, the Musical Party, in \ enice, he became the recorder of the life
the mendicant Friar, the old Drunkard, and and entertainments of polite society, always
so forth. In not a few cases the roots lie far back painted in the small cabinet format. But com-
in the allegorical representations of the Middle pared with the magic of a Watteau, the charm
Ages (e.g. the Schoolmistress as personification of a Lancret, the intimacy of a Chardin, or the
of Grammar, one of the Liberal Arts), in others biting wit of a Hogarth, the limitations of his
the pattern derives from religious imager\ or talent are obvious.
history painting (e.g. the Sewing School from Longhi's flair for showing the public their
Reni's fresco of the \ irgin sewing). Moreover, own lives in a somewhat beautifying mirror
it has rightly been pointed out'' ^
that by and won him enthusiastic admirers.' " Everv where
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING 497
BR
BIBLOSARTE
498 •
not become important till the second halt of of Giovanni Ghisolfi (1623-83),"' whose vedute
the seventeenth century, are in fact a late off- ideate show the characteristically Roman scenic
shoot, often combining landscape elements with arrangement of ruins. The boldness of Pannini's
the work of the trained architectural designer views, the sureness with which he placed his
as well as the quadraturisia or scene painter. At architecture on the canvas clear signs of the
the time one distinguished between the vedute trained quadraturisia - the handling and placing
esatte, precise renderings of topographical situa- of his elegant figures, the atmosphere pervading
tions, and the vedute ideate or di fantasia, imagi- his pictures, the crystalline clarity of his colours,
nary views, which offered the possibility of the precision of his draughtsmanship - all these
indulging in dreamlike flights into the past and, elements combine into an art sui generis, which
above ail, of rendering romantic and nostalgic had as much influence on the majestic visions of
pictures of ruins.'" In Rome the arcadian and a Piranesi as on the arcadian world created by
pastoral classical landscape remained in vogue, Hubert Robert.
practised mainly by the exceedingly successful Earlier than most of Pannini's vedute, but
italianized Fleming Jan Frans van Bloemen, influenced by them at the end of his career, are
called Orizzonte (1662- 1749),"- and by Andrea the often somewhat dry topographical render-
Locatelli (1695-c. 1741),^'^ whose elegant and ings of the city by the Dutchman Gaspar van
tidy work shows a typically eighteenth-century Wittel,'"* called Vanvitelli, who was born at
luminosity and transparency. NeapoHtan land- Amersfoort in 1653, made Italy his home in
scapists such as Gennaro Greco,"^ called Masca- 1672, and worked mainly in Naples and Rome
cotta (1663- 17 14), Pietro Cappelli, a Roman where he died in 1736. Deriving from the
(d. 1727), Leonardo Coccorante (1700-50), and northern microcosmic tradition of a Berkheyde,
even the late Carlo Bonavia (or Bonaria, active in Italy he soon developed a sense for well-
1750-88), stem mainly from Rosa and often composed panoramic views without ever aband-
emphasize the bizarre and fantastic."^ Com- oning the principle of factual correctness.
pared with these attractive but minor specialists, With Vanvitelli and Pannini and later with j
Rome had at least one great master who raised the magnificent engraved work of the Venetian I
both the veduta esatta and ideata to the level of Giambattista Piranesi (p. 364), Rome main-
a great art. tained a position of eminence in the special field
Gian Paolo Pannini,"^ born at Piacenza in of topographical and imaginary vedute. ^^'^ None-
169 1/2, first formed by impressions of the theless, Venice also asserted her ascendancy in
Bibiena and other scenographic artists, in 171 landscape painting and the aUied genres. Marco
joined the studio of the celebrated Benedetto Ricci (1676- 1 730),'-" Sebastiano's nephew and
Luti in Rome. His frescoes in the Villa Patrizi collaborator [353], must be regarded as the
(1718-25, destroyed) established him firmly as initiator of the new Venetian landscape style,
a master in his own right. Patronized by Cardi- which through him became an immediate inter-
nal Polignac and married to a Frenchwoman, national success. He worked in Turin, Florence,
his relations with France became close and his and Milan, and visited London twice between
influence on French artists increasingly im- 1708 and 17 16, the second time (1712-16) in the
portant. During the last thirty years of his life company of his uncle. From 17 17 on he made
(he died in Rome in 1765) he was primarily Venice his home. With his knowledge of intra-
engaged on topographical views of Rome, real Italian developments Marco combined quick
and imaginary [352], and one cannot doubt that reactions and a spirit of real artistic adventure.
he received vital impulses from the precise art Thus, in the first three decades of the eighteenth
BIBLOSARTE
352. Gian Paolo Pannini: Piazza del Quirinale, i. 1743. Rome, Qjiirinal Palace
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
501
century his manner underwent many changes: scenographic tradition is retained. It has long
the early 'scenographic' views derive from been known that his work, usually in strong
Carlevarijs, the dark, tempestuous landscapes chiaroscuro and glittering with the warm and
betray the study ofSalvator and Micco Spadaro, brilliant light of the Venetian lagoon, had a
the more arcadian ones that of Claude; in the formative influence on the greater Francesco
second decade his landscapes show some of the Guardi.
magic and nervous tension of Magnasco; later To the extent that all these landscapists were
his interest in classical ruins grows; at the same also veduttsti, it was primarily the veduta di
time his vision broadens, his palette lightens, fantasia that interested them. But parallel with
and the landscapes take on an eighteenth- the veduta esatta by Vanvitelli and Pannini runs
century luminous and atmospheric character a development at Venice: if Luca Carlevarijs
[353]. At this late moment he appears as a master from Udine (1663- 1730) was the Venetian
of the vedute ideate, fantastic visions of crumbled Vanvitelli, Antonio Canale, called Canaletto
antiquity, even before Pannini had developed (1697- 1 768), was the Venetian Pannini. Carle-
his own style in this genre. varijs,'--' also renowned as an engraver, ap-
Giuseppe Zais (1709-84) formed his rustic proached his subject with the eye and know-
style as a landscapist upon the art of Marco ledge of the trained quadraturista. The scenic
Ricci before he came into contact with the effect of his views of the Piazza S. Marco and
Tuscan Francesco Zuccarelli (1702-88), who the Canal Grande with their studied emphasis
settled in Venice about 1732 and soon found on perspective, the crowds, gondolas and acces-
himself in the leading position vacated by Marco sories filling his pictures, his interest in the
Ricci's death. Trained in Florence by Paolo narrative or the festive event (e.g. the Reception
Anesi and in Rome possibly by Locatelli, Zuc- of the Fourth Earl of Manchester as Ambassador
carelli had little of Marco's bravura although he at Venice, 1707, Citj- Art Gallery, Birmingham)
strove to emulate the latter's atmospheric - all this shows how different his art is from that
luminosity. But Tuscan that he was, his festive of his Roman counterpart. Yet like Vanvitelli he
idylls and arcadian elysiums under their large was mainly a 'chronicler', concerned with the
blue skies - more in line of descent from Claude factual rather than the poetical aspect of the
than from Marco - always retain a non-Venetian scene recorded. It was precisely this, the poeti-
colouristic coolness. His sweet and amiable art cal quality, the responsiveness to the mood of
secured him international success. He worked Venice, to her light and atmosphere, that Cana-
in Paris and London, where he became a founda- letto knew how to render. He began as a theatri-
tion member of the Royal Academy (1768), and cal designer under his father. After an early
his influence on the history of English land- visit to Rome (171Q), he worked first with Carle-
scape painting is well known. varijs, and his choice of views and motifs reveals
The most gifted follower of Marco Ricci, but it even at a much later date.
probably Canaletto's pupil, was Michele Mari- Canaletto's characteristic style was formed as
;i^^
eschi (171 0-43) with a quick brush he painted early as 1725 (four pictures for Stefano Conti at
imaginary views of Venice, landscapes with Lucca, now Montreal, private collection).'-^
ruins, and capriccios in which something of the Although he slowly turned from an early tene-
hroso manner to a brightly and warmly lit atmo-

spheric interpretation of his vedute, in keeping
353. Sebastiano and Marco Ricci:
Epitaph for Admiral Shovel, c. 1726. with the general eighteenth-century trend, he
Washington, National Gallery remained faithful to a fluid and smooth paint;
BIBLOSARTE
354- Camhno: Piazzi S. >faroo, f. 1760. Lmdm. Nstimml Gmtlrrj
and k is dus that hd|K to ooavey the mipressioo to the taste of the BritislL, and owing to the
c4â dispasskmate fcsdvc d^nhr and beatitiide patronage of the remarkable Consul Smith at
13541. No ei^dxentb-centniT pointer was more Venke there was soon a steady flow of Cana-
BIBLOSARTE
FAINTING -
505
lenos to Fngbnd, folBamrd benreen 1746 and ooqna was die wvik of mldiiBaiiw ia the
1755 by dnee îats ai die attin CD Loadoa.^^ stmfin. wIkxc ncry kind of <
A I^b-daK mktuw of Caulcno's mtammer Jfirptcd, from iipicnacs^

itiiiai
was his pmpi Giuseppe Mofctd;^^ bat oalr panMmgjit baMlc-pMfiiy aad cvca ftcscocs
Benuido Bellooo (1720-80), Canokteo's (173DS, G
Kri« mi> a, Tcaice). Qrir ia his haa
nephev, was capable of a |mwu i ioKipRCa- yean aad, abonc al. after the death of the elder
don of die older artist's waA. He left Venice A brother does he aec^ m haic cnaoeanaond oa
the age of twenty and. after wiiiig in Rone; die pmatrng of zadtfr, far wUcfc fe k aoa
Tnrin, Milan, and Verooa, soo^ his foftnae
north of the Alps. Btiami 1747 and 1756 he
vasooort painur in Dtesdea, later he wok to that opened â mayor problem of cziiici
Menm and Mnnicfa. and the bst tliirffien years Unti fairly icjcmdy it was IwJktui dot Ft
of his life he spent as oo^ painiei in Waisav, cesoo was the leal aad oaly graias in the <
poeticallT eoBobfiag cides and baUB^nnder Now, huweia. the scdcs have beca mtciaul
nuitliem skies by the matfaemancri piecisnn of
Ins rision and the terse appficadan of a <>na n snat figatc.!^ If he - as Ekdy «ms
lai^ of cold 'moonligjH' ooloois.^ F iancesuu was the awmT of the
Often allied with tbe bmk of CanaietBa. bu the ofj^m m the Chiem deTAagcfe
in fact taking op a diammitJy oppuain (alkr 1753) \2S5\ <kn, iadeed. the pdhi maai
position. Francesco Gnardi (1712-93) nHSt be go m him. b
spiK of sack tc-rilaainii of far-
given the pahi among the tadrtiii L ffc modest l
bfe-story icmaius ahaost as tmoanaaus as db« I aacriKD^s piai l ii ry hg wk

of a medieval artist. Ahboi^ in 1719 his sister
was married to Tiepolo. it is only after paiicat While Caaakim suais m dK oU tiadnaa of
research that a ii i i w in iiM i of Cks has bfcnmr of|»mt,atiadkiaa
knovn aboat hira. He nner attracted the with the pre-
tion of feveign risxtors. and not ti9 he
serenty-rwo was he athnjunl n the V <£dK kaded iavk, the
Academy. Untfl 1760 his peraoBafity was sob- ^ Can*, aad the aaoesny of his an goes
i
merged n the £nnily stndio headed by Ins back thfOMgh Mariesch ami Marco Riod m
brother Giaaananio (1699, not 98^-1760).^^ In Magaasoo, aad fiaiher m MaAEi. Fem, aad
this studio Fiancesoo plodded along Be aa Ly^ WUe
-irTJTm nf oM tnd iif d -a akin Mi d
i i 1 1 limiiii bhi widi theskilfai maaipafanoa of
practices. Asamanof over thirty he seems also prospecK aad taeiciiac rcmmas mside the grctf
to have worked io MariesdiTs stofio aad whea
over forty in that of CanaietiOL Moreacer. ke Gaarfi drifts
did not hesitaK to rqieat !««»<>* aor "
m ose and petsoaal
other arttsts' works - next to Canaletto's^ 00m- world [356] dat is
positioos by Sebastiano Ricci. Fetd. Piazzcta, rather
Strazzi. Crespi - and oae of his most ruislmig Whfle Caaakim ohieciifes cvea the puuit w£
paintinss^ the G^ Ctmcert of 1782 (Mmack. leaioe, GaaraisBb|BCXmescvea fa lad iccmd-
.\he Pinakothekl was cribbed fiom a dn- ea- gs. WbAc the ioimer, m a wmd, IS adi a dhOd
sravine h^ .Antonio Baratd after a design by of the RcaaissMoe traditiaa ia so far as the
Giovanni Batrisn CîaL FiaaBv. mach of his
BIBLOSARTE
355- Gianantonio Guardi: Story of Tobit, after 1753. Detail. Venice, S. RaJJaele, parapet of organ
BIBLOSARTE
PAINTING •
505
performance, the latter steps outside that tradi- and Jacopo Bassano, had constantly invigorated
tion in so far as the thing painted seems to have Italian Baroque painting at all levels, and had
no more than extrinsic value. contributed even more to the course painting
But w hether it was Gianantonio or Francesco took in the Low Countries and Spain.
who crowned the pursuits of the masters of the On this note the book might well have ended,
free brush-stroke, it is in their work that solid were it not for a strange paradox. Francesco
form is dissolved and dematerialized to an extent Guardi's art has often been compared with the
undreamed of by any precursor [355]. Between music of Mozart. Despite his modernity, Guardi
them, the two brothers opened the way to the was a man of his century and, more specifically,
'pure' painters di tocco of the next century, the a man of the Rococo. He continued creating his
Impressionists, who like them thought that spirited capriccios and limpid visions of Venice
form was fleeting and conditioned by the atmo- long after the spectre of a new heroic age had
sphere that surrounds it. broken in on Europe. When he died in the
Thus two masters essentially of the petite fourth year of the French Revolution, few may
maniere had broken through the vicious circle of have known or cared that the reactionary back-
Renaissance ideology and vindicated the de- water of Venice, the meeting place of the ghost-
velopment of a free painterly expression which like society of the past, had harboured a great
had started with the late Titian, with Tintoretto revolutionarv of the brush.
356. Francesco Guardi : View of the Lagoon, 1790.

Milan, Aluseo Poldo Pezzoli
BIBLOSARTE
5o6
LIST OF THE PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS USED
IN THE NOTES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Archivi Archivi d' Italia
Art Bull. The .4rt Bulletin
Baglione G. Baglione, Le Vite de' pittori, scultort, archttelli Rome, 1642

. . .
Bellori G. P. Bellori, Le Vite de' pittort, scultori ed architetti modernt. Rome, 1672
Boll. d'Arte Bollettino d'Arte
Boll. Soc. Piemontese Bolletttno delta Societd Piemontese di architettura e delle belle arti
Bottari G. Bottari, Raccolta di lettere. Milan, 1822
Brauer-Wittkower H. Brauer and R. Wittkower, Die Zetchnungen des Gtanlorenzo Bernini. Berlin,
1931
Burl. Mag. The Burlington Magazine
Donati, Art. Tic. U. Donati, Artisti ticinesi a Roma. Bellinzona, 1942
G.d.B.A. Gazette des Beaux-Arts
Golzio, Documentt V. Golzio, Documentt artislici sul seicento nelF archivio Chtgi. Rome, 1939
Haskell, Patrons F. Haskell, Patrons and Painters: A Study in the Relations between Italian Art and
Society in the Age of the Baroque. London, 1963
Jahrb. Preuss. Kunstslg. Jahrhuch der Preussischen Kunst sammlungen
Jf. W.C.I. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes
Lankheit K. Lankheit, Florentinische Barockplastik. Munich, 1962
Male E. Male, L'art religieux de la fin du XVIe siecle Paris, 1951
. . .
Malvasia C. C. Malvasia, Felsina pit trice. Bologna, 1678

Passeri-Hess G. B. Passeri, Vite de' pittori, scultori ed architetti. Ed. J. Hess. Vienna, 1934
Pastor L. von Pastor, Geschichte der Pdpste. Freiburg im Breisgau, 1901 ff.
Pollak, Kiinsttdtigkeit O. Pollak, Die Kunsttdtigkeit unter Urban Vlll. Vienna, 1927, 193
Quaderni Qiiaderni dell'Istituto di storia dell' architettura (Rome)
Rep.f. Kunstip. Repertorium fiir Kunstwissenschaft
Riv. del R. 1st. Rivista del R. Istituto di archeologia e storia dell' arte
Rom. Jahrb. f. Kunstg. Romisches Jahrbuch fiir Kunstgeschichte
Titi F. Titi, Descrizione delle pitture, sculture e architetture . . . in Roma. Rome, 1763
Venturi A. Venturi, Storia dell'arte italiana. Milan, 1933 ff.
Voss H. Voss, Die Malerei des Barock in Rom. Berlin, 1924
Waterhouse E. Waterhouse, Baroque Painting in Rome. London, 1937
Wiener Jahrb. Wiener Jahrbuch fiir Kunstgeschichte
Wittkower, Bernini R. Wittkower, Gtan Lorenzo Bernini. London, 1955
Zeitschr.f. b. Kunst Zeitschrift fiir bildende Kunst
Zeitschr.f. Kunstg. Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES
Bold numbers indicate page references
FOREWORD Pirri, S.I., in Archiium Historicum Societatis lesu, xxi

(1952)-
12. I. See Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, v 7. These connexions were first discussed in the valu-
(1946), 77-128, widi articles by R. Weilek, W. Ste- able but almost-forgotten book by W. Weibel,
chow, R. Daniells, W. Fleming; J. H. Mueller, thtd., Jesuitismus und Barockskulptur, Strasbourg, 1909.
XII (1954), 421; and ihid., Xiv (1955), 143-74, with 8. See p. 56.
articles by C. J. Friedrich, M. F. Bukofzer, H. Hatz- 25. 9. See Galassi Paluzzi (above. Note 3) and G.
feld, J. R. Martin, W. Stechow. Also G. Briganti, Rovella, S.I., in Civilta Cattolica, 103, iii (1952), 53,
Paragone, i (1950), no. i and 11 (1951), no. 13; idem, 165. See also Baroque Art and the Jesuit Contribution,
Pietro da Cortona, Florence, 1962, 15 fi. ; Wittkower ed. I. Jaffe and R. Wittkower (Bibliography, II, \).
in Accademia dei Lmcei, CCLIX (1962), 319. See also 26. 10. On Ponzio see L. Crema in Atti del IV Con-
Bibliography (I I, A). gresso Sazionale di stona dell'arte, Milan, 1939, and
H. Hibbard, The Architecture of the Palazzo Borghese,
CHAPTER I Rome, 1962, 97, up-to-date the fullest biographical
treatment. Born at \'iggiu near the Lake of Lugano,
22. I. Giovanni Andrea Gilio, Due Dialogi, Camerino, his career in Rome seems to have started in May 1585
1564 (ed. P. Barocchi, Trattati d'arte del Cinquecenlo, as architect of the Villa d'Este (D. R. Coffin, The Villa
Bari, 1961, 11, 40). d'Este at Tiioli, Princeton, i960, loi). In 1 591-2 he
2. This belongs, of course, to the oldest tenets of the worked as 'misuratore' in S. .\ndrea della Valle.
Church. The proscription reaffirms promulgations of II. It should, however, be noticed that during the
the Nicean Council. On the origin and character of early nineties the Cavaliere's rich and elegant classi-
the decree, see H. Jedin in Tiibtnger Theologische cism with its deliberate references to Raphael and
Quartalschrtft, CXVI (1935). Michelangelo (to be studied in the Loggia Orsini of
3. A full critical review of the extensive literature in the 'house of Sixtus V, Via di Parione, 1589; in the
C. Galassi Paluzzi, Stona segreta dello stile dei Gesuiti, vault of the Contarelli Chapel, S. Luigi de' Francesi,
Rome, 195 1 . See also F. Zeri, Pittura e Cnnlrortforma : 1 591 2; and in the Cappella Olgiati, S. Prassede,
L'arte senza tempo di Scipto da Gaeta, Turin, 1957, 1592-5) held promise for the future which his further
and E. Battisti, 'Riforma e Controriforma', in Enciclo- development did not realize. See I. Faldi, Boll, d' Arte,
pedia universale dell'arte. xi, 366-90. xxxviii (1953), 45 ft".
4. For the history of the word and its meaning see 27. 12. F. Haskell, in his review of Zeri'sP;/^;/raf Cow-
M. Treves in Marsyas, (1941). 1 troriforma (Burl. .Mag., C (1958), 396 ff.), emphasized
23. 5. L. Ponnelle and L. Bordet, St Philip Nen and that the poverty of the Jesuits dictated the choice of
the Roman Society of his Times, London, 1932, 576. their artists.
24. 6.Apart from the famous case of Padre Pozzo, the 13. Male, III.
architectsG. Tristano, G. De Rosis, Orazio Grassi, 14. For Brill's earlier work in the Vatican, see H.
and Giacomo Briano, the painters Michele Gisberti Hahn in .Miscellanea Bihliothecae Hertzianae, Munich,
and Rutilio Clementi, and the sculptor and engraver 196 1, 308.
G. B. Fiammeri may be mentioned. During the years 28. 15. See the interesting remarks by H. Rottgen,
1634-5 no less than fourteen Jesuit artists were work- 'Repriisentationsstii und Historienbild in der romis-
ing in the Gesii at Palermo. In addition, decorative chen Malerei um 1600', in Beitrdge fiir Hans Gerhard
wood-carving was largely in the hands of Jesuit artists, Evers, Darmstadt, 1968, 71-82, who interprets, e.g.,
such as Bartolomeo Tronchi, Francesco Brunelli, the Roncalli's 'grand manner' as an autonomous Roman
Taurine brothers, and Daniele Ferrari. .\ rich material, development.
mainly from Jesuit archives, was published by Pietro 16. The decoration of the pendentives began in 1598
BIBLOSARTE
508 •
NOTES TO CHAPTER I
from designs by Ccsare Nebbia and Cristolbro Ron- Note 10), 69, Vasanzio may be responsible for the
calli.For further details, also of the large altarpieces, second tier of the facâde.
see H. Siebenhiiner, in Fcstschnjl fiir Ham Scd/mayr, 31. The complex building history of the palace has
Munich, 1962, 292, 295, 300. For the programme of been disentangled by H. Hibbard (above, Note 10).
the dome mosaics, sec H. Sedlmayr, Epochen titid He showed convincingly that the palace was begun by
Werke, Vienna-Munich, i960, 11, 13. Vignola, 1560-5.
17. E. Durini, 'Ambrogio Bonvicino . .
.', Arte Lnm- 35. T,2. Hoogewerft's articles in Palladto, vi (1942),
barda, ill, 2 (1958), is disappointing. and in Archtvio della R. deputazione romana di stona
29. 18. Fullest discussion of this building by H. Egger patria, Lxvi (1943), clarify the mystery surrounding
in Alededeeltngeti van hel Nederlandsch histonsch this architect, who was born at Utrecht about 1550
Rume, ix (1929).
Institiiut te and died in Rome in 1621.
30. 19. The documents of payments made to the ^;i.

See Guglielmi in Boll. d'Arte, xxxix (1954), 318:
sculptors working in the chapel between 1608 and payment of February 1614.
15
1615 were published by C. Dorati, Commenlari, 34. This casino has been destroyed; on Cigoli's
XVIII (1967), 231-60. frescoes, see p. 98. The report about the Pallavicini
33. 20. Passignano also painted the frescoes in the complex of decorations by F. Zeri in Connoisseur
large new For the programme
sacristy of the basilica. (1955), 185, has been superseded by H. Hibbard,
of the paintings of the Cappella Paolina, see Male. - Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, xxiii
For the payments made to the painters working in the (1964), 163.
chapel, see A. M. Corbo, in Palatmo, xi (1967), 301 ft. Tassi and Gentileschi, friends who had become
21. According to "Bellori, ed. 1672, 369, he changed enemies in 16 12, worked once again together in 161
an angel into the Virgin. in the Villa Lante at Bagnaia (near Rome). They were
22. Further to the complicated history of the Quirinal joined there by the Cavaliere d'Arpino; see L. Salerno
Palace; J. Wasserman inXLV (1963), 205 ft.,
Art Bull., in Connoisseur, CXLVI (i960), 157.
with full documentation; also G. Briganti, // Palazzo 35. See M. La Villa Borghese, Rome,
Sacripanti,
del Qutrinale, Rome, 1962, 1-29. 1933, with new documents and full bibliography.
23. J. Hess, Agostino Tassi, Munich, 1935, believed 36. 36. The loggia [9] has incorrectly been attributed
was executed in two campaigns, 1 6 1 - 1
that the frieze 1 to Ponzio by Venturi, Stona dell' Arte, xi, ii, 905,
and 1616-17. His conclusions have been rejected by figure 837, and others, but the new building period
recent research; see Chiarini in Boll. d'Arte, xlv only started after November 16 13, when the villa was
(i960), 367, and the full discussion by G. Briganti purchased by Scipione Borghese. .^t that time Ponzio
(last Note), 34. In addition, E. Schleier in Burl. Mag., was dead.
Civ (1962), 255, and W. Vitzthum, ibid., cvi (1964), 37. 37. For the Acqua Paola and urban planning under
215- Paul V, see C. H. Heilmann, Burl. Mag., cxii (1970),
24. W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag., cvii (1965), 468 ft'. - 656 For the dates, see Hibbard, op. cit., loi (docu-
ft".
Spadarino (see Chapter 4, Note 17) also received ments). The engineering problems of this and the
(relatively small) payments. R. Longhi, Paragone, x smaller 'Fontana di Ponte Sisto' were in the hands of
(1959), no. 117, 29, claims on stylistic grounds that Domenico Fontana's brother, Giovanni (1540 1614).
the Veronese artists Bassetti, Ottino, and Turchi had The latter fountain consists of one triumphal arch,
minor by Briganti.
shares, a view accepted designed by Vasanzio in 161 2- 13; it stood at the end
25. A good deal of ink has been spilled over this of Via Giulia and was moved to the other side of the
problem, since Longhi opened the discussion ( Vita Tiber in 1897. On Giovanni Fontana, the most dis-
Artistica, (1926), 123); see the last two Notes for
1 tinguished water engineer of the period, see Donati,
further bibliographical guidance. Artisti ticinesi, Bellinzona, 1942.
26. For other paintings in the palace by Tassi, Orazio For these and other fountains, see also D'Onofrio,
Gentileschi, and Antonio Carracci, see Briganti, op. Lefontane di Roma, Rome, 1957, 147, 149, and/)d.«7w.
at., 41 passim. 38. 38. For the collection, see C. P. Landon, Galene
27. Documents 26 September 1609-16 February Giustiniani, Paris, 1812. The collection has been re-
1612; see Briganti, op. cit., 30. constructed in some articles by L. Salerno in Burl.
28. See pp. 34., 35, 83 ft". Mag., CI! (i960), 21, 93, 135. Many of the Marchese's
34. 29. On Scipione Borghese's collection, see J. A. F. pictures formed the nucleus of the Berlin Museum.
Orbaan, Documentt sul barocco, Rome, 1920, and F. For the Palazzo Giustiniani in Rome,
Toesca insee I.
Noack in Rep.f. Kunstw., L (1929). Boll. d'Arte, XLH (1957), 296, and Burl. Mag., Cil
30. According to Hibbard, Palazzo Borghese (above. (i960), 166.
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER I 509
For Giustiniani and other Roman patrons see also SS. Nereo and Achilleo also R. Krautheimer, in Essays
Haskell, Patrons. in the History ofArt presented to R. Wittkomer, London,
The decoration of Vincenzo Giustiniani's palace at 1967, 174 fl'.
Bassano di Sutri north of Rome gives an excellent idea 41. 49. It is interesting in this connexion that between
of the catholicity of this patron's During the taste. 1570 and 1693 twenty-five Jesuit martyrs alone were
first decade of the seventeenth century worked here beatified or canonized, twenty of them before 1630.
side by side the Florentine Antonio Tempesta, the 50. E. Male, in his classic work on the art after the
Genoese Bernardo Castello, the Bolognese Domeni- Council of Trent, difterentiates correctly between (i)
chino and Albani, and, in addition, the strange Man- traditional subjects which live on without considerable
nerist eccentric Paolo Guidotti (c. 1569- 1629). The (ii) the recasting of old subjects, and (iii) the
changes,
palace and its decoration has been the subject of illu- largebody of entirely new themes. - See also E.
minating articles by P. Portoghesi, M. V. Brugnoli, Kirschbaum in Gregonanum, xxvi, 100 ff. and L. Reau,
and I. Faldi in Boll. d'Arte, XLii (1957), 222-95. Iconographie de I'arl chretien, Paris, 1955, 1, 457.
39. E. Rodocanachi, Aveiitures d'lin grand seigneur 51. Ponnelle and Bordet, op. ctt. (Note 5), 413.
itatien, Paris [n.d.], and A. Banti, Europa Millesenen- 42. 52. Among the Flemish artists in Rome shortly
tosei - diano di viaggui di Bernardo
Bizom, Milan, before and after 1600 were, apart from Rubens and
1942. On Roncalli see also P. Pouncy in Burl. Mag., Paul Brill, Willem van Nieulandt and his nephew of
xciv(i952), 356. the same name, Sebastian Vranx, Jan Bruegel, and
40. W. Friedlaender, Caravaggio Studies, Princeton, Josse de Momper. See L. van Puyvelde, La pemture
1955- flamande a Rome, Brussels, 1950.
39. 41. Fullest information about Agucchi and his 43. 53. For this and the following see M. Vaes in
circle in D. Mahon, Studies in Seicento Art and Theory, Melanges Hulin de Loo, Brussels, 1931, 309 ff.
London, 1947. 54. Anton Mayer, Das Lehen und die VVerke der
42. Only a fragment of the treatise survives, incor- Briider Alatthaeus und Paul Bril, Leipzig, 1910;
porated into the preface of Simon Guillain's etchings Rudolf Baer, Paul Bril. Studten zur Entrpicklungs-
after Annibale Carracci's drawings of Bolognese geschichte der Landschaftsmaleret urn 1600, Munich,
artisans (1646); see Mahon, op. at. 1930; G. T. Faggin, Paragone, xvi, no. 185 (1965),
in
43. R. Lee, Art Bull., xxxiii (1951), 205. 21 ff., with a catalogue of Paul Brill's easel paintings
44. W. Friedlaender, op. ctt., and D. IVlahon, Art and a list of dated paintings between 1587 and 1626.
Bull., XXXV (1953), 227. See also above. Note 14.
45. Agucchi, for instance, praises Caravaggio as a 55. Tassi's role as an intermediary between the
colourist, although he regards his realism as vulgar. northern and Italian genre has been emphasized in
Albani looks down with utter contempt at the whole recent studies; see below Chapter 14, Note 20.
trend inaugurated by Caravaggio. 56. This has been pointed out by E. Gombrich in his
40. 46. For the full history of construction on the basis illuminating paper 'Renaissance artistic Theory and
of new documents, see J. Hess in Scntti dt storia the Development of Landscape Painting', G.d.B.A.,
delFarte m onore di Mario Salmi, 1963, III, 215. - xa (1954).
After Longhi's death (1591) Giovan Battista Guerra 57. It is only in recent years that some progress has
(1554-1627) took over. In 1605 (date of inscription) been made in reconstructing the careers of the two
Rughesi's facade was not quite finished. All available most important figures, Pietro Paolo Bonzi ('II Gobbo
material for Matteo di Citta di Castello in Hess's dei Carracci') and Tommaso Salini. As regards the
Appendix I. former (1576-1636), whose earliest still life in the

47. The complicated early history of the church has manner of Pieter Aertsen dates from c. 1606 (private
been clarified by H. Hibbard in Art Bull., XLiii ( 1961), coll., Madrid), see E. Battisti in Commentan, v (1954),
289 (fully documented). The Theatine Francesco 290 ft. and J. Hess, ihid., 303 ft. (frescoes in the Palazzo
Grimaldi had a hand in the design, which - as Hibbard Mattel, see below, Chapter 10, Note 52). For Salini,
shows - must be regarded as an important step be- see Salerno in Commentan, ill (1952) and V (1954),
yond the Gesia towards a typically Seicento articulated 254, and Testori in Paragone, v (1954), no. 51. Salini,
and unified conception. who died, according to Baglione, aged fifty in 1625,
48. For this and other restorations in Early Christian painted flower and fruit pieces before a dark back-
taste, see G. Incisa della Rocchetta, 'Cesare Baronio ground, with the objects close to the picture plane
restauratore di luoghi sacri', in Cesare Baronio. Siritti ('invenzioni molto capricciose e bizarre', Baglione).
vari, 1963, 323 and E. Hubala, 'Roma sotterranea
ft., See also R. Longhi, Paragone, i (1950), no. i, who
barocca . . .', in Das Miinster, xviii (1965), 157 For fl". started the recent discussions. In this context belong
BIBLOSARTE
510 •
NOTES TO CHAPTERS I AND 2
also the still lifcs by Fede Galizia (1578- 1630); see S. Player (Leningrad), and the Medusa (Uffizi). The
Bottari, Arte Antica e Moderna, VI, no. 24 (1963), 309, pictures of the early Roman period are difficult to
and idettiy Fede Galizia, Trent, 1965. arrange in a precise sequence, and their chronology
See also the older papers by Marangoni, Riv. d'Arte, will remain, to a certain extent, the subject of contro-
X ( 1 9 1 7), and Hoogewerft Dedalo, v ( 1 923-4). Charles
, 1 versy. Perhaps the most thorough attempt at establish-
Sterling's La nature niurte de Vantiqmte a nos. jours, ing a chronology was undertaken by D. Mahon, Burl.
Paris, 1952, contains many suggestive ideas. Mag., xciv (1952), 19. Interesting revisions were pro-
58. This may be the place to refer to Ottavio Leoni posed by E. .Arslan, Arte Antica e Moderna, 11 (1959),
(Rome, 578- 630), whose
1 1 activity in Rome in the 191; see also B. Joffroy, Le Dossier Caravage, Paris,
first quarter of the seventeenth century was entirely 1959, especially 300 ft., 331.
devoted to portraiture, especially to portrait drawings 8. From 1599 onwards all the important pictures are
in black and red chalk, to portrait engravings, and, to datable within a fairly narrow margin. 1599- 1600: the
a lesser extent, portrait paintings. His well-known lateral paintings in the Contarelli Chapel, S. Luigi de'
sober renderings of sitters have preserved for us a Francesi. There were, however, not three, but four
veritable pantheon of Roman artists, of professional paintings in all, since Caravaggio's first altarpiece of
persons and clerics. H.-W. Kruft, who published St Matthew and the Angel was rejected and bought by
Leoni's album in the Biblioteca Marucelliana, Flor- the Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani. (With the rest of
ence, containing 27 portrait drawings of artists (in the Giustiniani collection it went to the Kaiser Fried-
Storia delVarte, no. 4 (1969), 447 f[.), also suggested rich Museum, Berlin, and was destroyed in 1945.) The
a link between Leoni's interpretation of portraiture second St Matthew, substituted for the rejected ver-
and the aesthetic views of the Academy of St Luke, of sion, is in situ; both versions were painted between
which Leoni was Principe in 16 14. February and September 1602 (H. Rottgen, Zeitschr.
f. Kunstg. (1965), 54 ft'.). The earlier lateral panels, the
CHAPTER 2 Calling of St Matthew and the Martyrdom of St
Matthew, particularly the 'Martyrdom', contain many
45. I. For a re-appraisal of both Caravaggio's and rQ\ta\m% pentimenti (L. Venturi and G. Urbani, Studi
Annibale's art, prepared in many studies of the last radiografici sul Caravaggio, Rome, 953 1 ; for the recent
thirty years, the reader may now to the books by
turn restoration of all the paintings of the chapel, see the
D. Mahon, Studies m Seicento Art and Theory, Lon- detailed reports in Boll. dell'Istiluto Centrale del Res-
don, 1947; W. Friedlaender, Caravaggio Studies, taur 0, 1966). - 1 600- 1 : Cruciji.xion ofS t Peter and Con-
Princeton, 1955; R. Wittkower, The Drawings of the version of St Paul, Cerasi Chapel, S. Maria del Popolo.
Carracci, London, 1952; and D. Posner, Anmhale - 1602-4: Deposition of Christ, painted for St Philip
Carracci, London, 1971. Neri's church, the Chiesa Nuova, now Vatican Gallery.
2. On Peterzano, see C. Baroni, L'Arte, N.s. xi (1940), - 1604-5: Madonna di Loreto, S. Agostino, Rome. -
173 ft., with further references, and M. Calvesi, Boll. 1605 : Madonna dei Palafrenieri, painted for St Peter's,
d'Arte, XXXIX (1954). now Borghese Gallery (for the date see P. Delia Per-
3. He was 'about twenty', according to Giulio gola, Paragone, ix (1958), no. 105, 72). - 1605-6: the
Mancini, Caravaggio's earliest biographer. Death of the Virgin, for S. Maria della Scala, now
4. All the documents are now available in English Louvre, Paris; the Madonna of the Rosary, painted for
translation in Professor Friedlaender's book. See also Modena, now Vienna Gallery (finished, according to
S. Samek Ludovici, Vita di Caravaggio. Dalle testi- Friedlaender's plausible suggestion, by another hand).
momanze del suo tempo, Milan, 1956; annotated texts - 1607: The Seven Acts of Mercy, Chiesa del Monte
of all the sources and documents. Naples; Flagellation of Christ, S.
della Misericordia,
5. On Gramatica, see R. Longhi, Proporziom, i Domenico Maggiore, Naples. - 1608: Portrait of A to
(1943)1 54, and A. Marino, in L'Arte, nos. 3-4 (1968), de Vignacourt, Louvre, Paris (doubted by Longhi);
47 ff- Beheading of St John the Baptist, Cathedral, La Val-
6.During this period he painted the Sick Bacchus letta, Malta; Burial of St Lucy, S. Lucia, Syracuse. -
and the Boy with the Fruit Basket, both in the Bor- 1608-9: Adoration of the Shepherds and Raising of
ghese Gallery and originally in the possession of the Lazarus,Museo Nazionale, Messina. - 1609: Adora-
Cavaliere d'Arpino. tion with St Francis and St Lawrence, Oratorio di S.
7. Among the pictures in the Cardinal's collection Lorenzo, Palermo. Apart from the Vignacourt por-
were The Musical Party (Metropohtan Museum, New trait, this list contains only the large altarpieces.
York), the Fortune Teller (Louvre version?), the Card 46. 9. Though hardly ever discussed, it is still an open
Sharpers (formerly Palazzo Sciarra, Rome), the Lute question whether pictures like the Boy with the Fruit
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER 2 511
Basket, the Musical Party, or the Boy bitten by a Dead Christ in the Brera. For the whole problem of
Lizard (Longhi Coll.) were painted with a moralizing extreme foreshortening, see Kurt Rathe, Die .ius-
or allegorizing intent. drucksjunktton extrem verkiirzter Figuren, London,
10. In his 'Life' of Caravaggio, Bagiione remarks 1938.
generally that the young artist was in the habit of 49. 19. For the iconography of the Deposition, see the
painting self-portraits in a mirror, specifying a 'Bac- excellent study by M. A. Graeve, Art Bull., XL (1958),
chus' guise. Other early pictures such as the Boy 223.
bitten by a Lizard and the head of Medusa may con- 50. 20. Most of Caravaggio's late pictures, painted in
fidently be regarded as self-portraits. great haste, are in poor condition. In recent years some
1 1 The relation of the Bacchus to 'the sensuous have been carefully cleaned and restored, among them
idealism of certain Hadrianic representations' (W. the two pictures mentioned in the text. On this occa-
Friedlaender, op. ctt., 85) should not, however, be sion the extremely high quality of the Lazarus was
overlooked. revealed, whose authenticity had sometimes been
12. For the process of revaluing the ancient gods doubted.
after the Renaissance see the admirable account in F. 52. 21. The Borghese David with the Head of Goliath
Saxl's Antike Cotter in der Spdtrenatssance, Leipzig, (c. 1605), for instance, follows a representational type
1927. which was already current in the fifteenth century and
13. A though burlesque, reorientation may
similar, ultimately derives from illuminations in manuscripts
be observed in Nicolo Frangipani's Bacchus and of Perseus with the head of Medusa. For the rest, the
Buffoon, which was painted in Venice at about the reader must be referred to W. Friedlaender's thorough
same moment (Venice, Querini Stampalia Gallery; iconographical studies.
Venturi, ix, 7, figure 55). 22. Bellori, in his biography of Caravaggio, men-
14. Still lifes of extraordinary perfection are the rule tions that he painted this picture twice over, an asser-
in Caravaggio's early work, see, e.g., the Borghese Boy tion which recent X-ray studies have proved correct
wtth the Fruit Basket, the Leningrad Lute Player, and, (see above. Note 8).
of a slightly later date, the National Gallery Supper at 53. 23. The line of the neck of the Virgin in the Doria
Emmaus. It comes as no surprise, therefore, to find Repose on the Flight recurs number of pictures, e.g.
in a
amongst the earliest works a self-contained still life, the Penitent Magdalen and the Madonna di Loreto.
the Basket of Fruit (Milan, Ambrosiana). It has been 54. 24. See Chapter 3, p. 68.
pointed out, however, that this picture may be the 25. The break, of course, is not radical but was fore-
fragment of a larger composition, a hypothesis borne shadowed in early pictures.
out by the repainted buft background. See H. Swar- 26. Two versions are extant, one in the Doria Gallery,
zenski, Boston Museum Bulletin, Lii (1954), whose the other in the Capitoline Museum, Rome. D. .Mahon
attribution of the Boston still life to Caravaggio can (Burl. Mag., xcv (1953), 213) tried to show that the
hardly be accepted, in spite of his pertinent discussion latter picture, for long regarded as a copy, is the one
of the whole problem of early still lifes. mentioned by Bellori as being in the collection of
48. 15. According to a stimulating hypothesis by D. Cardinal Pio. See also D. Mahon and D. Sutton,
Heikamp, Paragone, xvii, no. 199 (1966), 62 ft., the Artists in Seventeenth-Century Rome, Loan Exhibi-
shield of Medusa has to be regarded as a tournament tion, Wildenstein, London, 1955, no. 17, with a full
weapon rather than as a painting. discussion of the intricacies of the subject matter.
16. Two of the early religious pictures share the same Further, see E. Battisti in Commentan, VI (1955),
quality: the Repentant Magdalen (Rome, Galleria 181 whose researches in the Pio archives seem to
ft.,
Doria-Pamphili) and the St Catherine (Lugano, Thys- militate against Mahon's identification. But L. Saler-
sen Coll.). Their interest
is largely focused on still life no, G. Mancini. Consider azioni sulla pittura, Rome,
and embroidered dresses. For the iconography of the 1957, II, note 891, gives convincing reasons for linking
Magdalen, see I. Toesca, J.W'.C./., xxiv (1961), 114. the Pio and Capitoline versions.
17. The date of this painting is still controversial. 55. 27. The better of the two existing versions seems
Dates as far apart as 1594 and 1602 have been sug- to be that in the Wadsworth .'Vthenaeum, Hartford,
gested. My previous assumption 'f. 1597' seems too Connecticut, see Mostra del Caravaggio, Catalogo,
early; the picture can hardly have been painted before i95i,no. 17.
1600. See M. Levey, National Callery Catalogues. The 56. 28. Dr Friedlaender in his recent book does not
Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Italian Schools, quite agree with this interpretation of the sources. I
London, 1971,49-53. cannot do more here than state his case, without being
18. The reader may be reminded of Mantegna's able to argue the matter out. It is true, however, that
BIBLOSARTE
512 • NOTES TO CHAPTERS 2 AND 3
the Madiinua dei Pulajreiiien was in St Peter's until cuted by I.ucio Massari. There is no reason to accept
about 1620. Only then did Cardinal Seipione Bor- this view. The picture is signed and dated and original
ghese incorporate the picture into his collection; see drawings by .Annibale are extant.
J.Hess, Cummentan, v (1954), 271 ft. 7. See, e.g., E. K. Waterhouse, Baroijue Painting in
29. For a detailed discussion of the relationship be- Rome, London, 1937, 7, where the term is used in spite
tween C.aravaggio's art and the reform movement the of certain reservations.
reader must be referred to W. Friedlaender's Cara- 8. The history and fallacies of the term 'eclectic' have
vaggui SiiiJtes, 121ft. been discussed by U. Mahon, op. cit. See also R. W.
Lee Art Bull., xxxiii (1951), 204 ft., .Mahon, ihid.,
in
xxxiv (1952), 226 ft., the apt remarks by B. Berenson
CHAPTER 3 in his Caravaggio, London, 1953, 78 ft., and Witt-
kower in Aspects of the Eighteenth Century, ed. E.
57. I. Translation in E. G. Holt, Literary Sources of Wasserman, The Johns Hopkins Press, 1965.
An History, Princeton, 1947, 329 ft. 62. 9. Even in Lodovico's most Baroque pictures there
2. D. Mahon's Studies
See the survey in in Seicento is a Mannerist undercurrent. Figures often lack a firm
Art and Theory, London, 1947, 212 ft. stance and - particularly in later works - gestures may
58. 3. Their collaboration is particularly puzzling in be as ill-defined as they are outre and eccentric. Such
the cycle of frescoes ofjhe Palazzo Fava (c. 1583-4) figures as the donors who appear in the Cento altar-
with scenes from Virgil's Aeneid as well as in that of piece like intruders from outside are a well-known
the Palazzo Magnani-Salem which illustrates
( 1 588 ft'.) Mannerist formula (see, e.g., Passarotti's Presentation
the early history of Rome after Livy M. Brown, (see J. in the Temple, S. Maria della Purificazione, Bologna).
Burl. Mag., Cix (1967), 710 ft., and opposing Brown, 10. According to the Alostra dei Carracci (op. cit.,
A. W. A. Boschloo, ihid., ex (1968), 220 f.). It is easier 128), the Martyrdom of St Angelus should be dated
to difterentiate between the three masters in the c. 1598-9.
frescoes of the Palazzo Sampieri-Talon {c. 1593-4). 63.1 1. Examples: The Calling of St Matthew of c. 1605
See Bodmer, Lodovico Carracci, Burg, 1939, 118 ft., (Bologna, Pinacoteca), the Assumption of the Virgin,
with further references. c. 1605-8 (Modena, Galleria Estense), St Charles
The paper by S. Ostrow in Arte Antua e Moderiia, adoring the Child, c. 161 5 (Forli, Pinacoteca), and the
III, no. 9 (i960), 68, is concerned with the iconography Paradise off. 1616 (Bologna, S. Paolo) with its im-
of the Palazzo Fava cycle. mensely elongated boneless figures.
4. The character and history of the Carracci Aca- 12. The iconography of the only canvas, Hercules
demy are discussed by H. Bodmer in the periodical at the Crossroads, now in the Naples Museum, was
Bologna, XI 11 (1935), 61 ft. Bodmer dates the founda- exhaustively discussed by E. Panofsky, Hercules am
tion of theAccademiadegli Incamminati in 1582. G.C. Scheidewege, Leipzig, Berlin, 1930. J. R. Martin, Art
Cavalli, the compiler of the Regesto published in the Bull., xxxviii (1956), 91, who threw new fight on the
Catalogue of the Alostra dei Carracci, Bologna, 1956, iconography of the whole cycle, showed that the pro-
76, believes the date tobe 1585. See also J. H. Beck gramme was conceived by Fulvio Orsini.
and M. Fanti, 'La sede dell'Accademia dei Carracci', 13. J. R. Martin, The Farnese Gallery, Princeton,
Strenna stoma bolognese, xvii (1967), 53 ft. For all 1965, 51 ff^., with further literature on the complicated
dates of the vite of the Carracci the Regesto should be question of chronology; see also the pertinent obser-
consulted. vations by D. Posner, in.'ir/5;///.,XLViii(i966), iii ft".
5. For .Agostino's development as an engraver see H. 14. Martin, op. cit., 52 ft'.
Bodmer, Die Grapliischen Kiinste, iv (1939) and v 15. Ibid., 144 f.
(1940). .^gostino's importance is nowadays generally For the symbolical interpretation the reader had
16.
underrated. With his systematic studies of parts of the to be referred until recently to Bellori, to Tietze's
body, of eyes, ears, arms, and feet (engraved after his basic article, and to Panofsky in Oud Holland, L (1933).
death and for 150 years frequently republished), he These earlier attempts have been superseded by the
became the ancestor of academic teaching; see R. full discussion in J. R. Martin's Farnese Gallery.
Wittkower, The Drawings of the Carracci at Windsor Nevertheless, today we are as far apart as ever regard-
Castle, London, 1952. The Vienna pictures, published ing the ultimate meaning of this festive decoration.
by O. K.\irz, J. W.C.L, xiv (1951), reveal Agostinoasa While Martin stresses the neo-Platonic overtones, C.
sophisticated and entertaining master of mythological Dempsey, in a remarkable paper (see Bibliography),
allegory. submits that a punning, satirical, mock-heroic spirit
6. Tietze believed that this picture was mainly exe- informs the classical scenes of the ceiling.
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS 3 AND 4 •
513
64. 17. Preserved in drawings; see Tietze's article; Pietd or the Bridgewater Danae (destroyed), fully
Wittkower, Carracci Drawings (op. ci/.); D. Mahon, illustrates this development.
Mostra dei Carracci, Disegni, Bologna, 1956, 108. 69. 27.See D. Mahon, Studies, op. cit., 204.
65. 18. See Karoline Lanckoronska's article in H lerier 70. 28. This is particularly impressive in the Louvre
Jfahrb., IX (1935). For the history and development of Virgin with St Luke of 1592.
ceiling decoration see F. Wurtemberger, 'Die Manie- 29. The best of six lunettes, painted, according to
ristische Deckenmalerei in IVlittelitalien', Rom.Jahrh. Bellori, for the chapel of the Palazzo .Aldobrandini,
j. Kunstg., IV (1940), and A. F. Blunt, 'Illusionist and executed with the help of pupils. H. Hibbard
Decorations in Central Italian Painting of the Renais- (Burl. .Mag., cvi (1964), 183) has found documentary
sance', ôwrna/ 0/ the R. Society of Arts, cvii (1959), proof according to which Albani together with other
313. For the early history of quadrat ura painting, see collaborators worked on these lunettes in 1605 and
the illuminating paper by J. Schulz, Burl. Alag., cm again in 1613. For the whole problem and a new
(1960,90. attempt to distribute the execution among .Annibale,
19. For the brothers Alberti in Rome, see M. V. Albani, Lanfranco, and Badalocchio, see Cavalli in
Brugnoli, Boll. d'Arti\ XLV (i960), 223-46. L'Ideale classico del Seicento in Italia e la pittura del
66. 20. From Alberti's De Pittitra on it was regarded paesaggw. Catalogue, Bologna, 1962, 61, with further
as an unassailable dogma that 'history painting' (in the literature. E. Borea in Paragone, Xiv (1963), no. 167,
widest sense) stood at the top of the hierarchical scale 22, gives Domenichino a share in the lunettes.
of artistic activity. 71. 30. A more
thorough investigation of this problem
68. 21. Later, Domenichino contributed most to the would probably reveal that their activity in this sphere
completion of the gallery (see J. R. Martin, Boll, belongs to a trend current in Bologna in the circle of
d' .Arte, XLI\ (1959), 41 ; Farnese Gallery, 62 ff.), while such artists as Calvaert (who came from .Antwerp),
the contributions of Lanfranco and Badalocchio are Passarotti, Prospero Fontana, and others. The
more problematical. D. Mahon has attempted to dis- Butcher's Shop, published by me (Carracci Drawings,
tribute a number of subsidiary scenes among these op. cit.) as Agostino, was attributed to .\nnibale at the
three hands; see 'Notes sur Tachevement de la Galerie Carracci Exhibition. |. R. Martin has shown (Art
Farnese et les dernieres annees d'Annibal Carrache", Bull., XLV (1963), 265) that this work,
far from being a
in R. Bacou, Dessins des Carraches, Louvre Exhibi- 'naive' genre painting,combines figures from .Michel-
tion, 1961, 57. See also below. Chapter 4, Note 20. angelo's Sacrifice of Noah on the Sistine Ceiling and
22. J. R. Martin wanted to identify this famous scene Raphael's fresco of the same subject in the Vatican
as 'Glaucus and Scylla' and C. Dempsey (in Zeitschr. Logge.
f. Kunstg., XXIX (1966), 67 ft.) as 'Thetis borne to her 31. Few caricatures by .Annibale have so far been
Wedding'. traced; see Wittkower, Carracci Drawings, 18. I can-
23. J. Anderson, in Art Bull., Lil (1970), 41 ft., not fully agree with some of the attributions made by
demonstrated convincingly that Agostino's cycle, de- W. Boeck in .MUnchner Jahrbuch der hildenden Kunst,
pendent on classical epithalamic poetry, was painted V (1954),54 ft. As for the problem of early caricatures,
1
as part of the celebrations for the arrival of the bride see Brauer-Wittkower, Die Zeichnungen des Gian-
of Ranuccio I, Margherita Aldobrandini. The pro- iorenzo Bernini, Berlin, 193 1; W. R. Juynboll, Het
gramme was probably devised by the Bolognese komische genre in de tlaliaansche schilderkunst, Leiden,
humanist Claudio .Achillini. 1934; E. Kris, Psychoanalytic E.xplorations m Art,
Bologna was
24. Agostino's funeral in a memorable London, 1953 (in, ch. 7, with E. Gombrich); also M.
occasion, during which Lucio Faberio, a member of Gregori, 'Nuovi accertamenti in Toscana sulla pittura
the literary Academy of the Gelati, delivered the "caricata" e giocosa'. Arte Antica e Moderna, nos. 13-
funeral oration. This speech, important for the crea- 16 (1961), 400 ft'., and W. Boeck, Inkunaheln der
tion of the 'eclectic legend', has been thoroughly Bildniskarikalur hei Bologneser Zeichnern des ij.
analysed by D. Mahon in Studies in Seicento .Art, Jahrhunderts, Stuttgart, 1968.

135 ft"., and in J. H'.C. I., xvi (1953), 306.
For work executed during the period of Anni-

25. CHAPTER 4
bale's illness, mainly by studio hands, see D. Posner
in Arte Anlica e Moderna, in, no. 12 (i960), 397; and 73. I. Orazio Gentileschi died on 7 February 1639.
below. Chapter 4, Notes 20, 21. Documentary evidence found by .\. .M. Crino (Burl.
26. A comparison of pictures like the early Roman Mag., cm (1961), 145) settles the old dispute.
Coronation of the Virgin (London, D. .Mahon Coll.) 2. B. Nicolson (see Bibliography) has assembled the
with works dating from after 1600, like the Naples little we know about Manfredi.
BIBLOSARTE
514 NOTES TO CHAPTER 4
3. v. Martinelli, 'Le date dclla nascita e dell' arrivo 9. Baglione's career has been reconstructed by Carla
a Roma di Clarlo Saraceni', Studi Romani, vii (1959), Guglielmi, Boll. d'Arte, XXXIX (1954). It appears that
679- the artist vacillated between progressive trends with-
4. Valentin's Christian name is unknown. It is not out absorbing them fully. After his Caravaggesque
Moise, as is usually maintained, which is simply a phase (see V. Martinelli, .4rte antica e moderna, 11, 5
misunderstood version of 'Monsii'. Caracciolo and (1959), 82), he turned 'Bolognese' (second decade,
Artemisia Gentileschi will be discussed with the Nea- Rinaldo and Arniida, Rospigliosi); in the third decade
politan school. For the Dutch, Flemish, and French he followed Guercino's Baroque (St Sebastian, S.
Caravaggisti the reader must be referred to other Maria dell'Orto, 1624). From c. 1630 on the quality of
volumes of the Pelican History of Art. For the litera- his work rapidly declines.
ture on the artists mentioned in this chapter, see also For Baglione's career, see also I. Faldi in Diz. Bw-
Bibliography. grafico degli Italiam, v, 1963, 187. For the involved
74. 5. See R. Longhi, Prnporzlnni, I
(1943), 21 f. story of his painting of Divine Love, see Martinelli,
Before the Caravaggesque phase, which includes such loc. cit.,and L. Salerno, Burl. Mag., Cli (i960), 103;
works as the Crowning with Thorns (Varese, Lizza- also R. Longhi, Paragone, xiv (1963), no. 163, 25.
Bassi Coll.), Longhi has reconstructed an earlier 75. 10. SeeS. Bottari, Commentari,\\ (1955), 108, who
Elsheimer-like period. In this he placed, no doubt published Borgianni's first picture, the St Gregory
correctly, the small Berlin David and St Christopher, (Catania, Palazzo Cerami), signed and dated 1593.
previously attributed to Elsheimer. Pictures such as Consequently Borgianni was probably born earlier
the St Cecilia and the Angel (Dr Bloch Coll.) and the than was hitherto believed.
Virgin and Child (Florence, Contini-Bonacossi Coll.), H. E. Wethey has successfully reconstructed Bor-
with their strong Florentine qualities, may belong to a gianni's early career {Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), 148 ff'.);
pre-Elsheimer period. One wonders whether the im- c. 1595-8, Rome; c. 1598-1602, first Spanish trip;
pressive SS. Cecilia, V'alerianus, and Tthurtius in the 1603, Rome; 1604-5, second Spanish trip. See I.
Brera, one of Orazio's masterpieces, usually dated Toesca's letter (378), Wethey's response (381), and
during his stay Marches (before 1617-21 ?),may
in the Toesca's rejoinder (ibid., cvii (1965), i,t, f.).
not be a few years earlier and nearer the time when the For Saraceni see the unprinted New York Uni-
1 1 .
impact of Caravaggio was most in evidence. versity thesis by Eve Borsook, 1953, with an excellent
For Orazio's work in the Marches, see Mezzetti, catalogue of the artist's aeuvre. See also Martinelli's
L'Arte, n.s. (1930), 541 fif., and Emiliani, Para-
I paper (Note 3, above), and F. Arcangeli, Paragone,
gone, IX (1958), no. 103, 38 (partly out of date); also H. xvii, no.
199 (1966), 46 ff. Finally, the satisfactory
Voss in Acropoli, i (i 960-1), 99 (for the frescoes in the monograph by Cavina, 1968 (see Bibliography), which
Cappella del Crocefisso, Fabriano Cathedral, datable contains most critical material. Some of my dating
between 16 13 and 16 17); for his stay in Paris (r. 1623- below from that given by Cavina.
differs slightly
5), see C. Sterling, Burl. Mag., c (1958), 112; for his For Elsheimer's relations with Saraceni and other
England (document of 1626), Burl. Mag., C
arrival in Italian painters, see the excellent catalogue of the
M. Crino, ;W.,cii (i960), 264
(1958), 253. See also A. Elsheimer Exhibition in the Stadelsches Kunst-
(documents) Crino and B. Nicolson, ibid., cm ( 1961),
; institut, Frankfurt, 1966-7 (written by Jutta Held).
144; E. Schleier, ihid., civ (1962), 432; Crino, ihid., 76. 12. Replicas in Bologna, Vienna, Hanover, Lille,
cix (1967), 533. etc. testify to the popularity of the picture.
6. The pictures are mentioned here in the sequence 13. The picture was carefully cleaned in 1968, see
in which they were painted according to H. Voss ( The Attivita della Soprintendenza alle Gallerie del Lazio,
Connoisseur, CXLIV (1959), 163). Rome (1969), 27.
For Gentileschi's Lot and his Daughters, also dating 14. See the famous nine mythological scenes in land-
from the early 1620s and existing in several autograph scape settings (on copper) in the museum at Naples.
versions, see R. W. Bissell, in Bulletin. The National Very close to Saraceni is the small group of impressive
Gallery of Canada, Ottawa, xiv (1969), 16 ft'. pictures by an anonymous artist, possibly of French
7. See J. Hess in English Miscellany (1952), no. 3. origin and now assembled under the pseudonym
8. But Van Dyck's influence makes its appearance 'Pensionante del Saraceni' (Longhi, Proporzioni, i
e.g. in the Prado Finding ofAloses, painted in London ( 1 943), 23). Saraceni's French contacts are well known.
and listed in 1 636 in the inventory of Philip I V's paint- During the last year of his life he was assisted by Jean
ings; see J. Costello, J.W.C.I., xiii (1950), 252. As Le Clerc from Nancy (c. 1590-c. 1633). After his re-
shown by E. Harris, Burl. Mag., cix (1967), 86, the turn to Venice Saraceni was commissioned with the
picture was taken to Madrid in the summer of 1633. large Doge Enrico Dandulo preaching the Crusade in St
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER 4 •
515
Mark's for the Sala di Gran Consiglio in the Palazzo the Catalogo, in addition to H. Voss, Die Maleret des
Ducale, but would seem that Le Clerc was wholly
it Barnck in Rom, Berlin, 1924, and Longhi, Proporzioni,
responsible for the work and that he carried it out be- 1(1943)-
tween 1620 and 1622. Other 'part-time' Caravaggistt will be discussed in
According to R. Pallucchini ( Arte Veneta, xvii (1963), their proper place.
178) Le Clerc also executed the Annunctalwn in the 18. Pieter van Laer's appearance and character
Parish Church at Santa Giustina (Feltre), with Sara- earned him the name of Bamboccw, which can be
ceni's signature and the date '1621' (anachronistically translated as childish, simple. By work
referring to his
- for the artist had died in 1620). as Bambocciata, meaning a trifle, thepun is evident.
For Le Clerc in Italy, see N. I vanoft in Criiica d 'Arte, The term remains today to designate the whole genre.
IX (1962), 62, and for his post-Italian career, F. G. On Van Laer see Hoogewerft", Oud Holland, l (1932)
Pariset in La Revue des Arts, viii (1958), 67. and LI (1933) and G. Briganti, Proporzioni, ill (1950)
15. For Valentin, see R. Longhi, ibid., 59 (with auvre and idem, I Bamboccianti, Catalogo, 1950. The Wiirz-
catalogue) and M. Hoog, ibid., x {i960), 267. burg dissertation by A. Janeck on Pieter van Laer
77. 16. An ethereally painted halo seems to surround (1968, see Bibliography) supersedes the earlier litera-
the head, but the inscription proves that Serodine's ture. Janeck does not accept the painting of illus-
father is represented. tration 28 as autograph. It is here reproduced as a
For a revision of Longhi's chronology of Serodine's characteristic piece of the genre rather than as a
work, see B. Nicolson, Terhrugghen, London, 1958, 1 characteristic Van Laer.
(note).W. Schoenenberger's Giovanni Serodme, pit- 78. 19. See .\. m France
Blunt, Art and Architecture
tore di Ascona, Basel, 1957, was written in 1954 as a 1500- 1700 (Pelican History of Art), Harmondsworth,
dissertation without a knowledge of Longhi's work or 1953 (paperback edition, based on 2nd hardback edi-
of Serodine's correct birth-date (1600). Although not tion, Harmondsworth, 1973 references in the present
;
published until 1957, the author left his text (including volume are to the first, hardback, edition); W. R.
patent errors) unchanged, but added some new facts Crelly, The Painting of Simon Vouet, New Haven and
in a preamble, among them documentary evidence of London, 1962 (see also the review by D. Posner, Art
the artist's death on 21 December 1630. - P. Askew, Bull., XLV (1963), 286). For Vouet's Italian period, see
'A Melancholy Astronomer by G. S.', Art Bull., XLVii now J. Thuilliers, 'Simon Vouet en Italic, Essai de
(1965), 121, enlarged Serodine's small auvre by a pic- catalogue critique', Saggi e memorie di sloria dell' arte,
ture in Dresden and added important iconographical IV (1965), 27 ff.
considerations. See J. Pope-Hennessy, Drawings of Domemchino

20.
17. Among other who came under Caravag-
painters at Windsor Castle, London, 1948, 14, and M. V.
gio's influence mainly during the second decade may Brugnoli in Boll. d'Arte, XLii (1957), 274; in addition
be mentioned the Veronese Pasquale Ottino (1570- to the literature given in Chapter 3, Note 21.
1630), Marcantonio Bassetti (1586- 1630), and Ales- 79. 21. D. Posner in Arte Anttcae Moderna, ill, no. 12
sandro Turchi, called L'Orbetto ( 1 578-1648), all three (i960), 397, has dealt fully with this work and the dis-
Felice Brusasorci's pupils before going to Rome (R. tribution of hands. Execution did not start until 1604.
Longhi in Proporzwni, I
(1943), 52); the Roman An- The frescoes, now in rather bad condition, are in the
gelo Caroselli (1585- 1652) and Bartolomeo Cavarozzi Museum at Barcelona and in thePrado, Madrid.
from Viterbo (r 590 1625) who were both influenced
.
1 22. Little is known about Tacconi apart from his
by Orazio Gentileschi Giovan Antonio Galli ('Spada-
; having been a pupil of .Annibale and active in Rome
rino'), a painter of real distinction (d. after 1650); between c. 1607 and 1625.
Nicolo Musso, who died in his home-town, Casale 23. In .\pril 1612 Reni was in Naples; see F. Bologna
Monferrato, c. 1620 after a stay of several years in in Paragone, xi (i960), no. 129, 54.
Rome; Alonso Rodriguez (1578 1648) from Messina, 24. Bottari-Ticozzi, Raccolta di lettere . . ., Milan,
in Rome in 1606, who followed Caravaggio in the 1822, I, 287.
second decade (A. Moir, Art Bull., .XLix (1962), 205); 25. The old puzzle of the attribution and dating of
finally Nicolas Regnier (Niccolo Renieri) from Mau- these scenes was finally resolved by the publication of
beuge (f. 1590- 1667), who appeared in Rome c. 161 the documents by G.Panofsky-Soergel, in /?rtw.Jfa/(r/>.
and settled in Venice about ten years later, where he / Kunstg., XI (1967-8), 132 ft". - The first frescoes of
stayed to the end of his days. About his early Caravag- the new palace were executed by pupils of Cristoforo
gesque phase see Voss, Zeitschr. f. b. Kunst, LViii Roncalli (1600-1). Later, in 1607-8, other late Man-
(1924). Characteristic works of all these painters were nerists, Gaspare Celio and Francesco Nappi, painted
to be seen during the 1951 Caravaggio Exhibition see ; ceilings in the palace.
BIBLOSARTE
5l6 • NOTES TO CHAPTER 4
26. For the chronology of this entry and the following Borea in Paragone, \\ (i960), no. 123, 12, and xiv
Reni entries, see H. Hibbard, in Burl. Mag., cvii (1963), no. 167, 28, favoured a date after 161 1. The
(1965), 502, and cviii (h)66), yo. issue has been settled once and for all by C^. D'Onofrio,
27. The documents were published by M. \ . Bru- La I ilia .4ldohrandini di Frascali, Rome, 1963, 126,
gnoli, in Bull. d'Artc, xiii (1957), 266 ft". w ho published the payments to Domenichino between
28. The correct dating is owed to E. Borea, Boll. November 1616 and June 1618. The whole question
d'Arle, xlvi (1961), 237. has been fully reviewed by M. Levey, I\'ational Gallery
80. 29. Contract of 4 December 1614 published by Catalogues, The Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century
Golzio, .irchivi, ix (1942), 46 ft. Italian Schools, London, 1971, 96 106.
30. J. Hess, .4gosiino Tassi, Munich, 1935, 21 f., 81. 36. It characterizes the whole classical trend that,
believed that Domenichino's Chariot of Apollo was after .Annibale's death, Raphael's influence grew
painted c. 1610 as an isolated qiiadro nportato and that rapidly.
some time later (c. 1621) the ceiling was converted by 37. See above, p. 39.
Tassi into an open sky with a qiiadratura surround. 38. See H. Hibbard in .Wiscellanea Bihliothecae Hert-
Pope-Hennessy (Domenichino Drawings., 92 on the
f.), zianae, Munich, 196 1 , 357 (documents) also E. Borea,
;
basis of original drawings, refuted this view, which Domenichino, Milan, 1965, 126, 184.
also seems contradicted by the iconographic evidence 39. In the Calling of St Andrew and St Peter the
(Saxl in Philosophy and History, Essays dedicated to figure of Christ is adapted from the Christ in Lodo-
Ernst Cassirer, Oxford, 1936, 213 ff.). Hess re- vico's Calling of St .Matthew (Bologna, Pinacoteca)
affirmed his old view in Commentari, v (1954), 314, and the oarsman from a similar figure in the Preaching
but dated The Chariot of Apullo in 16 15. of St John (ibid.).
31. L. Salerno, Commentari, ix (1958), 45. 39a. He left behind the unfinished Cappella della
32. I hid., 45 for the attribution, and passim for the Strada Cupa, a chapel in S. Maria in Trastevere, to
reconstruction of Badalocchio's ceuvre. See also yWaf- which R. E. Spear has dedicated a fully documented
stn delta pittura del Senentoemiliano(ig^gE\hih\non), article in Burl. Mag., cxi (1969), 12 ft"., 220 ff".
232, with further literature for Badalocchio. The 82. 40. For a different view, see Pope-Hennessv, op.
artist returned to Parma after Annibale's death. Back cit., 25, who should also be consulted for the sequence
in Rome after 1613, he settled in Parma in 1617. His of the execution of these frescoes.
later work, after his Annibalesque Roman period, has 41. The traditional title of the picture is incorrect. It
Parma flavour. See also D. Mahon, in Bull.
a strong 485-5 18, as K. Badt has shown in
illustrates Aeneid, v,
Wadsworth Atheneutn (1958), no. i, 1-4; E. Schleier, an illuminating paper in .Minichner fahrbuch d. bild.
in Burl. .Mag., CiV (1962), 246 ft". ; L'ideale classico del Kunst, XIII (1962), 216.
Seicento in Italia, Catal., Bologna, 1962, 63, 68. 42. It should, however, be recalled that Domeni-
33. Toesca, Boll. d'Arte, XLiv (1959), 337, and
I. chino's arch-enemy, Lanfranco, had the picture en-
Burl. Mag., civ (1962), 392, for the correct date of graved at his own expense in order to make Domeni-
these frescoes. chino's 'plagiarism' as widely known as possible.
34. The dating of these frescoes varies widely. Bos- 43. For Domenichino's landscapes, see M. Imdahl in
chetto'sdate i6oi-S{Proporzioni,n{iq.^S), i43)seems Festschrift Martin Wackernagel, Miinster, 1958, 153;
as unacceptable as that of Posse (Thieme-Becker), E. Borea, Paragone, xi (i960), no. 123, 8; L'ideale
1625. Tietze dates after 1609; Bodmer {Pantheon, classico del Seicento (Bologna Exhib. Cat., 1962); M.
XVIII (1936)), c. 1609-14. According to Albani himself Fagiolo dell'Arco, Domenichino ovvero Classicismo del
(Malvasia, work was executed after Bassano
11, 1 25) the Pnmo-Seicento, Rome, 1963, 104 (list of Domeni-
di Sutri, i.e. For reasons of style a date
after 1609. chino's landscapes in chronological sequence).
nearer to the middle of the second decade seems likely 44. Denis Calvaert (1540- 16 19), a northern .Man-
(see also Brugnoli (Note 20), 274). This dating has now neristwho had made his home at Bologna. For Albani,
been confirmed by L. Salerno, in Via del Corso, Rome see the hitherto unpublished dissertation by E. Van
(Cassa del Risparmio), 1961, 177. But his discovery of Schaack (Columbia University, 1969) with many new
a small scene representing an event of 16 17 opens a documents and ceuvre catalogue.
new problem, because Albani left Rome in 161 6. 45. In the 7'""/'''' Dream the influence of Lodovico is
35. These frescoes were usually dated much earlier, very strong. Albani must have known the picture of
in accordance with the stylistic (but as we now know, the same subject, now in the Pinacoteca, Bologna. This
misleading) evidence; see the admirable paper by L. connexion with Lodovico is interesting in view of the
Salerno Mag., cv (1963), 194, who (like others
in Burl. fact that after his arrival in Rome .\lbani was .Anni-
before him) advocated the years 1605-6. Only E. bale's collaborator in the Herrera Chapel and the .Aldo-
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS 4 AND 5 517
brandini landscapes (see pp. 78-t) and Chapter 3, Note 88. 56. Sec Hibbard, op. ctt., 358.
29). For Albani's relation to Annibale Carracci, see It worth summarizing Lanfranco's career as a
is
also M. Mahoney, Burl. Mag., civ (1962), 386. fresco painter in the second and third decade. 1616-
83. 46. The first example of this manner is the four 17: frescoes in S. .Agostino and the Qiiirinal Palace.
Venus and Diana roundels in the Galleria Borghese 1619 20: decoration of the Benediction Loggia over
which were commissioned by Cardinal Scipione Bor- the portico of St Peter's, a commission of the greatest
ghese in 1622. importance which attests to Lanfranco's reputation at
47. Payments found by H. Hibbard allow the Cruci- this time but which, though extensively prepared, was
fi.xion to be dated later than had hitherto been assumed. not executed. (Reconstruction of Lanfranco's project
The Louvre David is another example of Reni's Cara- by E. Schleier, in Revue de l' Art, no. 7 (1970), figure
vaggismo. The most impressive fusion of influences 49). 1621 3: decoration of the Cappella del Sacra-
from Caravaggio and Lodovico may perhaps be found mento, S. Paolo fuori le Mura (ruined); fully discussed
in the Colloquy between the Apostles Peter and Paul in by B. L. La Penta, Boll. d'.4rte, XLViii (1963), 54.
the Brera of ^^ 1605. 1624 5 : Villa Borghese. 1
625 7 S. Andrea della Valle.
:
48. This painting is usually dated about 161 1, but .'\fter 1627 the newly found frescoes of the Villa Muti
:
D. J. S. Pepper, Guido Reni's Activity m Rome and at Frascati; see E. Schleier, Paragone, xv (1964), no.
Bologna, i^g^-ihi4 (Columbia University Disserta- 171-59-
tion (unpublished), 1969, 219) argued persuasively For the dating of Lanfranco's easel paintings, par-
that the picture dates from as late as 161 5 16. of the first and second decade, see E. Schleier,
ticularly
49. See last Note; the Samson should probably be ihid., no. 177, 3.
dated about 1620. At the time of the dome frescoes of S. .Andrea della
84. 50. The identification of the pope is peculiarly Valle the Frenchman Francois Perrier worked for
difficult. D. Mahon (Burl. .Mag., xciii (1951), 81) re- Lanfranco. This artist was a success in Rome and after
placed the old name Paul V by that of Clement VIII. his first stay there in 1625-9 returned for a longer
This would date the portrait c. 1602, which seems hard period (1635-45), during which he executed the fres-
to accept. The sitter is almost certainly the Bolognese coes of the gallery of the Palazzo Gaetani-Ruspoli
Gregory XV and the date therefore c. 1621. (now Almagia) on the Corso; see E. Schleier, Para-
51. The old title Aurora is not quite correct. The gone, XIX (1968), no. 217, 42 ff.
frescoshows Apollo in his chariot surrounded by the 57. It has been shown by D. Mahon (5;/^/. .Mag., Lxx
dancing figures of the Horae and Aurora hovering on (1937)) that the young Guercino was influenced by
clouds before him and strewing flowers on the dark Scarsellino in Ferrara, where Guercino must have
Earth below. been in about 1616. Venetian influences, transmitted
86. Lanfranco's problematical early career has
52. to him through Scarsellino, were reinforced by a visit
been investigated by L. Salerno, Burl. Mag., xciv to Venice in 1618. See also D. Mahon in the Catalogue
(1952), 188, and Commentari, ix (1958), 44, 216. See of the Guercino Exhibition of 1 968, especially pp. 20 ff".
also Maestri della pittura del Seicento emiltano (Exhib. 89. 58. This slow change in Guercino's manner has
Cat., Bologna, 1959), 214, and for Lanfranco's draw- been fully discussed by D. Mahon in Studies in Set-
ings J. Bean W. Vitzthum, Boll. d'Arte, XLVi (1961), cento Art and Theory.
106, R. Enggass, fl«r/. .Wa^.,cvi (1964), 286. For Lan- 59. It has been rightly pointed out that Guercino's
franco's ascendancy over Domenichino, above all D. chiaroscuro. North Italian in character, was developed
Posner, in Essays in Honor of Walter Friedlaender, New without any appreciable influence from Caravaggio's
York, 1965, 135-46. form-preserving tenehroso. It is also likely that the ple-
53. First implied by Voss, then discussed by N. beian types which appear in Guercino's early work
Pevsner, the relationship to Schedoni was further in- reached him at one remove from Caravaggio.
vestigated by Mahon (Burl. Mag., xciii (1951), 81)
and Salerno, in the papers mentioned in Note 52. CHAPTER 5
54. This dating was suggested by Mahon in the cata-

logue of the 1955 Wildenstein Exhibition in London 91. I. This a judgement postjestutn, look-
is, of course,
(Artists in Seventeenth Century Rome, 60). ing back from the Baroque position, .\round 1600
55. Extensively repainted ; see Waterhouse, 75. These Florentine painters were vigorously active and their
were painted between
frescoes, always dated too early, all-European influence on the formation of the 'inter-
August 1624 and .March 1625; see H. Hibbard, in national' Mannerism can hardly be over-estimated;
Miscellanea Bibliothecae Hertzianae, Munich, 1961, see F. .Antal, 'Zum Problem des Niederliindischen
355- Manierismus', Kritische Berichte, i-ii (1927-9).
BIBLOSARTE
5l8 • NOTES TO CHAPTER 5
2. For Barocci's dates, see H. Olsen, Fedencu Barocci, circle, yet in his masterpiece, the Virgin in Glory with
Copenhagen, ig62, 20. Saints of 1595 (Bologna, S. Giacomo Maggiore), he
3. A. Emiliani, 'Andrea Lilli', Arte Antica e Aioderna^ reached a stylistic position not far from Lodovico. His
I(1958), 65 G. Sea vizzi, 'Note sull'attivita romana del

; laterwork shows progressive petrifaction. His career
Lilio e del Salimbeni', Boll. d'Arte, XLiv (iQSg), 33. has been fully reconstructed by Graziani in the article
4: P. A. Riedl, 'Zu Francesco Vanni und Ventura quoted in Note 7.
Salimbeni', Mitt. d. Kimsthist. Inst, in Florenz, IX 12. M. A. Novelli, Lo Scarsellino, Bologna, 1955,
(1959-60), 60 and 221 (Salimbeni's work, full biblio- with full bibliography.
graphy). 96. 13. For Schedoni's correct place and date of birth,
92. 5. \V. Friedlaender, Mannerism and Anti-Manner- see Alaestri della pittura del seicento emiliano, Bologna,
ism in Italian Paintings New York, 1957. 1959, 204. For Schedoni's procedure, see R. Kultzen,
6. When this book first appeared (1958) our know- 'Variationen iiber das Thema der heiligen Familie bei
ledge of these artists had hardly increased since N. B.S.', Miinchner Jb. d. hild. Kunst, xxi (1970), 167 ff.
Pevsner's Die Barockmalerei in den rumanischen Ldn- 14. Giulio Cesare Amidano, who began under the
dern, published in 1928. But in connexion with the influence of Correggio and Parmigianino, in his later
Bologna Exhibition of 1959 Bolognese Seicento paint- work fell under the spell of Schedoni.
ing has been intensely studied. The Catalogue {Maestri 97. 15. In this context should be mentioned Fabrizio
delta pittura del Seicento emiltano) is therefore indis- Boschi {c. 1570 1642), who hardly ever betrays that
pensable for this section. See also Bibliography under most of his working life belonged to the seventeenth
Artists. century.
7. A. Graziani, Cntica d'Arte, iv (1939), 93, pointed 16. M. Bacci, 'Jacopo Ligozzi e la sua posizione nella
out that Tiarini was influenced by Bartolomeo Cesi, pittura fiorentina', Proporzioni, iv (1963), 46-84. Full
Bologna (see Note 11).
his first teacher in monographic treatment.
For documented dates of all the works in the Cap-
8. 17. S. Bottari, in Arte Antica e Moderna, III (i960), 75.
pella di S. Domenico, see V. Alee, Arte Antica e 18. See E. Panofsky's fascinating paper Galilei as a
Moderna, (1958), 394.i Critic of the Arts, The Hague, 1954.
A. Ghidiglia Quintavalle, Paragone, xvii (1966), no. For a fully annotated edition of Cigoli's letters to
197, 37 ff., discusses Tiarini's documented work at Galilei, see 'xMacchie di sole e pittura; carteggio L.
Parma, where he worked from 1626 onwards. Cigoli-G. Galilei, 1609- 16 13', ed. A. Matteoli, in Boll,
94. 9. J. Hess's hypothesis that Spada was in Rome della Accademia degli Euteleti della cittd di San Mini-
between 1596 and 1601/2 is unconvincing {Comment- ato, XXII, N.S., no. 32 (San Miniato, 1959).
fln,V (1954), 281). The fullest information on Cigoli in the Catalogue
95. 10. Mastelletta's Triumph, published by R. Kult- of the 1959 Exhibition (see Bibliography); see also M.
zen, Burl. Alag., C (1958), 352, is an early picture, Pittaluga, Burl. Mag., Ci (1959), 444.
painted under the influence of Polidoro da Caravaggio. For interesting material on Sigismondo Coccapani,
II. Four minor artists Fran-
belong in this context: Cigoli's collaborator, see F. Sricchia, in Proporzioni,
cesco Brizio ( 1 574- 1623) and Lorenzo Garbieri ( 1 580- IV (1963), 249.
1654), the former mainly Agostino Carracci's pupil, 98. 19. G. Ewald, in Pantheon, .xxiii (1965), 302 ff., dis-
the latter a close follower of Lodovico Lucio Massari ; cussed, among other Florentines, mainly Allori and
(1569- 1633), Albani's friend, who oscillates between Biliverti, and published a Life of Biliverti written by
painterly tendencies pointing back to Parmigianino and the latter's pupil, Francesco Bianchi.
a stiffly wooden classicism (C. Volpe, Paragone, vi 20. For the development of Florentine painting in
(1955), no. 71, 3); and Francesco Gessi (1588-1649), the first half of the seventeenth century, see F. Sricchia
who began as a Lodovico follower and later capitu- (Note 18); see also the frescoes in seven rooms of the
lated to Reni. For Massari, Garbieri, and Brizio see Casino Mediceo, Via Cavour 63 (1621 3), illustrating
also F. Arcangeli, Arte Antica e Moderna, (1958), 236, i Medici exploits, to which a great number of artists
354. The fresco decoration of the Oratorio di S. Colom- contributed; A. R. Masetti, Cntica d'Arte, ix (1962),
bano in Bologna, where also Albani, Reni, Domeni- 1-27,77-109.
chino, and Galanino painted, is the main topic of this 2 1 For a new attempt at defining Manetti's stylistic
paper, which contains a major contribution to the development, see C. dal Bravo, in Pantheon, xxiv
Bolognese position around 1600. See also above, p. 63. (1966), 43-51.
Although not connected with this group of artists, the Francesco Rustici (d. 1626) from Pisa, who had a
name of Bartolomeo Cesi (1556- 1629) shoiild at least great reputation in his time, is still an undefined per-
he mentioned. A Mannerist, outside the Carracci sonality. .According to C. Brandi {R. .Manet ti) he fol-
BIBLOSARTE
lowed the Bolognese and in particular Reni's manner. 30. For documents about the early works see S.
An equally problematical figure is the Fisan Rimi- Vigezzi in Riv. d'Arte, xv (1933), 483 ft". This and F.
naldi ( 1586- 1 631); as the Exhibition Caravaggw e Wittgens' article, ibid., 35 ff^., correct some of the
caravaggeschi nelle gallerie di Firenze, 1 970, showed, he results of N. Pevsner's basic paper on G. C. Procaccini
was an artist of considerable dramatic power. The (ihid.,\ (1929)).
much younger Pietro Paolini (Lucca 1603 81), Caro- 103. 31. See F. Bologna, Paragone, iv (1953), no. 45.
selli's pupil inRome, much of whose work is reminis- }2.See W. .Arslan in Phoebus, 11 (1948). .After these
cent of R. Manetti, has recently received some atten- articles and the Caravaggio Exhibition of 1951 and the
tion; see A. Marabottini Marabotti, in Scntli di sloria Turin Exhibition of Piedmontese and Lombard .Man-
onore di Ala no Salmi, Rome, 1963, ill, 307;
dell' arte in nerists of 1955,Tanzio began to emerge as an artist of
A. Ottani in Arte Aiitica e Modenia, no. 21 (1963). ig. considerable calibre. The Tanzio Exhibition of 1959
22. Procaccini's birth date is taken from an unpub- (Bibliography) brought most of his known work to-
lished document discovered by H. Bodmer. gether see G. Testori's Catalogue and .\1. Rosci, Burl.
;
99. 23. For details regarding the two cycles, see E. Mag., cii (i960), 31.
.\rslan, Le Pitture nel dunmn di Milatio, Milan, i960, In a 1967 paper M. Calvesi (sec Bibliography) made
47, 63. - Cerano painted no less than ten canvases and it likely that Tanzio was Naples about 1610 and
in
Procaccini six. M. Rosci, Mostra del Cerano, Cata- returned home via .Apulia and possibly Venice.
logue, Novara, 1964, 66, 71, claims that Cerano was 33. For Tanzio's collaboration with his brother, the
the inventive genius of the entire first series (nineteen sculptor Giovanni d'Enrico, see .\. W. Brizio, in Pina-
bozzetti by him in the Villa Borromeo d'Adda
at Sen- coleca di larallo Sesia, \ arallo, i960, 19.
ago).Morazzone's contribution is also problematical; 34.Moncalvo, who worked mainly in Milan, Pavia,
although his name does not appear in the documents, Turin, Novara, and in small towns of Piedmont, is a
two paintings of the first series have always been attri- typical Neo-Cinquecentista who, in spite of his exten-
buted to him; further to this question M. Gregori, // sive aeuvre, may safely be omitted from this survey.
Alorazzone, Catalogue, Milan, 1962, 7, 31. Fullest discussion: V. Moccagatta in Arte Lombarda,
24. The strong Gaudenzio note in the early Cerano VIII (1963), 185-243. See also A. Griseri, Paragone, xv
has been emphasized by G. Testori in Paragone, VI (1964), no. 173, 17.
(1955), no. 67. 104. 35. M. Vaes in Bulletin de Finstitut histonque beige
25. See Mostra del mamensmo piemontese . . .
1955; de Rome, IV (1925).
Mostra del Cerano, 46 (no. 24). 105. 36. Reni's Assumption [},t,] of 1616-17 was com-
26. The results of N. Pevsner's pioneering article on missioned by Cardinal Durazzo.
Cerano, published in 1925, have been revised by G. A. 37. R. Longhi in Proporzioni, i
(1943), 53.
Deir.\cqua in L'Arte, N.S. xiii (1942) and xiv (1943). 106. 38. In addition to Longhi's article in Dedalo, vii
Rosci's Catalogue of the Cerano Exhibition sum- (1926-7), see Delogu in Pinacotheca, (1929), and I
marizes the entire research (full bibliography). Longhi, Marcenaro, Emporium, CV (1947);
ihid.;
For Cerano's pupil JVIelchiorre Gherardini (1607- Grassi, Paragone, III (1952), no. 31 G. V. Castelnovi, ;
75),who is often mixed up with his master, see S. Emporium, C\x (1954), 17.
Modena, Arte Lomharda, iv (1959), 109, and F. R. 39. .After the studies by G rosso in Emporium, LVii
Pesenti, in Pantheon, xxvi (1968), 284 ft". (1923), and by Lazareft, in Miinchner Jahrbuch der bil-
loi. 27. For his frescoes in the Cappella di S. Rocco in denden Kiinst, N.s. vi (1929), little work has been done
S. Bartolomeo, Borgomanero {c. 1615 17), see M. on the early Strozzi; but see H. .Mac.Andrew, Burl.
Rosci, Boll. d'Arte, xliv (1959), 451; M. Gregori's Mag., cxiii (1971), 4 ft".
Morazzone Catalogue, 60. 40. For these and other artists active in Venice in the
28. For the Sacri Monti see, in addition to the Biblio- first quarter of the seventeenth century Scarsellino,
graphy, Wittkower, in L'ffi// (1959). Leandro Bassano, Santc Peranda, .Matteo Ponzone,
29. After G. Nicodemi's uncritical monograph of and Pietro Damiani - see the Catalogue of the Seicento
1927, work on Morazzone was carried a step further Exhibition in Venice, 1959. - For Palma Giovane see
by C. Baroni (1941, 1944), E. Zuppinger (1951), and also V. Moschini, .4rte I'eneta, xii (1958), 97, and G.
M. Rosci (1959). The comprehensive Morazzone Ex- Gamulin, Arte .4ntica e Moderna, iv (1961), 259, who
hibition of 1962 has clarified many problems. M. Gre- suggests a revaluation of Raima's late period. For
gori's excellent Catalogue supersedes all previous Palma as draughtsman, see H. Schwarz, .Master Draw-
research. See also M. C. Gatti Perer in Arte Lombarda, ings, III (1965), 158, and D. Rosand, ibid., viii (1970).
VII (1962), 153, and M. Valsecchi, in Paragone, xxi - For Padovanino, see R. Pallucchini, Arte k'eneta, xvi
(1970), no. 243, 12 ft". (1962), 121.
BIBLOSARTE
520 NOTES TO CHAPTERS 5 AND 6
Pallucchini (ihid., 126) counts Saraceni, N. Regnicr, Frascati; see K. Schwagcr, Rom. Jahrh. J. Kunstg.,
J . Heintz, and \ ouct among the renovators of Venetian i\ \ (196 1 -2), 291.
art next to or even before Fetti, Lys, and Strozzi. This 4. The emphasis on the columns derives from the
view ofthe great connoisseur of Venetian painting can- North, while the conception of the enclosed bays is
not be accepted : for, first, the Venetian period of those typically Roman. - For the fa(;:ade of S. Susanna, see
four artists is either contemporary with or later than also below, pp. 120, 373.
that of Fetti and I-vs; and, secondly, none of them 112. 5. A minor though considerable problem con-
took up and developed further the specific Venetian sisted in that Domenico Fontana had placed the obe-
colouristic tradition. lisk a few degrees out of the axis of .Michelangelo's St
41. The best statement regarding the Venetian situ- Peter's, which was not noticeable as long as the old
ation at the turn of the sixteenth to the seventeenth basilica was standing. .My own conclusion had been
century is D. Rosand's paper 'The Crisis of the Vene- that Maderno corrected this mistake by slightly shift-
tian Renaissance Tradition', L'Arle, nos. 11-12 (1970), ing the axis of his nave. A new and probably correct
5ff- interpretation is given by C. Thoenes in Zettschr. f.
107. 42. See P. Askew, in Art Bull., l (1968), i-io. Kunstg., XXVI (1963), 128.
43. See J. Wilde, Jahrhuch der kunsthistonschen .Maderno's project was selected in 1607 after a com-
Sammlungen, IVien, n.f. X (1936). petition in which the following other architects also
44. P. Michelini, 'Domenico Fetti a Venezia', Arte took part: Flaminio Ponzio, Domenico and Giovanni
Veneta, ix (1955), 123. Here also the correct date of Fontana, Girolamo Rainaldi, Niccolo Braconio, Otta-
Fetti's death: 1623 (document). vio Torrigiani, Giovan Antonio Dosio, and Lodovico
45. The unprinted University of London Ph.D. Cigoli. The latter's designs (Uffizi) are particularly
thesis by Pamela .Askew (1954) contains a full and interesting.
reliable catalogue raisonne of Fetti's works. Partly pub- 6. Work on the towers stopped at Paul V's death in
lished in a new form as 'The Parable Paintings of 1 62 1.
D.F.\ Art Bull., XLiii (1961). 7. E. Paribeni, // Palazzo Alattei in Roma, Rome,
108. 46. V. Bloch, Burl. Mag., .xcii (1950), 278. 1932, has been superseded by G. Panofsky-Soergel, in
47. One of the few Venetians of this period who Rom. Jahrh. f. Kunstg., xi (1967-8), iii ft". The new
learned his lesson from Van Dyck was Tiberio Tinelli palace replacing an older one was carried out in three
(1586- 1 638), but his portraits - his main claim to fame stages: 1 598-1601, south-east sector; 1604-13, south-
- are archaizing compared with his model. See A. west part with the loggia of the cortile and the stair-
Moschetti, Burl. Mag., Lxxii (1938), 64, and R. Palluc- case; 1 61 3- 16, northern extension.
chini, Arte Veneta, xvi (1962), 126. 8. See, above all, O. PoUak, Kunsttdtigkeit, i, Vienna,
Of the three Veronese painters, Bassetti, Turchi, and 1928, 251 ft.; further Hempel, Borromim, Vienna,
Ottino, referred to above (Chapter 4, Note 17), the 1924; Cartisch, Carlo Maderno; Brauer-Wittkower,
most Venetian is certainly Bassetti. He spent some Zeichnungen des G. L. Bernini, Berlin, 1931. Fullest
time in Venice before going to Rome. On occasions he discussion of all available evidence in a paper by A.
was capable of impressive creations (portrait, Museo Blunt, J. W.C./., .XXI (1958), 256, to which the reader
Civico, Verona), which attest to his links with Fetti. must be referred. I have left my original text un-
changed since my results largely coincide with Blunt's.
CHAPTER 6 9. H. Thelen informed Blunt (note to p. 260) that the
Uffizi drawing was originally made for a different

III. The basic monograph on Maderno by N. Caf-
I . patron and a different site. Blunt reasonably suggests
lisch(Munich, 934) is not always reliable. U. Donati's
1 that it was submitted as an example of the type of
monograph (1957) has many good illustrations. palace which Maderno proposed to build.
2. W. Lotz {Rom. Jahrh. f. Kunstg., vii (1955), 65) 114. 10. For the prehistory of the Palazzo Barberini,
gives Maderno a larger share in the facade of S. Gia- see Cardinal Ehrle, Roma al tempo di Lrhano VIII. La
como degli Incurabili than was hitherto believed on plant a di Roma Maggi-Maupin-Lost del i62j, Rome,
the strength of Baglione(ed. 1733, 196). But Francesco 1915-
da Volterra, the architect of the church, designed the Some
of the rooms still have the Sforza coat of arms.
fa9ade after 1592 and Maderno seems to have finished For the complicated history of the Villa Mon-
11.
it after Volterra's death in 1594/5 (see H. Hibbard, in dragone see C. Franck, Die Barockvillen in Frascati,
Burl. Mag. (December 1967), 713). Munich-Berlin, 1956, 51.
3. At the same moment Maderno also worked at 12. See the arched opening at the foot of the staircase
Cardinal Pietro .Mdobrandini's Villa di Belvedere at of the Palazzo Mattei. The Albertina drawing men-
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER 6 52I
tioned in the text also shows the same type of window. been sufticienth studied. G. Zander's industrious
In the framework of the tomb of the Countess Matilda paper 30 (1958), i, is mainly con-
in Qiiaderni, no.
in St Peter's Bernini returned to this type of Mader- cerned with the problem of Montano's reliability.
nesque design. The same motif in Maderno's loggia of 22. Premoli, '.\ppunti su L. Binago', Archivio storico
the Palazzo Borghese facing the Tiber is an eighteenth- lomhardo, xi.m ( 1 9 1 6), 842 G Mezzanotte, 'Gli archi-
; .
century addition, see H. Hibbard, Palazzo Borghese, tetti Lorenzo Binago e Giovanni .\mbrogio Mazenta',
1962, 66 f. L'Arte, LX (1961), 231 70, with much new material.
13. He
used the motif in the courtyard of the Palazzo 1 17. 2T,. The facade too takes up the theme, introduced
Mattei. Borromini's influence on the external details by Bramante, of two towers which form the effective
is ascertained by his window design [1 14I; see p. ic>8. group with a dome between them. Binago's facâde, not
14. Blunt attributes to Bernini the enlargement of the finished until the eighteenth century (together with
saldiie and this, according to the author, led to com- the encasing of the dome), is an important link be-
plications in the design of the palace. tween Alcssi's S. .Maria di at Genoa and
Carignano
115. 15..Xmong the other practitioners in Rome at this Borromini's S. .Agnese in Rome. Further imformation
period the amateur architect Rosato Rosati (c. 1560- on S. .-Klessandro in C. Baroni, Documenti per la storia
1622) should be mentioned. Born near Macerata (Mar- dell'architettura a Milano, Milan, 1940, i, 3-34 (docu-
ches), he was appointed Rector to a small Barnabite ments); see also Mezzanotte (above, Note 22), 253.
College in Rome before 1590. In 161 2 he designed S. 24. C. Bricarelli in Ctviltd Cattolica, Lxxxiii, iii
Carlo ai Catinari with a dome of unorthodox design (1932), 251 ; F. Zeri in Paragone, VI (1955), no. 61, 35;
within the Roman setting (dome finished 1620; apse idem, Pittura e Controrijorma, Turin, 1957, 60; M.
finished 1646; most of the interior decoration between Enrichetti, 'L'architetto Giuseppe Valeriano (1542-
1627 and 1649; fa(;ade by Soria, 1636-8). Further for 1596) . .
.' Archivio star, per le prov. napoletane, xxxix
thisimportant church, see p. 117; Vincenzo Fasolo, (i960), 325.
La cupola di S. Carlo ai Catinan, Istituto di Studi 25. Examples: Maria di Canepanova, Pavia (begun
S.
Romani, 1947. 1492?) or S. Magno
at Legnano, 1504-18.
16. Among the characteristics of this important 26. See, e.g., Fra Giocondo's drawing in the Lffizi
palace are the elongated proportions of the windows, (3932), illustrated in G. T. Rivoira, Roman Architec-
reminiscent of Gothic shapes, the almost complete ture, Oxford, 1925, figure 209. Also plans and sections
abandonment of decoration, the emphasis on the in G. B. Montano's Scielta di varj tempietti anticht,
empty wall of the wide middle bay, and the incon- Rome, 1624.
gruous Serlio motif topping the centre. 1 1 8. 27. See, e.g., Francesco Gallo's Duomo S. Donato
For Scamozzi see F".monograph, 1952.
Barbieri's at Mondovi (1743-63) and C. Corbellini's S. Geremia
17. R. Pallucchini, 'Vincenzo Scamozzi e Farchitet- in Venice (1753-60).
tura veneta', L'Arie, xxxix (1936), 3 ff. 28. E. Cattaneo, // San Giuseppe del Richint, Milan,
18. For Curtoni, see P. Gazzola in Bolleliino del Cen- 1957, 36. The church was opened in 16 16. Cardinal
tra Inlernaz. di Studi di Architettura, iv (1962), 156. Federico Borromeo celebrated the Mass. When first
19. .Anthony Blunt, Artistic Theory in Italy, Oxford, he entered the building, he exclaimed: 'Ha del Ro-
1940, 127. On Milanese architecture of this period see, mano.'
above all, H. Hoffmann in H'lener Jfahrh., ix (1934), 120. 29. Original ground-plans in the Bianconi Collec-
91 ff. ; C. Baroni, Documenti per la storia dell'architet- tion (Biblioteca Trivulziana), probably dating from
tura a Milano, Florence, 1940; idem, L'archilettura da 1607, prove that the facâde was designed with the
Bramante alRicchino, Milan, 1941 P. Mezzanotte and ; church; but an (undated) elevation of the facade by
G. C. Bascape, Milano nell'arte e storia, Milan, 1948; Ricchino shows a 'pre-aedicule' stage see E. Cattaneo, ;
P. Mezzanotte in Storia di Milano, X, Milan, 1957, op. cit., 86 and figures 27, 28, 37.
part IV ; M. L. Gatti Perer, in // mito del classicismo 30. It must be pointed out, however, that the fa(;:ade
nel Seicento, Florence, 1964, loi. of S. Giuseppe contains a residue of Mannerist am-
116. 20. The second court, also usually ascribed to biguity only the verticals of the columns flanking the
:
Mangone, was built later in the century by Girolamo door in the lower and the window in the upper tier are
Quadrio. carried through with consistency. The outer columns
21. The Milanese Giovan Battista Montano (1534- of the upper tier find no proper response in the lower
1621) undertook the task of charting an enormous tier: they rise not over columns but over pilasters;
number of ancient buildings in several publications movement is also interrupted by the

here the vertical
which appeared posthumously between 1624 and 1636. unbroken horizontal of the entablature over the outer
The influence exercised bv these books has not vet bavs of the lower tier.
BIBLOSARTE
522 • NOTES TO CHAPTER 6
In addition, a chronological problem arises since 41. -Magnani rebuilt between 1622 and 1624 Ber-
Girolamo Rainaldi used the type in S. Lucia at Bolo- nardino Zaccagni's S. .Alessandro. He was also the
gna in 1623. But, as we have mentioned, Ricchino's architect of the Palazzo del .Municipio (1627), which
design is probably older and, in any case, he also was destroyed during the last war.
planned the 'aedicule facade' of the Ospcdale Mag- 42. .According to D. de Bernardi Ferrero, / disegni
giore in the mid twenties, see below, p. 120. d'architetlura civile el ecclesiaslica di G. Gtiarim . . .,
31. The following no longer exist: S. Ulderico, S. Turin, 1966, 63, a drawing for the church in the State
Eusebio, S. Lazaro in Pietra Santa, all built before .Archive at Parma carries only .Magnani's name and not
1619; S. Pictro in Campo Lodigiano and S. Vito al that of .Aleotti.
Carrobbio, both 162 S. Vittore al Teatro, S. Giorgio

1 ; 123. 43. Theatre of the .Accademia dcgli Intrepidi
al Palazzo, S. Bartolomeo, 1624; S. Pietro con la Rete (1606), destroyed by fire in 1679. For .Aleotti's I"er-
and S. Salvatore, 1625; S. Maria del Lentasio, 1640; rarese activity, see the well documented paper by D. R.
S. Giovanni alle Case Rotte, 1645; ^^^ Chiesa del Co^n, Journal oj the Soc. of Architectural Historians,
Seminario di S. Maria della Canonica (f 165 ) and S. .
1 ; \\l (1962), 116.
Marta, S. Agostino, S. Giovanni alle Quattro Faccie. 44. L. Magagnato, Teatri italiani del Cinquecento,
Best survey of Ricchino's work in L. Grassi, Pnninie A'enice, 1954, 80.
del Baroao e del Roano, Milan, iq66, 289 ft". 45. The history of the Strada Nuova has now been
32. E.g. S. Maria della Vittoria, S. Maria Maddalena, published in an exemplary cooperative work directed
S. Giacomoalle\'erginiSpagnoli. See also M. L. Gen- bv L. \ agnetti, Genova. Strada \uova, Genoa, 1967:
garo, 'Dal Pellegrini al Ricchino", Boll. d'Arte, xxx next to exhaustive sections on social, urban, and other
(1936), 202. aspects, a complete documentation ot each palace
33. P. Mezzanotte, 'Apparati architettonici del Ri- along the street.
chino per nozze auguste', Rassegiia d'Arte, x\ (191 5), 46. The history of Genoese Baroque architecture re-
224. mains to be written. In spite of valuable work, mainly

34. See Hoffmann, op. cit., 83. For the date of the by Mario Labo and Orlando Grosso, a large number of
Palazzo Durini, see P. Mezzanotte, Raccolta Btatnoiit, Genoese palaces are still anonymous, nor does a solid
Milan, 1942, 93 (extremely rare). historical basis exist for the major structures of the
121. 35. C. Baronihasmadeit probable, however, that Sei- and Settecento. But a start has been made with
Martino Bassi's designs of 1 59 1 for the courtyard were L. Profumo Miiller's monograph of B. Bianco (see
still used in 165 1 Most of the Brera was executed after
.
Bibliography) and with the fine study by G. Colmuto
Ricchino's death by his son Gian Domenico, Giuseppe on a specific type of Genoese longitudinal churches
Quadrio, and Rossone. The famous staircase, usually with paired columns along the nave (1970, see Biblio-
ascribed to Ricchino, belongs to the second half of graphy). - Bianco's date of birth is often given as 1604
the century. (O. Grosso), which is not possible in view of his
See the richly illustrated work by C. Del Frate,
36. activity during the second decade.
S. Maria del .Monte sopra Varese, Varese, 1933. For 47. .According to M. Labo, 'II palazzo dell' Lniver-
the chapel architecture by G. Bernasconi, see S. sita di Genova', Atti della R. i niversitd di Genova,
Colombo, Profilo della arcbitettura religiosa del Sei- XXV Bianco planned the palace in 1 630 and made
(n.d.).
cenlu. Varese .... Milan, 1970. his final project in 1 634, w hen construction w as begun.
d
122. 37. Antonio Morassi, Catalogo delle cose 'arte . . See also L. Profumo Miiller, B. Bianco ., 1968; see . .
Brescia, 1939, 144, with full bibliography. Bibliography.

38. A. Foratti, 'L'architetto Giov. Ambr. .Magenta', 125. 48. Similar to the courtyard of the Palazzo Bor-
Bologna, 1915. G.
in Studi dedicati a P. C. Pallet ti, ghese in Rome (p. 34). Airy arcades resting on single
Mezzanotte, L'Arte, LX (1961), 244. The dates of or even double columns are familiar from late six-
Magenta's buildings given in the text are based on teenth-century ecclesiastical architecture at Genoa,
this author's research. see SS. .Annunziata, S. Siro,and S. .Maria della \igna.
39. G. Cantagalli in Comuue di Bologna (1934), 48, 49. The embossed columns of the entrance have a
and Mezzanotte, op. cit. (last Note). Mannerist pedigree, and the ground-floor window
40. For earlv repercussions of the columned North surrounds are crow ned by lions' heads biting the vous-
Italian nave in Rome, see Ottavio Mascherino's S. soirs, follow ing the example of the Palazzo Rosso (by
Salvatore in Lauro (i 591 -1600). The columns in Rocco Luragor).

Paolo .Maggi's SS. Trinita de Pellegrini ( 1614) belong 50. See, e.g., Palazzo Pallavicini on Piazza Fontane
to G. B. Contini's eighteenth-century restoration (see .Marose ( 1 565 and the Palazzi Lomellini and Serra on
)
G. .Matthiae in .4rii Figurative, 11 (1946), 57, note 7). Piazza de' Bianchi.
BIBLOSARTE
523
51. Vera Daddi Giovannozzi, in AUileiliingt'ii (1951), 224and III (1952), 35, list the considerable
des kunsl/iistorisi/u'u Iiistiti/ls in Flareiiz, v (iq^yô), post-Thieme-Becker literature and also contain an
58- additional list of works.
52. V. Fasolo, 'Un pittore architetto: 11 Cigoli', 132. 69.For a difterent interpretation of Mochi's de-
Qtiaderni (1953), nos. i, 2; L. Berti in the Catalogue velopment the reader has to be referred to a recent
of the Muslra del Cijûli, 1959, 165. paper by I. Lavin, in Art Bull., Lii (1970), 132 fl".
53. L. Berti in Palladia, i (1951), 161; R. Linnen- 70. In some of his bronzes, however, Francesco
kamp, 'Giuiio Parigi architetto', Rir. d'Arte, viii Susini broke away from the tradition of the Giovanni
(1958), 51, with list of Giulio's works and new docu- Bologna studio (e.g. Rape of Helen, 1626); see E.
ments. Tietze-Conrat in Kunstg. Jahrh. der k.k. Zentral-
54. J. Hess, Agostirio Tasm, Munich, 1935. Konumssion, 11 (19 17), 95.
55. L. Berti, in Riv. d'Arte, xxvi (1950), 157; and 71. See the fully documented article by S. Lo Vullo
x.wii {1951-3), 93. Bianchi in Riv. d'Arte, Xiii (1931), 131 213. .Also E.
56. I follow Berti's careful assessment of the docu- Lewy, Pietro Tacca, Cologne [1928].
mentary material. 133. 72. Above all the bronze equestrian statues of
57. See Giovannozzi, op. cit., 60. Ferdinand I (Florence, in the Piazza .Annunziata),
126. 58. For the history of the chapel see \V. and E. Henry IV of France (1604- 1 1, Paris', destroyed), and
Paatz, Die Kintien von Florenz, Frankfurt, 1955, 11, Philip III of Spain (1606 13, Madrid).
469, 541, etc., and Berti, he. cit. (Note 55). 73. Giovanni Bandini's statue was erected in 1595-9
59. L. Wachler in Rom. Jahrh. J. KiiiiUj;,., iv (1940), (H. Keutner, Mi4nchner Jahrhuch d. htld. Kunst, Vii
194- (1956), 158). Tacca's Slaves were executed with the

60. For Neapolitan Baroque architecture see Chier- help of .\ndrea Bolgi, Cosimo Cappelli, Cosimo Cenni,
ici's articles inPalladia, (1937), and R. Pane's book
i Bartolomeo Cennini, Micheic Euccherini, and of Lo-
(Naples, 1939), which contains the only coherent his- dovico Salvetti. Soon after, Bolgi left for Rome. Cen-
tory of the subject. nini, too, went to Rome, where he made name as a
his
For Francesco Grimaldi, see H. Hibbard, Art Bull., bronze founder in Bernini's studio. The other pupils
XLiii (1961), 301, whom .1 follow for the dates of were men of little distinction.
Grimaldi's buildings. 74. W. Weisbach, Trionfi, Berlin, 19 19.
127. 61. For Stati's (1556-1619) stylistic position, see 75. It has, however, been correctly pointed out that
V. Martinelli in Riv. d'Arte, .xxxii (1959), 233. Hellenistic bronze statuettes of Negro slaves show
62. Cordier also enjoyed a reputation as restorer of attitudes extremely close to those of Tacca's slaves;
antique statuary;
"
see S. Pressouvre, in G.d.B.A., lxxi see, e.g., K. .\. Neugebauer, Die Gnechischen Bronzen
(1968), 147 ff. (Staatl. Museen), Berlin, 1951, plate 36.
128. 63. N. V. Hoist in Zeitsclir. Jiir Kunslg., iv (1935), 76. The statue of Ferdinand I was not finished until
Pope-Hennessy, Italian
35, has deflated this legend. J. 1642 by Pietro Tacca's son, Ferdinando.
High Renaissance and Baroque Sculpture, London, 77. Finished shortly before Pietro's death and erected
1963, Catalogue, 137, does not accept Hoist's con- by Ferdinando in 1642.
clusions. 78. It is not certain whether the copy in the Palazzo

64. Statues and reliefs in the Cappella .Aldobrandini, Pitti after the Velasquez painting in the Prado or the
S. Maria sopra .Minerva (1598- 1605); in S. Giovanni Spanish copy in the L'ffizi after Rubens's lost picture
inLaterano (1600); in the Cappella Paolina, S. Maria of 1628 was dispatched from Madrid for this purpose.
Maggiore (1608 12); in S. Maria della Pace (1614); 134. 79. For instance, his Virgin and Child on the tomb
and S. Maria di Loreto (1628 9), etc. of Porzia Coniglia (Naples, S. Giacomo degli Spagnu-
65. R. Wittkower, in Zeitschr.f. h. Kunst, LXII (1928), oli) derives from Danti's Virgin and Child in the
26; I. Robertson in Burl. Mag., LXIX (1936), 176; A. Cappella Baroncelli, S. Croce, Florence and the group ;
Donati, Stefanu Maderno scullore, Beilinzona, 1945. of Adam and Eve, which he presented to the Grand
66. The literature about him is fairly large. .More Duke Cosimo II (1616, now Boboli Gardens), from
recently P. Rotondi in Capitolium, xi (1933), 10, 392, Bandinelli's group in the Bargello.
and Riv. del R. 1st., v (1935-6), 189, 345, and V. Mar- 80. L. Bruhns in Riim. Jahrh. J. Kunstg., iv (1940),
tinelli in Commentari, iv (1953), 133, with further 293. On Naccherino, see .\. .Maresca di Serracapriola,
references. .Michelangelo Naccherino, Naples, 1924.
129. 67. See G. Fiocco's basic article in Le Arti, ill 8 1 His figures in the Chapel of the Crucifixion, Sacro
(1940-1), 74. .Monte, Varese, show, however, a true sense of Baro-
130. 68. V. Martinelli's articles in Commentari, 11 que drama and break w ith the conventions of the older
BIBLOSARTE
524 NOTES TO CHAPTERS 6, 7, AND
Francesco Silva {15X0 1641), who executed most of controversy; see, above all, \. Pevsner in Rep. J.
the groups in the chapels of the Sacro Monte. Knnstw., xlvi (1925), 243 and XLix (1928), 225, and
82. Among the sculptors who worked at Genoa may Weisbach, ;/»/^., 16.
be mentioned Filippo Planzoni from Sicily {d. 1636), 141. 15. Further for papal patronage, see the relevant
Domcnico Bissoni from \ enice (d. 1639) and his son chapters in Pastor's History oj the Popes.
Giovan Battista(d. 1659), and Stefano Costa (d. 1657) For further details see the documents in O. Pollak,
16.
and Pietro Andrea Torre (d. 1668). Most of these Die Kunsttdtigkeit iinter Urban VIII, Vienna, 1931, li,
worked mainly in wood. .Artists like the Bissoni have and the catalogues in E. Waterhouse, Baroque Painting
become more clearly defined personalities through the in Rome, London, 1937.
1939 Exhibition at Genoa (see p. 450). 142. 17. J. Hess in Illustrazwne Vaticana, vi (1935),
241.
CH.APTER 7 18. For details of the entire 'programme' see Witt-
kower, op. cit., 19.
137. I . First published Perugia, 1606, and many times For papal and other forms of patronage in Rome,
19.
thereafter. see now

part of the excellent work by F. Haskell,
i
2.R. Harvey, Ignatius Loyola, London, 1936, 257. Patrons and Painters, London, 1963.
138. 3. See, e.g., the many works of Guido Reni's
school. CH.APTER 8
For the follow ing see, above all, Hastings's Encyclo-
4.
pedia of ReJtgion and Ethics, s.v., and I. von Dollinger 144. I. For this chapter see the author's book on
and F. H. Reusch, Geschic/ite der Aloralstreitigkeiten Bernini (Gtan Lorenzo Bernini the Sculptor of the
ill der romisch-kathnlischen Kirche sett dem sechzehnteti Roman Baroque, London, 1966), with critical aeuvre
Jalirhiindert, Nordlingen, 1889. catalogue. References will therefore be kept to a
5. On laxism see M. Petrocchi, // problema del las- minimum.
sismo nel secolo XVII, Rome, 1953 (Storia e letteratura, 2. I can neither agree to the attribution of the Santoni
no. 45). bust to Pietro Bernini, as suggested by C. D'Onofrio
6. M. Petrocchi, // qnietismo italiano del Seicento, {Roma vista da Roma, 1967, 1 14 ft.), nor to the dating
Rome, 1948 (Storia e letteratura, no. 20); also L. von of the bust to 1610 as I. Lavin (Art Bull., L (1968),
Pastor, XIV, ii, 985. 223 ft.) assumes. H. Kauffmann, G. L. Bernini, 1970,
139. 7.For the following see the documents published 1 1, also refutes such an early date.
by F. Haskell in Burl. Mag., xcvii (1955), 287. 145. 3. The stone-coloured caryatids of the Farnese
8. Wittkower, Gian Lorenzo Bernini, London, 1955, Gallery had a formative influence on Bernini's con-
12. ception of antiquity while he was engaged on the Pluto.
9. M. de C.\\znXc\ou,yoiirnaldu voyage dii Car. Bernin The somewhat cold beauty of Proserpina's body is also
en France, Paris, 1885, under it, .-Xugust 1665. derived from Annibale Carracci's ceiling. Further-
140. 10. For the text illustrated by Pozzo, see E. Male, more, the David is indebted to the figure of Poly-
442. phemus in the fresco of Polyphemus killing Acis. For
11. 'La "rettorica" e I'arte barocca' in Retorica e further details, see Wittkower, 5 f.
Barocco. Atti del III Congresso internazionale di stiidi Recently C. Grassi, Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), 170, em-
umanistici, Rome, 1955, 9. The ideas of this concise phasized Polidoro da Caravaggio's influence on the
paper have influenced my argumentation. \eptune and Triton and to a lesser extent on the Pluto
12. See Sacchi's talk to Francesco Lauri, related by and David.
L. Pascoli, Vite de' pittori etc., Rome, 1736, li, 82 : 'lo 146. 4. Two almost identical busts exist in the Bor-
stimo, e credo, che i pittori dagli oratori deggian ghese Gallery. Bernini copied his first bust himself
pigliare i precetti'. See also H. Posse, Andrea Sacchi, because the marble showed a crack across the fore-
Leipzig, 1925, 118. head shortly before its completion. But the second
work has been done on these problems.
13. Little version lacks the intense animation of the first.
Not very helpful in this context is G. Weise and G. 151. 5. It is not generally known that the Angel with
Otto, Die religiose Ausdriicksgebdrde des Barnck (Schrif- the Superscription standing on Ponte S. .-Vngelo is also
ten und Vortrage der wurttembergischen Ges. d. Bernini's work. For the complicated history of these
Wissensch.; Geisteswissenschaften, .Abt. 3, 1938). .\ngels, see W ittkower, 248 ft.
See the stimulating book by W. Weisbach, Der

14. 152. 6. However, a passage in Kunstgeschtchtliche
Barock als Kunst der Gegenreformation, Berlin, 1921, Grundbegrijfe, first published in 19 18, shows that
which had a lasting influence but also aroused a heated Woelftlin was very well aware that Baroque sculpture
BIBLOSARTE
525
has a 'picture-like' character and is therefore com- 19. I"or the correct date, see D'Onofrio, Le Fontane
posed for one viewpoint. di Roma, Rome, 1957, 191, and H. Hibbard, Burl.
153. 7. Attention may be drawn to the Angel's right leg Mag., cvi (1964), 168 note.
and Habakkuk's right arm, clearly designed to counter- 20. Surviving drawings prove that the rock was de-
balance each other or to the cross of spatial diagonals
; signed with great care (Braucr- Wittkower, 47 ft".).
created by the Angel's arms and his right wing, whose 169. 21. Further for the Longinus, seeH. Kauffmann,
direction is continued in the prophet's right arm. in Miscellanea Bibliothecae Hertzianae, 1961, 366.
1 Polychrome settings became common after Six-
57. 8. 2.Z. judging from an illustration only, the terracotta
tus V's chapel in S. Maria Maggiore, see pp. 29 30. bozzetto of the C-onstantine published by K. Rossa-
I). This device is fully effective only in the afternoon, cher, in Alte and Neue Kiinst, Xli, 90 (1967), 2 ff.,
when the sun is in the west. seems to be suspect.
160. 10. In the Teresa group, as in the allegories of the 23. For a full exposition of the concetto, see Witt-
tomb of Pope Urban, marble seems to turn into flesh. kower in De Artihus Opuscula XL. Essays in Honor of
But the psychological effect is different for while here ; Ermin Panofsky, New "^'ork, 1961, 497.
the group has its own mysterious setting, there the alle- 170. 24. Further for the iconography of the Four
gories stand before the niche, in the spectator's space. Rivers Fountain, H. Kauffmann mjahresherichte der
161. 1 1. A good analysis of the colour scheme in R. Max Planck Gesellschaft (1953-4), 55 R-i ^nd more
Battaglia, La caltedra heniiniana, Rome, 1943, 75, 80 f. recently, N.Huse, in Revue de I'Art, no. 7 (1970), 7 ft'.,
164. 12. On
and other grounds Bernini's art found
this where conclusions are drawn from a text by Michel-
a severe critic in Sir Herbert Read The Listener, 24 ( angelo Lualdi who may have been Bernini's adviser.
November 1955). Sir Herbert voiced here opinions For the concetto of the Barcaccia in Piazza di Spagna,
held by many. see H. Hibbard I. Jaft'e, Burl. .Vlag., cvi (1964), 159.
13. For a further analysis, see Wittkower, 21. 25. See W. S. Heckscher in Art Bull., xxix (1947),
14. See, e.g., Roubiliac's tomb of Lady Elizabeth 55 ff-
Nightingale in Westminster Abbey ( 76 1 1

). Roubiliac's 26. K. Rossacher ('Das fehlende Zielbild des Peters-
dependence on the tomb of Alexander \'II cannot be domes, Berninis Gesamtprojekt fiir die Cathedra
doubted. Petri', Alte iind Moderne Kunst (Nov. -Dec. 1967))
167. 15. The formerin S. Lorenzo in Damaso, the argued eloquently that Bernini had planned a repre-
latter in S. Giacomo alia Lungarna. Further to the sentation of the Transfiguration in the window of the
history of these monuments, Wittkower, 210 f. Cathedra and claims have found Bernini's bozzetto
to
The bust was lost in the Whitehall Palace fire of

16. for this project, but the author's assumptions do not
1698. The best idea of the bust is conveyed by the seem to be supported by historical evidence.
eighteenth-century copy made from a cast, now at 27. Further for the ideas underlying the Cathedra
Windsor Castle (W ittkower, figure 48). Petri, see H. von Einem in Nachrichten der Akademie
i-j. Journal dii voyage dii Car. Bernin, ed. Lalanne, der IVissenschaften in Gttttingen. Philolog.-Hist. Klasse,
Paris, 1885; see Wittkower, Bernini's Bust of Louis 1955, 93. For the concetto of the Baldacchino see H.
XI l\ London, 195 1. Kauffmann in Miinchnerjahrhuch der hildenden Kunst,
168. 18. Particular reference may be made to Stoldo VI (1955), 222.
Lorenzi's Neptune in the Boboli gardens. See B. H. 171. 28. Cod. Ital. 2084, fol. 195, referred to in Witt-
Wiles, The Fountains of Florentine Sculptors and their kower, 254.

Folbwersfrom Donatella to Beniini, Cambridge, Mass., 29. Brauer-Wittkower, plate 7i.\.
1933- 30. See Brauer Wittkower, plates 42 7.

Since the Neptune and Triton will not again be men- 3 1 See also Wittkower, 'The Role of classical Models
tioned, may addI here that the problem of its concetto in Bernini's and Poussin's preparatory Work', in
has aroused much controversy. I first submitted (Burl. Studies in H'estern Art (.^cts of the 20th Internat.
Mag., xciv (1952), 75) that Bernini here intended to Congr. of the Hist, of .'\rt), Princeton, 1963, in, 41.
illustrate the Virgilian 'Quos Ego' (Aeneid, i, 145 f ); 172. 32. Wittkower, figure 107.
J. Pope-Hennessy (Catal. Ital. Sculpt, in the Victoria }7i. E.g. all the early works and the busts of Scipione
(5 Albert Mm., 1964, 11, 600) believed that his text was Borghcse, Costanza Buonarelli, Francis I of Este,
Ovid, Met., I, 330 ff'., while W. Collier (in J.fF.C./., Louis XI\ ; further, the Longinus, Daniel, and Habak-
XXXI (1968), 438 ff".) thought Ovid, .Wet., i, 283-4 was kuk, S. Bibiana and S. Teresa, and the .Angels for the
shown. H. Kauffmann, G. L. Bernini, Berlin, 1970, 39, Ponte S. .\ngelo. These are some examples. No at-
returned w ith new arguments to my original interpre- tempt at completeness is made in this and the follow-
tation. ing notes.
BIBLOSARTE
34. The Haldacchino, tomb of Urban V'lU. I ite de' pitton . genovesi, Genoa, 1768 9, 76.
. .
35. Monument of Countess Matilda; Cappella Rai- 50. See C^hantelou's Diary on 10 October 1665.
mondi; statues ot Urban VIII, Capitol, and of Alex- 175. 51. The work was finished in 1626; seeO. Pollak,
ander VII, Siena Cathedral; Angels above the main Kunsttdtigkeit, 1, 22 ff. Bernini was also responsible for
altar ol" S. Agostino; balconies in the pillars of St the restoration of the interior. Particularly impressive
Peter's; decoration of S. Maria del Popolo; chapel of is the classicizing aedicule above the high altar (Witt-
the De Silva family, S. Isidoro Valtrini and Merenda
; kower, Bernini, figure 27).
monuments; tomb of Alexander VII. This group, to 52. For historical data, see Brauer Wittkower, 19 22,
which many more works belong, is by no means and Wittkower, Bernini, 189 f. for the iconography,;
coherent. H. Kauffmann, 'Das Tabernakel in St Peter', Kunst-

36. St Barbara, Rieti Cathedral; Visitation, Cappella geschichtliche Gesellschaft zu Berlin, Silzungsherichte
Siri, Savona. (1954-5), 5 S; also Note 27 above.

37. L. Grassi, Bernini pittore, Rome,
1945, with 53. Bernini designed the decoration of the pillars in
bibliography up to that date. Further, Martinelli in 1628. The balconies serve for the exhibition of the
Commentari, i {1950), with brief critical but not en- most venerable relics on certain festive occasions.
tirely reliable auvre catalogue, and Wittkower in Burl. Further to this question, Wittkower, Bernini, 197 f.,
Mag., xciii (1951), 51 ff. and Kauffmann, loc. cit.
38. The portrait now in the Ashmolean Museum, Ox- 176. 54. On Borromini's probable contribution to the
ford (see Wittkower, op. and the self-portrait
cit.), design, see p. 197.
formerly in the collection of Mrs Richard Ford (D. 55. Prototypes for the motif were Early Christian sar-
Mahon and D. Sutton, Artists in Seventeenth Century cophagi with vines, a reference to the blood of Christ.
Rome, Exhib. Wildenstein, 1955, no. 5). By substituting laurels (a Barberini emblem) for vines,
173. 39. Early self-portrait, Borghese Gallery, and the Bernini turned the traditional into personal symbolism.
half-figures of St Andrem and St Thomas, formerly 56. Shortly before Bernini, Ferrabosco planned such
Palazzo Barberini, now National Gallery, London, a structure in lieu of the present Baldacchino; see
documented 1627; see Martinelli, op. cit., 99, 104. Costaguti-Ferrabosco, Architettura della basilica di S.
40. The most important document of this phase is the Pietro in Vaticano, Rome, 1684, plate 27.
David with the Head of Goliath, Coll. Marchesa Eleo- 57. See A. Munoz in Vita d'Arte, viii (191 1), iT^;
nora Incisa della Rocchetta, Rome. See the pertinent Pulignani in Illustr. Vaticana, li, 12 (1931), 23 ff.
remarks in Mahon's and Sutton's Catalogue, no. 7. For the master of the Val-de-Grace baldacchino,
58.
41. Between the first self-portrait in the Borghese usually wrongly attributed to Bernini, see Beaulieu, M .
Gallery of about 1620 and the second in the same 'G. Le Due, M. Anguier et le maitre-autel du Val-de-
museum lie at least twenty years. Grace', Bulletin de la societe de l' hist one de I'art fran-
42. Grassi's reversal of this relationship (p. 28) is (ais,annee ig^^-^b (1948), 150 and A. Blunt, Art and
unacceptable. Architecture m France, 250, note 22. For French high
43. For a full discussion of these compositions and altars dependent on Bernini's Baldacchino, see M.
also for the engravings made after Bernini's designs, Reymond in G.d.B.A., ix (1913), 207 ff.
see Brauer- Wittkower, 151 ft". 177. 59. The fullest account of the history of this
44. Waterhouse, 86; Grassi, op. cit., 37 ff. H. Posse, ; church and Bernini's other architectural works in
Der romische Maler Andrea Sacchi, Leipzig, 1925,53 f. Brauer-Wittkower. The book by R. Pane, Bernini
45. The same device is used, e.g., in the group of architetto, Venice, 1953, is uncritical and contains no
Pluto and Proserpina. serious contribution. For Castelgandolfo see also V.
46. Further for Abbatini's works, Passeri-Hess, Golzio, Documenti artist ici, Rome, 1939, 402. The
234 ff., Waterhouse, 45, Grassi, op. cit., 44 ff., Mar- church was first dedicated to St Nicholas and, after a
tinelli, Commentari, ix (1958), 99, B. Toscano, Para- change of plan in 1659, to the newly canonized St
gone, XV (1964), no. 177, 36. Thomas of Villanova.
174. 47. Passeri-Hess, 234 ff. The pun '. . . ha fatto 178. 60. The whole height is i^ times the length of the
parere vero effettivo quel falso, che e finto', is difficult axis of the church.
to translate. 61. The medallions reproduce the pictures hung in

48. Guglielmo Cortese (Guillaume Courtois) painted St Peter's on the day of the saint's canonization, see
in the 1660s in Bernini's churches (see Note 69) but Brauer-Wittkower, 125.
cannot be regarded as one of his studio hands. 62. See, e.g., the niche of the tomb of Urban VI 1 1 [83]
49. For Bernini's influence on GauUi see Pascoli, Vtte, or the apse of the Raimondi Chapel in S. Pietro in
Rome, 1730-6, 1, 195, and R. Soprani and C. G. Ratti, Montorio.
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER 8 "
527
63. The niche of Alexander VII's tomb ( 1671 8) [89] 84; .\. Mercati in Roma, xxii (1944), 18, documents).
is also decorated in this way. 81. Illustrated in P'alda, llniiovo teatro delle fabhriche,
64. A few eighteenth-century examples may be given 1, Rome, 1665, plate 30.
Fuga's Chiesa di S. Maria Orazione e Morte in
dell' 82. Brauer-Wittkower, 126; A. Busiri Vici in Palla-
Via Giulia, Rome; Luigi Vanvitelli's Chiesa dei PP. dio,\\ (1956), 127.
delle Missioni at Naples; and Juvarra's Supcrga near 83. Built for Niccolo Ludovisi, the nephew of
Turin. Gregory XV, who had married a niece of the Pamphili
65. B. M. Apolloni-Ghetti, Tl Palazzo Chigi all' Pope Innocent X. For the palace, see now the monu-
Qjiaderni (1953), no. 2, 10, with plans and a
.\riccia', mental, fully documented work by F. Borsi (and
not very helpful historical note. others), II Palazzo di Montecitorio, Rome, 1967.
()6. G. Incisa della Rocchetta, 'Notizie sulla fabbrica Coudenhove-Erthal, Carlo Fontana, 71 ff.,
84. E.
della chiesa collegiata di Ariccia', Riv. del R. hi., 1 figure 25,shows what was standing when Fontana
(1929), 281-5. Prauer-Wittkower, 115 ff. began working. It is mainly the central area that must
180. 67. Ihid., 120 ft. See also S. Bordini, in Qjmderni, be assigned to him. Vol. 168 of the Fontana papers in
,\iv,79-84 (1967), 53-84; extracts from a Roman the Royal Library at Windsor contains documents
doctoral thesis on Bernini and the Pantheon (1965-6). and drawings referring to the palace.
68. C. Fontana, // lempio valtcano, Rome, 1694, 186. 85. At the time large parts of the palace were
451 ft"., illustrations on pages 457, 467. standing. For its history, see Thomas Ashby, 'The
181. 69. The painting is by Guillaume Courtois, who Palazzo Odescalchi in Rome', Papers of the British
also supplied the altarpieces in S. Tomaso at Castel- School at Rome, viii (1916), 87 ft".; Brauer Wittkower,
gandolfo and S. Andrea al Quirinale. 1 27; A. Schiavo, La Fontana di Trevi, Rome, 956, 239. 1
182. 70. Documents published by Donati in Rn\ del 187. 86. In Rome, mainly Antonio da Sangallo's
R./i7., VIII (1941), 144,445,501. For the history of the Palazzo del Banco di S. Spirito (1523 34) and Giro-
church see Brauer-Wittkower, no ft.; also F. Borsi, lamo Rainaldi's Palazzo Senatorio on the Capitol.
La chiesa di S. Andrea al Qjarinale, Rome, 1967. 87. Examples of indirect derivation: Fuga's Palazzo
71. W. Lotz, 'Dieovalen Kirchenhiumedes Cinque- Cenci-Bolognetti, Piazza del Gesu, Rome (c. 1745);
cento', Rom. Jahrh.f. Kunstg., vii (1955), 55 ff. G. A. Veneroni's Palazzo Mezzabarba at Pavia (1728-
72. Wittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age of 30); and Juvarra's Palazzo Ferrero d'Ormea at Turin.
Humanism, 3rd ed., London, 1962, 97 f Outside Italy, among numerousexamples, Martinelli's
183. 73. See Note 69. Liechtenstein Palace and Fischer von Erlach's palace
74. About this important church see now W. Lotz, of Prince Eugen, both in Vienna, and the Marble
op. cit., 58, and above Chapter 6, Note 2. Palais in Leningrad.
184. 75. It is important to realize that the ground was 88. For the history of the Louvre, see L. Hautecoeur,
originally considerably higher. Only three steps led up Le Louvre et les Tuileries de Louis XIV, Paris, 1927;
to the portico; see G. B. Falda's engraving in // terzo idem, Histoire du Louvre, Paris, 1928. For Bernini's
lihro del novo teatro delle chiese di Roma, Rome [n.d.], contribution,Josephson,G.(/.fi.y'i.,X\ II (1928), 75-91,
13- and Brauer-Wittkower, 1 29-33. The whole story sum-
76. See above. Note 74. marized in Blunt, Art and Architecture in France, 230 ff.
77. See p. 114. See also .A Schiavo in Bollettino del Centra di Studi per
.
78. Pollak, Kunsltdtigkeit, 237-40.

i, la Storia dcW .4rchiteltitra, no. 10 (1956), 23.
79. For the palace at Modena Bernini mainly func- For the Louvre projects by Candiani, Rainaldi, and
tioned as consulting architect in 1651 ; see L. Zanugg, Cortona, see P. Portoghesi, in Qjiadernt (1961), 243.
Tl Palazzo ducale di Modena', Riv. del R. 1st., ix 89. Plan: Brauer Wittkower, plate 175; east front:
(1942), 212-52. Hautecoeur, Le Louvre, plate },t,. Another drawing in
His contribution to the Quirinal Palace, part of the Blunt, plate 155B.
so-called manica lunga (1656-9) along the Via del 188. 90. R. W. Berger, m Journal Soc. Architect. His-
Quirinale, has now been clarified by J. Wasserman, torians, XXV (1966), 170 ff., regards Bernini's first
Art Bull., .\LV (1963), 240. Louvre project as a direct offspring of .\ntoine Le
185. 80. Such as the projects for the Piazza del Quiri- Pautre's design for an ideal chateau, published in the
nale (Brauer Wittkower, 134), for the monument of latter's Desseins de plusieurs palais (1652). But no one
Philip IV of Spain to be erected under the old portico who has eyes to see will be able to accept this hypo-
of S. Maria Maggiore (thid., 1 57), and for the apse of S. thesis.
Maria Maggiore (1669), later executed by C. Rainaldi 91. See Brauer-Wittkower and Josephson, op. cit.,
(tbid., i63;S. Fraschetti, II Bernini, Milan, 1900, 379 81 (illustration).
BIBLOSARTE
528 NOTES TO CHAPTERS 8 AND 9
Q2. Illustrated in Munoz, Pietrn da Cortima (Bibl. 108. Brauer Wittkower, plate 164B, and Wittkower
d'arte ill.), Rome, IQ21, 15. See below, p. 246. in Boll. d'Arle, xxxiv (1949), 129 ft.
()3. The east front and the plan illustrated in Blunt, 193. 109. Bernini himself talked about this in Paris
plate 155c and figure 24. (Chantelou, ed. Lalanne, 42). Similar arguments also
94. This was an insufficient answer to the criticism in Bernini's report of 1659 60 (fol. i07\, see Brauer
of Colbert, who held that the entrance of the earlier Wittkower, 70).
projects was too insignificant. no. First used by Pietro da Cortona in S. .Maria
95. The conversations reported by the Sieur de della Pace.

Chantelou show that Bernini regarded this feature as III. Brauer-Wittkower, 88 ff^. Previous discussion of
immensely important (i July 1665). the Scala Regia with partly different results, Panofsky,
9(1. Bernini regarded the old rooms of the south front Jahrh. Preuss. Kunstslg., XL (1919) and Voss, ibid.,
as too small and artistically too insignificant to serve XLiii (1922).

as a royal apartment. 195. 1 12. D. Frey, op. cit., 217.
97. It is evident that Bernini also wanted to hide the 113. The whole material for this question in Witt-
old court facades, the pride of French architecture. kower, Boll. d'Arte, loc. cit. Also H. Hager, in Com-
98. See \. Blunt, ap. cit. mentari, xix (1968), 299 ff".
189. 99. Josephson, op. cit., 82-9. 1 14. For Carlo Fon tana's projects see Coudenhove-
100. But the influence of Bernini's project on general Erthal, op. cit., 91 ff. and plate 39. For later and similar
principles of design in France should not be under- projects see T. A. Polazzo, Da Casiel S. Angela alia
estimated. The traditional high-pitched roof and the basilica di S. Pietro, Rome, 1948.
pavilion system disappear after his visit. In addition, 1 15. This statement is true in spite of the fact that
his project found a sequel in other countries. Ex- this type of colonnade was first devised by Pietro da
amples: the Czernin Palace in Prague (1669), Sac- Cortona, see below, p. 246.
chetti's Royal Palace in Madrid (1739), and Tessin's 196. There are two passages for pedestrians and
1 16.
Royal Palace in Stockholm (see H. Rose in Festschrift between them a wider one for coaches.
Heinnch Holfflin, Munich, 1924, 245).
1 01. The only detailed discussion of the history of the CHAPTER 9
Piazza is in Brauer-Wittkower, 64-102. See also V.
Mariani, Siguificatu del porttca bermniano di S. Pietro, 197. I. The name Borromini (without Castelli) does
Rome, 1935, and the more recent interesting contribu- not appear in documents before 1628. For portraits
tion by C. Thoenes, Zeitschr. f. Kiinstg., xxvi (1963), of Borromini, see P. Portoghesi, Burl. .Mag., CIX
97-145. Bernini's principal assistants were his brother (1967), 709 f.
Luigi, Mattia de' Rossi, Lazzaro Morelli, and the 2. His activity can be followed in documents dating
young Carlo Fontana. between 1624 and 1633; see Pollak, Kuiisttdtigkeit, li,
102. Opposition was centred in reactionary ecclesi- Mufioz in Rassegna d'Arte, xix (1919), 107 ft., and
astical circles. They supported an elaborate counter- ibid., 'Francesco Borromini nei lavori della Fabbrica di
project ofwhich twenty-five drawings survive which S. Pietro", Scrilti in onore di B. \ogara, Rome, 1937,
time and again are attributed to Bernini himself. For 319-

the whole problem see Wittkower in J.W.C.I., III 3. Between 1621 and 1623, see N. Caflisch, Carlo
(1939-40). -Also Brauer-Wittkower, 96 ff. Maderno, Munich, 1934, 141.

103. This made it necessan,' to pull down Ferra- 198. 4. Brauer-Wittkower, 27 f
bosco's tower, see above, p. 29. 5. Exact date of the execution of the cloisters; 6
190. 104. See above, p. 112. February 1635 to 28 October 1644: see .\. Contri in
105. Mainly by Ferrabosco; see D. Frey, 'Berninis L'Architettura, (1955), 229, with valuable measured
i
Entwiirfe fiir die Glockentiirme von St Peter in Rom', drawings.

Jalirhuch der kunsthislonscluni Sammlungen, M'leii, xii 199. 6. See E. Hempel, Borromini, \'ienna, 1924,
(1938), 220 f., figures 243-5. figures 6-9.
106. The complex histor)- of these towers is discussed 201. 7. P. Portoghesi, in Quaderni (1954), no. 6, 16,
in Brauer-Wittkower, 37-43; see also Frey, op. cit., has come to somewhat similar conclusions. See also
and Underwood in Art Bull., x\i (1939), 283; H. below. Note 27.
Millon in Art Quarterly, X.XV (1962), 229, summarized For the wider issues involved see W ittkower, 'Sys-
the whole question. tems of Proportion', m.irchitects' > ear Book, \(i()s,2,).
107. Brauer-Wittkower, 41 ft., plates 156-7; D. Frey, 203. 8. The pattern is derived from S. Costanza, via
op. ctt., 224 f. the illustration in Serlio's Fourth Book.
BIBLOSARTE
529
206. 9. The name derived from the motto 'Initium 19. H. Thelen, Kunsuhronik, vii (1954), 264 ft".
sapientiae timor Domini' engraved over the main 213. 20. On the meaning of the capriccio in seven-
entrance. teenth-century art, see Argan, Borromini, 40.
H. Thelen, in his thorough reconstruction of the 21. For a detailed discussion of all the monuments,
history of the building (Mncfllanea Bihl. Hertzianae, see P. Portoghesi, 'I monumenti borrominiani della
1961, 285 307), convincingly shows that Giacomo basilica lateranense', Quaderni (1955), no. 11, and
della Porta had built the closed arcades of the hemi- R. L. .\lontini in Palladio, v (1955), 88 ft.
cycle long before Borromini took over. 22. New documents for the histor\' of the church
10. An exhaustive geometrical analysis by L. Bene- were published by L. Montalto in Studi Romam, V
volo, 'II tema geometrico di S. Ivo alia Sapienza', (1957), and Palladia, viii (1958). See also F. Fasolo,
Qttaderni {1953), no. 3. L'opera di Hwroninio e Carlo Rainaldi, Rome, i960,
11. See, e.g., the illustration in Serlio, Tulle I'dpcrc chapter .\, who makes it probable that the planning of
d'archilellura, Venice, 1566, 62, of a temple 'fuori di the church began as early as 1(145 7.
Roma'. 215. 23. See K. Noehles in Zeilschr. J. Kitnslg., xxv
208. 12. The string-courses run on across the two (1962), 173.
other bays C. I find a rather high-handed though unspecific criti-
210. 13. The feigned coloured marble effect that was que of my analxsis of S. .^gnese in G. Elmer's book
given the church under Pius IX in 1859 was removed on S. .\gnese (Bibliography under Rome), 114; hence
in a recent restoration and the church was given back I saw no reason for any changes.
its original white appearance. 24. This is due to the fact that the frames of the
For the emblematic character of the architecture, see painted pendentives are carried down through the
the papers by H. Ost and P. de la Ruffiniere du Prey area of the attic. It is worthwhile to compare Borro-
(Bibliography). mini's solution with that in St Peter's, where the en-
For S. Ivo, see also C. Brandi, Strultura e architet- tablature over the pilasters of the pillars does not
liira, Turin, 1967, 94 fl. project and where the arch of the vault rests on the
14.Other examples are the 'nymphaeum' in the entablature without an attic thus producing neither
garden of Sallust (Flavian), perhaps the earliest build- the unifying verticalism nor the slender proportions
ing of this type; the vestibule. Piazza d'Oro, Hadrian's of S. Agnese.
Villa, Tivoli (r. A.D. 125-35); and, of the same period, 217. 25. For a further analysis, see Wittkower, An
the Tempio di Siepe, Campo Marzo, Rome. Illustra- ««//., 'xix( 1937), 256 ft".
tions in G. T. Rivoira, Roman Architecture, Oxford, 26. Even Bernini had a hand in some of the decora-
1925. tion; he was responsible for the details of the entabla-
15. The ruins of Baalbek were already known in the ture.
sixteenth century. The 'Grand Marot' of about 1660- 218. 27. For a difterent opinion, see A. de Rinaldis,
70 has a reconstruction of the great temple. L'arte in Roma dal Seicentn al Novecento, Bologna,
16. W. Born, 'Spiral Towers in Europe and their 1948, 197. The lantern appears in a ground plan in the
oriental Prototypes', G.d.B.A., xxiv (1943), 2}} ft., -Mbertina (Hempel, figure 61) drawn into the plan of
has shown that, through the tradition of the Tower the 'drum'. This drawing is one of the most interesting
of Babel, spiral towers were more common in six- documents for Borromini's medievalizing approach to
teenth- to eighteenth-century Europe than is generally planning. His procedure can be fully reconstructed,
realized. since the design contains the complete geometrical
212. 17. The twelve .\postles in the tabernacles of the pattern carefully drawn. It appears, first, that the
nave (see 436) and the oval paintings above them
p. essential points of the construction are determined by
belong to the Pontificate of Clement XI. Borromini's incommensurable magnitudes and, secondly, that the
plans for portico and fac^-ade remained on paper. They is geometrically derived from the
shape of the lantern
were later executed by .\lessandro Galilei (p. 382). drum, and it is this the geometrical unification of dif-
For the development of Borromini's project see,
18. ferent storeys drawn into one plan that reveals the
above all, K.. Cassirer, 'Zu Borromini's Lmbau der closest contact with late medieval principles.
Lateransbasilika',7rt/^;7^ Preiiss. Kiinslslg., XLii (1921), 219. 28. For other chcrub-herms in Borromini's late
55 ft". In addition, H. Egger in Beitrdge ziir Kutisl- work, see the monument of Pope Sergius IV in S.
Franz IVickhiiJJ'geiridmet, Vienna, 1903, and
geschichte Giovanni in Laterano and the facade of S. Carlo alle
M. Dvorak, 'Francesco Borromini als Restaurator', Quattro Fontane 19I. 1 1
Kunstgeschtchtlnhes Jahrbuch der k.k. Zentral- 29. The coherence of the tiers of the tower is stressed,
Komnnsswn, Vienna, 1907 (Beiblatt), 89 ft. however, by the placing of all the supporting elements
BIBLOSARTE
in the diagonals, corresponding to the buttresses ot drical feature (decorated w ith a classicizing frieze) and
the 'drum'. a cone-shaped roof. .About 1660, Cappella Spada in
Of the whole exterior only the two upper tiers and S. Girolamo della Carita, laid out with colourful
the crowning feature of the tower were stone-faced marble decorations. Here the 'bizarre' idea of replac-
and finished. ing the balustrade of the chapel by kneeling angels
30. Until recently the design of the church had always who hold a piece of (marble) cloth between them (allu-
been dated in the early 1630s. The revision of the date sion to Christ's pall.'). Full discussion by P. Porto-
is due to Paolo .Marconi, in Palaliiio, x (1966), 194 ghesi in Qiiaderni (1953), no. 4; als<j //'/</., nos. 25-6
200; see also uh'tti in Stiidi siil Borrommi. Atli del (1958), 39. This is the most important of some minor
Couvegno, Rome, 1967, 1, 98. works for the Spada family, who patronized Borromini
31. The motif of the straight entablature ciwi arch from the 1630s onwards; seealso .\. Corbara in Cniua
derives from Hellenistic sources (familiar to (Quattro- d'arte, iv-v (1939-40), 141, and Portoghesi in Palla-
cento architects) and was here first used by Borromini. dio, IV (1954), 122. -For other minor work, see Porto-
In 1 646 he incorporated it in his project for the Palazzo ghesi, Qiiaderni, nos. 25-6 (1958).
Pamphili in Piazza Navona and executed it in the gal- 36. .\. Pernier, 'La Torre dell' Orologio dei Filip-
lery of the same palace (see below. Note 45). It is not pini', Capitolium, x (1934), and idem, 'Documenti
impossible that more than ten years later this stimu- inediti sopra un' opera del Borromini La fabbrica dei :
lated Pietro da Cortona to his use of the same motif in Filippini', Archive II (1935), 204. See also G. Incisa
the facade of S. Maria in Via Lata (148]. della Rocchetta, 'Un dialogo del P. Virgilio Spada
32. Here too Borromini worked with similar over- sulla fabbrica dei Filippini', Arch, della Soc. romana
lapping rhythms which, starting with the entrance di storia patria, XC. (1967), 165-21 1.
bay, may be expressed as: 37. Borromini laid the main axis through the centre
of the courtyards [135], but the long western wing
A|b'bb'|A|b'bb'|A|. . .
along the Via de' Filippini has no correspondence on

or: b'Ab'|b|b'Ab'|b|. . .
the side adjoining S. Maria in Vallicella. Consequently
33. It is not certain that anything above the cornice the fa9ade left (west) of the central axis consists of five
corresponds to Borromini's design. In any case, the bays, while the right-hand side (near the church) has
interior decoration, including the diamond-shaped only three bays. But the eye does not notice the asym-
simple coffers of the vault (painted), belongs to the metry, since the two farthest bays on the left lie outside
restorations of 1845 and 1928-9. See Marconi (above, the quoined edge of the facade proper.
Note 30) and M. Bosi, 5. Maria de' Sette Dolori, 224. 38. We must abstain from a further analysis,
Rome, 1953. particularly of the complex treatment of the walls.
34. Interior decoration after Borromini's death, Reference may be made to Argan's pertinent remarks
mainly by Carlo Fontana's son, Francesco. Complete about the transformation of functional into decorative
restoration of the interior in 181 5. elements and vice versa {Borromini, 53).
222. 35. For the sake of completeness, the following 39. In the clerestory above the cornice the wall articu-
list of minor ecclesiastical works may supplement the lation is taken up and continued in the bands ot the flat
buildings discussed in the text: 1638-43, decoration, vaulting - a first step towards the late solution of the
S. Lucia in Selci, Rome (discussion and documents in church of the Collegio di Propaganda Fide.
P. Portoghesi,j^«fl(/f/-//(, nos. 25-6 (1958), 2). - 1640-2, 225. 40. For the small cloister of S. Carlo, Borromini
altarof the Annunciation, SS. Apostoli, Naples, closely had chosen a different design he carried an extremely
:
resembling the system used for the faiâde ot the Ora- simple form of the 'Palladio motif without any inter-
tory of St Philip Neri. - 1 656 (not 1 664), design of high ruption across the bevelled corners. See p. 199.
altar chapel, S. Giovanni de' Fiorentini, with the Fal- 41. For the clock-tower see A. Pernier in Capilotiiim,
conieri tombs (document published by M. V. Bru- X (1934), 413-

xlv (i960), 341. The high altar of
gnoli. Bull. d'Arle, 42. See also the design G. B. Montano, Scelta di
in
S. Giovanni de' Fiorentini, begun much earlier by varj lempictti antic hi, Rome, 1624, plate 3, which was
Pietro da Cortona (1634), shows the latter's style). certainly known to Borromini and which he must
Borromini's Falconieri crypt in the same church, only have regarded as authentically antique.
recently discovered, should also be mentioned; see E. 42a. See P. Portoghesi, Borromini, Rome, 1967, 174.
Rufini, S. Giovanni de Fiorentini (Le chiese di Roma 43. See O. PoUak's classic article 'Die Decken des
-
illustrate, 39), Rome, 1957, 67, 103 (document). Palazzo Falconieri in Rom', Kunstffeschichlliches Jahr-
1658, rebuilding of the little chapel S. Giovanni in Oleo huch der h.k. Zentral-Kommission (191 1). The whole
near Porta Latina, with a dome hidden behind a cylin- problem of Borromini's decoration has been discussed
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS 9 AND lO •
531
by P. Portoghcsi in Ball. d'ArU\ XL (1^55), 12-38. CH.AFTER 10

44. Borromini, of course, had knowledge of Vasan-
zio's loggia in the garden of the \ ilia Mondragone at 231. I. Pii'lro da Corlona, I'"lorence, 1962.
Frascati (pp. 36-7). 2. SeeG. Briganti in Farag(ini\\i (i960), no. 123, ]iT,.,
45. Full discussion of the various plans for the palace alsoToesca (next Note).
by D. Frey, 'Beitrage', li'ienir Juhrh., in (ig24), 43 ff. 3. His biography in Passeri Hess, 75; see also I.
Here, too, publication of Borromini's alternative pro- Toesca in Boll. d'Arte, xlvi (1961), 177.
ject for the whole palace. 4. Now in the .\ccademia di S. Luca, Rome.
227. 46. A loggia of the courtyard with the richly For Marcello Sacchetti's patronage of Cortona, see
decorated doorway at its end and the simple spiral Haskell, Patrons, 38.
staircase behind it, dating from before if>43, were in- 5. .Marino had been in Paris for eight years until 1623.
corporated into the later building. No less than thirty- He died in 1625. The Rinaldo and Armtda painted for
eight drawings by Borromini for the palace survive Marino (Passeri-Hcss, 375) has not yet been traced.
(Vienna, Albertina). Full discussion by G. Giovannoni, For Marino, sec G. .-Ackerman, An Bull., XLiii
'II Palazzo Carpegna", in La Rcalc Insii^nc Aaademia di (1961), 326.
S. Luc a, Rome, 1934, 35^66. IVl. Tafuri (in Qiiaderni, 6. For Cassiano del Pozzo and his collection, see
XIV, 79-84 (1967), 85 ff.) examined Borromini's con- C. C. Vermeule, Art Bull., xxxviii (1956), 31; idem.
tribution again on the basis of documents in the Proceedings 0/ the American Philos. Snc., Cii (1958),
Falconieri Carpegna archive; Borromini's alterations 193, and Transactions oj the American Philos. Soc, N.S.
were executed between 1643 and 1647. L, pt 5; F. Haskell and S. Rinchart, Burl. Mag., cii
47. A similar idea is to be found in a drawing in the (i960), 318, and the able summary in Haskell's
Uffizi, attributed to Borromini, published by Porto- Patrons, 98 ff. For Cassiano in Spain, see E. Harris,
ghcsi, Qjiadenit (1954), no. 6, 28. Burl. Mag., CXii (1970), 364 ff.
.Among other domestic buildings by Borromini men- 7. The frescoes at Frascati and in the Palazzo Mattci,
tion may be made of the Palazzo di Spagna (1640s) to be discussed later, arc the only memorable excep-
where, according to Hempel (133), the vestibule and tion.
staircase of three flights survive. The later Palazzo 8. He may have had some training at Cortona with
Spada in Piazza di Monte Giordano (about 1(160) lost his uncle Francesco, who was an architect.
its Borrominesque character in a modernization of the 232. 9. Voss, 543. - Briganti, 11 1, on the contrary,
nineteenth century, but the courtyard is extant with emphasizes Cortona's unbroken powers as a painter
alterations. HempeFs attribution of the Palazzo Bar- to the very last.
berinialii Giubbonari has to be abandoned; see B. 10. Payments to Cortona begin in 1626 and run until
Maria Apollonj in Capi/olium, Viil (1932),' 451. Borro- 1630. The attribution of the building to Pietro da
mini's precise contribution to the Villa Falconieri at Cortona is maintained in a series of eighteenth-
Frascati has not yet been determined. .\n interesting century drawings by Pier Leone Ghezzi (1674 1755)
project for the villa of Cardinal Pamphili near Porta which gives a valuable general view and plans of the
S. Pancrazio has been published by Portoghcsi in three storeys (London, Coll. Sir .Anthony Blunt). In
Qiiaderiti (1954), no. 6. his brief description, Ghezzi calls the house 'casino
48. The inspiration for the giant order probably came fatto ad uso di fortezza'.
once again from Michelangelo's Capitoline Palaces, See also G. Tomassetti, 'Delia Campagna Romana:
which influenced Borromini throughout his lifetime; Castelfusano', Archivio della R. Societc) Romana di
but the closely-set pilasters and narrow bays are remi- storia patria,XX (1897); Francesco Chigi, 'La pineta
niscent of Palladio's late style of the Palazzo Valmarana di Castel Fusano', Vie d' Italia, xxxviii (1932).
and the Loggia del Capitano. 1 1. Only the grotto is preserved (sec Luigi Callari, Le
228. 49. It is true that the attic is later (1704), a fact ville di Roma, Rome, 1943, 266). Views of the villa
hitherto overlooked, but use must have been made ot exist in A. Specchi's Qjiarto libra del nuovo teatro . . .
a design by Borromini. \\. the time of Borromini's di Roma (1699), plate 44; G. \'asi's Delle magnificenze
death there was an iron railing over the cornice; see di Roma antica e moderna, v, Rome, 1754, and Percicr
L. Cruyl's draw ing of 1665 in the Albertina (H. Egger, and Fontaine's Choix des plus celehres maisons de plais-
Romischc Veduteii, Vienna, 1931, II, plate 75); G. B. ance de Rome, Paris, 1809, plates 39-41. Our know-
Falda's engraving in // niiovu teatro delle fahbnche ., . . ledge of the villa is considerably furthered by some
I, [Rome], 1665, plate 9; Falda's plan of Rome of Ghezzi drawings in the Blunt collection (see last
1676; and the drawing in the Library of Windsor Note): (i) the ground-plan [140], only published once
Castle, Albani volume 185, no. 10328. in [Blunt-Wittkowcrj, Exhibition of Architectural and
BIBLOSARTE
Deiiiratne Drawings, The Courtauld Institute (Feb- in Miscellanea Rihl. Hertzianae(nfh\), 375. F,. Hubala,
ruary, 104'). ^'O. 15, plate i ; (ii) the section and plan in Zeilschr. j. Kunstg., xxv (1962), 125, enriched the
of the grotto; (iii) one ot the windows on the first floor discussion by publishing some drawings in the Castello
at the sides ot the central niche. See also Incisa della Sforzesco, .Milan. Keller's and Hubala's results have
Rocchctta in L'l rhe (1949)' "O- 3^ 9 16. been corrected by K. Noehles, La chiesa dei SS. Luca
12. According to \'asi. Cardinal Giulio commissioned eMartina, Rome, 1969, 58 ff., who convincingly dates
the building; according to Specchi's caption it was the the 'mausoleum' project as early as 1623 4.
Marchesc Marcello. K. Noehles, up. cil., has, however, shown that

22.
13. A. Marabottini (Mmlra di Pielro da Carlona, the completion of the church dragged on until 1669.
1956, 34) believes that the pictorial decoration points 23. The bays adjoining the crossing in the longitu-
to a date not earlier than 1630. A. Blunt in Burl. Mag., dinal axis are wide enough to accommodate doors
XCViil {1956), even suggested 1634-5. Briganti, 191, which have balconies above them. The corresponding
does not commit himself. bays in the transverse axis contain only niches.
14. Wittkower, 'Pietro da Cortonas Ergiinzungs- 237. 24. Michelangelo's influence was stressed by
projekt des Tempels in Palestrina\ Festschrift Adulpli Hubala, op. cit.
Goldschniidt, Berlin, 1935, 137. For Praeneste, see C. 241. 25. See, e.g., Michelangelo's projects for the
Severati (and others), in L'Architettura, xvi (1970), facade of S. Lorenzo, Florence.
no. 6, 398, and no. 8, 540; valuable for the many 26. The plan [142] illustrates that the whole front
illustrations. may be likened to one of the apses flattened out and
234. 15. See the letter written by Cortona's nephew, reversed. The position and motif of the columns cor-
Luca March 1679, in G.
Berrettini, to Giro Ferri, 24 responds, but while the wall is recessed inside, outside
Campori, Lettere artistulie ineditc, Modena, 866, 510. 1 it seems to bulge outward.
16. Onlv the front with the portal and two windows 27. S. Carlino, begun in the same year, remained for
of characteristically Cortonesque design is standing. a long time without facade; see p. 203.
\. Blunt, 7.rr.C./., XXI (1958), 281, suggests that the 28. O. Pollak in Kunstchronik, XXiil (1912), 565.
theatre was executed between 1638 and 1642. 29. In the interior Cortona was above all responsible
one of the 'Quattro Fontane', on the side of
-Also, for the modernization of the old dome. There is good
the Palazzo Barberini, is by Cortona, but it was not reason to believe that this was not finished in 1657, the
finished until the reign of Alexander VII (probably date of the inscription of the consecration (see Brauer-
after 1665). Wittkower, 1 12, note 3). The dome shows once again
235. 17. .\long the main front Cortona indicated in the combination of ribs and coffers, but the coffers are
pencil the rooms of the piana nohilc. The 'sala' occu- shape and un-Cortonesque. Since Cortona
classical in
pies 4 octagons, the 'salone' 4 octagons plus the vesti- was absent from Rome in 1658, it is not at all unlikely
bule, and the 'anticamera' 2 octagons. The length of work was left in the hands of the young Carlo
that the
Cortona's Salone would have been 125 feet compared Fontana who, at precisely this period, also began to
with the 85 feet of the executed one. - The note in ink assist Bernini. It is therefore possible that Cortona's
on the left mentions that a corridor should run above design was classicized under Bernini's influence.
from which one could reach all the rooms. 30. Illustration 146, redrawn from a preparatory
18. A scale in Roman palmi is at the bottom of the drawing by Cortona in the \ atican Library, shows one
sheet. Cortona's ground floor would have been c. 3 teet street flanking the church on the right and another at
higher than the present one, judging from the dia- an angle to the church on the left. The dotted lines
meter of the columns in his plan. indicate what had to be demolished in order to create
19. O. Pollak in Kinistchronik, xxiii (19 12) and idem, the small piazza.
Kiinsltiiligkeit, i, 163. 242. 31. The quadrant wing on the right-hand side is
20. The documents published by O. Pollak, op. cii., a ''ham structure.
185 ff. See also G. Giovannoni, 'La Chiesa di S. Luca ^,2. The portico is also an impressive landmark when
e il suo restauro', in La Reale Iiisigne Accadenua di S. approached from the Via di Parione Pace.
Luca, Rome, 1934, 19 25, with measured ground plan. 33. Brauer-W'ittkower, 74.
All earlier work on the church has now been super- 34. In actual fact, Cortona permitted himself con-
seded by K. Noehles' excellent monograph (see next siderable freedom. The column is not 'correct' Doric,
Note). nor is the entablature 'correct' Ionic.
21. .\n important drawing by Cortona in .Munich 35. The break at right angles of a coherent moulding
(Graphische Sammlung), revealing that at first a sepul- is essentially a Borrominesque motif. It first occurs at
chral church was planned, was published by H. Keller, the garden front of the Palazzo Barberini.
BIBLOSARTE
533
For a somewhat different interpretation ot the facade 46. See Note 4. Cortona's original draw ing is in a
1
of S. Maria deila Pace, see H. Sedlmayr, Epocheii ittid volume once belonging to John Talman, purchased
Werke, i960, 11, 66. before the war by the Victoria and .-Mbcrt .Museum.
244. 36. N. Fabbrini, I'lla del Cav. Piclni da Cortnna, 47. Illustrated in .\. E. Brinckmann, Tlwalrum
Cortona, i8g6, 118; Luigi Cavazzi, La Diatona di S. Novum Pedemontii, Diisseldorf, 1931; sec also L.
Maria in Via Lata, Rome, igoS, 130 f1. Hoctin in L'CEil, no. 97 (1963), 70. Excellent illustra-
37. I have mentioned before that Borromini used tions in .\. Pedrini, Ville in Picmonte, Turin, 1965,
. . .
the motif more than once (Chapter t). Note 31) and 367 ^.
that Cortona may have been stimulated by him. I have 48. Brauer VVittkower, 148.
also pointed out that the Hellenistic architecture of 49. Bottari, i, 419.
the Near East was known during the seventeenth 247. 50. This was, among others, Luca Berrettini's
century (Chapter q. Note 13). opinion stated in the letter mentioned above. Note 5. 1
245. 38. Cortona's dome was begun in 1668 but 51. Dated, probably correctly, c. 1616 by Briganti,
finished after his death, as testified by Luca Berrettini 153, who discovered these frescoes. For an early work,
(see above. Note 15). This probably accounts for cer- perhaps of the same period, see E. Schleier, Burl.
tain rather dry Cortonesque details which induced .Wag., cxii (1970), 752 ft".
some scholars to deny Cortona's authorship of the 52. J. Hess, 'Tassi, Bonzi e Cortona a Palazzo Mattei',
design altogether. There is no reason to doubt that Coinmenlari, v (1954), 303. For the correct dates (docu-
Cortona also made designs for the interior decoration ments), see K. Noehles in Kunstchronik, x\i (1963),
of the church. For further data relating to S. Carlo al 99, and G. Panofsky-Soergel, in Riim. 7ahrh. /. Kunstg.,
Corso, see Chapter 12, Note 23. XI (1967-8), 142 fr.
39. The Cappella Gavotti, with powerful motifs com- Hess attributes the decorative organization ot the
pressed into a small area and richly decorated with ceiling to Bonzi, while Noehles believes that Cortona
sculpture by Raggi, Ferrata, and Cosimo Fancelli, is rather than Bonzi was responsible for it.
Cortona's latest masterpiece. But he did not live to see 53. Luca Berrettini reports that Cortona drew all the
it finished Ciro Ferri completed
: it after his death. The reliefs of Traian's Column no less than three times.
classicizing altar of St Francis Xavier was completed One of these drawings is preserved in the Gab. Naz.
as late as 1678. delle Stampe, Rome (.Mostra di Pietro da Cortona,
For Ciro Ferri as designer of sculptural and architec- Rome, 1956, plate 51); others are in a sketchbook by
tural decorations, see K. Noehles in Miscell. Bibl. Cortona in the R. Ontario Museum, Toronto,
see G.
Herizianai- (ig6i), 429. AlsoH. W. Kruft, Burl. Mag., Brett in Bulletin R. Ontario Mus. (December 1957),
CXI I (1970), 692 ft". no. 26, 5. .-According to the sources, Cortona was par-
246. 40. Bottari, i, 418, 419. ticularly interested in the engravings of Polidoro da
41. The problems presented by these drawings are Caravaggio, and echoes of his work are evident in the
rather complex. Cortona's principal design seems to be later Cortona.

Uffizi 2231. K. Janet Hoffman in an unprinted thesis 249. 54. For the Sacchetti and Barberini patronage of
(New York University, 1941) tried to establish the Cortona, see the documents published by I. Lavin
authentic drawings and their chronological sequence. (with M. .Aronberg Lavin), Burl. .Mai^., c;xii (1970),
42. Erected in 1660 and pulled down in the nine- 446 ff.
teenth century. V. Lugari, La I la della Pedacchta e la 55. His life in Passeri-Hess, 168. .\ list Of his paint-
casa di Pielrn da Cortona, Rome, 1885, contains some ings in VVaterhouse, 51, superseded by .\. Sutherland
illustrations. Harris's study (see Bibliography).
43. K. Noehles, 'Die Louvre-Projekte von Pietro da 56. For Sacchi's contribution see G. Incisa della
Cortona und Carlo Rainaldi', Zeitschr.f. Kioistg., xxiv Rocchetta in L'Arte, xxvii (1924), 60, and H. Posse,
(1961), 40; see also P. Portoghesi in Qjiaderni (1961), Der romisihe .Maler .indrea Sacelii, Leipzig, 1925, 27.
nos. 31-48, 249. See also .A. Sutherland Harris and E. Schaar, Die
44. Chantelou (ed. Lalanne), 257, and Bottari, 11, Handzeichnungen von Andrea Sacchi und Carlo Mar-
51 f. (Ciro Ferri's letter to Lorenzo .Vlagalotti, 17 atta, Kunstmuseum Diisseldorf, 1967, 26.
February 1666.) Further to the Castel Fusano frescoes. Note 56

57.
45. G. Giovannoni, 'II restauro architettonico di and Posse m Jalirh. Preuss. Kunstslg., XL (1919), 153;
Palazzo Pitti nei disegni di Pietro da Cortona', Ras- Briganti, 177.
segtia d'.4rle, XX (1920), 290; E. Vodoz in Mittetlungen 58. Before 1625; see Jane Costello in J.W .C./., xiii
des kunsthistorischen Inst Huts in Florenz, \I (1941), (1950), 244; Mostra di Pietro da Cortona, Rome, 1956,
no. 3-4, 50. 3, 25. For the date, see Briganti, 164.
BIBLOSARTE
534 NOTES TO CHAPTERS 10 AND II
250. 59. Cortona copied after Titian for his patron, .\pollo, which he began only in 1647 shortly before re-
.Marcello Sacchctti. Sandrart (ed. Peltzcr, p. 270) turning to Rome (for a different interpretation of the
reports that he himself and Cortona, Duquesnoy, documents, see Briganti, 236, who believes that (Cor-
Poussin, and Claude studied Titian's Bucdiaiials, tona began the Sala di .Apollo in 1642 3). It was fin-
then in the Casino Ludovisi. See also above, p. 276. ished by Ciro Ferri in 1659 60. The latter was entirely
60. Fosse's masterly discussion of the ceiling has not responsible for the Sala di Saturno, 1663 5, the
yet been superseded (Jalirh. Pretiss. Kiiiislli;., XL, decoration of which is only a faint echo of that of the
1919), and, although we cannot fully agree with him other rooms.
on all points, the reader must be referred to it for 67. The fresco of the Sala di Marte, here illustrated,
further study. is the most developed of the series. In the centre, the
252. 61.The only known preparatory drawing for the Medici coat of arms floating through the air like a sump-
system of the ceiling (Munich Posse, figure 26) shows
; tuous trophy along the borders the prince's victorious
;
that Cortona first envisaged it with clearly defined exploits which are rewarded by Justice and Peace.
frames for quadn riportali still close to the Farnese 68. .According to Baldinucci {Notizie de' projesson,
ceiling. Florence, ed. 1846, iv, 428), Raffaello Curradi's pupil,
The large bozzetto in oil in the Galleria Nazionale, Cosimo Salvestrini, executed the stuccoes of the first
Rome (E. I.avagnino, Bull. d'Artc, xxix (1935), 82), room and some of the following ones. On the other
corresponds so closely to the execution that it must be hand, James Holderbaum found payments in the
a copy rather than a preliminary study. Archivio di Stato to the stuccatori Battista Frisone,
62. This is already true for Michelangelo's Sistine Santi Castellaccio (or Cartellaccio), and Gio. Maria
Ceiling. Characteristic later examples: Pierino del Sorrisi. The latter was one of the stuccatori who worked
Vaga's Sala del Consiglio, Cast el S. Angelo, and Sal- in the Villa Doria-Pamphili in Rome (Chapter 11,
viati's frescoes in the great hall of the Palazzo Farnese. Note 24) proof that Cortona did not find in Florence
63. Detailed description in H. Tetius, Aedes Bar- the specialists he needed.
herinae, Rome, For an illuminating revision of
1642. 256. 69. See A. Blunt, Art and Architecture in France,
previous interpretations, see W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag., 161, 173, 206, 253.
cm (1961), 427, whom I follow. 70. M. Lenzi in Roma, \ (1927), 495; L. Grassi in
For the various levels of allegorical meaning read Boll. d'Arte, XLii (1957), 28.
into such works in the seventeenth century, see J.

Montagu, in J. W.C.I. xxxi (1968), 334 f.
,
253. 64. In addition to the frescoes of the Gran Salone, CHAPTER II
Cortona in the Palazzo Barberini decorated the Chapel

and two rooms on the first floor (1632-3). To the same 261. I. Art and Architecture in France, 182.
period also belongs the beginning of his work for the H. Posse's biography of Sacchi (Leipzig, 1925) and
2.
Chiesa Nuova (S. Maria in Vallicella, fresco on ceiling his article in Thieme-Becker are first-rate contribu-
of sacristy, 1633-4). Further, in 1633 he began the tions and have not been superseded, but an extensive
large cartoons of Constantine's life for the Barberini monograph by A. Sutherland Harris is in the press.
tapestry works, which he directed from 1630 on (Lr- For Sacchi's work in the CoUegio Romano, see idem.
bano Barberini, in Boll. d'Arte, xxxv (1950), 43, 145). Burl. .Mag., CX (1968), 249 ff".
For these tapestries, see now D. Dubon, Tapestries 262. 3. A. Sutherland Harris (Burl. Aiag., CX (1968),
from the Samuel H. Kress Collection at the Philadelphia 489 ft.) has made it likely that the St Romuald was
Museum oj Art, London, 1964, and the critical review painted in the early 1630s rather than during the last
by W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag., CVii (1965), 262 f vears of the decade, as was generally assumed.
65. For this and the following see H. Geisenheimer, 263. 4. O. Pollak, Kunsttdtigkeil, i, 141. Waterhouse,
Pietro da Cortona e gli ajfrescht di Palazzo Pitti, Flor- plates 10, 11; D. Mahon, G.d.B.A.,
(1962), 65; l.v
ence, 1909. .Also D. R. Coffin in Record of the Art Harris Schaar (see above. Chapter 10, Note 56), 45 ft'.
Museum Princeton University, xiii (1954), t,3, M. 5. The most important altarpiece of the 1640s, the
Campbell and M. Laskin, Jr, in Burl. Mag., Ciu (1961), Death of St Anne (S. Carlo ai Catinari, 1649; see
423, W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag., cvii (1965), 522, and \\ aterhouse, 91) shows that he preserved his rich and
Campbell, ihid., 526 f warm palette, in contrast to Poussin.
66. The first room Sala di Venere was executed in G. Incisa della Rocchetta in L'.-irte, xxvii (1924),
6.
1641-2. He carried on with the fourth room, the Sala 65. For the problems connected with the dating and
di Giove (1643-5), then with the third, the Sala di with the small replicas, see Jane Costello mj.]] .C.I.,
Marte (1646), and finally with the second, the Sala di XIII (1950), 242. For the subject, see Passeri- Hess, 29;
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER II 535
H. Tetius, Aedes Barhennac, Rome, 1642, 83; Incisa, made as early as 1626. In any case, it dates from before
luc. cil.\ Posse, op. (it., 38; Haskell, Patrons, 50. For - and probably some years before the Cardinal's
this type of allegorical Fresco, see F",. Gombrich in death on 7 .August 1637. P'or this bust, see H. Posse,
J.W.C.I.^W (1948), 186. For drawing related to Divine Jafirh. Preuss. Kunslslg., xxv (1905), and J. Pope-
Wisdom, see Harris-Schaar, op. cil., 2(). Hennessy, Italian High Renaissance and Baroque
7. M. Missirini, Memnrie per servire alia sloria delta Sculpture, London, 1963, Catalogue, 142, with further
rnmana Accademia di S. Ltica, Rome, 1823, 111. references.
Mahon (see Note 4), g7, reasonably suggests the year 268. 22. In the first (hardback) edition I showed on
1636 for these discussions. Plate i)t)A the bust of I'Vancesco Bracciolini (Victoria
8. R. Lee in An Bull., xxii (11)40), 11)7. and .Albert .Museum), traditionally and as it seemed
265. Q. The question whether tragic or epic poetry is to me - correctly attributed to Algardi. .A. .Nava Cel-
the higher form of art goes, of course, back to Aris- lini, in Paragone, \ in (1957), no. 84, 67, attributed this
totle's Poetics, XXVI. bust to P'inelli and reasserted her attribution ihid., \\
10. Pascoli, II, 77. See E. Battisti in Rendnonti (1960), no. 131, 19. It now appears that she is right, for
Accademia dei Lincei, viii (1933), 139. there is contemporary evidence tor this attribution (see
11. Malvasia (ed. 1678), 11, 267. J. Pope-Henncssy, Catal. of Ital. Sculpture in the
12. On this point see p. 140. Victoria and .ilhert .Museum, London, 1(^64, 11,609 ff>
13. Albani had planned to write an art theoretical no. 643). The bust shows to what extent Finclli was
treatise together with a Dr Orazio Zamboni (b. 7 dependent on Algardi. Together with the bust of
January ifto6), about whom little is known. Notes for Michelangelo Buonarroti the \'ounger, the Bracciolini
this w ork, w hich can be dated betw ecn the early 1 (1408 must be regarded as his highest achievement as a
and -Albani's death in 1660, were incorporated by portrait sculptor.
Malvasia in his Felsina pittrice (11, 244-38). 23. After A. Munoz's generic discussion of Algardi's
14. Trallato della pittura, Florence, 1652. portrait busts (Dedalo, i (1920), 289), the problem was
15. G. M. Tagliabue, '.Aristotelismo e Barocco', Atti not treated for forty years. In 1956 O. Raggio {The
del III Cotigresso Internazionale di Stiidi Lmanistici, Connoisseur, cxxxviii (1956), 203) published Algardi's
Rome, 1955, 119. bust of Cardinal Scipione Borghese in the Metro-
266. 16. It will be noticed that Cortona as a decorator politan Museum, New York, with some pertinent re-
(see p. 253) and as a painter had his following on marks. Few of the busts are dated and the following
different sides of the fence. sequence, taking into account only part of .Algardi's
17. The traditional birth-date 1595 has to be changed production, is an attempt at a chronological order. The
to 1598; see the document published by .\. .Arfelli, Santarelli seems to be quite early, perhaps the earliest
Arte Atilica e Moderna, il, no. 8 (igsgX 462. Roman portrait. A group of busts is close to the Millini
18. There were, however, many in his own genera- and should be dated about 1630; mainly the Cardinal
tion who held him in high esteem I mean not only the : Laudivio Zacchia [163] and the so-called Cardinal
small circle of close friends, such as Poussin and Sac- Paolo Emilio Zacchia Rondanini (Lgo Ojetti, Flor-
chi, but foreigners like Blanchard and Van Dyck, who ence). In contrast to these, the later busts are not only
painted his portrait, and Rubens, who wrote him a more classical in handling but also show a more
most flattering letter. R. S. Magurn, The Letters of balanced relation between the head and the lower part.
P. P. Rubens, Cambridge, Mass., 1955, 413, 509, A date for the later series is supplied by the magni-
rightly refutes J. Hess's opinion that this letter was a ficent busts of Donna Olimpia Pamphili and of the
seventeenth-century forgery (see Revue de I'art ancien Pamphili prince [164], after 1644, the year of Innocent
et moderne, LXIX (1936), 21). X's accession to the papal throne. (Bellori called the
19. The entire inventory of 1633 of the Ludovisi latter bust 'Benedetto Pamphili', who was the Pope's
collection was published by K. Garas, Burl. Mag., brother; it is now usually called Panfilo Pamphili but
cix (1967), 287 ff., 339 ff. may represent Camillo, the son of Panfilo and Olim-
267. 20. On .Algardi as restorer of antiques see M. pia.) The posthumous Frangipani busts in S.
three
Neusser in Belvedere, xiii (1928). .Apart from the un- .\Iarcello al (first mentioned in P. Totti, Ritratto
Corso
printed Harvard thesis by E. Barton (1952), no recent di Roma moderna, Rome, 1638) seem to mediate be-
study of .\lgardi exists and reference must be made to tween the early and late group of busts: they clearly
the articles by Posse in Jalirh. Preuss. Kunstslg., xx\ display strong classicizing tendencies. Finally, the bust
(1905), 169 and .A. Munoz in Attt e Memorie della of Mario Millini in S. .Maria del Popolo obviously
Reale .4ccademia di S. Luca, 11 (19 12), 37. echoes Bernini's I'rancis I of Este and must date from
21. If the apocryphal date is correct, the bust was after 1650; but it was probably executed by a studio
BIBLOSARTE
536 • NOTES TO CHAPTER II
hand. My chronology of Algardi's busts is at variance 31. In an illuminating paper, J. .Montagu convinc-
with that suggested by \'. Martinelli in // Seicentu ingly demonstrated the novelty of .Algardi's last work,
europeiu Rome, 1957, Catalogue, 246 fF. Another the high altar in S. Nicolo da Tolentino, where he
chronology has been attempted by A. Nava Cellini in show ed 'a deep niche containing figures car\ ed in varv-
Dizionano Bmgr. degli lialiam. 11 (1960), 350, and ing degrees of relief {Burl. .Mag., cxil (1970). 282 ff^.).
idem. Paragone, \\ (1964), no. 177, 15. For Algardi's }2. ¥uU\o Testi, in a letter of 1633 to the Duke of
busts of Innocent X in the Palazzo Doria, formerly Modena, called him the best sculptor in Rome after
attributed to Bernini, see Wittkower, Bernini. 211. Bernini (P'raschetti, Bernini. 75). On Duquesnoy see
269. 24. The list of Algardi's principal commissions M. Fransolet's monograph (Brussels, 1942), which is
during these years is impressive 1 644-8
: building and : tar from being conclusive.
decoration of the \'illa Doria-Pamphili (Belrespiro) How difficult it sometimes still is to keep .\lgardi and
(Chapter Note 37; the stuccoes of the villa have
12, Duquesnoy apart has been demonstrated in a model
now been studied in an exemplary paper by O. Raggio. paper by J. Montagu (in Bulletin des .Musees royaux
Paragons, no. 251 (1971), 3 ft.); 1645-9: fountain, d'art el d'histoire. Brussels, \.\x\iii-.vxxix (1966-7),
Cortile S. Damaso, \ atican ; hozzello for the fountain's 153 ff.) in which she investigates the well-known
relief with Pupe Liheniis haptizmg Seuphyles in the bronze group of the Flagellation of Christ, known in
Minneapolis Institute of Ans, see Wittkower in The many similar versions, some of which (she claims) are
Minneapolis Inst, oj Arts Bulletin (i960), 29; i648( ?)- attributable to Duquesnoy and others to .\lgardi.
50: stucco reliefs above Borromini's aedicules in the 33. He died at Leghorn, on his way to Paris, where he
nave of S. Giovanni in Laterano; 1646-53: Attila was travelling in response to the off'er of a position as
relief, St Peter's; 1649-50: entire stucco decoration of court sculptor and director of the Academy of Sculp-
S. Ignazio; statue of Innocent X, Capitol; 165 1-4: ture.
sculptural decoration of the main altar, S. N'icolo da 34. .According to Passeri he w as responsible for some
Tolentino (finished aficr Algardi's death by Guidi, of the putti in the foliage of the columns. Payments
Ferrata, and Francesco liarana). refer to the models of the angels above the columns, in
25. Documents in O. Pollak, Kiinstlatigkeit, II. Con- which, among others, Finelli also had a share (see O.
tract 2! July 1634; the figures were finished in 1644, Pollak, Kunsttiitigkeit. 11).
but the monument was not unveiled until 1652. 35. Finished in 1633. Documents published by E.
Peroni and Ferrata, on the strength of Passeri tradi- Dony, 'Francois Duquesnoy', Bulletin de I'lnstitut
tionally quoted as the artists responsible for the execu- historique beige de Rome. 11 (1922), 114. See also
tion of the two allegories, did not ioin Algardi's studio Fransolet, op. cit.
until the tomb was practically completed. 274. 36. The figure is now standing in the wrong niche,
26. The relief celebrates a papal triumph over w orldly on the left-hand and not on the right-hand side of the
pow ers. Leo's reign had lasted only tw en ty -seven days altar.Consequently the gesture of the hand, pointing
(1605) and offered little scop>e for a suitable subject. away from the altar, has lost its meaning.
The scene chosen shows Henry I\ of France signing 37. Compare, for instance, the left hands on the two
the peace with Spain. W ith one hand on the Gospels, statues; the one with dimples, agile and supple, the
the king affirms the sanctitv of the treaty in the pres- other neutral, a hand of stone.
ence of Leo XI, then papal legateat the French court. 275. 38. See Sobotka in Thieme-Becker also A. ;
27. The was derived from ancient or Early

idea Mufioz in L'Arte. xix (1916), 137. For the famous,
Christian sarcophagi, but the trapezoid shape was a often discussed bust in wax in the Musee \\ icar in
novelty. Lille, see Sobotka in Berliner Kiinstgeschuhtliche
270. 28.The great model was finished for the Holy Gesellschaft . Sitzungsherichte (1910), no. vii, 40. In
Year 1650 and placed in position. It is one of the few this context the marble bust in the Museo Estense,
such models that have survived (now Biblioteca \'alli- .Modena. should also be mentioned; see R. Salvini in
celliana). Domenico Guidi's collaboration (Passeri) Burl. .Mag., xc (1948), 93.
seems to be noticeable in the right half of the relief. It 39. B. Lossky, 'La Ste Suzanne de Duquesnoy et les
is less certain whether Ferrata had a share in the statues du 1 8e s.'. Re-cue helge archeologique el historique
execution, as Baldinucci maintains. de Fart, ix (1939), };^t^.
271. 29. The beginning of the work is not quite cer- 40. .M. Fransolet, 'Le Saint .Andre de Francois
tain; its completion
1647 is attested by P. Masini,
in Duquesnoy', Bulletin de I'lnstitut helge de Rome. l\
Bologna perluslrata. Bologna, 1666, i, 144. (1933). Duquesnoy made a small bozzetto for the St
272. 30. See also Correggio's Martyrdom ofS. Placidiis -Andrew between June 1627 and March 1628. The
and S. Flaiia (Parma, Gallery ). large model was in position as early as November 1629,
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS II AND 12 537
while work on the Susanna did not begin until a divino e profano after Philostratus's text (original
month later. model Palazzo Spada, Rome; original marble \'illa
276. 41. J. Hess in Revue de I'art ancten et moderne, Doria Pamphili, Rome, see I. Faldi, Arte Antua e
LXIX(iq;,6). 34. Moderna, 11 (1959), 52; replicas Victoria and Albert

For other busts by Duquesno\ see A. Nava Cellini, , .Museum, Detroit, Prado, etc.).
Paragone, VII (1Q56), no. 65, 27 f., K. Noehles, Arte 46. .\mong Duquesnoy 's few pupils there was Orfeo
Antua e Moderna, no. 25 (1964), S. and H. Rottgen, Boselli (c. 1600-67), who venerated his master as the
The Connoisseur (Feb. 1968), 94 ff. 'angelic sculptor' and the 'phoenix of our age'. Boselli
42. A reflection of this can be found in the many pic- is of particular interest because he left a (still un-
tures, particularly of the Dutch school, in which works published) manuscript of absorbing interest for the
by Duquesnoy are shown see, for instance, Frans van
; history of sculpture entitled 'Osservazioni della Scul-
Mieris, Detroit; .Adriaen van der Werff, Heylshof tura Antica' (Bibl. Corsiniana, Rome, MS. 1391); see
Coll., Worms; Netscher, The Hague (No. 127); and -M. Piacentini. in Boll, del R. Istituto di Archeologia e
above all G. Dou"s pictures, .Altman Coll., New York; Storia dell'Arte, IX, i-vi (1939), and P. Dent Weil, in
Duke of Rutland, Belvoir Castle ; L ffizi, \ ienna, Dres- Studies in Conservation, XI! (1967), 81 ff., with a partial
den, Louvre; Nat. Gall., London, etc. Still in the late translation of Boselli's Fifth Book on the restoration
eighteenth century Nollekens valued his Duquesnoy of antique sculpture.
models very highly; see. J. T. Smith, Nollekens and
his Times, London, 1949, 234.
43. However, the design of the \'ryburch monument CHAPTER 12

with the spread-out skin, on which the inscription is
placed, is comparatively Baroque, while that of the 279. I. In Bologna he executed the vaulting of S.
later van den Eynde monument is comparatively Petronio, S. Lucia with unfinished facade (1623), and
classical [171]. SS. Girolamo ed Eustachio, of which little survives.
D. Mahon, G.d.B.A., L.\ (1962), 73, read into my text His is also a project for the facade of S. Petronio, a
that I regard the Wyburch putti as less 'painterly' than fantastic cross-breed between Mannerism and Gothic
those of the van den Eynde monument, while I was, in (1626). In Parma the vaulting of Fomovo's SS. An-
fact, concerned with Duquesnoy 's turn trom an Italian nunziata was due to him, and in Modena he had an
(Titianesque) to a native (Rubenesque) taste. For Du- important share in the design of the Palazzo Ducale
quesnoy 's stylistic development, see also K. Noehles, ( 1 63 1 -4), see p. 29 1 For Girolamo and Carlo Rainal-
.
'Francesco Duquesnoy; un busto ignoto e la crono- di, see now the somewhat unwieldy monograph by
logia delle sue opere'. Arte Antica e Moderna, \ii, F. Fasolo 196 1 ), which contains, however, a great deal
(
no. 25 (1964), 86. of material and should be consulted for this section.
278. 44. .\s an example we may mention the Cupid as 2. See the synopsis in Fasolo, op. cit., 420. Girolamo's
Archer (described by Bellori; ivory, Musees Royaux most important work is the Carmelite church of S.
dWrt et d'Histoire, Brussels) which corresponds al- Silvestro at Caprarola near Rome (1621, Fasolo, 65).
most exactly in reverse to the archer in Titian's Bac- 3. See D. Frey in W lener Jahrb., Ill (1924), 43 ff.
chanal of Children; the same figure was used by Pous- 4. Wittkower in .Art Bull., Xix (1937), 256. Some
sin in the Dresden Venus and Cupid oi zhout 1630. scholars disagree with me and attribute the project to
45. Date: 1640-2. We show in illustration 174 the Girolamo; see C. Montalto in Palladio, viii (1958),
charming bozzetto in Berlin. The similarity of these 144, and K. Noehles, Zeitschr. f. Kiinstg., xxv (1962).
putti to those of Rubens was first pointed out by A. E. 168.
Brinckmann. We can follow Carlo's career from 1633 onwards (G.
It need hardly be emphasized that Duquesnoy 's .Matthiae in .-itti Figurative, II (1946), 49). His project
small representations of children are not genre. Just for the towers of St Peter's and the modernization of
like Rubens, he drew constantly on ancient texts and the fa<;:ade, dating from 1645, shows him dependent
ancient prototypes, see, for example, the Cupid chip- on his father's Mannerism. Between 1650 and 1653 he
ping theBow (marble, Berlin) in which he corrected made a number of plans for the Square of St Peter's
Parmigianino's painting of the same subject in \ ienna which are rather pedestrian and traditional (Brauer-
by reference to the Lysippian Eros; or the reliet of Wittkower, 67).
Putti and \ymph mocking Silenus (illustrating Xirgil's 5. Further on the history of S. Maria in Campitelli.
sixth Eclogue), which was in the collection of Cassiano Wittkower in Art Bull., xix 1937). See also Bassi in (
del Pozzo (versions Berlin, Brussels (private coll.), Riv. d'Arte, XX (1938), 193, and Argan, Commentan,
Dresden, \ ictoria and Albert Museum); or the Amor XI (i960), 74.
BIBLOSARTE
280. 6. In addition, for the motif otthe double columns but he obscured the whole problem by insisting on the
he was indebted to Cortona's S. Maria della Pace. exclusion ot Fontana's participation in 1662 because
282. 7. See, e.g., Gallo da Mondovi's S. Maria dell' at that time his name does not appear in the documents.
Assunta at Carrii (1703 18). Golzio overlooked, however, that the fa(;ade of S.
283. 8. Carlo had a special interest in the Capitol. His .\ndrea della \'alle is evidence of a collaboration of
father was in charge of the construction of the palace Rainaldi and Fontana at this period. These and other
on the left (1646), which was completed by the son in problems have now been resolved by H. Hager in his
the reign of .Alexander VII. fully documented history of the two churches, in Riim.
It is worth observing how the outside bays of S. jfahrh. J. Kun.<;tg., xii (1967-8), 191 fT.
Maria in Campitelli are integrated with the rest of the Bernini's name appears in the documents for the first
facade Rainaldi used the small order also tor the main
: time on 18 December 1674. But there can be little
entrance and repeated the shape of the pediment of the doubt that it was he who provided the disegno nuoio
windows over the central window of the upper tier. \t for S. Maria di Monte Santo which was used after the
thesame time, he gave the pilasters at both ends of the fall of 1673.
front a typically Mannerist double function : they be- 286. 15. Rainaldi used the columns from Bernini's
long as much to the church as to the adjoining palaces. dismantled tower of St Peter's (Golzio, Archivi, x
Q. In Rome itself, see, e.g., the facades of S. Apol- (1943X58).
linare, S. Caterina della Ruota, and SS. Trinita in Via 16. I mention the tomb of Clement IX in S. Maria
Condotti. Rainaldi's own unfinished facâde of S. Maggiore (1671), the Ceva (1672) and Bonelli (1673)
Angelo Custodeat Ascoli Piceno (1684-5) w^s planned tombs in S. Venanzio and S. Maria sopra Minerva
on the same scheme but with a colossal order; the respectively the richly decorated fountains in the gar-
;
Chiesa del Carmine also at .Ascoli Piceno has a simple den of the Palazzo Borghese (1672-3, see Chapter 13,
aedicule facade in two tiers (1687); for these churches, Note 40) and the loggia facing the Tiber in the same
see Fasolo, 372. palace ( 675) the high altars in S. Lorenzo in Lucina
1 ;
An interesting adaptation of the facade of S. Maria in (1675) and SS. Angeli Custodi (1681, destroyed); the
Campitelli is that of the cathedral at Syracuse (1728), completion of the facade of S. Maria in Via (1681), and
probably designed by Don Andrea Palma from Pal- the little church of S. Sudario (about 1685); finally, the
ermo and not by Pompeo Picherali as usually main- undistinguished Palazzo Mancini-Salviati al Corso,
tained (see F. Meli, Archivto Storico per la Sicilia, iv-v executed, according to L. Salerno's suggestion (in Via
(1938-9), 341). The grandest example in Venice is S. del Corso, Rome, 1961, 244), by Sebastiano Cipriani
Maria degli Scalzi by Giuseppe Sardi (1672-80), who after Rainaldi's death in 1690. The Borrominesque
gave the type a characteristically Venetian note. entrance doors to the Palazzo Grillo have always been
For the history of the aedicule fa9ade, see now^ also attributed to Carlo Rainaldi. The addition of the
N. T. Whitman, m Journal Soc. Architect. Historians, domed portion to Soria's cathedral of Monte Com-
XXVII (1968), 108 ff. patri, usually attributed to C. Rainaldi (Hempel,
10. The facade was executed between 1661 and 1665. Mandl, Matthiae, Wittkower), was executed in the
For illustrations of the various designs, see Wittkower, nineteenth century, as Howard Hibbard has con-
^rr 5a//., XIX (1937), figures 17,20-3, andF. Fasolo in vincingly pointed out to me.
Palladia, I (1951), 34-8. K. Noehles, loc. cit., 176 (see above. Note 11), has
11. Fontana, in fact, received payments in January correctly observed that Rainaldi's late work is flat
1662; see Fasolo, loc. cit. Fasolo, Rainaldi, 1 961, 379 f., rather than spatial and sculptural. In this respect
objects to Fontana's participation without valid Rainaldi leads on to the classicizing tendencies of the
reasons. K. Noehles, Zeitschr. f. Kiinstg., xxv (1962), end of the century.
175, returns to my interpretation of the evidence. 288. 17. Archivio di Stato, Rome, Cart. 80, R. 537.
284. 12. The greatest width of the oval dome lies See also Roma, xvi (1938), 477. The church itself is
further back in the wedge-shaped area than that of the not by Longhi, as has wrongly been maintained. An
circular dome, namely at a point where the diameter interesting project by Longhi for the facade of S.
of the oval equals that of the circle. Giovanni Calibita over a concave columnar plan in the
285. 13. Carlo Fontana was responsible for parts of the Albertina, Vienna, dating from 1644, and thus pre-
drum, the dome, and the choir. ceding SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio, was published by
14. I have tried (in Art Bull., xix (1937), 245) to dis- J. Varriano, in An Bull., Lil (1970), 71.
entangle the complex history of these churches. V. 18. It is precisely the relatively little projection from
Golzio published new documents (Archivi, viii ( 1 941 ), one column to the next that forces the eye to see the
122) which allow the establishment of correct dates. triad as a unit.
BIBLOSARTE
iQ. If, according to the well-informed Passcri (Hess, Of importance among Longhi's work are the staircase
235), some sculptural decoration was planned on the (c. 1640) in Ammanati's Palazzo Caetani (now Rus-
large scale wall surfaces, now bare, it would certainly poli) on the Corso and, above all, the even more
not have been reliefs of excessive dimensions, for the interesting staircase hall in the Palazzo Ginctti at Vel-
appearance of plain wall at these points is very impor- letri (after 1644, largely destroyed during the last war).
tant to set off the columnar motif. Longhi's will was published by V Golzio . in .irchrvi,
20. The staircase has, of course, an articulating func- V (1938), 140.

tion. It not only stresses the unity of the whole front, 24. Vincenzo, who was a papal architect, had an
but also knits together the columns framing the out- architect son, Felice (i. 1626 77). It was Felice (and
side bays (rising steps) as well as the whole central area not Vincenzo, as usually maintained, also in the first
(landing). ed. of this book) who worked in the Palazzo Chigi on

21. It is interesting that such a shrewd observer as the Piazza Colonna (courtyard and staircase) and was
Gurlitt (Geschnhle ties Bannkstiles, Stuttgart, 1887, concerned with a systematiz^tion of the Piazz.a Colon-
400) describes the facade as if this were so. If the - na for Alexander VII; see Incisa della Rocchetta in
arch of the larger pediment is prolonged downwards, Via del Corso, 1961. 185. He was also employed by the
it meets exactly the edge of the capital of the third Chigi for their palace in Piazza SS. ."Xpostoli (Brauer-
column. See also H. Sedlmayr's interpretation of this Wittkower, 127 fT. Golzio, Documenti, 4
; ff. ; also
facade (Epmheit iind H'erke, i960, 11, 57). above. Chapter 8, Note 85).
22. Recently destroyed. For an illustration see 289. 25. See Bianca Rosa Ontini, La Chiesa di S. Do-
Wittkower, Art Bull., \i\ (1937), figure 64. menuo in Roma, Rome [n.d., c. 1952]. Nicola Turriani
23. For the history of S. Carlo, see mainly B. Nogara, was probably the brother of the better-known Orazio
SS. Amhrugw e Carlo al Corso (Chiese di Roma (Donati, Art Tie, 355). Vincenzo della Greca only
illustr.), Rome, 1923. Foundation stone: 29 January added the portal, without any regard for the architec-
1612. Onorio Longhi died in 1619. In 1635 the nave is ture of Turriani's facade.
vaulted {Roma, xvi (1938), 119). 1651 the high altar : 26. O. Pollak in Kiinstg. Jahrh. der k.k. Zentral-
unveiled (ihid., 528). c. 1656: cessation of Martino Kommtssion, ill (1909), 133 fT.
Longhi's activity. 1662: Tommaso Zanoli and Fra 27. The decoration of the gallery by Carlo Fontana's
Mario da Canepina appointed as architects (see docu- nephew, Girolamo, was not finished until 1703. The
ments published by L. Salerno in I'la del Corso, 1961, gallery makes, therefore, a later impression than is
146 ff., also for the following. Salerno denies any par- warranted by its architecture. For the frescoes of the
ticipation of Carlo Fontana who, according to O. vaulting, see p. 334.
PoUak's unusually reliable Cortona article in Thieme- 28. I. Faldi, // Palazzo Pamphily al Collegio Romano,
Becker, received payments from 1660 onwards). Rome (Associazione Aziende Ordinarie di Credito),
1665 ff. : Cortona directs construction of transept and 1957, with good illustrations.
choir. 1668-72: drum and dome executed from Cor- 29. About 1665 Antonio Grande was engaged on
del
tona's design, who also designed the stucco decora- the rebuilding of the Colonna palaces at Genazzano
tions of nave, transept, and choir. Payments for C. and Pahano. In 1666 and 1667 he was paid for work in
Fancelli's stuccoes between 1674 and 1677 (see also S. Agnese in Piazza Navona. On his part in the Palazzo
Titi, ed. 1674, 403). 1672: church mainly completed, di Spagna, see E. Hempel, Borromint, Vienna, 1924,
but finally in 1679 (Pastor, xiv, ii, 691). 1682-4: facade .29 f.
by Giovan Battista Menicucci from

(insignificant) 30. For Carcani's stucco decoration, see below,
Cardinal Omodei's design. p. 435. It must be pointed out that the traditional date
Longhi's fa9ade of S. .'\ntonio de' Portoghesi, be- 'after 1650' for Rossi's architecture is probably too
gun after 15 December 1629 (Hibbard, Boll. d'Arte, early. Titi, in his edition of 1674, 244, still mentions
Lii (1967), 113, no. 167), but left unfinished when he Maderno's chapel and only in the edition of 1686, 195,
moved during the last years of his life to Milan, shows remarks that it has been replaced by that of G. .A. de'
a considerable increase in sculptural decoration as Rossi. For all works by G. .\. de' Rossi, the mono-
compared with SS. Vincenzo ed .Anastasio but is archi- graph by G. Spagnesi (see Bibliography) has now to
tecturally less remarkable, in part because he retrained be consulted.

entirely from the use of columns (finished 1695 by Rossi's earliest work was probably the little church
Cristoforo Schor, son of Giovan Paolo see Descrizione ; S. Maria in Publicolis.
di Roma moderna, 1697, 486; also .Ansaldi in Capito- î. Titi, ed. 1686, 332. - Worthy of note is the little
lium, IX (1933), 61 1 ff., and U. Vichi, in // Santo, vii forecourt, skilfully squeezed in on the restricted site.
(1967), 339-54)- M. Bosi, S. .Maria in Campo .Marzio (Le chiese di
BIBLOSARTE
540 •
NOTES TO CHAPTER 12
Roma illustrate, 61), Rome, ii)6i, is not very useful so iii, iv. The names of the papal architects, /Aitgi Art-
far as Rossi's architecture is concerned. But new gucci and Domemco Caslelli, often recur in documents,
material (drawings and documents) has been pub- but they were officials rather than creative masters.
lished by H. Hager, in Cummentari, xviii (1Q67), .'\rigucci's most notable building is the dry double
329 ff. tower facade of S. Anastasia, often wrongly ascribed to

32. On the site was an older chapel built by Maderno. Bernini (Battaglia in Palladto, vii (1942), 174-83).
Rossi's authorship of the present chapel is attested by Castelli (d. 1658), in the papal office of works from
Pascoli (1, 317) and Titi (ed. 1686, 98), who saw it in 1623 to 1657, is responsible for the rebuilding of S.
course of construction and mentions the splendid in- Girolamo della Carita (1652-8, docs, in Fasolo,
crustation with coloured marbles. Carlo Francesco Ramaldi, 1961).
Bizzacheri finished the chapel, especially the decora- V. Domenichino had pretensions as an architect and
tion of the oval dome, between 1695 and 1707. architectural drawings by him for S. Ignazio and
290. 33. A. Mezzetti, Palazzo Altieri, Rome, 195 1; other schemes (J. Pope-Hennessy, The Drawings of
V. Martinelli, Commentari, x (1959), 206. Also A. Domenichino, London, 1948, 121) are not without
Schiavo, The Allien Palace, Rome, 1965. The older proficiency.
palace alone is shown in Lieven Cruyl's drawing in the vi. Andrea âcr/?; also regarded architecture as a side-
Albertina (H. Egger, Riimische Vediilen, 11, plate 89); line. In 1637 he is first called 'architect'. N. Wibiral
see also Falda, Nunvi disegm deU'architellura (before (Palladio, V (1955), 56-65) has made it probable that
1677), plate 38. The important staircase was finished he designed the Acqua Acetosa, often attributed to
in 1673 (Pastor, xiv, i, 626). Carlo Fontana also made Bernini.
projects for the extension of this building (Couden- vii. The Jesuit Ora£(o Craw; ( 1 583- 1654), depending
hove-Erthal, Carlo Fonlana, 30). - Fontana's Palazzo on a Maderno-Borromini project, designed and exe-
Bigazzini on Piazza S. Marco (before 1677, pulled cuted the church of S. Ignazio, one of the largest in
down 1900) was dependent on the Palazzo Altieri. Rome (1626-50). At different stages of the erection,
34. The palace, overlooking the Piazza Venezia, was commissions of specialists were called in : 1627 for the
Francesco D'Aste: contract 7 June 1658 (see
built for plan; 1639 for the sacristy; 1642 for the facade, which
L. Salerno, in Via del Corso, 1961, 256). Finished has often been wrongly attributed to Algardi and ; 1
677
probably before 1665 (see Cruyl's drawing, Egger, for the dome, which remained unexecuted. See C. Bri-
Riimnche Vediiten, 11, plate 90). carelli, 'O. G. architetto', Civilla Caltolica, LXXiii
Worthy of note also De' Rossi's Palazzo Carpegna at (1922), 13 ff.; D. Frey in Wiener Jahrh., Ill (1924),
Carpegna, published by M. Tafuri, in Palatino, xi II ff. ; C. Montalto in Boll, del Centro di studi per la
(1967), 133 ff- storia deirarchitettura, no. 11 (1957), t,t,.
35. See below, p. 376. Although O. Pollak (Zeilschrift f. Geschichte d.

viii.
36. See Roma anttca e moderna, Rome, 1765, II, 254; Architektur,v, 1910-11) seemed to have deflated the
also Salerno, op. cit., 220. view, going back to Passeri, that Alessandro .4lgardt
37. Among the lesser figures active in Rome at this was a practising architect, more recent research has
period may be mentioned vindicated the contemporary tradition. In any case,
i. Paolo Maruscelli ( 1 594-1649), architect of the Con- the Villa Doria-Pamphih outside Porta S. Pancrazio
gregation of St Philip Neri until 1637 (Pollak, Kunst- (executed mainly in 1646-8) is owed to him, while the
tdtigkeit, whom we have mentioned as Borro-
I, 423), Bolognese painter Giovan Francesco Grimaldi served
mini's competitor. He has to his credit the Palazzo as his clerk. Apart from its size - the villa is the largest
Madama (according to Ferrerio, Palazzi di Roma, in Rome - the building has not much to recommend
Rome [n.d.], plate 11, to be dated 1642) with top- it. It is a rather dry, unimaginative structure, distin-
heavy window frames and arrangement ofa decorative guished, however, by its high-class stucco decoration.
the mezzanine under the cornice; remarkable because The question of the Villa Pamphili and its stuccoes
the top floor is more important than the piano nobile. has now been fully investigated in a brilliant paper by
ii. Mattia de' Rossi (1637-95), although much O. Raggio, in Paragone, no. 251 (1971), 3-38. Recently
younger, may here be mentioned because he worked F. Fasolo {Fede ed Arte, xi (1963), 66 ft.) suggested
for Bernini for almost a whole generation, serving that Algardi made the plans for S. Nicolo da Tolen-
many times as his clerk of works. As an architect in his tino, previously attributed to G. M. Baratta. j
own right he built mainly chapels and altars without ix. Giovan Baltista Mola (1585- 1665), born at Cold- I
special distinction. His largest work, the facade of S. rerio near Como; from 1612 to 1616 in Rome; in 1616
Francesco a Ripa (1692 f.), is a frigid, classicizing appointed 'architetto della camera apostolica'. His few
affair. buildings in a retardataire style are discussed by K.
BIBLOSARTE
541
Noehles in the Introduction to his edition of Mola's 46. The window below is contained in an arched
important Roman guide-book published from the 'Palladio motif, the rectangular one above by an
signed Viterbo manuscript of 1663 (Roma I 'anno i66j aedicule frame.
di Gtov. Batt. Mola, Berhn, 1966). 47. See Palladio's S. Giorgio Maggiore, where a
most important work is the rather
291. 38. Avanzini's system of small orders is seen through the screen of
charming modernization of the Ducal Palace at columns framing the altar.
Sassuolo. 298. 48. P. Bjurstrom in his informative and thought-
The problems concerning the Palazzo Ducale at ful book Giacomo Torelli and Baroque Stage Design,
Modena have been discussed with great circumspec- Stockholm, 1961, 104, 106, has discussed the close
tion by L. Zanugg in Riv. del R. ht., iX (1942), 212. affinity of Torelli's stage sets to Longhena's architec-
39. By Giuseppe Tubertini, 1787. Luigi Acquisti's ture. Torelli, bom at Fano in 1608, worked in Venice
sculptural decoration also dates from this period. The from 1640 to 1645; for the next fifteen years he was
facade was built in 1905. stage designer at the Paris court. In 1661 he returned
292. 40. Bergonzoni goes a step beyond Borromini by to Fano, where he died in 1678.
opening up the pillars under the pendentives into 49. Wittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age of
chapels and corettt. Also the decorative detail of the Humanism, 3rd ed., London, 1962, 97.
coretti has a Late Baroque quality. 50. The conception of both churches is basically dif-
41. The biography of Longhena by C. Semenzato ferent the : one is a typical Renaissance 'wall structure',
(L'archttettura di B. Longhena, Padua, 1954) is not the other (as shown in the text) a 'skeleton structure'.
very satisfactory. E. Bassi's chapter on Longhena in In a very direct sense the Salute is constructed like a
Architettura del Set e Settecento a Venezia, 1962, 83- Gothic building. W. Lotz (Rbm.Jahrb.f Kunstg., vii
185 (the backbone of her book), is infinitely better. (1955), 22) has demonstrated that Labacco published
42. See among others the old but still basic work by Antonio da Sangallo's project for S. Giovanni de'
G. A. Moschini, La chtesa e il seminario di S. Maria Fiorentini, Rome.
della Salute, Venice, 1842; further V. Piva, // tempio 299. 51. It is likely that Longhena followed Michel-
delta Salute, Venice, 1930, and R. Wittkower, 'S. angelo's design for the dome of St Peter's also for the
Maria della Salute: scenographic Architecture and false inner lantern which lies between the two shells
the Venetian Bzroque ,yournal.of the Society of Archi- of the dome. But it may be recalled that there was a
tectural Historians, XVI (1957), and idem in Saggi e long North Italian tradition for treating the inner and
Alemorie di storia dell' arte, in (1963). outer lantern independently of each other.
43. See Bramante's S. Maria Canepanova at Pavia
di 52. I have left unmentioned that the rich sculptural
(begun 1492 ?) or Battaglio's S. Maria della Croce near decoration contributes considerably to the picturesque
Crema (1490- 1500). - Even the high drum with two impression of the building. For a full understanding
round-headed windows to each wall section stems of the structure, the programme of the decoration must
from this tradition. be considered.
R. Pallucchini, in a review of my book in Arte Veneta, 53. See p. 375.
xiii-xiv (1959-60), 250, seems to infer that I over- 54. J. Tiozzo, La Cattedrale dt Chioggia, Chioggia,
looked the importance of Sanmicheli's S. Maria di 1929.
Campagna near Verona as prototype of the Salute. 55. C. Montibeller, 'La Pianta originale inedita della
But S. Maria di Campagna is not closer to the Salute chiesa dei Padri Carmelitani Scalzi di B. Longhena',
than churches of the Bramantesque tradition and, like Arte Veneta, VII (1953), 172. For the facade by G.
them, moreover, lacks the ambulatory. E. Bassi, too Sardi, see above. Note 9.
(op. cit., 174), rejects the influence of the Madonna di 56. E. Bassi, 'Gli architetti dell'Ospedaletto', Arte
Campagna on Longhena. Veneta, vi (1952), 175.
The reader may also be referred to G. Fiocco's critical 57. An example of his early Scamozzesque style is
remarks in Barocco europeo e Barocco veneziano, Flor- the Palazzo Giustinian-Lolin (after 1625).
ence, 1963, 89. 58. The Palazzo Rezzonico, the more restrained of
297. 44. The oddly shaped units lie behind the large the two, was going up in 1667. The top floor was built
pillars of the octagon and are, therefore, visually of no by Giorgio Massari, 1 752-6 (see G. Mariacher, in Boll.
consequence whatsoever. Alusei Ciiici Veneziani, IX (1964), no. 3, 4 ff^.). The

45. For instance, the arch of the octagon is repeated Palazzo Pesaro was begun between 1652 and 1659.
in the arch of each chapel and again in that of the seg- Progress was slow. In 1676 the fa(;ade was begun. In
mental window. Moreover, all the orders tally and 1679 the piano nohile was finished, but the palace was
supplement each other; see illustration 186. completed by Antonio Gaspari only in 1710. See G.
BIBLOSARTE
542 •
NOTES TO CHAPTER 12
Fiocco, 'Palazzo Pesaro', Riv. mensile di Venezia (1925), Badia: Giambologna's Cappella di S. Antonio in S.
377 alsoG. Mariacher in Ateneu Veneto, cxxxv (1951);
; Marco (1578-89) and Giovanni Caccini's chancel of
G. Badile in Arte Venela^ vi {1952), 166 and, above all, ; S.Domenico at Fiesole (1603-6).
E. Bassi in Saggi e Memorie di slona dell'arte, 111 (1963), 64. Reliefsand figures are later, mainly by Foggini
88 (with new documents). For other works by Lon- and Gaetano is the best place to study
his school. S.
ghena, see E. Bassi, in Cntica d'Arte, xi (1964), 31 xii ; Florentine sculpture of the late Seicento. For the
(1965), no. 70, 43 and no. 73, 42. names of the sculptors and the problem of dating, see
For Gaspari (c 660- 1 749), see Bassi's basic study,
1 in Lankheit, 71 f
Saggi e Memnrie (above), 55-108. 65. Baldinucci, ed. 1846, iv, 427.
301. 59 D. Giovannozzi in L'Arte, xxxix (1936), 33, 66. The technique had been developed in Rome. It
and W. and E. Paatz, Die Kirchen von Florenz, Frank- was introduced into Naples by Dosio, who probably
furt-on-Main, 1940-54, in, 335,471, where the whole began the marble incrustation of the Certosa of S.
question is lucidly summarized. See also Panofsky's Martino (Wachler in Rom.Jahrb.f. Kiinstg., i\ (1940),
interesting remarks on Silvani's 'compromise solu- 194). It was Fanzago and others such as Dionisio Laz-
tion' (Meaning in the Visual Arts, New York, 1955, zari (d. 1690), the architect of the dome of St Philip
193)- Neri, who gave this decorative technique the Neapoli-

60. Documents Linnenkamp,
for Parigi's share in R. tan imprint. Thus transformed, it was assimilated
Riv. d'Arte, viii (1958), 55, 59. Giuseppe Ruggieri through Fanzago in other Italian cities (Venice,
added the northern and southern wings in 1764 and Bergamo).
1783 respectively; the. latter was not finished until the 67. Documents prove that Fanzago, and not Dosio,
beginning of the nineteenth century. See also F. made the design; see P. Fogaccia, Cosimo Fanzago,
Morandini, 'Palazzo Pitti, la sua costruzione e i suc- Bergamo, 1945.
cessivi ingrandimenti', Commentan, xvi (1965), 35 ff. 68. For Fanzago see the unsatisfactory^ work by
On the strength of a Callot drawing of 1630, Sir Fogaccia, with further references.
Anthony Blunt (The French Drawings at Windsor 303. 69. Chiesa dell'Ascensione a Chiaia (1622-45),
Castle, London, 1945, 19) has made it probable that S. Maria dei Monti (early), S. Trinita delle Monache
all the extensions were derived from a Buontalenti (after 1630, destroyed), S. Teresa a Chiaia (1650-62),
project made for Ferdinand I. S. Maria Maggiore ('La Pietrasanta', 1653-67), an im-
61 There is no satisfactory modern work on Silvani. proved version of the Ascensione plan with oval satel-
Apart from the brief chapter in Venturi (xi, 2, 624), the lite chapels instead of square ones, S. Maria Egiziaca
reader must be referred to R. Linnenkamp's publica- (1651-1717).
tion of a contemporary Life of Silvani (Rtv. d'Arte, 70. is supported by his Latin-cross plans, such
This
VIII (1958), 73-1 11) which Baldinucci used for his Maria degli Angeli alle Croci (1639) and the even
as S.
Vtta. more interesting S. Giorgio Maggiore (1640-78), the
62. Foundation stone: 1604. The general lines of the design of which owes much to Venice.
plan seem to have been worked out by the Theatine 304. 71 U. Prota-Giurleo, 'Lazare veni Foras', //
. Fm-
Don Anselmo Cangiani. Some time between 1604 and doro, IV (1957), 90 ff., dated 1653 from
published a list
1628 Nigetti worked on the structure, without much the Naples notarial archive enumerating works of the
effect. The present church is to all intents and pur- Lazzari shop (above Note 66), and this list includes
poses Gherardo Silvani's work; see Baldinucci, ed. the facades of both the Sapienza and the Palazzo
1846, 353; Paatz, Kirchen von Florenz, iv, 181;
IV, Firrao.
Berti in Riv. d'Arte, xxvi (1950), 157. Inscription on 72. U. Prota-Giurleo, 'Alcuni dubbi su Fanzago
the facade; 1645. Consecration of the church: 1649. architetto', // Fuidoro, iii (1956), 1 17 ff., attributes the
The ornamental by Alessandro
detail of the facade is Palazzo Donn'Anna to Bartolomeo Picchiati (see next
Neri Malavisti. The statues of the i68os are by Bal- Note). On the latter's death Onofrio Gisolfi continued
thasar Permoser, Anton Francesco Andreozzi, and the palace; see F. Strazzullo, Architetti e ingegnen
Carlo Marcellini. Lankheit, 172, dates them 1687-8. napoletani dal '^00 al '700, Naples, 1969, 181 f. I owe
302. 63. A particularly good example of this style is the the last two notes to the kindness of Fred Braueen.
Badia, rebuilt between 1627 and 163 1 (Paatz, op. cit., 73. Among other Neapohtan architects of this period
I, 267) by Matteo Segaloni, about whom little is the names of Bartolomeo Picchiati (d. 1643) and his
known. Here also the characteristic screening-off of son, Francesco Antonio (1619-94), should at least be
the monks' choir by the so-called Palladio-motif, mentioned. The former began as Domenico Fontana's
which had a home in Florence from the mid sixteenth clerk of works and designed later S. Giorgio dei Geno-
centun,' onwards. Prominent examples before the vesi (1626) and S. Agostino alia Zecca (1641), which
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS 12 AND 13 •
543
was given its extravagant apse a hundred years later itdates, according to inscription, from 1648, and the
(1756-61 ) by Giuseppe Astarita and Giuseppe de Vita. weaker female portrait from 1650.
The son designed the Guglia di S. Domenico (1658, For Finelli's portrait busts, see the informative article
finished 1737 by D. A. Vaccaro), the church and palace by A. Nava Cellini in Paragone, xi (i960), 9-30.
of the Monte della Misericordia (1658-70), and the 7. Documents O. Pollak, Kunstidtigkeit, 11.
in
churches of S. Giovanni Battista and S. Maria dei 306. 8. For Bolgi's work under and with Bernini, see
Miracoh (1661-75). Wittkower, Bernini, Catalogue, nos 21, 25, 29, 33, 36,
40, 46, 47. For Bolgi's portrait busts, see A. Nava Cel-
CHAPTER 13 lini in Paragone, XIII (1962), no. 147, 24.
9. See the bust of Francesco de Caro and the praying

305. I. No less than thirty-nine masons and sculptors figure of Giuseppe de Caro (signed and dated 1653) in
were employed, among them names
all the well-known the Cappella Cacace in S. Lorenzo.
of the Bernini studio - Giacomo Balsimello, Matteo V. Martinelli in Commentan, x (1959), 137, judges
Bonarelli, Francesco Baratta, and Niccolo Sale; Bolgi's Neapolitan career rather more positively. Mar-
further the more distinguished Bolgi, Ferrata, Raggi, tinelli's paper (with auvre catalogue) contains a num-
Cosimo and Giacomo Antonio Fancelli, Girolamo Lu- ber of attributions and suggestions (mainly regarding
centi, Lazzaro Morelli, Giuseppe Peroni, and others. the collaboration with Bernini) to which I cannot fully
2. Among other works, he carried out the four winged agree. Cellini's criticism in Paragone (last Note) seems
victories for Bernini's tower of St Peter's (1640-2), to me entirely justified.
which were later used for Innocent X's coats of arms Taking up an eighteenth-century tradition, John
10.
in the aisles of the basilica. A catalogue of his auvre Pope-Hennessy (in Slil iind Vherlieferung in der Kunsi
was published by V. Martinelli in Commenlari, iv des Ahendlandes, Akten des 21. Internal. Kongresses
(i953)> 154- fiir Kunstgeschichte, Bonn, 1964, 11, 105) attributed
3. He joined, in fact, Pietro Bernini's studio, but was the Palestrina Pieta (as by Michelangelo in the
straightaway employed by Gianlorenzo on the Apollo Accademia, Florence) to Menghini. I doubt the cor-
and Daphne group. rectness of this attribution and also that suggested
4. Finelli in these years executed mainly the bust of by Ettore Sestieri (in Commentari, xx (1969), 75 ff.),
Cardinal Ottavio Bandini (1628, S. Silvestro al Quiri- who varied Pope-Hennessy's hypothesis; he does not
nale) and the Cortonesque St Cecilia (1629-33, S. exclude Menghini's participation, but introduces as
Maria di Loreto), the counterpart to Duquesnoy's deus ex machma Bernini, who would have invented this
Susanna. piece in imitation of Michelangelo and started it.
Passeri (ed. Hess, 248), in his well-informed Life of 307. 1 1 . There is no reason to doubt Pascoli's informa-
Finelli, writes in detail about the cabals in Rome, and tion in his Life of CaflFa (i, 256) that the artist was bom
later in Naples. in 1635. The date of his death (before 10 September

5.His most important works in Naples are the two 1667) has been established by E. Sammut in Scientia,
marble statues of St Peter and St Paul, left and right of XXIII (1957), 136.
the entrance to the Cappella del Tesoro, Cathedral 12. A bozzetto for this figure in the Palazzo Venezia,
(1634 c. and eleven bronze statues inside the
1640), Rome, was published by R. Vramtshtr^tr,- Wiener
same chapel (finished 1646; see A. Bellucci, Memorie Jahrb., xxii (1969), 178 ff.
star, ed artisltche del Tesoro etc., Naples, 19 15); the 13. The St Catherine was probably finished in 1667.
figures of Cesare and Antonino Firrao, princes of S. (A drawing for the St Catherine at Darmstadt was pub-
Agata, in the left transept of S. Paolo Maggiore (1640), lished by G. Bergstrasser, in Revue de I'Art, no. 6
which foUowthe type of Naccherino's Pignatelh tomb (1969), 88 f.). The St Thomas of Villanova Chapel in
in S. Maria Mater Domini and the sculptural decora-
; S. Agostino was begun in 1 661, and Caffa's group was
tion of the Cappella Filomarini is SS. Apostoli, with finished by Ferrata after 1668 (see Note 5). The relief 1
the exception of Duquesnoy's putto relief (c. 1642-7). in S. Agnese, begun was also finished by Fer-
in 1660,
In addition, he made the kneeling figures of the vice- rata with the assistance of the weak Giovan Francesco
roy, the Count of Monterey, and his wife for the church Rossi. The date 1669 which appears with Caffa's sig-
of the Agustinas Recoletas at Salamanca (1636), which nature on the St Rosa at Lima (see J. Fleming, Burl.
also follow Naccherino's Pignatelli. Mag., Lxxxix (1947), 89) must have been added by
6. See tombs of Giuseppe and Virginia Bonanni
his another hand since Caffa was dead at the time, and
in S. Caterina da Siena a Monte Magnanapoli (A. consequently the figure was probably not finished by
Muiioz in Vita d'Arie, xi (1913), 33, and Dedalo, ill the artist himself In addition, the impressive mem-
(1922), 688). The male portrait is the better of the two; orial statue of Alexander VII in the cathedral at Siena
BIBLOSARTE
was once again finished by Ferrata (W. Hager, Die stucco decoration in the Sala Ducale, Vatican (1656);
Ehrenstatuen tier Papste, Leipzig, 1925, 25), while G. collaboration on the Cathedra (1658-64); the sculp-
Mazzuoh, Caffa's only pupil, executed the commis- tural decoration of the church at Castel Gandolfo
sion given to Carta for the Baptism of Christ for the (1660 I ); statue of .-Mexander VII, Cathedral, Siena
high altar of the cathedral at Valletta, Malta (Witt- (166 1 -3); St Bernard, Chigi Chapel, Cathedral, Siena
kower, Zeitschr.f. h. Kunst, LXii {1928-9), 227). Caffa's (1662-3); rnost of the stuccoes in S. Andrea al Quiri-
signed bronze bust of Alexander \'II has been nale (1662-5); the Angel with the Column on the
acquired by the Metropolitan Museum, New York; Ponte S. .^ngelo (1667-70); etc.
see Wittkower in The Metrop. Mus. of Art Bulletin 23. Since the publication of the article by A. Nava in
(April 1959). Another fine version in Siena Cathedral; L'Arte, n.s. viii (1937), it has become customary to
see V. Martinelli, / ntratti di pontefici di G. L. Bermni, underestimate Raggi's achievement, and also to find in
Rome, 1956, 45. his work a 'neo-Cinquecentesque' revivalism, which

308. 14. The present reliefs by PietroBracci( 1755) are should, however, be considered with due caution.
isolated features and cannot accord with Caffa's Good illustrations in Donati, Art. Tic.
original project. 311. 24. Itisthis that may be interpreted as a Manner-
15. The female figure in the execution is consider- ist revival.
ably more classical than in the bozzetto, and this 312. 25. They represent different countries paying
change was certainly due to Ferrata after Caffa's homage to the Name of Jesus (Philippians, 2, 10).
death. I cannot agree with A. N. Cellini (Paragone, vii 26. Retti (active 1670- 1709), whom I have mentioned
(1956), no. 83, 23) who attributes the execution of the before (p. 310), can best be studied in the curiously
'Charity' to Caff a. In fact, Ferrata finished the 'Char- brittle, luminous relief with over-long, boneless
ity' only in May 1669, because it had been merely figures on the tomb of Clement X (c. 1686, St Peter's).
roughed out by Caff a. - For Michele Maglia, see p. 316. - Naldini (1619, not
16. A. Nava CeUini, 'Contributo al periodo napole- 16 15, -91) first belonged to the circle of Sacchi and
tano di Ercole Ferrata', Paragone, xii {1961), no. 137, Maratti and was in opposition to Bernini. His main
37- work at this period is the many stuccoes in S. Martino
17. The twolesser allegories in flat relief are also by ai Monti (payments between 1649 and 1652 ; see A. B.
Ferrata. - Mari worked for Bernini mainly in the Sutherland, Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), 1 16). Later he be-
1650s. His principal work is the Mora in the Piazza came closely associated with Bernini. He was respon-
Navona (1653-5) from Bernini's design. sible for the sculptural decoration of Bernini's church
18. Participation in the decoration of S. Maria del at Ariccia (1664) and on the upper landing of the Scala
Popolo (1655-9); collaboration on the Cathedra ( 1658- Regia (1665). He also had a share in the Cathedra
60); statue of St Catherine for the Cappella Chigi in (1665). In theGesii the colossal figures of Temperance
the cathedral at Siena as counterpart to Bernini's. and Justice under the dome are his work.
Magdalen and Jerome and Raggi's St Bernard (1662- 27. Works by him are at Bologna, Faenza, Forli,
3); execution of the Elephant carrying the Obehsk, Genoa, Modena, Naples, Perugia, Pisa, and Torano.
Piazza S. Maria sopra Minerva (1666-7); Angel with 313. 28. L. Bruhns has studied exhaustively the history
the Cross for Ponte S. Angelo (1667-9). of tombs with the dead in 'eternal adoration' see Rom. ;
310. 19. The mother and child in the left-hand corner Jahrh.f. Kunstg., IV (1940).
are also types borrowed from Domenichino. 29. A. Grisebach, Rbmische Pnrtrdtbusten der Gegen-
20. V. Golzio in Archivi, 1 (1933-4), 304i L. Mon- reformatwn, Leipzig, 1936, 162.
talto in Commentari, viii (1957), 47. 30. Ihtd., 170.
21. Payments to Raggi for work on Algardi's sculp- 314. 31. The architectural setting, also designed by
tural decoration of the Villa Doria-Pamphili have Algardi, is flat, and classicizing.
additive,
recently come to light ; see A. Nava Cellini in Paragone, 32. The figure was sent from Naples; the setting,
XIV (1963), no. 161, 31. (For the villa, see Chapter 12, made in Rome, is extraordinarily retrogressive. The
Note 37.) church of S. Lucia was demolished in 1938 but has
22. Important work for Bernini includes the Noli me recently been rebuilt.
Tangere in SS. Domenico e Sisto (1649); the figure of 315. 33. The architectural detail, however, is classiciz-
Danube for the Four Rivers Fountain in Piazza Na- ing. Execution before 1675.
vona (1650- 1 ); the Virgin and Child, Notre-Dame, 34. The sculptural decoration was not finished until
Paris {c. 1652); Charity on the tomb of Cardinal after 1686. The first tomb on the left, representing
Pimentel, S. Maria sopra Minerva (1653); a large part Ercole and Luigi Bolognetti, by Michele Maglia; the
is
of the decoration in S. Maria del Popolo (1655-9); the first on the right of Pietro and Francesco is by Fran-
BIBLOSARTE
545
cesco Aprile (the lively bozzetto for it is shown as illus- Dice; Fancelli, .Angel with the Sudarium; Morelli,
tration 205). The second tombs left and right of Gior- Angel with the Scourge; .\. Giorgetti, Angel with the
gio and Francesco Maria Bolognetti are by Francesco Sponge; Lucenti, .Angel with the Nails. See H. G.
Cavallini. The stucco statues of saints above the tombs Evers, Die Engelshriicke in Rom, Berlin, 1948; Witt-
are by Cavallini, Maglia, and Ottoni; the sculptural kower, Bernini, 232.
decoration of the high altar by Cavallini, Naldini, and 42. So far as possible, Jennifer Montagu (Art Bull.,
Mazzuoli. Lii (1970),278 ff.) has disentangled the lives, works,
316. 35. His only pupil of any standing was Vincenzo and styles of .Antonio and Gioseppe Giorgetti. .An-
Felici, his son-in-law , who inherited his studio. Other tonio died young, in 1669, before his angel for the
sculptors like Michele Maglia and Filippo Carcani bridge was entirely finished. His more mediocre
occasionally worked for Guidi. younger brother Gioseppe, who made a living mainly
36. Pascoli (1, 251) says of him that 'he had no luck from the restoration of antique sculpture, worked his
with pupils, few coming out of his school and none of St Sebastian (J. Montagu convincingly argues) from
particular talent'. a design by Ciro Ferri.
37. Ferrata's studio abounded in study material. The 43. Lucenti was a highly qualified bronze caster. He
elaborate, highly interesting inventory of the studio cast all the bronzes of Bernini's altar of the Cappella
was published by V. Golzio, Archivi, 11 (1935), 64. del Sacramento in St Peter's (1673-4) ^nd 'he figure
38. Aprile's ceuvre is small but distinguished. He of Death of the tomb of .Alexander VII (1675-6).
seems to have worked for no more than a decade. The The strange, archaic, and picturesque Sicilian sculp-
information in Thieme-Becker that he was active from tor Francesco Grassia is a completely isolated pheno-
1642 onwards is incorrect. menon in Bernini's Rome. Little is known about him.
39. See M. Nicaud in L'Urbe, iv (1939), 13. See also He probably died His few known works have
in 1683.
below, Chapter 18, Note i. been published by L. Lopresti in L' Arte, xxx (1927),
40. In S. Maria where Fer-
della Pace, for instance, 89, and I. Faldi in Paragone, ix (1958), no. 99, 36.
rata's kneeling St Bernard and Fancelli's St Catherine 44. G. Walton, 'Pierre Puget in Rome: 1662', Burl.
frame the latter's Cortonesque bronze relief Equally Mag., CXI (1969), 582 ff.
close in style are Ferrata's Charity and Fancelli's 318. 45. Between 1659 and 1660 he executed a large
Faith on the tomb of Clement IX in S. Maria Mag- wooden model of the porticoes and between 1661 and
giore (1671). - Giacomo Antonio's masterpiece is the 1672 at least twenty statues above the porticoes.
decoration of the Cappella Nobili in S. Bernardo alle 46. His best pupil was his cousin Giuseppe Giosafatti
Terme with busts of the family in Cortonesque frame- (1643 -1 731) who handed on the tradition to his son,
works and the over life-size statue on the altar of St Lazzaro (i 694-1 781). The continuity of Bernini's
Francis receiving the stigmata. manner can be traced here in a direct line over a period
Most of the minor masters here mentioned collabor- of almost 150 years. Lazzaro Giosafatti renewed con-
ated in 1672-3 on the fountains in the garden of the tact with Rome by studying under Camillo Rusconi.
Palazzo Borghese, namely Cosimo and Francesco Fan- G. Rosenthal (Journal of the Walters Art Gallery, V,
celli, Retti, and Carcani (see p. 435).
Cavallini, Maglia, 1942) published a rehef by Lazzaro. For the Giosafatti,
Giovan Paolo Schor (see Chapter 14, Note 33), who see G. Fabiani, Artisti del Set- Settecento in Ascoli,
worked under Carlo Rainaldi, was probably respon- .Ascoli-Piceno, 1961, 35-54.
sible for the design. H. Hibbard has published the 47. Among them was Paolo Naldini; see Narducci in
documents for this enterprise {Burl. Mag., c (1958), Buonarotti, v (1870), 122. Failing proper statistics, we
205) and also for the Galleria of the palace (ihid., civ do not know how many of them were painters, sculp-
(1962), 9), where Cosimo Fancelli executed the stucco tors, or artisans, nor how poor they were.
reliefs between 1674 and 1676 in the Cortonesque set- 48. G. Campori, Artisti estenst, Modena, 1855, 66. -
ting designed by Giovan Francesco Grimaldi. The Roman scudo was probably worth at least £1
317. 41. Since the distribution of these angels among (present value).
the different hands is often confused, a list may be 49. Archivio della Fabbr. di S. Pietro, Giustific. 369
helpful : Bernini, Angels with the Crown of Thorns (14 December
1671) and Uscita 417 (7 June 1725).
and the Superscription (now in S. Andrea delle Cornacchini drew additional payment for work con-
now on the bridge, of the first by
Fratte); replacement, nected with the monument.
Naldini, of the second by Bernini himself (this angel 319. 50. Venturi, x, iii, 873.
was prepared by Cartari); Ferrata, Angel with the Without a knowledge of the cor-
51. Lankheit, 36. -
Cross; Raggi, Angel with the Column; Guidi, .Angel rect attribution, I had stated in the first ed. that 'the
with the Lance; Naldini, Angel with Garment and rehef can hardly date from before 1670'.
BIBLOSARTE
546 •
NOTES TO CHAPTERS 13 AND 14
52. See illustrations in F. Fogaccia, Cosimo fanzago, the Palazzo Cavallerini a via dei Barbieri; L. Salerno,
1945, figures 8 and 9. in Palatino. vm (1964), 13 f.
53. See above, Chapter 12, Note 66. 323. 6. F"or the Bamboccianti, see Briganti's contribu-
tions. For Codazzi, R. Longhi, Paragone, vi (1955),
CHAPTER 14 no. 71, 40, E. Brunetti, ibid., \ii (1956), no. 79, 61
and idem. Burl. .Mag., C (1958), 311; also H. Voss, ibtd.,
321. I. For G. Gimignani, see the full treatment by G. CI (1959), 443, and U. Prota-Giurleo, Pitt, nap.,
di Domenico Cortese, in Commentari, x\iii (1967), Naples, 1953, 76.

186-206. - The number of Cortona's pupils, and of 7. G. J. Hoogewerflf, De Bentveugheh, The Hague,
those directly and indirectly influenced by him, is 1952-
legion. The most important Roman Cortonescht of the 8. .According to Haskell, Patrons, 139 (note), the
next generation are Lazzaro Baldi (1623- 1 703), Gugli- collaboration between Cerquozzi and Codazzi began
elmo Cortese (Guillaume Courtois, 1627-79), Ciro after 1647.
Ferri (1628/34-89), and the pair Giovanni Coli (1636- 9. See .A. Sutherland Harris, in Paragone, xviii
80) and Filippo Gherardi (1643- 1704). Even the (1967), no. 213,42.
Sienese Raffaello Vanni (1587- 1673), pupil and son of ID. L. Montalto, Commentari, vi (1955), 224. For dif-
Francesco, came later under Cortona's influence. ferent interpretations of Mola's early itinerary see E.
Among his minor pupils, responsible for spreading Schaar, Zeitschr.f. Kunsig., xxiv ( 196 1 ), 1 84, and .A. B.
his manner, may be mentioned Adriano Zabarelli, Sutherland, Burl. Alag., CVI (1964), 363 (new docu-
called Palladino, from Cortona (1610-81), Carlo Cesi ments), and 378, in reply to S. Heideman, 377 f.
from Rieti (1626-86), Pietro Paolo Baldini (active 1 1. His most famous painting of this class is the 5/
c. 1660), Pietro Locatelli {c. 1634- 1710), Francesco Bruno, existing in many
work not un- versions, a
Bonifazio (b. 1637), who painted mainly at \ iterbo, influenced by Sacchi's St Romuald. For Mola, see
Giovanni Marracci (1637- 1704), whose work is to be .\rslan. Boll. d'Arte, viii (1928), 55; Wibiral, ibid., XL
found Lucca, and Camillo Gabbrielli, Ciro Ferri's
at (i960), 143; Martinelli, Commentari, IX (1958), 102;
pupil, who painted at Pisa. Of the above-mentioned and Sutherland's revised chronology (last Note). The
Pietro Locatelli (or Lucatelli) several hundred draw- important problem of various versions of the same
ings have been identified in the Berlin Print Room; subject in Mola's work has been discussed by A.
these have been discussed in a splendid paper by P. Czobor, Burl. Alag., ex (1968), 565 ff'., 633.
Dreyer (Jahrb. d. Berliner Museeiu i.^ (1967), 232-73), 324. 12. A. S. Harris published a number of studies
who also concerns himself with the close cooperation for this work in Revue de I'Art, no. 6 (1969), 82-7.
between Ciro Ferri and Lucatelli. 13. Wittkower, Born under Saturn, 1963, 142.
For other Tuscan Cortoneschi, see below. Note 65. 325. 14. The man reaching
etching shows a young
2. For the early Cozza, see his St Joseph and Angels in Parnassus by the torch of Wisdom which disperses
S. Andrea delle Fratte with signature and date 1632 Ignorance, Envy, and other vices. The contrast be-
which appeared when the painting was cleaned; see tween the classicality of individual figures and the
Attivita della Sopnntendenza alle Gallerie del Lazio, non-classical horror vacui should be observed. On
X, Settimana dei Musei, Rome, 2-9 aprile 1967, no. 11, Testa's etchings, A. Petrucci, Boll. d'Arte, x\ (1935-
figure 15. 6), 409. For the problem of interpretation, see, e.g.,
3. See R.-.'\. Weigert in Art de France^ 11 (1962), 165. T.S.R. Boase,/ Jr.C./., (1939-40), in. The most
iii
Perhaps Romanelli's Dido and Aeneas car-

series of penetrating discussion of some of Testa's etchings in
toons for the tapestries woven by Michel Wauters be- .\. Sutherland Harris and C. Lord, Burl. Alag., CXII
long to the Paris period. Six Romanelli cartoons were (1970), 15 ft'., 400. For Testa's chronology, see \.
sold at Sotheby's in March 1969 and purchased by the Sutherland Harris, Paragone, XVI 11 (1967), no. 213,
Norton Simon, Inc. Museum of .A.rt, California; see 35 ft"., and E. Schleier, Burl. Aiag., CXii (1970), 665 ff.
the scholarly paper by R. Rubinstein, in Art at Auc- 15. Rosa's early education is still a problem, and
tion : The Year at Sotheby's ($ Parke Bernet, ig68-6g, above all his relation to Falcone. A teacher-pupil rela-
London, 1969, 116 ff. tionship probably existed, although Falcone's rather
322. 4. Only fragments are preserved of Lanfranco's restrained battle-pieces are very different from Rosa's
Immaculate Conception, once over the high altar and fiery melees; see F. Saxl, y.Jl.C./., in (1939-40), 70;
finished as early as 1630. also .\. Blunt, Burl. .Mag., CXi (1969), 215.
5. E. Waterhouse, Baroque Painting, 25, 27, first dis- 16. Rosa's anticlericalism was emphasized by L. Sal-
cussed the archaizing tendencies of the 1640s. For erno, Salvator Rosa, 1963, 23. - It can, however, not
Giacinto Gimignani's later style, see his frescoes in be maintained that Rosa, despite all his extravagance.
BIBLOSARTE
547
created 'almost single-handed the image of the artist Istituto,III (1954), 228. See also E. Battisti, Com-
as being apart' (Haskell, Patrons, 22). For the history mentari, IV (1953), 41.
of this concept, see Wittkower, Born under Saturn. For Some of Rosa's most interesting works arc concerned
Rosa's conception of his genius, see R. \\ Wallace, in . with stoic, macabre, and proto-romantic subjects; for
Art Bull., XLVii (1965), 471 ff. For his stoicism, ihiJ., this side of his activity, see the stimulating papers by
and Haskell, 143. R. W. Wallace (Bibliography) and N. R. Fabbri, in
326. 17. R. Wallace, Burl. Mag., cix (1967), 395 ff., 7.IV.C.I., XXXIII (1970), 328 30.
has shown that Rosa selected the unusual theme of the 24. On Bellori, see Schlosser, Kunstliteratur; E.
'Death of Atilius Regulus' for a painting in support of Panofsky, Idea, Florence, 1952; K. Donahue, Mar-
his claim that he was above all a history painter. syas. (1943-5), '07; F- Ulivi, Galleria di scrittori
III
18. Institute of Art, Detroit, from the Palazzo Colon- d'arie, Florence, 1953, 165.
na, Rome; see Paul L. Grigaut, Bull. Detroit Inst, of 328. 25. I believe this has never been commented on.
Art, xxvii {1948), 63. 26. E.g. Guarini's churches or S. Maria della Salute.
Rosa's classicism was emphasized in a remarkable The oil paintings planned for the dome of the latter
note by B. Nicolson, Burl. .Mag., C (1958), 402. church were clearly a last afterthought; see, however,
327. 19. H. W. Schmidt, Die Landschaftsmalerei Sal- E. Bassi, Critica d'Arle, XI (1964), fasc. 62, 4.
vador Rosas, Halle, 1930, gives an account of Salvator's 27. For his intense desire to return to Rome as early
relation to the landscape tradition and his develop- as 1640, see E. Schleier, in Master Drawings, v (1967),
ment as a landscapist.
20. Further to G. Dughet's development, A. Blunt, 28. See B. Canestro Chiovenda, Commentari, X
French Art eti., 201 ; Wibiral, Boll. d'Arte, xi. (i960), (i959)> 16.
134; the important paper by D. Sutton, G.d.B.A., Lx 29. 1672-4: frescoes of the dome; in 1679 the frescoes
(1962), 268-312; M. R. Waddingham, Paragone, Xiv ofthe nave were unveiled; those ofthc apse after 1679;
(1963), no. 161, 37; Sutherland, Burl. Mag.,C\\ (1964), see .\. M. Brugnoli, Boll, d'.-trte, xxxiv (1949), 236;
63. Here the correct date for the S. Martino ai .Monti P. Pecchiai, // Gesii di Roma, Rome, 1952, 1 26 ff. ; also
frescoes is given; 1649-51. See also .\. Sutherland R. Enggass, Baciccio, 1964, 31.
Harris, Burl. Mag., CX (1968), 142 ff., and M. Chiarini, For .Antonio Gherardi, Mola's pupil, who had spent
Burl. .Mag., cxi (1969), 750 ff. years in Venice and distinguished himself also as an
For Gaspar's pupil, Crescenzio Onofri (1632-98), architect (p. 376), see .\. .Mezzetti, Boll.d' .4rte, xxxill
see I. Toesca, Paragone, xi (i960), no. 125, 51. (1948), 157"
After J. Hess's pioneering book, the literature on To the same period belong Giovanni Coli's and
Tassi has steadily grown; see E. Schaar in Mlttei- Filippo Gherardi's frescoes in the dome of S. N'icolo
lungen des Florent. Inst., ix (1959-60), 136; E. Knab in da Tolentino (1669-70, dependent on Cortona's dome
Jahrh. d. kuiisthist. SIg. Wien, XX (i960), 84; M. R. of S. .Vlaria in Vallicella) and their paintings inserted
Waddingham, Paragone, xil (1961), no. 139, 9, and in the ceiling of S. Crocedei Lucchesi (c. 1674). Lodo-
ibid., XIII (1962), no. 147, 13. vico Gimignani's dome frescoes in S. Maria dellc Ver-
21. See, among others, his frescoes in the Palazzo gini date from 1682; G. D. Cerrini's frescoes in the
Santacroce (Waterhouse, 74), in the Villa Doria- dome of S. Maria della Vittoria (undated) may belong
Pamphih (1644-8), where he also worked as architect in the 1670s.
(Chapter 12, Note 37), and in S. Martino ai Monti 30. The frescoes in the apse are by Gaulli's pupil,
(1648; Sutherland, loc. cit.). For Grimaldi as deco- Giovanni Odazzi; see H. Voss, 328.
rator in the Palazzo Borghese, see Chapter 13, Note 330. 31. Waterhouse, 71.
40. 32. Giacinto Brandi (1623-91), Lanfranco's pupil, a
For the connexion between Grimaldi and Dughet, prolific but facile painter who remained faithful to his
see Wibiral, op. cit., 137. master's style, contributed little that deserves special
22. This manuscript, now at Diisseldorf, was skil- attention.
fully discussed by A. Marabottini, Commentari, v Francesco .Allegrini (1624-63) was one ofthe minor
(1954), 217. For Testa's art theory, see also .M. \ilm- Cortona followers.
T,},. Of German descent, Egidio and Giovan Paolo
ner, yahrh. Preuss. Kunslslg., i\ (1962), 174.
23. It may be noted that the Blind Belisarius in the (1615-74); the latter, the more important ofthe two,
Palazzo Pamphili, until recently always attributed to was whose paintings as well as designs
a versatile artist
Salvator, has been shown to be a work by Francesco for applied art Cortonesque flavour; on a num-
have a
Rosa (1681), whose activity between 1638 and 1687 ber of occasions he worked for Bernini (.see Chapter 18,
has been reconstructed bv L. Montalto, Riv. dell' Note ). G. P. Schor has recently been given the atten-
I
BIBLOSARTE
tion he deserves, see G. Aurcnhammcr, Die Hand- Spear, ibid., cx (1968), 37 f Of the older literature may
zetchnungen des ij.JahrhiiiiJerts. in Osterreuh, Vienna, be mentioned Brugnoli's article in Boll. d'Arte, xxxiv
1958, 13, 103; H. Hibbard, Burl. Alag.^C (1958), 205; (1949), 236 (with ceuvre catalogue).
A. Blunt-H. L. Cooke, The Roman Drawings at 334. 41. Documents published by E. Feinblatt (see
H'indsor Castle, London, iq6o, 1 10. Interesting addi- Note 36).
tions in \\ ibiral. Bull, d' Arte, XL (1960), 144. For Canuti, see Malvasia, Vite di pit ton holognesi, ed.
34. Their names are Angelo Canini, Carlo Cesi, .\. Arfelli, Bologna, 1961, 13-35. Canuti had been in
Fabrizio Chiari, Bartolomeo Colombo, Filippo Lauri, Rome in 1651 (or earlier) and stayed on until 1655 (see
Francesco Murgia, and, in addition, the more con- unpublished thesis by L. Zurzolo, University of
siderable Jan Miel {c. 1599- 1663), a Fleming, who Bologna, 1958-9, 31) before he returned in 1672.
first belonged to the circleof the Bamboccianti in 42. Despite chronological difficulties I still believe
Rome, but turned in Turin to the grand manner in that Canuti learned the new mode of organizing a
fresco and came under Cortona's influence in the last large fresco (stimulatedby Bernini's genius) in Rome
years of his life. rather than vice versa.Meanwhile E. Feinblatt {Art
The complicated history' of the Quirinal Gallery has Quarterly, 1961) has shown that Canuti operated with
been disentangled in an excellent paper by N. Wibiral, large dark and light areas in his fresco of the hall of the
op. fit., 123-65, which also contains valuable new in- Palazzo Pepoli, Bologna, as early as 1669; after his
formation on all the participating artists. See also W. Roman interlude, he practised similar principles in the
Vitzthum in Boll, d' Arte, XLViii (1963), 96, who warns frescoes of the library (1677-80) and dome of S.
against over-estimating Grimaldi's role. - For Lauri Michele in Bosco (1682-4) i" Bologna. Gaulli, on the
(1623-94), Caroselli's pupil, see B. Riccio, Commeii- other hand, did not begin the Gesii frescoes until 1672.
fan, x(i959), 3. 43. For Pozzo's work on perspective, see G. Fiocco,
35. See the fully documented by L. Montalto,
article Emporium, XLix (1943), no. 1,3. For his work in Tus-
Commentan, vi (1955), 267. For Mola's destroyed cany, P. della Pergola, Riv. del R. Istituio, v (1935/6),
Stanza dell' ana frescoes of the Pamphili villa at Val- 203.
montone, see R. Cocke, Burl. Mag., cx (1968), 558 ff. On Pozzo as painter, see Marini's monograph (1959)
36. By him the Jupiter ceiling of the large room on the and his paper in Arte Veneta, Xii-xiv (1959-60), 106,
first floor (1675), attributed by Waterhouse, 48, to N. and on Pozzo as architect, Carboneri's monograph
Berrettoni, and correctly named Canuti by E. Fein- (196 1 ). See also A. de Angelis, 'La Scenografia sacra di
blatt, Art Quarterly, .XV (1952), 51. A. P. a Roma e a Frascati', Sttidi romani, vi, 2 (1958),
37. In addition to these may be mentioned Ro- 160; L. Montalto, W. P. nella chiesa di Sant'Ignazio',
manelli's frescoes in the Palazzi Lante {1653) and Bar- tbid., VI, 6; A. M. Cerrato in Commentan, x (1959), 24
berini (1660), Antonio Gherardi's impressive Stori^ (with ceuvre catalogue).
of Esther in the Palazzo Naro (1665-70.'), and the B. Kerber's monograph ( 1 97 1 ; see Bibliography) has
frescoes in the Villa Falconieri, Frascati, by Ciro now to be consulted for all questions concerning Pozzo.
Ferri, N. Berrettoni, and C. Maratti (before 1680). For the problem of the viewpoint of the S. Ignazio
38. See N. Pevsner, 'Die Wandlung um 1650 in der frescoes and other Baroque ceilings, see W. Schone in
italienischen Malerei', Wiener Jahrh., viii (1932), 69. Festschrift Kurt Badt, Berlin, 1961, 344, and Kerber's
C. Refice Taschetta, Mattia Preti, Brindisi, 1961, 83, objections (102 ff.) to Schone.
dates these frescoes incorrectly in 1653. She over- In 1703 Pozzo settled in Vienna and his work there
looked that the date 1661 is assured by Preti's own (Jesuit church; Liechtenstein Garden Palace) had a
statement (see Ruffo, Boll. d'Arte, x (1916), 255). He strong influence on Austrian and German fresco
painted the frescoes in the Palazzo Doria Pamphili at painting.
Valmontone on the occasion of his brief visit to Rome, Pozzo's frescoes in S. Ignazio found immediate fol-
before going to Malta. lowing; see, Giuseppe Barbieri's frescoes in the

e.g.,
39. L. Montalto, Commentan, vii (1956), 41, with dome, nave, and transept of S. Bartolomeo at Modena,
documents. See also L. Mortari, Paragone, Vii (1956), executed 1694-8 (N. Carboneri, in Arte in Europa.
no. 73, 17, and J. Offêrhaus in Bull, van het Rijks- Scrittt di Stona dell' Arte in onore di Edoardo .irslan,
museum, x (1962), 5. Milan, 1966, 737 ft'.).
332. 40. GauUi has been thoroughly studied after the 44. On the ceiling three scenes illustratir;g events in
Second World War, mainly by A. M. Brugnoli, R. the life of Marcantonio Colonna. The victory of Le-
Enggass, and F. Zeri. All the older research in Eng- panto shown in our illustration was won under him.
gass's recent monograph (1964). In addition, see R. For Coli and Gherardi, see A. M. Cerrato in Com-
Enggass, Burl. Mag., cviii (1966), 365 f, and R. E. mentan, X (1959), 159 (with ceuvre catalogue).
BIBLOSARTE
549
337. 45. See the otherwise irrelevant article by E. Fein- For all the painters mentioned in this paragraph, see
blatt, AnQitarterly, x (1947), 237. the Exhibition Catalogue of the Seuento Emtliano,
46. This may be the place to mention Giovanni Maria Bologna, 1959, and Bibliography under individual
Morandi (1622-1717), who has recently attracted painters.
attention (Waterhouse, see Bibliography). Born in 54. F. .Arcangeli,Paragone, (1950), no. 7, 38.
i
Florence, he settled early in Rome and paintings by Cantarini's pupil, the strong Flaminio Torri (1621-
him are known from the late 1650s onwards. While as 61), may here also be mentioned; sec G. Raimondi in
a portrait painter he competed with Gaulli, his altar- Studt onore di Matteo .Marangoni, Florence, 1957,
in
pieces are often close to Maratti's. 260. - The weak Reni follower Francesco Torriani
47.The high cove of the ceiling is now white and one (1612-81), who worked mainly in .Mendrisio, was
isreminded of the contrast between the painted field given the undeserved honour of a one-man Exhibi-
and the surrounding whiteness at the period of Reni's tion; see G. Martinola, Francesco Tornani. Calalogo
Aurora, but surviving drawings (and Bellori's text) della mostra, Mendrisio, Palazzo Nobili Torriani, 1958.
prove that Maratti planned frescoes also for the vaulted 55. M. Zufta in .4rte Antica e Moderna, vi, no. 24
part of the ceiling; see F. H. Dowley, Burl. Mag., Ci (1963), 358, has reconstructed the artist's itinerary
(1959), 71 ;W. Vitzthum,;/»/^.,cv(i963), 367;J.Bean, from documents and has established that his name is
ibid., 511; Harris-Schaar, Diisseldorf Catalogue, 1967, Cagnacci (not Canlassi, Thieme-Becker) and that he
nos. 256-76. died in 1663 (not 1681).
48. See the excellent article by O. Kutschera- For Cagnacci's Viennese career, see G. Heinz in
Woborsky, 'Ein kunsttheoretisches Thesenblatt des Jahrh. d. kunsthist. Slg. in H ten, Liv (1958), 173, 183.
Carlo Maratti', Graphische Kiinste. Milleilungen (19 19), 343. 56. For Pasinelli, whose art is attracting increas-
9- ing attention, see C. Volpe, Paragone, viii (1957),
49. On Agucchi and his theory, see above, p. 39, no. 91, 30, 36; C. Baroncini, Arte Anttca e Moderna,
with further references. no. 2 (1958); D. C. Miller in Burl. Mag., CI (1959), 106.
339. 50. A fully documented modern treatment of - For Canuti's pupil Giuseppe Rolli (1643- 1727), the
Maratti (with truvre catalogue) is now available; see painter of the important ceiling of S. Paolo in Bologna
A. Mezzetti, Riv. Jell'htituto, iv (1955). For the paint- (1695), see F. de' Maffei, in Scrttti di storia dell'arte in
ingshown as illustration 220 see F. H. Dowley, 'Some onore di Mario Salmi, Rome, 1963, iii, 325, and E.
Maratti Drawings at Diisseldorf, Art Qjiarterly, xx Feinblatt, in Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), 569 ff. Also idem,
(1957X 174- in Master Drawings, vil (1969), 164 ff.
51. I. Matalon, Riv. d'Arle, xii (1930), 497; G. 57. According to Baldinucci (ed. 1846, iv, 682), he
Testori, Paragone, in (1952), no. 27, 24. called this type of perspective 'vedute non regolate da
Del Cairo, court artist in Turin from 1633 onwards, un sol punto'. Further to this problem, J. Schulz in
is now a well-defined artistic personality of con- Burl. Mag., cm (1961), 101, according to whom the
siderable importance. New ground was broken at the quadratura painters Cristoforo and Stefano Rosa from
Mostra del maniensmo pietnuntcse 1955, where the. . . Brescia used multiple vanishing points as early as the
often reproduced Si Francis, in the Castello Sforzesco, sixteenth centurv. - Colonna worked in the Palazzo
previously attributed to Morazzone, was given to Del Pittibetween November i637andjune i639and again
Cairo. The whole question is reviewed in M. Gre- in 1641; see M. Campbell, .-irt Bull., xi.viii (1966),
gori's Morazzone Catalogue of 1962, 48, 108, with 135 f. Further for Colonna see S. de \ ito Battaglia,
other valuable material for Del Cairo; see also the St L'Arte, xxxi (1928), 13. E. Feinblatt, Art Qitarterly,
Francis paintings by Cerano (Mostra del Cerano, 1964, XXI (1958), 265, discusses the ceilings in the Villa
100). Albergati-Theodoli at Zola Predosa (near Bologna);
340. 52. E. S. Natali's paper on the artist in Com- Colonna's most extensive work during the period of
mentari, xiv (1963), 171, is disappointing. Giacomo .\lboresi (1632 77), .Vli-
collaboration with
342. 53. The new assessment of Reni's late manner, telli's pupil, whom he took on as collaborator after
foreshadowed as early as 1937 in O. Kurz's pioneering Mitelli's death.
article (see Bibliography), was one of the important For Mitelli, see now E. Feinblatt's Introduction to the
results of the Reni Exhibition of 1954. Mitelli Exhibition in Los Angeles (see Bibliography).
'Sbozzata solo' (i.e. left unfinished) according to .MaU 344. 58. For the following F. Sricchia, 'Lorenzo Lippi
vasia, the Girl with a Wreath shows the characteristic nello svolgimento della pittura fiorentina della prima
condition of a number of pictures of this period, for meta del '600', Proporzwm, iv (1963), 243-70; M.
which see comment in C. Gnudi-G. C. Cavalli, Guide Gregori Paragone, xv (1964) no. 169, 16; and idem,
in
Reni, Florence, 1955, 100. JO pitture e sculture del 'boo e 'joofiorentmo, Florence,
BIBLOSARTE
550 •
NOTKS TO CHAPTKR 14
1965; also Hibbard-Nissman, Florentine Baroque Art, Milan, 1946; and La Pittura del Seicento a Venezia,
196CJ (sec Bibliography). Catalogue, Venice, 1959, with full bibliography.
59. C. del Bravo in Paravane . xii (19O1), no. 135, 28. 347. 69. Arslan, op. cit., 24; G. F"iocco, Arte Veneta, iv
60. See G. Briganti, Paragone, (1950), no. 7, 52. i (1950), 150; L. Frohlich-Bum and R. Longhi, Para-
61. Cecco Bravo is emerging as one of the most un- gone. Ill (1952), no. 31, 34; N. Ivanoft, 'Giorgione nel
conventional Florentine artists of his generation. G. Seicento', in Venezia e I'Europa, Venice, 1956, 323.
Ewald was the first to give back to him a number of 70. Arslan, 29, 42. For Carpioni's dates, see Zorzi,
pictures previously attributed to S. Mazzoni {Burl. Arte Veneta, xv (1961), 219. G. M. Pilo's monograph
Mag., CM (i960), 343, cm (196 1 ), 347). A. R. Masetti's (1962) contains all previous research. See also idem,
monograph (1962) with (ruvre catalogue and biblio- 'Giulio Carpioni e Vicenza', Odeo Olimpico, v (Vi-
graphy contains a document for Bravo's hitherto un- cenza, 1964-5), 55 ff.
known birth-date. The painting of illustration 232 has 71. See also G. M. Pilo, in // mito del classicisnui nel
previously been attributed to S. Mazzoni, but Ewald seicento, Florence, 1964, 227.
and others are in agreement that it has to be given back 72. G. Fiocco, Dedalo, iii (1922), 275; J. Zamowski
to Cecco Bravo. and F. Baumgart, Boll. d'Arte, xxv (1931-2), 97; R.
For Pietro Ricchi ( 606-75) and Mario Balassi ( 1 604-
1 Pallucchini, ihid., xxviii (1934), 251.
67), the first from Lucca, the second from Florence, 73. N. Ivanoff, Boll. d'Arte, xxxviii (1953), 321.
who both owed Venice a formative influence, see H. 74. G. Ewald in Critica d'Arte, vi (1959), 43, and
Voss in Kunstihronik, Xiv (1961), 211. Further for Boll. Musei Civici Veneziani, 1959, i.
Ricchi, see R. Pallucchini, Arte Veneta, xvi (1962), 75. A. Rizzi's monograph (i960) with cetivre cata-
132, and A. Rizzi, ihid., 171. logue (completely illustrated) supersedes all previous
62. M.
Gregori (Note 58) offers a more positive research.
assessment of Giovanni da San Giovanni's art; see 348. 76. See Ivanoff 's Catalogue of the MafTei Exhibi-
also M. Campbell, Art Bull., xlviii (1966), 133 ff. tion, 1956, with further bibliography. In addition, R.
345. 63. M. Winner, Mitteilg. d. kunsthist. Instit. Marini, Tl dare e I'avere tra Pietro Vecchia e Maffei',
Florenz, x (1963), 219, discusses the interesting icono- Arte Veneta, x (1956), 133; L. Magagnato's excellent
graphy of this cycle (documents). review of the Exhibition, ihid., 245 F. Valcanover, ;
64. His aetivre has first been reconstructed by G. Emporium, cxxiii (1956), 150; Haskell, Burl. Mag.,
Ewald, Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), 218. xcviii (1956), 340; R. Marini, Arte Veneta, xv (1961),
65. Among the Cortona followers in Florence worth 144 (attempt to clarify chronology).
mentioning are the Fleming Lieven 630-9 1 ) Mehus ( 1 77. C. Gnudi, Critica d'Arte, I (1935-6), 181; N.
Vincenzo Dandini (1607-75) an^^ his nephew, Pier Ivanoff, Arte Veneta, i
(1947), 42, and idem in Saggi e
Dandini (1646-1712), who in his later work, however, Memorie dt storia dell'arte, 11 (1958-9), 211-79 (basic
broke away from his early Cortonesque manner; in study).
addition Salvi Castellucci from Arezzo (1608-72) and 349. 78. A. M. Mucchi and C. della Croce, // pittore
Lorenzo Berrettini, Cortona's nephew and pupil, who .-indrea Celesti, Milan, 1954, with ceuvre catalogue and
worked mainly at Aquila. See also Berti, Mostra di contribution by N. Ivanoff.
Pietro da Cortona, Rome, 1956. 79. G. M. Pilo, Arte Veneta, xvii (1963), 128.
66.Demonstrated in a thoughtful article by G. Heinz 80. See Arslan, op. cit., 32.
mjahrh. d. kunsth. Slg. in Wien, LVl (i960), 197. 81. A. M. Pappalardo, Atti dell' 1st it u to Veneto di
346. 67. See A. Blunt, The Drawings ofG. B. Casti- Scienze . . ., cxii (1953-4), 439.
glione and Stefano della Bella at Windsor Castle, Lon- Two artists who came under Bolognese influence
don, 1954, 89, with further references. See also Alex- should at least be mentioned: Giannantonio Fumiani
andre de Vesme's standard catalogue of Stefano della (1650 (not i643)-i7io, see Arslan, 44) and Gregorio
Bella's prints, reprinted with corrections and annota- Lazzarini (c. 1660/2- 1720), Tiepolo's first teacher.
tions by P. Dearborn Massar, New York, 1970; also ForLazzarini,seeG. M. Pilo in Arte Veneta, w (1957),
the same author's 'Stefano d. B.'s Illustrations for a and Critica d'Arte, V (1958), 233.
Fireworks Treatise', Master Drawings, vii (1969), 350. 82. The equally mediocre .\ntonio Busca (1625-
294 ff., dating from 1649; and F. Viatte and W. Vitz- 86), director of the .\ccademia .Ambrosiana in 1669,
thum. Arte Illustrata, ill, nos. 34-6 (1970), 66 S., who may be mentioned; see C. Rossi o.p., in Arte
at least
offer new material to the question of Stefano della Lomharda, iv (1959), 314. For C. F. Nuvolone, seeU.
Bella's journey to the Levant. Ruggeri, in Arte Lomharda, xii (1967), 67 fT. For the
68. For the following see mainly G. Fiocco's pioneer- Nuvolone family, see N. Ward Neilson, Burl. Mag.,
ing work, published in 1929; also the challenging re- CXI (1969), 219 f.
marks by E. Arslan, // concetto di rumimsmu 83. Longhi-Cipriani-Testori, / pittori della realtd in
BIBLOSARTE
. . .,
551
Lomhardia, Milan, 1953, with bibliography; G. Tes- 326, makes the tentative suggestion that de Ferrari
Paragone, iv (1Q53), no. 39, 19.
tori, met Gaulli at Parma in 1669. - Sec also Disegni di G.
352. 84. See Arslan's (Note 68, 24) relatively negative de F., E.xhibition, Palazzo Rosso, Genoa, 1963, and .\.
assessment of Strozzi; also A. M. Matteucci, Arte Griseri, Gregorw de Ferrari (I maestri del colore, 1 35),
Veneta, ix {1955), 138. Milan, 1966.
85. E. Falletti, Cotnmentan, vii (1956), 158. 355. 94. Bolognese quadratura had been introduced in
86. A. M. Goffredo, ihid., 147. Among Strozzi's Genoa by Colonna's fresco decoration in the ex-
pupils in Genoa may be mentioned .\ntonio Travi Palazzo Reale (formerly Baibi) in 1650.
(1608-65), who later made his name by concentrating 356. 95. In addition to the basic articles by R. Longhi
on the popular genre and on landscapes with ruins. (1915) and H. Voss (1927), see R. Causa, Paragone, 1
87. B. Riccio, Commentan, viii (1957), 39. (1950), no. 9, 42, R. C^rita, ihid., 11 (1951), no. 19, 50,
353. 88. M. Bonzi, Pe/legro Ptola e Barlolomeo Biscamo, and F. Bologna, ihid., xi (i960), no. 129, 45.
Genoa, 1963. Fcllegro or Fellegrino Fiola 1616 40), ( For the following, see, apart from .\. de Rinaldis's
who had been apprenticed with Gio. Domenico Cap- book (1929), S. Ortolani's remarkably perceptive
pellino, practised an antiquated, cinquecentesque Introduction to La nostra della pittura napoL, Naples,
manner; see also Must r a dei pit tori genovesi . . ., 1938, and R. Causa's excellent survey (1957).
Genoa, 1969, nos. 41, 42. 96. See E. du Gue Trapier's monograph (1952) and
Of other painters who died of the plague, I mention D. F. Darby's review, Art Bull., x.xxv (1953), 68. Also
Orazio de Ferrari ( 606-57), who stems from Ansaldo
1 U. Prota-Giurleo, P/V/. nap., 1953,91. Ribera'sdateof
and Assereto (M. Labo, Emporium, c\ (1945), 3), and birth is usually wrongly given as 1588. J. Chenault,
Silvestro Chiesa (1623-57), whose only known picture Burl. Mag., cxi (1969), 561 ff., has published docu-
(S. Maria dei Servi, Genoa) reveals him as a master of mentary proof of Ribera's stay in Rome in 1615 and
uncommon power (A. Morassi, Mostra della pittura 16 16 (the year he probably returned to Naples) and of
. . . Liguria, 1947, 57). his trip north about 1630.
89. I am following mainly Anthony Blunt's recon- 357. 97. Giovanni Do (1604 56), like Ribera bom at
struction of Castiglione's career; see J. H. C.I. viii , Jatiba in Spain, settled in Italy c. 1623 and married the
(1945), 161 and The Drawings of G. B.C. at Windsor, sister of Pacecco de Rosa (1626). His impressive
London, 1954. For interesting new results, see A. Adoration of the Shepherds (Chiesa della Pieta dei Tur-
Percy, Burl. Mag., cix (1967), 672 ff. See also E. chini, Naples) - the only picture known by him - is
Waterhouse, 'An Immaculate Conception by G.B.C.\ entirely Riberesque. .Among the minor Ribera pupils
The Minneapolis Institute of Arts Bulletin, lvi (1967), Bartolomeo Passante (1618-48) from Brindisi may be
5 ff., with new ideas on Castiglione's chronology. mentioned. On Passante, see J. H. Perera, .irchivo
354. 90. O. Grosso, Dedalo, iii (1922-3), 502. Espaiiol de Arte, xxviil (1955), 266, and the criticism
91. M. Marangoni, / Carloni, Florence, 1925. Gio- by F. Bologna, F. Solimena, 1958, 30. On these artists
vanni Battista, the more important of the two brothers, R. Longhi wrote one of his last papers (Paragone, w
was a prolific fresco painter. His work is to be found in (1969), no. 227, 42), in which he also revived the al-
the Gesii, S. Siro, the Chiesa dellWnnunziata where most forgotten 'naturalista' Giovan Battista" Spinelli
he collaborated with Giovanni .\ndrea, etc. Trained (d. c. 1647).
under Passignano in Florence, he was later strongly 98. Reni's abortive stay at Naples in 1 622 lasted about
influenced by Rubens. His son Andrea (1639-97), who a month. His magnificent .-idoration oj the Shepherds
worked in Maratti's studio in Rome, brought back to in the Certosa di S. Martino, painted shortly before his
Genoa (1678) a fluid Cortonesque manner. For his death (1641 .'), came after the critical moment in the
work in the Palazzo Altieri, Rome (1674-7), see E. history of Neapolitan painting. But less important
Gavazza, Arte Lombarda, viii (1963), 246. works of an earlier period (c. 1622) were in the Chiesa
Giulio Benso (1601-68) may also be mentioned; his di S. Filippo Neri.
frescoes in the Annunziata (partly destroyed during 99. A list of frescoes painted by minor artists in
the war) reveal him as an able painter with a special Lanfranco's manner in Ortolani, op. cit., 79.
interest in quadratura and determined sotto in su com- 100. According to VV. R. Crelly, The Painting of
Simon I'ouet. New Haven and London, 1962, this
positions.
For Piola see G. V. Castelnoxi, I dipinti di S. Gia- 'first full announcement of his post-Italian altarpieces'
92.
como alia Marina (Quaderni della Soprintendenza alle (p. 36) is signed and dated 1623 (184, no. 79).
Gallerie. .dellaLiguria), Genoa, 1953; also E.Mala-

.
But if it were correct that in 1620 \'ouet had painted
goli, Burl. .Mag., cviii (1966), 503 ff.
the Virgin appearing to St Bruno for the Certosa of S.
Martino, as Crelly and others (.\. Blunt, Art and Archi-
93. A. Griseri, Paragone, vi (1955), no. 67, 22. E.
tecture in France, 167; Briganti, P. da Cortona, 1962,
BIBLOSARTE
Gavazza in Arte Antica e Moderna, VI, no. 24 (1963),
NOltS TO ClIAPTKR 14
49) believed, he would already then have drifted away 109. For the Fracanzano problem see F. Bologna
from Caravaggio. Critical opinion, however, now dates (Note 103), 55, and idem, F. Solimena, 1958, 28.
this painting later; D. Posner, Art Bull., XLV (1963), 110. The phrase is F. Si\Vs,J.W.C.L, iii (1939-40),
291, f. 1623; B. Nicolson, Burl. .Mag., cv (1963), 310, To-

c. 1627; G. Darquct and J. Thuillier, Saggi e Memurie ll I. M. S. Soria, .4rt Quarterly, xxill (i960), 23.
di sloria ili-U'urle, IV (lyO.s), 47, no. A31, i. 1624-6. It seems appropriate to mention here the German
loi. All the major Neapolitan artists felt her in- painter Johann Heinrich Schonfeld (1609 82/3), who
fluence, but she also took from them. Among the was in Italy from 1633 to 165 1 and spent twelve years
second-rate artists, 590- 1 656), w ho
Paolo Finoglia (c. 1 in Naples. In his early Neapolitan years (about 1640)
had started his career under Battistello in the Certosa his work is close to that of Gargiulo and .-Xnicllo Fal-
of S. Martino, was much indebted to her; see M. cone ; later his palette darkens and his style approaches
d'Orsi, Paolo Finoglia. pillore iiapolilatio, Bari, 1938. Bernardo Cavallino's (mid 1640s). Like Elsheimer,
Another 'belated' Caravaggista should here be men- Schonfeld excelled by virtue of the intensity of poetical
tioned, Matthias Stomer from Amersvoort, Holland narration and there can be little doubt that he left his
(c. i6oo-f. 1650), who appeared in the early 1630s in mark on Neapolitan painting. This great artist was re-
Rome and soon transferred his activity to Naples and discovered in the 1920s, primarily through H. Voss
Sicily. Reputedly closely connected with Honthorst, (monograph Biberach, 1964) and has now acquired
his style shows affinities with Terbrugghen, Baburen, fuller contours through a splendid exhibition; see H.
and even Vouet; see R. Longhi, Proporziont, 1 (1943), Pee, J. H. Schonfeld, Ulm, 1967.
60. 112. R. Causa, Paragone, vii (1956), no. 75, 30. This
358. 102. F. Bologna (in Bulletin, Musees Royaux des article makes the older literature on Monsii Desiderio
Beaux-Arts, Bru.xelles {1952), no. 2, 47) stressed the obsolete (see A. Scharf 's Catalogue of the Sarasota Ex-
influence of van Dyck's palette on Ribera and other hibition, 1950; G. Urbano's monograph, Rome, 1950;
Neapolitan painters from about 1635 on. Ribera's F. G. Pariset, Commentari, ill (1952), 261). See also
Communion of the Apostles (Certosa of S. Martino) next Note.
with the disproportionately large putti in the sky and 1 13. F. Sluys, Les Beaux Arts, Brussels, 4 June 1954;
the large empty areas is an example of his weak late idem, Didier Barra et Franfois de Nome, Paris and New
manner (dated 165 1). York, 1 96 1.
103. His career has been reconstructed by F. Bologna, 360. 1 14. Codazzi, e.g., went to Rome and Ribera fled.
Opere d 'arte nel Salernitaiio, Naples, 1955 M. Grieco, ; 115. Longhi, Proporzioni, i (1943), 60: reconstruc-
Francesco Guarini da Solofra, Avellino, 1963. tion of this phase with auvre catalogue. C. Refice Tas-
104. For Mellin, see J. Bousquet in Revue des Arts, chetta, Mattta Preti, Brindisi, 1 96 1 45, does not accept ,
V (1955X55- such an early Caravaggesque phase; she is certainly

105. In his otherwise unsatisfactory monograph on correct in claiming a strong impact of Guercino on the
Stanzioni (1937), H. Schwanenberg established the early Preti. Her monograph, however, is far from
date 1623 for the St Anthony in Glory in S. Lorenzo in being definitive; see above. Note 38.
Lucina, Rome. But Stanzioni was working in Rome 116. M. Fantuzzo, Boll. d'Arte, XL (1955), 275.
even Borsook (Burl. .Mag., xcvi
five years earlier. E. 117. See above, p. 322. The St Charles Borromeo giv-
(1954), 272) published payments to him between ing Alms of 1642 in S. Carlo ai Catinari, Rome, already
October 161 7 and April 1618 for a (lost) picture for S. shows his dependence on Sacchi and Domenichino.
Maria della Scala. Stanzioni's large dated cycles begin 118. R. Causa, Emporium, cxvi (1952), 201. C. Refice
in 63 1 with the decoration of the Bruno Chapel in the

1 Taschetta, op. cit., 54, favours the older dating: not
Certosa of S. Martino, finished 1637. Stanzioni had a later than 1650.
large school; among his pupils were Agostino Beltrami 361. 1 19. In 1664 (not 1653) he painted the badly pre-
and Giacinto de Popoli (see Ortolani, op. cit., 72). served frescoes in the dome of S. Domenico Soriano,
106. His 'classicism' is fully developed in the Rest on Naples, which abound with Correggiesque reminisc-
the Flight into Egypt and the .Annunciation of the Birth ences; see C. Refice, Boll. d'Arte, x.xxix (1954), 141.
of the Virgin, both in S. Paolo Maggiore, dated 1643- 120. For Porpora, see R. Causa, Paragone, 11 (1951),
4 by R. Causa, La Madonna nella pitt. del '600 a no. 15, 30; for Luca Forte, idem, ibid., xiii (1962), no.
Napolt, Naples, 1954, t,},. 145, 41 for Giacomo Recco, idem, .4rte .Antica e Mod-
;
359. 107. In addition to the older literature, see C. erna, v ( 1 96 1 ), 344 for Giacomo and Giuseppe Recco,
i ;
Refice, Emporium, CXIII (1951), 259. S. Bottari, thid., 354; further attributions to Forte and
108. M. Commodo Izzo, Andrea Vaccaro, Naples, Giacomo Recco in Bottari, ihid., vi, no. 23 (1963), 242.
1 95 1, with ceuvre catalogue and bibliography. 121. See last Note, and also Zeri, ihid., ill (1952), no.
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS I4, 15, AND 16 "
553
33' 37; N. di Carpegna in B()ll.d'Arie,\L\i{ig6i\ 123. Fontanesi, Luca Carlevarijs, Vittorio Bigari, and
122. Carpegna, loc. cii. others.
362. 123. Dominici (ed. 1844, ill, 558) records that 10. G. M. Crescimbcni, L'lstona delta basilica . . . di
Ruoppolo painted many pictures for Gaspar Roomer, S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma, Rome, 1715, 159. -
which the latter sent to Flanders. Roomer, an im- For Naldini see above, p. 312.
mensely rich Flemish merchant, had made Naples his 11. Monnotdid not accept .Maratti's design, nor does
home; he had a large gallery and patronized contem- it seem that the sculptors of the statues in S. Giovanni
porary artists (M. Vaes, Bull. nut. hist, beige, v (igas), in Laterano were delighted (see also p. 436 and Chap-
184; F. Saxl,7Jr.C./.. Ill (ig.^y 40), 80). It was in his ter 18, Note 9). .Although it was not till slightly later
gallery that Ruoppolo and the other Neapolitan still- that sculptors welcomed the collaboration of painters,
life painters had excellent opportunities of studying it is almost certain that Padre Andrea Pozzo made oil
Flemish still lifes. sketches for reliefs on the altar of St Ignatius in the
Gesii; see B. Kerber, in Art Bull., xi.vii (1965). 499.
CHAPTER 15 i2.Titi,ed. 1686, 155. - .At the same time C:. Fancelli
worked from designs of Gio. Francesco Grimaldi in
364. I . For the following see the relevant passages in the Palazzo Borghese see above, (Chapter 3, Note 40.
;
1
Pastor, vols 14-16, and in Carl Justi, Winckelmann und 13. C. G. Ratti and R. Soprani, Delle vite de' pitton
seine Zeitgenossen, Leipzig, i8g8, vols 2 and 3. . genovesi, Genoa, 1769, 11, 303.
. .
2. A. Bertolotti in Arcbivio stunco uriisluo . . . cd. F. The almost forgotten Pietro Bianchi, Luti's student
Gori, (1875) and P. G. Hiibner, Le statue di Roma,
I inRome, produced .Arcadian Rococo pictures of great
Leipzig, 191 2, 73. charm; see .A. M. Clark in Paragone, \\ (1964), no.
M. Praz in Magazine of Art, xxxii (1939), 684.
3. 169, 42.
The best recent study of Piranesi is by A. H.
4. 14. B. de Dominici, Vile de' pittori . . . napoletani,
Mayor (1952); see Bibliography. Naples, 1742-3, 458.
J. Harris ('Le Geay, Piranesi and International Neo- K. Lankheit (70 and Mitteilungen d. Flor. Inst., viii
classicism in Rome 1740-1750', Essays in the History (1957-9), 48) has shown that Foggini used the help of
of Architecture presented to R. H'lttL'ower, London, the painter Anton Domenico Gabbiani in the Corsini
1967, 189 ft'.) ingeniously reconstructed the Roman Chapel in S. Maria del Carmine, Florence, before
career of Jean Laurent Le Geay, who probably had a 1680.
formative influence on the young Piranesi. 367. 15. Baumgarten's Aesthetica appeared in 1750.
5. R. Wittkower, 'Piranesi's "Parere su I'architet- 16. The Connoisseur ; an Essay on the whole Art of
tura"",/W.C./., 11 (1938-9), 147. Criticism . . ., London, 17 19.
366. 6. See, above all, H. Tintelnot's remarkable but 368. 17. .A. Gabrielli, 'L'.AIgarotti e la critica d'arte in
not always reliable study Barocktheater und barocke Italia nel Settecento', Criiica d'.4rte. ill (11)38), 155,
Kunst, Berlin, 1939. IV (1939), 24. For Algarotti, see also Haskell, Patrons,
7. R. Bernheimer in Art Bull., xxxviii (1956), 239, 347 (and index).
finds that as early as 1600 in the performance directed
by Buontalenti in Florence on the occasion of Maria CHAPTER 16
de' Medici's wedding with Henry IV of France the
barriers which separate the stage from the audience 369. I. Juvarra, Fuga, Vanvitelli, Salvi, Raguzzini,
had been abolished. Spectators were placed on the Galilei, and Preti.
stage and 'continued the court into the world of make- 370. 2. For the concept of stylistic liberty and fast
believe and thus provided that element ot illusion, at changes of style at this period, see the pertinent re-
which many artists of the Baroque were to try their marks by R. Berliner in Miinchner Jarhb. d. bild.
hand'. Kunst, ix-x (1958-9), 282.

K. Schwager has made some acute observations on 371. 3. The Palazzo .Mezzabarba is the earliest of four
the Baroque notion of the theatre, in Riim. Jabrb. f. interconnected palaces of supreme importance. To the
Kunstgesch., ix-x (1961-2), 379. group belong, apart from the Doria-Pamphili, the
8. A. Ademollo, / leatri di Roma nel secolo decimoset- exactly contemporary fa(;ades of the Palazzi Litta at
timo, Rome, 1888, 36. Milan (Note 5) and Montanari at Bologna (p. 390). -
Tintelnot, «/). cit., 151, 215 refuses to acknowledge
9. Veneroni {c. 1680 after 1745), almost unknown a few
amajor influence from the stage on Tiepolo and finds it years ago, emerging as a major figure of North Italian
is
mainly among such eighteenth-century painters and Baroque architecture. A pupil of Giuseppe Quadrio in
engravers of vedute and ruins as Pannini, Francesco Milan, he was appointed 'engineer' of the province of
BIBLOSARTE
554 NOTi:S TO CHAPTKR I ()
Pavia in 1707. The BorromincsquG facade of S. Marco 9. He never wrote himself. His ideas were later pub-
(1735 8) remains, next to tiie remarkably sophisti- lished by his admirer .Andrea Memmo, FJemenii
cated Palazzo Mezzabarba, as a witness to the high d' architettura lodoliana, Venice, 1786, and second ed.
quaUty of V'eneroni's architecture at Pavia; see C. 1834. Count Francesco Algarotti (17 12 64), the well-
Thoenes in Attt dellu VIII convegnn nazionale dt Gloria known Venetian courtier, writer, and patron of the
dell'architettura, Rome, 1956, 179, and S. Colombo in arts, was one of the first to write about Lodoli's theories
Commenlart, xiv (1963), 186; also M. G. Albertini, (Saggio sopra l' architettura, Pisa, 1753). Piranesi, too,
Considerazwni suir architettura lodigiana del prima Sel- the steadfast upholder of the supremacy of Roman
tecento, dissertation, Pavia University, 1963-4 (un- architecture, came under Lodoli's influence, as the
published). For other works by him, see L. Grassi, text of his Delia magnificenza ed architettura de' Ro-
Province del Barocco Rococo, Milan, 1966, 443 ff.
e del mani, Rome, 1761, reveals. See Wittkower, 'Piranesi's
Veneroni's Pavia contemporary, Lorenzo Cassani "Pareresu rarchitettura"',J. H'.C./., li (1938-9), 147.
(1687-f. 1765), has been studied by A. Casali, Boll. 10. This judgement seems to me correct, although
d'Arte, LI (1966), 58 ff. ; less progressive than Vene- Lodoli attacked, of course, the tenets of classical archi-
roni, Cassani reveals a belated attachment to Ric- tecture. H-isktW, Patrons, 321, underestimates perhaps
chino's architecture. Lodoli's influence on architects. See also E. Kaufman
4. The architect of the fa9ade, one of the most original Jr, in Art Bull., XLVi (1964), 172.
creations of the eighteenth century, seems to be un- 373. II. A. Rava, 'Appartamenti e arredi Veneziani
known. The staircase hall, too, was later remodelled del Settecento', Dedalo, i (1920), 452 ff., 730 ff. Ro-
(by Faustino Rodi, 1780s). It has an oval dome with caille stuccoes, among others, in the Palazzi Barbarigo,
gallery, through which appears a second ceiling, a Foscarini, Rezzonico (particularly good quality), Ven-
design which probably indebted to Guarini. See G.
is dramin, and the Casino Venier, the latter two pub-
Mezzanotte, Architettura neoclassica in Lombardia, lished in Dedalo.
Naples, 1966, 219. 12. Correct birth-date in Donati, Art. Tic, 263.
5. Other examples are Bologna Torreggiani's build-
: : 13. The frame, probably intended for a relief, was
ings, see below; Carpi: Santuario del SS. Crocifisso; never filled.
Cesena: Madonna del Monte (staircase hall); Crema: 375. 14. On this problem, see above, p. 297. Fontana's
SS. Trinita by Andrea Nono
(1737); Forli; Palazzo plan dates from 1681. Foundation stone of the church
Reggiani (staircase hall); .Milan Palazzo Litta, facade
: 1689; in 1 7 10 the convent into which the church is in-
by Bartolomeo Bolli, 1743-60, also interior ('Sala degli corporated was partly finished. 1738: consecration of
Specchi'); Ravenna S. Maria in Porto; Santa Maria
: the church without the decorations. The latter execu-
di Sala (Veneto): Villa Farsetti, the richest French ted by Spaniards, after that date. O. Schubert, Gesch.
Rococo villa in North Italy, but for the classicizing des Barock in Spanien, Esslingen, 1908, 263; Couden-
exterior forty-two columns from the Temple of Con- hove-Erthal, C. Fontana, Vienna, 1930, 133.
cord in Rome were used; Stra: Villa 'La Barbariga'. 15. Fontana himself was partly responsible for it; see
See also Ferdinando Bibiena's diaphanous vaulting above pp. 284-5.
in the choir of S. Antonio at Parma (1714 ff.), in the 16. E.g., the high pedestals on which the pilasters of
parish church at Villa Pasquali (1734), and in a chapel the interior stand further, the gallery above the pil-
;
of S. Maria Assunta at Sabbioneta. The two latter con- asters and the (admittedly later) statues crowning the
sist of curvilinear gratings through whi«.li the painted pilasters of the drum. Also the open balustrade, on
blue sky appears. For the church at Villa Pasquali, see which the pediment of the fa9ade is superimposed, is
D. de Bernardi, Arte Lomharda, xi (1966), 51 ff. to be found in the Salute.
For Venice, see pp. 372-3. 17. The most concise assessment of the develop-
372. 6. A. Neppi, 'Aspetti dell'architettura del Sette- ment of polychromy between the sixteenth and the
cento a Roma', Dedalo, xv (1934), 18-34; M. Loret, eighteenth centuries in L. Bruhns, Die Kiinst der Stadt
'L'Architetto Raguzzini e il rococo in Roma', Boll. Rom, Vienna, 1951, 575.
d'Arte, xxvii (1933-4), 3i3~2i Associazione fra cul-
; 1 18. Not everybody agreed with his designs. The
tori di architettura, 'Architettura minore in Italia', diarist Valesio calls Fontana's design of the tomb of
Rome [n.d.]; M. Rotili, Raguzzini, Rome, 1951, 103. Queen Christina of Sweden in St Peter's, finished in
7. For the following, Wittkower, Architectural Prin- 1702, 'in extremely poor taste'. He, moreover, talks
ciples, 3rd ed., 1962, 144. about the architect as 'the liar Carlo Fontana'. See
8. Schlosser, Kunstliteratur, 578. Massimo Petrocchi, Scatassa in Rassegna bthltografica, xvii (1914), 179 f.
Razionalismo architettonico e razionalismo storiograjico, For the history of this tomb, see now A. Braham and
Rome, 1947. H. Hager (Bibliography).
BIBLOSARTE
NOTFS T(.) CHAPTKR 1 (j
376. 19. Further to this problem, Coudenhove-Erthal Nibby ascribes to him the campanile and monastery of
(in Festschrifl H. Egger, Graz, 1933, 95), who makes S. Maria di Monte Santo (pp. 283 flf.), dated 1765,
the point that in contrast to Bernini and his generation which is, however, by Cav. F. Navona (see H. Hager,
Fontana dealt with comprehensive urban projects. Rom. Jahrh. f. Kunstg., \\ (1967-8), 282). Teodoli's
20. Twenty-seven volumes from Fontana's estate contribution to the design of the Teatro .Argentina is
were purchased for King George III from Cardinal problematical; see F. Milizia, .Memone degli architetti,
Albani and are now in the Royal Library at Windsor. II, Bassano, 1785, 257.
When writing his biography of Fontana, Coudenhove- 29. .\. .Agosteo and .\. Pasquini, // Palazzo della
Erthal was unaware of their existence. Consulta, Rome, 1959.
21. The painting of the altar with the Inspiration ofS. 30. H. Hager, 5. .Maria delFOrazione e Morte (Chiese
Cecilia is also by his hand. di Roma
illustrate, 79), Rome, 1964 contains a
22. On Contini as well as all the members of the Fon- thoughtful discussion of the church, with new docu-
tana family, see U. Donati, Art. Tic, with further ments.
bibliography. See also H. Hager, 'G. B. Contini e la 31. For De Dominicis, a minor architect in the orbit
loggia del Paradiso dell'Abbazia di Montecassino', of Raguzzini, see V. Golzio in L'Urhe (1938), no. 7,
Commentary x.xi (1970). 7 ff. ; F. Fasolo in Qiiaderni (1953), no. 4, i. .Also G.
There seems now to be a measure of agreement to Segni - C. Thoenes L. .\lortari, 55. Celso e Giuliano
attribute the delightful Borrominesque facade of the (Chiese di Roma illustrate, 88), Rome, 1966.
little church of S. Maria della Neve (S. Andrea in 32. Neo-Cinquescentesque, not without dignity, but
Portogallo) to Francesco Fontana and date it 1707-8; astonishingly tame for the architect of S. Giovanni in
see N. J. Mallorv, in J. Soc. Arch. Hist., .\xvi (1967), Laterano. Documents for the facade published by V.
Moschini in Roma, ill (1925), no. 6.
23. He is, for instance, responsible tor the rebuilding }}. Sardi (c. 1680- 1753, not to be mixed up with the
of the interesting Palazzo di S. Luigi de' Francesi Venetian architect of the same name, c. 162 1 99) often
(1709-12), which foreshadows the Rococo palace in acted as clerk of the works to other architects. The
Rome. See also above. Chapter 12, Note 32. complicated history of S. Maria .Maddalena, to which
For Bizzacheri, see M. Tafuri, in Diz. Biograf. degli G. A. Rossi and Carlo Quadrio contributed, has been
Italiani, x, 1968. cleared up by V. Golzio in Dedalo, xil (1932), 58, but
24.For Specchi, Thomas Ashby and Stephen Welsh the facade still presents a puzzle. It is usually attributed
in The Town Planning Review, XI (1927), 237-48. i to Sardi w as, however, built by Carlo Giulio Quadrio
; it
Specchi illustrated many of Fontana's works and col- between 1697 and 1699 and only the facing and the
laborated in works on Roman topography and archi- extravagant stucco decoration date from 1735. N. .\.
tecture. Mallory (see Bibliography under Sardi) argued rather

25. Alessandro Bocca, // Palazzo del Banco di Roma, convincingly that there are no indications in Sardi's
Rome, 1950 (last ed. 1967). documented work that would favour an attribution of
377. 26. But W. Lotz, in Rom. Jahrh. f. Kunstg., Xil Rococo frames and rich floral decoration to him. By
(1969), has made it likely that Specchi had a formative contrast, P. Portoghesi (Roma harocca, Rome, 1966,
influence on De Sanctis' final project. 348) eloquently advocates Sardi's authorship. Even
It may also be mentioned that between 17 18 and 1720 the richly and elegantly decorated church of the SS.
Specchi skilfully completed the fafade of S. Anna de' Rosario Marino near Rome, the attribution of which
at
Palafrenieri, which had been left unfinished in 1575, to Sardi supported by contemporary tradition (see
is
after Vignola's death; see M. Lewine, in Art Bull., S. Benedetti, in Qjiaderni, Xli, 67-70 (1965), 7 ff.), has
XLVii (1965), 217. nothing in common w ith the Rococo decoration of S.

27. This facade shows an interesting development Maria Maddalena.
away from Fontana's S. Marcello in the direction of 34. Derizet (1697- 1768), born at Lyons, came to
Juvarra's S. Cristina at Turin but probably without Rome as a student of the French .Academy (1723) and
a knowledge of the latter. stayed there until his death. See A. .Martini-.Vl. L.
28. Teodoli, also 677-1766), philosopher,

Theodoli ( 1
Casanova, SS. Nome di Maria (Chiese di Roma illus-
trate, 70), Rome, 1962, 23 (with documents). .A paper

poet, and architect, three times principe of the .Aca-
on Derizet by W. Oechslin is about to appear in
demy of St Luke (1734-5, 1742, 1750) and therefore a
figure of considerable standing, has to our present Qiiaderm.
knowledge only this one church to his credit. The ^5. The architect was a Portuguese who had made
interior is without special merit, but the exterior with Rome his home as early as 1728 (Lidia Bianchi, Disegni
the stepped dome reveals an interesting personality. di Ferdinando Fuga, Rome, 1955, no) and was still
BIBLOSARTE
556 •
NOTES TO CHAPTER 16
there in 1772. Sardi acted as his clerk of works at SS. F. Cerroti, Leitcre e memorie aiitografe, Rome, i860;
Trinita. M. Tafuri, in Qjiaderni, XI, 61 (1964), i ft'., A. Prandi, 'Antonio Derizet e il concorso per la facciata
gives the history of the church and monastery from di S. Giovanni in Laterano', Roma, xxii (1944), 23;
documents and the drawings preserved in the Archivio Rotili,Raguzzini (Note 39); L. Bianchi's Catalogue
di Stato. (Note 35); A. Schiavo, op. cit. (Note 45), 37, and idem,
36. Ameh's design is graceful, but infinitely less 'II Concorso per la facciata di S. Giovanni in Laterano
powerful and original than Valvassori's. e il parere della Congregazione', Botletlino deU'Unione
37. V. Golzio in L'Urbe (1938), no. 7, 7 ff. On P. Storia ed Arte, Rome, May-June 1959, 3. V. Golzio
Passalacqua from Messina, see M. Accascina in Anht- has published Galilei's own memorandum about his
vio storun messinese, l-li {1949-50). design in Miscellanea Bihl. Hertzianae, 1961, 450. See
38. The material assembled by R. Berliner in Miin- also the New York University M.A. thesis by Virginia
chner Jahrh. f. Kunst, ix-x (1958-9), 302 ff.,
hild. Schendler (summary Marsyas, xiv (1968-9), 78).
in
shows that both beginning and end of the building are Only seventeen of the twenty-three competitors are
difficult to determine. The dates given in the text are mentioned in the literature, amongst them the Bolo-
approximations. According to J. Gaus {Marchtonrii, gnese Ferdinando Galli Bibiena and C. F. Dotti, the
1967, 23, 25, see Bibliography) the planning began in Venetian Domenico Rossi, the Sienese Lelio Cosatti,
1748 and the villa was completed in 1762. and the Neapolitan L. Vanvitelli. Two other competi-
39. Mario Rotili, Filippo Raguzzini e il rococo romatui. tors, overlooked by all those who have written about
Rome, 195 1, with further literature. this matter, were Pietro Carattoli (1703-60) from
40. M. Loret in Illustrazione Vattcana, iv (1933), 303, Perugia, the architect of the Palazzo Antinori (Gal-
and A. Rava in Capitolitim, x (1934), 385-98. See also lenga Stuart, 1748-58), the most impressive Baroque
F. Fasolo, Lc chiese dt Roma nel 'joo, Rome, 1949, 70. palace of his native city; and Bernardo Vittone from
41. Ilaria Toesca in English Miscellany, ill (1952), Turin (see his Istruzioni element an, Lugano, 1760,
189-220. 443 and plate 74). Another competitor, rediscovered
42. Guglielmo Matthiae, Ferdinando Fuga e la sua by H. Hager, was Ludovico Rusconi Sassi (1678-
opera romana, Rome, 1951; L. Bianchi's Catalogue 1736), about whom see Donati, Art. Tic, 393.
(see Note 35); R. Pane, F. Fuga, Naples, 1956. was not until January 1726 that Galilei, then in
47. It
379. 43. For its history, see mainly E. Hempel in Fest- Florence, was advised from London that 'the reigning
schrift H. Woelfflin, Munich, 1924, 283 ff. C. Bandini ; taste is Palladio's style of building', a fact of which he
in Capitolium, ¥11(1931), 327 P. Pecchiai, La scalinata

; was obviously unaware. See I. Toesca, op. cit., 220.
di piazza dt Spagna, Rome, 1941 and the exhaustive ; Just before leaving London in 17 19, Galilei may have
paper by W. Lotz (quoted above. Note 26). designed Castletown, Co. Kildare, near Dublin in a
380. 44. Raguzzini's undulating facade of S. Maria vaguely Palladian manner; see M. Craig and the
dellaQuercia reveals the same spirit; see A. Martini, Knight of Glyn, in Country Life, CXLV (27 March
S. Maria della Quercia (Chiese di Roma illustrate, 67), 1969), 722 ff.
Rome, 1 96 1. 383. 48. Marchionni's second great work is the well-
45. Clement XII arranged a competition in 1732. known Sacristy of St Peter's (1776-87). New docu-
Sixteen designs were exhibited in the Quirinal and ments important paper by Berliner (Note 38,
in the
Salvi's was chosen. After the latter's death, Giuseppe 368, 395), who published the extensive (ruiTf of draw-
Pannini was appointed architect of the fountain (1752). ings for a great variety of purposes by Carlo (1702-86)
The major change he introduced is the three formal and his son Filippo (1732-1805). For the Sacristy of
basins under Neptune. St Peter's also H. H2geT,Jfuvarra, 1970, 49 (see Biblio-
The literature on the Fontana Trevi is vast. The most graphy), and the extensive chapter in Gaus's book on
recent studies by Armando Schiavo (La Fontana di Marchionni (Bibliography), 67 ff.
Trevi e le allre opere di Nicola Salvi, Rome, 1956) and 49. W. Korte, 'Piranesi als praktischer Architekt',
H. Lester Cooke, Jr (Art Bull., xxxviii (1956)) are Zeitschr. f Kiinstg., 11 (1933), 16-33. Wittkovver in
fuller than any previous treatment without, however, Piranesi, Smith College Museum of Art, Northamp-
presenting the entire material on the history of the ton, Mass., 96 1, 99, has reconstructed the history of
1
fountain. In addition, Cooke's article should be used Piranesi's S. Maria del Priorato on the Aventine
with caution. See also C. d'Onofrio, Le Fonlane di (1764-6) from documents and original drawings.
Roma, 1957, 225-62, with some new material, but also The mediocre Alessandro Dori, architect of the
unacceptable assertions and attributions. Palazzo Rondanini {c. 1760; see L. Salerno, in Via del
382. 46. The history of this most important event has Cor so, 96 1,1 1 24), indicates the relatively low standard
not yet been fully reconstructed. For information see of Roman architecture at this moment.
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER l6 557
386. 50. For the history of Venetian Baroque architec- Architettura . . . a I'enezia, 1962 (see Bibliography),
ture see E. Bassi's basic work (1962). For the survival 236 ft"., and that of the priest Carlo Corbellini from
and transformation of the Pailadian tradition, see Brescia, who in the large church of S. Geremia (1753-
Wittkower in Barocco europeo e Barocco veneziano, 60) returned to a classicizing Greek-cross type with
Florence, 1962, 77, and Bolktttno del Centra Internaz. additional satellite chapels at the west. His use of a
di Studt di Architettura^ v (1964). giant order of half-columns all round the interior is in
51. S. Moise is early, 1668. The undifferentiated the tradition coming down from Palladio, but the type
Late Baroque quality ensues from the profusion of as such belongs to the eighteenth-century revival of
Meyring's ('Arrigo Merengo's') later sculptural dec- similar late sixteenth-century churches (p. 1 17). The
oration rather than from the structural pattern, which strong Baroque facade of Corbellini's S. Lorenzo
is basically Pailadian. Martire at Brescia ( 1 75 1 -63) also contains neo-cinque-
For Tremignon, see C. Semenzato in Alti della centesque elements.
Accademta Patavina di scienze, lettere ed arti, N.S. LXI\ For the continuity of the Pailadian tradition in
(1952), and G. B. Alvarez in Boll, del Museo Civico dt Venice, see R. Wittkower, in Boll, del Centra Internaz.
Padova, l (1961), 59. di Sliidi di .inhitettiira, V (1964), 61 ft'.
52. The entire interior of the Chiesa dei Gesuiti is 59. For the carefully calculated system of proportion
spun over with inlaid marble imitating tapestry. The (p. 372), see Cicognara-Diedo-Selva, Le fahhnche e 1
high altar is by .\ndrea Pozzo's brother, Jacopo An- monumenti cnspicui di Venezia, Venice, 1858, II, 95.
tonio (1645-1725), a specialist in altar designs, whose D. Lewis (above. Note 55), 40, emphasized the reli-
importance has only recently been discovered; see F. ance of SS. Simeonc e Giuda on Palladio's Tempietto
Pilo Casagrande in Palladia, viii (1958), 78. The at Maser.
facade, closely set with free-standing columns, is 60. D. Lewis, op. cit., has skilfully reconstructed the
Rossi's largest work. His earlier fa9ade of S. Stae small but important ceuvre of .\1. Lucchesi. - For
(1709) is more interesting, for its structure is based on Temanza's life, see Ivanoft 's Introduction to T. Tem-
an unorthodox handling of Palladio'sinterpenetration anza, Zibaldon (Note 53). Temanza or, more likely, his
of a large and a small order. uncle Scalfarotto was the teacher of Giovanni Battista
53. Yet a comparison of Tirali's Valier with Lon- Novello, the architect of the mid-eighteenth-century
ghena's Pesaro monument of 1669 in the Frari shows Palazzo Papafava at Padua, which displays surprising
that the classical element of the column has been given originality ;.\. Rowan, Burl. .Ma?.. c:\iii (1966), 184 ft".
new weight, while the statues, the principal feature of 389. 61. Fausto Franco, 'La scuola architettonica di
the Pesaro, are disproportionately small. Vicenza', / .Wonumenti Italiani, ill (1934), and idem,
The principal source for Tirali's life is Temanza's 'La scuola Scamozziana "di stile severo" a \ icenza".
Ztbaldon, ed. N. Ivanoff, Venice-Rome, 1963, 17. Palladia. I
(1937), 59 ft'.
387. 54. For Palladio's project, see W. Timofiewitsch For the continuity of Scamozzi's classical formulas at
in Arte Veneta, xiii-.xiv (1959-60), 79. Vicenza, see, e.g., Pizzocaro's Istituto dei Proti and
55. D. Lewis, 'Notes on XVIII Century Venetian Palazzo Piovini-Beltrame, both 1658, and his master-
Architecture', Boll, dei Musei Civici Veneziani, xn piece, the Villa Ghellini Dall'Olmo at Villaverla
( 1 967), no. 3, has given rather convincing arguments

in (1664-79; for Pizzocaro, see L. Puppi in Prospettne,
favour of this late date in preference to the previously no. 23 (1960-1), 42, and R. Cevese in Boll, del Centra
accepted dating of 1700. Internaz. di Studi di Architettura, i\ (1962), 135), and
56. E. Bassi's chapter (Note 50) on .\Iassari super- Carlo Borella's Palazzo Barbieri-Piovene (1676-80),
sedes the studies by V. Moschini in Dedalo, xii (1932), also attributed to Tremignon and Giacomo Borella.
198-229, and C. Semenzato in Arte Veneta, xi (1957), i- Carlo Borella, the architect of the Sanctuary on .Monte
56a. G. Fiocco, in Saggt e Alemorie di storm dell' arte, Berico (1688- 1703), was not averse to using a certain
VI (1968), 1 18 ft'., attributes the painted architecture to amount of Baroque paraphernalia. But the Chiesa dell'
Francesco Zanchi, the chiaroscuri to Michelangelo Araceli (began in 1675), always attributed to him, was
Morlaiter, and the figures to Giacomo .\ntonio Ceruti. based on a design by Guarini; see P. Portoghesi in
57. Massari's chief assistant, Bernardo .Maccaruzzi Critica d'Arte, no. 20 (1957), 108 and no. 21, 214. For
{c. 1728-1800), the architect of S. Giovanni Evange- Borella, see Cevese, op. cit., 140.
lista in Venice (r. 1755-9) and of the Cathedral at 62. Francesco Muttoni (see F. Franco, thid., 147), the
Cividale (1767 ff.), deserves mention; see D. Lewis tireless builder of villas (Villa Fracanzan, Comune di
(above. Note 55), i ff^. Orgiano, 1710; 'La Favorita' at .Monticello di Fara,
58. may add the name of Andrea Cominelli, who
We 1 7 1
4- 1 5 Villa Valmarana at .Altavilla N'icentina, 1 724;
;
enlarged the Palazzo Labia before 1703 (E. Bassi, etc.), is famed for his creations in a mildly Baroque
BIBLOSARTE
taste: principal example, his well known Palazzo Re- 1821) staircase of the Palazzo Hercolani (Via Mazzini
peta at Vicenza (now Banca d'ltalia, 1701 11) with a 45) of 1792 the Baroque tradition is also continued
large scenic staircase. Yet he never denied his Falla- without a break.
dian derivation (see F. Barbieri in Qtiadcrni, vi vill 69. See, e.g., Tommaso Mattei's mid-eighteenth-
(1961), 287; also M. Tafuri, 'II parco della Villa Tris- century staircase of the Palazzo Arcivcscovilc at Fer-
sino a Trissino e I'opera di Francesco Muttoni', in rara or G. F. Buonamici's grand staircase of the
L'Architellura, cronache e sloria, x, no. 114 (igfi.s), Palazzo Baronio (now Rasponi Bonanzi) at Ravenna
832 ff.). It is interesting for the rise ofPalladianism in (the palace was by Domenico Barbiani, 1744).
built
England that he maintained close contact with Lord The Palazzo at Crema has a superb
Albergoni
Burlington. eighteenth-century staircase on the pattern of Lon-
The Villa Cordellina at Montecchio Maggiore, pre- ghena's staircase in S. Giorgio Maggiore.
viously attributed to Muttoni, is by Massari (1735), ]0. C.Ricci, I teatri di Bologna, Bologna, 1888, i76ff.
seeC. Semenzato in Arte Veneta, xi (1957), 6; see also 71. For a fuller survey, see P. Mezzanotte's chapters
Connoisseur, CXL (1957), 151. in Storia diMtlano, 1958, xi, 441 and 1959, xii, 659.
;
63. F. Barbieri in Arte Veneta, vii (1953), 63. Also R. 72. For Merli or Merlo, see now the excellent mono-
Cevese, 'Palladianita di Ottone Calderari', in Odeo graph by M. L. Gatti Perer (Bibliography).
Olimpico, V (1964-5), 45 ff. 73. The contemporary tradition as to Ruggeri's
For a survey of Baroque architecture at Verona, place of birth ambiguous, but he was born in Rome
is
Padua, Treviso, and Bassano, see the papers by P. rather than Milan see G. Mezzanotte, 'G. R. e le ville
;
Gazzola, G. M. Pio, M. T. Pavan, and C. Semenzato di delizia lombarde'. Boll. Centro Internaz. Studt di
in Boll, del Centro Internaz. di Studi di Architettura, Archit., XI (1969), 243.
IV (1962). The fa9ade of the Palazzo Litta is often wrongly
For the Veronese Neo-classicist Alessandro Pompei, attributed to Ruggeri, who is the architect of the splen-
see Semenzato, Arte Veneta, xv (1961), 192. did Villa Alari-Visconti at Cernusco. His pupil Gia-
64. See Le ville venete. Catalogo a cura di Giuseppe como Muttone ( 1 662- 1 742) built the well-known Villa
Mazzotti (many collaborators), Treviso, 1954, with Belgioioso (now Trivulzio) at Merate. Among the
full bibliography. minor Milanese practitioners may be mentioned Fed-
65. Giovanni Ziborghi who is unknown
otherwise erico Pietrasanta (1656-f. 1708, see M. L. Gengaro in
signed as architect of the Villa Manin (1738). The Riv.d'Arte, xx (1938), 89), Francesco Croce (Gengaro
monograph by C. Grassi, La Villa Manin di Passari- in Boll. d'Arte, xxx (1936), 383), Giovan Battista
ano, Udine, 1961, is disappointing. See also A. Rizzi, Quadrio and his pupil, Bernardo Maria Quarantini
in Boll. Ufficiale della Camera di Commercio, Industria (1679-1755); seeM. L. Gatti Perer in Arte Lomharda,
. . . di Udine (March 1964), 3-10. and XI (1966), 43 ff.
VIII (1963), 161,
The Villa Pisani is usually incorrectly attributed to Lodi had Late Baroque architects in Michele and
Girolamo Frigimelica. M. Favaro-Fabris, L'architetto Pier Giacomo Sartorio, and Bergamo in Achille and
F. M. Preti, Treviso, 1954, has proved that Preti's Marco Alessandri. For other names, see L. Angelini,
design was executed. It must, however, be pointed out 'Architettura settecentesca a Bergamo', Atti dello VIII
that this work is of infinitely higher quality than the convegno nazionale di storia dell' architettura, Rome,
unusually dry Palladian buildings of the architect from 1956, 159-
Castelfranco (1701-74). Giuseppe Antonio Torri's (1655 1713) S. Domenico
Frigimelica (1653-1732), who worked in his native at Modena (1708-31) is a remarkable centralized
Padua (S. Maria del Pianto, 1718-26), at Rovigo, building. The facade is an interesting version of the
Modena, Vicenza, Stra, etc., would deserve more aedicule facade, consisting of a closely set colossal
attention. See Bibliography. order of pilasters applied to a red-brick wall.
66. Fogolari in L'Arte, xvi (1913), 401-18. See also Brescia had native Baroque architects in Antonio
now the book by A. M. Matteucci, 1969 (Biblio- Turbini and his son Gaspare and in Giovan Battista
graphy under Bologna). Marchetti and his son Antonio (1724-91). The latter
390. 67. See Commune di Bologna, xi (1933), 69. built the Palazzo Gambara (now Seminario Vescovile)
391. 68. See the Palazzo of the Credito Italiano (Via and the Palazzo Soncini (1760s), both with impressive
Monte Grappa 1770; the Casa del Linificio Na-
5), staircase halls, and the Villa Negroboni, now Feltri-
zionale (formerly Palazzo Ghisilieri); and the Palazzo nelli, at Gerolanuova (1772-92) in an international
Scagliarini (Via Riva di 77), 1796, where the en-

Reno Baroque style; see G. Cappelletto in Arte Lomharda,
and the staircase form a pic-
trance, the courtyards, III (1958), 51.
turesque ensemble. In Angelo Venturoli's (1749- 74. For Piermarini and other neo-classical Lombard
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER l6 559
architects and their reveahng connexions with the Naples of the new King, Charles 1 11, in 1 738 those for
earlier eighteenth-centurj' manner, see G.Mezzanotte, the King's wedding, etc.
Architettura neoclassica in Lomhardia, Naples, 1966. 84. Other churches by him Chiesa delle Crocelle; S.
:
392. 75. M. Labo, 'Studi di architettura Genovese', Maria succurre miseris; facade of S. Lorenzo, 1743;
L'Arte, xxiv (1921), 139-51, repeats the traditional chiostro, monastery of Donnaregina together with the
attribution of the palace to Pier Antonio Corradi. C. restoration and enlargement of the church and monas-
Marcenaro in Paragone, xii (1961), no. 139, 24, has tery, etc.
corrected the attribution on the basis of documents. -
394. 85. Further on his staircases. Pane, op. cit., 182 fl".
The splendid pictorial decoration of the palace by Gre- Illustration 270 after Pane, 187, illustrates the double
gorio de Ferrari, Giovan .Andrea Carlone, Bartolomeo staircase in the palace in \'ia Foria 234. (This address
Guidobono, and others began in 1679. given by Pane is no longer correct.) The charming
76. See, among others, rooms in the Palazzo Durazzo staircase of the Palazzo Fernandez, attributed to
(formerly Reale), which - according to tradition - was Nauclerio, follows the type shown in illustration 269.
given its final shape towards the garden from designs 395. 86. By Sir Anthony Blunt in lectures given at the
by Carlo Fontana (1705); further rooms in the Palazzi Courtauld Institute. Fuga's staircase of the Palazzo
Granello (Piazza Giustiniani) and Saluzzo (Via Al- della Consulta (p. 382), unique in Rome, derives from
baro) and, above all, in the Palazzo Balbi Cattaneo staircases by Sanfelice (see Pane, Fuga (Note 42), 41) -
(Via Balbi). thus an .Austrian conception makes its entry into Rome
77. According to Soprani, Vite, 11, 271, De Ferrari's via Naples.
last work, executed shortly before his death in 1744 at 87. See mainly L. Vanvitelli Jr, Vila dell'archtleltn
There is now a satisfactory monograph
the age of 64. L. Vanvitelli, Naples, 1823; F. Fichera, Luigi Vanvi-
by E. Gavazza on L. de Ferrari (see Bibliography). telli, Rome, 1937, with further literature. On Vanvi-
78. Hugh Honour, 'The Palazzo Corsini, Florence', telli's work at .Ancona, L. Serra in Dedalo, x (1929).
Connoisseur, CXXXVlii (1956), 160. The eighth Congress of the History of Architecture
79. For the early history of S. Firenze, above p. 246. was to a large extent devoted to Vanvitelli; see .-///;
The church itself was built by Pier Francesco Silvani dello VIII convegno nazionale di sloria dell' architettura,
after 1668, and not by Ferri, as is usually said. See Rome, 1956, with many valuable contributions.
Paatz, Ktrchen von Flnrenz, II, 115. 88. G. Chierici, La Regia Rome, 1937; F.
di Caserta,
393. 80. Buontalenti influence is also to be found in the de Filippis, Caserta Naples, 1954 (also
e la sua reggia.
work of Ignazio Pellegrini (171 5-90), who was born in the same author's // Palazzo Reale di Caserta e i Bor-
Verona but practised in Florence between 1753 and honi di Napoli, Naples, 1968); Marcello Fagiolo-Dell'
1776; see R. Chiarelli in Rtv.d'Arte, XXXI (1958), 157; Arco, Funzwni simholi valori della Reggia di Caserta,
also idem, Architetturefiorentineetoscanedi LP. (1715- Rome, 1963, with full bibliography. The foundation
ijgo), 1966, and Architetture pisane di IP. nei disegni stone of Caserta was laid on 20 January 1752 between ;
deH'archivio Pellegrini di Verona, Universita di Pisa, 1759 and 1764 interruption; after Luigi's death in 1773
1966. the work was continued by his son, (^rlo. The exterior
81. Begun in 1738 by Giovanni Antonio Medrano was finished in 1774, not entirely in accordance with
with the assistance of .Antonio Canevari (i68i-f. Luigi's plans. E. Rufini, 'L'importan/.a di un epistol-
1750), and not yet finished in 1759. Medrano also built ario inedito di L. Vanvitelli', in Studi in memoria di G.
the theatre of S. Carlo (1737) to which later Fuga and Chierici, Rome, 1965, 281 ff., reports an extensive find
G. M. Bibiena contributed. It was destroyed by fire (in the .\rchive of S. Giovanni de' Fiorcntini, Rome)
in 1 816. See A. Venditti, Archil etiura neoclassica a of letters which \'anvitelli addressed to his brother Don
Napoli, Naples, 1961, 237. Lrbano between 1751 and 1768, written from Caserta
For the following see mainly R. Pane, Architettura and to a large extent concerned with the building of
Naples, 1939, and idem,
dell 'eta harocca in Napoli, the castle.
Napoli imprevista, Turin, 1949; also Bibliography. 398. 89. But the differences are not negligible; see
82. R. Mormone, 'D. A. Vaccaro architetto', Napoli Fichera, op. cit., 42.
Nohilissima, i (1961-2), 135. 90. Fagiolo-Dell'.^rco, op. cit., 46, wants to derive the
83. He was responsible in 1701 for the funeral decora- Caserta octagons from Early Christian or Byzantine
tions for King Charles II in the Cappella del Tesoro; sources (precisely what I have claimed for S. .Maria
in 702 for the festival decorations on the occasion of della Salute) and. without supporting his argument,
1
Philip V's visit to Naples; in 1731 for the funeral dec- refuses to accept the obvious: the direct impact of the
orations of the Duke Gaetano .\rgento; in 1734 he Salute, a building well known to \ anvitelli.
designed the festival decorations for the entry into 399. 91. It is noteworthy not only that \ anvitelli in
BIBLOSARTE
this church made use of Borrominesque detail but that Giuseppe Mariani from Pistoia (1681 1731), prob-
he fashioned the design of the dome after Cortona's ably Giacomo .Amato's pupil, whose work has a Borro-
SS. Martina e Luca. In keeping with his rationahsm, minesque flavour, became court architect in Palermo
however, he did not superimpose the ribs of the vault in 1722; see V. Scuderi in Commentan, xi (i960), 260.
upon the coffers and gave the latter a severely geo- 98. A. Chastel in Reiiie des sciences humaines, fasc.
metrical octagonal star-form. 55 6 (1949), 202.
92. For Neapolitan architecture of the second half of 401. 99. E. Calandra, Breve storia deU'architettura in
the eighteenth century, see A. Venditti, Architcltura Sicilia, Bari, 1938, 134, reports nineteenth-century
neoclas.su a a Napoli, Naples, 1961, 51 and passim. alterations to this facade. The only monographic treat-
93. Work on Apulian architecture of the seventeenth ment of G. B. Amico is by V. Scuderi, Palladio, xi
and eighteenth centuries is in its beginnings. The (1961), 56 (with chronological work catalogue). G. B.
older book by M. S. Briggs, /;; ihe Heel oj Italy, Lon- Comande (in Qitaderni, Xii, 67-70 (1965), t,}, ff.) pub-
don, 1910, is still useful. In his article in Comment an., V summary of Amico's rare book L'Architetto
lished a
(1954), 316, M. Calvesi applies historical methods to pratico of 1726.

the investigation of the architecture of Lecce for the 100. For these villas, see the fine study by \'. Ziino,
first time. M. Calvesi and M. Manieri-Elia, Architet- Contributi alio studio dell 'architettura del 'joo in Sicilia,
tura barocca a Lecce . . ., 197 1, replaces the previous Palermo, 1950. For the correct dating of the Villa \'al-
literature on the subject. guarnera, see V. Ziino in Atti (see Note 95), 329.
Interesting contributions by G. Bresciani Alvarez, loi. Monstrosities always exercise a particular fasci-
M. Calvesi, and M. Manieri-Elia appeared in the Atti nation and, therefore, more has been written about this
del IX Congresso Nazwnale di storia dell'architettura, villa than about any other Sicilian monument. The
Rome, 1959, 155, 177, 189. These authors turn against most recent book on the subject is by K. Lohmeyer,
the legend of the Spanish influence and emphasize the Palagonisches Barock, Frankfurt, 1 943 see also Brassai ;
importance of Naples and Sicily for Apulia. in G.d.B.A., lxi (i960), 351, and G. Levitine, ihid.,
400. 94. For the literature see Bibliography, section LXiii (1964), 13, with further references.
SICILY. Maria Carolina, Maria Theresa's daugh-
102. Later,
95. The Quattro Canti are traditionally attributed to ter, the Queen of Bourbon Naples, and her
became
the Roman (.') Giulio Lasso, 1608; Mariano Smiriglio daughter, Maria Theresa, Princess of Naples and
directed the work in 16 17 and Giovanni de Avanzato Sicily, married the Hapsburg Emperor Francis II.
in 1621; see F. Meli, Arch. Star, per la Sicilia, iv-v 103. See above. Chapter 12, Note 9. For Picherali,
(1938-9), 318. For Smiriglio, ibid., 354; G. B. Com- see G. Agnelli in Arch. stor. per la Sicilia, ii-iii (1936-
mande in Atti del VII Congresso Naz. di storia dell' 7), VI (1939), and series III, vol. 11 (1947), 281. For
arch., Palermo, 1956, 307. Luciano Ali, the architect of the remarkable Palazzo
96. Many features of this palace derive from the stock Beneventano at Syracuse (1779), see S. L. Agnello in
of Mannerist motifs, but the balcony surrounding the Atti dello I III convegno nazionale di storia dell'archi-
entire structure and the large supporting brackets tettura, Rome, 1956, 213.
superimposed on the triglyphs of the entablature 104. O. Sitwell, 'Noto, a Baroque City', Architec-
underneath are typically Sicilian. tural Review, Lxxvi (1934), 129; N. Pisani, Noto. la
For Vermexio, see E. Mauceri, Giovanni Verme.xio, Citta d'Oro, ed. Ciranna, 1953; J. -J. Ide \n Journal
Syracuse, 1928; G. Agnello, 'I! tempio vermexiano di R.I.B.A., Lxvi (1958), 1 1 ; F. Popelier in G.d.B.A., Lix
S. Lucia a Siracusa', Arch. Stor. per la Sicilia orient ale, (1962), 81. S. Bottari in Palladio, viii (1958), 69, is
VII {1954), 153; and idem, I Verme.xio, Florence, 1959 mainly concerned with Gagliardi's work.
(also A. Blunt's review in Burl. Mag., Cii (i960), 124). Gagliardi's and other Sicilian architects' church
97. I have been unable to find out whether the book fafades with high central tower are un-Italian and
by V. Grazia Pezzini, Giacomo Amato e I'architettiira point once again to Austrian prototypes. To this class
barocca a Palermo, announced in 1961, has ever ap- belong Gagliardi's Cathedral and S. Giuseppe at
peared. L. Biagi's 'Giacomo Amati e la sua posizione Ragusa and S. Giorgio at Modica.
nell'architettura palermitana', L'Arte, xlii (1939), 29, 105. F. Fichera, G. B. Vaccarim e I'architettiira del
gives less than the Documentary

title promises. Settecento in Sicilia, Rome, 1934.
material for Paolo and Giacomo Amato in Meli, op. 106. The Benedictine monastery has a long and com-
cit., 359, 367. Paolo Amato's La nttova pratica della plicated building history for which see Fichera, op.
prospettiva (Palermo, 1736), published posthumously cit., 80, 143, etc. The main contributors were Antonino
by his friend Giuseppe de Miteli, is prefaced by a life Amato and his sons Lorenzo and Andrea (until 1735),
of the architect (presumably written by De Miteli) Francesco Battaglia (1747-56), Giuseppe Palazzotto
which includes a list of works with dates. (until 1763), and Stefano Ittar (1768).
BIBLOSARTE
561
CHAPTER 17 Bihl. Hertzianae, 1961, 418; M. Passanti, Nel mondo

magico di Guarino Guarini, Turin, 1963 (an architect's
403. I. For Vittozzi, see Bibliography. On the Castel- study who follows up the genesis of Guarini's motifs).
lamonte see C. Boggio, Gli architeiti Carlo ed Amedeo The pedestrian dissertation by M. .Anderegg-Tille,
di Castellamonle, Turin, 1896, and G. Brino (and Die Schule Guarinis, Winterthur, 1962, contains little
others), L'opera di Carlo eAmedeo di Castellamorile, information of interest. For the enormous increase of
Turin, 1966. Buildings by Amedeo: S. Salvario in via Guarini studies in recent years the reader is referred
Nizza (1646-53), Chiesa di Lucento (1654), S. Mar- to the Bibliography.
tiniano (1678, destroyed), Palazzo della Curia Maxima 6. T. Sandonnini, op. cit., 489, and Portoghesi, op. cit.
(1672), Hospital of S. Giovanni (now containing also 7. On Guarini's writings, E. Olivero in // Duomo di
collections of the University, begun 1680), and, above Torino, 11, no. 6 (1928).
all, the Palazzo Reale, begun in 1646. The architect 8. M. Accascina
in Boll. d'Arle, XLI (1956), 48, pub-
and engraver Giovenale Boetto (1640c 1678) reveals lished an old photograph of the facade of the .^nnun-
close links with Vittozzi and Carlo di Castellamonte in ziata; see also W. Hager, 'Guarinis Theatinerfassade
his buildings in Piedmont; see monograph by i\. in Messina' in Das Werk des Kiinstlers. Hubert Schrade
Carboneri A. Griseri (Bibliography). zum bo. Gehurtstag dargebracht, Stuttgart, i960, 230.
2. His most important buildings: the extensive Pa- The picturesque facade of S. Gregorio, destroyed in
lazzo di Citta (1659-63, enlarged by Alfieri; see E. 1908, is often illustrated as a characteristic example of
Olivero in Torino, \ (1927), 373 ft'.), Chiesa della Visi- Guarini's But documents prove (.•\ccascina,
style.
tazione (166 1, facade 1765), S. Rocco (1667-91 facade , ihid., was not finished
XLii (1957), 153) that the facade
1890), SS. Maurizio e Lazzaro (1679 dome and facade until 1743. The strange campanile 'a lumaca' was
1835), the latter church according to Olivero by Lan- finished in 17 17, .M. Accascina suggests from a design
franchi's son. CarloEmanuele. All these churches are by Juvarra; this does not seem convincing.
centralized buildings, S. Rocco and SS. Maurizio e 9. Portoghesi, op. cit., wants to date the design about
Lazzaro with impressive use of free-standing columns. 1670, and Hager (last Note), 232, follows Portoghesi's
For Lanfranchi, see A. Cavallari-Murat in Boll. Sac. late dating. There seems to be a general inclination to
Piemontese di archeologia e di belle arti, xiv-xv (1960- favour the late date.
i), 47-82. 405. 10. L. Hzutec(EUT,Histoirede r architecture classi-

3. For the whole question of Turin's urban develop- que en France, 11, Paris, 1948, 245, with further litera-
ment, see P. Gribaudi, 'Lo sviluppo edilizio di Torino ture. The history of the church has now been clarified
dall'epoca romana ai giorni nostri', Torino, xi (1933), by D. R. Coffin m Journal ofthe Society ofArchitectural
no. 8; also M. Passanti, 'Le trasformazioni barocche Historians, xv (1956), no. 2.
entro I'area della Torino antica', Atti del X Congresso 1 1. The correspondence with similar devices used by
di storia delTarchitettura, Rome, 1959, 69-100. Francôis Mansart at an earlier date (.\. Blunt, .irt and
4. Further for seventeenth-century Piedmontese Architecture in France, 148; P. Smith, Burl. .Wag., cvi
architecture: A. E. Brinckmann, Theatrum Novum (1964), 114, figure 20, suggests that .Mansart had de-
Pedemontii, Diisseldorf, 193 1; A. Ressa, 'L'architet- vised a cut-ofl dome design for the Val de Grace as
tura religiosa in Piemonte nei secoli .XVII e X\'III)\ early as 1645) is striking. There seems to have been an
Torino, XIX (1941); M. Passanti, Architettura in Pie- interesting give and take between Guarini and the
monte, Turin, 1945. - On the richly decorated Castello French. While Guarini's truncated dome of Saintc-
del Valentino, the planning of which is essentially Anne-la-Royale (1662) was in all likelihood developed
French, see the monograph by Cognasso, Bernardi, from .Mansart 's staircase at Blois, the latter in turn fol-
Brinckmann, Brizio, and Viale, Turin, 1949. - On the lowed Guarini's version of Sainte-.\nne for the design
Baroque architecture at Carignano near Turin, see G. of the Bourbon Chapel at Saint-Denis (1665). In his
Rodolfo, in Atti del W congresso della Societa Pie- church of the Invalides(i679ff".),J.Hardouin-Mansart
montese di Archeologia e Belle Arti (A cura della R. used the same type of dome, but adjusted the curve of
Deput. subalpina di storia patria), Turin, 1937, 130- the second vault, w hich he closed in the centre (instead
86. - See also Bibliography, III. of opening it into a lantern). Once again Guarini incor-
404. Apart from P. Portoghesi's monograph on

5. porated this latest version into his project for S. Gae-
Guarini (Milan, 1956), which is useful in spite of the tano at \'icenza (last period).
brief text, see T. Sandonnini, 'II Padre Guarino Gua- 12. pagoda-like build-up, for which precedents
The
rini', Atti e mem. R. Deput. di storia patria . . . provincie exist inNorthern Italy (p. 122), was often used by
modenesi e parmensi, ser. 3, v (1888), 483; E. Olivero, Guarini and developed much further than ever before.
'La vita e Parte del P. Guarino Guarini', in // Duomo The most advanced example: his design for the Sanc-
di Torino, II, no. 5 (1928); W. Hager in Miscellanea tuary at Oropa (1680).
BIBLOSARTE
13. A. Terraghi in Allt del X Congresso di storia dell' 408. 18. See the oval reliefs in the pendentives of S.
arch., Rome, h)5(), 373, suggests a date between 1656 Carlo alle Quattro Fontane.
and 659 1 for the church and oft'crs a hypothesis regard- 409. 19. The Palazzo Carignano may illustrate how he
ing Guarini's hkely stay in Portugal. But at the Guarini applied similar contrasts to a palace; see the undulat-
Congress in Turin (1968) F. Chuecas suggested that ing window frames (produced as if by chance) con-
Guarini's church was not buih until i6g8. tained by hard geometrical forms, particularly the
406. 14. Begun by Guarini in 1679 and continued by constantly repeated star-pattern of the court front.
Michelangelo Garove (1650 1713). Further for the 410. 20. See also E. Battisti, 'Note sul significato della
history of the church, G. Chevalley, 'Vicende costrut- Cappella della S. Sindone', Atti del X Congresso di
tive della Chiesa di San Filippo Neri', Bnllettmo del storia dell'arch., Rome, 1959, 359.
Centra di studi areheulogin . . . del Piemonle, fasc. 11 21. S. Lorenzo is a Theatine church. Its foundation
(1942). Here, too, further information on Garove's stone had been laid, long before Guarini, in 1634. See
work. G. M. Crepaldi, La Real Chiesa di San Lorenzo in
15. The Palazzo Carignano (1670-92) is by far the Torino, Turin, 1963.
most important of Guarini's domestic buildings. Its 22. Reference may be made to the fact that two ad-
plan combines motifs from Borromini's designs for the joining niches with statues always vary in depth and
Palazzo Carpegna and Bernini's first Louvre project, stand at angles to each other which cannot easily be
but in the treatment of detail and of the decoration perceived. Moreover, since the sides of the octagon are
Guarini is highly original. Much material in O. Cra- not equally curved (the curves are flatter in the main
vero, Tl Palazzo Carignano', Atti e Rass. tecmca della axes than in the diagonals), the relationships differ be-
Soc. Ingegneri e Architetlt in Torino., xvii (1963). A fine tween two adjoining columns and the niches behind.
analysis of the palace in H. A. Millon, Baroque and The Architettura civile contains, however, no
412. 23.
Rococo Architecture, New York, 1961, 22. Guarini also chapter on domes. This omission suggests that the
made designs for the royal castle at Racconigi (between MS. was unfinished at the time of Guarini's death.
1679 and 1683; C. Merlini in Torino, xix (1941), 35) 24. With Naples and Sicily belonging to the Kingdom
and for other palaces (see Portoghesi, op. cit.). We leave of Castile, it seems unnecessary to speculate about
a discussion of all this aside in favour of an analysis of Guarini's early contacts with Hispano-Moresque I
his major work at Turin.

ecclesiastical architecture.
16. His design of 1678 had to incorporate an older The eight-pointed star-shaped dome above the
church the dome of 1703 does not correspond to Gua-
; crossing of the cathedral of Saragossa probably comes
rini's design; enlargement by Juvarra, 17 14. Decora- nearest to the dome of S. Lorenzo. The extraordinary
tion finished in 1740. Facade, 1854-60. Addition of twelfth-century vestibule of the cathedral at Casale
four elliptical chapels, 1899-1904. See P. Buscalioni, Monferrato near Turin with a vault consisting of inter-
La Consolata nella storia di Torino, Turin, 1938. secting ribs was, of course, known to Guarini. In 1671
407. 17. According to documents in the State Archive, Guarini himself designed S. Filippo at Casale Mon-
Turin (available in the Soprintendenza), Bernardino ferrato, complex interpenetration of circu-
based on a
Quadri directed the work until 1667, supported by lar spaces. This church was completely altered in 1877.
Antonio Bettino (1659-64). 1660-3: construction of See also Terraghi (above, Note 13), 369.
the sacristy and the communication with the Palazzo 413. 25. Similarly, the system of the dome of the Cap-
Reale. 1667: the carpenter G. Rosso is paid for the pella della SS. Sindone may have been stimulated by
wooden model of Guarini's project. Guarini had to use the stalactite work in Islamic architecture.
marble and bronze which had already been worked. 26. But see W. Miiller, 'The Authenticity of Guarini's
The altar, planned by Guarini, was executed by An- Stereotomy in his Architettura Civile', Journal Soc.
tonio Bertola. 1690; execution of the pavement. 1694: Architect. Historians, xxvii (1968), 202 ff., and idem,
transfer of the relic into the finished chapel. See also in Guarino Guarini e Tinternazionalita del Barocco,
Olivero in II Duomo di Torino, 11 (1928), no. 3 (ihid., no. Turin, 1970, I, 531 fT.
7, material about Bertola, 1647- 17 19, who was mainly 27. His publications of the 1670s and 80s are mainly
a military architect) A. ; Midana, 'II Duomo di Torino', concerned with mathematics and astronomy.
in Italia Sacra, v (1929); and above all M. Passanti, 28. Guarini celebrated the first Mass in S. Lorenzo -
'Real Cappella della S. Sindone', in Torino, xx (1941), probably a unique case of the alliance of architect and
nos. 10, 1 and idem, Nel mondo magico (above, Note
1 ; priest in thesame person.
5). For Antonio Bertola, see N. Carboneri, in Studi di In the same year, 1680, Emanuele Filiberto Amedeo,
Storia dell'Arte in onore di Vittorio Viale, Turin, 1967, Prince of Carignano, appointed him his 'teologo'. The
48 ff. revealing document mentions that in him 'are united
BIBLOSARTE
the highest philosophical, moral and theological Battista Sacchetti, who reduced its size and admitted a
sciences, which befit a zealous priest'. See Olivero in strong influence from Bernini's Louvre project. Sac-
// Duomo di Torino, 11 (1928), no. 4. chetti followed Juvarra's design more closely in the
29. For Piedmontese architecture between the death execution of the garden front of the palace of La Gran-
of Guarini and the arrival of Juvarra, see H. Millon, ja at S. Ildefonso near Segovia. New documents for
'Michelangelo Garove and the Chapel of the Beato this work, published by E. Battisti in Commeniari, ix
Amedeo of Savoy in the Cathedral of Vercelli', Essays (1958), 273.
in the History oj Architecture presented to R. H ittkower, 37. None of his great projects for Rome (Sacristy of
London, 1967, 134 ff. Next Garove, the most gifted
to St Peter's, Spanish Staircase, facade of S. Giovanni in
successor to Amedeo Castellamonte and Guarini (see Laterano) were executed. Juvarra was not an official
above, Note 14), the following minor architects were participant in the Lateran competition of 1732, but his
active: Maurizio Valperga, Giovanni Francesco Ba- early biographers mention that he was invited to send
roncelli (d. 1694), who built the Palazzo Barolo (1692- a project; for this sketches survive (Turin), .^s regards
3) and to whom the Palazzo Graneri (1682-3) is tradi- his other work in Rome, see !V1. Loret in Critica d 'Arte,
Emanuele Lanfranchi (1632-
tionally attributed. Carlo I (1936), 198, and R. Battaglia in Boll. d'Arte, xxx
1721) and Antonio Bertola (1647- 17 19) who worked (1937), 485, and also Arti Figurative, Ml (1947), 130.
on three of the buildings left unfinished by Guarini. 38. With the exception of S. Croce, Turin (1718 ff.),
For Bertola, see also above Note 17; for Garove, R. these churches will be discussed later.
Pommer, Eighteenth-Century Architecture in Pied- 39. The palace of the Venaria Reale (1714-26), Pa-
mont, New York-London, 1967, passim. lazzo Madama (1718-21), the castles at Rivoli (1718-
414. 30. The principal publication on Juvarra is that 25; see A. Telluccini in Boll. d'Arte, x (1930/1), 145,
by L. Rovere, V. Viale, and A. E. Brinckmann ('A cura 193) and at Stupinigi (begun 1729).
del Comitato per le onoranze a F.J.'), of which only 40. Palazzi Birago, now Delia Valle; Martini di Ci-
the first volume appeared in 1937. gala,now Belgrano (both 17 16); Richa di Covasolo;
For the early Juvarra, see G. Chevalley in Boll. Soc. and Guarene, now d'Ormea (both 1730).
Piemontese, N.s. (1947), 72, and, above all, M. Accas-
i 415. 41. This would have been even more evident if
cina in Boll, d 'Arte, XLi (1956), 38 XLii (1957), 50. For; the wings had been built. The palace, which screens
the Piedmont see A. Telluccini, L'arte dell'
work in widow of Carlo
the medieval castle, was erected for the
architetto FilippoJuvara in Piemonte, Turin, 1926. Emanuele IL Construction was interrupted in 72 .•\. 1 1 .
31. Sketchbooks in the Victoria and Albert Museum, Telluccini, II Palazzo .Madama di Torino, Turin, 1928.
London, and the Biblioteca Nazionale, Turin. For the I cannot always follow W. Collier's analyses ('French
theatre, see A. Rava, // Teatro Ottobom nel Palazzo Influence on the .Architecture of Filippo Juvarra',
della Cancelleria (R. Istituto di Studi Romani, ill), Architectural History, VI, 1963, 41), but he is certainly
Rome, 1942. not correct in maintaining that the French influence

32. Brinckmann, Theatrum Ped. (above, Note 4), 31. on Juvarra has been overlooked.
- A. A. Tait, Burl. Mag., cviii (1966), 133 f., attributes 416. 42. It should, however, be pointed out that the
the work on the Palazzo Pubblico at Lucca to Fran- type with radiating wings was also developed in
cesco Pini on the basis of documents. eighteenth-century Austria and France. Boff'rand even
Here Juvarra planned an enlargement of the old
33. maintained in his Lnre d' architecture, Paris, 1743,
royal palace, which was, however, not executed; see where he published the Chateau La .Malgrange near
Augusta Lange in Bollettino storico-biblwgrafico sub- Nancy with a plan similar to Stupinigi, that the latter
alpino, XLiv (1942), nos. 1-4; M. Accascina, Boll. was designed by him. Brinckmann (Baukunst
.A. E.
d'Arte, XLII (1957), 158. des I J. und 18. den romamschen Land-
Jahrhunderts in
34. Juvarra's project remained on paper; the palace em, Berlin, 9 9, 3 6) has shown that Boff^rand 's asser-
1 1
1
was built by Johann Friedrich Ludwig and his son tion is without foundation. But J. Garms, in II lener
Johann Peter. Jahrb., xxii (1969), 184 ff"., accepts Boff'rand's X-

Juvarra also designed the lighthouse in the harbour shaped plan as a genuine product of 1 7 1 1
- 1 2. .\1. Pas-
of Lisbon and the church and palace of the Patriarch. santi in L'Architettura, HI (1957), 268, published good
he dedicated a volume with architectural
35. In 1730 measured drawings. After Juvarra's death Alfieri (see
fantasies to Lord Burhngton, now at Chatsworth; see Note 72) was probably responsible for the planning of
Wittkower in Boll. Soc. Piemontese, N.S. in (1949). the considerable extension of Juvarra's project (1739).
The wooden model of Juvarra's design in the The park was begun in 1740 by the Frenchman F.
36.
Museo de Artilleria, Madrid. The palace was executed Bernard. For further information, see M. Bernardi, La
between 1738 and 1764 by Juvarra's pupil, Giovanni Palazzina di Caccia di Stupinigi, Turin, 1958. N.
BIBLOSARTE
Gabrielli (with M. Tagliapietra Rasi and L. Tam- tern; in 1727 the campanili were built, and in 1 731 the
burini), Aluseo deirArredamento Stupmtgi. La Palaz- decoration of the interior was finished. See also G. A.
zitia di caaia. Catalogo, Turin, 1966, contains the his- Belloni in Torino, xi ( 1 93 1 ), nos 9, 1 0, and .\1. Paroletti,
ton,' of Stupinigi and its decoration based on a wealth Description historiqiic de la . . . Superga. Turin, 1808.
of new documents. The same documentation was used By horizontal segments of masonry The same
422. 50. .
by Pommer for his comprehensive analysis of Stu- method was used in the satellite chapels. The prob-
pinigi in Eighteenth-Ceniury Architecture in Piedmont, able source is Borromini's doors in S. Ivo.
New York- London, 1967,61-78, 188-218. Theapogee 5 1 . The ratio is now 1:15; see Note 47. The body of
of Stupinigi studies is L. Malle's foho of over 500 the church looks therefore like a base to drum and
pages, Stupinigi. In capulavoro del Settecento europeo dome.
tra barocchetto e classicismo, Turin, 1968. Similar relationships prevail in Fischer von Erlach's
43. The original great design, published by Tavi- Karlskirche in Vienna (designed 17 15, begun 17 16,
gliano in 1758, was influenced by Rainaldi's S. Maria executed until 1722, but drum and dome finished after
in Campitelli. In1730 it was reduced to its present Fischer's death, 1739). The not unlikely connexion
form without crossing and dome. On the complex between the two churches would need further investi-
history of this church, see G. Chevalley's paper, gation.
quoted above. Note 14. 423. 52. The designs for S. Raffaello are similar. They
44. L.Tamburini, Le chiese di Torino dalrinasctmento are usually dated as early as 17 18, which seems to be
al harocco, Turin, 1968, 339-50. The church was untenable in view of Juvarra's other production at
gutted during the last war. that period.

In 1734 Juvarra made a design similar to that of the 53. See W. Herrmann m Jahrbuch fur Kunstwtssen-
Carmine for the church of the Padri Gesuiti at Ver- schaft, IV (1927), 129 ff.
celli; execution later (1741-73), with considerable 424. 54. Among Juvarra's contemporaries and follow-
changes. See \ \ iale in Atti del
. Congresso di storm X ers should be mentioned Gian Giacomo Planteri, the
Rome, 1959, 427.
dell'arte, architect of the Chiesa della Pieta and S. Maria dell'
419. 45. See Pozzo's altars in S. Maria degli Scalzi, Assunta at Savigliano (both begun 1708) and of the
Venice, and, later, in the Jesuitenkirche, \ ienna (I703- magnificent Palazzo Saluzzo-Paesana at Turin (1715-
5). Fischer von Erlach used the motif first in a design 22); for Planteri, see A. Cavallari Murat in Atlie Ras-
for the high altar in the church at Strassengel {c. 1690, segna tecnica Soc. Ingegneri e Architetti in Torino, xi
Albertina). (1957), 313, and S. J. Woolf, ibid., XV (1961, Septem-
46. The earliest example seems to be the Stiftskirche ber issue); further G. B. Sacchetti (see Note 36) and
Waldsassen, Oberpfalz, 1685-1704, designed by the the Conte Ignazio Tavigliano (Note 43). The most
Italianizing A. Leutner from Prague, with Georg extensive architectural practice next to Juvarra's was
Dientzenhofer as clerk of works. that of Francesco Gallo from Mondovi (1672-1750);
47. Rovere-Viale-Brinckmann, and op. cit., plates 31 he was, however, infinitely less imaginative than either
32. One will easily recognize the features deriving from Juvarra of Vittone. Among his more distinguished
Borromini, Bernini, Rainaldi, Carlo Fontana, and even works may be named the Chiesa Parrocchiale at Carrii
from Longhena's Salute (figures above columns in- (1703-18; see Chapter 12, Note 7), with a character-
side). In view of Juvarra's further development, the istic centralized plan, often varied by him; the Chiesa
change of proportion as compared with S. Agnese is della Misericordia (1708-17) and the cathedral at
notable. In S. .\gnese the body of the church is related Mondovi (1743-63); S. Giovanni at Racconigi (1719-
to drum and dome as i : i, in Juvarra's project as i :
15, 30); SS. Trinita at Fossano (1730-9); and the oval S.
i.e. the importance of drum and dome has grown. Croce (also called S. Bernardino) at Cavallermaggiore
420. 48. Another scenic feature (without pedigree) is (1737-43), which is perhaps his masterpiece and be-
the perforating of the pillars with three openings in trays Vittone's influence. He was also responsible for
the balcony zone through which one can look into the the completion of Vittozzi's Sanctuary at Vicoforte di
domes of the satellite chapels. - The detail of the Mondovi (1701-33). All his buildings excel in the
church combines classical tabernacle frames with richness, harmony, and taste of their decoration. A
ornament that shows almost a Rococo tinge. fully documented monograph about him was pub-
49.The church was intended as a thanksgiving by lished by Nino Carbonieri, Turin, 1954.
King Vittorio Amedeo II for the support given by the 55. On Vittone see the monograph by E. Olivero
Virgin to the royal house. In May 17 17 the wooden (Turin, 1920) which is useful for the collection of fac-
model, still existing in the monastery, was paid for; by tual material. Further: G. Rodolfo, 'Notizie inedite
1726 the structure had been carried as high as the lan- dell'architetto Bernardo Vittone' in Atti della Soc.
BIBLOSARTE
565
Piemontesedi Arch, e Belle Arti, XV ( 1933) C. Baracco, 66. The first stone of the Hospital was laid
;
in 1744. It
'Bernardo Vittone e I'architcttura Guariniana' in Tor- was erected at the expense of .Antonio Faccio, who was
ino, XVI (1Q38), 22; Olivero in Palladia, vi (1942), 120; also responsible for the Sanctuary at Vallinotto. The
C. Brayda, 'Opere inedite di Bernardo \'ittone' in Boll. church was consecrated in 1749. See G. Rodolfo,
Soc. Piemontese, N.s. 1
(1Q47); P. Portoghesi, ihid., XIV- Baroccn a Carignano (above. Note 4), ^y. i
XV ( 1 960-1). P. Portoghesi published a very well- 67. Badly redecorated in 1945.

illustrated monograph in 1966; it also contains the 68. E. Olivero in Boll. Soc. Piemontese, IX (1925),
long inventory of Vittone's estate and other docu- nos 1-2.
ments. R. Pommer, Eighteenth-Century Architecture 431. 69. On Rana, see C. Bravda, Tormn, xix (19^9),
in Piedmont, New York-London, 1967, made it likely 16.
that Vittone was born in about 1702 rather than in 70. On Bonvicini, see .Augusta Lange in Bolletiino
1704 or 1705 as is usually assumed. storico-hibliogra/ico siihalpino, XLIV (1942), no. 1.
The Acts of the 1970 Vittone Congress at Turin are 432. 7 1 . Like some other great men, Vittone was extra-
in the press. ordinarily mean. His heirs had to pay large sums to
56. H. .\. Millon (Boll. Soc. Piemontese, N.S. Xll-xiii, some of his collaborators who had not received any
1958-9) has shown that Vittone was a practising archi- money for a long time.
tect before going to Rome and that he was still in 72. Vittone's most contemporary
distinguished
Turin on 29 July 1730. among Piedmontesc was the Cionte Bene-
architects
57. Vittone himself calls Juvarra his teacher; see detto .Alfieri (1700 67), who succeeded juvarra as
Istruzioni element ari, Lugano, 1760, 285. 'First Architect to the King'. Outstanding among his
58. Very little of his pre-Roman activity is known, see palaces are the Palazzo Ghilini at .Alessandria (now
Note 56. Palazzo del Governo) executed in 1732 from a design
59. Height less than 70 feet, diameter c. 50 feet. The by Juvarra his own palace at .Asti 749) and the Pa-
; ( 1 ;
exterior was whitewashed in 1939. lazzo Caraglio (now Accademia Filarmonica) at Turin.
425. 60. It is particularly close to Guarini's unexecuted He is particularly remembered for his share in the
design for S. Gaetano, Nice, later built by Vittone decoration of the Palazzo Reale, Turin, and, above all,
himself. for S. Giovanni Battista at Carignano (1757 64) with
61. See our discussion of hexagonal planning in rela- its extraordinary horseshoe plan. For .Alfieri, see D.
tion to Borromini's S. Ivo (p. 206). The plan of S. Ivo de Bernardi Ferrero in .-//// e Rassegna tecnica Sue.
with alternating concave and convex recesses prob- Ingegnen e Architetti in Torino, xili (1959), and V.
ably influenced Vittone. Moccagatta in Atti e Memorte del Congresso di I'arallo
Hexagonal plans occur often in Vittone's aeuvre; see Sesia, Turin, i960, 151.
the Chiesa Parrocchiale at Grignasco (1752-67), the Among those influenced by \'ittone's manner may be
designs for S. Chiara, .Alessandria, and the church of mentioned, apart from Rana and Bonvicini (Notes 69,
the Collegio dei Chierici Regolari, Turin; also S. 70), Costanzo Michela who was responsible for the
Chiara at Vercelli, the Chiesa Parrocchiale at Borgo undulating plan of S. .Vlarta at .Aglie (1760; R. Pom-
d'Ale (1770), and others. mer, .4rt Bull., L (1968), 169 ff.); Giovan Battista
427. 62. Again, the closest analogy is to be found in the .Maria Morari (d. c. 1758), who built the parish church
design of S. Gaetano, Nice. at Cumiana (Olivero, Miscellanea di archtt. Piemontese
63. See, e.g., S. Maria Maddalena at Alba, 1749, and del Settecentn, Turin, 1937, 5); the spirited G. B. Fer-
the project for S. Chiara at .Alessandria. roggio, the architect of the church at San Germano
428. 64. It should be mentioned that there is a close Vercellese (1754-64), of the Chiesa dello Spirito Santo
connexion between the architectural conception of S. at Turin (1764 7, Olivero in Torino, xii (1934), no.
Chiara at Bra and the quadratura frescoes in the dome 12; bombed during the war) and the interesting oval
of the Consolata, Turin, executed by Giambattista Al- S. Catarina at Asti (1766 73); and the Conte Filippo
beroni from designs by Giuseppe Bibiena, with figures di Robilant (1723-83). the builder of S. Pelagia at
by Giambattista Crosato; to be dated, according to F. Turin (1770; for this and his other works, see Olivero
Fiocco, Giambattista Crosato, Padua, 1944, 49, in 1740, in Torino, x (1932), 42, and N. C^rboneri, 'Per un
i.e. just before Vittone planned his church. The rela- profilo dell'architetto Filippo Nicolis di Robilant', in
tionship of Vittone's architecture to Piedmontese Sludi in memoria di G. Chierici, Rome, 1965, 183 fl.).
quadratiira painting would need further investigation. With Vittone's devoted pupil Mario Quarini, Pied-
430. 65. Millon (Note 56) suggests as date 1738-40 montesc architecture turns towards Neo-classicism
and places correctly in the same period the little jewel, (see his large cathedral at Fossano, 1779-91, after the
S. Luigi Gonzaga at Corteranzo. model of St Peter's).
BIBLOSARTE
CHAPTER 18 the tomb of Monsignor .Agostino Favoriti in S. Maria

Maggiore (1682-6).
I. See, e.g., the German brothers Schor, in par- 6. Design of the altar by Andrea Pozzo. The sculp-
433.
ticular Giovan Paolo, whom we recognize now as an tural work, begun in 1695, was mainly finished in 1699.
important artist in Bernini's studio; until fairly re- For the altar, see now Pio Pecchiai, // Gesii di Roma,
cently he was almost entirely unknown (see above, Rome, 1952, with further literature. See also C. Brica-
Chapter 14, Note 33). Among theFrenchmen of Ber- relli in and G. M.
Civil ta Cattolica, Lxxiii (1922), 401,
nini's circle may be mentioned Claude Poussin ('Clau- March Archivum Hisloricum Socielatis Jesii, in
in
dio Francese' or 'Claudio Porissimo' in Italian docu- (1934), 300. For the contribution of the Florentine
ments), who was responsible for the River Ganges on bronze sculptor Lorenzo Merlini, see Lankheit, 183.
Bernini's Four Rivers Fountain (the statue is usually For Pozzo's oil sketches preparing the small bronze
wronglv given to another Frenchman, Claude Adam); reliefs by Rene Fremin, Angelo de'Rossi, Peter Paul
Niccolo Sale, whom Bernini employed very often, e.g. Reiff, and Pierre Etienne Monnot, see B. Kerber, in
on the tomb of the Countess Matilda, for the Cappella An Bull. ,\L\ii (1965), 499. Altogether over a hundred
Raimondi in S. Pietro in Montorio, and the Four artists and artisans worked for the altar. Fullest dis-
Rivers Fountain; and Michel Maille ('Michele Ma- cussion, based on new documents, in Kerber, A.
glia', 'MonsCi Michele', 'Monsii Michel Borgognone' Pozzo, 1 97 1, 140-80.
in documents), who worked the figure of Alexander VII 436. 7. For Ludovisi, see U. Schlegel, Mitteitg. des
of the pope's tomb (1675-6); he belonged to Ferrata's kiaisthist. Inst, in Florenz. x (1963), 265. The author
studio and carried on the Berninesque tradition in wants to exclude Ludovisi's collaboration on the St
independent works until 1702, when he seems to have Ignatius altar and argues that the sculptor was prob-
died. ably not bom before 1700. But see E. Lavagnino,
434. This group, known as La Renommee, shows
2. Altari barocchi in Roma, 1959, 174, and R. Enggass,
Fame writing the deeds of the King into the Book of Burl.Mag., cx (1968), 438 ff., 494 ff., and 613 ff.
History which is carried by Time, together with a 8. He had come to Rome from Milan, where he had
medallion portrait of Louis XIV. The work was not worked for twelve years under Giuseppe Rusnati. For
finished until 1686. Its present position is near the Rusconi,seeA. L.Elkan, Thesis, Cologne, 1924; Witt-
Bassin de Neptune in the garden of Versailles. For the kower in Zeitschr. f. h. Kunst, LX (1926-7), 43; S.
relations of Guidi with Lebrun, see A. de Montaiglon, Baumgarten in Revue del' art, LXX (1936), 233 ; Donati,
Correspondence des dtrecteurs de I 'Academie de France a Art. 1942; Samek Ludovici in Archtvi, XVII
Tic.,
Rome, I, 76 ff. ; L. Hautecceur in G.d.B.A., iv, vii (1950), 209; V. Martinelli in Commentari, IV (1953),
(1912), 46; Wittkower mJ.W.C.L, 11 (1938-9), 188. 231 I. Lavin in Boll. d'Arte, XLII (1957), 46.
;
435. 3. For Mazzuoli see, above all, V. S\iho& mjahrh. 9. Carlo Maratti supplied designs for these statues;
Preuss. Kunslslg. IIL (1928), 33, and F. Pansecchi in seeM. Loret in Archtvi, 11 (1935), 140; L. Montalto,
Comment ari, X (1959), t,^, with new material, mainly Un Mecenato in Roma harocca, Florence, 1955, 279,
at Siena. 442, 530, 545-
4. Wittkower in Rep.f. Kunstw., L (1929), 6. Ottoni's 10. Suboff, Zeitschr. f. h. Kunst, LXii (1928-9), iii.
best friend was the French sculptor Theodon, who 11. For Cornacchini, see H. Keutner in North Caro-
cunningly managed to take over Bernini's studio be- lina Museum of Art Bulletin, i (1957-8) and 11 (1958);
hind St Peter's which the Congregation had promised Lankheit, 188; Wittkower in Miscellanea Bibl. Hert-
to Ottoni. Ottoni's most extensive stucco work is in St zianae, 1961, 464: full documentation for the Charle-
Peter's, particularly above the arcades of choir and magne. Also C. Facciolo, in Studi Romani, xvi (1968),
transept (1713-26). 431 ff-
5. The illustration shows the stuccoes above the altar In the context of the relationship of such Late Baro-
and one of the four medallions of the vault with scenes que works to the theatre (see above, p. 366), it is worth
from the life of St Francis. They are surrounded with noting that a copy of Cornacchini's Charlemagne was
realistic palm leaves and roses and carried by putti the ; shown on the stage of Cardinal Ottoboni's theatre in
chapel is entirely white. All this lends support to the 1729 on the occasion of the opera Carlo Magno per-
rather gay and light quality of Carcani's art. In his formed in honour of the birth of the Dauphin (en-
marbles Carcani followed Berninesque prototypes graving by Gabbuggiani). See A. Rava, / Teatri di
more closely. The allegory of Charity on the Bonelli Roma, Rome, 1953, 83.
tomb Maria sopra Minerva (1674), for instance,
in S. For Cornacchini's statue of Clement XII in Ancona,
derives directly from the tomb of Urban VIII. Similar see W. E. Stoppel, in Rdm.jfahrl>.f. Kunstg., xii (1969),
observations may be made in regard to later works, e.g. 203 ff.
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTF.R l8 •
567
438. 12. See Wahl in Rep. f. A'«nj/n'., XXXiv (191 1), 15, demie (I. Budde, Katal. Jer Handzeichnungen, no. 449,
and J. Fleming and H. Honour, in Essays in the History plate 66) shows that Rusconi began with a symmetrical
of Art presented lo R. Wtttkoirer, London, u)67, 255 ft". composition.
13. Erected by Clement XII to his uncle's memory. 21. .Algardi's tomb of Leo XI is centrally composed
It is not without interest in our context that Cardinal but aftbrds a number of satisfactory views, while Rus-
Neri Corsini was papal Nunzio in Paris in 1652. coni's tomb ofters a coherent view only if one ap-
14. Apart from Maini, the principal contributors proaches it coming from the transept (compare the
were Cornacchini (marbles and stuccoes), Filippo della illustration here with the wrong view published by
Valle, Pietro Bracci, Giuseppe Rusconi (the classiciz- Donati, An. Tn., figure 461).
ing allegory of Courage), Giuseppe Lironi (1679, not 22. Filippo della Valle departs slightly from tradition
1689,-1749; for Lironi, see U. Schlegel, above. Note by placing the sarcophagus in an isolated zone under
7, 259), another pupil of Camillo Rusconi (his is the the triangle of the figures; but for the latter, he reverts
cool allegory of Jusiue), and Carlo Monaldi (1691- Chanty being derived from that of the
to Bernini, his
1760), who
more Baroque in his allegories in S.
is tomb of .Alexander VII, but he translates Bernini's
Maria Maddalena (1727) than in the figures which ac- drama into calm graciousness.
company Maini's statue of Clement XII in the Corsini 443. 23. The architecture of the chapel is by Raguz-
Chapel (for Monaldi see R. Chyurlia in Clummentari, i zini. The tomb was designed by Carlo .Marchionni
(1950), 222). In addition, there worked the less im- (1704 80), the architect of the Villa .Albani and the
portant Bartolomeo Pincellotti and Paolo Benaglia Sacristy of St Peter's, who also executed the relief
and, unconnected with the Rusconi circle, the French- The allegory of Humility is by Bracci's collaborator,
men Pierre Lestache and Lambert-Sigisbert -\dam. Bartolomeo Pincellotti. According to Soprani ( \ He de'
Between 173 1 and 1733 most of these sculptors, put on . . . was the painter Pietro Bianchi
genovest) it
among a host of others, supplied important works for who helped Marchionni on this and other occasions.
the cathedral Mafra (Portugal); see A. deCarvalho,
at For Bianchi, see Chapter 15, Note 13.
A esculturaem Mafra, Mafra, 1956. 24. It is true, however, that he used «w allegory. Faith
15. V. Moschini in L'Arte, xxviii (1925); H. Honour (and not the customary two). Together with the Angel
in Connoisseur, CXLIV (1959), 172 (with (vuvre cata- of Death and the lions, it belongs to a zone composi-
logue); Lankheit, 190. tionally and spiritually entirely divorced from the
16. It should also be recalled that Bouchardon worked praying pope.
in Rome between 1723 and 1732. 25.This interesting artist, who was born at Cattinara
439. 17. See the monograph by K. v. Domarus (Stras- in Piedmont in 1669 (not 1682) and died in Rome in
bourg, 191 5) and C. Gradara (Milan, 1920). 1736, worked for fifteen years in the studio of Lorenzo
18. The history of the Fontana Trevi is long and Ottoni. His most important works arc the four Bar-
complicated. It began in the reign of Pope Nicholas V berini tombs in S. Rosalia, Palestrina, of which the
as early as 1453 and developed through many stages two earlier ones of 1704 show Baroque angels related
from 1629 onwards for fully a hundred years. .After to Raggi's style. C. Pericoli in Capitiilium, XXXMII
Nicolo Salvi's project was chosen in 1732, the execu- ( 1 963), 131, contributes some new material for Cametti
tion progressed fairly quickly. The four statues of the but erroneously believes that he was born in Rome in
attic by Bartolomeo Pincellotti, Agostino Corsini, Ber- 1670. For a full monographic treatment of Cametti
nardo Ludovisi, and Francesco Queirolo were finished with reliable autre catalogue, see L". Schlegel mjahrb.
in 1 735 (see inscription). The second period of the exe- Preuss. Kunslslg., N.F. V (1963), 44, 151.
cution began under Salvi's successor, Giuseppe Pan- 444. 26. Painted portraits on tombs occur, of course,
nini (further for the history of the fountain, see Chap- before the eighteenth century. The most interesting is
ter 16, Note 45). To this period belongs the sculptural perhaps the one which Giovan Battista Ghisleri erec-
decoration of the lower part: 1759-62, Bracci's Nep- ted for himself in 1670 in S. .Maria del Popolo with the
tune and Tritons, Filippo della Valle's Health and Death looking out of his vault. The inscrip-
figure of
Fecundity, and the reliefs illustrating legendary epi- tions under the portrait nkqif. ilic VIVLS and
sodes of the origin of the Fontana Trevi by Giovanni under Death neqle illic mortixs (Male, 221)
point out that 'he (Ghisleri) is neither alive here nor
Battista Grossi and .Andrea Bergondi.
dead in the beyond'.
440. See O. Sobotka's classic article in Jahrh.
19.
Preuss. Kunstslg., xxxv ( 1914), which can, however, no 27. This feature was introduced by Raphael in the
longer entirely be followed; see also M. \'. Brugnoli,

memorial chapel of the Chigi family in S. Maria del
Boll. cl'Arie, XLV (i960), 342.
Popolo. During the sixteenth and the first half of the
seventeenth centuries, however, tombs with pyramids
442. 20. A preparatory sketch in the Diisseldorf Aka-
BIBLOSARTE
remained was once again Bernini who, with the

rare. It Lankheit, 88. The execution lay in the hands of twelve
redecoration of the Chigi Chapel (1652 ft.), opened the collaborators, among whom .Marcellini, .\ndreozzi,
way to using the pyramid as a Baroque sepulchral ele- Giuseppe Piamontini, Giovacchino Fortini, and Sol-
ment. For Raphael's Chigi Chapel and later changes, dani may be mentioned.
see J. Shearman in J. li. C.I. xxiv (1961), 129 (134, on
, Kven though Lankheit (77) claims that these as well
pyramid tombs), and J. Pope-Hennessy, Italian Hi^h as other works executed with the help of assistants
Renaissance and Baroque Sculpture, London, 1963, should not be used to assess Foggini's potentialities as
Catalogue, 43. a sculptor, they were his responsibility and demon-
446. 28. Michelangelo Slodtz (1705-64), member of a strate, moreover, how in Florence the few major sculp-
family of Flemish artists who had settled in Paris, went tural tasks were handled in which all the available
to Rome in 1728 and remained there for seventeen talent joined forces.
years. The St Bruno is his masterpiece in Rome. See Foggini himself, in the finest of his portrait busts
Bibliography. (Cosimo III de' Medici and Gran Principe Ferdin-
447. 29. The first important examples of Italian ex- ando de'.Medici, both c. 685, Donaueschingen Lank-
1 ;
port of Baroque sculpture are works by Bernini: the heit, figures 175, 176), despite his reliance on Bernini's
bust of Cardinal Melchior Klesl in the cathedral of busts of Charles I, Francis I of Este, and Louis XIV,
Wiener Neustadt (Austria), the (destroyed) bust of smothered the heads in emphatically suggestive acces-
King Charles I of England, and the portrait of Mr sories and played havoc with the 'amputated' arm.
Baker (Victoria and .\lbert Museum). (For these see 33. Lankheit, 110-60, with further literature. For
Wittkower, Bernini, Cat. nos 22, 39, 40.) Also fairly Soldani as architect, see U. Procacci, in Festschrift
early is Algardi's marble relief of Mary Magdalen car- Ulrich Middeldorf, Berlin, 1968, 476 ff.
ried up to Heaven (1640) in the church at Saint- 34. Lankheit, 162. Carlo Marcellini, .'\nton Fran-
Maximin in Provence. Among later exports may be cesco Andreozzi, Francesco Ciaminghi, Giovanni Ca-
mentioned Ferrata's and Guidi's figures for the mem- millo Cateni, Giuseppe Piamontini are hardly men-
orial chapel of Cardinal Friedrich, Landgraf of Hesse tioned in art historical writing before Lankheit. All
Darmstadt, in the cathedral at Bratislava ( 1 679-83 see
; these sculptors studied in the Florentine .Academy in
B. Patzak, Die Elisabethkapelle des Breslauer Doms, Rome before it closed its doors in 1686.
Bratislava, 1922); Guidi's monument to Louis Phely- 35. For Giovanni Baratta and his brothers Pietro and
peaux de la Vrilliere in the church of Chateauneuf- Francesco, see H. Honour in The Connoisseur, CXLii
sur-Loire (1681 ; see Sobotka in Amtliche Ber. d. kgl. (1958), 170 (with ceuvre catalogue); also idem in Diz.
tomb of
Pr. Kunstslg., xxxii (1910/11), 235); Raggi's Biogr. degli Italiani, 1963, v, 790; and Lankheit, 172.
Lady Jane Cheyne in Chelsea Old Church, London Giovanni's best known work is the very Florentine
(1671, partly destroyed); and Monnot's tomb of John monumental Tohias and Angel reliet in S. Spirito, Flor-
Cecil and his wife in St Martin's at Stamford (1704). ence (1697-8). Later, Giovanni had a distinguished
30. For Foggini and the following, see Lankheit, 47 ff. career as sculptor to the Turin court. The Florentine
and passim. Foggini was with Ferrata for three years note is also very strong in Giovacchino Fortini, who is
(1673-6). In 1687, after Ferdinando Tacca's death, he the sculptor of the tomb of General Degenhard of
was appointed court sculptor and slightly later also Hochkirchen in the cathedral of Cologne; see F.
court architect. His all-powerful position was there- Schottmueller in Boll. d'Arte, XXVI (1932-3), and
fore assured. His 'Giornale', a sketchbook of almost Lankheit, 175.
300 drawings (Uffizi and Victoria and Albert Museum; Among the sculptors of this generation Girolamo
and idetn, Riv. d 'Arte, xxxiv ( 1961 ),
see Lankheit, 5 1 -9 Ticciati, Antonio Montauti (the artist of the Pietd in
55), gives an excellent idea of the great variety of enter- the crypt of the Corsini Chapel, S. Giovanni in Later-
prises on which the artist was engaged in the years ano, Rome, a work of doubtful merit but traditionally
1713-18. See also K. A. Piacenti, in Festschrift Ulrich attributed to Bernini), and the skilful bronze sculptor
Middeldorf, Berlin, 1968, 488 ff". Lorenzo Merlini (see above. Note 6) are worth men-
31 Foggini's tomb of Donate dell'Antella in SS. An- tioning. For these artists, see Lankheit, passim.
nunziata (1702), according to Lankheit, 73, by an 36. Another (reputed) pupil of Ferrata, Giovan Bat-
assistant, is particularly close to Guidi. tista Barberini {c. 1625 91), deserves a note. Like
32. Corsini Chapel: Lankheit (70, 83, and Mittei- Ferrata and so others born in the Lake Como
many
lungen des Flor. Inst., viii (1957), 35) believes that of region, he became one of the most sought after stucco
the three large pictorial reliefs of the chapel only that sculptors in northern Italy. His work is to be found at
over the altar with the Apotheosis nfS. Andrea Corsini Cremona, Bologna, Genoa, Mantua, Bergamo, Como,
(1677-83) is by Foggini's hand. - Feroni Chapel: and elsewhere and, in addition, in Vienna, Krems-
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER l8 •
569
miinster, and Linz. His emotional, typically Lombard The

46. latest summing up of Ladatte's career is by
realism shows few links with his master. The almost L. .Malle, in Essays in the History 0/ Art presented to R.
forgotten book by H. Hoffmann, Der Stuckplasliker H'lttkoirer, London, 1967, 242 AT., with bibliography.
G. B. Barberim ( 1625-91 }, Augsburg, 1928, is un-
47. A. Telluccini, 'Ignazio e Filippo Côllini e la scul-
usually informative (many documents). See also E. tura in Piemonte nel secolo .\\ III', Boll. d'Arte, II
Gavazza in Arte Lombarda, vii {1962), 63. (1922-3), 201, 254; M. Strambi, 'La cultura dei Col-
448. 37. See G. Piccaluga Ferri, in Commenlan, xviii lino', in Boll. SocielH Piemontese Arch, e Belle Arti,
(1967), 207-24. Buzzi was born in Viggiii in 1708 and 1964; L. Rosso, La piltura e la scultura del 'joo a
died there in 1780. Torino, Turin, 1934.
38. Further on Lombard sculpture: S. Vigezzi, La For Piedmontese sculpture, see also J. Fleming,
sculttira lomharda nell'eta harinca, Milan, 1930, and Apollo, LXiv (1963, i), 188, and L. .Malle's chapter in
G. Nicodemi, / Caligan scultori hresciani del Setle- the Catalogue of the Turin Baroque Exhibition, 1963.
cenio, Brescia, 1 924. The work of the Caligari often 48. In his stucco work .Mazza was c-apabic of display-
has real Rococo charm. ing a luscious Late Baroque manner (Palazzo Biancon-
39. F. Ingersoll-Smouse, 'La Sculpture a Genes au cmi, Bologna), which vies with the richest decorations
XVIIe G.d.B.A., lvi, ii (1914).
siecle', anywhere in Italy. For Mazza, see Fleming in Con-
I J.
40. P. Rotondi, 'La prima attivita di Filippo Parodi noisseur, CXLVIII (1961), 206 (with auvre catalogue).
scultore'. Arte Antica e Ahtderna, 11, no. 5 (1959), 63 Giuseppe xMazza, who began his career as a painter,
(and idem, F. Parodi, 1962, 24), suggests that Parodi was the son of Camillo .Mazza (1602-72), .Algardi's
studied with Ferrata rather than Bernini, but this is pupil. Giuseppe's pupil, .Andrea Ferreri (1673- 1744),
supported neither by the sources nor by the evidence settled at Ferrara, where he was appointed director of
of Parodi's Genoese work. Moreover, in her not the .Academy (1737). .Angelo Pi6( 1690- 1770), a pupil
entirely satisfactory book (p. 66) she oflers the im- of Ferreri and Mazza, followed the general trend by
probable hypothesis that Parodi was in Rome not only going to Rome in 1718, where he worked under Ca-
from 1653 but again from 1668 to 1674.
to 1661 millo Rusconi; see E. Riccomini, Arte Antica e .\iod-
41. Parodi's main work in the territory of Venice and erna, VI, no. 21 (1963), 52, and idem, Paragone, .XVIII
one of the principal monuments of the Late Baroque in (1967), no. 213, 60. Filippo Scandellari (1717-1802)
northern Italy is the Cappella del Tesoro in the Santo continued the Late Baroque tradition of Mazza and
at Padua; he executed the rich multi-figured decora- Pio to the end of the century. Best information on Bo-
tion between 1689 and 1692 with the help of pupils. A lognese sculpture of the eighteenth century in Ricco-
late Genoese w ork, S. Pancratius, was published by R. mini's exhibition Catalogue (1965, see Bibliography).
Preimesberger, in Pantheon, xxvii (1969), 48 ft.
49. See L. Planiscig, Venezianische Bildhauer der
Reference should also be made to Parodi's magni- Renaissance, Vienna, 192 1, 597. Nicolo's antependium
ficent decorative sculpture and furniture, to which P. in the sacristy of S. Moise, V enice (executed together
Rotondi has drawn attention (Boll. d'Arte, XLIV (1959), with his son, Sebastiano; signed and dated 1633), de-
46). serves special mention. It is a work of fascinating
42. Another collaborator was Francesco Biggi, who beauty. Its strange iconography would require detailed
executed the famous lions at the foot of the staircase investigation, but the depth of sensibility and devo-
of the Palazzo dell'Universita from Parodi's models. tion expressed by the many small bronze figures ally it
43. V. Martinelli in Commentart, iv (1953), 231. closely to the religious temper of counter-reformatory
For Francesco Schiaffino's and Diego Carlone's col- art.
laboration in the twelve large stucco figures in S. Maria 50. The following names may be mentioned: .Mel-
di Carignano (1739-40), executed in a post-Rusconi chiorBarthel (1625-72) from Dresden and theTirolese
nervous quasi-Rococo manner, see E. Gavazza, Arte Thomas Ruer and Heinrich .Meyring, all three notori-
Lomharda, vii (1962), 105. ous for their facile handling of the Berninesque idiom
450. 44. Le casacce e la scultura lignea sacra genovese del (.Meyring's clumsy imitation of Bernini's S. Teresa in
Setcento e del Settecento (Catalogue of the Genoese the Chiesa degli Scalzi, 1699,is well known); and the
Exhibition, 1939). Hungarian Michele Fabris, called 'Ongaro' or 'Ln-

45. J. Fleming in Connoisseur, cxxxviii (1956), 176. gheri", whose painterly and diffused style may be
See also E. Olivero, La chiesa di S. Francesco di Assist studied in the chapel of Cardinal Francesco Vendra-
in Torino, Chieri, 1935, with much documentary- min built by Longhena in S. Pietro di Castello (f.
material for C. Giuseppe and his son Giovan Battista John Bushnell (b. c. 1630) may be men-
1670-4). .Also
Plura (who died in London in 1757), for Clemente and tioned; he England after 1660, spent some time in
left
G. B. Bernero (1736-96). Rome, and settled in Venice for about six years where
BIBLOSARTE
570 • NOTES TO CHAPTER l8
under Josse de Corte he executed parts of the large 453. 56. The older and younger generation collabor-
Mocenigo monument in S. La/.zaro dei Mcndicanti. ated on these works. The faiâde ot the Gesuati has
For Meyring, see D. Lewis, in Boll, dei Musei Civui sculpture by .Antonio Tarsia, Francesco Cabianca,
Vencziaui, xii (1967), 15 f. Lewis removed the large Giuseppe Torretti, Francesco Bonazza, .AlviseTaglia-
Holy Family in the Scalzi from the work of Giuseppe pietra, Gaetano Fusali, and Gian Maria Morlaiter; in
Torretti and attributed it to Meyring (1700 2). the Cappella del Rosario, which suffered in the fire of
452. 51. For de Corte see N. Ivanoff, 'Monsu Giusto 1867, worked Giovanni Bonazza and his sons, Giu-
ed altri collaboratori del Longhcna', Arte Veneta, li seppe Torretti, Alvise Tagliapietra and his son Carlo,
(ig48), 1 15. De Corte's tomb of Caterino Cornaro in and, above all, Gian Maria Morlaiter.
the Santo at Padua shows a standing figure of the ad- Giovanni Bonazza and his sons spent most of their
miral, baton in hand, surrounded by trophies with lives at Padua. The best known of his sons is -\ntonio
prisoners at his feet; it became the prototype of many (1698- 1763), who is famed for the garden figures in
similar tombs. The pictorial tendencies of the main the Villa Widmann
at Bagnoli di Sopra (Padua), exe-
altar of S. Maria della Salute were further developed cuted charming realistic Rococo style (1742); see
in a
in his last work, the sculptural decoration of the main C. Semenzato, Antonio Bonazza, Padua, 1957.
altar ofAndrea della Zirada (1679).
S. 57. Corradini has been fairly well studied; see G.
For de Corte and the other Venetian Baroque sculp- Biasuz in Boll. d'Arte, xxix (1935-6); A. Callegari,
tors mentioned below, see C. Semenzato, La scultiira ihid., XXX (1936-7); G. Mariacher in Arte Veneta, i
veneta del seicento e del seltecenlo, Venice, 1966. (1947), and A. Riccoboni, ihid., Vi (1952) with autre
52. Knowledge of this sculptor's work is based on catalogue; T. Hodgkinson, in Victoria and Albert
Temanza, Zthaldon, ed. N. Ivanofl", Venice, 1963, 42. Museum Bulletin, iv (1968), 37.
The Zibaldim should also be consulted for Michele 58. G. Biasuz and A. Lacchin, A. Brustolon, Venice,
Fabris, Thomas Ruer, and Antonio Tarsia. 1928.
53. Marinali was also influenced by Parodi. His aiivre 59. For Schulenburg as a collector and patron see A.
has been collected by Carmela Tua in Riv. d'Arte, Binion, Burl. Mag., cxu (1970), 297 fif.
XVII (1935), 281.His most important commission was 60. He specialized in veiled figures in which all the
the sculptural decoration of the Sanctuary on Monte forms under the veil are discernible; see Note 63. Cor-
Berico near Vicenza (1700 fl.); see F. Barbieri's mono- radini had the typical career of the migrant eighteenth-
graph, i960 (Bibliography). Barbieri also published century Venetian artist ; it took him to Vienna, Prague,
Marinali's work in the Museo Civico, Vicenza, in Dresden, Rome, and Naples.
Studi in onore di Federico M. Mistrorigo, Vicenza, Giuseppe Torretti (see above, Notes 50, 55) practised
1958, III. See also L. Puppi, 'Nuovi documenti sui a highly sophisticated Rococo style; see his excellent
Marinali', Atti dell' htitiito Veneto di scienze, letlere ed statues in the crossing at the Chiesa de'Gesuiti. For
arti (cl. di scienze morali, lettere ed arti), cxxv (1966- Torretti's work at Udine (mainly Cappella Manin,
7), 195 ff- 1732-6), see H. Tietze Zeitschr. f. h. Kunst, xxxix
54. The above-mentioned Thomas Ruer and Michele ( 1 9 1 7-1 8), 243. Torretti's nephew, Giuseppe Bernardi-
Fabris, see Note 50. Torretti (r. 1694-1774), was Canova's first teacher (A.
55. On the Valier monument were engaged the Car- Munoz, Boll. d'Arte, iv (1924-5), 103).
rarese Pietro Baratta, Giovanni Bonazza (c. 1654- 61. For Marchiori, see W. Arslan in Boll. dArte, v
1736), the head of a family of sculptors, Antonio Tarsia (1925-6) and VI (1926-7), and L. Menegazzi, Arte
(1663- 1 739), and Marino Groppelli (i 662-1 721). On Veneta, xiii-xiv (1959-60), 147 (a sketchbook after,
the fafade of S. Stae worked the same Pietro Baratta not by Marchiori, as the author believes); for Mor-
and Antonio Tarsia and, in addition, Paolo and Giu- laiter, see G. Lorenzettiin Dedalo,\\ 1930- 1) and W. (
seppe Groppelli, Paolo Callalo, Matteo Calderoni, .Arslan in Riv. di Venezia, xi (1932). L. Coletti, .4rte
Francesco Cabianca, and two more significant artists, Veneta, xiii-xiv (1959-60), 138, makes the point that
Giuseppe Torretti (c. 661 -1743) and Antonio Corra-
1 the bozzetti mentioned in the text need not necessarily
dini (on whom see below). be by Morlaiter. See also G. Mariacher, 'G. M Mor-
For Pietro Baratta ( 1 688-(. 1773), see C. Semenzato, laiter e la scultura veneziana del Rococo', in Sensihilita
Crttica d' Arte, v (1958), 150, and H. Honour in Dizi- e Razionalitd del Settecento, ed. V. Branca, Venice,
nnario hiugra/ico degli Ilaliani, 1963, v, 793. For An- 1967, II, 591 fl'.
tonio Tarsia (c. 1663- 1739), see H. Honour, Connois- 454. 62. M. Picone, La Cappella Sansevero, Naples,
seur, CXLVI (i960), 27 (with aeiare catalogue). For 1959, with full documentation.
Giuseppe Bernardi, called il Torretti, see C. Semen- 456. 63. Other similar veiled fi.gures by him are: the
zato, Arte Veneta, xii (1958), 169. Sarah in S. Giacomo, Udine; a female bust, Museo
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTERS l8 AND U) •
371
Correr, Venice; Faith of the altar of the Sacrament, da send, XVII, XVIII, XIX. Mostra, Naples, 1938,
Cathedral, Este; a similar figure from the Manin and R. Causa, Piltura napoletana dal at XIX XV
Monument, Cathedral, Udine,t. 1720; Time and Truth, seiolii, Bergamo, 1957. See also Bibliography.
» Grosser Garten, Dresden; Tuccia, Staatl. Skulptu- For Luca Giordano see, above all. Posse's excellent
renslg., Dresden; etc. See also G. Matzulevitsch, 'La article in Thieme-Becker. Also .\. Griseri, Paragone,
"Donna Velata" del Giardino d'Estate di Pietro il VII(1956), no. 81, 33; G. Heinz, Arte Veneta, X (1956),
Grande', Boll. d'Arte, L (i{)65), 80 fl". 146; F. Bologna, Solnnena, 1958, 34; Y. Bottineau,
64. The relationship of Sammartino's marble to Cor- G.d.B.A., LVi (i960), 249; M. Milkovich, L.G. in
radini's model in the Museo Nazionale di S. Martino America (loan exhib.. Brooks Gallery), .Memphis,
W was discussed by G. Alparone in Boll, d' Arte, XLii Tennessee, 1964 (with full bibliography). The three-
I (1957), 179- See also M. Piconc (Note 62), 108 ff. volume monograph by O. Ferrari and G. Scavizzi
65. Among other Late Baroque sculpture
Naples at (1966) supersedes most of the older literature; see
may be mentioned the decoration of the nave of S. Bibliography. See also O. Ferrari, Burl. Mag., cviii
Angelo a Nile with a number of symmetrically ar- (1966), 298 fl'., and H. E. Wethev, ihid., cix (1967),
ranged tombs (1709), a coherent programme echoing 678 ff.
the influence of churches like Gesu e Maria in Rome. .Among Luca's pupils may be mentioned Soli-
3.
Attention may drawn to the following names:
also be mena's competitor, thefacile and academic Paolo de
Paolo Persico, who worked in the Cappella Sanse- Matteis (1662 1728), whom Lord Shaftesbury chose
verino and at Caserta; the versatile Domenico .An- as a congenial painter to translate into visual
terms the
tonio Vaccaro(i68i-i75o), prominent member of the directives given in his dogmatic essay, the Choice of
well-known family of artists, whose w ork in the Cer- Hercules; further, the Heming VVillem Borremans {c.
Martino is worth a more thorough studv and
tosa di S. ; 1670- 1 744), who brought his master's style to Sicily
Matteo Bottiglieri and Francesco Pagano, both pupils (principal work; the frescoes in the cathedral of Cal-
ot Lorenzo Vaccaro who collaborated in the decoration tanisetta, 1720); and .Nicola .Malinconico (1663 1722),
of the Guglia dell'Immacolata (1747-51) designed by who endeavoured to emulate his teacher (L. Prota-
Giuseppe di Fiore. Giurleo, Pitt. nap. del Seic, 1953, 38).
66. The artists responsible for the figures are, above A special place must be assigned to Giacomo del Po,
all, Paolo Persico, .'Angiolo Brunelli, and Pietro Solari. who was born in Rome in 1659, moved to Naples in
67. R. Berliner, Denkmdler der Krippenkunst , .-Kugs- 1683, and worked there until his death in 1726. Under
burg [1Q25-30]; idem. Die Weihtiachlskrippe, Munich, Giordano's and Solimena's influence but never for-
1955- getting the lesson learned from Cortona and Gaulli in
Mention should here at least be made of the macabre Rome, he developed in his late works towarijs a free,
wax allegories of the Sicilian sculptor Gaetano Giulio painterly, quasi-Rococo manner; see Picone in M
Zumbo ( 1 656- 1 70 1 ) they
; tie up with the South Italian Boll. d'Arte, .\Lii (1957), 163, 309.
taste for supra-realistic popular imagery, but it is tell- 4. See F. Bologna's fine monograph, w ith a prelimin-
ing that Zumbo worked for the Florentine Court (see arv wuvre catalogue and full bibliography. For Gior-
R. W. Lightbown, Bibliography). dano's influence, see idem, in .4rt (Quarterly, xxxi
458. 68. A. Sorrentini in Boll. d'Arte, vii (1913), 379. (1968), 35 fl.
.\n early I'he Fall of Simon

work, dated 1690,
459. 69. G. Agnello, 'II prospetto della cattedrale di 465. 5.
Siracusa e I'opera dello scultore palermitano Ignazio Magus, S. Paolo Maggiore I325], show-s the charac-
Marabitti', Archivi, iv (1937), 63, 127, with biblio- teristic arrangement of figures radiating from a nodal
graphy concerning Sicilian Baroque, and ibid., \\\\ point in the centre like spokes of a wheel.
(1955), 228 with further literature. 6. ¥..g,., the nude man in the right-hand corner of
According to documents published by R. Giudice, illustration325 and the soldier with the fasces above
F. Ignazio Marabitti, Palermo, 1937, 12, the sculptor him derive from the Igntidi of the Farnese Gallery the ;
was born in 17 19; he went to Rome in 1740 i and mother seen from the back with her child clinging to
stayed there for fully five years. her is a standard group coming down from Domeni-
chino, etc. Solimena's Heliodorus in the Gesii Nuovo,
CHAPTER 19 Naples, combines features from Raphael's \'atican
Heliodorus and School 0/ .Athens.
461. I. Letter to Cav. Gabburi, 10 September 1733. 7. Many painters of the Solimena succession are at
Bottari, Lettere, 11, 404. present not much more than names, but work on them
462. 2. Good
surveys of Neapolitan eighteenth-cen- is proceeding; see R. Enggass, Burl. Mag., cm (1961),
tury painting by L. Lorenzetti in La ptttura napoletana 304, for .Andrea deir.\ste ((. 1673 i. 1 721) and Matteo
BIBLOSARTE
Siscara (1705-65), and M. Volpi, Paragone, x (1959), i6a. See F. R. di Federico, 'Documentation for
no. 119, 51, for Domenico Mondo {<. 1717-1806), Francesco Trevisani's Decorations for the Vestibule
whose paintings are often mixed up with those by Gia- of the Baptismal Chapel in St Peter's', in Storia dell'
quinto. Also H. Voss, in Festschrift Ulrich Middeldorf, Arte, no. 6(1970), 155 ff.; this monumental commis-
Berhn, 1968, 494 ff., for Lorenzo de Caro. sion occupied Trevisani for almost the last 35 years of
8. For Giaquinto's career, see M. Volpi, Boll, d' Arte, his life.
XLiii (1958), 263, and d'Orsi's monograph (Biblio- G. V. Castelnovi, in Studies in the History of Art.
17.
graphy); for Amigoni and Giaquinto in Madrid, see Dedicated to William E. Suida, London, 1959, 333,
the documents pubhshed by E. Battisti, Arte Antica e with further references.
Aloderna, in, no. 9 (i960), 62. See also the book by A. 468. 18. The picture is a fascinating re-interpretation
Videtta (Bibliography). of Raphael's Transfiguration
in a Correggio-Lanfranco
9. For a full study of de iVlura's attractive decoration manner. For Benefial, see G. Falcidia, Boll. d'Arte,
of the Chiesa della Nunziatella at Naples with the large XLVIII (1963), III : discusses decoration of the salone
ceiling fresco of the .Assumption of the Virgin (1751), in the Palazzo Massimo, Arsoli (1750). See also .\. M.
see R. Enggass, Bnll. d'Arte, .xlix (1964), 133 ff. De Clark, Paragone, xvii (1966), no. 199, 21 ff., and M. G.
Mura's manner was continued by his pupil Giacinto Paolini, ihtd., xvi (1965), no. 181, 70 ff.
Diano ( 1 730- 1 800), who enjoyed a considerable repu- Benefial's contemporary, Placido Costanzi (prob-
tation. ably 1701-59), pupil of Trevisani and Luti, may here
10. The problems connected with our illustration 326 be mentioned. He has become a tangible figure owing
were solved by I. Faldi, Burl. Mag., ci (1959), 143. to A. M. Clark's paper in Paragone, xix(i968), no. 219,
The illustration represents the oil sketch for a ceiling 39 ff. his great ceiling fresco in S. Gregorio Magno,
;
of c. 1 75 1, originally in the Palazzo Santa Croce, Pa- dated 1727, reveals a classicizing sobriety which is
lermo, and installed in the Palazzo Rondanini-San- scarcely independent of Conca's style in his S. Cecilia
severino, Rome, more than fifty years ago. two years earlier.
fresco of
loa. G. Sestieri, 'Contributi a Sebastiano Conca', Emmerling, P. Batont. Darmstadt, 1932; L.
19. E.
Commentari, XX (1969), 317-41; xxi (1970), 122-38, Marcucci, Emporium, xcix (1944), 95; L. Cochetti,
with aeuvre catalogue. Commentari, ill (1952), 274; R. Chyurlia, Emporium,
467. 1 1 . Mazzanti's paintings are sometimes mixed up cxvii (1953), 56; A. M. Clark, Burl. .Mag., ci (1959),
with those by Francesco Fernandi, called Imperiali (b. 233. Much of the older literature has been superseded
Milan, 1679), whose pleasant Marattesque pictures by the Catalogue of the Batoni Exhibition at Lucca in
were fashionable in early-eighteenth-century Rome; 1967; see Bibliography. - Also F. Russell, Bml. Mag.,
reconstruction of his oeuvre by E. Waterhouse, Arte cxii (1970), 817.
Lomharda, III (1958), loi, and A. M. Clark, Burl. A lesser name, that of Gregorio Guglielmi (1714-73),
Mag., cvi (1964), 226. may here be mentioned. Born in Rome, he worked at
12. F. Zeri, Paragone, vi (1955), no. 61, 55, discussed the courts of Dresden (1752-3), Vienna (Schonbrunn,
this artist's links with Gaulli's manner. For a fuller 1 760- 1 ),
Berlin, Turin 1 765-6), and St Petersburg in
(
treatment, see G. di Domenico Cortese, Commentari, a classicizing Rococo manner; see S. Beguin in Para-
XIV (1963), 254. gone, VI (1955), no. 63, 10; A. Griseri, ibid., no. 69, 29;
13. See above, Chapter 14, Note i. On Cortese, see and, above all, Klara Garas in Acta Hist. Art mm, ix
F. A. Salvagnini's work (1937). (1963), 269. See also M. Demus, in Almanack der
14. An interesting contribution by E. Schaar to the Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, cxv
artist's preparation in sketches of his 'Sacrifice of (1965), I ff., about the restoration of Guglielmi's ceil-
Ceres' in the Villa Falconieri at Frascati, in Festschrift ing painting of 1755-6 in the large hall of the Vienna
fur Ulrich Mtddeldorf Berlin, 1968, 422 ff. Academy.
1 5. Kerber (see Bibliography),
Chiari's biographer, B. 20. Just as Bellori in his Life ofMaratti had extolled
shows that the artist also drew inspiration from the the latter's artistic genealogy back through Sacchi and
Carracci, Reni, Cortona, and Sacchi. Albani to Annibale Carracci, so Benefial saw himself
16. For Masucci, see Bibliography. Mancini began as proudly in line of descent, from Annibale to .\lbani
a pupil of the Bolognese Carlo Cignani and painted and Carlo Cignani (Bottari, Lettere, V, 10) - an indica-
mainly in the Marches and L'mbria. His principal work tion how such an artist interpreted the high road of the
in Rome is the frescoes in the 'Kaffeehaus' of the Pa- classical tradition.
lazzo Colonna (1735-40; see E. Toesca, L'Arte, XLVi 469. 21. should be recalled, however, that true
It
(1943), 7), the attractive architecture of which is due judged differently. Winckelmann regarded
classicists
to Niccolo Michetti (1731). Mengs's Parnassus in the Villa Albani (i 760-1) as the
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER IQ •
573
most beautiful work of modern art even for Burck-; Piola's and Gregorio de Ferrari's proto-Rococo may
hardt Mengs was the rejuvenator of modern painting. be observed. The full fruit of this change is to be seen
22. M. Marangoni's article in Riv. d'Arte (igi2, re- in Galeotti's frescoes in the Palazzo Spinola (1736).
printed in Arte barocca, Florence, 1953, 205) is still the 28. For older bibliographical references see H. Bod-
foundation of any study of Florentine Settecento mer, Mitteilungen des kunsthislonschen Instituts in
painting. Florenz, v (1937), 91 See also Maestri della piitura del
.
For Gabbiani, see A. Bartarelli, Riv. d'Arte, xxvii Seicento emiliano. Catalogue, Bologna, 1959.
(1951-2), 105. Gabbiani was in Rome between 1673 471. 29. S. \ . Buscaroli, Carln Cignani, Bologna, 1953.
and 1678 studying with Giro Ferri. .Although he suc- Of the .\lbani pupils who reached fame, only Cignani
cumbed to the influenceof Maratti, Gortonesque remi- continued to produce the small cabinet painting in W-
niscences linger on, for instance, in his masterpiece, bani's manner. Cignani's masterpiece is the Assump-
the Apotheosis ofCosimo the Elder at Poggio a Gaiano tion in the dome of the Cathedral at Forii, 1702 6.
(1698). .Among his pupils may be named Luigi Quaini (1643-

From the large number of Gabbiani's pupils and fol- 1717) and his two sons, Felice and Filippo Cignani.
lowers may be singled out Tomaso Redi (1665- 1726), His grandson, Paolo (1709-64), continued the school
who worked with Maratti in Rome; Giovanna
later into the second half of the century. Sec Emiliani, in
Fratellini (1666-1731), famed in her time for her Maestri delta pittura del Seicento emiliano, Bologna,
pastels; and Giovanni Battista Gipriani (1727-85), 1959, 146 ff.
who made his fortune in England. 30. Wiener Jahrb., viii (1932), 89.
23. G. .Arrigucci, Commentan, v (1954), 40. 31. .\. Comunedi Bologna, XXI (1934), no.
.ArfcUi, 1 1
24. Bonechi may be studied in the Palazzo Gapponi D. G. Miller, Boll, d 'Arte, XLI ( 956), 318; idem. Burl.
1
(after 1705), where Sagrestani, Lapi (Note 26), and .Mag., xcix (1957), 231, and ibid., cii (i960), 32; E.
Antonio Puglieschi (1660- 1732) also worked. The Feinblatt, ibid., cm (1961), 312; P. Torriti, ibid., civ
latter stemmed from Gortona through his teacher Pier (1962), 423. D. C. Miller published a Toilet of Venus
Dandini. (.Mitnchner Jahrb. d. bild. Kunst, IX-X (1958-9), 263)
470. 25. L. Berti, Commentari, 1 (1950), 105; Edward which illustrates very well Franceschini's reliance on
A. Maser, The Disguises of Harlequin by G. D. Ferret ti. .\lbani. For his relationship with Pope Clement XI,
The University of Kansas Museum of Art, 1956. The idem. Burl. .Mag., CXII (1970), 373 ff.
same author has now published a full monograph on For Giulio Quaglio (i 668-1 751), Franceschini's
Ferretti (see Bibliography). pupil, a highly successful fresco painter, see R. Marini,
Mention may be made of Vincenzo Meucci (1694- Arte Veneta, IX (1955), 155; xil (1958), 141.
who studied at Bo-

1766), Ferretti's contemporary, 32. E.Mauceri, Comttne di Bologna, xix (1932), no. 6,
logna with dal Sole and came later under the influence 35; G. Lippi Bruni, Arte Antica e Moderna, il (1959),
of S. Ricci; his main work is the frescoes in the dome 109 (with ffinrt' catalogue).
of S. Lorenzo, 1742. Dal Sole's pupil, Felice ToreUi (1667- 1748), though
26. M. M. Pieracci, 'La difficile poesia di un ribelle less distinguished than his master, was yet a figure of
all'Accademia; Alessandro Gherardini', Commentan, importance in his day; see D. C. .Miller, Boll, d Arte,
IV (1953), 299. For a richly illustrated monographic XLix (1964), 54 ff. (with ceinre catalogue).
treatment of Gherardini, see G. Ewald in Acropoli, iii 33. C. Alcsuti, Comune di Bologna, XIX (1932), no. 9,
RoH, Arte Antica .Woderna, (1959). 328, and
(1963), 81-132 (with a hitherto unpublished Life of 17; R. e II
the artist by Baldinucci). In the allegoric-mythological VI, no. 23 (1963), 247; for Roll's monograph of 1967,
cycle of frescoes in the Palazzo Corsini, Gherardini see Bibliography. Also C. Lloyd, Burl. .Wag., cxi
worked next Gabbiani (they had the lion's share).

to (1969), 374 ff. Creti's style has many facets, as the pic-
Pier Dandini, Bonechi, and minor masters. tures painted for Owen McSwiny prove. On this
A modest follower of Luca Giordano was Niccolo interesting set of paintings, see Note 63.
Lapi (1661-1732). Francesco Gonti (1681-1760) be- Creti's style as a draughtsman, subtle, refined, and
gan in Maratti's manner, but later became a Ricci was fashioned on Reni, see O. Kurz, Bolognese
elegant,
follower. Drawings at Windsor Castle, London, 1955, and R.

27. N. Garboneri, Sebastiano Galeottt, Venice, 1955; Roli, Boll. d'Arte, XLVii (1962), 241.
P. Torriti, Atttvitd di S.G. in Liguria, Genoa, 1956. H. Bodmer (Note 28) claims that Benedetto Gennaro
Galeotti's most important work at Genoa is the cycle the younger, nephew and pupil of Guercino, whose
of frescoes in the Ghiesa della Maddalena (1729-30; Bolognese activity lies between 1692 and his death in
171 5, forms the link between the older
generation of
with G. B. Natali (1698-1765) ^squadraturista), where
the transition from Giordano's manner to Domenico Franceschini and the younger of D. Creti.
I BIBLOSARTE
472. .^4. There is a puzzling connexion brtween our that revolutionized the Baroque stage. Giuseppe's de-
picture and an almost identical but more extensive sign, shown as illustration 335, gives an idea of the rich
composition in the Museum, Lisbon (no.

National and restless effect of diagonal perspective.
294), there attributed unknown to me

for reasons Yet the purpose of the design is in the tradition of the
to Charles Alphonse Dufresnoy (161 68). The refer- 1 medieval mystery plays. It reproduces one of 'the in-
ence to the Lisbon painting escaped the attention of R. tricate peepshows, or theatra sacra, that Giuseppe con-
Roli,D. Creti, 1967, 87, nos. 21-8. Roli dates the pic- structed yearly for the court chapel at Vienna. Each
ture here illustrated in the second decade of the feastof Corpus Christi brought a fresh variation on the
eighteenth century (which appears to me too early). theme of wide ramps of stairs converging on a balus-
35. H. Voss, Paragnnc\ i\ (1958), no. 97, 53, and R. traded platform where the Man of Sorrows stood
RoH, Arte Antua e Moderna, ill, no. 10 (i960), 189. under a vast arch opening on lofty architectural dis-
36. Not to be mixed up with his namesake from Bres- tances' (Hyatt Mayor, op. cit., 12).
cia (1646- 171 3), a master of battle-pieces in the man- Giuseppe was famed for his opera sets at Vienna,
ner of Borgognone. For Francesco Monti, see R. Roli, Dresden, Munich, Prague, Venice, and Berlin. The
in Arte Antua e ff. D. C.
Aloderna, no. 17 (1962), 86 ; exuberant decoration of the opera house at Bayreuth
Miller, ihid., and Art Qiiarterly,
no. 25 (1965), 97 ff.; is his work (1748).
XXXI (1968), 423 ff. In addition, U. Ruggeri's mono- Francesco's main theatre buildings (only partly sur-
graph, Francesco Monti Bolognese, Bergamo, 1968. viving) are the Opera House in Vienna and the theatres
37. R. Roli in Arte Anttca eModerna, vi, no. 22 (1963), at Nancy, Verona (Teatro Filarmonico), and Rome
166. (Teatro Aliberti, 1720). Antonio distinguished him-
473. 38. Crespi worked under them in 1680-4 î^d self as theatre architect (Teatro Comunale, Bologna;
1684-6 respectively. above, p. 391) and as painter of illusionist frescoes
39. C. Gnudi, Bnlogua (Riv. del Comune), xxii (Vienna, Pressburg, etc.).
(1935), 18. The Bibiena had a large school. Mention may be

474. 40. V. Constantini, La pittiira italiana delSeicento, made of an outsider, Mauro Tesi 1730 ( 66), an excel-
Milan, 1930, 11, 202. lent draughtsman in the manner of the Bibiena, who
41. Between 1686 and 1688 Crespi worked in his was at an astonishingly early date attracted by Egyptian
studio. See E. Riccomini, Arte Antica e Moderna, 11, archaeology as subjects for his designs. His special
no. 6(1959), 219. For Burrini, see H. Brigstocke, Burl. claim to fame lies in that Count Algarotti patronized
Mag., cxii (1970), 760. and advertised him.

42. He continued Malvasia's Felsina pittrice, Rome, 48. For Verona, see below, p. 484. Best survey of the
1769. school of Brescia : Emma Calabi, La pittura a B. nel
43. H. Voss, Zeitschr. f. Kunstg., 11 (1933), 202; R. Seicento e Settecento, Catalogue, Brescia, 1935. Brescia
Roli, Arte Antica e Moderna, in, no. 11 (i960), 300. excelled in minor genre painters such as Faustino Boc-
44. D. C. Miller, in Art Quarterly, xxxi (1968), chi (1659- 1729), a Bambocciante who introduced the
42 1 ff emphasized Donato Creti's influence on Bigari.
.,
trick of showing people with large heads and small de-
45. E. Feinblatt, 'A Letter by Enrico Haffner', Burl. formed bodies; Giorgio and Faustino Duranti (1683-
Mag., cxii (1970), 229 ff. 1755, 1695-1766), who made birds and hens their
46. An authoritative work on the quadraturisti is still speciality ; Francesco Monti (see Note 36), internation-
wanting. Some material in C. Ricci, La Scenografia ally known for his battle-pieces; and the landscapist
Italiana, Milan, 1930 (with comprehensive biblio- Giuseppe Zola (1672- 1743; see E. Calabi, Rir. dArte,
graphy) and V. Mariani, Storm della scenografia itali- xii (1934), 84). See also for this whole section G. De-
ana, Florence, 1930; see also H. Tintelnot, Barock- logu, Pittori minori liguri, lombardi, piemontesi del '600
t heater, Berlin, 1939. e 'joo, Venice, 1931.
476. 47. Apart from the works by C. Ricci and Hyatt 49. Voss, 589. Seiter left Rome in 1688 and practised
Mayor, see / Bibiena scenografi. Mostra dei loro disegni, a Cortonesque manner in Turin to the end of his life.
schizzi e bozzetti, Florence, 1940. Before Seiter's arrival in Turin, Giovan Paolo Recchi
In 17 1 1 Ferdinando published his important L'/Jn/i;- and his nephew Giovan Antonio handled large fresco
tettura civile preparata sulla geometria e ridotta allepro- commissions; see A. M. Brizio in Arte Lombarda, 11
spettive, where he discussed at length his 'scene vedute (1956), 122.
in angolo', stage designs seen from an acute angle. It For Piedmontese painting, see the older works by L.
was this not entirely new device (Marcantonio Chia- Rosso and by V. Viale, and Andreina Griseri's Cata-
rini had staged his La Forza della Virtii in Bologna logue of the Turin Baroque Exhibition, 1963 (refer-
showing a prison as a scena per angolo as early as 1694) ences in the Bibliography).
BIBLOSARTE
For the position in Turin at the beginning of the 55. Lorenzo de Ferrari 680 744) has already been ( 1 1
seventeenth century, see A. Griseri, Paragone, xii mentioned (p. 392). For Domenico Parodi (1668-
(1961), no. 141, 19. 1740), Filippo's son, sec S. Soldani, 'Profilo di Do-
50. A. Vesme, 'I Van Loo in Piemonte', Arch. star, menico Parodi', Cnlicad' Arte, xiv, no. 87 (1967), <x> ff.
dell'arte, vi {1893), 333. Other members of this large Paolo Girolamo Piola (1666 1724), Domenico's son,
family of painters, above all Giovanni Battista (1684- who switched over to .Vlaratti's international style, de-
1745), also painted in Turin. serves a note, and so do Giovan .Maria delle Plane, 'il
5Conca and Giaquinto were, of course, 'romanized'

1 Mulinaretto' ( 1660 1745), who painted grandiloquent
Neapolitans. Conca was in Turin ofifand on during the portraits reminiscent of Rigaud (M. Bonzi, // .Mulina-
1 720s painting in the Venaria Rcalc, the Superga, and retto, Genoi, i962),and Carlo Antonio Tavella( 1668-
the Palazzo Reale; Giaquinto came twice, first in 1733 1738), a landscapist, who began as friend and follower
and again in 1740-2 (frescoes Villa della Regina and S. of the romantic Haarlem master, Pietcr Mulier (called
Teresa). De Mura worked in the Palazzo Reale in 'il Tempesta', c. 1637- 701 ), then followed Claude and
1
1741 3, and in the late forties, the fifties and sixties re- Gaspar Dughet, but also collaborated w ith Magnasco.
ceived payments for work executed in Naples and sent On Pietro Tempesta, see C. Roethlisherger, Burl.
to Turin; see .\. Griseri, 'Francesco Mura fra le corti Mag.. Cix (1967), 12 ft".
di Napoli, Madrid e Torino", Paragone, xiii (1962), 56. Among them .Andrea Lanzani ( 1 639 1712), Filip-
no. 155,22. po Abbiati ( 1 640 7 5 F. Renzo Pescnti, Commentari.
1
1
;
G. Fiocco, G. B. Crosalo, Venice, 1941 2nd ed.

52. ; XVII (1966), 343 ft".), and Stefano Maria Legnani ( 660- 1
1944; A. Griseri, Tl "Rococo" a Torino e Giovan 17 13/ 1 5) have pride of place. Lanzani's career is typi-
Battista Crosato', Paragone, xii (1961), no. 135, 42. cal. He followed the fashionable course of study by
Crosato came first in 1733 and again in 1740. going to Rome and working under .Maratti. But his
478. 53. A. Griseri, 'Operc giovanili di CI. Fr. Beau- work shows that he was much impressed by Lanfranco.
mont e alcune note in margine alia pittura barocca', in In 1697 he accepted a call to V ienna; later he went to
Scritti van, II (a cura della Facolta di Magistero di Spain.He returned home shortly before his death; see
Torino), Turin, 195 1, with much valuable material; M. G. Turchi in L'.4rte, LIX (i960), 99 (with wuvre
also idem. Connoisseur, CXL (1957), 145 (documents). catalogue).
For further references to Beaumont, see Catalogue of Among other Lombard painters may be mentioned
the Baroque Exhibition, 11, 81. (i) Pietro Gilardi, who studied with Dal Sole in Bo-
54. Delogu, op. tit., 235. - Mention should also be logna and became a quadraturista of distinction (his
made of the brothers Domenico (d. before 1771) and fresco of 1715 in the Oratory of S. .Angelo, Milan, is a
Giuseppe (d. 1761) Valeriani who had come from tour deforce, derived from Pozzo's S. Ignazio ceiling);
Rome to Venice in about 1720 and painted between see M. Bussolera in Arte Lomharda, vi (1961), 43; (2)
173 1 and 1733 the Gran Salone at Stupinigi [292] in a P. Antonio Magatti ( 1 69 1 1767), who was oriented to-
manner reminiscent of contemporary Genoese dec- wards Venice (Pittoni) and shows close connexions
orations. For their work and that of Crosato, Carlo with the Piazzetta follower Petrini; see E. .Arslan in
Andrea Van Loo, and V. A. Cignaroh at Stupinigi, see Commentari, vili (1957), 211, and S. Colombo in Arte
A. Telluccini, Le decoraziom della gia Reale Palazztna Lomharda, viii, 2 (1963), 253; (3) the minor Rococo
di Caccia di St., Turin, 1924, \\. Bernardi's book of masters Gian Pietro and Cesare Ligari; see R. Bossa-
1958, and L. Malle's Stupinigi, Turin, 1969. glia in Commentari, X (1959), 228; (4) Pier Francesco
For the Galliari, the distinguished Piedmontese fam- Guala (1698- 1757), who appeared with unconven-
ily ofquadraturisti and theatrical designers, see Tintel- tional and impressive portraits at the Turin Baroque
not (Note 46), 95; M. Ferrero Viale, Disegnt scenografici Exhibition, 1963, and won laurels as an arcadian
dei Galliari, Catalogue, Turin, 1956, and idem. La painter in the manner of Crosato (see Bibliography);
scenografia del Setteceitto e i fratellt Galliari, Turin, (5) Carlo Innocenzo Carloni (1686-1775), probably
1963 for the frescoes of the three brothers Bernardino,
; the most gifted Lombard Rococo painter, who was
Fabrizio, and Giovanni Antonio and of Fabrizio's ceaselesslv active in many places of Central Europe,
son's, Giovanni and Giuseppino, see the papers by R. above all in Vienna, Prague, southern Germany, and
Bossaglia in Arte Lomharda, ill (1958), 105; iv (1959), northern Italy; see .\. B. Brini and K. Garas (Biblio-
131; Critica d'.-irte, vii (i960), 377; and her book / graphy). Characteristic for his manner are the hyper-
fratelli Galliari ptttori, Milan, 1962. The best frescoes trophic quadratura frescoes in the \ ilia Lechi at .\lon-
of the Galliari are in the Salone of the Villa Crivelli at tirone near Brescia, painted together with Giacomo
Castellazzo di BoUate, w here the exuberant quadratura Lecchi in 1 746 see Connoisseur. cxi.\
; 1 ( i960), 1 53 ; also
unifies walls and vault. A. Barigozzi Brini in Arte Lomharda. vi (1961), 256.
\ BIBLOSARTE
For these and other Lombard painters, see the excel- Giuseppe .Angeli (1710-98), Francesco Daggiii, called
lentchapter by A. M. Romanini in Sloria di Milano, il Cappella (1714-84), .\ntonio Marinetti, called il
1959, XII, 713. Chiozzotto ( 1720- 1803), and Domenico Fedeli, called
57. The Piedmontese Giuseppe Antonio Pianca il .Maggiotto (171 3-93). About all these artists, see Pal-
(1703-after 1755) was to a certain extent dependent on lucchini, Rn. di Venezia, X (1931), XI (1932). Mag-
Magnasco. This long forgotten artist has recently giotto's pupilLudovico Gallina from Brescia (1752-
aroused much interest; see C. Debiaggi in Boll. Soc. 87) also worked in Piazzetta's academic manner.
Ptemontese di archeol. e di belle arti, xii-xill (1958-9), The Ticinese painter Giuseppe .Antonio Petrini
158; M. Rosci in Alti e Memorie del Congresso di Va- (1667-1758/9) has recently attracted much attention
rallo Sesia,Turin, 1962, 115; idem, G. A. Pianca. owing to a comprehensive exhibition at Lugano. .-X
Calalogo, Varallo Sesia, 1962 (exhibition catalogue pupil of Bartolomeo Guidobono, he came later under
with many illustrations). Piazzetta's influence, whose manner he imitated with
58.N. Ivanoff, Moslra del Bazzani in Mantova, Ber- varying success; see W. .\rslan, G. A. Petrini, Lugano,
gamo, 1950, with full documentary material and bib- i960 (with wuvre catalogue); L. Salmina, Burl. Mag.,
liography. CM (i960), 118; S. Colomho, Arte Antica e Moderna, V
479. 59. Francesco Maria Raineri, called Schivenoglia (1962), 294 (new documents).
(1676-1758), whose work is similar to Bazzani's, is 67. M. Goering, â/ir/». Preuss. Kunstslg., LVI (1935),
just beginning to become a defined personality; see C. 152, with ceuvre catalogue.
Volpe and N. Clerici Bagozzi, Arte Antica e Moderna, 68. R. Pallucchini, Rtv. d'Arte, xiv (1932), 301 (with
VI, no. 24(1963), 337, 339. autre catalogue) and Critica d'Arte, I (1935-6), 205;
60. O. Benesch, Staedel Jahrbuch, III-IV (1924), 136, Goering, ibid., II (1937), 177. E. .Arslan, Emporium,
discussed Bazzani's influence on Maulpertsch. xcviii (1943), 158, claims Lombard influence on Ben-
61. For the following I am much indebted to G. covich through Filippo .Abbiati, .Magnasco's teacher.
Fiocco's work (1929) and, above all, to R. Pallucchini's 69. On Pagani, see H. Voss, Belvedere, vm ( 1929), 41
La pittura veneziana del' /OO, Bolognz, 1951, 1952. His N. Ivanoff, Paragone, viii (1957), no. 89, 52, claims
La pittura veneziana del Settecento, Venice, i960, con- that Giulia Lama also belongs to the circle of Pagani,
tains the latest summary of current research. - Part iii who has his place on the way which 'leads from the
of Haskell's Patrons contains a great deal of new ma- Venetian Caravaggeschi to Piazzetta'.
terial for eighteenth-century Venice in an eminently 69a. The painting of illustration 340 belongs to Ben-
readable form. covich's early period and shows him strongly influ-
62. B. Nicolson, Burl. Mag., cv (1963), 121, has col- enced by G. M. Crespi in fact, until fairly recently the
;
lected all data referring to Ricci's relation to Lord work had been attributed to the latter.
Burlington in London. 70. Fontebasso, an untiring worker, came under Tie-
481. 63. Viatico per cinque secoli di pitt. ten.,
1946, 34. polo's influence and ended his career in a rather tired
Illustration 353 represents a work of collaboration of Tiepolesque manner. At the beginning of the 1760s he
Sebastiano and Marco Ricci (pp. 498-501). It is un- followed a call to St Petersburg. Recent studies on
usually brilliant and commands special interest be- Fontebasso by A. Pigler, Arte Veneta, xiii-xiv (1959-
cause it belongs to the set of twenty-four allegories and R. Pallucchini, ibid., xv (1961), 182.
60), 155,
commissioned by the impresario Ow en McSwiny from For G. Diziani, see F. Valcanover, Mostra di pitture
the foremost Bolognese and \'enetian painters. This del Settecento nel Bellunese, Venice, 1954, 85; A. Rizi
series of pictures has been intensely studied; see H. in Acropnli. 11 (1962), iii. For Zompini, O. Battis-
Voss, Rep. Kunstw., xlvii (1926), 32; W. Arslan,
f. tella, Delia vita e delle opere di G.G.Z., Bologna, 1930,
Riv. d'Arte, XIV (1932), 128; ihid., xv (1933), 244, and with ceuvre catalogue.
Commentari, vi (1955), 189; T. Borenius, Burl. Mag., For the Veronese painter Giovan Battista Marcola
LXix (1936), 245; F. J. B. Watson, ibtd., xct (1953), (c. 1701-80), whose style as draughtsman shows un-
362; W. G. Constable, ibid., xcvi (1954), 154; idem, deniable links with Sebastiano Ricci, see L. Ruggeri,
Canaletto, 1963, 172 (documents), 432. Best sum- Critica d'Arte, xvii, no. no (1970), 35 ff., and ibtd.,
mary in Haskell, Patrons, 287. no. 112, 49 ff"., with further literature on the artist.
482. 64. D. M. White and A. C. Sewter, Art Qitarterly, 71. M. Goering, Miinchner Jahrbuch der bildenden
xxiii (i960), 125, attempted (to my mind, not wholly Kunst, XII (1937-8), 233 A. Bettagno, Disegm
; e dipinti
successfully) to interpret this picture allegorically. di Ant onto Pellegrini, Venice, 1959 (basic study).
65. R. Pallucchini, Rn. di Venezia, xin (1934), 327; 483. 72. H. \o^s,,Jahrh. Preuss. Kunstslg., XXXIX ( 1918),
W. .-Vrslan, Critica d'Arte, 1 (1935-6), 188. 145 .Arslan, Critica d'Arte,
; 1 ( 1935-6), 238; J. Wood-
66. Of the more important pupils may be mentioned ward, Burl. Mag., XCIX (1957), 21; G. M. Pilo, Arte
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTER I9 •
577
Veneta, xii (1958), 158 (review of older literature); be a preliminary sketch for the group of a river god,
idem, Arte Antica e Muderna, ill, no. 9 (i960), 174 naiad, and fisher boy at the far end of the south portion
(also for connexions with Ricci and Pellegrini); A. of the Clerici ceiling; see Bean and F. Siampfle,
J.
Griseri, 'L'ultimo tempo dell'Amigoni e il Nogari', Drawings from New York Collections III. The Eight-
Paragone, xi (i960), no. 123, 21. eenth Century in Italy, New York, 1971, 47, no. 82.
73. From Amigoni's school came Pier Antonio No- 486. 84. G. Knox, 'G. B. Tiepolo and the Ceiling of
velli much of whose work belongs to the
(1729- 1 804), the Scalzi', Burl. .Mag., ex (1968), 394 ff".
history of Neo-classicism (see .\1. Voltolina, Riv. dt 85. M. H. von Freden and C. Lamb, Die Freshen der
Venezia, xi (1932)), also Antonio Zucchi (1726-95), Witrzhurger Residenz, Munich, 1956.
Angelica Kauffmann's husband, and the sculptor 86. .Assisted by his sons, Gian Domenico and Lo-
Michelangelo Morlaiter. renzo, who had accompanied him to Madrid.
74. L. Coggiola-Pittoni, 'Pseudo influenza francese 87. A. Morassi, Tiepolo e la Villa Valmarana, Milan,
nell'arte di G.B.P.', Rtv. dt Venezia, xii (1933), with 1945; R. Pallucchini, Gli Affreschi di G. B. e G. D.
ceuvre catalogue and bibliography. Tiepolo alia Valmarana, Bergamo, 1945. \l.
Villa
75. .\ development similar to that of Pittoni was Levey, J.H'.C./., xx (1957), 298, has analysed brilli-
taken by Nicola Grassi (1682 -1748) from Friuli who antly the iconography of the \ almarana cycle.
began his career in Venice under Nicolo Cassana (d. 88. This feature derives from \alerius Maximus
17 3). .^n artist of distinction, he was drawn in his late
1 ('.Agamemnon saw Iphigenia advance towards the fatal
phase to Pittoni's manner; see G. Fiocco, Dedalo, x altar, he groaned, he turned aside his head, he shed
(1929), 427; L. Grossato, Arte Veneta, 11 (1948), 130; tears, and covered his face with his robe"); classical
G. Gallo, Mostra di Nicola Grassi, Catalogue, Udine, authors assert that in his famous (lost) painting Tim-
1961. anthes of Sikyon represented .Agamemnon way
in this
76. E. Battisti, Commentari, v (1954), 26 (with wuvre thus he appears on Greek vases and in a Pompeian
catalogue). fresco.
484. 77. G. Fiocco, Pitt, venez., 1929, 47 (English ed.), In a learned dispute of his day, Tiepolo sides here
pointed out that Balestra's influence extended from with textual fidelity and decorum, as did Lessing in
Mantua Trentino and the .ûstrain Baroque.

to the his Laocoon, 1766 ('Timanthes knew the limits which
78. F. R. Presenti, Arte Antica e Moderna, in, no. 12 the Graces had fixed to his .Art"). The opposite view-
(i960), 418. point is Falconet "s words (1775): 'Vou
epitomized in
78a. Cignaroli's Death of Rachel caused a sensation. think of veiling Agamemnon; you have unveiled your
In 1770 was exhibited in the Piazza S. Marco and
it own ignorance .'. Reynolds (£/^/r/A Discourse,
. .
1778)
was, according to a contemporary observer, studied by takes up an empirical, common-sense position: The
one and all with admiration and amazement. veiling 'appears now to be so much connected with the
79. Hugh Honour, 'Giuseppe Nogari', Connoisseur, subject, that the spectator would, perhaps, be disap-
CXL (1957), 154. For Nogari's connexion with \m\- pointed in not finding united in the picture what he
goni, see Griseri (above. Note 72). always united in his mind, and considered as indis-
80. Derivation from Balestra made Bortoloni an easy pensably belonging to the subject'.
prey to the influence of the Frenchman Louis Dorigny 89. Mengozzi-Colonna was responsible for the t/uad-
(1654-1742), who painted in Venice, Verona, and ratura.

Udine in Lebrun's cool academic manner. That influ- 487. 90. For Tiepolo's help to Mengozzi-Colonna, see
ence will be noticed in Bortoloni's remarkable decora- A. Morassi, Burl. .Mag., c.i (1959), 228.
tion of Palladio's Villa Cornaro at Piombino Dese (N. 489. 91. See T. Hetzer, Die Freshen Tiepolos in der
Ivanoff', Arte Veneta, iv (1950), 123). Wiirzhurger Residenz. Frankfurt, 1943.
Another Balestra pupil, Giambattista Mariotti (i 690- 490. 92. See G. Reynolds, Burl. .Mag., l.xxxii (1940),
1765), adhered later to the Bencovich-Piazzetta cur- 44-

rent; see N. Ivanoff", Boll. Aluseo Civico Padova, xxxi- 491. 93. For the minor pupils of Tiepolo, Giovanni
XLiii (1942-54), 145. Raggi, .Menescardi, Francesco Lorenzi,
Giustino
81. N. Ivanoff", Boll. d'Arte, xxxviii (1953), 58. Fabio Canal, and others, see R. Pallucchini, La put.
82. See the excellent introduction by .\ntonio Mo- venez., ii, 25. For Francesco Zugno (1709-87), see the
rassi, G. B. Tiepolo, London, 1955, with bibliography; monograph by G. M. Pilo, Venice, ig$8, idem in Saggi
and the accompanying oeuvre catalogue, London, 1962. e .Memorie di storia delTarte, i! (1958-9), 323 (with
(suvre catalogue), and Paragone, \ (1959), no. in,
485. 83. P. d'Ancona, Tiepolo in .Milan: The Palazzo 2,2,.
Ciena Frescoes, Milan, 1956. It has been suggested Jacopo Guarana (1720 1808) continued the Tiepol-
that the drawing reproduced as illustration 345 might esque tradition into the nineteenth century.
BIBLOSARTE
578 • NOTES TO CHAPTER IQ
94. As early as 1678 Malvasia {Feh. pitt., 11, 129) 103. R. Longhi, Critica d'Arte, in (1938), 121.
criticized this specialization. 496. 104. Longhi, op. cit.
493. 95. For the chronology of Longhi's portraits, see 105. W. L'Arte, xxxvi (1933), 255; M. Moj-
.'^rslan,
V. Moschini, L'Arle, XXXV ( 1932), 1 10 also W. Arslan, ; zer, Acta Historiae Artium (Budapest), iv (1956), 77.
Emporium, xcviil (1943), 51. 106. The Arti dt Bologna appeared several times be-
96. See R. Longhi, I'ialiio, etc., 35. It is true that tween 1646 and 1740 and had a wide circulation.
Rosalba had a formative influence on Maurice Quentin 107. The connexion is particularly clear in those cases
de la Tour, Liotard, and others. where the figure, large and isolated in the foreground,
Of other portrait painters may be mentioned Fran- is not co-ordinated with the indication of landscape or
cesco Pa vona (1692-1777), oneof Rosalba's imitators; architecture.
Bartolomeo Nazari (1699-1758), who began as a fol- A. Griseri, Paragone, XII (1961), no. 143, 24, has
lower of Fra Galgario and later embraced Amigoni's pointed out that the Lombard Gio venale Boetto ( 1 604-
more elegant manner (F. J. B. Watson, Burl. Mag., xci 78) etched popular types (1633 ff.) similar to the Arti
(1949), 75); and Ludovico Gallina (Note 66) from di Bologna even before the latter appeared and that
Brescia, whose work has affinities with A. Longhi's Boetto may have influenced Ceruti. Griseri studied
and Rosalba's. these problems further in the Boetto monograph of
97. / pittori delta realta in Lombardia, Catalogue. 1966 (see Bibliography), 42 ff.
Milan, 1953. 108. Arslan, op. cit., 256.

98. Bibliography in the-Catalogue quoted in the pre- 109. Longhi's pupil, the Frenchman Giuseppe Fli-
ceding Note. In addition G. Testori, Paragone, v part (1721-97), found a ready public for this type of
(1954), no. 57. genre in Spain, where he settled as court painter.

Owing and exhibitions (see
to fairly recent research A rather facile genre of a similar kind was practised
BibHography) the number of works now known by by Marco Marcola (1740-93) from Verona.
Ceruti has almost doubled in recent years; his career In this context I may come back to another Veronese
can be followed from 1724 to 1761 and perhaps even artist, Pietro Rotari (1707-62), who was a consider-
beyond this date. Unexpectedly, some landscapes and able success in his day. His teachers were Balestra in
some remarkable still lifes by him have been found; Verona, Piazzetta in Venice, Trevisani in Rome, and
see A. Morassi, in Pantheon, xxv (1967), 348 ff. Solimena in Naples a typical eighteenth-century cur-
494. 99. Traversi's career was reconstructed by R. riculum. He specialized in sweetish heads rendered
Longhi, Vita Artist ica, 11 (1927), 145. Dated religious with great precision in clear, cold colours; see G.
paintings by him Naples (1749), Rome (1752),
are in Fiocco, Emporium, XLViii (1942), 277.
and Parma (1753). See also Longhi, Paragone, i (1950), 497. 1X0. I cannot discuss the battle-piece, animal
no. I, 44, and A. G. Quintavalle, ibid., vii (1956), no. genre, and still life. All these had their great period
81, 39- during the seventeenth century. The many eighteenth-
495. 100. M. Abbruzzese, Commentari, vi (1955), 303; century painters go the trodden path.
A. M. Clark, Paragone, xiv (1963), no. 165, 11. See For the battle-piece, see L.Ozzola, //);//»// (//â/Za^/zf
also F. Negri Arnoldi, ihtd., xxi (1970), no. 239, 67 ff. nel Seicento e nel Settecento, Mantua, 1951, with brief
loi. M. Loret, Capilolium, xi (1935), 291, with notes comments on all the practitioners. Francesco Simo-
on all his sketch-books with caricatures. See also A. nini from Parma (1686- 1753), who worked in Venice
Blunt and E. Croft-Murray, Venetian Drawings of the in the 1740s, has been more carefully studied; see A.
&
XVII XVIII Centuries ...at Windsor Castle, Lon- Morassi in Pantheon, xix (1961), i; G. M. Zuccolo
don, 1957, 138 ff., with a detailed analysis of Consul Padrono, .4rte Veneta, xxi (1967), 185 ff.
Smith's album of caricatures. Also D. Bodart, 'Disegni In Naples the brilliant Andrea Belvedere ( 1 652- 1 732)
giovanili inediti di P. L. Ghezzi nella Bibl. Vaticana', and others followed in the footsteps of Ruoppolo.
Palatino, xi (1967), 141 ff. Felice Boselli ( 165 1- 1732) from Piacenza excelled in
Ghezzi's Venetian counterpart as a caricaturist was animal, bird, and fish still lifes; see G. Bocchia Casoni
Antonio Maria Zanetti the Elder (1680- 1767), distin- inParma per '.-/r/f XI V ( 1 964), 3 1 Bologna had in the
/
, .
guished collector, engraver, and draughtsman, whose Cittadini a whole family specializing in fruit and flower
'Album Cini' (now belonging to the Fondazione Cini, still lifes. For Pier Francesco Cittadini, see E. Ricco-
Venice) with about 350 caricatures gives an enchanting mini, Arte Antica e .Moderna, iv (1961), 362, and A. G.
impression of the society of eighteenth-century Ven- Quintavalle, Artisti alia corte di Francesco d'Este, Mo-
ice; see A. Bettagno, Caricature di Anton Maria Zan- dena, 1963, 32. Arcangelo Resani (1668/70-1740), the
etti, Venice, 1969. painter of impressively compact still lifes, may here be
102. H. Voss, Pantheon, 11 (1928), 512. mentioned. Born in Rome, he moved early to Bologna
BIBLOSARTE
NOTES TO CHAPTKR ICj •
57C)
and on to Forli and Ravenna, where he died; see A. Paintings by the litlle-known Alberto Carlini (1672
Corbara, in Paragone, xvi (1965), no. 18:5, 52 ff'., and after 1720) are often attributed to Pannini see H. Voss,
;
L. Zauli Naldi, ihui., 55 ft'. Burl. Mag., CI (1959), 443.

Carlo Magini ( 1
720 1 806) from I'orh painted homclv 117. M. G. Rossi, Commeniari, xiv (1963), 54 A fine
still lifes with a Caravaggesque flavour; see A. Servo- study of Ghisolfi with much new material was pub-
lini, Commentan, via (1957), 125, with further litera- lished by \. Busiri Vici, in Palalino, viii (1964), 212-
ture. 20.
For still life painting in Emilia, see \. G. Quintavalle, 118. C. Lorenzetti, C. I'anvilelli, .Milan, 1934, with
Chnstofnro Miinan e la nalura mnria emiltana : Cata- auire catalogue and bibliography G. Briganti in Cri- ;
logue of the 1964 Parma Exhibition of this painter lica d'.4rle, V (1940), 129; idem, Caspar I an H illcl,
(1667-1720). Rome, 1966 (see Bibliography).

498. III. The lure of Roman ruins has a long historv of 1 Caspar Vanvitelli had followers in Rome, above
19.
its own going back to Petrarch and, in visual terms, to all the Dutchman Hendrik Frans van Lint (1684-
the Hypnenitomacbia Polifili (1499). Their early 'ro- 1763), who spent most of his life in Italy, and Giovanni
mantic' inclusion in landscapes by Brill, the antiquarian Battista Busiri (1698 1757), who had a penchant for
tendencies of northern artists, such as Heemskerck, the small format and w hose work w as immensely popu-
and the appearance of ruins in the work of the Bam- lar with eighteenth-century P^nglish 'Grand Tourists'.
boccianti and northern landscapists of the mid seven- See the fully illustrated monograph by .Andrea Busiri
teenth century cannot here be discussed. For the early Vici, G. B. Busiri. I edultsla romano del 'joo, Rome,
history of the cult of ruins see W. G. Heckscher, Dte 1966.
Riimrumeii, Wiirzburg, 1936; for the general problem 120. SeeG. M.Pilo's excellent Catalogue of the Mar-
Rose Macaulay's excellent book The Pleasure uj Ruins, co Ricci Exhibition, 1963 (Introduction by R. Palluc-
London, 1953; for the particular problems under re- chini), with bibliography listing all previous research.
view, L. Ozzola, 'Le rovine romane nella pittura del 501. 1 2 1 . For Marieschi, see, apart from the 1967 Cata-
XVII e XVIII secolo', L'Arie, xvi (1913), i, 112. logue / vedulisli veneziani, .A. Morassi, .\\. Marieschi.
112. See A. M. Clark in Paragone.xu (1961), no. 139, Calalogo, Bergamo, 1966, and idem in Festschrift U.
51- .Middeldorj: Berlin, 1968, 497 ft".
1 13. prima maniera di .Andrea Lo-

A. Busiri Vici, 'I, a 122. Apart from C. Mauroner's monograph, see H.
catelli', Palatnw. xi (1967), 366 ft"., and M. M. Mosco, Voss, Rep. J. Kunstw., XLVii (1926), i. On Carlevarijs's
'Lestroismanieresd' Andrea Locatelli', Revue del' An, Swedish pupil, Johan Richter (1665-1745), "^^^ \\\*i^
no. 7 (1970), 19-39. This is the fullest discussion of in Venice from 1717 on, see G. Fiocco, L'.-irie, XXX\
Locatelli's art; with wuvre catalogue. See also '.Monsii (1932)-

Alto, le maitre de Locatelli', ihid., 18. 123. W. G. Constable, Canaletto, 1962, 102, 265. J.
114.H. Voss, Apollo, III (1926), 332. G. Links, Burl. .Mag., cix (1967), 405 ft., published
115. O. Ferrari, 'Leonardo Coccorante e la "veduta some paintings unknown to Cônstable.
ideata" napoletana'. Emporium, cxix {1954), 9; W. G. 503. 124. See the basic article by H. F. Finberg, Hal-
Constable, 'Carlo Bonavia and some Painters of Ve- pole Society, IX (1920 i), 21 ; also Constable, op. cil.,
dute in Naples', Essays in Honor ojG. Smarzenski, 32. P'orConsul Smith, see Haskell, Patrons, 299.
Chicago, 1952, 198. For Bonavia, see also the same Canaletto's later work deteriorated in quality. .Mass
author in An Quarterly. 1959, i960, 1962. production and the grow ing demands made upon him
Mention may also be made of the anonymous nor- bv tourists led to a progressive mechanization ot his
therner'Monsu X', an artist reconstructed by R. Lon- style.
ghi Paragnne, V ( 954), no. 53, 39) who w orked mostly 125. Other minor vedulisli, such as .Antonio Visentini
( 1
in Rome and combined influences from Rosa and (1688- 1 782), famed as architect and engraver, An-
Courtois with those from Seghers, Rembrandt, and tonio Jolli (f. 1700 77), PietroGaspari(i720 85), and
other Dutch painters. Francesco Battagholi (b. c. 1722), can only be men-
Pandolfo Reschi, born in Danzig in 1643, who spent tioned; for the whole trend, R. Pallucchini, Pilt. ten.,
most of his life in Italy, imitated Salvator and Courtois. II, and Pitt. ven. Settecento, i960, 205.
He died in 1699 in Florence where he mainly worked. 126. It is well known that Canaletto as well as Bellotto
1 1 6. F. Arisi's monograph ( 1 96 1 ) with elaborate, fully and other painters before and after them, among them
illustrated ceuvre catalogue supersedes L. Ozzola's G. M. Crespi and even Guardi, regarded the camera
monograph of 1921 and must be consulted for all ohscura as a convenient aid for rendering 'correct'
questions concerning Pannini. The author established views. Best survey of this problem in H. Allwill Fritz-
that Pannini was in Rome as early as 171 1. sche, B. Bellotto, Burg, 1936; see also J. Byam Shaw,
\ BIBLOSARTE
The Drawings of F. Guardi, London, 1951, 22; T. (1952), 99, and, more recently, Francesco Guardi.
Pignatti, II quaderno di disegni del Canaletin alle Gal- L'Angelo Raffaele, Turin, 1958). Once again, Morassi
lerie di Venezia, Milan, 1958, 20; and the penetrating summarized the problem in Burl. Mag., xcv (1953),
analysis by D. Gioseffi, Canaletlu, Trieste, 1959, who 263, where he tried to round ofTGianantonio's ceuvre.
based his-research on the same quaderno, a sketchbook .\ 'conciliatory' positionwas taken up by J. Byam
with 1 38 original Canaletto drawings, now in the Acca- Shaw Note 126, 46) and R. Pallucchini, Pitt.
(op. cit..
demia, Venice. Constable, Canaleiio, 1962, 162, seems venez., II, 196, and Pittura venez. del Settecento, i960,
to have been unaware of Gioseffi's publication. 131 (full discussion), who do not accept the encomium
127. See M. Muraro, Burl. Mag., cii {i960), 421. of Gianantonio at the expense of Francesco. See also
128. Idem, ibid., C (1958), 3. N. Rasmo's balanced assessment in Cultura Atestna,
129. The question was opened up in a penetrating IX (1955), 150.
article by W. Arslan {Emporium, c (1944), July-Dec, D. Gioseffi in Emporium, cxxvi (1957), 99, once again
3) and first summarized by A. Morassi, ihtd., cxiv attributes the S. Raffaele paintings to Francesco and
(1951), 195; see also T. Pignatti, .-irrf Fenf/a, iv (1950), advances reasons for dating them as late as 1780-90,
144. In 1951appeared also F. de Maffei's partisan Gian while A. Morassi, ihid., cx.xxi (i960), 147, 199, offers
Antonio Guardi pit tore di figure (Verona), which arous- new arguments for the attribution to Gianantonio. See
ed considerable controversy. G. Fiocco valiantly de- also S. Sinding-Larsen, in Acta ad archaeologiam et
fends the old position of Francesco's primacy, first art turn historiam pertinent la (Institutum Romanum
defined by him in his classic monograph of 1923 (see Norvegiae), 1 (1962), 171-93. The Bibliography (pp.
Most ra delle opere dt Francesco e Gianantonw Guardi 607-8) should be consulted for later writings on the
esistenti nel Trentino, Trent, 1949; also Arte Veneta, vi Guardi brothers.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Bibliography cannot aim at completeness. As a 3. Sculpture

I have excluded the literature listed in Thieme-
rule, 4. Architecture
Becker's Kiiiisiler-Lexikon. Only those older articles 5. Drawing
and books which are still standard works to-day are
here included. Moreover, to a certain extent the foot- III. Cities and Provinces
notes and the Bibliography supplement each other: Bologna and Emilia
I had to exclude from the Bibliography many refer- Florence and Tuscany
ences given in the footnotes; conversely, many im- Genoa and Liguria
portant studies will appear only in the Bibliography. Milan and Lombardy
Titles of articles are quoted only if they contain a Naples and the South
specific key to the content. Rome
In a few exceptional cases book reviews of special Sicily
merit are mentioned. Turin and Piedmont
I have tried to characterize a number of important Venice and the Veneto
items by brief comments. For reasons of space these
had to be selective. IV. Artists in alphabetical sequence
Initials of artists are given only in cases where the
identity would otherwise be doubtful. LIST OF PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS: See p. 506
For older bibliographies, see N. Pevsner, Die italie-
nische Malerei vnni Ende der Renaissance bis zum aits-
gehenden Rakoko, Wildpark-Potsdam, 1928 (paint- I. SOURCES

ing); A. De Rinaldis, L'arte m Roma . . . Bologna,
1948 (full bibliography for Rome); V. Golzio, // Sei- A. DOCUMENTS AND LETTERS
cento e il Settecento, Turin, 1950 (selection). Indis-
pensable for the sources and art theory: J. Schlosser- BARON I, C. Documenti per la storia dell'archilettura
Magnino, La lelleratura artistua, Florence- Vienna, a Milano nel rinascimento e nel barocco. i : Edifici
1964. The best up-to-date bibliographies are in the sacri. Florence, 1940.
current issues of Cnmnienlari, Arte Veneta, Zeitschrift BOTTARl, M. G., and Ticozzi, S. Raccolla di lettere
fiir Kitnstgeschichte. The Dizionarw Biografica degli siilla pittura, scultura ed architeltura. Milan, 1822.
Italtam, Rome, i960 ft'., should also be consulted. CERROTI, F. Lettere e memorie autografe ed inedtle
At the time of concluding this revision only twelve diartistitratte dai tnanoscriiti della Corsiniana. Rome,
volumes have appeared. i860.
The bibliographical material is arranged under the FOGOLARI, G. 'Lettere pittoriche del Gran principe
following headings: Ferdinando di Toscana a Niccolo Cassana (1698-
1709)', Riv. del R. 1st., VI (1937-8).
I. Sources GOLZIO, V. Documenti artistici sul Seicento nelV
A. Documents and Letters archivio Chigi. Rome, 1939.

B. Lives of .Artists GUHL, E. Kiinstlerbriefe. 2nd ed. by .\. Rosenberg.
Berlin, 1880.
II. General Studies ORBAAN, J. A. F. Documenti sul barocco in Roma.

A. Interpretations of the Baroque Rome, 1920.
B. Iconography POLLAK, O. Die Kunsttdtigkeit unter irban VIII.
c. Histories and Studies Vienna, 1927, 193 1.
aus der
of Baroque \n and Architecture POLLAK, o. 'Italienische Kiinstlerbriefe
1 The Three .Arts Barockzeit', >Ar^. Preiiss. Kunslslg., xxxiv (191 3),
2. Painting Beiheft.
BIBLOSARTE
582 •
BIBLIOGRAPHY
B. LIVES OK ARTISTS II. GENERAL STUDIES

BAGLIONE, G. Le Vile cif' pillori. uullori. architelli, A. interpretations OF THE BAROQUE
ed inlagliulori, dal ponlijicalo di Grei>orio XIII del
1^72. Jiiw a tempi di Papa Lrham VIII net 1642. ANCEScm, L. Del harocco ed alt re prove. Florence,
Rome, 1642. Facsimile ed. with marginal notes by 1953-
Bellori (ed. V. Mariani). Rome, 1935. Atti del III Congresso Internazionale di Stiidi L mani-
BALDINUCCI, F. Notizic de' professori del dise^no da stici: 'Retorica e Barocco' . Rome, 1955.
Cimahue in qua. Florence, 1 681 -1728. Collection of important papers, above all,
BELLORI, G. p. Le vite de' pitlori. sciiltori ed architetti C. G. .\rgan, 'La "Rettorica" e Parte barocca',
moderm. Rome, 1672. and G. .M. Tagliabue, '.Kristotelismo e Ba-
BELLORI, G. p. Vite di Giiidij Rem, Andrea Sacifii e rocco'.
Carlo Maratti (ed. M. Piacentini). Rome, 1942. Fac- Baroque Art and the Jesuit Contribution. .\ Symposium
simile ed. with an essay by Eugenio Battisti on ed. by I. Jaff'e and R. Wittkower, New ^'ork, 197 1,
'Bellori as Critic', a Life and Catalogue of published with contributions bv J. .\ckerman, P. Bjurstrom,
Works by Elena Caciagli, and with Indices appeared T. Culley, S. J., F. Haskell, H. Hibbard, R. Taylor,
1969) in the Qjiadenii dell' Istituto di Storia dell' Arte R. \\ ittkower.
della L niversita di Geriova, no. 4. BiALOSTOCKi, J. 'Le "Baroque": style, epoque,
CRESPI, L. Vite de' pit tori holognesi non descritte nella attitude', in L'Information d'Histoire de I'Art, VII
Felsina Pit trice. Rome, 1769. (1962).
DE DOMINICI, B. Vite de' pit ton, sculton ed archi- BRIGANTI, G., in Paragone, i (1950), nos i, 3; 11
tetti napoletani. Naples, 1742-3. (1951), no. 13.

GIANNONE, O. Giutite stille Vite dei pittori napoletani CROCE, B. Storia dell'etd barocca in Italia. Bari, 1929.
(ed. O. .Morisani). Naples, 1941. FRANCASTEL, P. 'La contre-reforme et les arts en
MALVASIA, C. C. Felstna pit trice. Vite de pittori ho- Italic a la fin du XVr siecle", .4 travers Fart italien
lognesi. Bologna, 1678; also Vite di pittori Bolognesi du XV^ au XX^ Steele. Paris, 1949.
(Appunti inedtti). Ed. .\. Arfelli, Bologna, 1961. GALASSi PALUZZi, c. Storia segreta dello stile dei
MANCINI, G. Considerazioni siilla pittura (ed. .\. Gesiiiti. Rome, 1951.
Marucchi and L. Salerno). Rome, 1956 7. GRASSI, L. 'Barocco e arti figurative'. Emporium, CI
Written between 16 14 and 1621, with addi- (1945)-

tions until 1630. See also J. Hess, 'Note Man- GRASSI, L. Costruzione della critica d'arle. Rome,
ciniane', .Miinchner Jahrb., Xix (1968), 103 ft. 1955-
ORLANDi, P. A. .ihecedario pittorico. Bologna, 1704. With interesting chapters on Baroque art
.\n encyclopedia of artists. Many later editions theory and good bibliography.
with additions. IVANOFF, N. 'Stile e maniera', in Saggi e .Memorie di
PASCOLI, L. Vite de pittori, sculton, ed architetti storia dell'arte, I (1957).
moderni. Rome, 1730-6. Investigation of how writers from the Renais-
PASSERI, G. B. Vite de' pittori, sciiltori ed architetti sance onwards interpreted 'style' and maniera.
che haiino lavorato in Roma, morti dal 1641 Jiiio al KURZ, o. 'Barocco: storia di una parola', in Lett ere
ibjj. Rome, 1772. Re-issued with notes by J. Hess. Italiane, XII (i960).
Vienna, 1934. Best terminological study.
RIDOLFI, C. Le maraviglie dell'arte vero le vite LEE, R. w. '
"t/ pictura poesis'^: the Humanistic
degl' illustri pittori veneti e dello stato. Venice, 1648. Theory of Painting', .irt Bull., XXil (1940).
New critical ed. with notes by D. von Hadeln. Berlin, MAHON, D. Studies in Seicento .Art and Theory.
1914-24. London, 1947.
SANDRART, J. von. L'academia todesca della archi- MA HON, D. 'Eclecticism and the Carracci: Further
tectura, scultura £5" pittura. Niirnberg-Frankfurt, Reflections on the Validity of a Label', J.IV.C.I.,
1675-9. Modem ed. with notes by A. Peltzer. XVI (1953)-
Munich, 1925. pA N OFSK Y , E . Idea ' . em Beit rag ziir Begriffsgeschichte
SOPRANI, R., and ratti, C. G. Vite de' pittori, scul- derdlleren Kiinsttheorie. Leipzig-Berhn, 1924; Italian
tori, ed architetti genovesi. Genoa, 1768-9. ed., 1952.
SUSINO, F. Le vite dei pittori messinesi, 1724. Ed. V. RIEGL, A. Die Entstehung der Barockkunst in Rom.
Martinelli, Florence i960. Vienna, 1908.
BIBLOSARTE
583
ST A M M R (ed. )• Die Kutistformen des Baroikzeilalters.

, .
.\n encyclopedic attempt with close to a thou-
Munich, 1956. sand illustrations.
A collection of papers by fourteen authors. GRISERI, A. Le metamorfost del harocco. Turin, 1967.
TINTELNOT, H. Biiriuktht'iiUr unci hanicke Kunst. i\n unusual and fascinating work, containing
Berlin, 1929. many challenging ideas; concentration on
WEISBACH, w. Der Barock ah Ktirisl der Cegen- Piedmont.
reformalKin. Berlin, 192 1. HASKELL, F. Patrons and Painters: .A Study m the
wiTTKOWER, R. 'II barocco in Italia', «Wcanti- Relations between Italian Art and Svciely in the Age of
MORI, D., 'L'eta barocca', in Manierismo, Barinco, the Baroque. London, 1963.
Rococo: concetti e termini, Accademia dei Ltncei, An important work; supplements ideally the
cccLix (1962), 319, 395. present book.
WOLFFLIN, H. Renaissance iind Barock. Munich, LEES-MILNE, J. Baroque m Italy. London, 1959.
1888. Useful as an introduction.
SALMI, M. L'arte italiana. III. Florence, 1944.
B. ICONOGRAPHY TAPIE, v.-L. The Age of Grandeur. Baroque and
Classicism in Europe. London, i960 (first French ed.,
ASKEW, P. 'The Angelic Consolation of St Francis of 1957)-
Assisi in Post-Tridentine Italian Painting',^. W.C./., Emphasis on historical aspects. Italy takes up a
XXXII (1969), 280 306. relatively small section. Poor English trans-
An exemplary iconographical study. lation.
DEJOB, C. De r influence dii Conctle de Treiite sur la VENTURI, A. Stona dell' arte italiana. IX-XI. Milan,
literature et les beaux arts ctiez les peuples catholiques. 1933 ft. i.x, 6-7 Painting; x, 3 Sculpture; xi, 2-3
Paris, 1884. .Architecture.
MALE, E. L'art religieux de la Jin du XVle siecle, du These volumes should be used for the tran-
XVIIe siecle et du XVI lie siecle. Paris, 1951. from the sixteenth to the seventeenth
sition
The indispensable study.' century.
MRAZEK, w. 'Ikonologie der barocken Decken- WEISBACH, w. Die Kunst des Barock m Italien,
malerei', Sitzungsberichte der phil. hist. Klasse der Frankreich. Deutschland und Spanien. Berlin, 1924.
Oesterr. Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1952. Volume XI of the 'Propylaen Kunstgeschichte'.
MRAZEK, w. in Kunstchronik. IX (1956).
Plan of an analytical index of Baroque icono- 2. Painting

graphy.
MUNOZ, A., in Rassegna d'Arle, in (1916), IV (1917), ARSLAN, E . // concetto di lumimsmo e la pittura veneta
v(i9i8). barocca. Milan, 1946.
PIGLER, A. Barocktliemen. Budapest, 1956. New Suggestive ideas.
enlarged ed.. New York, 197 1. Art in Italy, 1600- i~oo. Ed. F. Cummings, Intro-
SALERNO, L. 'II dissenso nella pittura. Intorno a duction R. Wittkower. Detroit, 1965.
Filippo Napoletano, Caroselli, Salvator Rosa e altri', The Detroit Exhibition brought together the
Stona dell'Arte. no. 6 (1970), 34-65. best of Italian Seicento painting, drawing, and
A magic on one
discussion of the interest in sculpture in .\merican collections. Learned
hand and stoicism on the other by a group of catalogue entries by seven experts.
seventeenth-century painters, BUSCAROLI, R. La pitliira di paesaggw in Italia.
voss, H. 'Die Flucht nach Agypten', Saggte .Memone Bologna, 1935.

di stona dell' arte, i (1957). The only comprehensive study.
Supplements Pigler, who does not mention the COSTANTINI, V. La pittura Italiana del 'boo. Milan,
theme. 930-
Contribution to the histor\- of ideas rather than
C.HISTORIES AND STUDIES OF style.
BAROQUE ART AND ARCHITECTURE DELOGU, G. La pittura italiana del Seicento. Florence,
1931-
/. The Three Arts FRIEDLAENDER, w. Mannerism and Anti-.Wannerism
in Italian Painting. New York, 1957.
GOLZio, v. // Seicento e il Seltecento. Turin, 1950. Reprint of classic articles, first publ. 1925,
Third ed., 1968. 1929.
BIBLOSARTE
584 • BIBLIOGRAPHY
GALETT I , L . , and C A M F, SASCA , E . Etiiuldpcdia dcllti First serious attempt to catalogue and illustrate
piltura italiana. Milan, igsi. all Italian Seicento paintings in Spain. Review
Valuable articles on seventeenth- and Mag., cx (1968), 159 f.
E. Harris, Burl.
eighteenth-century painters, with biblio- Petit Palais. La peinlure ilalientie au I He XV siecle.
graphies. Nov. 1960-Jan. 1961.

GERSTENBERG, K. Die ideiik LandsLhaftmuikrei. Exhibition catalogue with good bibliographies.
Halle, 1923. See M. Levey, Burl. Mag., cm (1961), 139.
GNL'Dl, C, and others. L'ideak ilassiio del Seicentii PEVSNER, N. Die italienische Aialerei vom Ende der
in Italia e la pittura dt paesaggio. Bologna, 1962. Renaissance his zum ausgehenden Riikoko (Handbuch
Exhibition catalogue with a number of essays der Kunstwissenschaft). Wildpark-Potsdam, 1928.
of great value. Review by E. Schaar, Zeituhr.f. A pioneering work.
Kimstg., XXVI (1963), 52. PEVSNER, N. 'Die Wandlung urn 1650 in der
LANZI,L. Storm pittarica dell' Italia. Bassano, 1795-6 italienischen Malerei', Wiener Jahrh., VIII (1932).
(first complete ed.). First English transl. by Roscoe, WATERHOUSE,E. Italian Baroque Painting. London,
1828. 1962.
Still unequalled for knowledge of the material An eminently readable introduction.
and breadth of approach.
LORENZETTI, G. La pit t lira Italiana del Settecento. J. Sculpture
Novara, 1948.
The best general treatment of the subject. BRINCKMANN, A. E. Barockskulptur. Berlin-Neu-
MARANGONI, M. Arte hanicca. Florence, 1953 (first babelsberg, 19 19.
ed. 1927). A spirited enterprise, now largely antiquated.
Reprint of articles on still life, Guercino, BRINCKMANN, A. E. Barock-Bozzetti. Frankfurt,

G. M. Crespi, Caravaggio, Florentine Sette- 1923-4-
cento painting, etc. A vast and still important collection of material.
MCCOM^ , \. Baroque Painters in Italy .H-iTSdivdi^ i934- DELOGU, G. La scultura italiana del Seicento e del
The only general study in English. Limited Settecento. Florence, 1932, 1933.
usefulness. Useful brief compilation, not always reliable.
Masters of the Loaded Brush. Oil Sketches from Rubens FALDI, I. La scultura barocca in Italia. Milan, 1958.
to Tiepolo. Columbia University Exhibition Cata- Brief, competent text.
logue. New York, 1967. FERRARI, G. La tomha nell'arte italiana. Milan, [1916].
Introduction by R. Wittkower on the history FERRARI,G. Lo stucco nell'arte Italiana. Milan, [1910].
of theoil sketch. A number of bozzetti never These two volumes are handy collections of
shown before are discussed and illustrated. Re- illustrations.
view D. Posner, Burl. Mag., cix (1967), 360 ff. MARTINELLI, V. Scultura Italiana dal tnanierismo al
MOSCHINI, V. La pittura italiana del Settecento. rococo. Milan, 1968.
Florence, 193 1. Useful introduction with good illustrations.
Brief text. POPE-HENNESSY, High Renaissance and

J. Italian
Mostra - II Seicenio europeo. Rome, 1957. Baroque Sculpture. 3 vols. London, 1963.
With contributions by various authors. Cata- An excellent introduction, though the space
logue prepared by L. Salerno and A. Mara- allotted to the Baroque is relatively brief.
bottini. Scholarly catalogue entries.

NEBBIA, U. La pittura italiana del Seicento. Novara, SOBOTKA, G. Die Bildhauerei der Barockzeil (ed. H.
1946. Tietze). Vienna, 1927.
OJETTI, U., DAMI, L., and TARCHIANI, N. La
pittura italiana del Seicento e del Settecento alia mostra 4. Architecture
di Palazzo Pitti. Milan-Rome, 1924.
Still basic. ARGAN, G. C. L'architeltitra harocca in Italia. Milan,
OJETTI, and others. // ritratto
U., italiano dal Cara- 1957-
vaggio al Tiepolo. Bergamo, 1927. Brief, stimulating text.
A monumental work. ARGAN, G. C. L'architettura harocca in Italia. Appunti

PEREZ SANCHEZ, A. E. Ptntura Italiana del s. XVII delle lezioni tenute durante Tanno accademico 1959-
en Espana. Madrid, 1965. 60, raccolti dal prof Maurizio Bonicatti. Rome (ed.
dell'Ateneo), i960.
BIBLOSARTE
585
BR AND I, C. La prima tircliiletliini Ihinma. Pictrn du Collections II. I'be Seienteenth Century in Italy. New
Cortnna, Bondmim, Benimi. Bari, i()70. York, 1967.
A paperback well worth while studying. An important catalogue containing much new
BRIGGS, M. G. Biirtiiiiic Architeclurc. London, 1913. material. Review W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag.,
Antiquated. cix (1967), 253.
BRINCK.VIANN, A. E. Bdukunsl (IcS I
J. Utld /,S. .Much work has been done on draw ings of the Baroque
Jalirhiinderts in dai romanisihen Ldndeni (Handbuch in recent years. See entries under BOLOGNA,
der Kunstwisscnschatt). Berlin Neubabelsberg, MILAN, and, above all, VENICE.
1919 (and later editions).
Stimulating, but difficult to digest.

CATTAV I, G. L' archil ett lira barmca. Rome, 1962. III. CITIES AND PROVINCES
A brief summary.
CHIERICI, G. // palazzfi italiarw dal secolu XVII al BOLOGNA AND EMILIA
XIX. Milan, 1957.
General, useful illustrations. BODM ER , H 'Studien
. iiber die bologneser .\lalerei des
DF.LOGL', G. L'arihitettura italiana del Seicento e del 18. Jahrhunderts', .Mitteilungen des kunslhisturtschen
Settecentn. Florence, 1935. Institiits in Florenz, v (1951).
General survey. E.MILIANI, A. .Mostra di disegni del seicento emiliano
FREY, D. Arcliitettura banicca. Rome .Milan, 1926. nella Pinacoteca di Brera. .Milan, 1959.
Brief, but interesting text. FOR ATT I, A. '.\spettideirarchitetturabolognesedella

GLRLITT, C. Geuliuhle dei Bannksliles in Italien. seconda meta del secolo XVI alia fine del Seicento*,
Stuttgart, 1887. // Coniune di Bologna, XVlll (1931), XIX (1932).

.^ revolutionary work; still useful. GNUDI, C, and others. .Maestri della pittura del Sei-
HAGER, \V. Biiroik Architektiir.Baden-Baden, 1968. cento emiliano. Catalogue. Bologna, 1959.
.\ thoughtful, all-European history w ith biblio- The learned Catalogue, which accompanied
graphy and chronological tables. one of the most stimulating exhibitions of the
MI L Z A F Meniorie degli
I I , . ari lutein anticlii e mnderiii. decade, must be consulted for all questions
4th ed. Bassano, 1785. concerning the Bolognese seventeenth century.
A primary source for eighteenth-century archi- KURZ, o. Bolognese Drawings of the XI II <5 X I'll I
tects. Centuries . . . at Windsor Castle. London, 1955.
POLLAK, O. 'Der .Architekt im 17. Jahrhundert in LONGHi, R. 'Momenti della pittura bolognese',
Rom', Zeituhr. fiir Geseli. d. Arcliilektiir. in (1909 L'Archiginnasio, xxx (1935).
10). MALAGUZZi-VALERi, F. Arte gaia. Bologna, 1926.
Problems of the profession and terminology On Bolognese festivals, drawings, caricatures,
based on documents. etc.
RICCI,C. L'archilettiira Ihiranu in Italia. Turin, 1922. MALVASiA, c. Le pi tt lire di Bologna. Bologna, 1686
Collection of illustrations. (also eighteenth-century editions).
The most important contemporary guide-
5. Drawing book.
MATTE LCCI, A. M. Carlo Francesco Dotttê Farcht-
BEAN,j.,andSTA.\iPFLE,F. Drawingsfrom New York tettura bolognese del Settecenlo. Bologna, 1969.
Ci/llectiiins III. The Eighteenth Century in Italy. New Foundation for a long-neglected field of study
York, 197 1. Biographical material, ifuvre catalogues, docu-

IVANOFF, N. / disegni italiani del Seirenlo. Scuole ments, a chronological table.
veneta, lombarda, ligiire, napoletana. Venice, 1959. Mostra del Setlecento bolognese. Bologna, 1935.
Examples also of minor artists. Essential.
ROL I
, R. / disegni italiani del Seicento sciiola emiliana, Ricci, c, and zlcchini, g. Guida di Bologna. 6th
toscana, romana. marchigiana e umbra. Treviso, 1969. ed. Bologna, 1930.
Reviews by W. \ itzthum, .-irte Illustrala. ill, The best modem guide-book.
34-6 (1970), 88 ft., and, most detailed, by .\. S. RiccoMiM, E. Mostra della scultura bolognese del
Harris, .4rt Bull.. Liii (i 971), in press. Setlecento. Bologna, 1965.

only coherent history of
STAMPFLE,F.,andBEA.\,j. Dra wings from New York Contains the
eighteenth-centun, Bolognese sculpture.
BIBLOSARTE
586 BIBLIOGRAPHY
RICCOMINI, E. II Seicento ferrarese. Milan, ig6q. Beilrdge zur Kunstgeschichte, Feslschnfl G. Fiensch,
A great deal o( new material. Many painters, 87 ft. Giessen, 1970.
hitherto entirely unknown, are discussed. .\n important episode reconstructed with the
ZANOTTI, F. M. C. Stiirta deW Accadcmici Clementina. help ot many drawings.
Bologna, 1739. HAATZ, w . and t. Die Kin hen von I'lorenz. I'Vankfurt,
ZUCCHINI, G. Edijici di Bologna. Repertorw bihlio- 1940-54.
grafico e icunografuo. Rome, 1931. Indispensable.
ZUCCH N I
I , G Paesaggi e rovtne nella
. pittura holognese
del Settecento. Bologna, 1947. GENOA AND LIGURIA
FLORENCE AND TUSCANY ALIZERI, F. Guida illustrativa . . . per la cittd di

Gennva. Genoa, 1875.
Bocc H I
, F ., and CI N EL L I , G Lf helkzze
. della cilia di Best older guide-book.
Firenze. Florence, 1677. COLMUTO, G. 'Chiese barocche liguri a colonne
Best contemporary guide-book. binate', Quadernu
n. j (Lniversita degli Studi di
CAMPBELL, M. 'Medici Patronage and the Baroque: Genova) (1970), 99-184.
A Reappraisal', An Bull., .xlviii (1966), 133 ft". DELOGU, G. Pillori minori ligitri, lomhardi e piemontesi
CHI AR INI, M. Artisli alia carle granducale. Florence, del '600 e 'joo. Venice, 1931.
1969- Indispensable for the study of minor masters.

Fully documented catalogue of an exhibition DE NEGRI, E. 'Chiese settecentesche a pianta ellittica
in the Palazzo Pitti. Revealing for the taste of del Genovesato', Ballet tiiw Liguslico (1967), 43 ft".
the Florentine court. FIESCHI BossoLO, G. 'Aspetti dell'architettura set-

DAL POGGETTO, P. Arte w Valdelsa dal sec. XII al tecentesca in Liguria', Palladia, xv {1965), 129 ft".
XVIII. Exhibition Catalogue. Certaldo, 1963.

sec. Discussion of some scarcely known, but
Interesting for a number of minor Tuscan interesting Baroque churches such as the
Baroque painters. Sanctuary 'La Madonetta' at Genoa, the
GREGORI, M. JO pitlure e scullure del '600 e 'joo parish church at Arenzano, S. Giovanni
fiorentmo. Florence, 1965. Battista at Cervo, and S. Matteo at Laigueglia.
Catalogue of an important Exhibition in the GROSSO, O. Parlali e palazzi di Genova. Milan fn.d.].
Palazzo Strozzi. The Introduction contains an GROSSO, o. Decaralari genavesi. Rome, 1921.
excellent survey of Florentine Baroque paint- GROSSO, 0. Dimari genavesi. Milan, 1956.
ing. INGERSOLL-SMOUSE, F. 'La Sculpture a Genes au
See also Gregori, Paragone, no. 145, 21 ft"., XVIIIe siecle', G.d.B.A., lvi, ii (1914).
and no. 169, 11 ft. MANNING, R. and B. Genoese Masters. Camhiaso la
HIBBARD, H., and NISSMAN, J. Florentine Baroque Magnasca ijô-ijjo. Exhibition at the Dayton Art
Art from American Collections. New York, 1969. Institute, Ringling .Museum of .Art, and Wadsworth
A Columbia University Exhibition at the Atheneum. Dayton, Ohio, 1962.

Metropolitan Museum. The first attempt in A fine catalogue many pictures from American
;
.\merica to present a coherent picture of private collections.

Florentine seventeenth-century painting. MARCENARO, C. (and others). Maslra dei pitlori gena-
INGERSOLL-SMOUSE, F. 'La Sculpture florentine a vesi a Genova nel '600 e nel 'joo. Genoa, 1969.
la fin du XVIIe siecle', G.d.B.A., 5 per., (1920). i Scholarly catalogue of a great exhibition which
LANKHEIT,K. Florentitiische Barockplustik. Munich, constitutes a landmark despite some harsh
1962. criticism (e.g., C. Volpe, in Arte Illustrata,
A monumental standard work opening up a II, 1969).
field to which little attention had been paid MORASS I, A. Maslra della pillura del Seicenla e Sette-
before. cento in Liguria. Catalogo. Milan, 1947.

MARANGONI, M. 'Settecentisti fiorentini', Riv. So far the fullest presentation of this material.
d'Arte, Viii (1912); reprinted in Arte harocca, MORAZZONi,G. Sluccfii italiant. Maestri genovesi sec.
Florence, 1953. XVI-XIX. Milan, 1950.
The only survey of Florentine eighteenth- Maslra di pitlori genovesi del Seicenla e del Settecento.
century painting. Catalogue by O. Grosso, M. Bonzi, and C. Mar-
NOEHLES, K. 'Der Hauptaltar von Santo Stefano in cenaro. Milan, 1938.
Pisa: Cortona, Ferri, Silvani, Foggini', in Giessener Still very useful; good bibliographies.
BIBLOSARTE
587
RATTI, C. G. Jnslruzwm' di quaiito puo vedersi di piii .MAZZINI, F. Mostra di Fra Galgario e del Settecento
hello in Genova. Genoa, 1780. in Bergamo. Catalogo, .Milan, 1955.
ROSSI, A. L'archilellura n-li,siiisu harocca a Genova. With full bibliography.
Genoa, 1959. NICODEMI, G. Pitlon lomhardi (Bibl. d'aric illus-
Good photographic survey. trata). Rome, 1922.
ROTONDI, p. Calaloô della nio.tlra della Madonna Limited usefulness.
nell'arte in Liûria. Genoa, 1952. Sloria di Milano. Milan, vol. X, 1957; XI, 195S; XII,
RUBENS, p. p. Palazzi di Genova. 1622; ed. H. 1959-
Gurlitt, Berlin, 1924. The three volumes contain the most up-to-
Le ville iênovesi. Pubhshed by the Genoese Section date historv of Milanese art during the Bar-
of 'Italia Nostra'. Genoa, 1967. oque period. X, part iv: !'. .Mczzanottc, Mila-
A cooperative enterprise by E. De Negri, C. nese architecture to the mid seventeenth cen-
Fera, L. Grossi Bianchi, E. Poleggi. Reliable tury; part vi. G. .\. Dell'.Acqua, .Milanese
guide to about 150 seventeenth- and eigh- painting to 1630; part vii: G. Nicodemi,
teenth-century villas in and near Genoa. Sculpture to 1630.
XI, part viii: .Mezzanotte, .Architecture from
MILAN AND LOMBARDY Ricchino to Ruggeri; part ix, x: Nicodemi,
Painting and Sculpture i<i30 1706.
BARELLI, E. S. Disegni di maestri lomhardi del primo XII is concerned with the eighteenth century.
Seicento. Catalogo. Milan, 1959. Part ix: Mezzanotte, .Architecture; parts x,
BARONI, C. L'archilellura da Bramante at Ricchino. xi: .\. .M. Romanini, Painting and Sculpture.
Milan, 1941. The section on painting, in particular, is the
BASCAPE, G. C. / palazzi della vecchia Milano. Milan, result of a great deal of new research.
1945- TESTORI, G. .Mosira del manierismo piemontese e lom-
CALABI, E. La pilliira di Brescia nel Setcenio e Selte- hardo del Seicento. Turin, 1955.
cento. Catalogo. Brescia, 1935. Concerned with the masters of the early
Still very useful. seventeenth century including Del Cairo.
COLOMBO, S. Projilo della archilettura religiosa del Bibliography.
Seicento. Varese e il sua territorio. Milan, 1970. VIGEZ7,I, S. La scullura lomharda neU'etd hamcca.
Scholarly publication that focuses on impor- Milan, 1930.
tant, scarcely studied buildings. General, but the only book on the subject.
DEL FRATE, C. 5. Maria del Monte sopra Varese.
Varese, 1933. NAPLES AND THE SOUTH
monograph on
Full the 'Sacro Monte'.
GATTI PERER, M. L. (ed.). // Diionio dt Milano. .4tti Atti del IX Congresso Nazionale di storia dell'archilel-
Congresso Inlernazionale. 2 vols. Milan, 1969. liira. Rome, 1959.
With important contributions to the sculpture Contains papers by B. Calza, 'II Barocco salen-
and the planning of the facade in the Baroque tino'; G. Bresciani .Alvarez, '.Accostamenti e
period. proposte per un'impostazione critica dell'
GRASS I, L. Province del harocco e del rococo. Proposia architettura Leccese'; .M. Calvesi, 'Intluenze
di un lessico hui-hihlwgrajico di archiletti in Lom- napoletane e siciliane sull'architettura barocca

hardia. Milan, 1966. del Salento'; .M. Manieri Elia, 'II Barocco
Dictionary of architects working in Lombardy Salentino nel suo quadro storico'.
between the late sixteenth and the second half BOLOGNA, r., and doria, g. .^\ostra del ritrallo
of the eighteenth century. First-rate. slorico napolitano. Naples, 1954.

HOFFMANN, H. 'Die Entwicklung der Architektur BRIGGS, M. S. In the Heel oj Italy. London, 1910.
Mailands von 1550- 1650', Wiener Jahrh.. IX (1934). CALVESI, M., and manieri-elia, m. .'ir chit el t lira
One of the few satisfactory studies of .Milanese harocca a Lecce e in terra di Piiglia. Rome, 1971.
architecture. First full modern study of Apulian Baroque;
LONGHI,R., CIPRIANI, R., and TESTORI,G. I pitlori excellent illustrations; bibliography.
della realtd in Lombardia. Catalogo. Milan, 1953. CARPEGNA, n. di. Pit I on napolitani del 'boo e del
Important catalogue. Full bibliographies. 'yoo. Catalogue. Rome, 1958.
LONGHi, R. 'Dal Moroni al Ceruti", Paragone, iv Exhibition in the Palazzo Barberini. Good
biographical notes and bibliography.
(1953), no. 41.
BIBLOSARTE
CAUSA, R. Mostra del hnzzelti luipoletam del '600 e sn WELL, s. Southern Baro(jue .Art. London, 1924.
del '-joo. Catalogue. Naples, 11)47 viTZTHUM, w. Disegni napoletani del Sei- e Sette-
CAUSA, R. La Madnmm nella pitlura del '600 a Napoli. cento. Catalogue. Naples, 1966.
Catalogue (with bibliography). Naples, 1954. A pioneering enterprise.

CAUSA, R. Pit turn mipiileliina diil XV al XIX secolo. See also idem. Cento discgni napolitani, V\ot-
Bergamo, 1957. ence, 1967 (Lffizi Exhibition), and idem and

An excellent survey, with full bibliography. C. Monbeig-Goguel, Le dessm a Naples dii
CECi, G. 'Notizie e documenti su artisti napolitani', XVI au XVIir Louvre, Paris, 1967.
Steele,
Archivi, iv (1937). VITZTHUM, W., and causa, r. Disegm napoletani
CELANO, C. Nolizie del hello delFanticn e del curiasa del Sei- e del Settecento. Rome, 1970.
della citid di Napoli. Naples, 1856-60 (first ed. 1692). Kxhibition of 80 drawings in the Palazzo Bar-
Most important Neapolitan guide-book. berini, partially identical with those exhibited
CHiERici, G. 'Architettura religiosa a Napoh nei at Naples, 1966.

secoli XVII e XVIIF, Palladw, (1937). i
CONSTABLE, w. G. 'C. Bonaria and some Painters

of Vedute in Naples', Essays in Honor of Georg
Smarzenski. Chicago, 1952. BLUNT, A., and COOKE, H. L. I'fie Roman Drawings
d'elia, M. Mostra dell' arte in Piiglia del tardo antico of the XVII and XVIII Centuries at Windsor Castle.
al Rococo. Rome, 1964. London, 1960.
Important for Baroque painters working in BONNEFOY, Y. Rome i6jo. L'horizon du premier
Apulia. haroque. Paris, 1970.
DE RINALDIS, A. Neapolitan Painting of the Seicento. .•\ttempt at sketching contemporan, events in
New York, 1929. Rome about 1630 with special emphasis on

Rhetorical. the French contribution.
GILBERT, C. Baroque Painters of Naples. Catalogue. BOSTICCO, S. (and others). Piazza Navona, Isola dei
Sarasota, Florida, 1961. Pamphilj. Rome, 1970.
An interesting catalogue; many pictures from .A monumental work with excellent photo-
x^merican collections. graphs by L. von Matt. Of special value the
HAUTECOEUR, L. 'Les arts a Naples au XVIIT on the painted decoration of the

sections
siecle', G.d.B.A., 4 per., v (191 1). Palazzo Pamphili, by D. Redig de Campos.
MANCINI, F. Scenografia napoletana dell'etd harocca. BRIGANTI, G. / Bamhoccianti. Pitt on della vita po-
Naples, 1964. polare nel Seicento. Catalogue. Rome, 1950.
A scholarly work that breaks much new Concerned almost entirely with Rome. Fully
ground. documented.
ORTOLANl, S., LORENZETTl, C, and BIANCALE, BRIGANTI, G. // Palazzo del Qiiirinale. Rome, 1962.
M. Mostra XVII-
della pittiira napoletana dei secoli Documented and fully illustrated. Particularly
XVIII- XIX. Naples, 1938. important for the fresco decorations.
The best comprehensive histor}' of Neapolitan BRUHNS, L. 'Das Motiv der ewigen .\nbetung in der
painting before Causa's book. romischen Grabplastik des 16., 17. und 18. Jahr-
PANE, R. Architettura dell'etd harocca in Napoli. hunderts\ Riim. Jatnb. f Kitnstg., iv (1940).
Naples, 1939. An important publication.

The only book on the subject, but it will be BRUHNS, L, Die Kunst der Stadt Rom. Vienna, 1951.
replaced by a work by Anthony Blunt that is With good chapters on the Baroque city.
in the press. CARPEGNA, N. di. Paesisti e vedutisti a Roma nel 'boo
PANE, R. Napoli imprevista. Turin, 1949. e nel 'joo. Catalogue. Rome, 1956.
PANE, R. Ville vesiiviane del settecento. Naples, 1959. CHIARINI, M. Paesisti bamhoccianti e vedutisti nella
Rich material concerning very little known Roma seicentesca. Florence, 1967.
and rapidly disappearing buildings. Contri- Catalogue of 53 paintings, originally Medici

butions by several authors. property, now Palazzo Pitti.
PROTA-GIURLEO, U. Pit ton nupolctani del Seicento. CHYURLiA, R. 'Di alcune tendenze della scultura
Naples, 19 1 3. settecentesca a Roma e Carlo Monaldi', Coninien-
Biographical, based on documents. /r/n, 1(1950).
SCHIPA, M. // regno di Napoli al tempo di Carlo di COLASANTI, A. Case e palazzi harocchi di Roma.
Borhone. Milan, 1923. Milan, 1913.
BIBLOSARTE
589
DE R NAL
1 I S, A . L'lirte III Rditui c/ul Seicetitu al Nove- Barockarchitektur', H lener Jalirh., in (1924).
ceiito. Bologna, 1048. Important.
Controversial; full bibliography. GERLINI, E. Piazza Navona. Cataloô. Rome, 1943.
DONATl, U. Artisti ticitu'si a Roma. Bcllinzona, 1942. With contributions, among others, by G.
Interesting illustrations; little original re- Matthiae and R. Battaglia.
search; extensive bibliographies. GLOTON, M. c. Trompe-l'wil et decor pla/onnant dans
d'onofrio, C. Le Fonlane di Ruiiia. Rome, 1957. les eglises romaines de I'diê baroque. Rome, 1965.
Much new documentarv material. The basic The fullest discussion of Roman ceiling fres-
work to be consulted tor Roman fountains. coes of the seventeenth and eighteenth cen-
d'onofrio, c. Roma vista da Roma. Rome, 1967. turies: iconography, style, technical problems,
See BERNINI. a chronological table, and bibliography.
d'onofrio, C. Roma net Seuenlo: 'Roma oniata GOLZio, V. 'Pitture e sculture nella chiesa di S.
dair Archilettura, Pi/liira e Scollitra' di Fwravante .^gnese a Piazza Navona', .-Irifini, i (1933-4).
Martiiielli. Florence, 1969. Documents.
Publication of the manuscript (Bibl. Casana- HAGER, H. 'Zur Planungs- und Baugeschichte der
tense 4984) of a Roman guidebook by .Marti- Zwillingskirchen auf der Piazza del Popolo', Rom.
nelli written between i6()0 and 1663; with Jalirb. f. Kunsts., xi (1967-8), 191 fJ".
notes by Borromini, who 'edited' the text for A most detailed monographic treatment with
his friend M. new archival material.
DREYER, P. Romisthe Banickzeuiiiiiiiineii. Berlin- HAUTECCEUR, L. Rome el la renaissance de I'antiqutte
Dahlem, 1969. a la Jin du XVI IF siecle. Paris, 1912.
Catalogue of 1 50 Berlin drawings dating main- Review by H. Tietze in Kunstgeschuhtltche
ly between 1650 and 1750. .-inzeigen, 19 12.
EiMER, G. Ltf Fahbnca di S. Agnese m Piazza Navona. HESS, J. Kunstgeschichtliche Studien zu Renaissance
Stockholm, 1970. und Barock. 2 vols. Rome, 1967.
The first volume of a two-volume work en- Collection of widely dispersed papers written
tirely based on archi\al material. .\ standard over a period of 40 years and concerning
publication with much new material for Rai- mainly the Early Baroque in Rome.
and Borromini.
naldi HIBBARD, H. The .irchitecture oj the Palazzo Bor-
ELLiNG, c. 'Function and Form of the Roman Bel- jlhese. Rome, 1962.
vedere', Del. Kgl. Danske Videmkah. Selskab. Ar- Richly documented. Important for early-
kaeol.-Kuiuth. Meddel., Kopenhagen, in, no. 4 seventeenth-century architecture in Rome.

(1950)- HIBBARD, H. Boll. d'.Arte, LII (1967), 99 ^
ELLING, C. Rom. Arkiteklurem Liv fru Bermiii til 177 documents from the .\rchivio Storico
Thurvaldseii. Gyldendal, 1956. Capitolino referring to Roman buildings be-
The first comprehensive treatment of Rome's tween 1586-9 and 1602-34.

architecture of this period. Danish text. LAVAGNINO, E., ANSALDI, G. R., and SALERNO, L.
ESCHER, K. Barofk iind Klassizismiis. Studieti zur Allari barocchi in Roma. Rome (Banco di Roma),
Geschuhte der .irchitektur Roms. Leipzig, 1910. 1959-
FASOLO, F. Le chiese di Roma nel 'joo. i : Traslevere. Splendid publication with colour plates.
Rome, 1949. LOTZ, w. 'Die Spanische Treppe als .Mittel der

The volume, which had no sequel, contains Diplomatic", Rom. Jalirb. f. Kunsti;., xil (1969), 39 fl'.
much documentary material for minor eigh- The final word on the Spanish stairs, with
teenth-century churches and artists. complete documentation.
FASOLO, V. 'Classicismo romano nel Settecento', See also M. Laurain-Portemer, '.Mazarin,
Benedetti et I'escalier de la Trinite des .Monts',
Qjiaderrii (i()Si\ no. 3.
FOKKER, T. H. Roman Baroque Art. The History of a G.d.B.A., LXXii (1968), 273 94.
Style. Oxford, 1938. MAGNI, G. // barocco a Roma neirarchitettura e nella
A cumbersome study, biased and difficult to scultura decorativa. Turin, 1911-13.
read. Still invaluable for the many excellent plates.
Frascati. .Munich- MAHON, D., and SLTTON, D. Artists in ijth Century

FRANCK, C. Die Barockvillen in
Berlin, 1956. Rome. Exhibition, Wildenstein. London, 1955.

FREY, D. 'Beitrage zur Geschichte der romischen MissiRiNi, M. .Memorte per servire alia storm delta
BIBLOSARTE
romaiia Accademia dt S. Liicii. Rome, 1823. zoc;CA, M. /.(/ cupola di S. Ciaconw in Augusta e le
Moslru di Riima secentescu. (A cura dciristitiito di cupole elittiche m Roma. Rome, 1945.
studi Romani). Rome, 1930.
Catalogue 0(871 exhibits
MUNOZ, A. Riima harmca. Milan, 1928.
NOACK, F. 'Kunstpflcjte und Kunstbesitz der Familie ACCASCINA, M. Profilo dell' architettura a Messina dal
Borghese', Rep. f. Kiinsiir., 1. (ig2y). iboo al iHoo. Rome, 1964.

OZZOLA, L. 'Le rovine romane nella pittura del II W Basic study.
e XVIII secolo", L' Arte, xvi (1913). AGNELLO, G. 'Preliminari delta storia dell'archi-
PASTOR, L. VON. Gesfhhlile der Pa pile. Freiburg im tettura barocca a Siracusa', Boll. Stor. Catanese,
Breisgau, 1901 ft. (also English ed.). xi-xii (1947-8).
The seventeenth-century popes begin with AGNELLO, G. 'Architetti ignorati del Settecento a
vol. XIII. The chapters on their patronage are Siracusa', Arch. Stor. per la Sicilia orientale, iv
indispensable. (1951)-
PECCHIAI, p. La scalinata di Spagna e Villa .Medici. Documents.
Rome, 94 1. 1
.4tti delVII Congresso Nazionale di storia dell' archi-
With rich documentation. tettura. Palermo, 1956.

PORTOGHESI, P. Rdtnu hariicca. Staria di una civiltii Contains papers by S. Caronia Roberti (his-
architelloiiica. Rome, 1966. toriography of Sicilian Baroque studies); R.
A most ambitious enterprise with almost 500 Guccione Scaglione (extensive bibliography
illustrations, pursuing the story to the late for Sicilian Baroque); G. Di Stefano (drawings
eighteenth century, attending to general view- by Palermitan architects with fuU biblio-
points as much as to the work catalogues of graphical references).

individual architects. BLUNT, A. Sicilian Baroijue. London, 1968.
PUYVELDE, L. VAN. La peintwe flamaude a Rome. The best study of Sicilian architecture. Good
Brussels, 1950. illustrations. Bibliography. Review^ D. .\L
REAU, L. 'Les sculpteurs fran9ais a Rome', Bull, de Smith, Burl. Mag., CXi (1969), 569 ft.
la sociele de I'liistoire et de I'art fratifais, annee 1933. BOTTARi, S. La cultura figurativa in Sicilia. Messina-
With a catalogue of works Florence, 1954.
RiCCOBONi, A. Roma iiell'arte. La scultura ncll'evo Pp. 71-90. The Baroque period.
miideriKi. Rome, 1942. BOTTARI, S. 'Contributi alia conoscenza dell'archi-

(Euvre catalogues of all Roman Baroque tettura del '700 in Sicilia', Palladia, \III (1958).
sculptors. Important study for the south-eastern part
SALERNO, L. Ptazza di Spagna. Naples, 1967. of the island.

II Settecenlo a Rtima. Catalogue. Rome, 1959. CALANDRA, E. Breve storia dell' architettura in Sicilia.
Contains a great deal of interesting material Bari, 1938.

for this still neglected period. Bibliography. Best survey.
A year-by-year chart of important artistic CARONIA ROBERTI, S. // Barocco in Palermo. Pa-
events is particularly useful. lermo, 1935.
TITI, F. Descrizwne delle pit I tire, sculture e archi- Unsatisfactory.
tetture esposle al puhbluo in Rinna. Rome, 1763. CHASTEL, A. 'Notes sur le baroque meridional'. Revue
Still the best guide to Baroque works of art in des sciences humames, fasc. 55-56 (1949).
Rome. DE SIMONE, M. Vilk palemiitaiie dei sec. XVII e
Via del Cur so. Rome (Cassa di Risparmio), 1961. XVIII. Genoa, 1968.
The history of Rome's main thoroughfare and EPIFANIO, L. Schemi compusiltvi dell' architettura
its buildings. A monumental publication by sacra pulermitana del Setcento e del Settecento.
several authors. Most important the contri- Palermo, 1950.

butions by L. Salerno. FICIIERA, F. G. B. Vaccarim e r architettura del Sette-
VOSS, H. Die Malerei des Baroek Rom. Berlin, 1924. iii cento m Sicilia. Rome, 1934.
The basic study without which no work in Text difticult to use. Large corpus of illustra-
the field can be undertaken. tions.
WATER HOUSE, E. Barocjue Pamtinii in Rome. The GANG I, G. // Barocco nella Sicilia orient ale. Rome,
Seventeenth Century. London, 1937. 1964.
CEuvre catalogues; indispensable. Good photographs.
BIBLOSARTE
591
LOHMEYER, K. Palagunisches Bcirock. Frankfurt, BRiNCKMANN, A. E. Theatriim Soviim Pedemontii.

1943- Dusscldorf, 1931.
Questionable hypotheses on connexion with Baroque architecture in Piedmont. Indispen-
German rococo. sable.
LO JACONO, G. StiiJi e rilievi di palazzi pakrmitam BRINCKMANN, A. E. Von Ciiariiio C liar nil his
dell'eta harncai. Palermo, ic)62. Balthasar Neumann. Berlin, 1932.
Plans and elevations of eight palaces. BRizio, A. .M. L'architettura harona in Piemonte.
LO .MONACO, 1. DI. Pitton e uullori siciliani dal Sei- Turin, 1953.
cento al pnmo Oti/uento. Palermo, 1940. CUE VALLEY, G. Gil architetti. rarchilelliira e la de-
Reliable dictionary; extensive bibliographies. cor azione delle ville piemontesi nel XI 'HI secolo.
r MELl, F. "Degli architctti del senato di Palermo nei Turin, 1912.

secoli XVII e XVIIT, Anh. s/oruo per In .Sialia, DE ROSSI, O. Nuova guida per la citta di Torino.
IV-V (1938-9). Turin, 1781.
Important. Documents. The best guide-b(X)k.
M N
I 1 ss I , F. Aspelli deiriiri/iiielliini n'li»iosii del Selte- CiALLONi, p. // Sacro .Monte di I'arallo. Varallo,
cetilo ill Siiiliu. Rome, 1958. 1909-14.
Plans and photographs of churches in pro- Basic study.
\incial towns. Bibliography. MALLE, L. Le arti figurative in Piemonte. Turin (n.d.,
PiSANi, N. BdiiHco III Siiilui. Syracuse, 1958. 1961 2).
.\ weak work. .\ comprehensive up-to-date survey in con-

POLiCASTRO, G. Cataiiiti iiel Setleceiitd. Catania, siderable detail, without notes but with exten-
1950. sive bibliography.
ZANCA, A. La caltedrale di Palermo. Palermo, 1952. MALLE, L. Palazzo Aiadama in Torino. 2 vols. 'Turin,
ZIINO, V. Ciiiilrihiili alio studio dell'arcliilelliira del 1970.
'joo in Siiilia. Palermo, 1950. .MARINI, G. L. L'arcliileltura harocca in Piemonte.
Mainly concerned with \illas. Important Turin, 1963.
study. A not always reliable, but nevertheless useful
survey, with bibliography. Review by H. .K.
TURIN AND PIEDMONT Millon, in .4rt Bull., xi.vii (1965), 532.
OLIVERO, E. La ctiiesa di S. Francesco di .i.wsi in

BAL DI DI VESME, A. 'L'aftc ncgli stati sabaudi', Atti Torino e le sue opere d'arte. Chieri, 1935.
d. Socield Pieiuoiiiese di archeoloaia e belle arli. 1932. Contains much biographical and documentary
BENEVOLO, L. 'L'architettura della \ alsesia superiore material on many Piedmontese artists.
durante Teta barocca', Palladio. \.s. iii (1953); also 1. 1 \ ERO, E . Miscellanea di arc hit el I lira piemonlese del
Qjiaderiii. nos 22-4 (1957). Settecento. Turin, 1937
Competent survey of buildings in the valleys p ASS A NT I, M. .irchitettura in Piemonte. Turin, 1945.
west of \ arallo. pEDR N I

I
, A . Ville dei secoli XVIIeXVIII in Piemonte.
BERNARD I, M. La Palazziihi di Caaia di Stiipiiiigi. Turin, 1965.
Turin, 1958. Most valuable material, especially the illustra-
BERNARD I, M. // Palazzo Reale di Torino. Turin, tions.
1959- POMNtER, R. Eighteenth-Century Architecture in
BERNARD I, .\i . // SaiTii .Monte dt Varallo. Turin, Piedmont. New York-London, 1967.
i960. .\n industrious, useful study with much new

BERNARD I, M. Tie pahizzi a Torino. Turin, 1963. archival material, especially for Juvarra and
Palazzi Carignano and delTAccademia Filar- \ ittone, and with challenging and contro-
monica and \illa della Regina. .\\\ these versial ideas.
publications with scholarly texts and excellent RESSA, A. 'L'architettura religiosa in Piemonte nei
reproductions. secoli XVII e XVIIT, Torino, xix (1941).
BRAYDA, c, COLI, L., and SESIA, D. 'Ingcgneri e .\ good collection of plans.

architetti del Sei e Settecento in Piemonte', .4lti e ROSSO, L. La pittura e la scultura del '-00 a Torino.
Rassegna teaiica della Societddegltingegnerieanhitetli Turin, 1934.

in Torino. XVI! (1963). T A M B L R N L Le chicsc
I I , . di 7 orino dal rinascimento al
.Appeared also as a separate publication. 731 harocco. 'Turin, 1968.
names w ith brief biographies and chronological .\n excellent critical studv.
wuvre catalogues. Extremely useful.
BIBLOSARTE
TESTORI, Ci. Aioslra del iihinu'nsiiio pieintintcie e DONZELLI, c, and Fii.o, (i. M. / pit ton del Seicento
liimhardi) del Seicenta. Turin, igss- veneto. Florence, 1967.
TESTOR , Ci. Manieristi piemotitesi f lumhurdi del 'boo. 270 artists are discussed in dictionary form.
1
Milan, 1967. FIOCCO, G. La ptttiira leneziana del Seicento e del
Discusses painters from Moncalvo to Fran- Settecento. Verona, 1929 (also Knglish ed., Florence
cesco del Cairo, with emphasis on Cerano Paris).
and Morazzone. I'he basic study, summarizing previous re-

VI ALE, V. 'La pittura in Piemonte nel Settecento', search.
Torino, XX (1942). FOGOLARI, G. 'LWccademia veneziana di pittura e
An excellent survey of eighteenth-century scultura del '700', L'Arte, xvi (1913).

painting in Piedmont. GAR AS, K. Wllegorie und Geschichte in der vene-
VIALE, V. Mustra del haniccii piemontese. Calalogo. zianischcn Malerei des 18. Jahrhunderts', Acta
3 vols. Turin, 1963. Historiae Artiiim, XI (1965), 275 fi.
An indispensable work, with rich biblio- GIOSEFFI, D. Pittura veneziana del Settecento. Ber-
graphies. Collaborators: M. Bernardi, N. gamo, 1956.
Carbonieri, M. Viale Ferrero, A. Griseri, GOERING, M. 'Paolo Veronese und das Settecento',
L. Malle. Jalirh. Preuss. Kunstslg., LXI (1940).
HEINZ, G. 'Studien zu den Quellen der dekorativen
VENICE AND THE VENETO .Malerei im Venezianischen Settecento', Arte Veneta,
x(i956).
ARSLAN, E. 'Studi suUa pittura del primo Settecento LEVEY, M. Painting m Xl III Century Venice. Lon-
veneziane', Critua d'Arte, i (1935-6). don, 1959.
BARBIERI, F., CEVESE, R., and MAGAGNATO, L. .\ general, verv readable introduction. G. M.
Guida di Vuenza. Vicenza, 1956. Pilo's condemning re\iew in .-Irte Veneta,
A model guide-book, with full bibliography. xiii-xiv (1959-60), 250, is not quite justified.
BASSI, E. Ar c hit ett lira del Sei- e Settecento a Venezia. LONGH I
, R . Viatico per cinque secoli di pittura venezi-
Naples, 1962. ana. Florence, 1946.

Standard work, superseding most previous LORENZETTI, G. Le feste e le ma sc here veneziane.
studies of Venetian Baroque architecture. Venice, 1937.

BETTAGNO, A. Disegni venett del settecento del In Catalogue. .\n important contribution.
Fundazione G. Cini. Venice, 1963. LORENZETTI, G. Venezui e il Slid esluano. Rome,
The latest of a series of books concerning 1956.
Venetian drawings; the previous volumes by I'he best Venetian guide-book.
M. Muraro, K. T. Parker, M. Mrozinska, and MARTINI, E. La pittura veneziana del Settecento.
A. Morassi discuss the drawings in the Janos Venice, 1964.
Scholz and Paul Wallraf Collections and in A provocative, scholarly work, written by a
Oxford and Poland. restorer who has an unmatched knowledge of
BLUNT, A., and CROFT-MURRAY, E. I'eiietlil?! DlclW- Venetian painting.
ings of the XVII and XVIII Centuries at Windsor . . . MAZZOTTI, G., and others. Le ville venete. Treviso,
Castle. London, 1957. 1954. Second ed., 1967.
BRUNELLI,B., and CALLEG AR A Ville del Brentd e I , . .About a thousand villas are listed and de-
degli Euganei. Milan, 1931. scribed ; full bibliographies.
A splendid publication. NOVELLO, A. ALPAGO. Ville dellu provincia di Bel-
DAMERINI, G. / pittori venezuiiii del 'boo e 'joo. luno. Venice, 1968.
Bologna, 1928. PALLUCCHINI, R. Gil incisori veneti del Settecento.
Unsatisfactory; see review N. Pevsner, Got- Venice, 1941.

ttnger Gel. Anzeigen, 1929. PALLUCCHINI, R. La pittura veneziana del 'yoo.
DELOGU, G. Pittori veneti minori del Settecento. Bologna, 1951-2.
Venice, 1930. Important publication, based on courses ot
Still indispensable. The content of this work was incor-
lectures.
DONZELL I
, c / pittori veneti del Settecento. Florence,
. porated into the next item,
1957- p A L L l: c C H N I
I
, R . L(/ pittura veneziaiui del Settecento.
With (Pinre catalogues and full bibliographies. Venice, i960.
BIBLOSARTE
593
Standard work. Must be consulted tor all TEMANZA, T. Zihatdon. Ed. N. Ivanofl. \ enice-
painters of the Venetian eighteenth century. Rome, 1963.
Bibliographies only up to 1457 8. -Many of I'emanza's notes are a primary source,
La pittura del Scueuto a Veiu-zia. Catalogo. Venice, particularh for minor Baroque artists in
1959- \ enice.
Authors: P. Zampetti, G. .Mariacher, G. M. \ AI.CANOVER, K. Alostra di pniiire del Sellea-nio iiel
Pilo. The first exhibition de\ oted to the Vene- Belliinese. Venice, 1954.
tian seventeenth century. Extensive catalogue With bibliography.
with full bibliography. The contro\ersial VALSECCiii, M. I enezui joo. Bergamo, 1969.
nature of some of the pictures shown is reflected .A Gallery Lorenzeiti Exhibition of eighteenth-
in the reviews ; see, abo\ e all, B. Nicolson, Burl. century Venetian painting in Bergamo private
Mag., Cl (1959), 286, and .\. Morassi, Arle collections,
Veneta, xiii-xiv (1959 60), 269. voss, H. 'Studien zur venezianischen Vedutenmalerci
PRECERUTTI GARBERI, M. Affresitii selleieiilcsctti des 18. Jahrhunderts', /?c/)./ Kunslir.. XLVii (1926).
delle villi' veiiele. Milan, 1968. English ed., London, WATSON, F. J. B. Eighteenth Century Venue, An
1971. Exhibition, London, 1951.
The first coherent study of this important See R. Pailucchini, .irte I'enela, \ (1951).
subject. Contains many unpublished fresco ZAMPETTI, P. / vedutisti veneziani del Setteeento.
cycles. Venice, 1967.
RIZZI, A. Sturia dell'arte in Fniili. II Scicenlo. Ldine, Critical catalogue of the extensive \ enice
1969. Exhibition, with over 30 pp. of bibliography.
R I ZZ I , A Si una
. dell' uric in Friiili. II S:llcienlii. Ldine, See also R. Pailucchini, in Atti dell'Isiiiuto
1967. venetu di seienze. lettere ed arti, Classe di scienze

.\lthough the names ot artists discu.ssed in morali, lettere ed arti, c;xx\ (1966 7), 397 f\.;
these two volumes are predominantly \ ene- G. .\1. Pilo, in .-irte Veneta. XXI (1967), 2^)9 ft.;
tian, they contain much unknown or scarcely R. Longhi, in Paruuone, xix (1968), no. 217,
known material. 37 fl-
RlZZi, A. Mosira dclhi pilliira veneta del Selleeenlo in ZAMPETTI, p. Dal Run a I Tiepolo. I pit ton di Jigura
Friuli. Ldine, 1966. del Settecento a I enezui. \ enice, 1969.
RIZZI, A. .Mosira della pill lira venela del SeiceiiUi in This Exhibition did not have an enthusiastic
Friuli. Ldine, 1968. reception, but was illuminating for such artists
Two excellent catalogues; both exhibitions as Bencovich, Grassi, Diziani, and I'ontebasso.
contained many unpublished paintings b\ such Ev en for the major masters the contribution of
artists as Bombelli, Carneo, Celesti, Cosattini, the Exhibition was considerable.
Maftei, Mazzoni, Fontebasso, Grassi, et al.
ROBINSON, F. w . 'Rembrandt's Influence in Eigh-

teenth Century Venice', Nederlands Kunslliislori.uti IV. ARTISTS
Jaarboek, XVlll (1967), 167 ff.
So far the fullest investigation of this important ALBA N

question. Bodmer, H., in Pantheon, win (193^).
ROSAND, D. 'The Crisis of the Venetian Renaissance Frescoes in the Palazzo \ erospi.
Tradition', L'Arte, nos. 1 1-12 (1Q70), 5 f^. Boschetto, A., in Proporzioni, 11 ti948).
A brilliant study. Lnreliable.
RUGGIERI, u. Disegiii piazzattesehi. Disegni inedili di Harris, .A. S., in .U(/.s7(T Drawings. \ii (i9()9), 152 t1.
racialle hergannisilie. Bergamo, 1968. Publications of chalk drawings by Albani.

Publishes a large group of drawings by Giulia \ an Schaack, E. 'Ln'opera tarda di F. A.', Arte Antua
Lama; also drawings by such minor artists as e .Woderna. no. 21 (1963), 49.
Francesco Migliori. See also idem. \\n Lnpublished Letter by
SEMENZATO, G. La sculttira veneta del Sen en to e del V..\.\ .-in Bull.. LI (1969), 72.
Settecento. Venice, 1966.
The first systematic attempt to master the terra AL I I KR
ineognila of \enetian Baroque sculpture: bio- Chev alley, G. L n avvocato architettn il conte Benedetto
graphies and (euvre catalogues. .tl/ieri. lurin, 1916.
BIBLOSARTE
594 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Rosci, M. 'Benedetto Alfieri e I'archilettura del '700 BACiLIONE, G.

in Piemonte', Palladio, N.s. iii (1953). Guglielmi, C, in Boll. d'.4rte, xxxix (1954).
Longhi, R., in Paragone, xiv (1963), no. 163.
ALCARDI Pepper, S., in Paragone, xviii (1967), no. 211.
Monographs by M. Heimbiirger, J. Montagu,
and O. Raggio are in an advanced state of BALESTRA
preparation. Battisti, Y.., in Commenlari, v (1954).
Cellini, A. Nava. 'L'Algardi restauratore a Villa With (euvre catalogue.
Pamphilj', Paragotw, xiv (1963), no. 161.
Cellini, A. Nava. 'Note per I'Algardi, il Bernini, e il BAMBOCCIO, IL see LAER, P. VAN
Reni', Paragone, xvm (1967), no. 207, 35 fl.
The 'Pallavicini Crucifix' as a work by .\lgardi. BARBIERI, <;. F, See OUERCINO

Heimbiirger, M., in Paragnnc, xx (1969), no. 237.
Heimbiirger, M., in Sludi Roniani (1970), 216 fF. BASCHEMS
Johnston, C. 'Drawings for Algardi's "Cristo.\ ivo"', .\ngelini, L. / Baschenis. Bergamo, 1943; 2nd ed.,
5ttr/. .'Wa^.,cx (1968), 458 flf. 1946.
Montagu, J. 'Alessandro Algardi's Altar of S. Nicola £ran5/oSa.«t/;f/«i(/6o7-/ 677). Exhibition Catalogue,
da Tolentino and Some Related Models', Burl. Mag., Galleria Lorenzelli. Bergamo, 1965.
cxii (1970), 282 ff. Geddo, A. Evansto Basihenis. Milan, 1965.
Munoz, .\.,in.^//; e mcnwrie della R. Accademia di S. A brief monograph.
Luca. Annuario 1912. See also milan and lombardy, longhi a. o.,
Munoz, .A. 'Alessandro Algardi ritrattista', Dedalo, Mostra, 1953, under heading cities and pro-
1(1920). vinces.
PoUak, O. 'Alessandro .Algardi als .\rchitekt', Zemchr.
f. Gesch. der Archilektur, iv (1910-11). BATON!
Posse, H., mjahrb. Preuss. Kunstslg., .xxv (1905). Barsali, I. B. Mosira di Pompeo Batoni. Catalogo.
Still the basic article on the sculptor. Lucca, 1967.
Raggio, O. 'Alessandro .\lgardi e gli stucchi di Villa An excellent catalogue with contributions bv
Pamphili', Paragone (1971), no. 251, 3 if. A. M. Clark, A. Marabottini, F. Haskell, I.
Vitzthum, W. 'Disegni di Alessandro Algardi', Boll. Belli Barsali, and a dossier of 65 Batoni letters.
d'.4rte, XLviii (1963). A. Busiri Vici, Le 'donne' del Batoni, Lucca,
1968, contains reprints of all the reviews of the
AMIGONI Exhibition.
Griseri, A., in Paragone, XI (i960), no. 123. Borelli, E. Pompeo Batoni {i/o8-ij8y). Lucca, 1967.
Pilo,G. M., in Arte Veneta, Xli (1958). A brief but excellent study.
Voss, H., mjahrh. Preuss. Kunstslg., xxxix (19 18). Chyurlia, R., in Emporium, cxvii (1953).
The pioneering study. Clark, A. M., in Burl. .Mag., Ci (1959).
Cochetti, L., in Commentari, ill (1952).
ARIGUCCI Emmerling, E. Pompeo Batoni. Darmstadt, 1932.
Battaglia, R. 'Luigi Arigucci architetto camerale di
Urbano VIII', Palladia, vii (1942). BAZZANI
IvanoflF, N. Aiostra del Bazzani in Aiantova. Bergamo,
ASSERETO 1950.
Castelnovi, G. F., in Emporium, cxx (1954). Full documentation, aitire catalogue and
Grassi, L., in Paragone, III (1952), no. 31. bibliography.
Longhi, R., in Dedalo, vii (1926-7). Tellin, C. Perina. 'Precisazioni sul Bazzani', Arte
The basic study. Lombardo, xiii, ii (1968), 103 ff.
BACiccio see gaulli bealmont

Griseri, .A., in Scritti van, 11 (1951) (a cura della
BADALOCCHIO Facolta di Magistero di Torino).
Salerno, L., in Commenlari, ix (1958). Mainly on the early work.
Zucchi, M. La vita e le opere di CI. Fr. Beaumont.
Turin, 1921.
BIBLOSARTE
595
BELLOTTO Bernini, G. L. Fontana di Trevi. Comniedia inedita.

Bernardo Bellnltn genanni CanalelKi in Dresden iind Introduction and commentary by C. d'Onofrio.
Warachau. Exhibition Catalogue. Dresden, 1963. Rome, 1963.
Review J. Bialostocki, Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), Review bv I. Lavin, .in Bull., Xi.vi (1964),
289 S. Kozakiewicz, Bulletin du Musee
t". ;
568 ff.
National de Varsovte, vi (1965), 17 ff. Brauer, H., and Wittkower, R. Die Zeuhmmgen des
See also the Catalogue of the Bellotto Gianlorenzo Bernini. Berlin, 1931.
Exhibition in Vienna in 1965, with Introduc- Chantelou, M. de. Journal du voyage du Cat. Bernin
tion by V. Oberhammer. en France (ed. Lalanne). Paris, 1885.
Europdische I edulen des Bernardo Bellotto. Exhibition. A contemporary diary, invaluable as a source.
Villa Hijgel, Essen, 1966. D'Onofrio, C, in Palatino, x (1966), 201.
62 paintings and (15 drawings; bibliography of The author makes it probable that Baldinucci's
previous Bellotto exhibitions. monograph of Bernini was dependent on that
Fritzsche, H. .\. Bernardo Bellotto. Burg, 1936. written by Domenico Bernini.
Kozakiewicz, S. Bernardo Bellotto. 2 vols. 1969. D'Onofrio, C. Roma vista da Roma. Rome, 1967.
First vol. biographical, second ceinre cata- Three parts: (i) .Vlaffeo Barberini (later Urban
logue. VIII), (ii) Scipione Borghese, (iii) the 'Barcac-
Lorentz, S., and Kozakiewicz, S. Aiostra di Bernardo cia' in Piazza di Spagna. The book is almost
Bellollo i/20~8o. Opere provenienti della Polonia. exclusively concerned with Bernini. The
Exhibition, Venice, 1955. author's attempt to ascribe a number ol works
An almost identical exhibition (with Cata- of Gianlorenzo's youth to Pietro Bernini will
logue in English) at the Walker Art Gallery, scarcely find wide acceptance, but this book
Liverpool, 1957. contains many suggestive ideas.
Wallis, M. Canaletto, the Painter oj Warsair. Warsaw, Fjnem, H. von. 'Bemerkungen zur Cathedra Petri',
1954- Sachruhten dcr Wissenscliajten in Gbttmgen. Philol.-

A monograph on Bellotto's Polish views. Hist. Klasse (1955), no. 4.
Fagiolo deir.-\rco, Maurizio and .Marcello. Bernini,
BENCOVICH Una introduzione al gran teatro del haroeco. Rome,
Goering, M., in Criiiea d'.4rle, II (1937). 1967.
Pallucchini, R., in Riv. d'Arte, xiv (1932), with aeuvre An almost complete, intelligent survey of
catalogue, and Critica d'Arte, i (1935-6), in (1938). Bernini's entire activity, based on a remarkable
knowledge of the literature; bibliography of
BENEFIAL almost 700 items.
Falcidia, G., in Boll. d'Arte, xlviii (1963). Fraschetti, S. // Bernini .Milan, 1900. .
Standard work.
BERNINI, G. L. Gonzalez-Palacios, .•\. 'Bernini as a Furniture De-
The Bernini literature is steadily growing. To signer', Burl. .Mag., CXII (1970), 719 ff.
supplement the list below the following may be Grassi, L. Bernini pittore. Rome, 1945.
summarily mentioned 1957 0. P. Berendson, ; : See also Burl. .Wag., cvi (1964).
Marsyas, viii; R. Enggass, Art Bull.; E. Harris, .\. S., in Master Drawings, \I (1968), 383 ff.
Sestieri, Commentari. 1958: E. Battisti, ihid.\ Important addition to Bernini's corpus of
C. Gould, .Art Qiiarterly. 1959: F. Zeri, Para- drawings.
gone, no. 115. i960: A. J. Braham, Burl. Mag. Hibbard, H., and Jaffe, I. 'Bernini's Barcaccia', Burl.
1961 : M. V. Brugnoliand I. YMi^-irte Antica Mag., CVI (1964).

Moderna. 1962: P. della Pergola, Capitolium,
e .An exemplary iconographical study. - See also
G. Matzulevitsch, Boll. d'Arte.
no. II. 1963: Hibbard, in Boll. d'Arte, xliii (1958) and
Baldinucci, F. Vita diGian Lorenzo Bernini. Florence, .XLVi (1961).
1682. Modern ed. by Sergio Samek Ludovici, Milan, Hibbard, H. Bernini. Harmondsworth, 1965.
1948. .\n excellent introduction to B., with learned
Main source for Bernini's life. notes.
Bernini, D. Vila del Car. Gio. Lorenzo Bernini. Rome, Kauffmann, H. Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini. Die jigiir-
1713- liilien Kompositionen. Berlin, 1970.

Written by the artist's son Domenico. The most important Bernini publication ol
recent vears; tendency towards iconographic
BIBLOSARTE
59^ • BIBLIOGRAPHY
in\csiigations. The author's earlier Bernini Sacchetti Sasseiti, .\. 'Bernini a Rieti', .-irchiii. xxii
papers have been incorporated. (1955)-
Kitao, T. K. 'Bernini's Church I'avades: Method ot Documents.
Design and the Ctintiiipp<isli\Joiinni/ Sik. Archilecl. Schiaxo, .\. 'II \iaggio del Bernini in P'rancia nei
Hisliiritins, \xiv (icjds), 263 ft. documenti deir.\rchi\io Segreto Vaticano', Boll, del
Kruft, H.-W., and Larsson, I.. O. 'Entwiirfe Berninis centra di sliidi per la si ana dell' archilellura, no. 10
fiir die Engelsbriicke in Rom', Miiiichner Jahrh. dcr (i95f)).
bildendeii Kii/isl, xvii (u)66), 145 ff. Schlegel, L., in Jahrhuch der Berliner .VUiseen, ix
Kruft,H.-W.,andl.arsson, L.O. 'Portratzeichnungen (1907), 274 ft.
Berninis und seiner Werkstatt', Panlhenn, xxvi Publication of the small marble Piitio with
(igfxS), 130 ft. Ddlphin, a fine work of Bernini's early period,
Kuhn, R. Die Enlslehmiii des Bernini' sclieii Heiliacn- purchased by the Berlin .Museum.
hildcs. Dissertation. Munich, ic)66. Sommer, F. H., in .Art Qjiarterly, xxxiii (1970), 30 ft.
.\mbitious but problematic attempt to link Suggestion of influence of a Jesuit emblem

Bernini's religious imagery closely to Francis book, H. Hugo's Put desideria (1624), on
ot Sales' devotion. Bernini's Lodo\ica .-Mbertoni.
Kuhn, R., in Alte und Moderne Kunst, xii, 94 (1967), Thelen, H. Ziir Entstehungsgcschichte der Hachultar-
2 ft. .-irchiteklur van St Peter m Ram. Berlin, 1967.
Attempted interpretation of the Cornaro Ihelen's and Lavin's works (see abo\ e) supple-
Chapel. ment each other to a certain extent. Review of
Kuhn, R. 'Gian Lorenzo Bernini und Ignatius von both works bv M. S. Weil, Burl. Man., CXili
Loyola', in Argo. Festschrift fiir Kurt Badt, Cologne, (1970,98 ft.'
1970, 324 ft. Weil, M. S., in Journal of the Halters Art Gallery,
Laurain-Portemer. 'Mazarin et le Bernin a propos du XX1X-XX.X (1966-7), 7 ft.
"Temps qui decou\re la verite" ", G.d.B.A., Lxxiv Identification of a bronze statuette corres-
(1969), 185. ponding to that over the ciborium of the altar
Important new documents. of the Cappella del Sacramento in St Peter's
Lavin, I. 'Five New Youthful Sculptures by G.L.B. and documents for Bernini's work in the
and a Revised Chronology of his Early Works', Art chapel.
5;///., L (1968), 223 ft. Winner, M. 'Berninis Verita', Festschrift H. Kaitff-
Revolutionary discoveries and controversial niann. .Minuscula Discipuliiruni. Berlin, 1968, 393 ft.
ideas about chronology. An important iconological study.

Lavin, I. Bernini and the Crossing of Saint Peter's. Wittkower, R. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, 7 he Sculptor of
New York, 1968. the Roman Baroque. London, 1955. Second reworked
A full discussion of Bernini's decoration and and enlarged ed., 1966.
the stages of its development. With bibliography and critical cenvre cata-
Martinelli, V. Bernini. Milan, 1953. logue. Second ed., review H. Kauftmann, in
A brief biography. Zeitschr. f Kunstg.. x.xx (1967), 326 ft.
Martinelli, V. / ritratti di pontefici di G. L. Bernini. Wittkower, R., in Burl. Alag., C\\ (1969), 60 ft.
Rome, 1956; see also Studi Romani, ill (1955) and Publication of the first version of the bust of
Ciiininenlari, vii (195ft), ^ ('959)i ^^'l (1962). Urban VIII known from the version formerly
Montagu, J. 'Two Small Bronzes from the Studio of in the coll. of Principe Enrico Barberini.
Bernini', Burl. Mag., cix (1967), 566 ft. Zamboni, S. Da Bernini a Pinelli. Bologna, 1968.
Petersson, R. T. The .4rt af Ecstasy. Teresa, Bernini, Publication of the modello for the Four Rivers
and Crashaw. New York, 1970. Fountain in the Accademia di Belle Arti,
An unusual book in which mystical experience, Bologna.
Baroque art, and poetry are sensitively inter-
preted. BERNINI, p.
Pochat, G. 'liber Berninis "Concetto" zum Vier- Rotondi, P., in Rii: del R. 1st., \ (1935-6).
stromebrunnen auf Piazza Navona', Konsthistorisk Martinelli, V., in Conimentan, iv (1953).
Tidskriji, xxxv (1966), 72 ft.
Interpretation stimulated by H. Kauftmann's. BERRKTTINI .SWCORTONA
BIBLOSARTE
597
BIANCO, B. Longhi, R., in I.' Arte, Wll (1914).

Protumo Miiller, L. 'Baitolomco Bianco architctto c The fundamental study.
il barocco geno\ese', Bulleiiiiui del Ceiiiro di Stiult Wethey, H. E., in Burl. Mag., cvi (1964).
per la Sloria dell' Architetluru, no. 22 (u)68). Reconstruction of early Borgianni.
The first monograph ot Genoa's greatest
Baroque architect. BORROMINI
Argan, G. C. Bnrroiniiii. \ erona, 1952.
B B E N .A
I I
Concist and forcible in style.
Madamo\vsk\ F. Die Familie Bihienu in Wieii. Leheii
, Benevolo, L. Ml tema geometrico di S. ho della
und PVerk fiir das Theater. Vienna, 1962. Sapienza', Qiiaderni, no. 3 (1953).
.\ great treasury ot documents and recorded Bernardi Ferrero, D. de. L' opera di T.B. iiella lettera-
drawings. tiira artistua e nelle ineisiotii dell'etd hannea. Turin,
Mayor, .-V. H. The Bihieiia Family. New ôri^, 1945. 1967.
The best survey, with further references. Bianconi, P. Franeeseu Bnrnimini. Vita, opere, for-
Ricci, C. / Bihieiia. Milan, 191 5. tiiiia. Bellinzona, 1967.
.A relatively brief, but well informed intro-
B 1 NAGo duction to Borromini.
Mezzanotte, G., in L'Arte, i.x (i()6i). Borromini. Opus .inhiteetonniiin. Republication of
the 1725 ed. with introduction and notes by P.
BOETTO, (i. Portoghesi. Rome, 1964.
Carboneri, N., and Griseri, .\. Cnneiiale Baelln. Fos- Review H. Millon, Burl. .V/a?., cviii (1966),
sano (Cassa di Risparmio), 1966. 433. See also the facsimile reprint by the
.An excellent study of this little known archi- Gregg Press.
tect and engra\er, with documents and (eiivre Biirromiiii, Stiidi siil B. .4tti del Cuineiiiiii pninwsso
catalogues. dair Aecademia Nazioiiale di San Liiea. Rnnie, ig6/.
Rome, 1970.
BOLGI Only the first vol. with 20 contributions has
Martinelli, V., in Comtnenlari, x (1959). so tar appeared.
With aeinre catalogue. - See also A. N. Cellini, Brizio, .\. M. 'Nel terzo centenario della morte di
in Paratâne, Mil (i9(>2), no. 147. F. B.\ Aecademia Naz. dei Fiiuei. Celehrazumi
Lincee. Rome, 1968.
BOMBELl.l Of interest tor Borromini's Milanese years.
Rizzi, .\. Alaslra del Bmubelli e del Canieo. Ldine, Bruschi, A. 'II B. nelle stanze di S. I'ilippo alia \ alli-
1964. cella'. Palatum, xii, i (1968), 13.

Important exhibition catalogue. Introduction Fagiolo dell'Arco, \\. 'Francesco Borromini', Storia
by R. Pallucchini. dell'Arte, 1-2 (1969), 200.
Critical survey of Borromini literature of 1967,
BONAVI A 1968.
Constable, \V. G., in Art Quarterly, XXII (1959). Hempel, E. Franeeseu Bornimini. \ ienna, 1924.
With ceiivre catalogue. Standard work, listing full\ older literature.
Marconi, P. Fa Roma del Bnrroinini.Rome, 1968.
BONAZZA .A fine survey with man\ revealing illustra-
Semenzato, C. Antdiiw Bmiazza ( i6g^-i/6j). Padua, tions.
1957- See also .Marconi's paper in Palatnm, \ (1966).

Qîivre catalogue, documents, bibliography. Montalto, L. 'II drammatico licenziamento di I'ran-
cesco B. dalla fabbriat di S. .Agnese in Agone',
BONONI Palladia, \u\ (1958).
Emiliani, A. Carlo Boiioiii. Ferrara, 1962. Important: 28 pp. documents.

Schleier, E. 'C.B. and .\ntonio Gherardi', .Master Ost, H. 'Borrominis romische Lniversitiitskirche S.
Drairinns, vii (1969), 4i.Vff. ho', Zeitsehr.j. Kiinsti;., \\\ (1967), loi fl.
A serious attempt at an iconological inter-
BORGIANM pretation.
Bottari, S., in Commentari, VI (1955).

Borgianni's first signed and dated work.
BIBLOSARTE
Piazzo, M. del. Riiiigiuiiili Jidnoniinuiiii. Rome, i()()8. (All' A

C.aialoguc ot the iy<)7 ICxhibition of Boiro- Cellini, .A. N., in Paragone, VII (1956).
niini documents by the Director ot the Roman I'leming, J., in Burl. Mag., l.xxxix (1947).
State Archise. Basic tor many aspects ot Wittkower, R., in .Melrofîdilan Museum nf .4rl
Borromini's lite and work. Bulletin, April, 1959.
Portogihesi, P., in Qiicii/enii, no. 4 (1953), no. 6 (11)54), Bust of Alexander VII.
no. II (u)55), nos. 23 c) (ig^S); Piillin/ia, iv (11)54);
5f*//. (/'./;/(•, .\L (i()55). c: A ci N A c: c i
I'ortoghesi, P. Bdrnnniiii itclln nilliiici ciimpti. Rome, Buscaroli, R. II piltarc Cuidn Cagnacci. Forli, 1962.
i()(i4- lo be consulted tor earlier literature.
.\ collection ot earlier papers enlarged. Appen- Pasini, P. 'Note ed aggiunte a G.C.\ Boll, d' .hie.
dices containing B.'s will, the inventory ot Ill (1967), 78 ft.
his house, el cil. Zufta, M., in Arte .Inlica e .Moderna, \ 1, no. 24 ( 1 963).
Portoghesi, P. The Rome oj Bornimiiii. New York, Documents.
u)f)S. Translation by B. L. La Penta tiom the Italian
ed., Rome, lyhy. CAIRO, !. del
Supplements the author's monograph ot i9()4. Brunori, M. 'Considerazioni sul prime tempo di
Stress on an interpretation ot B.'s architec- Francesco del Cairo', Boll. d'Arie, xi.ix (1964), 236 ft.
tural language, supported by splendid photo- See also Brunori, in Pantheon, xxv (19^)7), 105 ft.
graphs. Vlatalon, S., in Rn: d'Arte, XII (1930).

Rutfiniere du Pre}, P. de la. 'Solomonic Symbolism Testori, G., in Paragone, III (1952), no. 27.
in Borromini's Church of S. Ivo delta Sapienza',
Zeituhr. f. Kiiiisla., xxxi (1968), 216 ft. CALICJARI
Interesting ideas that carry conviction. Nicodemi, G. / Caligari scullori hresciani del Sette-
Sedlmayr, H. Die Archileklw Borrinniins. Berlin, ceiilii. Brescia, 1924.

1930; Munich, 1939.
A challenging but often controversial work. CAMASSEI
Tafuri, M. 'Inediti borrominiani', Palatino, \\ (19(^)7), Domenico Cortese, G. di. 'La vicenda artistica di
255 ft. See also idem, ihii/., x (1966). A.C, Comineiilari, xix (1968), 281 ft.
Thelen, H. /o disegni di Francesco B. dalle collezumi Harris, A. S. 'A Contribution to Andrea Camassei
dell' Albertina di Vienna. Catalogue. Rome, 1958-9. Studies', .Art Bull., Lii (1970), 49-70.
Thelen, H. Fraiicesca Boirumini. Die Handzeich- The first biographical survey and critical cata-
niiiigen. i. Ahteilinii!.: Zeitraiim von 1620- J2. Graz, logue of this rather neglected artist.
1967.
First volume of the corpus of Borromini draw- CAMETTl
ings. Basis for all further study of B. But Schlegel, L., in Jahrh. Preuss. Kunstslg., n.f. \(i963).
although the author is guided by the most Fully documented ceuvre catalogue.
meticulous scholarship, he also opens up many
controx ersial problems. Reviews by H. Brauer, CANALETTO
Zeilsclir. /'. Kunslg., x.xxii (1969), 74 ft. and Chiappini, I. 'Gli atti di nascita e di morte del Cana-
A. Blunt, in Ktinstchronik (March 1969), 87 ft. letto'. Boll, dei .Musei civici veneziani, xiii (1968),
no. 2, 2 f.
BRACCI Constable, W. G. Giovanni Antonio Canal, i6gj~i/68.

Domarus, K. \on. Pieiro Bracci. Beitrdge zw riimischen New York, 1962. French ed., Toronto, 1964-5.
Kiinslsiescliuiile des XI III. Juhrhiindevls. Stras- The definitive monograph.
bourg, 191 5. Finberg, H. F. 'Canaletto in England', IValpole
\ \ ery important contribution, generally o\ er- Society, ix (1920-1).
lookcd. The basic study.
Gradara, C. Pieiro Bracci sciillorc ronniiio f/oo-i//j. Gioseflfi, D. Canaletto. II quaderno delle gallerie vene-
Milan Rome, 1920. ziane e Fimpiego della camera otiica. Trieste, 1959.
Based on Bracci's own diary. An ingenious study.
Hadeln, D. \on. Die Zeichnungen von .-/. Canal, ge-
BRUSTOLON nannt Canaletto. Vienna, 1930.
Biasuz, G., and Lacchin, \. .-indrea Briislolim. Venice,
1928.
BIBLOSARTE
599
Moschini, \'. Canalciin. Milan, 1454 (also London, .\rgan, C. G. 'II "realismo" nella poetica del Cara-
1955)- vaggio', Seritti di storui dell'arte m onore di L. Ven-
With chronological and bibliography. tabic liiri. Rome, 195ft.
Parker, K. T. The Drawings of Antonio Canaletio .^ronbcrg Lavin, .M. 'Caravaggio Documents trom
. at Windsor Castle. London, 1948.
. .
the Barberini .-Krchive', Burl. Mag. cix (19^7), 470 I.
Parker, K. T., and Shaw, J. Byam. Canalello e Giiardi. 1603 as date of the Sacrifice of Isaac (Uffizi).
Catalogue. Venice, 1962. .\rslan, E., in Arte .-tntua e .Moderna, 11 (1959).
Fitty C.analetto drawings from Windsor Castle .An important, but controversial paper.
and Guardi drawings from various collections, Bauch, K. 'Zur Ikonographie von Caravaggios IViih-
exhibited at the Fondazione Cini. See T. werken', Kunstgeseliuiillithe Studienjur Hans Kauff-
Pignatti, in Master Drawings, (1Q63). I inanu. Berlin, 195^).
Pignatti, T. // quaderna di disei>ni del Canaletio alle Baumgart, F. Caravaggio; Kunst and Hirkluhkeit.
gallerie di Venezia. Milan, 1958. BcKlin, 1955.
A text volume and a volume with 74 pp. ot Berne-Joflroy, .\. Ia' dossier Caravage. Paris, 1959.
facsimile reproductions of the sketchbook. Critical survey ot the historiography of Cara-
Watson, F. J. B. Canaletio. London, 1949. vaggio research.
Borea, E. Caravaggio e caravaggeschi nelle gallerie di
C.^NT.'VRIM Firenze. Catalogue. Florence, 1970.
.•\rcangeli, ¥ ., in Paraône^ i (1950), no. 7. The scholarly catalogue contains a number
Emiliani, K., in Arle .•inlica c Moderna, 11, no. 8 of pictures never before illustrated.
(1959)- Bousquet, J. 'Documents incdits sur C. : la date des
Catalogue ot Cantarini's drawings and etch- tableaux de la chapelle Saint-Matthieu . .
.", Revue
ings. des Arts (1953).
Lavallee, M., in A trovers Fart it alien dii XV au Brugnoli, .M. V ., in Boll, d' .Arte, Liii (1968), 11 f1.
XX" sii'ile. Paris, 1949. Attribution to Caravaggio of a St Francis in

S. Pietro at Carpineto Romana; the painting
CANUTi had only been known through a copy.
Feinblatt, E., in .-irt Qitarterly, XV (1952), and ihid... Enggass, R. 'L'.Amore Giustiniani del C, Palatino,
XXIV (1961). XI (1967), 13.
Also idem, in Master Drawings, vil (1969), 164, The Berlin painting is discussed in terms of
and T. Poensgen, ihid., v (1967), 165 fi. an allegory celebrating the attainments of the
patron, Vincenzo Giustiniani.
c.AR.ACCiOLO (Battistello) Fagiolo dellWrco, .M. 'Lc "Opere di misericordia":
Carita, R., in Parasone, II {1951), no. 19. Contributo alia poetica del Caravaggio', L'Arte, no. 1
Causa, R., in Paraaone, I (1950), no. 9. (1968), 37 ft-
Longhi, R., in L'Arte, xviii (1915)- .\n ambitious and, it seems, on the whole
Fundamental study. successful attempt to clarify the iconography
Voss, H., mjahrh. Preuss. Kitnslsla., ill- (1927)- of C.'s Seven Works of Mercy.
Important. Friedlaender, W. Caravaggio Studies. Princeton,
1955-
CARAVAGGIO Graeve, M. .\. 'The Stone of Unction in Caravaggio's
For a survey ot the vast literature up to 1955: Painting for the Chiesa Nuova', .Art Bull., XL (1958).
F. Baumgart, Zeilschr. f. Kunstti., xvii {1954) An important iconographical study.
and A. M. Raggi, .irte Lombarda, (1955)' 1 Hess, J. '.Modelle e modelli del Caravaggio', Com-
177. In addition articles by L. Salerno, C. ment an, \ (1954).
Maltese, and F. Battisti in Commentari, \\ I links, R. Michelangelo .Vierisi da Caravaggio. Lon-
(1955), La Revue des .Arts, v (1955),

Rene in don, 1953.
J.
R. Jullian in Arte Lomharda, 11 (1955)1 and W ith further literature.
D. Macrae, Burl. Mag., cvi (1964), 412. For Jullian, R. Caravage. Lyon Paris, 1961.
a complete survey of Caravaggio studies from .A well considereil monograph, based on lull
1 95 1 to 1970 (139 items), see .M. Fagiolo knowledge ot the literature.
del!' Area and M. .Marini, in L'.-irte, .\os. 11- Longhi, R., and others. .Mostra del Caravaggio e dei
12 (1970), 117 f\.

caravaggeschi. .Milan, 1951.
With lull bibliography, 1603 1951.
BIBLOSARTE
()00 •
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Longlii, R. 'Lltimi siudi siil CAiiaxaggio c la sua Rizzi, A. Disegiii, iinisioiii e hozzelti del (Carlevarijs.
cerchia', Pniporzidiii, i (1943). Catalogo della .Mostra. Ldine, 1964.
Very important for the Cara\aggeschi. Discussion ot 122 items. Bibliography.
Longhi, R. II Ciiriivuiiuio. Milan, 1952. Reprint with Rizzi, A. /,//((/ Carlevaris. \ enice, 1967.
slight changes, Rome Dresden, igftS.
See D. Mahon, Burl. Mii»., \c\ (1Q53). CARLOM
Sec also Longhi's contributions in Paniaone, Brigozzi Brini, .\., and Garas, K. Carlo Innocenzu
X (ic>5()), no. 111; \i (ig6o), no. 121; xiv Carloiii. .Milan, 1967.
(1963), no. 165. Kxhaustive monograph.

Mahon, D. 'A Late Caravaggio Rediscovered', Burl. .Marangoni, .M. / Carloiii. Florence, 1925.
Mag., xcviii (1956). The only comprehensive work on this dynasty
Moir, A. J'he Italian Followers ofCaravasaio. 2 \ols. of artists.
Cambridge, .Mass., 1966.

An extensi\e compilation without the pre- CARNF.O
tence at making an original contribution, but Geiger, B. Antonio Cameo. Ldine, 1940.
not without pitfalls, see reviews by .A. Pao- Rizzi, A. Antonio Cameo. Ldine, i960.
lucci, Piiragiine, xviii (1967), no. 213, 67-78; Preface by L. Coletti. With ueiivre catalogue,
\V. Bissell, in Renaissaine Quarterly, xxi, 3 completely illustrated. See also bombelli.
(1968), 325 ft.; B. Nicolson, in Burl. Mas., cx
(1968), 635 ft.; C. Dempsey, in Art Bull., Lli CARPI OM
{1970), 324 ft. Pilo, G. M. Carpioni. Venice, 1962.
Moir, A. 'Did Caravaggio Draw?", Art Quarterly, CEuvre catalogue and bibliography.
xxxiii (1969), 354.
Much support tor the obvious, namely that CARRACCI
C. did draw. Anderson, J. 'The "Sala di Agostino Carracci" in
Rottgen, H. 'Giuseppe Cesari, die Contarelli-Kapelle the Palazzo del Giardino", Art Bull., Lii (1970).
und Caravaggio', Zeitsehr. /'. Kuiists., xx\ii (1964), Bacou, R. Dessins des Carraclies. Louvre Exhibition.
201 ff". Paris, 1 96 1.
Mainly concerned with the Cavaliere d'Ar- \\ ith an important essay by D. Mahon on the
pino's part in decorating the chapel. late .Annibale.
Rottgen, H. 'Die Steliung dcr Contarelli-Kapelle in Bellori, G. P. The Lives of Annihale and .igostino C.
Cs. Werk", Zeitsehr. J'.

Kunst«., xx\iii (1965), 47 ft. (transl. C. Enggass). Lniversity Park and London,
Publication of documents revolutionary for 1968.
the chronology of C.'s work in the chapel. Bodmer, H. Lodovico Carraeci. Burg, 1939.
Rottgen, H. 'Caravaggio-Probleme', Muiuhrier Jalirh. See W. Friedlaender's review in Art Bull.,
d. I'llil. Kunst. XX (1969), 143 ft. XXIV (1942).
A most stimulating interpretative paper. Cahesi, M., and Casale, \ . Le nuisioni dei Carraeei.
Salerno, L., Kinkead, D. T., Wilson, W. H. 'Poesia e Catalogue. Rome, 1965.

simboli nel C. I dipinti emblematici', Palatino, X Dempsey, C. '
"Et Nos Cedamus Amori" Observa- :
(1966), 106 ft. tions on the Farnese Gallerv', Art Bull., L {1968),
Scavizzi, G. Caravaggio e caravaggesehi. Catalogo della 363-
Mostra. Palazzo Reale, Napoli. Naples, 1963. Foratti, .\. / Carraeei nella teoria e nell'arle. Citta di
Steinberg, L. 'Observations in the Cerasi Chapel', Castello, 1913.
Art Bull., XLi (1959). .\ \ery good book.
Venturi, L. // Caravaggio. Novara, 1951. Kurz, O. 'Engravings on Silver by .\nnibale Carracci',

Wagner, H. Miehelangelo da Caravaggio. Berlin, 1958. Burl. Mag., xcvil (1955).
Caravaggio's art in relation to the art of the Mahon, D. Mostra dei Carraeei. Disegni. Bologna,
Renaissance; industrious, but not always con- 1956.
vincing. Large bibliography. Forms the critical basis for further study.
Mahon, D. '.Afterthoughts on the Carracci Exhibi-

C.^RLEVARIJS, L. tion',G.d.B.A., XLix (1957).
Mauroner, F. Luca Carlevarijs. Padua, 1945. Martin, J. R. 'Imagini della Virtu; The Paintings of
With (Buvre catalogue and bibliography. the Camerino Farnese', Art Bull., xxxviii (1956).
BIBLOSARTE
6oi
Martin, J. R., in An Bull., XLV (1963). monte e lo sviluppo edilizio Torino nel secolo XVII.
The Renaissance pedigree ot the Butcher's Turin, 1896.
Shop. Brino, G., a.o. L'opera di Carlo Amadeo
e dt Castella-
Martin, J. R. The Faniese Gallery. Princeton, 1965. monte. Turin, 1966.
A monumental study with a complete cata- Collobi, L., in Boll, storico hihliograjico suhalpmo,
logue ot drawings and extensive discussion of XXXIX (1937).
the iconography. Reviews by D. Posner, in
.4rt Bull., xi.viii (iqhh\ icy; \\ . \ itzthum, CASTELLO, V.
in Master Drawings, iv (1966), 47. Labo, M., in Emporium, xcvi (1942).
Miller, D. C. 'A Drawing by Agostino Carracci tor Riccio, B., in Commentan, viii (1957).
his Christ and the Adulteress in the Brera', Master
Drawings, vii (1969), 410. CA.STIGLIONE
Mostra dei Carracci. Catalogo critico. Bologna, 1956. Blunt, The Drawings of Giovanni Ballista Casti-
.\.
A work of collaboration, with an intro-

critical and SteJ'ano della Bella
glione at H'indsor Castle. . . .
ductory essay by C
Gnudi. Basic, with lull London, 1954.
bibliography. Contains new critical assessment of Casti-
Ostrow, S., in .4rte Antica e Moderna, ill, no. 9 (i960). glione's career; also J. H. C.I. . viii (1945).
Iconography of the Palazzo Fava frescoes. Calabi, A. 'The Monotypes of Gio. Battista Casti-
Ottani, .\. Gli affreschi Carracci in Palazzo Fava. glione', The Print Collector's Qtiarterly, \ (1923), XII
Bologna, 1966. (1925), XVII (1930).
Reviews in Master Drawings, IV, 3 (1966), 311; Delogu, G. Giovan Battista Casliglione detto il
C. Johnston, Burl. .Mag., ci,\ {1967), 596 t. Grechetto. Bologna, 1928.

Posner, D., in .-irle .Anttcae .Moderna. Ill, no. 12(1960). Percy, A., in Burl. Mag., CIX (1967), 672 ff.
The frescoes of the Herrera Chapel and .\nni- Contribution to C.'s life and chronology, with
bale's latest period. documents.
Posner, D. .'innihale Carracci. London, 1971. Percy, .A., in .Master Drawings, w (1968), 144 fl.
At the time of going to press the work, that Attempted reconstruction of a large Casti-
contains an aeuvre catalogue, had not yet glione 'album' of drawings of which so far at
appeared. least 13 have been identified.
Salerno, L. 'L'opera di Antonio Carracci", Boll. d'.4rie, Wunder, R. P., in Art Bull., xlm (i960).
XLi (1956).
Tietze, H. Mnnibale Carraccis Galerie ini Palazzo CAVALLINO
Farnese und seine romische Werkstatte', Jahrb. d. Benesch, O., in Jahrb. der kunsth. SIg. Vienna, N.F. i
kunsthist. SIg. des .illerhiichsten Kaiscrh., \XVI (1906). (1926).

Opens modern research; a masterly work. De Rinaldis, A. Cavallmo. Rome, 1921.
Wittkower, R. The Drawings of the Carracci at If indsor Liebmann, M. ex (1968), 456 ff.
P., in Burl. .Mag.,
Castle. London, 1952. Picture in the Pushkin Museum, .Moscow.

Zamboni, S. 'Ludovico Carracci e Francesco Gessi: Milicua, J., in Goya, 11 (1954).
due dipinti inediti', Antichitd Viva, vii (1968), no. 1, Percy, A. The Paintings of Bernardo Cavallmo. Penn-
3 ft- sylvania University Press, appearance imminent.

See also articles by F. .\rcangeli, F. Bologna, \. Only full monograph of Cavallino with cata-
Fenyo, M. Gregori, R. Longhi, and M. Jaffe in logue raisonne.
Paragone, \ii (1956), \lii (1957), Burl. Mag.. Refice, C, in Emporium, cxili (1951).
Cii (i960); .M. Calvesi, Commeutari. vii (1956); Brief text.

Bull, du .Musee Hougrois des Beaux-Arts, xvii Sestieri, E., in L'Arte, xxiii (1920) and Dedalo. 11
(i960) and XXV (1964); Master Drawings, \ (1921).
(1967); L. Street, in Art Qiuirterly. xxxiii Tzeutscher Lurie, A. 'Bernardo Cavallino: Adoration
(1970). of the Shepherds', Bull. Cleveland .Museum of .-irt,
Lvi (1969), 136 ff.
CARRIKRA
Malamani, V. Rosaiha Carriera. Bergamo, 1910. CAVEDONI
Bodmer, H., in Die Graphischen Kiinste, v (1940).
CASTELLAMONTE On drawings.
Boggio, C. Gli architetti Carlo e .Amedeo di Castella- Roli, R., in Paragone. vii (1956), no. 77.
BIBLOSARTE
602 •
BIBLIOGRAPHY
CECCO BRAVO see MONTELATICI CHIARI, G. B.

Kerber, B., in .4rt Bull., L (1968), 75.
CKLF.STI, A. .\n entirely satisfactory monograph of this
Mucchi, A. M., and Delia Crocc, C. II piliore Andrea Late Baroque Roman painter.
Celesti. Milan, ig54.
QLtivre catalogue and bibliography. CIGNANI
Buscaroli, S. V. Carlo Cignant ( 1628-i/ig). Bologna,
CERANO (G. B. Crespi). 1953-
Deir Acqua, G. A., in L'Arte, xlv (1942), xlvi (1943). .\ fine monograph, with bibliography.
Pevsner, N., in Jahrh. Preiiss. Kiiiistslg., XLVi (1925).
Rosci, M. Mostra del Ceratui. Cat. Novara, 1 964. CIGOLI {L. Cardi)
Fullest treatment of Cerano, summarizing all Cigoli, G. B. Vita di Lodovico Cigoli, per cura della
previous research. Commune della citta di S. Mtniato. Florence, 19 13.
Testori, G., in Paraîme, vi (1955), no. 67. Biography by Cigoli's nephew.
Valsecchi, M., in Paragone, XV (1964), no. 173. Cigoli, Lodovico Cardi da. '.Macchie di sole e pittura;
carteggio L. Cigoli-G. Galilei, 1609- 1613', ed. .\.
CERESA Matteoli, in Bollettino della .Accademia degli Euteleti

Longhi, R., Cipriani, R., and Testori, G. I pit tori dellii della citta di San Miniato, XXii, N.S. no. 32 (1959).
realta inLamhardia. Catalogo. Milan, 1953. Fully annotated edition of Cigoli's letters.
Testori, G., in Parasmie, iv (1953), no. 39. Bucci, M., and others. Catalogo della mostra del Cigoli
e del suo amhiente. San .Miniato, 1959.
CERQU07.ZI Indispensable for the study of Cigoli. .M.
Briganti, G. 'Michelangelo Cerquozzi, pittore di Gregori contributed a section on artists in
nature morte", Paragone, v (1954), no. 53. Cigoli's circle and L. Berti a paper on Cigoli
See also LAER, P. va.n. as architect.
Fasolo, v., in Qitaderni, nos i, 2 (1953).
CERUTI On Cigoli as architect.
Boschetti, A., in Paragone, Xix (1968), no. 219, 55 ff". Panofsky, E. Galileo as a Critic of the Arts. The
Fiocco, G. 'Giacomo Antonio Ceruti a Padova', Saggi Hague, 1954.
e Memorie di storia dell' arte, vi (1968), 113 ff'. Fascinating comment on Galileo's letter to
Longhi, R., Cipriani, R., and Testori, G. / pittori Cigoli, 1612.
della realta in Lombardia. Catalogo. Milan, 1953.
Also Longhi, in L'CEil, no. 73, Jan. 1961. CIPPER (Todeschini)
Malle, L., and Testori, G. Giacomo Ceruti e la ritrat- Arslan, W., in L'Arte, xxxvi (1933).
tistica del siio tempo nell' Italia settentrionale. Turin,
1967. COCCORANTE
Catalogue of an exhibition which next to
in Ferrari, O. 'Leonardo Coccorante e la "veduta ideata"
Ceruti paintings by R. Carriera, G. B. Cro- napoletana', Emporium, CXix (1954).
sato, V. Ghislandi, P. F. Guala, F. Guardi,
and others were shown. CODAZZI
Marini, O., in Paragone, xvii (1966), no. 199, 34 ff. Brunetti, E., in Paragone, Vli {1956), no. 79.
On Ceruti's patrons at Brescia. Longhi, R. 'Codazzi e I'invenzione della veduta rea-
Testori, G., in Paragone, v (1954), no. 57. listica', Paragone, \\ (1955), no. 71.
Testori, G. Giacomo Ceruti. Mostra di J2 opere inedite

JO Oct. -14 Nov. ig66. 'Finarte', Milan, 1966. CORNACCHINI
Bibliography. Emphasis on connexions with Keutner, H., in North Carolina Museum of Art
older painters in Brescia. Bulletin, I (1957-8), II (1958).
Monographic treatment.
Wittkower, R., in .Miscellanea Bibl. Hertzianae, 1961.
Graziani, A., in Critica d'Arte, iv (1939). Full documentation for the Charlemagne in
An excellent paper. St Peter's.
CORRADINI
Biasuz, G., in Boll. d\4rte, xxix (1935-6).
BIBLOSARTE
6o3
Callegari, A., in Boll. d'Arle, \xx (1936-7). bird's eye view of C. as architect with
.\ some
Mariacher, G., in Arte Veneta, i
(1947). new material.
Riccoboni, A., in Arte Veneta, vi (1952). Noehles, K. La chiesa dei SS. Liu a e .Martina nel-
With ceircre catalogue. r opera di Pietro da Cortona. Rome, 1969.
.Masterly investigation of a great Roman Bar-
CORTE, J. de (Lecurt) oque structure. .\ new standard of detailed
Ivanoft", N., in Arte Veneta, 11 (194S). and circumspect presentation.
Pollak, O. 'Neue Regesten zum Lebcn und Schaftcn
CORTON.A, p. da des romischen Malers und Architekten Pietro da
Briganti, G. Pietro da Cortona e delta pittura hanicca. Cortona', Kumtchronik, xxiii (1912).
Florence, 1962. Posse, H. 'Das Deckenfresco des P. da C. im Palazzo
Considers only Cortona as painter. Indispen- Barberini . . .\ Jahrh. Preuss. Kunslslg.. XL (1919).
sable. Broad critical analysis and wuvre cata- Basic study.
logue. Reviews by K. Noehles in Kiinstchronik, Samek-Ludovici, S. 'F. S. Baldinucci, Vita mano-
XVI (1963); W. Vitzthum, Burl. .Ma^., cv scritta di Pietro da C, .Archiii, xvii (1950).
(1963). Vitzthum, W. 'Inventar einesSammelbandes des
Campbell, M. .Mustra di disegm di P. da C. per gli spiiten Seicento mit Zeichnungen von P. da Cortona
affreschi di Palazzo Pitii. Exhibition, Uffizi, Flo- und Ciro Ferri', in Studies m Renaissance and Bar-
rence, 1965. oque .4rt presented to Anthony Blunt, no. xxii. Lon-
Casale, V. 'P.d.C. e la cappella del Sacramento in don, 1967.
San .Marco a Roma', Comment ari, xx (1969), 93 ft. Wibiral, N. 'Contributi alle ricerche sul Cortonismo
Publication of documents. in Roma. I pittori della Galleria di .\lessandro \'II
Chiarini, M., and Noehles, K. 'P. da C. a Palazzo nel Palazzo del Quirinaie", Boll. d'.4rte, xi, (i960).
Pitti: un episodio ritrovato'. Boll. d'.4rte, lii (1967), .\ first-rate study based on a wealth of new
233 ff- documents.
Del Piazzo, M. Pietro da Cortona. .Mostru docn- Wittkower, R. 'Pietro da Cortonas Hrganzungsprojekt
mentana. Rome, 1969. des Tempels in Palestrina", Festschrift .4dolph Gold-
A brief guide through the exhibition of Cor- schmidt. Berlin, 1935.
tona documents organized in the .Archivio di
Stato, Rome, on the occasion of the tricen- COLRTOIS (CORTESE)
tenary of Cortona's death. Holt, E. L. 'The British Museum's Phillips-Fenwick
Fabbrini, N. Vtta del Car. Pietro da Cortona. Cor- Collection of Jacques Courtois's Drawings and a
tona, 1896. partial Reconstruction of the Bellori N'olume', Burl.
Still useful. .Mag., cviii (1966), 345 ft'.
Geisenheimer, H. Pietro da Cortona e gli affreschi di Salvagnini, F. .\. / pittori horgognoni Cortese. Rome,
Palazzo Pitti. Florence, 1909. 1937-
Documents.
Lavin, I. 'Pietro da Cortona and the Frame', The Art COZZ.\, F.
Qiiarterly, xix (1956), 55. Lopresti, L., in Pinacuteca, I (1928).

Moschini, V. 'Le architetture di Pietro da Cortona', Montalto, L., in Commentari, vi (1955), vii (1956).
L'Arte, xxiv (1921). .Vlortari, L., in Paragone, vii (1956), no. 73.
Mostra di Pietro da Cortona. Catalogue by .A. .Vlara-
bottini and L. Berti. Rome, 1956. CRESHI, D.

Fullest study of Cortona as painter before Nicodemi, G. Daniele Crespi. Busto .\rsizio, 191 5;
Briganti's book. 2nd ed. 1930.
Mufioz, A. P. da Cortona (Bibl. d'.\rte). Rome, 1921. See R. Longhi's review in L'.-irte, XX (1917).
Cortona as architect.
First study of Ruggeri, U. 'Per Daniele Crespi', Crttica d'.4rte, xiv,
Noehles, K. 'Die Louvre Projekte von P. da C. und no. 90 (1967), 45 ft.; XV, no, 93 (1968), 43 ft.
Carlo Rainaldi', Zeitschr.J. Ktinstg., xxiv (1961).

See also P. Portoghesi, in Qjiaderni, nos. 31 48 CRESPI, G. M.
(1961), with similar results. .\rcangeli, F"., and Gnudi, C. Mostra celehrativa di
Noehles, K. 'Architekturprojekte Cortonas', .Miinch- Giuseppe Maria Crespi. Calalogo. Bologna .Milan,
ner Jahrh. d. btld. Kunst, XX (1969), 171 fl'. 1948.
BIBLOSARTE
604 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Preface by R. Longhi. Important catalogue, DERIZET

with bibliography. Prandi, .A. '.Antonio Derizet c il concorso per la facciata
Arcangeli, F. 'Nature morte di G.M.C.", Paragotic, di S. Giovanni in Laterano', Roma, XXii (1944).
XIII (1962), no. 149.
Gnudi, C. 'Mazzoni e le origin! del Crespi', Bolngiui, DOLCI

Riv. del Commune, XXII (1Q35). Del Bravo, C, in Paragone, xiv (1963), no. 163.
Lasareff', V., in Art in America, xvii (1929). Discusses Dolci's stylistic development.
.Merriman, M. P. 'Two late Works by G. M. Crespi', Heinz, G., in Jahrb. d. kunslhisl. Slg. in Wien, LVi
Burl. ,Wrt^?., cx(i968), 120 ft'. (i960).
A full monograph of Crespi with oeuvre cata- .An excellent study ; concerns Dolci's religious
logue by the same author is in the press. convictions.
Volpi, C, in Piinigone, VIII (1957), no. 91.
On the beginnings of G. M. Crespi. DOMENICHINO

Voss, H. Giuseppe Maria Crespi. Rome, 1921. Borea, E. 'Domenichino a Fano', Arte Antica e Mo-
derna, II, no. 8 (1959).
CRETI With documents.
Roll, R. Dorialo Creti. Milan, 1967. Borea, E. Domenichino. Milan, 1965.
Based on the author's own earlier papers. An Offers valuable information particularly for
important, richly illustrated publication; D.'s early career, but contains weaknesses and
autre catalogue and bibliography. Review by inaccuracies. R. E. Spear's remarkable review
D. C. Miller, Burl. Mag., cxi (1969), 306 f (Art Bull., XLix (1967), 360) should be read
with the book.
CROSATO Borea, E., and Cellini, P., in Boll. d'Arte, xlvi (1961).
Fiocco, G. G. B. Crosato. Venice, 1941 ; 2nd ed. 1944. Important for the frescoes in S. Luigi de'
Francesi.
DAL SOLE Fagiolo-Dell'Arco, M. Domenichino ovvero Classicismo
Bruni, G. Lippi, in Arte Antica e Muderna, II (1959). del Primo-Seicento. Rome, 1963.
With auvre catalogue. With well considered critical apparatus.
Keller, H. 'Das Jiinglingsbild des Domenichino in
DE FERRARI, G. A. Darmstadt', Festschrift L'lrich Middeldorf, Berlin,
Falletti, E., in Commentan, vii (1956) and Goffredo, 1968, 408.
A. M., ihid. Neppi, A. Gil affreschi del D. a Roma. Rome, 1958.
Rotondi, P., in Boll. d'Arte, XXXVI {1951). A brief, pedestrian book.
Pope-Hennessy, The Drawings of Domenichino in
J.
DE FERRARI, G. ^
the Collection of His Majesty the King at Windsor
De Masi, Y. La vita e le opere di Gregorio de Ferrari. Castle. London, 1948.
Genoa, 1945. With a stimulating introduction.
Griseri, A., in Paragone, VI (1955), no. 67. Serra, L. Domenico Zampieri detto il Domenichino.
Rome, 1909.
DE FERRARI, L. Standard work.
Gavazza, E. Lorenzo de Ferrari ( 1680-IJ44). Milan, Spear, R. E. 'The Early Drawings of Domenichino
1965. at Windsor Castle and some Drawings by the Car-
An important publication, because one of the racci', Art Bull., xlix (1967), 52.
great but not sufficiently known Genoese New identification and changes of attribution,
decorative talents has for the first time been the majority of which is certainly correct.
given a monographic treatment with oeuvre Spear, R. E., in Master Drawings, vi (1968), iii ft".
catalogue. A significant contribution to Domenichino's pre-

paratory drawings (but see k. Sutherland Harris,
DEL GRANDE, A. Burl. Mag., cxii (1970), 47 f). See also Spear's
Pollak, O., in Kunstli. Jahrb. der K. K. Zentral- paper on Domenichino cartoons, ibid., v (1967), 144,
kommission. III (1909). and C. Johnston, Revue de PArt, no. 8 (1970), 56 ff^.
six new drawings.

DELLA BELLA, S. See CASTIGLIONE Wittkower, R., in Burl. Mag., xc (1948).
BIBLOSARTE
6o5
DOTTl FERRATA
Foratti, A., in L'Arte, xvi (1913). Cellini, .\. N'. 'Contribute al periodo napoletano di
See also above. Part iii of Bibliography (under Bo- F.rcole Ferrata', Ptiragnne, xii (19(11), no. 137.
logna). Golzio, V. 'Lo "studio" di F-,rcolc F'errata', irchni,
'>('935)-
DUQUESNOY, F. Important inventory.
Faldi, I., in Arle Antica e Modenia, 11 (1959).
Rediscovery of the original Amor divmo e pro- FERRETTl, G. D.
fano relief. Maser.E. The Disguises ofHarlei/iiin. An Kxhibition
.V.
Fransolet, M. Frutifois du QuestKiy uulpleiir d' L rhaiii organized and presented by the University of Kansas
VIII. Brussels, 1942. -Museum of Art. Lawrence, 195ft.
Huse, N. 'Zur "S. Susanna" des Duquesnoy', in Argo. Maser, F.. A. Cum Domenun Ferrelii. Florence, 1968.
Festschrift fiir Kurt Badt, Cologne, 1970, 324 ft". .Monograph with aeinre catalogue and biblio-
Lavin, I. 'Duquesnoy's "Nano di Crequi" and Two graphy.
Busts by Francesco Mochi', Art Bull., Lii (1970),
132 fl". FETTI

Lavin solved once and for all the problem of a .Askew, P. 'The Parable Paintings of D. F.\ .in Bull.,
small bust in the coll. of Prince Urbano Bar- XLIII (1961).
berini that had been attributed to Bernini .\n important studv. See also Burl. .Wag., (ill
(Sestieri), and suggests a new vision of Mochi's (1961).

stylistic development. De Logu, G. '.An Unknown Portrait of .Monteverdi
Martinelli, V., in Cummentun, Xiii (1962). by Domenico Feti', Burl. .Wag., cix (1967), 706 ft.
Noehles, K., in Arte .iiitud e Maderna, \ii, no. 25 .Michelini,P. 'Domenico I'etti a Venezia", .irte I'enela,
(1964). IX (1955).
Contains observations on Duquesnoy's sty- Oldenbourg, R. Dimteuiai Feti. Rome, 1921.

listic development. Wilde, J., in Jahrh. der kunsth. SIg., Vienna, N.F. X
Schlegel, U., in Pnutheon, .vwii (1969), 390. {'93^)-
EMPOLi (J. Chimenti da) FINELLI

De Vries, S., in Rn. d'Arte, xv (1933). Cellini, A. N., in Paragane, xi (i960). no. 131
Forlani, A. Mustra di disegni di jf. da E. Florence, On Finelli's portrait busts.
1962.
FOGGINI
F.\CC1NI Lankheit, K., in Riv. d'.irte, xxxiv (1959).
Marangoni, M., in L'.-lrte, xiii (1910). Reprinted in On the Uflizi sketchbook of 70 pp. For Lank- 1
Arte Banucii, 1953. heit's monographic treatment of Foggini, see

Posner, D., in Piiragoiie, xi (i960), no. 131. Florentiuischc Bannkplustik.
Faccini's relation to and break with the Car-

FONTANA, C.
Braham, A., and Hager, H., 'The Tomb of Christina",

FALCONE in .-inalecta Reginensni 1 Queen Clirislina aj Sweden.
.
Saxl, F., inJf.W.C.I., 111 (1939-40). Dmuments and Studies, Stockholm, 1966, 48 fl.
Soria, M. S., in Art Qiiarterly, xvii (i954)- History of the tomb based on drawings and
documents.
FANZ.^GO Braham and Hager are the authors of the
Cunzo, M. .\. de. 'I documenti sull'opera di C. F. corpus of P'ontana drawings in the R. Library
nella Certosa di San Martino', Mapoli Nnhilissima, at Windsor Castle which was due to appear
VI (1967), 98ft. in 1971.
Fogaccia, P. Ctninio fuinzago. Bergamo, 1945. Cûdenhovc-Erthal, E. Carlo Fontana und die .irchi-
StrazzuUo, F. 'La vertenza tra Cosimo Fanzago e la tektur des romischen Spdiharock. Vienna, 1930.
deputazione del tesoro di S. Gennaro', Areh. slor.

per le prov. napoliiane, xxxiv (1955). FRANCESClllM, M. A.
Comune di
Arfelli, A., in Bologna, xxi (1934). "o "•
Documents.
BIBLOSARTE
6o6 • BIBLIOGRAPHY
Miller, D. C, in Boll. d.Artc. xli (1956) and Burl. f.ANDOI.FI

Mag., xcix (1957), cii (i960), cvi (1964). Bianchi, L. / Gandidji piiton del Sellecenio holognese.
A monograph with catalogue raisonee by D. C. Rome, 1938.
Miller is in the press (1971). Zucchini, G., in .itli e memone dell' .iccademia Cle-
mentina, V (1953).
FRIGIMELICA On Gaetano Gandolfi.
Zaccaria, M., in Bollciiino del Miiseo Cnico di Padova,
xxix-xxx (1939 40). GAULLi (Baciccio)
'An Exhibition of Paintings, Bo/.zctti and Drawings
FUGA by Giovanni Battista Gaulli', .illen .Memorial .irt
Agostco, A., and Pasquini, A. // Palazzo dclla Con- Museum Bulletin, \xiv, 2 (1967).
sult a. Rome, 1959. With contributions by J. Spencer, E. Water-
Bianchi, L. Disegrii dt Ferdiuaiido Fiiga e di altri archi- house, and H. L. Cooke. The first compre-
tetti del Settecenlo. Rome, 1955. hensive exhibition dedicated to G. See review
Scholarly exhibition catalogue with entirely by R. Enggass, Burl. Mag., Cix (1967), 184 ft.
new material. Brugnoli, M. V., in Boll. d'.4rte, xxxiv (1949).

Matthiae, G. Ferdiuaiido Fuga e la sua opera routaua. With (tuvre catalogue.
Rome, 195 1. Enggass, R. The Painting of Baciccio. Giovan Battista
Pane, R. Ferdinaudo Fuga. Naples, 1956. Gaulli ibjg-ijog. The Pennsylvania State Univer-
Fully documented. Compilation of documents sity Press, 1964.
by R. Mormone. Standard work with ceuvre catalogue. Reviews

by F. H. Dowley, .4rt Bull., xlvii (1965), 294,
FURINI E. Waterhouse, Burl. Mag., cvii (1965), 530.
Biirkel, L., in Jahrh. . . . des Allerhoclnteii Kaiser- Tacchi-Venturi, P. 'La convenzione tra G. B. Gaulli
hauses, xxvii (1907-8). e . .G. P. Oliva per le pitture del Tempio Far-
.
StanghelHni, A., in Vita d'Arle, xii (1914). nesiano', Roma, xiii (1935).
Toesca, E. Francesco Furiui. Rome, 1950.
GENTILESCHI, A.andO.
GABBIANI Bissell, R. W. 'Dipinti gio\anili di O. G. a Farfa
Bartarelli, A., in Riv. d'Arte, xxvii (1951-2). (1597-1598)', Palatino, vill (1964), 197 ft'.
With ceuvre catalogue. Documented works, revealing for the Man-

nerist beginnings of O. G.
GALEOTTl Bissell, R. W. 'Artemisia Gentileschi - A new Docu-
Carboneri, N. Sehastiauo Galeotti. Venice, 1955. mented Chronology', Art Bull., L (1968), 153 ft'.
Torri, P. Attivita di Sehastiauo Galeotti in Ligurta. The basic study for .\. G. See also Bissell in
Genoa, 1956. Bull. Detroit lust, of Arts, XLVI (1967), 71 ft.,
and M. Gregori, in Festschrift i'. Middeldorf

GALILEI Berlin, 1968, 414.
Kieven, E. (Bonn University) is preparing a mono- Campos, R. de, in Riv. d' Arte, xxi (1939).
graph on A. Galilei. With full bibliography.
Toesca, I. 'Alessandro Galilei in Inghilterra", Euglisfi Crino, A. M., in Burl. Mag., CII (i960); cm (1961),
Miscellany, III (1Q52). with B. Nicolson.
Emiliani, .\., in Paragiine, IX (1958), no. 103.
GALL I see BIB! EN A For the stay in the Marches.
Longhi, R., in L'Arte, xix (1916).
GALLIARI The basic work.
Bossaglia, R. I fratelli Galliari pittori. Milan, 1962. Rosci, M. Orazio Gentileschi (I maestri del colore,
Rexiew A. Griseri, Burl. Mag., CVIII (1966), 83). Milan, 1965.
528 ff'. Sterling, .\., in Burl. Mag., c (1958).
Discusses the stay in Paris.
GALLO, F.
Carboneri, N. L'archilello Francesco Gallo. Turin, GESSI, F.
1954- Roli, R., in Arte Antica e Moderna. I, no. i (1958).

Exhaustive documentation.
BIBLOSARTE
6o7
GHERARDI, A. The scholarly treatment of these sculp-

first
Mezzetti, A., in Ball. d'Arte, xxxiii (11)48). tors, based on documents in the Barberini
.\rchive.
GHERARDI, F.
Cerrato, A. M. 'Giovanni Coli c I'ilippo Gherardi', GIOVANNI DA SAN GIOVANNI

Ciimmenlari, X (1959). Giglioli, O. H. Giovanni da San Giovanni. Florence,
With mare catalogue. 1949.
Review by G. Briganti in Paragone, 1 (1930),
GHISLANDl (FRA GALGARIO) no. 7.
Fra Galgarui ( i('>S5-i743) "dlf ('nlk'ziotu private Ber- Zeri, v., in Paragone, 111 (1952), no. 31.
gammche. Bergamo, 1967.
This fine catalogue ot 37 paintings is intro- GRASSI
duced by a paper by R. Pallucchini. Gallo, G. Mosira di Nicola Grassi. Catalogue. L dine,
Locatelli Milesi, A. Fra Galgarm. Bergamo, 1945- 1961.
Longhi, R., Cipriani, R., and Testori, G. / pilturi 80 works illustrated. See also M. Gregori, in
Lomhardia. Catalogo. Milan, 1953.
delta reallii in Paragone, xiii (1962), no. 147.
Mazzini, F. Ainstra di Fra Galgaria e del Settecetito a
Bergamo. Catalogo. Milan, 1955. GUALA
Carita, R., in Atti Soc. Piemonteae d'.4rcheologia e Belle
GIAQUINTO Arli. N.s. 1 (1949).
Dania, L., in Paragaiie, xx (1969), no. 235. Basic paper with all earlier literature.
Orsi, M. d\ Corrado Giaqutiitn. Rome, 1958. Castelnovi, G. V., in Studies in the History of .irt.
CEinre catalogue; bibliography. Dedicated to William E. Suida. London, 1959.

Videtta, A. Coiisiderazioni su Cnrrada Giaqmiitu in
rapporto at disegni del Museo di S. Martina. Naples, GUARDi, F. and G. A.
1965. Binion, A. Giovanni Antonio and Francesco Giiardi
Mainly an attempt to define the graphic prin- Their Life and Milieu, with a Catalogue oj their
ciples of Giaquinto's drawings. Drawings. Dissertation, Columbia University, New
Volpi, M. 'C. G. e alcuni aspetti della cultura tigura- York, 1971. Also idem. Burl. .Mag.. c.\ (1968), 519.
tiva del '700 in Italia', Boll. d'Arle, XLIII (1958). Fenyo, L, in Burl. Mag., ex (19^18), 65 ft.
Discovery of a processional banner of the
GIORDANO, L. 'Madonna of the Rosary' by Francesco and
Ferrari, O. 'Una "vita" inedita di Luca Giordano', Giovanni .\ntonio Guardi.
Napoli Nobilissima. v (1966), 89 ft'., 129 ff. Fiocco, G. Francesco Guardi. Florence, 1923.
Publication of the 'Life' written by Francesco The classic biography. .Mso articles by Fiocco
Saverio Baldinucci from the MS. in the Bibl. in Burl. .Mag., XLVi {1925), Dedalo, xiii (1933),
Naz., Florence. Critica d'Arte, il (1937), and his monograph
Ferrari, O., and Scavizzi, G. Lma Giordano. 3 vols. Francesco Guardi, L'.ingelo Rajfaele. Turin,
Naples, 1966. 1958.
A tour de force breaking much new ground, Fiocco, G. 'Le pitture dell'.^ngelo Raftaele e la
this work will be for a long time to come the Confraternitadel Sacramento', Paragone, xvii ( 1966),
basis for further Giordano studies. Review no. 197.45 ff-
W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag., cxil (1970), 239 ft. Francesco Guardi e il suo tempo nelle raccolte private
Griseri, A., in Paragone, Vli (1956), no. 81. hergamasche. Bergamo, 1969.
On the work in Spain. A Galleria Lorenzelli F.xhibition. Contribu-
Griseri, A., in Arte Antica e Moderna, i\ (19A1). tions by R. Pallucchini, .VL Valsecchi, B.
Lurie, A. T. 'L.G. The .\pparition of the Virgin to Lorenzelli.
Saint Francis of .\ssisi'. Bull. Cleveland Miis. of Goering, M. Francesco Guardi. \ ienna, 1944-
Art, LV (1968), 39 ft'. Haskell, F., mJ.W.C.I., xxiii (i9f>o).
Hutter, H. Francesco Guardi in der Gemdldegalene

GIORGETTI, A. and G. der Akademie der Btldenden Kiinsle Wien. Vienna, w
Montagu, J 'Antonio and Giuseppe Giorgetti Sculp-
. : 1967.
Kultzen, R. Francesco Guardi in der .-ilten Pmakothek.
tors to Cardinal Francesco Barberini", .4rl Bull., Lii
(1970), 278 ft. Munich, 1967.
BIBLOSARTE
6o8 • BIBLIOGRAPHY
Maftei, F. de. Gum AnlauKi Giiardi pillon- tii Jiffure. De Bernardi Ferrero, D. / 'Dtsegni d'arcliilettura civile
Verona, 1031. el ecclesiastua' di Guarino Guarini e I' arte del maestro.
Contains challenging hypotheses. Turin, 1966.
Mahon, D., in Burl. Mtii;.. ex (1968), 69 ff. Interesting observations introducing a fac-
Mahon claims 1750 as the date at which F. simile ed. ot the plates of Guarini's treatise.
Guardi began painting vediite esalle. Guarini, G. Architettura civile. Turin, 1737.
Morassi, A., in Studies in the Histiiry of Art. Dedicated Guarini, G . Architettura civile. .Milan, 1968.
to William E. Suida. London, 195Q. Modern critical edition with brilliant intro-
On Francesco's beginnings as vedutista. duction by N. Carboneri, full bibliography
Morassi, A., Emporium, CXXXI (1960).
in and notes, and appendix by B. Tavassi La
Reconstruction of Antonio's wuvre on the basis Greca. \ facsimile reprint of the Treatise was
of new documents. - See also idem in Master published by the Gregg Press in 1964.
Drawings, vi (1968), 132 ff. Guarino Guarini e t'lnternazionatitd del harocco. .4tti
Moschini, V. Francesco Guardi. London, 1957. del convegno internazionale . . . igbS. 2 vols. Turin,
Muraro, M., in Burt. Mag., C (1958) and Emporium, 1970.
cxxx (1959)- 43 contributions, partly of considerable length,
On figure paintings by Francesco. covering every aspect of Guarini's architec-
Nicolson, B., in Burl. Mag., cvil (1965), 471 f. tural work and theory, his contributions to
Pallucchini, R. / disegm del Guardi al museo Correr di various fields of learning, and his influence.
Venezia. Venice, 1942. Hager, W., in Miscellanea Bibtiothecae Hertzianae,
Pignatti, T. Disegm dei Guardi. Florence, 1967. 1961.
Prohlemi guardeschi. Atti del convegno di studi promosso Oechslin,W. 'Bemerkungen zu Guarino Guarini und
da Ha mostra dei Guardi. Venice, 1967. Juan Caramuel de Lobkowitz', Raggi (Journal of
With 20 contributions, some of them provoca- Art History and Archaeology), ix, 3 (1969), 91 ft.
tive, especially D. Mahon's (66-155). Important investigation of Guarini's relation-
Rasmo, N., in Cultura Atesina, IX (1955). ship to Caramuel and his unorthodox ideas.
Valuable summary of Guardi problems. Passanti, M. Nel mondo magico di Guarino Guarini.
Shaw, J. Byam. The Drawings of Francesco Guardi. Turin, 1963.
London, 195 1. A revealing study b^' an architect.
An excellent book. Portoghesi, P. Guarino Guarini. Milan, 1956.
Zampetti, P. Mostra dei Guardi. Venice, 1965. A fine, though brief monograph; bibliography.
An expert catalogue with exhaustive biblio- Portoghesi, P. 'Guarini a Vicenza: La chiesa di S.
graphy. See also idem, Bihliografia delta mostra, Maria d'Araceli', Critica d'Arte, nos 20, 21 (1957).
Venice, 1966, listing the publications discuss- Sandonnini, T., in Atti e memorie R. Dep. di storia
ing the Exhibition. patria . . . provincie modenesi e parmensi, ser. 3, v
(1888).
GUARINI An important study.
Anderegg-Tille, M. Die Schule Guarinis. Winterthur, Torretta, G. Un'analisi detla cappella di S. Lorenzo di
1962. Guarino Guarini. Turin, 1968.
A somewhat pedantic work, based on the Published by the Turin 'Istituto di Elementi
categories developed by A. E. Brinckmann di Arch, e Rilievo dei Monumenti'. By an
half a century before. architect who continues the style of M. Pas-
Brinckmann, A. E. Von Guarino Giiarmo bis Batthasar santi's investigations. Most valuable measured
Neumann. Berhn, 1932. drawings.
Crepaldi, G. M. La Real Chtesa di San Lorenzo in
Torino. Turin, 1963. GuERc No I
Primarily a social and cultural study. Import- De Grazia, D. Guercino Drawings in the Art Museum
ant review by H. A. Millon, in Art Butt., Princeton University. Princeton, 1969.
XLVii (1965), 531. Grimaldi, N. // Guercino. Gtan Francesco Barbieri,
De Bernardi Ferrero, D. 'II conte I. Caramuel de iSgi-1666. Bologna [n.d., 1957?]. Improved 2nd ed.
Lobkowitz, vescovo di Vigevano, architetto e teorico 1968.
dell'architettura", Pattadio, xv (1965), 91 ft'. A work of little distinction.
First modem discussion of Caramuel's theo- Mahon, D. 'Notes on the young Guercino', fi//r/. .Mag.,
ries, which influenced Guarini so deeply. Lxx(i937).
BIBLOSARTE
6o9
Mahon, D. Studies in Seicentn Art and Theory. Contains facsimile reproduction ol 'Modello
London, 1947. della chiesa di S. Filippo Torino 1758'.
. . .
Mahon, D. // Giiercino. Catalogo critico dei dipinti. Rovere, L., Viale, V., and Brinckmann, A. E. Filippu
Bologna, 1968. Juvarra. .Milan, 1937.
The best critical work on Guercino : reviews D. Standard work; full bibliography.
Posner, Burl. Mag., C\ (1968), 596 ff'., R. Telluccini, .\. L'arte dell'architelto Filippo Juvara in
Longhi, Paragone, xix (1968), no. 225, 63 fl". Piemonte. Turin, 1926.
Mahon, D. // Guercino. Catalogo critico dei disegni. Still very useful.
Bologna, 1969. Viale, V. Mostra di Filippo Juvarra. Messina, 1966.
The standard work on G. as draughtsman. An indispensable work; contains .Maffei's
Mezzetti, A., and Mahon, D. Omaggio al Guercino. Elogio, the contemporary I'lta, Sacchetti's
Mostra di dipinli restaurati e dei disegni delta collezione Catalogue of Drawings, biographical data, a
Denis Mahon di Londra. Cento, 1967. modem catalogue of drawings and models,
Important especially for G.'s early paintings at and bibliography.
Cento. D. Mahon supplied 50 learned entries Viale, V. 'I disegni di F. J. per il palazzo del conclave',
for drawings from his collection. This Cata- Atti della Accademia delle Sctenze di Torino, CIII
logue also appeared separately as Disegni del (1968-9).
Guercino della colleziofie Mahon, Bologna, Publication of J.'s alternative projects of 1725
1967. for a Palazzo del Conclave near the Lateran
Roli, R. / fregt centesi del Guercino. Bologna, 1968. and near St Peter's.
Reliable account of G.'s frescoes in his home- Viale Ferrero, .VI. Filippo Juvarra scenografoearchiletio
town of Cento. Review Posner, .Art Bull., teatrale. Turin, 1970.
LI (1969), 297. .\ monumental work containing a complete
Vivian, F., in Burl. .Mag., cxiii (1971), 22 fl. catalogue of J.'s theatre drawings and repro-
Works by Guercino recorded in the Barberini ductions of every drawing.
archive. Wittkower, R. 'Ln libro di schizzi di Filippo Juvarra
a Chatsworth', Boll. Soc. Picmontese, 111 (1949).
GUIDI, D.
Bershad, D. L. 'A Series of Papal Busts by Domenico LAER, P .van
Guidi', Burl. Mag., cxii (1970), 805 ff. Briganti, G. 'P. van Laer and M. Cerquozzi', Pro-
Cellini, A. N., in Paragone, xi (i960), no. 121. porzioni. III (1950).
Wittkower, R. 'Domenico Guidi and French Clas- Briganti, G.; see rome.
sicism', J. ff'.C./., II (1938-9). Janeck, .A. L'ntersuchung iiher den holldndischen Maler
Pieter van Laer, genannt Bamhoccio. Dissertation,
JUVARRA Wiirzburg, 1968.
Accascina, .\. 'La formazione artistica di Filippo \ careful, fully documented study with ceiivre
Juvara', Boll. d'Arte, XLI (1956), XLII (1957). catalogue.
Careful study of Juvarra's beginnings at
Messina. LANFRANCO
Atti del X Congresso di storia dell'architettura. Rome, In addition to the literature given below, see
also E. Schleier, Burl. .Wag., Civ (1962); idem.
1959-
Papers by T. Bianchi, L. Angelini, V. Viale. Art Bull., L (1968); .\4. Heimbiirger, Paragone,
Carboneri, N. 'Filipf)o e il problema delle facciate no. 243 (1970).

J.
Paragone, vi (1955), no. 65.
"alia gotica" del Duomo di Milano', Arte Lomharda, Faldi, I., in
VII (1962). Hibbard, H. 'The Date of Lanfranco's Fresco in the
Hager, H. Filippo Juvarra e il concorso di modelli Villa Borghese', in .Miscellanea Bihl. Hertzianae,
bandito da Clemente XI per la nuova sacrestia di S. 1961.

Pietro. Rome, 1970. La Penta, B. L. 'La decorazione della Cappella del
Rediscovery of Juvarra's wooden model as well Sacramento a San Paolo', Boll. d'Arte. xi.viii (1963).
as of other models believed burned during Pergola, P. della, in // I'asari, vi

(1933 4).
World War II. Informative text. Posner, D. 'Domenichino and Lanfranco: The Early
Mandracci, V. Comoli. Le tnvenzwni di F.J. per la Development of Baroque Painting in Rome', in
chiesa dt S. Filippo Neri in Torino. Turin, 1967. Essays in Honor of If alter Friedlaender, 135 ff. New
York, 1965.
BIBLOSARTE
6lO •
BIBLIOGRAPHY
New assessment of the importance of Lan- Rovere, L. 'Le statue di Pietro Legros nel Duomo di
franco's early style. Torino', // Duomo dt Torino, 1 (1927), no . 9.
Salerno, L. 'The early Work of Giovanni Lanfranco',

Burl. Mag., XCiv (1952); idem, Commentart, V (1Q54) LHiOZZI
and IX (1958): chronology of Lanfranco. Bacci, M., in Proporzioni, IV (1963).
Schleier, E. 'Lanfranco's Malereien in der Sakra- Full monographic treatment.
mentskapelle in S. Paolo fuori le mura in Rom:
Das wiedergefundene Bild des Wachtelfalls', Arte LIPPI
Antuae Moderna, no. 19(1965), 62ff. ;no. 30(1965), Sricchia, F. 'Lorenzo Lippi nello svolgimento della
188 ff.; nos 31-2 (1965), 343 ff. pittura fiorentina della prima meta del '600',
Detailed investigation of the chapel (most of Proporzioni, IV (1963).

its decoration destroyed), originally Lan-
franco's most important work before S. Andrea LONGHENA
della Valle. The Ram nf Quails (Exodus, XVI, Semenzato, C. L'architettura di Baldassare Longhena.
13) is now in a private collection. Padua, 1954.

Schleier, E. 'Les projets de Lanfranc pour le decor de Wittkower, R. 'S. Maria della Salute: Scenographic
la Sala Regia au Quirinal et pour la Loge des .Architecture and the Venetian Baroque', Journal of
Benedictions a Saint-Pierre', Revue de I' Art, no. 7 the Society of Architectural Historians, xvi (1957) and
(1970), 40 ff. Saggi eMemorie di storia dell' arte, in (1963).

A fundamental study. E. Schleier is preparing A fully documented monograph on Longhena
a full Lanfranco monograph. by Douglas Lewis is on the point of going to

Toesca, L, in Ball. d'Arte, XLiv (1959). press.
Frescoes in S. Agostino, Rome.

LONGHI, A.
L.WGETTI Arslan, W., in Emporium, xcvill (1943).
Fiocco) G. 'G. B. Langetti e il naturalismo a Venezia', Moschini, V., in L'Arte, xxxv (1932).
Dedalu, in (1922).
The basic study. LONGHI, P.
Pallucchini, R., in Bull. d'Arte, XXVIII (1934). Pignatti, T. Ptetro Longhi. Venice, 1968. English ed.
London-New York, 1969.
LANZANI Standard work with over 500 illustrations;
Turchi, M. G., in L'Arte, LIX (i960). supersedes V. Moschini's monograph of 1956.
With aeuvre catalogue. Reviews by M. Levey, Art Bull., Lii (1970),
463, J. Cailleux, Burl. Mag., CXi (1969) 567 ,
ff'.
LAZZARINI
Pilo, G. M. 'Lazzarini e Tiepolo', Arte Veneta, xi LUTI
(1957), and 'Fortuna critica di Gregorio L.', Critica Dowiey, F. H., in Art Bull., XLIV (1962).
d'Arte, V (1958). Moschini, V., in L'Arte, XXVI (1923).
LEGROS LYS (Liss)

Baumgarten, S. Pierre Legros artiste romain. Paris, Bloch, v., in Burl. Mag., xcvii (1955).
1933- Steinbart, K. Johann Liss. Der .Maler aus Holstein.

D'Espezel, P., in G.d.B.A.. xii (1934). Berlin, 1940.
Correction of Baumgarten; important con- Standard work.
tribution. Steinbart, K., in Saggi e Aie?norie di storia dell' arte, li
Haskell, F. 'P. Legros and a Statue of the Blessed (1958-9).

Stanislas Kostka', Burl. Mag., xcvii (1955). Summarizes all recent research.
Documents.
March, G. M., in Archivum Historicum Soc.Jesu, in MADERNO, C.
(1934)- Caflisch, N. Carlo Maderno. Munich, 1934.

Documents, altar of St Ignatius, Gesu. In many ways antiquated.
Preimesberger, R. 'Entwiirfe Pierre Legros' fur Donati, U. Carlo .Maderno. Lugano, 1957.
Filippo Juvarras Cappella Antamore', Rom. his- Egger, H. Carlo Madernas Projekt fiir den Vorplatz
lorische Mttteilungen, x (1966-7), 200 ff. von San Pietro in Vaticano. Leipzig, 1928.
BIBLOSARTE
6ii
Hibbard, H. Carlo Madernn. Originally a Hamburg dissertation, the book

A
monograph, based on a broad foundation of represents the first serious investigation of the
new documents, appeared in 1972. themes of M.'s paintings.
Panofsky-Soergel, G. 'Zur Geschichte des Palazzo
Mattei di Giove', Rvm.Jahrh.f. Kunslg., Xi (1967-8), MANCINI
111-88. Berti Toesca, E. 'Francesco Mancini a Palazzo
An important, fully documented study. Colonna', L'Arte, XLVi (1943).
MADERNO, St. MANETTI, R.

Cellini, A. Nava. Maderm (I maestri della scultura). Brandi, C. Rutilw Manetti. Siena, 1931.
Milan, 1966.
Cellini, A. Nava. 'Stefano Maderno, Francesco Vanni MANKRED I
e Guido Reni a S. Cecilia in Trastevere', Paragone, Nicolson, B. '

Bartolommeo Manfredi', in Studies m
XX (1969), no. 227, 18 ff. Rfnatssance and Baroque .4rt presented to Anthony
Donati, A. S.M. sciiltnre. Bellinzona, 1945. Blunt, no. xxi. London, 1967.
Hoist, N. v., in Zeitschr.f. Kunstg., iv (1935).
Illuminating study of the St Cecilia. MARABITTI
Robertson, J, in Burl. Mag., laix (1936). Agnello. G., in Archivi, iv (1937) and xxii (1955).
Giudice, R. Francesco Ignazw Marabittt. Palermo,
MAFFEI 1937-
Ivanoff, N. Francesco Maffei. Padua, 1947.
Ivanoff, N. Catalogo della mostra di Francesco Maffei. MARATTI
Venice, 1956. Bellori, G. P. Vita di Guido Rem, Andrea Sacchi e
With full bibliography. Carlo Maratti (ed. M. Piacentini). Rome, 1942.
Marini, R., in Arte Veneta, xv (1961). Dowley, F. H., in Art Quarterly. XX (1957).
Attempt to clarify influences and chronology. Drawings at Diisseldorf
Dowley, F. H. 'Carlo Maratti, Carlo Fontana, and the
MAGENTA Baptismal Chapel in Saint Peter's", .-trt Bull., XLVii
Foratti, A., in Studi dedicati a P. C. Falletti. Bologna, (19^15)-
1915- An important contribution, also to art theoreti-
Mezzanotte, G., in L'Arte, Ui. (1961). cal problems, supplemented by F. Schaar, in
Important study. Art Bull., XLViii (1966), 414, and F.R. di

Federico, ihid., L (1968), 194.
MAGNASCO Kutschera-Woborski, O. 'Fin kunsttheoretisches
Bonzi, M. Saggi sul Magnasco. Genoa, 1947. Thesenblatt Carlo Vlarattas und seine asthetischen
Diirst, H. Alessandro Magnasco. Teufen-Basel, 1966. .\nschauungcn\ .Witteilungen der Ges. f vervielfdlt.
Attempt at an analysis in depth of the pheno- Kunst, XLII {1919).

menon Magnasco. \ classic paper.
Geiger, B. Alessandro Magnasco. Berlin, 1914. Mezzetti, A., in Rn. del 1st., iv (1955).
Standard work. Standard work, with critical aeuvre catalogue.
Geiger, B. Saggto d'un catalogo delle pitture di Ales- See also Arte Antica e .Moderna, iv (1961).
sandro Magnasco. Regesti e hihliografia. Venice, 1945. Nieto .\lcaide, V. \\. Dihujos de la R. .4cadamia de San
Geiger, B. / disegm del Magnasco. Padua, 1945. Fernando : Carlo .Maratti, 4J Dihujos de tema religioso.
Alessandro Magnasco (i667-i74g). An E.xhihitwn held Madrid, 1965.
at the J. B. Speed Art Museum and the C niversity of The attribution of 10 of these 43 drawings is
Michigan Museum of Art. Catalogue. 1967. doubted by F. H. Dowley in an informative
A fine catalogue with an Introduction by .\. review in .4rt Bull., i.ii (1970), 456 ft
Morassi. Raftaele, E. Nntizie della familia del pitlore Carlo

Morassi, A. Mostra del Magnasco. Genoa, 1949. Maratti. Monza, 1943.
With bibliography. Schaar, E. 'C.M.'s "Tod des heiligcn Franz Xaver"
Pospisil, M. Magnasco. Florence, 1945. im Gesii', Festschrift H. Kauff'mann. 247 ft Berlin,
Syamken, G. Die Bildinhalte des A. M. Hamburg, 1968.
1965.
BIBLOSARTE
6l2 BIBLIOGRAPHY
MARCHIONNI, C. The only attempt at providing a richly docu-

Berliner, R. 'Le sedie settecentesche della statua di S. mented account of the life and style of
Pietro nella Basilica Vaticana', Sliidi Romani, iv Masucci.
Berliner, R., in Minuhner Jalirh. der Inld. KunsI, ix x MAZZA

(1958-9)- Fleming, J., in Connoisseur, cxLViii (1961).
Drawings by Carlo and Filippo Marchionni. With auvre catalogue.
A very rich study with a wealth of new docu- Riccomini, E. 'Opere veneziane di Giuseppe Maria
ments. Mazza', Arte Venela, xxi (1967), 173 ft.
Gaus, J. Carlo Marchionni. Ein Beilrag zur rotmschen

Architekur des Settecento. Cologne, 1967. .MAZZONI
A fully documented monograph. Review A. Gnudi, C, in Critica d'Arte, I (1935-6).
Blunt, Burl. Mag., CXi {1969), 162 ft. Ivanoff^, N., in Saggi e Memorie di storm dell'arte, II
(1958-9).
MARCHIORI Basic study with ceuvre catalogue and biblio-
Arslan,W., in Bull. i'yir/6',v( 1925-6) and VI (1926-7). graphy.
MARIANI MAZZUOLI
Fiocco, G., in Le Arti, in (1940-1). Pansecchi, F., in Commentari, x (1959).
The basic study. Schlegel, U., in Burl. Mag., cix (1967), 388 ft".
Cartlas bozzetto in the Victoria and Albert

MARIESCHI Museum.
Mtchele Marieschi (iyio-i/4j). Bergamo, 1966. Suboff^, v., mjahrb. Preiiss. Kunstslg., ill (1928).
Exhibition Catalogue with preface by A.

Morassi. The first comprehensive appreciation MEDICI, G. DE'
of this veduttsta. - See also M. Precerutti- Daddi Giovannozzi, V., in Mitteilungen des kunst-
Garberi, in Pantheon, xxvi (1968), 37 ft. historischen Instituts in Florenz, V (1937).
MARINALI MERLO
Barbieri, F. L'attivita dei Marmali per la decorazione Gatti Perer, M. L. Carlo Giuseppe Merlo architetto.
della basilica di Monte Berico. Vicenza, i960. Milan, 1966.
New documents. First comprehensive study of this architect
Puppi, L. 'Nuovi documenti sui Marinali', Atti based on documents and drawings.
dell'Istitutu Veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, Classe di
scienze morali, lettere ed arti, cxxv (1966-7), 195 ff^. MITELLI, A.
Tua, C, in Riv. d'Arte, xvii (1935). Feinblatt, E. Agostino Mitelli. Drawings. Loan Exhibi-
With oeuvre catalogue. tion from the Kunstbiblwthek, Berlin. Los Angeles
County Museum of Art, 1965.
MASSARI, G. An important addition to the scarce literature
Bassi, E., in Boll. Centra Internaz. Studt di Archi- on Mitelli.

tettura, iv(i962).
Moschini, V., in Dedalo, xii (1932). MITELLI, G. M.

Semenzato, C, in Arte Venetci, xi (1957). Buscaroli, R. G.M. Mitelli. Bologna, 193 1.
MASSARI, L. MOCHI
Volpe, C, in Paragone, VI (1955), no. 71. See also duquesnoy.
Martinelli, V., in Commentari, 11 (1951) and iii (1952).
MASTELLETTA With ceuvre catalogue and full bibliography.
Marangoni, M., in L'Arte, xv (19 12), reprinted in
Arte barocca, Florence, 1953. MOLA
Arslan, W., in Boll. d'Arte. viii (1928-9).
MASUCCI Arslan, E. 'Disegni del M. a Stoccolma', Essays in the
Clark, .\. M. '.^.M.: A Conclusion and a Reformation History of Art presented to R. Wittkorrer, 197. Lon-
of the Roman Baroque', Essays in the History of .4rt don, 1967.
presented to R. Wittkoirer, 259 ft. London, 1967.
BIBLOSARTE
6i3
Lee, R. W. 'Mola and lasso', in Studies in Renais- N.ACCHERINO

sance an J Baroque An presented to Anthony Blunt. Maresca di Serracapriola, A. M.-Nacchenno scultore
no. xxvi. London, 1967. fiorenttno. Naples, 1924.
A stimulating contribution.
Rudolph, S., in Arte lllustrata. nos 15 1(1 (1969), 10 ft. NIGF.TTI
Critical essay, containing; also a survey of all Berti, L., in Rn. d'.irle. xxvi ( i95o)and xxvii ( 195 1 3).
previous Mola literature. See also R. Cocke,
in Burl. Mat;.. CXi (1969), 712 ft., tcJem. ihid., NOME (Monsii Desidcrio)
ex (1968), 558 ft., and A. Czobor, ihid.. 565 ft'. Causa, R., in Paragone, vii (1956), no. 75.
Sutherland, .\. B., in Burl. .Mag.. CVI (1964). Sluys, F". Didier Barra et Franfois de Nonudits Monsit
Desiderio. Paris, 1961.
MOLIN.^RI The final statement with full references and
Pappalardo, .\. M, in .///; dell' Istituto Veneto dt ceuvre catalogue.
Science . . ., cxii (1953-4).
NOVELLI
MONNOT Di Stefano, G. Pietro Noielli. Palermo, 1940.
Sobotka, G. 'F.in Elntwurf Marattas zum Grabinal
Innocenz Xl\ Jahrh. Preuss. Kunstslg.. XX.XV (1914), l^\ (J .\ N I , p
Ivanoft, N., in Paragone. vili (1957), no. 89.
MONTEL.\Tici (Cecco Bravo) Voss, H., in Belvedere, viii (1929).
Masetti, A. R. Cecco Bravo. Venice, 1962.
With auvre catalogue and bibliography. PALM.\ GIOVANE
Forlani, .\. Mostra dt disegnt di Jacopo Palma il
MONTI, F. Giovane. Florence, 1958.

Ruggeri, U. Francesco Monti holognese. Bergamo,
1968. PANNINI
A monumental work with a catalogue of .\risi, F. G. P. Panmi. Cassa di Risparmio di Piacenza,
almost 500 drawings. 1 96 1.
Ruggeri, U. 'Francesco Monti bolognese a Brescia", A monumental work, with wuvre catalogue;
Criticad' Arte. \\\, no. 108 (1969), 35 ft.; xvii, no. 109 fully illustrated.
(1970), 37 ff- Ozzola, L. G. P. Pannini. Turin, 1921.
MORANDI, G. M. PARIGI, A. and G.

Waterhouse, E. 'A Note on G.M.M.', Studies in Berti, L., in Palladio, 1 (1951).
Renaissance and Baroque Art presented to Anthony Linnenkamp, R., in Riv. d'Arte. .X.XXIII (i960).
Blunt, 117. London, 1967.
The fullest statement on this rather neglected PARODI, F.
painter, with work catalogue. Grossi, O., in Dedalo. 11 (1921).

Rotondi Briasco, P. Ftltppo Parodi. Genoa, 1962.
MORAZZONE (Mazzucchelli, P. F.) Not yet the final monograph.
Baroni, C, in L'Arte. XLiv (1941).
Gregori, M. II .Morazzone. Milan, 1962. PASINELLI
Exhibition catalogue, with complete docu- Baroncini, C, in .irie .Intica e .Moderna, 11 (1958).
mentation, veuire catalogue, and bibliography.
Supersedes previous studies. PELLEGRINI
Nicodemi, G. II Alorazzone. Varese, 1927. Bettagno, A. Dtsegni e dipinti di G. A. Pellegrini.
Uncritical, see review N. Pevsner, Rep. f. Venice, 1959.
Kunstir., L (1929). Exhibition catalogue. Basic study. See also T.
Zuppinger, E., in Commentari. 11 (1951). Pignatti, in Burl. .'^\ag.. CI (1959), 451; R.
Pallucchini,in/^rfn//i<"n,xvili(i96o), 182,245.
MORLAITER Goering, M., in .Wimchner Jahrh., xii (1937-8).

Arslan, W., in Riv. di Venezia. xi (1932).
Lorenzetti, G., in Dedalo, xi (i 930-1). PETRINI
.Arslan, E. Giuseppe .Antonio Petrini. Lugano, 1960.
BIBLOSARTE
6l4 • BIBLIOGRAPHY
First comprehensive study, with veuvre cata- Goering, M., in Mitleilungen des kiinsthistorischen
logue and bibliography. Instituts in Florenz, IV (1934).
Pallucchini, R. / disegni di G. B. Ptitoni. Padua, 1945.
PIAZZETTA Pittoni, L. 'Pseudo influenza francese sull'arte di
Maxwell White, D., and Sewter, A. C. / Jisegni di Giambattista Pittoni', Riv. dt Venezia, xii (1933).
Gwvan Battista Piazzetta nclla Bihlinteca Reale di
Torino. Rome, 1969. PIZZOCARO
Scholarly catalogue of the two Piazzetta Puppi, L. 'Antonio Pizzocaro architetto vicentino',
albums in Turin. in Prospettive (Milan), no. 23 (1961).
Pallucchini, R. L'arte di Gtamhatltsta Piazzetta.
Bologna, 1934. PONZIO
Standard work. Crema, L. Flaminio Ponzio architetto milanese a Roma
Pallucchini, R. Piazzetta. Milan, 1956. (Atti del IV Congresso Nazionale di storia dell'
architettura). Milan, 1939.
PICHERALI
Agnello, G., in .Archivio Stor. per la Sicilia, ii-lll PORPORA
(1936-7), VI (1940), and serie iii, 11 (1947). Causa, R. 'Paolo Porpora e il primo tempo della natura
morta a Napoli', Paragone. Ii (1951), no. 15.
PIOLA
Castelnovi, G. V. / dipinti di S. Giacomo alia Marina. POZZO
Genoa, 1953. Carboneri, N. Andrea Pozzo architetto. Trent, 1961.
With full bibliography.
PIRANESI Kerber, B. 'Bibliographic zu Andrea Pozzo', Archtvum
Cochetti, L. 'L'opera teorica di Piranesi', Cnmmentari, Hist. Soc.Jesu, XXXIV (1956).
VI (1955)- An exemplary study.
Fischer, M. F. 'Die Umbauplane des G. B. Piranesi Kerber, B. Andrea Pozzo. Berlin-New York, 1971.
fur den Chor von S. Giovanni in Laterano', Miinc finer A full study of Pozzo as painter and architect,
Jahrb. d. hild. Kiinst, xix (1968), 207ff. incorporating all previous research.
Focillon, H. Giovanni Battista Piranesi. Paris, 1928. Marini, R. Andrea Pozzo ptttore. Trent, 1959.
Hind, A. M. Giovanni Battista Piranesi. London, 1922. Pergola, P. della. 'Le opere toscane di A. Pozzo', Riv.
Both Hind and Focillon are standard works. del R. 1st., V (1935-6).
Korte, W. 'G. B. Piranesi als praktischer Architekt', Pozzo, A. Perspectiva pictorum et architectorum. Rome,
Zeitschr.f. Kunstg., II (1933). 1693.
Study of Piranesi as architect. Partly super-
seded by R. Wittkower, in Piranesi, Smith PRETI, F. M.
College Museum of Art, Northampton, Mass., Favaro-Fabris, M. V architetto Francesco Maria Preti.
1 96 1. Treviso, 1954.
Mayor, A. H. Giovanni Battista Piranesi. New York,
1952- PRETI, M.
Best modem study. Causa, R., in Emporium, cxvi (1952).
Mostra di incisioni di G. B. Piranesi. Catalogue. Fantuzzo, M., in Boll. d'.4rte, xl (1955).
Bologna, 1963. Frangipane, A. Mattia Preti, 'il cavalier calabrese'
Introduction by S. Bottari. Useful survey. Milan, 1929.
Thomas, H. The Drawings of Giovanni Battista Mariani, V. Mattia Preti a Malta. Rome, 1929.
Piranesi. New York, 1954. Refice, C. 'Gli affreschi di Mattia Preti nella chiesa di
Vogt-Goknil, U. Giovanni Battista Piranesi. Carceri. S. Domenico Soriano', Boll. d'Arte, XXXIX (1954).
Ziirich, 1958. Refice Taschetta, C. .Mattia Preti. Brindisi, 1961.
Some interesting material, but to be used with Professional, but too brief and not always
caution. reliable.
Wittkower, R. 'Piranesi's "Parere su FArchitettura" ',
J.W.C.I., II (1938-9)- PROCACCINI, G. c.

Pevsner, N., in Riv. d'.4rte, xi (1929).
PITTONI Vigezzi, S. 'I primi anni d'attivita di G. C. Procaccini',

Fenyb, I., in Acta Historiae Artium^ i
(1954). Rtv. d'Arte, xv (1933).
BIBLOSARTE
6i5
Valsecchi, M., in Paragone, XXI (1970), no. 243, 12 ft'. Johnston, C. 'Reni Landscape Drawings in the
Wittgens, F., in Riv. d' Arte, xv (1933). Mariette Coll.', Burl. .Mag., cxi (1969), 377 ft.
Kurz, O., in Jahrh. d. kunsthist. Sammlungen, Vienna,
RAGGI XI (1937)-
Donati, U., in L'L'rhc, vi (1941), ii Basic study.
Fountains at Sassuolo. Kurz, O. '.A Sculpture by Guido Reni', Burl. Mag.,
Nava, A., in I.' Arte, XL (1937). Lxxxi (1942).
Sorrentino, .\., in Riv. d'Arte, xx (1938). Pepper, D. S. 'Guido Reni's early Drawing Style',
Farnese busts. Master Drawings, VI (1968), 364 ft".
Pepper, D. S. 'Guido Reni's early Style; His Activity

RAGUZZINI in Bologna 1595 1601', Burl. Mag., cxi (1969),
Rotili, M. Filippo Raguzzini e il rococo romatio. Rome, 472 ff.
1951-
A well documented study with further litera- R I B F. R a
ture. Bedarida, H., in .4 travers I' art itatien du XV' au XX'
Steele. Paris, 1949.
RAINALDl, C. Iconographical.
Fasolo, F., in Qjiaderni. no. 2 (1953). Mayer, A. L. Jusepe de Rihera. Leipzig, 1923.
On the latest period, with documents. The standard biography.
Fasolo, F. L'opera di Hieronlnw e Carlo Rtiinaldi. Trapier, E. du Gue. Rihera. New York, 1952.
Rome, 1 96 1.
Important; many new documents, but some- RICCHINO
what chaotic and difficult to use. Constructive Cataneo, E. II San Giuseppe del Richini. .Milan, 1957.
review by K. Noehles, Zeitschr. J. Kunstg., Gengaro, M. L. 'Dal Pellegrini al Ricchino', Boll.
XXV (1962). d'Arte, xxx (1936).
Hempel, E. Carlo Rainaldi. Munich, 1919. Mezzanotte, P. '.\pparati architettonici del Richino
Matthiae, G., in Arti Figurative, II (1946). per nozze auguste', Rassegna d'Arte, XV (19 15).
Wittkower, R. 'Carlo Rainaldi and the Roman Archi-
tecture of the Full Baroque', Art Bull., xix (1937). Ricci, M. and s.
Czobor, A., in Acta Hisloriae Artiiim, i (1954).

RECCO, G. Derschau, J. Sehastiano Run. Heidelberg, 1922.
Zeri, F., in Paragone, ill (1952), no. 33. Standard work.

Gabrielli, N. 'Aggiunte a Sehastiano Ricci', Propor-
REN! zioni. III (1950).
Bellori, G. P., jfcf maratti Milkovich, M. Sehastiano and .Marco Ricci in America.
Cuppini, L., in Commentari, ill (1952). University of Kentucky, 1966.
On Reni's late manner. Catalogue of a loan exhibition illustrating 98
Giondo, G. 'La critica su Guido Reni', Riv. del 1st., 11 paintings and drawings.
(1953)- Osti, O. 'Sehastiano Ricci in Inghilterra', Com-

Gnudi, C, and Cavalli, G. C. Mostra di Guido Rem. mentari, II (1951).
Bologna, 1954. Pilo, G. M. Marco Ricci. Catalogo delta mostra.
Very important, with full bibliography. Venice, 1963.
Gnudi, C, and Cavalli, G. C. Guido Rem. Florence, Introduction by R. Pallucchini. Fullest study
1955-
ofMarco Ricci. Discussion of 250 works; rich
Standard work with catalogue raisonne and bibliography. Sec also Pilo, in Paragone, Xiv
bibliography. See D. Mahon, Burl. .Mag., (1963), no. 165.

xcix(i957), 23H. Pallucchini, R., in Arte Veneta, vi (1952) (Sebastiano),
Sammlungen, Vienna, IX (1955) (Marco), x (1956) (Sebastiano and Marco).

Heinz, G., mjahrh. d. kunsthist.
XV (1955). .Marco Ricci e gli incisori hellunesi del 'joo e '800.
Hibbard, H. 'Guido Reni's Painting of the Im- Venice, 1968.

maculate Conception', The .Metropolitan Museum of Catalogue of an Exhibition at Belluno based
Art Bulletin, xxvili (1969), 19 ff".
on material from the .Mpago-Novello collec-
sensitive contribution to R.'s iconography tion.
A
and stylistic development.
BIBLOSARTE
6l6 •
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ROSA, S. ROTARI
Cecil, R. A. 'Apollo and the Sibyl of Cumaea by Barbarani, E. Pietro Rotari. Verona, 1941.
S. R.', Apollo, Lxxxi (ig^s), 464 ff. Fully documented.
De Rinaldis, A. Letlere medttc di Salvator Rosa a
G. B. Ruciardt. Rome, 1939. RUSCONI
Limentani, U. Poesie e lettere inedile di Salvator Rosa. Baumgarten, S., in La Revue de I'Art, Lxx (1936).
Florence, 1950; idem, Bthlioifrafia della vita e delle Martinelli, V., in Commentan, iv (1953).
npere di S.R. Florence, 1955. With further literature.
Mahoney, M. 'S.R.'s Saint Humphrey', The Minnea- Samek Ludovici, S., in Archivi, xvii (1950).
polis Inst, of Arts Bulletin, 1.111, 3 {1964), 55 ff". Publication of F. S. Baldinucci's 'Life' of
Mahoney, M. The Drawings of Salvator Rosa. Un- Rusconi.
published dissertation, Courtauld Institute, Univer- Webb, M. J., in Burl. Mag., xcviii (1956).
sity of London, 1965.
See the author's paper on Rosa, in Master SACCHl
Drawings, ill (1965), 383 ff. Harris, A. S., and Schaar, E. Die Handzeuhnungen
Morgan, Lady Sydney. The Life and Times of Salvator von Andrea Sacchi und Carlo Maratta. Katalog
Rosa. Paris, 1824. Kunstmuseum Diisseldorf Diisseldorf, 1967.
The classic biography. Harris, A. S. 'Andrea Sacchi and Emilio Savonanzi
Oertel, R. 'Die Verganglichkeit der Kiinste', Miinch- at the Collegio Romano', Burl. Mag., cx (1968),
ner Jahrh. d. bild. Kunst, xiv (1963). 249 ff. ; also idem, 'The Date of A.S.'s "Vision of
Valuable contribution to Rosa's vamtas con- St Romuald" ', ibid., 489 ff.
ceptions. Harris, A. S. .4ndrea Sacchi.

Ozzola, L. Vita e opere dt Salvator Rosa. Strasbourg, A fully documented monograph with reuvre
1908. catalogue is in the press.
Standard work. Incisa della Rocchetta, G., in L' Arte, xxvii (1924).
Prota-Giurleo, U. La famtglia e la giovinezza di Documents.
Salvator Rosa. Naples, 1929. Posse, H. Der romische Maler Andrea Sacchi. Ein
Biographical. Beitrag zur Geschichle der klassizistischen Bewegung
Salerno, L. Salvator Rosa. Milan, 1963. im Barock. Leipzig, 1925.
The only modern monograph, with auvre Indispensable.
catalogue. Review F. Haskell, Burl. Mag., Wibiral, N., in Palladia, v (1955).
evil (1965), 263. On Sacchi as architect.
Wallace, R. W. 'The Genius of S.R.', Art Bull.,
XLVii (1965), 471. SALINI, T.
An exploration of Rosa's conception of genius Salerno, L., in Commentari, ill (1952).

based on an iconological study of his etching Zeri, F., in Paragone, vi (1955), no. 61.
'Genius of Rosa'.
Wallace, R. 'W. 'Salvator Rosa's "Justice appearing SALVl, N.
to the Peasants", J. ff.C./., xxx (1967), 431. Schia\'o, A. La Fontana di Trevi e le attre opere di
Wallace, R. W. 'Salvator Rosa's "Democritus" and Nicola Salvi. Rome, 1956.

"L'Umana Fragilta" ', Art Bull., l (1968), 21.
See also the same author's 'Salvator Rosa's SARACENI
"Death of Atilius Regulus" ', Burl. Mag., cix Cavina, A. Ottani. Carlo Saraceni. Milan, 1968.
(1967), 395- Brief text; curriculum; documents; (eitvre
catalogue. Supersedes the author's paper in

ROSSI, A. DE Arte Veneta, xxi (1967), 218 f^'. Review B.
Martinelli, V., in Studt Romant, vii (1959). Nicolson, Burl. Mag., cxii (1970), 312 fl".
Porcella, A., in Riv. mensile della cittd di I'enezia, \ii

ROSSI, G. A. DE (1928).
Spagnesi, G. Giovanni Antonio De Rossi architetto
romano. Rome, 1964. SARDl, G.
Full monographic treatment; many new docu- Mallory, N. A., in Journal Soc. Architect. Historians,
ments. XXVI (1967), 83 ff.
BIBLOSARTE
6i7
First critical monograph treatment of this Full monograph with (emre catalogue. Sec
eighteenth-century Roman architect. V. Antonov, Paragone, XIX (1968), no. 22^,
74 ft'.
SCAMOZZI
Barbieri, F. Vimenzo Saimozzi. Vicenza, 1952. TACCA, P. and F.
With detailed 'regesto' and full bibliography. Bianchi, E. S. 'Pietro and Fcrdinando Tacca', Riv.
Zorzi, G., in Arle Veneia, x (1956). d'Arte, Xiii (1931).
Documents. Fully documented.
Lewy, E. Pieiro Tucca. Cologne, 1928.
SERODINE Unsatisfactory; see review by E. S. Bianchi,
Askew, P. W Melancholy .Astronomer by G.S.', Art Riv. d'Arte, XI (1929).
Bull., XLVii (1965), 121.
Longhi, R. Giovanni Serodtne. Florence 1 1954]. TANZIO
(Eiivre catalogue, documents, bibliography. .\rslan, W. 'Affreschi del Tanzio a Milano', Phoebus,
Schoenenberger, W. Guivnnni Scrodine pit tore di 11(1948).
Ascona. Basel, 1957. Bologna, F., in Paragone, iv (1953), no. 45.
Partly superseded by Longhi's book, not yet Calvesi, M. 'Considerazioni su Tanzio da Varallo', in
known to the author at the time of writing. Stiidt di Storici deir Arte in onore di Viltorio Vuile,
35. Turin, 1967.

SERPOTTA Previtali, G. 'Frammenti del Tanzio a Napoli', Para-
Caradente, G. Gtacoma Serpoita. Turin, 1967. gone, XX (1969), no. 229, 42 ft.
Excellent monograph. Full bibliography of the decade after the

Meli, F. Giacomo Serpotta. Palermo, 1934. Tanzio Exhibition.
Basic work, published as vol. 11 to 'Gia- Testori, G. Tanzio da Varallo. Catalogue. Turin,
como Serpotta. Secondo centenario serpot- 1959-
tiano 1732- 1932'. The fullest treatment of 'Tanzio ; bibliography.
SLODTZ, M. TASSI
Golzio, v., in Dedalo, xi (1930-1). Hess, J. Agostino Tassi, der Lehrer des Claude Lorratn.
Souchal, F. Les Slodtz, sculpteiirs el decoraleiirs dii Munich, 1935.
rot. Paris, 1967. Salerno, L. 'II vero Filippo Napoletano e il vero
Exhaustive treatment of all the members of Tassi', Storia dell'.irte, no. 6 (1970), 139 ft'.
the family. Revolutionary hypotheses concerning the two

artists.
SOLIMENA Waddingham, M. R., in Paragnne, xii {1961 ), no. 139;
Bologna, F. Francesco Solimena. Naples, 1958. XIII (1962), no. 147.
First modern monograph, with auire cata-

logue and bibliography. TESTA
Harris, A. Sutherland, in Paragone, xvili (1967), no.
STANZIONI 2i3>35ft'-
Schwanenberg, H. Lehen und Werk des Massimo First attempt at chronology of Testa's work.
Stanzioni. Bonn, 1937. Harris, A. S., and Lord, C. 'Pietro Testa and Par-
A dissertation, not satisfactory. nassus', Burl. Mag., CXil (1970), 15 ff.
First opening up of Testa's difficult icono-
STROZZI graphy.
Lazareff, V., in .Miinchner Jahrh. der hild. Kiinst, VI, Lopresti, L., in L'Arte, .vxiv (1921).
ii (1929). The basic study.
The best study of the early Strozzi. Marabottini, .\., in Commentari, v (1954).
Matteucci, A. M. 'L'attivita veneziana di Bernardo Important paper, with an account of Testa's

Strozzi', Arte Veneta, IX (1955). art theory.
Milkovich, M. B. Strozzi. Catalogue. Binghamton,

N.Y., 1967. T AR
I I M
Paintings by Strozzi in America. Fiori, T., in Commentari, viii (1957)-
Mortari, L. Bernardo Strozzi. Rome, 1966.
BIBLOSARTE
6l8 • BIBLIOGRAPHY
Malaguzzi \'aleri, I"., in Cnmache d' Arlt\ i (\i.)i^). morali . . . ), cxxvii (1967 8), 211 50.
Szollbsi, M. Andrea Tuirtnt ptllare Ixilognese. Buda- .A thoughtful study based on diligent archival
pest, 1936. work and a wide knowledge of literature. See
also idem, in .4ntichitd Viva (1968), 2, 34 ff.
TlEPOLO, G. B. and G. D. Rizzi, and Morassi,

.\., .\. Disegni del Tiepolo. Cata-
D'Ancona, P. Tiepnlo in Milan: The Palazzo Clerici logo. Udine, 1965.
Frescoes. Milan, 195A. Shaw, J. Byam. The Drawings of Domenico Tiepolo.
Hetzer, T. Die Freshen Tiepolos in der IViirzhiirger London, 1962.
Restdenz. Frankfurt, ig43-
A very sensitive study. TORKI.l. I
Knox, G. Catalogue of the Tiepolo Drawings in the Bjurstrom, P. Giacomn Torelli and Baroque Stage
Victoria and Alhert Museum. London, i960. Design. Stockholm, 1961.
Fundamental for the study of Tiepolo as .An important contribution.
draughtsman.
Knox, G. 'The Orioft .\lbum of Tiepolo Drawings', TRAVERSI
Burl. Mag., cm (1961). Longhi, R., in Vita Artistica, 11 (1927).
Catalogue of g6 drawings. Reconstruction of Traversi's career.
Knox, G. 'Giambattista Domenico Tiepolo: "The Quintavalle, A. G., in Paragmie, \ii (1956), no. 81.
Supplementary Drawings of the Quaderno Gat-
teri" \ Bollettino del Aiusei Civici Veneziani, xi TREVISANI
(1966), no. 3,3 ff. Griseri, .\., m Paragone, Xiii (1962), no. 153.
225 sheets of drawings in the Museo Correr,

supplementary to the publication of the Gat- VACCARiNi see Sicily under heading cities and
:
teri Album published in 1946 by G. Loren- provinces

zetti.
Knox, G. 'G. B. Tiepolo and the Ceiling of the Scalzi', vaccaro, a.

Burl. Mag., CX (1968), 394. Commodo Izzo, M. .4ndrea Vaccaro pittore. Naples,
Knox, G. Tiepolo. .4 Bicentenary E.xhthition 1770- 1951.
igjo. Fogg Art Museum, Harvard Univ., 1970.
Indispensable for students of Tiepolo as a VALENTIN
draughtsman. Ivanoff, N. Valentin de Boulogne. Milan, 1966.
Knox, G., and Thiem, C. Tiepolo. Zeichmingen von Longhi, R., in La Revue des .4rts, vili (1958).
Giambattista, Domenico und Lorenzo Tiepolo aus der With ceiivre catalogue.
Graphischen Sammlung der Staatsgalerie Stuttgart . . .
Stuttgart, 1970. VALERI

An excellent, fully illustrated catalogue of 210 Valeri, U. L' ultimo allievo del Bernini : .4ntonio Valeri.
numbers. Rome, 1946.
Lorenzetti, G. .Mostra del Tiepolo. Catalogo. Venice, Monograph on the uninteresting teacher of
1951- Canevari, Salvi, and Vanvitelli.
With chronological survey and full biblio-
graphy. VALLE, F. della
Molmenti, P. G. B. Tiepolo. Milan, 1909. Honour, H., in Connoisseur, cxli\ (1959).
The classic monograph. With ceuvre catalogue.
Morassi, A. G. B. Tiepolo. His Life and Work. Lon- Moschini, V., in L'.4rte, xxviii (1925).
don, 1955.
A reliable survey; selected bibliography. VANVITELLI, G.
Morassi, A. A Complete Catalogue of the Paintings of Briganti, G. Caspar Van Wit tele I' nrigine della veduta
G. B. Tiepolo. London, 1962. settecentesca. Rome, 1966.
Basic, despite the criticism by M.
harsh A broad study of topographical landscape
Levey, in Art. Bull., XLV (1963), 293. painting. CEuvre catalogue; richly illustrated.
Puppi, L. 'I Tiepolo a Vicenza e le statue dei "Nanni" Supersedes all previous writings on G. v. W.
di villa Valmarana a S. Bertiano', .4tti dell' Istituto Review W. Vitzthum, Burl. Mag., Cix (1967),
Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed .-irti (Classe di scienze 317 f-
BIBLOSARTE
6i9
VANVITELLl, L. Oechshn, W. 'Ln tempio di .\losc. I disegni ofterti da

Atti dello VIII lanvegno nazumale di siorui ileH'iiri/ii- B. .\. Vittone all'Accademia di San I.uca nel 1733',
tettura. Rome, 1956. Bull. d'Arle. Lii (1967), 167 fl.
The first half of the \olumc with contribu- Identification of Vittone's reception piece for
tions by many authors is- dedicated to L. the .Accademia di S. Luca, 1733.
Vanvitelli. Olivero, E. Le opere di Bernardo .intnnw I'lttone.
CaroseUi, M. R. La Reggiii di Caserla. Laiori cosio Turin, 1920.
effetti delld aistruzume. Milan, iq68. .\ valuable collection of facts.
Important study by a social historian based Panizza, A., a.o. S. Liiigi Gonzaga di Curteranzo.
on new documents. Turin, 1970.
Chierici, G. La Reggiu di Caserta. Rome, 1937. New .\ co-operative enterprise published by the
ed., u)6q. Istituto di Elementi di Architettura e Rilie\o
Fagiolo-dell'Arco, M. Funzioni simboli valori delta Monumenti. Scholarly work by architects, of
Reggia di Caserta. Rome, 1963. considerable interest.
Fichera, F. Liiigi lurivitelli. Rome, 1937. Portoghesi, P. Bernardo Viiione. I n artliiletto ira
Not very satisfactory; some documents, bib- Illumimsmo e Rococo. Rome, 1966.
liography- For the time being the standard monograph.
Galasso, E. V'atniielli n ficHt'cCH/^. Benevento, 1959. .\ new situation will be created by the publi-
New documents. cation of about 20 papers (presently in the

Stoppel, W. E. 'Der .\rco Clementino Van\ itcllisund press) delivered at the \ ittone Congress of
die Statue Cornacchinis im Ehrenbogen fiir Clemens 1970 in Turin.
XII in .Ancona', Rhm. Jahrh. f. Kunstg., Xil (1969), Rodolfo, G., in .•///; della soc. piemoniese di arch, e belle
203 ff. aril. .\v(i933).
Vanvitelli, L. Dichiaraztone dei disegni del real palazzo Documents.
di Caserta. Naples, 1756. Wittkowcr, R. 'Vittone's Drawings in the Musee des
With engravings of Vanvitelli's project. ArtsDccoTaiiis'yin S I udiesm Renaissance and Baroijue
Art presented lu Anthony Blunt. London, 1967.
VASANZio (Van Santen)
Hoogewerfl, G. J., in Roma, \i (1928), Palladia, \\ VITTOZZI
(1942), and Arch, della R. Dep. ronuina di sluria Carboneri, N. Ascanio Vilozzi. L n architetto tra
patria, LXVl (1943). Maniensmo e Baroccn. Rome, 1966.
.•\ fully documented critical monograph. Re-
VASSALLO view bv V. .Moccagatta in Palladio. \\ 1 ( 1966),
Grosso, O. 'A. M. Vassallo e la pittura d'animali nei 183 ft.'
primi del '600 a Genova", Dedalo. iii (1922 3). Scotti, A. Ascanio Vitozzi ingegnere diicale a Torino
(publication of the Istituto di storia dell'arte
VER.MEXIO medievale e moderna all'Lniversita di .Vlilano).
.^gnello, G. / Vermexui. Florence, 1959. Florence, 1970.
VITTONE WITTEL, G. VAN SCe VANVITELLI, G.

Baracca, C. 'Bernardo Vittone e I'architettura guari-
niana', Torino, xvi (1938). ZANCHI, A.
Brayda, C, in Boll. Soc. Piemontese. n.s. i (1947). Riccoboni, .\. '.\ntonio Zanchi e la pittura vcneziana
Carboneri, N., m Quadenii. xiiqf^T,), nos 55-60, 59-74. del Seicento', Saggi e .\lemorie di storia delFarte. v
Discussion of the Turin \ olume of drawings (1966), 55-134.
preparatory to V.'s publication of his Treatise Full biography, catalogue raisonne. and biblio-
of 1766 and publication of drawings for the graphy.
church at Pecetto Torinese.
Carboneri, N., and \'iale, V. Bernardo I'lltone ZLCCARELLI
architetto. \ercelli, 1967. Bassi Rathgeb, R. in album inedilo di Francesco
First-rate exhibition catalogue, published on Zuccarelli. Bergamo, 1948.

the occasion of the restoration of Vittone's S.
Chiara at Vercelli.
BIBLOSARTE
Levey, M. 'F. Z. in England', Italian Studies, xiv zumbo

J'^59)- Lightbown, R. W., in Burl. Mas;., cvi 486
(1064) t fl
Rosa, G. Ziicairelh. Milan, 1952.
563 ft
Slight text.
pjrst professional attempt at assessing the work
in wax of this remarkable artist.
BIBLOSARTE
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Sculpture; If the medium is not given, it is always 18. Annibale Carracci; The Farncse Gallery, begun
marble 1597. Frescoes. Rome, Palazzo Farnese (G.F.N.)
Painting; If the medium is not given, it is always oil 19. Annibale Carracci; Polyphemus. Farnese Gallery
Abbreviation G.F.N. Gabinetto Fotografico Nazion-
; [cf i8| (G.F.N.)
ale, Rome 20. .\nnibale Carracci ; The Triumph of Bacchus and
Ariadne. Farnese Gallery |cf. i8| (Anderson)
21. Annibale Carracci ; The .Assumption of the Virgin,

1601. Rome. S. Maria del Popolo, Cerasi Chapel (.A.
Villani & Figli)
1. Rome, piazza and fa(;ade of St Peter's (Anderson) 22.Annibale Carracci The Flight into Egypt,
; 1604. <".
2. Flaminio Ponzio; Rome, S. Maria Maggiore, Cap- Rome, Galleria Dona-Pamphili (\. Villani & Figli)
peila Paolina, 1605-11 23. .Annibale Carracci; Man with a .Monkey, before
3. Rome, S. Maria Maggiore, Cappella Paolina, I'omb 1595. Florence, ijfizi (\. \ illani & Figli)
of Paul V, 1608-15 (Alinari) 24. Orazio Gentileschi; The .Annunciation, probably

4. Rome, S. Maria Maggiore, Cappella Paolina. One 1623. Turin, Pinacoleca (Anderson)
of the pendentives and arches with frescoes by the 25. Orazio Borgianni; St Charles Borromeo, 161 1-12.
Cavaliere d'Arpino and Guido Rcni, 1610 12 Rome, S. Carlo alle Qûattro Fontane (G.F.N.)
(Alinari) 26. Carlo Saraceni; St Raymond preaching, c. 1614.
5. Giovan Battista Soria; Rome, S. Gregorio Magno, Rome. Chiesa della Casa Generaltzta dei Padrt Mer-
1629-33 (Alinari) cedart (.Alinari)
6.Flaminio Ponzio and Giovanni Vasanzio; Rome, S. 27. Giovanni Serodine; Portrait of his Father, 1628.
Sebastiano, 1609-13 (Alinari) Lugano. Museo Ctvico (V. Vicari author's copyright)
;
7. Flaminio Ponzio and Giovanni Vasanzio; Rome, S. 28. Pieter van Laer(?); The Brandy-Vendor, after
Sebastiano, 1609-13 (Alinari) 1625. Rome, Galleria Naztonale (G.F.N.)

8. Giovanni Vasanzio; Rome, Villa Borghese, 1613- 29. Domenichino; St Cecilia before the Judge, 1613
15.From a painting (Anderson) 14. Fresco. Rome, S. Luigi de' Francesi (Anderson)
9. Frascati, Villa Mondragone. Garden front. Begun 30. Francesco .Albani; Earth, one of a series of The
byM.Longhi, 1573, continued by Vasanzio, 1614 21 Four Elements, 1626-8. Turin. Pinacoleca (Alinari)
(Alinari) 31.Guido Reni; The Triumph of Samson, c. 1620.
10. Flaminio Ponzio; Rome, Acqua Paola, 1610 14 Bologna. Pinacoleca (.A. Villani & P'igli)
(Anderson) 32. Guido Reni; .Aurora, 1613-14. Fresco. Rome,
11. Caravaggio; Bacchus, c. 1595. Florence, Uffizt Palazzo Rospigliosi, Casino dell' Aurora (.Anderson)
(Alinari) 33. Guido Reni; The .Assumption of the Virgin, 1616-

12. Caravaggio; Supper at Emmaus, c. 1600. London, 17. Genoa. S. Amhrogio (Brogi)
National Gallery (Reproduced by courtesy of the 34. Giovanni Lanfranco; The Gods of Olympus (re-
Trustees, the National Gallery, London) painted) and Personifications of Rivers, 1624 5. De-
tail of ceiling fresco. Rome. Villa Bwr^/uw (.Anderson)
13. Caravaggio; Conversion of St Paul, 1600-1. Rome,
S. Maria del Populo. Cerast Chapel (Anderson) 35. Giovanni Lanfranco; The Virgin in Glory, 1625-
14. Caravaggio; Raising of Lazarus, 1608-9. Messina, 7. Fresco. Rome. S. Andrea della Valle. ^«mf (G.F.N.)
Museo Nazwnale (Alinari) 36. Guercino; .Aurora, 162 1-3. Fresco. Rome. Casino
Caravaggio; Martyrdom of St Matthew, 1599. Ludovisi (Anderson)
15.
37. Alessandro Tiarini: St Dominic resuscitating a
Rome, S. Luigt de' Francesi, Conlarelli Chapel
(Anderson) Child, 1614-15. Bologna. S. Domenico (A. Villani &
Figli)
16. Annibale Carracci; The Virgin with St John and
St Catherine, 1593. Bologna, Pinacoleca (Alinari) 38. Giacomo Cavedoni; The Virgin and Child with
17. Lodovico Carracci; The Holy Family with St SS. Alo and Petronius, 1614. Bologna, Pinacoleca
Francis, 591 Cento, Museo Cnico (A. Villani& Figli)
1 .
(.Alinari)
BIBLOSARTE
622 • LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
39. Mastellctta : The Rest on the Flight into Egypt, c\ 62. Giovanni de' Medici, .Alessandro Picroni, .Matteo
1620. Bdhifjia. Ptnatdteca (Alinari) Nigetti, Bernardo Buontalenti: Florence, S. Lorenzo,
40. Carlo Bonone: The Guardian Angel, c. 1610. Cappella dei Principi, begun 1603 (Alinari)
Ferrara, Pinacnleca (Alinari) 63. Stefano .Maderno: Hercules and Cacus, c. 1610.
41.Bartolommeo Schedoni: Christian Charity, 161 1. Dresden, Alhertinum (Staatliche Kunstsammlung,
Naples. Museo Nazwnale (Anderson) Dresden)
42. Cigoli:The Ecstasy ot St Francis, 1596. Florence. 64. Pietro Bernini: St John the Baptist, 1614 15.
S. Marco, Museum (Alinari) Rome. S. Andrea della Valle (.Anderson)
43. Cerano: The Virgin of the Rosary, c\ 161 5. Milan. 65. Camillo Mariani: St Catherine of .'Mexandria,
Brera (Alinari) 1600. Rome. S. Bernardo alle Terme (G.F.N.)
44. Morazzone: Ecce Homo Chapel, 1609-13. Fres- 66. Francesco .Mochi : The Virgin of the Annunciation,
coes. V'arallo, Sacro Monte (Alinari) 1603-8. Onieto. Museo dell'Opera (Alinari)
45. Giulio Cesare Procaccini: St Mary Magdalen, c. 67. Francesco Mochi: Alessandro Farnese, 1620-5.
1616. Milan. Brera (Alinari) Bronze. Piacenza. Piazza Cavalli (.Alinari)
46. Antonio d'Enrico, il Tanzio: David, c. 1620. 68. Francesco Mochi: Christ, from the Baptism, after
Varallo. Pinacnieca (Ferruccio Lazzeri) 1 634. Rome. formerly Ponte Molle (Calderisi author's ;
47. Daniele Crespi: St Charles Borromeo at Supper, copyright)

c. 1628. Milan. Chiesa delta Passione (Alinari) 69. Pietro Tacca: Philip IV, 1634-40. Madrid. Plaza
48. Gioacchino Assereto: The Supper at Emmaus, de Oriente (Foto Mas)
after 1630. Genoa. Private Collection (Brogi) 70. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Bust of Urban VHL 1640-
49. Domenico Fetti: The Good Samaritan, c. 1622. 2. Bronze. Detail. Spoleto. Cathedral (G.F.N.)
New York, Metropolitan Museum (Metropolitan 71. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Aeneas and Anchises, 1618-
Museum of Art) 19. Rome. Galleria Borghese (Anderson)
50. Giovanni Lys: The Vision of St Jerome, c. 1628. 72. Gianlorenzo Bernini: David, 1623. Rome. Galleria
Venice, S. Nicolo da Tolentino (Alinari) Borghese (Schneider-Lengyel, by permission of the
51. Carlo Maderno: Rome, S. Susanna, 1597- 1603 Phaidon Press)
(Anderson) 73.Gianlorenzo Bernini StBibiana, : l62.^-6. Rome, S.
52. Rome, Palazzo Barberini, 1628-33. P'^n adapted Bibiana (Foto Vasari, Rome)
from drawing by N. Tessin showing the palace be-
a 74. Gianlorenzo Bernini: St Longinus, 1629-38.
fore rebuildingoff. 1670 (CourtesyHoward Hibbard) Rome. St Peter's (Anderson)
53. Carlo Maderno and Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, 75. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Bust of Pope Paul V, 1618.
Palazzo Barberini, 1628-33. Centre of fa9ade( Ander- Rome. Galleria Borghese (Schneider-Lengyel, by
son) permission of the Phaidon Press)
54. Fabio Mangone: Milan, Collegio Elvetico (Archi- 76. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Bust of Cardinal Scipione
first courtyard, begun 1608 (Alinari)
vio di Stato), Borghese, 1632. Rome. Galleria Borghese (Anderson)
55. Lorenzo Binago: Milan, S. Alessandro, begun 77. Gianlorenzo Bernini: St Mary Magdalen, 1661-3.
1601. Plan (Adapted from C. Baroni, Uarchitettura Siena. Cathedral. Cappella Chigi (Anderson)
lombarda da Bramante al Richtni. figure 174) 78. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Angel with the Crown
56. Francesco Maria Ricchino: Milan, S. Giuseppe, of Thorns, 1668-71. Rome. S. Andrea delle Fratte
begun 1607. Section and plan (E. Cattaneo, // San (Anderson)
Giuseppe del Richmi, figures 30, 32) 79. Gianlorenzo Bernini The Angel with the Super-
:
57. Francesco Maria Ricchino: Milan, S. Giuseppe, scription, 1668-71. Rome. S. Andrea delle Fratte
begun 1 607 (Cassa di Risparmio delle Provincie Lom- (Anderson)
barde) 80. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Prophet Habakkuk,
58. Francesco Maria Ricchino: Milan, Collegio Elve- 1655-61. Rome. S. Maria del Popolo, Cappella Chigi
tico (Archivio di Stato). Facade, designed 1627 (Anderson)
(Alinari) 81. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Altieri Chapel with the
59. Giovanni Magenta: Bologna, S. Salvatore, 1605- Blessed Lodovica Albertoni, 1674. Rome, S. Fran-
23. Plan cesco a Ripa (Schneider-Lengyel, by permission of
60. Bartolomeo Bianco: Genoa, University, planned the Phaidon Press)
1630. Courtyard (Alinari) 82. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Constantine, seen from the
61. Bartolomeo Bianco: Genoa, University, planned portico, 1654-68. Rome, St Peter's (Schneider-
1630. Section and plan (Haupt, Palastarchttektur, 1, Lengyel, by permission of the Phaidon Press)
plate 14)
BIBLOSARTE
623
83 Gianlorenzo Bernini: Tomb of Urban VIII, 1628 105. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, S. Andrea al
47. Bronze and marble. Rome, St Peter's (Anderson) Quirinale, 1658-70 (.Marburg)
84. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Cx)rnaro Chapel, 1645- 106. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, Palaz-'.o di Monte-
52. Eighteenth-century painting. Schwerin, Museum begun 1650 (Anderson)
citorio,
(Photo A. Heuschkel) 107. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, Palazzo Chigi-
85. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Kcstasy of St Teresa, Odescalchi, begun 1664. With N. Salvi's additions,
1645-52. Rome, S. Maria delta Vtttona, Cornaro i745(G.F.N.)
Chapel (Anderson) 108. Gianlorenzo Bernini First project forthe Louvre,
:
86. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Baldacchino, 1624-33. 1664. Plan (From a drawing in the Louvre, Paris)
Bronze. Rome, St Peter's (Brogi) 109. Carlo Maderno: Rome, St Peter's. Fav'ade.
87. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Cathedra of St Peter, 1656- .VL Greuter's engraving, 1613
66. Bronze, marble, and stucco. Rome, St Peter's no. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, St Peter's. Facade
(Leonard von Matt) with free-standing towers. Drawing, c. 1650. Rome,
88. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Detail from the Cathedra of Vatican Library
St Peter [cf. 87] 111. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, Vatican Palace,
89. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Tomb of Alexander VII, Scala Regia, 1663-6 ( Alinari)
167 1 -8. Rome, St Peter's (Anderson) 112. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, The Piazza of St
90. Gianlorenzo Bernini Bust of Costanza Buonarelli,
: Peter's. Detail (Eric de .Mare)
c. 1635. Florence, Bargello (Brogi, by permission of 113. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, The Piazz.a of St
the Phaidon Press) Peter's, begun 1656. Aerial view Alterocca) (
91. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Bust of Louis XIV, 1665. 1 14. Francesco Borromini Rome, Palazzx) Barberini,
:
Versailles, Castle (Giraudon) facade. Window next to the arcaded centre, c. 1630
92. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Triton Fountain, 1642-3. (From Magni, // Roma)
Barocco a
Travertine. Rome, Piazza Barberini (Chauflburier) 115. Francesco Borromini: Rome,S. Carlo alle
93. Gianlorenzo Bernini: The Four Rivers Fountain, Quattro Fontane, 1638 41. Plan (Hempel, Borro-
1648-51. Travertine and marble. Rome, Piazza mini, figure 5)
Navona (AUnari) 116. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Carlo alle

94. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Monument of Louis XIV. Quattro Fontane, 1638 41. Section (From /nsignmm
Wash drawing, id-j],. Bassano MuseoCivtco(G .¥ .N.)
, Romae Templorum prospectus, 1684)
95. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, S. Bibiana, 1624-6 117. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Carlo alle
(G.F.N.) Quattro Fontane, 1638 41. View towards high altar
96. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Castelgandolfo, S. Tomaso (Alinari)
di Villanova, 1658-61. Plan (Brauer-Wittkowcr, 118. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Carlo alle
Zeichnungen des G. L. Bernini, plate 170a) Quattro Fontane, 1638 41. Dome (.Alinari)
97. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Castelgandolfo, S. Tomaso 119. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Carlo alle
di Villanova, 1658-61. View into dome (Anderson) Quattro Fontane. Favade, 1665 7 (Alinari)
98. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Ariccia, S. Maria dell' 120. Detail of illustration 119, with .Antonio Raggi's
Assunzione, 1662-4. Exterior (G.F.N.) Borromeo (Alinari)

statue of St Charles
99. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Ariccia, S. Maria delP 121. Francesco Rome, S. Ivo della
Borromini:
Assunzione, 1662-4. P'^" (From a seventeenth- Sapienza, 1642-50. Plan (From F. Borromini, Opus
century engraving) architectonicum, 1 725)
100. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Maria
.Ariccia, S. dell' 122. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Ivo della
Assunzione, 1662-4. Section. Engraving Sapienza, 1642 50. Interior (Vasari & Figlio)
loi. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Ariccia, S. Maria dell' 123. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Ivo della
Assunzione, 1662-4. View into dome (.Anderson) Sapienza, 1642-50. Plan (Qiiadernt (i953). "«• '.
102. Gianlorenzo Rome, S. .Andrea al

Bernini: figure 3)
Quirinale, 1658-70. Plan (From Jnstgnium Romae 124. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Ivo della
Templorum prospectus, 1684) Sapienza, 1642 50. Dome (Vasari & Figlio)
125. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S.
Ivo della
103. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, S. Andrea al
Quirinale, 1658-70. Section. Engraving Sapienza, 1642-50. \ iew from the courtyard (Paolo
Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, S. .Andrea al Portoghesi)

104.
Quirinale, 1658-70. View towards the altar 126. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Giovanni in
(Schneider-Lengyel, by permission of the Phaidon Laterano. Nave, 1646-9 (Alinari)
Press)
BIBLOSARTE
127. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Agnese in 149. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, S. Maria in Via Lata.
Piazza Navona, begun 1652. Section and plan (From (G.F.N.)
Interior of portico
Insigntum Riimae Templorum prospeclus, 1684) 150. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, S. Carlo a! Corso.
128. Francesco Borromini:Rome, S. Agnese in Dome, begun 668 (From Magni, //5ar«cfo a Roma)
1
Piazza Navona, begun by Girolamo and Carlo 151. Pietro da Cortona: St Bibiana refuses to sacrifice
Rainaldi in 1632. Interior (Anderson) to Idols, 1624-6. Fresco. Rome, S. Btbiana (G.F.N.)
129. F"rancesco Borromini: Rome, S. Agnese in 152. Pietro da Cortona: The Rape of the Sabine
Piazza Navona. Faijade, 1653-5, completed 1666 by Women, c. 1629. Rome, Capitoline Museum
other hands (Anderson) (Anderson)
130. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Andrea delle 153. Pietro da Cortona: Glorification of Urban VIII's
Fratte. Tower and dome, 1653-65 (Alinari) Reign, 1633-9. Fresco. Rome. Palazzo Barherim,
131. Francesco Borromini: Rome, S. Maria dei Sette Gran Salone (Anderson)
Dolori, begun 1642-3. Interior (Oscar Savio) 154. Pietro da Cortona: Florence, Palazzo Pitti, Sala
132. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Collegio di Propa- di Marte, 1646. Ceiling. Fresco (Alinari)
ganda Fide. Church, 1662-4 (Vasari & Figlio) 155. Pietro da Cortona: Florence, Palazzo Pitti, Sala
133. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Collegio di Propa- di Giove, 1643-5. Stuccoes (Alinari)
ganda Fide. Vaulting of the church (Oscar Savio) 156. Pietro da Cortona: Florence, Palazzo Pitti, Sala
134. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Oratory of St di Apollo, 1647. Stuccoes (Alinari)
Philip Neri. Facade, 1637-40 (Anderson) 157. Pietro da Cortona The Trinity in Glory (dome),
:
135. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Oratory of St 1647-51, and The Assumption of the Virgin (apse),
Philip Neri and Monastery, begun 1637. Plan (From 1655-60. Frescoes. Rome, S. Maria in Vallicella
F. Borromini, Opus archttectonicum, 1725) (Alinari)
136. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Palazzo Falconieri, 158. Pietro da Cortona: Xenophon's Sacrifice to
1646-9. River front (Anderson) Diana, after 1653. Rome, Palazzo Barherim (for-
137. Francesco Borromini: Rome, Collegio di Propa- merly) (Anderson)
ganda Fide. Facade, 1662 (Paolo Portoghesi) 159. Andrea Sacchi: St Gregory and the Miracle of
138. Francesco Borromini Rome, Collegio di Propa-
: the Corporal, 1625-7. Rome, Vatican Pinacoteca
ganda Fide. Centre bay, 1662 (Alinari) (Anderson)
139. Pietro da Cortona: Rome (vicinity). Villa del 160. Andrea Sacchi: The Vision of St Romuald, c.
Pigneto, before 1630. Destroyed. Engraving (Au- 163 1.Rome, Vatican Pinacoteca (Anderson)
thor's photograph) 161. Andrea Sacchi: La Divina Sapienza, 1629-33.
140. Pietro da Cortona: Rome (vicinity). Villa del Fresco. Rome, Palazzo Barherim (G.F.N.)
Pigneto, plan. Drawn by P. L. Ghezzi. London, Sir 162. Alessandro Algardi: St Mary Magdalen, c. 1628.
Anthony Blunt (Author's photograph) Stucco. Rome, S. Silvestro al Qitirtnale (Alinari)
141. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, Palazzo Barberini. 163. Alessandro Algardi: Bust of Cardinal Laudivio
Entrance to the theatre, c. 1640 (Alinari) Zacchia, i626(.'). Berlin, Staatliche Museen (Staat-
142. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, SS. Martina e Luca, liche Museen)
1635-50. Section and plan (From Insignium Romae 164. Alessandro Algardi: Bust of Camillo(?)Pamphili,
Templorum prospectus, 1684) after 1644. Rome, Palazzo Dona (Alinari)
143. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, SS. Martina e Luca, 165. Alessandro Algardi: Tomb of Leo XI, 1634-44.
1635-50. Interior (G.F.N.) Rome, St Peter's (Alinari)
144A and B. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, SS. Martina e 166. Alessandro Algardi: The Meeting of Pope Leo I
Luca, 1635-50. Dome, interior and exterior (Paolo and Attila, 1646-53. Rome, St Peter's (Alinari)
Portoghesi and Magni, // Barocco a Roma) 1 67. Alessandro Algardi : The Decapitation of St Paul,
145. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, SS. Martina e Luca, 1641-7. Bologna, S. Paolo (Alinari)
1635-50. Facade (Anderson) 168. Francesco Duquesnoy: St Susanna, 1629-33.
146. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, S. Maria della Pace, Rome, S. Maria dt Loreto (G.F.N.)
1656-7. Plan of church and piazza (From a drawing 169. Francesco Duquesnoy: St Susanna, 1629-33.
in the Vatican Library) Detail. Rome, S. Maria di Loreto (Anderson)
147. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, S. Maria della Pace, 170. Francesco Duquesnoy: St Andrew, 1629 40.
1656-7. Fa9ade (Anderson) Rome, St Peter's (Anderson)
148. Pietro da Cortona: Rome, S. Maria in Via Lata. 171. Francesco Duquesnoy: Tomb of Ferdinand van
Facade, 1658-62 (Anderson) den Evnde, 1633-40. Rome, S. Maria delFAntma

(G.F.N.)
BIBLOSARTE
f)-25
172. Francesco Duquesnoy : A Putto from the Andrien 192. GherardoSilvani: Florence, S. Gaetano. Facade,
Vryburch Tomb, 1629. Rome, S. Maria dell' Anima 1645 (Brogi)
(G.F.N.) 193. Cosimo Fanzago: Naples, S. Martino. Cloisters,
173. Francesco Duquesnoy; A Putto, after 1630. detail, c. 1630 (Alinari)
Bronze. London. Victoria and Albert Museum (Vic- 194. Cosimo Fanzago: Naples, S. Maria Egiziaca,
toriaand Albert Museum) 1651-17 17. Section and plan (Pane, Architellura
174. Francesco Duquesnoy: Putto Frieze, 1640-2. dell'eta harocca a Napoli, 107, 108)
Terracotta model for SS. .Apostoli (Naples). For- 195. .Andrea Bolgi: St Helena, 1629-39. Rome, St
merly Berlin, Deutsche^ Museum (Berlin Museum) PeleVs (.\nderson)
175. Carlo Rainaldi: Rome, S. .Maria in Campitelli. 196. Melchiorre Cafta: The Ecstasy of St Catherine,
Project, 1662. S. Maria in Campitelli (Foto Vasari, finished 1667. Rome, S. Caterma da Siena a Monte
Rome; author's copyright) Magnanapoli (G.F.N.)
176. Carlo Rainaldi: Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli, 197. Melchiorre Caffa: St Thomas of Villanova dis-
1663-7. Interior (Marburg) tributing .\lms, 1661. Terracotta model. La Valletta,
Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli,
177. Carlo Rainaldi: Museum (.Author's photograph)
1663-7. Plan (From Insignium Romae Templorum 198. Ercole Ferrata: St .Agnes on the Pyre, 1660.
prospectus, 1684) Rome, S. Agnese m Piazza Navona (Alinari)
178. Carlo Rainaldi: Rome, S. Maria in Campitelli, 199. Ercole Ferrata: The Stoning of S. Emcrcnziana,
1663-7. Fa(;ade (Marburg) begun i66o(finished by Leonardo Retti, 1689 1709).
179. Carlo Maderno and Carlo Rainaldi: Rome, S. Rome, S. Agnese in Piazza Navona (.Anderson)
Andrea della Valle. Facade, 1624-9, 1661-5 200. Antonio Raggi The Death of St Cecilia, 1660-7.
:
(Marburg) Detail. Rome, S. Apiese in Piazza Navona (.Alinari)

180. Rome, Piazza del Popolo, from G. B. Nolli's plan, 201. Antonio Raggi: .Allegorical Figures, 1669-83.
1748 Rome. of nave (.Anderson)
Gesit, clerestory
181. Carlo Rainaldi and Gianlorenzo Bernini: Rome, 202. Domenico Guidi Lamentation over the Body of
:
Piazza del Popolo. S. Maria di Monte Santo and S. Christ, 1667-76. Rome, Cappella Monte dt Pieta
Maria de' MiracoH, 1662-79 (Alinari) (G.F.N.)
182. Martino Longhi the Younger: Rome, SS. Vin- 203. Gianlorenzo Bernini: Gabrielc Fonseca, <. 1668-
cenzo ed Anastasio, facade, 1646-50 (Anderson) 75. Rome, S. Lorenzo m Lucina (Leonard von Matt)
1 83. Giovan Antonio de' Rossi Rome, Palazzo D' Aste-
: 204. Giuliano Finelli: Tomb of Cardinal Giulio An-
Bonaparte, 1658-f. 1665 (Alinari) tonio Santorio, after 1630. Rome, S. Giovanni in
184. Giovan Battista Bergonzoni: Bologna, S. Maria Laterano (.Anderson)

della Vita, begun 1686. Plan (H. Strack, Central- Model for the tombs of Pietro
205. Francesco .Aprile:
und Kuppelktrchen der Renaissance m Italien, plate 30) and Francesco Bolognetti, after 1675. London, Vic-
185. Baldassare Longhena: Venice, S. Maria della toria and Albert Museum (Victoria and .Albert
Salute, begun 163 1 Section and plan (C. Santamaria,
.
Museum)
L'Architettura, (1955), and Cicogna-Diedo-Selva,
i
206. Cosimo Fancelli: The Angel with the Sudary,
Le fabbriche e i monumenti cospicui di Venezta, li) 1668-9. Rome, Ponte S. Angela (R. Moscioni)
Longhena: Venice, S. Maria della 207. Giovanni Battista Salvi, il Sassoferrato The
186. Baldassare
:
begun 1631. View towards the chapels Virgin of the Annunciation, c. 1640-50. Detail. Cas-
Salute,
(Giorgio Cini Foundation) peria (Rieti), S. Maria Nuova (G.F.N.)
187. BaldassareLonghena: Venice, S. Maria della 208. Michelangelo Cerquozzi and Viviano Codazzi:
Salute, begun 1631. View towards the high altar Roman Ruins, c. 1650. Rome. Pallaiictm Collection
(Osvaldo Bohm) (G.F.N.)
209. Pier Francesco Mola: Joseph making
himself
188. Baldassare Longhena: Venice, S. Maria della
Salute, begun 1631 (AHnari) known to his Brethren, 1657. Fresco. Rome, Palazzo
Longhena: Venice, S. Maria della del Quirinale, Gallery (G.F.N.)
189. Baldassare
Pietro Testa: Allegory of Reason, 1640-50.
Salute, begun 1631. View into the dome (Giorgio 210.
Cini Foundation) Etching

Longhena: Venice, Palazzo Pesaro, 211. Salvator Rosa: Landscape with the Finding of
190. Baldassare
1652/9- 17 10 (.^hnari) Moses, c. 1650. Detroit, Institute of Art (Detroit
191. BaldassareLonghena: Venice, Monastery of S. Institute of Art)
Giorgio Maggiore. Staircase, 1643-5 (Giorgio Cini

Foundation)
BIBLOSARTE
212. Salvator Rosa: The Temptation of St Anthony, 233. .Antonio Molinari: Fight of Centaurs and La-
c. 1645-Q. Florence, Palazzo Pitli (Soprintendenza, piths, c. 1698. Venice, Palazzo Rezzonico (Foto
Florence) Cacco, Venice)
213. Giovan Battista Gaulli: Adoration of the Name 234. Evaristo Baschenis: Still life, after 1650. Brussels,
of Jesus, 1674-9. Fresco. Rome. Gesit, ceilini; of nave Alusee des Beaux Arts (Alinari)
(.Alinari) 235. Bernardo Strozzi: St Augustine washing Christ's
214. Francesco Cozza: Apotheosis of Casa Pamphih, Feet, c. 1620-5. Genoa, Accademia Ligustica (.\linari)
1667-73. Fresco. Rome, Palazzo Pamphtli in Piazza 236. Bernardo Strozzi: David, c. 1635. Vterhouten,
Navona, Library (G.F.N.) Van Beuningen Collection (Alinari)
215. Giovan Battista Gaulli: Head of an .Angel, after 237. Valerio Castello: Rape of the Sabines, c. 1655.
1679. Fresco. Detail. Rome, Gesii, apse (G.F.N.) Genoa, Coll. Duca Nicola de Ferrari (Soprintendenza,
216. Domenico Maria Canuti and Enrico Haffner: Genoa)
Apotheosis of St Dominic, 1674-5. Fresco. Rome, 238. Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione: The Genius of
SS. Domenico e Sisto (G.F.N.) Castiglione, 1648. Etching
217. Andrea Pozzo: Allegory of the Missionary Work 239. Gregorio de Ferrari: Decorative Frescoes, 1684.
of the Jesuits, 1691 4. Fresco. Rome, S. Ignazio, Detail. Genoa, Palazzo Balbt-Groppallo, Sala delle
ceilingof nave (Alinari) Rovine (Soprintendenza, Genoa)

218. Giovanni Coli and Filippo Gherardi: The Battle 240. Gregorio de Ferrari: Death of St Scolastica, c.
of Lepanto, 1675-8. Fresco. Rome, Palazzo Colonna, 1700. Genoa, S. Stefano (Soprintendenza, Genoa)
Gallery (G.F.N, 241. Giovanni Battista Caracciolo: Liberation of St
219. Carlo Maratti: The Triumph of Clemency, after Peter, 1608-9. Naples, Chtesa del Monte della Miseri-
1673. Fresco. Rnme, Palazzo Allien, Great Hall cordia (Alinari)

(G.F.N.) 242. Artemisia Gentileschi: Judith slaying Holo-
220. Carlo Maratti: Virgin and Child with St Francis fernes, c. 1620. Florence, LJffizi (Alinari)
and St James, 1687. Rome, S. Maria dt Montesanto 243. Massimo Stanzioni: Virgin with SS. John the
(G.F.N.) Evangelist and Andrea Corsini, c. 1640. Naples, S.
22 1 Morazzone St Francis in Ecstasy,
: c. 1615. Milan, Paolo Maggiore (Alinari)
Brera (Alinari) 244. Bernardo Cavallino: The Immacolata, c. 1650.
222. Francesco del Cairo: St Francis in Ecstasy, c. Milan, Brera (Alinari)
1630. Milan, Museo del Castello Sforzesco (Alinari) 245. Mattia Preti: The Plague of 1656. Naples, Museo
223. Guido Reni: Girl with a Wreath, c. 1635. Rome, Nazionale (Alinari)
Capitoline Museum (Alinari) 246. Giovanni Battista Ruoppolo: Still life, late seven-
224. Simone Cantarini: Portrait of Guido Reni, c. teenth century. Naples, Museo di S. Martino (Alinari)
1640. Bologna, Pinacoteca (Alinari) 247. Giovanni Battista Piranesi: Plate from the Car-
225. Angelo Michele Colonna and Agostino Mitelli: ceri, 1745. Etching (Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Quadratura frescoes, 1641. Florence, Palazzo Pitti, 248. Cremona, Palazzo Stanga, early eighteenth cen-
Museo deglt Argenti, third room (Alinari) tury (Alinari)
226. Francesco Furini: Faith, c. 1635. Florence, 249. Carlo Fontana: Rome, S. Marcello. Fafade,
Palazzo Pitti (Alinari) 1682-3. Detail (Ahnari)
227. Carlo Dolci: Portrait of Fra Ainolfo de Bardi, 250. Carlo Fontana Project
: for the completion of the
1632. Florence, Palazzo P;V/; (Brogi) Piazza of St Peter's, Rome, 1694 (Fontana, Templum
228. Giulio Carpioni: Bacchanal, before 1650. Colum- Vaticanum, 420-1)
bia, South Carolina, Museum of Art (Kress Founda- 251. Francesco de Sanctis: Rome, the Spanish Stair-
tion) case, project, 1723, redrawn from the original in the
229. Giambattista Langetti: Magdalen under the Ministere des Affaires Etrangeres, Paris
Cross, after 1650. Venice, Palazzo Rezzonico, from 252. Francesco de Sanctis: Rome, the Spanish Stair-
Le Terese case, 1723-6 (Alinari)
230. Francesco Maffei Parable of the Workers
: in the 253. Filippo Raguzzini: Rome, Piazza S. Ignazio,
Vineyard, c. 1650. Verona, Museo di Castelvecchio 1727-8. Plan (Fokker, Roman Barocjue Art, figure
(Alinari) 240)
231. Sebastiano Mazzoni: Annunciation, c. 1650. 254. Gabriele Valvassori: Rome, Palazzo Doria-
Venice,Accademia (Alinari) Pamphili, 1730-5. Detail (Alinari)
232. Cecco Bravo: Apollo and Daphne, c. 1650. 255. Nicola Salvi: Rome, Fontana Trevi, 1732-62
Ravenna, Pinacoteca (Alinari) (Anderson)
BIBLOSARTE
627
256. Ferdinando F"uga : Rome, Palazzo della Consulta, 278. Guarino Guarini: Turin, Cappella SS. Sindone,
1732-7 (Alinari) 1667-90. Section from Architettura civile. 1737
257. Carlo Maderno: Rome, St Peter's. Facade, 1605- 279.Guarino Guarini: Turin, Cappella SS. Sindone,
13. Detail (Alinari) 1667-90. View into dome (.lames .Austin)
258. Alessandro Galilei: Rome, S. Giovanni in Late- 280. Guarino Guarini: Turin, Cappella SS. Sindone,
rano. Facade, 1733-6. Detail (Alinari) 1667-90. Exterior of dome (.•\linari)
259. Andrea Tirali: Venice, S. Nicolo da Tolentino. 281. Guarino Guarini: Turin, S. Lorenzo, 1668 87.
Facade, 1706-14 (.\linari) Plan from Architettura cnile. 1737 (plate 4)
260. Giorgio Massari: Venice, Chiesa dei Gesuati, 282. Guarino Guarini: Turin, S. Lorenzo, 1668 87.
1726-43 (Osvaldo Bohm) View of the interior (James .Austin)
261. Giorgio Massari : Venice, Palazzo Grassi-Stucky, 283.Guarino Guarini: Turin, S. Lorenzo, 1668 87.
1749 ff. (.\linari) View into main dome and dome of the presbytery
262. Giovanni Antonio Scalfarotto: Venice, SS. (from G. \\. Crepaldi. La Real Chiesa di .San Lnrenzii
Simeone e Giuda, 1718-38 (Osvaldo Bohm) in Torinu. published by Rotocaico Dagnino, Via
263. Giovanni Antonio Scalfarotto: Venice, SS. Giuria 20, Turin)
Simeone e Giuda, 1718-38. Section and plan (Ci- 284. Filippo Juvarra: lurin, Palazzo .Madama, 1718-
cogna-Diedo-Selva, Le fabhrtche e mmumenti cu- 1 21. Fa(;ade (.Anderson)
sptcut di Venezia, 11, plates 200, 201) 285. Filippo Juvarra: Stupinigi, Castle, 1729-33
264. Francesco Maria Preti: Stra, Villa Pisani, 1735- (.Alinari)
56 (Osvaldo Bohm) 286. Filippo Juvarra: Stupinigi, Castle, 1729 33.

265. Carlo Francesco Dotti : Bologna, Madonna di S. Plan (Tellucini, L'arte dell'architettn F. Juvarra, 91)
Luca, 1723-57. Plan (H. Strack, Central und Kuppel- 287. Filippo Juvarra: Turin, Chiesa del Carmine,
kirchen der Renaissance in Ilalien, plate 30) 1732-5. View towards altar (\ ittorio \ iale, 'Turin)
266. Giambattista Piacentini: Bologna, Palazzo di 288. Filippo Juvarra: Turin, Chiesa del Carmine,
Giustizia. Staircase hall, 1695 (Alinari) 1732-5. Section (Brinckmann, Theatrum Suvuni
267. Antonio Arrighi; Cremona, Palazzo Dati. Stair- Pe demon til. 194)
case hall, 1769 (Alinari) 289. Filippo Juvarra: Supcrga near Turin, 1717 31
268. Cremona, Palazzo Dati. Plan; staircase by An- (Alinari)
tonio .Arrighi, 1769 (Haupt, Palast-Architektur, v, 290. Filippo Juvarra: Supcrga near Turin, 1717 31.
plate 50) Section and plan (M. Paroletti, Descriptum histonqiie
269. Ferdinando Sanfelice: Naples, Palazzo San- de la hasiliqiie de Superga. plate 6)
1728 (Author's photograph)
felice. Staircase, 291. F"ilippo Juvarra: Sketch for the Duomo Nuovo,
270. Ferdinando Sanfelice: Naples, palace in Via Turin, after 1729 (From a drawing in the .\luseo
Foria. Double staircase and plan (Pane, Archtletlura Civico, Turin)

dell'eta harncca a Napolt, 187) 292. Filippo Juvarra: Stupinigi, Castle, 1729-33.
271. Luigi Vanvitelli: Caserta, former Royal Palace, Great Hall (Ahnari)
begun 1752. Detail of facade (.\linari) 293. Bernardo Vittone: Vallinotto near Carignano,
272. Luigi Vanvitelli: Caserta, former Royal Palace, Sanctuary, 1738-9 (Author's photograph)
begun 1752. Plan (From L. Vanvitelli, Dtchiarazwne 294. Bernardo Aittone: Vallinotto near Carignano,
dei dtsegni del Real Palazzo di Caserta. 1756) Sanctuary, 1738-9. Section and plan. Engraving
273. Luigi Vanvitelli: Caserta, former Royal Palace, (Author's photograph)
begun 1752. Staircase (Alinari) 295. Bernardo \ittone: Vallinotto, Sanctuary,
view
274. Guarino Guarini Messina, Church ot the Soma-

; into dome (Prof. Paolo Portoghesi)
scian Order. Project, i66o( ?). Engraving from Archi- 296. Bernardo Vittone: Bra, S. Chiara, 1742. Eleva-
tettura civile, 1737 tion, section, and plan. Engraving (Author's photo-
275. Guarino Guarini: Paris, Sainte-.\nne-la-Royale, graph)
297. Bernardo Vittone: Bra, S. Chiara, 1742. View
begun 1662. Destroyed. Section from Architettura
civile, 1737 into dome (Prof Paolo Portoghesi)
Guarino Guarini: Lisbon, S. Maria della Divina 298. Bernardo Vittone; Turin, S. Maria di Piazza,
276.
Providenza. Plan from Architettura civile, 1737 part of the church and choir, 175 1-4. Section and
(plate 17) plan (From B. A ittone, Istruzumi diverse. 1766)

Bernardo Vittone: Villanova di .\londovi, S.
277. Guarino Guarini: Turin, Cappella SS. Sindone, 299.
Croce, View into vaulting (Prof Paolo
1667-90. Plan from Architettura civile, 1737 (plate 2) 1755.
Portoghesi)
BIBLOSARTE
628 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
300. Pierre Legros the Younger: St Louis Gonzaga 322. Luigi Vanvitelli: Caserta, Castle. The great
in Glory, 1698-9. Rome, S. Ignazio (Alinari) cascade, 1776 (Alinari)
c.
301. Giuseppe Mazzuoli: Angels carrying the Cibo- 323. Giacomo Serpotta: Courage, 1714-17. Palermo,
rium, c. 1700. Siena, S. Marttnn S. Domenico, Oratorio del Rosario (.Alinari)
302. Filippo Carcani: Stucco decoration, c. 1685. 324. Luca Giordano: Triumph of Judith, 1704.
Rome, S. Giovanni in Laterano, Cappella Lan- Fresco. Naples, S. Martino, Cappella del Tesoro
cellotti (Alinari) (Ahnari)
303. Camillo Rusconi: St Matthew, 1713-15. Rome, 325. Francesco Solimena: The Fall of Simon Magus,
S. Giovanni in Laterano (Anderson) 1690. Fresco. Naples, S. Paolo Alaggiore (Alinari)
304. Agostino Cornacchini: The Guardian Angel, 326. Corrado Giaquinto: Minerva presenting Spain
1729. Orvieto, Ca//;f^rtf/(Raffaelli-Armoni; author's to Jupiter and Juno. Oil sketch for a ceiling, c. 1751,
copyright) now in the Palazzo Sanseverino, Rome. London,
305. Giovanni Battista Maini: Monument to Cardinal National Gallery (Reproduced by permission of the
Neri Corsini, 1732-5. Rome, S. Giovanni in Laterano, Trustees, the National Gallery, London)
Cappella Corsini (Anderson) 327. Sebastiano Conca: The Crowning of St Cecilia,
306. Filippo della Valle: Temperance, Rome,
c. 1735. 1725. Fresco. Rome, S. Cecilia (Anderson)
S. Giovanni in Laterano, Cappella Corsini (Anderson) 328. Marco Benefial: Transfiguration, c. 1730. Vet-
307. Pietro Stefano Monnot: Tomb of Innocent XI, ralla, S. Andrea (G.F.N.)
1697-1704. Rome, St Peter's (Anderson) 329. Pompeo Batoni: Education of Achilles, 1746.
308. Camillo Rusconi: Tombof Gregory XIII, 1719- Florence, Uffizi (Alinari)
25. Rome, St Peter's (Anderson) 330. Luca Giordano: Pluto and Proserpina. Oil study
309. Filippo della Valle: Tomb of Innocent XII, for the Gallery of the Palazzo Medici-Riccardi, 1682.
1746. Rome, St Peter's (Anderson) London, D. Mahon Collection (Denis Mahon)
310. Pietro Bracci and others: Tomb of Benedict 331. Alessandro Gherardini: The Dream of St
XIII, 1734. Rome, S. Maria sopra Minerva (Ander- Romuald, 1709. Fresco. Florence, S. Maria degli
son) Angeli (now Circolo della Meridtana) (Soprinten-
311. Bernardo Cametti: Tomb of Giovan Andrea denza, Florence)
Giuseppe Muti, 1725. Rome, S. Marcello (Alinari) 332.Donato Creti: Sigismonda(?), c. 1740. Bologna,
3 1 2. Pietro Bracci Tomb of Cardinal Carlo Leopoldo
: Comune (A. Villani & Figli)
Calcagnini, 1746. Rome, S. Andrea delle Fratte 333. Giuseppe Maria Crespi: The Queen of Bohemia
(Warburg Institute) confessing to St John Nepomuc, 1743. Turin. Pina-
313. Michelangelo Slodtz: St Bruno, 1744. Rome, St coteca (Alinari)
(Anderson)
Peter's 334. Giuseppe Maria Crespi: The Hamlet, c. 1705.
314. Giovanni Battista Foggini: The Mass of S. Bologna, Pinacoteca (A. Villani & Figli)
Andrea Corsini, 1685-91. Florence, Chiesa del Car- 335. Giuseppe Bibiena: Engraving from Architetture
mine (Brogi) e Prospettive, Augsburg, 1740 (Metropolitan Mu-
315. Filippo Parodi : Tomb of Bishop Francesco Mor- seum of Art)
osini, 1678. Detail. Venice, S. Nicold da Tolentino 336. Alessandro Magnasco: The Synagogue, c. 1725-
(Osvaldo Bohm) 30. Cleveland, Museum of Art (Cleveland Museum
316. Giuseppe Mazza: St Dominic baptizing, c. 1720. of Art)
Venice, SS. Giovanni e Paolo (Osvaldo Bohm) 337. Giuseppe Bazzani: The Imbecile (fragment.'), c.
317. Josse de Corte: The Queen of Heaven expelling 1740. Columbia, University of Missouri, Museum of
the Plague, 1670. Venice, S. Maria della Salute, high Art and Archaeology (National Gallery of Art,
altar (Anderson) Washington, Samuel H. Kress Collection)
318. Josse de Corte: Atlas from the Morosini Monu- 338. Sebastiano Ricci: Hercules and the Centaur,
ment, 1676. Venice, S. Clemente all' /sola (Osvaldo 1 706-7. Fresco. Florence, Palazzo Marucelli (Soprin-
Bohm) tendenza, Florence)

319. Antonio Corradini: Virginity, 1721. Venice, S. 339. Giovanni Battista Piazzetta: The Virgin appear-
Maria Carmine (Fiorentini-Venezia)
del ing to St Philip Neri, 1725-7. Venice, S. Maria della
320. Giovanni Marchiori: David, 1743. Venice, S. Fava (Alinari)

Rocco (Anderson) 340. Federico Bencovich: Madonna del Carmine, c.
321. Francesco Queirolo: Allegory of 'Deception Un- 17 10. Bergantino, Parish Church (Alinari)
masked', after 1750. Naples, Cappella Sansevero de' 341. Antonio Balestra: Nativity, 1704-5. Venice, S.
Sangn (Alinari) Zaccarta (Alinari)
BIBLOSARTE
629
342. Giambettino Ggnaroli; The Death of Rachel, 351. Pietro Longhi: The House Concert, c. 1750.
1770. Venice, Accademia (.\linari) Milan. Brera (Alinari)
343. Giambattista Tiepolo: Sacrifice of Iphigenia, 352. Gian Paolo Pannini: Piazza del Quirinale, c.
1757. Fresco. Vicenza, Villa Valmarana (Rodolfo 1743. Rome, Qutrinal Palace (.Minari)
Pallucchini) 353. Sebastiano and Marco Ricci Epitaph
: for .Admiral
344. Giambattista Tiepolo: Plate from the Varj Shovel, c. 1726. Washington, National Gallery (Na-
Cappricj, published 1749. Etching tional Gallery of .Art, Washington, Samuel H. Kress
345. Giambattista Tiepolo: Sketch, pen and wash. Collection)
New York. Pierpont Morgan Library (The Pierpont 354. Canaletto: Piazza S. Marco, c. 1760. London,
Morgan Library) National Gallery (Reproduced by permission of the
346. Giambattista Tiepolo: Head from 'Rinaldo and Trustees, the National Gallery, London)
Armida', 1757. Fresco. Vicenza, Villa Valmarana 355. Gianantonio Guardi: Story of Tobit, after 1753.
(Rodolfo Pallucchini) Detail. Venice, S. Raffaele, parapet of organ (Fioren-
347. Gian Domenico Tiepolo: Peasant Women (de- tini-Venezia)

1757. Fresco. Vicenza, Villa Valmarana
tail), 356. Francesco Guardi: View of the Lagoon, c. 1790.
348. Giuseppe Ghislandi: Portrait of Isabella Ca- Milan, Museo Poldo Pezzoli (Alinari)
mozzi de" Gherardi, c. 1730. Costa di Mezzate,
Bergamo, Conti Camozzi-Vertosa Collection (Alinari)
349. Giacomo Ceruti: Two Wretches, c. 1730-40.
Brescia, Pinacoteca (Alinari) The drawings and adaptations in the text were made
350.Gaspare Traversi A wounded Man, before 1 769.
: by Sheila Gibson. The map was executed by Donald
Venue, Brass Collection (Alinari) Bell-Scott.
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
INDEX
References to the notes are given to the page on which

the note occurs, followed by the number of the note.
Thus 575'" indicates page 575, note 56. Artists' names
are always indexed under the final element of the
surname thus Filippo della Valle will be found under
;
Valle. Where names of places or buildings are followed

by the name of an artist in brackets, the entry refers
towork by that artist in such buildings or places; thus
Florence, Villa Petraia (Volterrano) refers to the
frescoes by Volterrano at the Villa Petraia. Names of
architects appear in brackets in this way in a few cases,
where they were responsible for only part of the
building.
Abate, Niccolo dell', 95, 96 Albani, Giovan Girolamo, 313

Abbatini, Guido Ubaldo, 142, 173, 526^* Alberoni, Giambattista, 565"^
Alberti, Cherubino, 35, 41, 65, 513'''
Abbiati, Filippo, 478, 575'% 576*>«
Academies Alberti, Giovanni, 65
Ambrosiana, 116, 134, 550" Alberti, Leon Battista, 43, 48, 69, 244, 263, 303, 417,
French, Rome, 363, 433, 434, 555" 432,513'"

Percossi, dei, 325 Alberti, Romano, 21
Royal Academy, London, 501 .'\lbertoni. Blessed Lodovica, 152, 155 (ill. 81), 160
S. Fernando, Madrid, 465 .\lbissola. Villa Gavotti, 392
S. Luca, di, 39, 232, 263, 327, 375, 419, 424, 434, Alboresi, Giacomo, 549"
510", 555'« .\ldobrandini, Ippolito, 39
Sohmena's, 465 Aldobrandini, Margherita, 513-^

Venetian, 482, 503 Aldobrandini, Pietro, 38, 40, 80, 82, 520^
Achillini, Claudio, 513^^ Aldrovandini, .Mauro, 474
Acquisti, Luigi, 541^'' Aldrovandini, Pompeo, 474
Adam, Claude, 566' Aldrovandini, Tommaso, 474
Aleotti, Giovan Battista, 122-3, 522*^"
Adam, Lambert-Sigisbert, 567'^
Aedicule facade, 120, 282-3, 538" Alessandri, A. and .M., 558"
Aertsen, Pieter, 71, 104, 509" Alessandria
Affettt, 69, 265 Palazzo Ghilini (now del Governo), 565'^
Aglie, S. Marta, 565" S. Chiara, Vittone's project, 430, sbs*'"^"

Agucchi, Giovanni Bajtista, 38-9, 63, 80, 81, 266, .^lessi, Galeazzo, 115, 121, 123, 521-^
509'"'''^ Alexander the Great, 171
337>
Alexander VII, 138, 140, 141, 143, 144, "''O, '''4-
Alba, S. Maria Maddalena, 565"
Albani, .\lessandro, 364, 555-" 165 (ill. 89), 170, 172, 189, 195, 206, 212, 246, 279,
Albani, Francesco, 33, 39, 70, 78-9, 79, 80, 82-3 (ill. 363, 442, 443, 526", 527"', 532'", 539-\ 543", 544",
30),i05,26i,265,343,47i,509'*^Si3",5i6^^-^*"' 566-
535'-', 573''-
Alexander VIII, 440
518",
BIBLOSARTE
632 • INDEX
Alfieri, Benedetto, 561% S^3*'^ 5^5" Arigucci, Luigi, 540^'

Algardi, Alessandro, 138, 172, 261, 265, 266, 266-72 Ariosto, 486
(ills. 162-7), 274, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, Aristotle, 69, 140, 535*
317, 318, 318-19, 322, 433, 436, 439, 440, 448, Arpino, Cavaliere Cesare d', 26, 28, 32 (ill. 4), 33, 34,
535' ,540^544^''^',567^',568^", 569^" 38, 45, 141, 173, 323, 356, 507", 508", 510"
Algarotti, Francesco, 368, 553'", 554", 574" Arrighi, Antonio, 391 (ills. 267, 268)
All, Luciano, 560"" Arsoli, Palazzo Massimo, decoration, 572'*
Allegory, 252-3, 445-6 Arti di Bologna (Carracci), 494, 496, 578'"''
AUegrini, Francesco, 330, 547^^ Asam brothers, 161

AUori, Alessandro, 98 .'\scoli Piceno
Allori, Cristofano, 98, 518''' Chiesa del Carmine, fa9ade, 538'
Aloisi, Baldassare, see Galanino S. Angelo Custode, facade, 538'
Altavilla Vicentina, Villa Valmarana, 557"' Ascona (Serodine), 76-7
Altieri, Giovan Battista, 290 Aspetti, Tiziano, 450
Alzano Maggiore, S. Martino (Fantoni), 448 Asselyn, Jan, 323
Amato, Andrea, 560'°* Assereto, Gioacchino, 105-6 (ill. 48), 347, 519^*, 551**
Amato, Antonino, 560'°* Astarita, Giuseppe, 543''
Amato, Giacomo, 400, 560'' Aste, Andrea dell', 571'
Amato, Lorenzo, 560'"'' Aste, Francesco d', 540^^
Amato, Paolo, 400, 560-' Asti
Ambrosini, Floriano, 122 Palazzo Alfieri, 565'^
Ameli, Paolo, 377, 556^'' S. Catarina, 565'-
Amico, Giovanni Biagio, 400-1, 560"^ Atri, cathedral, baldacchino, 176

Amidano, Giulio Cesare, 518'^ August the Strong of Saxony, 414
Amigoni, Jacopo, 462, 465, 479, 483, 572*, 576'^ Avanzato, Giovanni de, 560^'
577"-", 578"" Avanzini, Bartolomeo, 291, 541^*
Ammanati, Bartolomeo, 125, 237, 370, 539^^ Azzolino, Gian Bernardino, 356
Amorosi, Antonio, 495
Ancona Baalbek, temple, 210, 244, 529'^
Arco Clementine, 395 Babel, Tower of, 529'"
Gesii, 395 Baburen, Dirck van, 78
lazzaretto, 395 Baciccio, see GauUi
lighthouse, 395 Badalocchio, Sisto, 78, 80, 85, 5i3'>'^', 5x6^^
quay, 395 Bagheria, villas, 401, 56o''"''°'
statue of Clement XII, 566" Baglione, Giovanni, 28, 33, 35, 73, 74, 141, sh'
Andrea, Giovanni, 551" Bagnaia, Villa Lante (.'\rpino, Gentileschi, Tassi),
Andreasi, Ippolito, 107 5o8^\
Andreozzi, Anton Francesco, 542^-, 568^-' ^ Bagnoli di Sopra, Villa Widmann (A. Bonazza), 570^''
Anesi, Paolo, 501 Baker, Thomas, 150, 568-'
Angeli, Giuseppe, 576"" Balassi, Mario, 550"'
Angelini, Francesco Maria, 390-1 Balbi, Alessandro, 122
Angeloni, Francesco, 39 Baldi, Lazzaro, 330, 546'
Ansaldo, Andrea, 105-6, 551** Baldini, Pietro Paolo, 546'
Amelia, Donato dell', 568^' Baldinucci, Filippo, 161, 172, 212, 542*^
Antuhita romane (Piranesi), 364 Balestra, Antonio, 461, 462, 479, 483-4 (ill. 341),
Aprile, Carlo d', 459 5,^76.77,80^5^810,
Aprile, Francesco, 315 (ill. 205), 316, sW'^ 545^* Balsimello, Giacomo, 543'
Aranjuez, S. Pascal (Mengs, Tiepolo), 486 Bamboccianti, 265, 266, 323, 515'*, 546*
Architettura civile (Guarini), 404, 405, 412, 413, 424, Bambocciate, 77, 515'*
562" Bandinelli, Baccio, 134
Ariccia Bandini, Giovanni, 133, 523'^
palace, 178, 527*' Bandini, Ottavio, 543''
S. Maria dell'Assunzione, 176, 178-81 (ills. 98-101), Baratta, Francesco, 160, 305, 306, 308, 536-*, 543'
527"" ;
(Naldini), 544^" Baratta, Francesco (brother of Giovanni), 568^^
BIBLOSARTE
633
Baratta, Giovanni, 447, 568'' Bencovich, Federico, 474, 479, 482, 48^ (ill. 540), 485,
Baratta, Giovanni Maria, 217, 540-" 576"", ""
Baratta, Pietro, 568^', 570'' Benedict XIII, 363, 439, 443 (ill. 310)
Baratti, Antonio, 503 Benedict XIV, 364, 439
Barberini, Antonio, 263, 322 Marco, 468 (ill. 328), 469, 471, 484,
Benefial, 572"'-2'>
Barberini, Francesco, 112, 146, 231, 235, 246 Bensberg Castle (Pellegrini), 483
Barberini, Giovan Battista, 568^'' Benso, Giulio, 551"
Barberini, Taddeo, 112 Beretta, Carlo, 448
Barbiani, Domenico, 558'''' Bergamo, Colleoni Chapel (Tiepolo), 485
Barbieri, Giuseppe, 548^^ Bergantino, parish church (Bencovich), 482, 483 (ill.
Barcelona, Museum (Albani etc.), 515'' 340), 576"""

Bardi, Ainolfo de', 345 (ill. 227) Bergondi, .Andrea, 308, 567'"
Barletta, 399 Bergonzoni, Giovan Battista, 291 2 (ill. 184), 541*"
cathedral (Fanzago), 319 Berhn (Algardi), 267-8 (ill. 163), 535"; (Baglione),
Barnabite Congregation, 40 74, 514"; (formerly, Caravaggio), 510"; (formerly,
'Barocchetto', 393 Cerano), 99; (formerly, Duquesnoy), 278 (ill. 174),
Barocci, Federico, 28, 34, 41, 91, 92, 95, 97, 98, 99, 537^^ (Gentileschi), 514''; (LcKatelli), 546'; (Lys),
105, 5i8- 108

Baroncelli, Giovanni Francesco, 563"' Bernard, F., 563*-
Baronius, Cardinal, 23, 40, 509^" Bernardi, Giuseppe, 57o'"'^5'>"
Barozzi, Serafino, 292 Bernardi-Torretti, Giuseppe, 570**
Barra, Didier, 359, 552"^ 'Bernardo, Monsu\ see Keil
Barthel, Melchior, 569^" Bernasconi, Giuseppe, 121, sii^*"
Bartolommeo, Fra, 58 Bernero, Giovanni Battista, 450, 569'"

Baschenis, Evaristo, 350, 351 (ill. 234), 362, 493 Bernini, Domenico, 172
Bassano, Jacopo, 95, 348, 505 Bernini, Gianlorcnzo, 24, 34, 38, 63, 112, 113 (ill. 53),
Bassano, Leandro, 519^'^ 114, 115, 127, 132, 136(111.70), 137, 138, 139, 140, 141,
Bassano, Museo Civico (Bernini), 170 (ill. 94) 142, 143-96 (ills. 71 108, 1 10-13), 197-8, 203, 206,
Bassano (di Sutri) Romano, Palazzo Odescalchi 210, 219, 227, 229, 231, 234, 236, 237, 239, 242, 246,
(Albani, Domenichino, etc.), 79, 509^"* 247, 250, 261, 265, 266, 267-8, 269-70, 271, 272, 274,
Bassetti, xMarcantonio, 5o8-\ 515", 520'" 275, 278, 279, 280, 284, 285-6 (ill. 181), 289, 29 1 , 303,
Bassi, Martino, 120, 522'' 305, 306, 307, 308,309,310,311,312,313, 314(111.
Bath, Royal Crescent, 399 203), 315, 316, 3i7->8, 323, 325, 334, 337, 354- 355,
Batoni, Pompeo, 468 (ill. 329), 470, 484, 493, 572'" 363, 369, 370, 375, 376, 419, 422, 427, 431, 433, 434,
Battaglia, Francesco, 560'"" 435, 436, 439, 440, 442, 443, 444, 446, 447, 448. 456,
Battaglio, 541^* 458, 487, 52i'\ 524'", 529^ 532-'", 535-', 538'*,
Battaglioli, Francesco, 579'-' 540'^ 543"'", 544'"' 545''- ^ ^ 548^ S62'^ 563''.
564'", 567-=-, 568^' -''•"^\ 569^"-
5"
Battistello, see Caracciolo
Bayreuth, opera house (Bibiena), 574^^ Bernini, Luigi, 305, 528'"', 543-
Bazzani, Giuseppe, 478-9 (ill. 337),
576-^'''*'' Bernini, Pietro, 30, 128-9 ('"• 64). 134, '43- 523*",
Beaumont, Claudio Francesco, 476-8, 575^^ 524-, 543^
Bella, Stefano della, 346, 550"' Berrettini, Francesco, 531"
Bellange, Jacques, 348 Berrettini, Lorenzo, 550''*

Berrettini, Luca, 532'', 533^"'
*°"
Bellarmine, Cardinal, 313-14
Bellori, Giovanni, 266, 274, 314, 327, 337, 469, 547-S Berrettini, Pietro, see Cortona
572-" Berrettoni, \iccol6, 467, 548^'
Bellotto, Bernardo, 479, 503, 579'-*" Bertola, Antonio, 562", 563-"*
Bellotto, Pietro, 495 Bertoldo, 133

Bellucci, Antonio, 349, 483 Bertotti-Scamozzi, Ottavio, 372, 389
Beltrami, .\gostino, 552'"' Bettino, .Antonio, 562"
Belvedere, Andrea, 578"" Bianchi, Francesco, 518'"
Belvoir Castle (Dou), 537^- Bianchi, Marco, 391
Benaglia, Paolo, 567'^ Bianchi, Pietro, 366, 553'\ 567"
BIBLOSARTE
634 INDEX
Bianco, Bartolomeo, 123 5 ('"s- fto, 61), 2yo, 522^"" Bologna conlinued
Bibicna, Antonio, 39 1, 476, 574'' Pietro, S., 122, 522^"
Bibiena, Ferdinando, 364 6, 474-6, $$4^, 556*", 574"" Salvatore, S., 122 (ill. 59), 281
Bibiena, Francesco, 474-6, 574^' Stefano, S. (Tiarini), 92
Bibiena, Giuseppe, 475 (ill. 335), 476, 565"\ 574^' Palazzi
Bibiena lamily, 474-6, 498, 574^' Bianconcini (Mazza), 569^"
Biffi, Andrea, 99, 134 Cloetta-F*"antuzzi (Canali), 292
Biffi, see also Binago Credito Italiano, 558'"
Bigari, Vittorio Maria, 474, 553", 574^^ Davia-Bargellini, 291 ;
(Borelli, Torreggiani), 391
Biggi, Francesco, 569^- Fava (Carracci), 64, 88, 512*
Biliverti, Giovanni, 98, 518''' Ghisilieri, see Linificio Nazionale, Casa del
Binago, Lorenzo, 115, 1 16-18 (ill. 55), 120, 122, Giustizia, di (Piacentini), 390 (ill. 266)
521^2.23 Hercolani, staircase, 558''"
Birmingham, City Art Galler> (Carlevarijs), 501; Magnani-Salem (Carracci), 64, 512^
(Gentileschi), 74, 514" Malvezzi-De Medici (Torreggiani), 391
Biscaino, Bartolomeo, 353, 551**'* Montanari, 390 391, 553^; (Angelini), 391
Bisnati, Alessandro, 116 Pepoli (Canuti), 548*-^; (Creti), 471
Bissoni, Domenico and Giovan Battista, 524"' Sampieri-Talon (Carracci), 512^
Bizzacheri, Carlo Francesco, 376, 540^', 555"^ Scagliarini, 558'"
Blanchard, Jacques, 535'" Other secular buildings, galleries, collections
Bloch, Dr, Collection (Gentileschi), 514' Comune 472 (ill. 332), 574^^
(Creti),
Bloemen, Jan Frans van, see Orizzonte Esposti, Ospedale degli (Spada), 94
561"
Blois, staircase, Galliera, Porta, 291
Blondel, F., 372 Liceo Musicale (Torreggiani), 391
Bocchi, Faustino, 574^* Linificio Nazionale, Casa del, 558''*
Boetto, Giovenale, 561', 578'°' Pinacoteca (."Vlbani), 82 (Bigari), 474 (Cantarini),
; ;
Boffrand, Germain, 563''^ 342-3 (ill. 224); (Carracci), 58, 59 (ill. 16), 60, 62,
Bolgi, Andrea, 305, 305-6 (ill. 195), 318, 523", SAl,'^'''"' 68, 5120", 5i6^'«; (Cavedoni), 93 (ill. 38);
BoUi, Bartolomeo, 391, 554^ (G. M. Crespi), 473 (ill. 334); (Faccini), 95;
Bologna, Giovanni, 130, 132-3, 134, 154, 319, 446, (Guercino), 88; (Mastelletta), 94 (ill. 39); (Reni),
542"' 83-4 (ill. 31), 85, 150, 517'" '"; (Spada), 94;
Bologna (Tiarini),
92
Churches Teatro Comunale, 391, 574'"
Bartolommeo, S. (Albani), 83 University (Tibaldi), 64
Celestini (Burrini, Haffer),
474 Zucchini, Casa (Angelini), 391
Colombano, Oratorio S., decoration, 82, 518" Bolognetti, Giorgio, 315
Corpus Domini (Franceschini), 471, 474; (Haff- Bombelli, Sebastiano, 493
ner), 474 Bonarelli, Matteo, 543'
Domenico, S., 518*; (Carracci), 62; (Mastelletta), Bonaventura, St, 55
95; (Spada), 94-5; (Tiarini), 92, 93 (ill. 37) Bonavia (Bonaria), Carlo, 498, 579"'
Giacomo Maggiore, S. (Cesi), 518" Bonazza, Antonio, 570'''
Girolamo ed Eustachio, SS., 537' Bonazza, Francesco, 570'"
Gregorio, S. (Carracci), 60 Bonazza, Giovanni, 57o'5-56
Lucia, S., 281, 282-3, 522*', 537' Bonechi, Matteo, 469, 573^''-*'
Madonna di S. Luca, 370, 389-90 (ill. 265) Bonifiazio, Francesco, 546'
Maria della Purificazione, S. (Passarotti), 512'' Bonito, Giuseppe, 465, 495
Maria della Vita, S., 291-2 (ill. 184), SA^^""'*^ Bonone, Carlo, 92, 95-6 (ill. 40)
Michele in Bosco, S. (Canuti), 548^- Bonvicini, Pietro, 431, 565'"
Niccolo, S. (Carracci), 60 Bonvicino, .Ambrogio, 28, 30, 127, 508''
Paolo, S., 122; (Algardi), 271-2 (ill. 167), 308, Bonzi, Pietro Paolo, 509", 533''-
536^'; (Carracci), 512"; (Cavedoni), 93; (Rolli), Bordeaux, St Bruno (Bernini), 146
549'" Borella, Carlo, 387, 557"'
Petronio, S. (G. Rainaldi), 537' Borella, Giacomo, 557'''
Philip Neri, Oratory of St, 390 Borelli, G., 391
BIBLOSARTE
635
Borghese, Scipione, 33-7, 38, 79, 82, 84, 143, 144 5, Broeck, Hendrick van den, see Fiamingo, .\rrigo
146, I4g (ill. 76), 167, i6y, 267-8, 517^'', 525", 535-' Bronzino, .Angelo, 46, 73
Borghini, Raftaello, 21 Bruegcl, Jan, 43, 70, 509"'-
Borgianni, Orazio, 41,7^, 74 5 (ill. 25), 77, 107, log, Brunelleschi, I'ilippo, 1 17, 210, 295, 369
1'''
514'" Brunelli, .Angiolo, 57
Borgo d'.Mc, Chiesa Parrocchialc, 565"' Brunclli, Francesco, 507''
Borgognonc, .Michel, sec Maglia, Michele Brusasorci, Felice, 515"
Borgomancro, S. Bartolomeo (.Morazzone), 5 19-' Brussels
Borremans, W illem, 571 .Musce des Bcaux-.^rts (Baschenis), 351 (ill. 234);
Borromeo, St (iharles, 21, 25, 40, 41, 56, 75 (ill. 25), (Guercino), 88
98, 103 (ill. 47), 1 15, 205 (ill. 120) Musees Royaux d'.Art ci d'Histoire (Duquesnoy),
Borromeo, I'ederico, 42-3,98, 99, 116, 118, 121, 521-" 537"
Borromini, IVancesco, 112, 114, 115, 122, 138, 197- Private Collection (Duquesnoy version), 537**
229 (ills. 1 14-38), 231, 235, 239, 242, 279, 282. 283, Brustolon, .-Kndrea, 453, 570''"
286, 289, 291, 303, 328, 366, 369, 370, 372, 377, 392, Bufalo, Paolo, 218
395, 403, 404, 405, 408, 409, 412, 415, 422, 430, 431, Buonamici, G. F., 558"'
5'J
433, 521", 528>^' , 532^% 533'', 540", 562'*, 564^'- Buonarelli, Costanza, 166 (ill. 90), 167, 525"
565"' Buonarroti, .Michelangelo, the younger, 535--; st-f alsn
Bortoloni, Mattia, 476, 484, 577**" .Michelangelo

Borzone, Luciano, 105-6 Buontalenti, Bernardo, 125, 126 (ill. 62), 132, 232, 237,
518'''
Boschi, Fabrizio, 253- 302, 359, 393< 409, 542"". 553'. 559""
Boschini, Marco, 250 Burckhardt, Jacob, 573-'
Bosclli, Felice, 578"" Burlington, Lord, 558"-, 563^', 576*''
Boselli, Orfeo, 537'"* Burrini, Giovan .\ntonio, 474, 574*'

Both, .\ndries, t^zt, Busca, .\ntonio, 550"-
Bottalla, Giovanni Maria, 355 Bushnell, John, 5'i9"'
Bottiglieri, .Matteo, 456, 571"'^ Busiri, Giovanni Battista, 579"''
Bouchardon, Edme, 246, 567"' Bussola, Dionigi, 134, 523"'

Boucher, Fran(;ois, 465 Buzio, Ippolito, 30, 41, 127
Bra, S. Chiara, 428 (ill. 296), 429 (ill. 297), 565''^ Buzzi, Elia Vincenzo, 448, 569"
Bracci, Pietro, 366, 436, 439-40, 443 (ill. 310), 444 5 Buzzi, Leiio, 116
(ill.312), 544'\5^7""''
**
Bracciano, Castle (Bernini), 150 Cabianca, Francesco, 452, 570"' "•
Bracciano, Duke of, 150 Caccia, Guglielmo, see .Moncalvo
Bracciolini, Francesco, 252, 535" Caccini, Giovanni, 132, 542''
Braconio, N'iccolo, 520^ Caffa, .Melchiorre, 307 8 (ills. 196, 197), 316, 319,
Bramante, 1 17, 120, 225, 292, 297, 541*' 448.543""
Brambilla, 134 Cagnacci, Guido, 342-3, 549"
Brandi, Giacinto, 315, 328, 330, 547" Cagnola, Luigi, 122
Cairo, Francesco del, 339, 340 (ill. 222), 350, 549'''
Bratislava Cathedral (Ferrata, Guidi), 568-"
Bravo, Cecco, 344, 348, 349 (ill. 232), 550"' Calandrucci, Giacinto, 328, 467, 572"
Brescia Calcagnini, Carlo Leopoldo, 444 5 (ill 3'^)
Duomo N'uovo, 117, 121-2, 522^' Calderari, Ottone, 389, 558''
570''"'
Palazzo Gainbara (Seminario Vescovile), 558'^ Calderoni, .Matteo,
Palazzo Soncini, 558'^ Caligari, the, 569"
Pinacoteca (Ceruti), 494 (ill. Callalo, Paolo, 570"
349)
S.Lorenzo .Martire, facade, 557'" Callot, Jacques, 125, 346, 359, 478, 542'^'
S. Maria .Maggiore (Fantoni), 448 Caltanisetta, cathedral (Borremans), 571
Briano, Giacomo, 507" Calvaert, Denis, 82, 94, 513"', 516''
Brignole Sale, brothers, 392 Camassei, .Andrea, 141, 249, 321, 322, 330, 533"
Brill, Mattheus, 43, 326, 509^^ Cambiaso. Luca, 104, 115, 353
"",
Brill, Paul, 27, 35, 43, 7°^ 5^^^ 497> 507"- 509'- Cambiaso, Orazio, 105
"''
579'" Camera ohscura, 579'
518" Cametti, Bernardo, 436, 443-4 ('•' 3" 44'> 7. 5^'*

Brizio, Francesco, 63, ).
BIBLOSARTE
636 INDEX
Camilliani, Francesco, 134 Carlone, Diego, 569^^

Gammas, G., 397 Carlone, Giovanni .Andrea, 354, 474, 551'", 559'^
Campagna, Girolamo, 450 Carlone, Giovanni Battista, 354, 551'"
Campana, Tommaso, 33 Carloni, Carlo Innocenzo, 575^''
Campi, Giulio and Antonio, 45 Carloni, Taddeo, 134
C!ampi, Pier Paolo, 447 Carmelite Order, 25, 137
Ganal, Fabio, 577" Carneo, Antonio, 347, 550'*
Canal, Giovanni Battista, 503 Caro, G. and F. de, 543''
Canale, Antonio, see Canaietto Caro, Lorenzo de, 572"
Canaletto, 461, 479, 501-3 ubrr..
(ill. 354), 57^124. ^^^ Caroselli, .Angelo, 515'', 519'', 548'**
also Bellotto, Bernardo Carpegna, Palazzo Carpegna, 540**
Canali, Paolo, 292 Carpegna, Ambrogio, 227
Candiani, 527"** Carpi, Santuario del SS. Crocefisso, 554'
Canepina, Mario da, 539-^ Carpioni, Giulio, 340, 346 (ill. 228), 347, 550'"
Canevari, Antonio, 559**' Carracci, Agostino, 57-8, 63, 68, 70-1, 82, 85, 92,
Cangiani, Anselmo, 542" 512^% 513- ",518"
Canini, Angelo, 548''' Carracci, Annibale, 28, 33, 38-9, 39, 42, 43, 45, 57 ff.
Canova, Antonio, 270, 443, 453, 570*° (ills. 16, 18-23), 73, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85, 91,
98,
Cantarini, Simone, 342-3 (ill. 224), 549''' 109, 130, 145, 247, 250, 259, 265, 327, 367, 465, 468,
Canuti, Domenico Maria, 328, 330, 333 (ill. 216), 334, 469, 479, 494, 496, 497, 509^-, 512'" 5i6^\ 524^ ,
343, 473, 474, 548"- '-,549"' Carracci, Antonio, 33, 508-*'

Capella, II, see Daggiii Carracci, Lodovico, 57-8, 60-3 (ill. 17), 81, 82, 83, 86,
Capodimonte, palace, 393, 559*' 88, 92, 93, 94, 96, 109, 173, 261, 266, 473, 512^'',
Cappelli, Cosimo, 523'^ 5I6-^<'«,5^7^^5I8'>
Cappelli, Pietro, 498 Carracci 'academy', 58, 73, 78, 92, 267, 470, 512^
Cappellino, G. D., 551** Carriera, Rosalba, 479, 493, 578""
Caprarola, S. Silvestro, 537^ Carrii, S. Maria dell' Assunta, 538", 564^^
Caracciolo, Giovanni Battista, 73, 92, 340, 356 (ill. Cartari, Giulio, 317, 434, 545^'
241), 358, 360, 551'', 552"" Cartellaccio, see Castellaccio
Caraffa, Vincenzo, 138 Casale Monferrato
Caraglio, 133 Cathedral, vestibule, 562'*
Carattoli, Pietro, 556^* S. Filippo, 562-^
Caravaggio, 24, 26, 28, 33, 34, 38, 39, 43, 45 ff, (ills. 1 1 - Caserta, former Royal Palace, 372, 393, 395-8 (ills.
15), 57, 63-4, 68-9, 71, 73 ff., 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 103, 271-3), 559'*''" ; fountains and gardens, 456, 457
104, 106, 107, 108, 109, 130, 266, 340-1, 347, 350, (ill. 322); (Persico), 571'''
355 ff., 362, 367,

433, 469, 490, 509«, 510"' , 515'", Casperia, S. Maria Nuova (Sassoferrato), 322 (ill. 207)
5i7^-^552i»« Cassana, Nicolo, 577"
Caravaggisti, 73 ff- Cassani, Lorenzo, 554'
Carbone, Giovanni Bernardo, 352, 353 Castel Fusano, Chigi villa, 232, 531'"; (Camassei),
Carcani, Filippo, 316, 434, 435 (ill. 302), 436, 448, 249, 321; (Cortona), 249, 533'"; (Sacchi), 249, 262,
545^", 566= 533'"
Career! d'Invenziotie (Piranesi), 364-6 (ill. 247) Castelgandolfo
Cardi, Ludovico, see Cigoli papal palace, 185
Carducci, .^chille, 400 S. Tomaso di Villanova, 176-8 (ills. 96, 97), 180,
Caricature, 71, 495, 513^' 181, 182, 422, 526'""^ ;
(Cortese), 527''"; (Raggi),
Carignano, 561^ 544--; (Sacchi), 272
Ospizio di Carita, 430, 565*"'' Castellaccio, Santi, 534**
S. Giovanni Battista, 565^- Castellamonte, .Amedeo di, 403, 407, 561'
Carlevarijs, Luca, 501, 553", 579'^^ Castellamonte, Carlo di, 403, 561'
Carlini, .Alberto, 579"^' Castellazzo di Bollate, A'illa Crivelli (Galliari), 575'''
Carlo Emanuele I, 74, 403 Castelli, Domenico, 458, 459
Carlo Emanuele II, 403, 406, 407 Castelli, Domenico (papal architect), 540'"
Carlone, Andrea, 551"' Castelli, Francesco, 120
BIBLOSARTE
637
Castelli, Giovanni Domenico, 197 Champaigne, Philippe de, 438

Castelio, Battista, 104 Chantelou, Sieur de, 157, 167, 171, 197
Casteilo, Bernardo, 28, 104, 352, 509^" Chantilly (Domenichino), 310; (Poussin), 265
Castelio, Valerio, 341, 352-3 (ill. 237), 355, 359 Chardin, J. B. S., 362, 496
Castellucci, Salvi, 550''' Charles I of England, 74, 167, 525'", 568^"
Castiglione, Francesco, 354 Charles Emperor, 458
II,
Castiglione, Giovanni Benedetto, 104, 139, 325, 341, Charles VII, Emperor, 479
35i< 352- 35.V4 (ill- 238), 355> SS'"" Charles III, King ot Spain, 486
Castle Howard (A. Pellegrini), 482-3 Charles III of Naples, 393, 395
Castletown (Co. Kildare), 556^' Charles Borromeo, St, see Borromeo
Casuistry, 138 Chateauneuf-sur-Loire, church (Guidi), 568^
Catania, 400, 401 Chatsworth (Juvarra), 563"
Benedictine monastery, 401, 560'"'' Chelsea Old Church (Raggi), 568-^
Cathedral, facâde, 401 Cheyne, Lady Jane, 568-"'
Chiesa Collegiata, 402 Chiari, Fabrizio, 548^^
Collegio Cutelli, 401 Chiari, Giuseppe, 467, 572'*
Palazzi: Biscari, 401; Cerami (Borgianni), 514'"; Chiarini, .Marcantonio, 474, 574*'
Municipale, 401 Chiaruttini, Francesco, 474
S. Agata, 401 Chieri
S. Placido, 402 S. Andrea, faijade, 415
Catanzaro (Fanzago), 319 S. Bernardino, 428-30
Cateni, Giovanni Camillo, 568" Chiesa, Silvestro, 551*"
Catullus, 137 Chigi, Agostino, 178
Cavallermaggiore, S. Croce (or S. Bernardino), 564'^ Chigi, Flavio, 178, 186
Cavallini, Francesco, 315, 316, 545^^'"' Chigi, Mario, 178
Cavallino, Bernardo, 359 (ill. 244), 360, 552""'" Chimenti da Empoli, Jacopo, 97
Cavarozzi, Bartolomeo, 515'' Chioggia, cathedral, 299, 541'*
Cavedoni, Giacomo, 92, 93-4 (ill. 38), 342, 358, 518" Chiozzotto, U, see Marinetti
Cavrioli, Francesco, 452 Christina of Sweden, 185, 554"
Cecil, John, 568-" Christmas cribs, 456, 571'''
Celebrano, Francesco, 456 Ciaminghi, Francesco, 568'^
Celesti, .\ndrea, 349, 550'"* Ciampelli, .\gostino, 27, 97, 141, 247
5-'
Celio, Gaspare, 34, 38, 51 Ciarpi, Baccio, 231, 322
Cellini,Benvenuto, 154 Cifrondi, Antonio, 496
Cenni, Cosimo, 523"^ Cignani, Carlo, 343, 469, 470, 471, 473, 474, 476,
Cennini, Bartolomeo, 523" 482, 572'", 573-"'
Cento Cignani, Felice, Filippo, and Paolo, 573"'
Casa Provenzale (Guercino), 88 Cignaroli, Giambettino, 484, 485 (ill. 342), 577"**
Museo Civico (Carracci), 60-2 (ill. 17), 512'* Cignaroli, \'ittorio .Amedeo, 478, 575'^
Cerano, 92, 98-9 (ill. 43), loi, 103, 116, 120, 519-'"% Cigoh, Lodovico, 28, 33, 34, 35, 55, 92, 97-8 (ill. 42),
549" 104, 107, "09- i25> 5'8'*, 520', 523'-

Ceresa, Carlo, 350, 493, 550'*' Cino, Giuseppe, 400
Cernusco, \'illa Alari-Visconti, 558'' Cipper, Giacomo Francesco, 496
Cerquozzi, xMichelangelo, 323 (ill. 208), 546" Cipriani, Giovanni Battista, 573--
Cerrini,Giovan Domenico, 266, 321, 322, 547"' Cipriani, Sebastiano, 538'"
Ceruti, Giacomo, 476, 493-4 (ill. 349), 496, 557'''"i Circignani, Nicolo, see Pomarancio, Nicolo
5^898.107 Citta di Castelio, Matteo di, 40, 509*"
Cervelli, Federico, 349 Cittadini family, 578""
Cesari, Giuseppe, see Arpino, Cavaliere d' Cividale, cathedral, 557"
Cesena, .Madonna del Monte, staircase hall, 554' Civitavecchia, arsenal, 185
Cesi, Bartolomeo, 518'
" Claude Lorraine, 43, 70, 82, ^26, ^27, 497, 501, 534",
Cesi, Carlo, 546', 548'^ 575'-^
Chambers, Sir William, 397 Clement VIII, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 38, 40, 41
BIBLOSARTE
638
Clement I\, 443, 538'", 545^" Correggio, 58, 60, 62, 69, 81, 85, 86, 88, 91, 93, 95, 96,
Clement \, 2i)0, 443, 544-'' loi, 252, 258, 259, 276, 332, 334, 352, 355, 471, 479,
Clement XI, iî, 364, 375, 573'' 5i8'\536'"
Clement XII, 363, 364, 382, 395, 438, 442, 556^\ 566' '
Corsham Court (Reni), 84, 517*"
567" Corsini, Agostino, 567'"
Clement XIII, 364, 443 Corsini, Filippo, 392
Clement XIV, 364 Corsini, Neri, 438, 439 (ill. 305), 567"
Clemente, Stefano Maria, 450, 569^' Cort, Giusto, see Corte
Clementi, Rutilio, 507" Corte, Josse de, 450-2 (ills. 317, 318), 569'", 570*'
Cleveland, Museum
of Art (Magnasco), 477 (ill. 336) Corteranzo, S. Luigi Gonzaga, 565"
Coccapani, Sigismondo, 518"* Cortese, Giacomo, 330
Coccorante, Leonardo, 498, 579"'' Cortese, Guglielmo, 330, 467, 526''*, 527™, 546', 572",
Codazzi, Viviano, 323 (ill. 208), 546"*, 552'" 579"^
Colbert, Jean-Baptiste, 187, 188, 189, 528"^ Cortona, Pietro da, 41, 138, 141, 142, 146, 173, 174,
Coli, Giovanni, ^30, ^^4, 336 (ill. 218), 349, 546', 178, 184, 188, 197, 199, 213-15, 225, 231-59 (ills.
547;"; 548;^ 139-58), 261, 262, 263-6, 268, 274, 279, 280, 283,
Cellini, Filippo and Ignazio, 450, 569" 286, 289, 291, 301, 305, 316, 321, 322, 324, 328, 330,
Cologne, cathedral (Fortini), 568" 334> 337, 339, 344, 345, 347, 354-5, 37°, 380, 390, 399,
Colombo, Bartolomeo, 548'^ 403, 448, 462, 464, 467, 469, 470, 479, 487, 527'<«,
Colonna, Angelo Michele, ^43 (ill. 225), 474, 476, 528""."5, 53031^ 531, rr,^ 535,,.^ 538.., 546.^ 5^72..,
549", 551"^ 548", 560", 57I^ 572'5, SIT,-'

Colonna, Marcantonio, 548^^ Cortona, S. Agostino (Cortona), 258
Columbia, University of Missouri (Bazzani), 478 (ill. Cosatti, Lelio, 556^"
337) Cosimo I, 125, 126, 253
Columbia, South Carolina, Museum of Art (Carpioni), Cosimo II, Grand Duke, 133
346 (ill. 228) Cosimo III, Grand Duke, 469, 568^^
Comanini, Gregorio, 21 Costa, Gianfrancesco, 474
Cominelli, Andrea, 557^** Costa, Stefano, 524*-
Commodi, Andrea, 231 Costa di Mezzate, Conti Camozzi-Vertosa Collection
Conca, Sebastiano, 382, 465-7 (ill. 327), 476, 572"'''- "*,
(Galgario), 492 (ill. 348)
575^' Costanzi, Placido, 572"*
Concetto, 169-70 Courtois, Guillaume, see Cortese
Concord of Free Hill with the Gifts of Grace (Molina), Cozza, Francesco, 321, 330, 331 (ill. 214), 546-
24 Crabeth, 78
Conforto, Giovan Giacomo di, 127 Crema
Constantine, 150-1, 155 (ill. 82), 169, 171, 436, 458, Palazzo Albergoni, 558*"
525-;' .S. Maria della Croce, 541^^
Conti, Francesco, 573-'' SS. Trinita, 554^
Conti, Stefano, 501 Cremona
Contini, Giovanni Battista, 376, 522^", 555^^ Palazzo Dati, 391 (ills. 267, 268)
Conventi, Giulio Cesare, 266 Palazzo Stanga, 371 (ill. 248), 554*
Coppola, Giovanni Andrea, 358 Crescenzi, Giovan Battista, 38, 43
Corbellini, Carlo, 521-', 557-^'' Crespi, Daniele, 103-4 ('" 47)
Cordemoy, Abbe de, 372 Crespi, Giovanni Battista, see Cerano
Cordier, Nicolo, 30, 41, 127, 523''- Crespi, Giuseppe Maria, 341, 461, 472 (ill. t,},],),
Cordova, mosque, dome, 412 473-4 334), 481, 482, 491, 493, 494, 496, 503,
(ill-
Corenzio, Belisario, 356 574", 576'"", 579'-"

Corfu (Corradini), 453 Crespi, Luigi, 474, 574^-
Cornacchini, Agostino, 318, 436-8 (ill. 304), 446-7, Cresti, Domenico, see Passignano
545^566",567'^'^ Creti, Donato, 471-2 (ill. 332), 573", 574^-'"
Cornaro, Caterino, 570^' Cristiani, G. F., 372
Corradi, Pier .Antonio, 125, 559^^ Croce, Baldassare, 33
Corradini, Antonio, 453 (ill. 319), 454, 456, Croce, Francesco, 558'^
55, 57, bO, 63
570 ,
571"^ Cronaca, 245
BIBLOSARTE
<i39
'"*
Crosato, Giambattista, 476, 565"^, 575''-' Dou, G., 537^-
Cumiana, parish church, 565'- Dresden
Curradi, Raflaele, 302, 534"" .Albertinum (Duquesnoy version), (S.
sn**;
Curti, Girolamo, sfe l3entone .Maderno), i28(ill. 63)
Curtoni, Domenico, 115, 521"* Gallery (Carracci), 60; (Correggio), 58; (Dou),
537*-; (Poussin), 537"; (Serodine), sis'"
Daggiu, Francesco, 576** Grosser Garten (Corradini), 571''
Damiani, Pietro, 519^" Staatl. Skulpturensammlung (Cx)rradini), 571"^
Dandini, Pier, 550'''', 573'*-* Dublin (Gentileschi), 74
Dandini, Vincenzo, 550"^ Duca, Giacomo del, 313
Dante, 55 Dufresnoy, Charles .Mphonse, 574**
Danti, Vincenzo, 134, 523'" Dughet, Caspar, 327, 330, 547-'"-', 575"
Darmstadt (Cafia), 543" Dujardin, Karel, 323
David, Jacques-Louis, 469 Duquesnoy, Francesco, 38, 172, 261, 265, 266, 267,
Degenhard, General, 568^' 272-8 (ills. 168-74), 305, 308-9, 311-12, 433, 436,
Delacroix, Eugene, 367 5}4'\ 535'", 536''"
DeirArchtti'ttiira (Gioffredo), 399 Duquesnoy, Jerome, 272
Dentone, 343 Durand, M., 372
Derizet, Antonio, 372, 377, 555^\ 556^" Duranti, Faustino and Giorgio, 574^"
Desargues, 413 Durazzo, Cardinal, 519"'
Descartes, Rene, 69 Diirer, .\lbrecht, 462, 489
Desenzano, parish church (Celesti), 349 Diisseldorf, .\kademie (Rusconi), 567^
'Desiderio, Monsii", 359-60, 552"-
Detroit, Institute of Art (Duquesnoy version), 537*'; Eclecticism, 58-60, 369
(Mieris), 537^-; (Rosa), 326 (ill. 211), 547'" Edinburgh (Serodine), 77
Deza, Cardinal, 34 Einsiedeln, 422
Diano, Giacinto, 572' Electa, Joaquim de, 486
Dientzenhofer, Georg, 564^'' Elsheimer, .Adam, 70, 75, 76, 497, 514'", 552'"
Dionysius the Areopagite, 139 Emanuele Filiberto, 403, 406
Directory (St Ignatius), 24 Emanuele Filiberto .Amedeo, 562-^"
Discalced Trinitarians, 40 Empoli, Collegiata (Cigoli), 98
Diziani, Antonio, 497 Enrico, .Antonio d', see Tanzio
Diziani, Gaspare, 482, 576'" Enrico, Giovanni d', 519"
Do, Giovanni, 551" Errard, Charles, 434
Dolci, Carlo, 344, 345 (ill. 227), sso''*' Escorial, 395
Domenichino, 33, 34, 38, 39, 70, 78-9, 79, 80, 80-2 Escoubleau de Sourdis, Cardinal, 146
(ill. 29), 83, 85, 86, 92, 93, 105, 141, 247, 249, 250, Este, .Alfonso d', 122
263, 267, 275, 310, 31 1. 321, 322- 324, 33O' 357, 358, Este, cathedral (Corradini), 571"'
359, 360, 367, 433, 465, 509^^, 5I3-'•-^ sis-"\ Eynde, Ferdinand van den, 275-6 (ill. 171)
6-'*- -*"'=•'"", 5175-, 518", 540^', 544'^ 552"',
5 1
3-*
571' Faberio, Lucio, 51
Dominici, Bernardo da, 362, 394 Fabriano, Gilio da, 21
Dominicis, Carlo de, 377, 555^' Fabriano
Cathedral (Gentileschi), 514"^
Donatello, 134, 145, 270
Donati, Nicolo, 122 S. Bencdetti (Gentileschi), 41
Donaueschingen (Foggini), 568^- Fabris, .Michele, 569'"', 570*^*^
Donducci, Giovanni Andrea, see Mastelletta Faccini, Pietro, 95
Donzelli, Giuseppe, see Nuvolo Faccio, .Antonio, 565'*
Dori, Alessandro, 556^'^ Falcone, Aniello, 325, 359, 360, 546'\ 552'"
Dorigny, Louis, 479, 577"' Fancelli, Cosimo, ^16, 317 (ill. 206), 533'", 539-\
Dosio, Giovan Antonio, 125, 126, 127, 237, 300, 52o\ 543', 545'"' *', 553''
542""-"" Fancelli, Francesco, 545'"
Dossi, Dosso, 34, 95, 96 Fancelli, Giacomo Antonio, 305, 316, 543', 545*"
Dotti, Carlo Francesco, 370, 389-90 (ill. 265), 556^" Fantoni, Andrea, 448
BIBLOSARTE
640 • INDEX
Fanzago, Cosimo, 127, 291,3020". (ills. 193, 194), 305, Florence

319, 393, 542'"'" Churches
Fara San Martino, parish church (Tanzio), 103, 519^' Annunziata, SS. (Foggini), 447, 568^'^-; (Volter-
Farnese, Alessandro, 130, 131 (ill. 67) rano), 345
Farnese, Odoardo, 38, 63, 79 Badia, 542"^
Farnese, Ranuccio, 68, 95, 130, 476, 513" Baptistery, 237; (Ghiberti), 319
Fattoretto, G. B., 452 Cathedral, 302; campanile, 301; dome, 210;
Favoriti, Agostino, 566^ fa9ade projects, 300-1, 542^'
Fedeli, Domenico, 576** Croce, S. (Danti), 523"
Felici, Vincenzo, 545^^ Felicita, S., 125
Ferdinand I, Grand Duke, 125, 126, 133, 542"" Firenze, S., 392, 559'"; Cortona's project, 246
Ferdinand II, Grand Duke, 253, 300 Gaetano, S., 125, 301-2 (ill. 192), 542''^-^
Fernandi, Francesco, see Imperiali Giovanni Evangelista, S., facade, 370
Ferrabosco, 29, 526'", 528'"' Lorenzo, S., Cappella dei Principi, 126 (ill. 62),
Ferrara 523^*; facade project (Michelangelo), 532";
Accademia degli Intrepidi, theatre, 522''^ (Meucci), 573-'; Old Sacristy, ii7;(Tacca), 133,
Palazzo Arcivescovile, 558'''' 523'"
Pinacoteca (Bonone), 95 (ill. 40), 96 Marco, S. (Cigoli), 97 (ill. 42), 98 (Giambologna),
;
S. Maria in Vado (Bonone), 96 542''^; (Poccetti), 97

University, 122 Maria degli Angeli, S. (formerly, Gherardini),
Ferrari, Daniele, 507^ 470,471 (ill. 331)
Ferrari, Gaudenzio, 99, loi, 519'^'' Maria del Carmine, S. (Foggini), 447 (ill. 314),
Ferrari, Giovanni Andrea de, 352 553'', 568^'; (Gabbiani), 553''; (Giordano), 469
Ferrari, Gregorio de, 354-5 (ill. 239), 356 (ill. 240), Nuova, Chiesa, fa9ade, 392-3
474, 551", 559", 573'' Nuova di S. Filippo, Chiesa, see Firenze, S.
Ferrari, Lorenzo de, 392, 559'', 575^^ Ognissanti, 125

Ferrari, Luca, 341 Spirito, S., sacristy, 245; (G. Baratta), 568^'
Ferrari, Orazio de, 551** Stefano, S. (F. Tacca), 319
Ferraro, Orazio, 458 Palazzi
Ferraro, Tommaso, 458 Capponi, 392; decoration, 573-''
Ferrata, Ercole, 134, 307, 308-10 (ills. 198, 199), 311, Corsini, 392, 559'*; (Bonechi, Dandini), 573^*;
312, 316, 319, 434, 435, 436, 443, 447, 459, 533«, (Ferri), 392; (Gabbiani, Gherardini), 573"^*;
-3624.25.28^ 543'- 1\ 544>5-i«, 545"-*'>-^\ 566', (Passardi), 392
5682''».36 56^40 Covoni, 302
Ferreri, Andrea, 569''* Marucelli-Fenzi, 302; (Ricci), 469, 479, 480 (ill.
Ferretti,Giovanni Domenico, 469-70 338)

Ferri, Antonio Maria, 392, 559" Medici-Riccardi (Giordano), 469, 470 (ill. 330)
Ferri, Giro, 217, 246, 328, 330, 345, 469, 5321^, 53339, Nonfinito, 125
534'', 545'', 546', 548'', 573" Pitti,Cortona's designs for additions, 246, 301,
533^5 ff. (CigoH),
Ferroggio, G. B., 565"- 98; (Colonna), 343 (ill. 225),
Fetti, Domenico, 75, 77, 92, 106-7 ('H- 49), 108, 347, 549^'; (Cortona), 232, 246, 247, 253-6 (ills.
348, 351, 354, 478, 503, 519-20'" ', 520-*' 154-6), 256-8, 469, 534"=" ; (Dolci), 345 (ill.
Fiamingo, Arrigo, 27 227); (Ferri), 345, 534'"'; (Foggini), 319, 545=';
Fiammeri, G. B., 507* (Furini), 344 (ill. 226); (Mitelh), 343 (ill. 225);
Fiasella, Domenico, 105-6, 352, 519^' (Rosa), 327 (ill. 212); (Ruggieri), 542''"; (San
Fiesole, S. Domenico, chancel, 542^^ Giovanni), 344; (F. Susini), 132; (Tacca), 319;
Figura serpentinata, 145 (Volterrano), 345
Finelli, Giuliano, 305, 306, 312, 314-15 (ill. 204), 318, Riccardi, see Medici
319, 535", 536'', 543'" Other secular buildings, galleries, collections
Finoglia, Paolo, 552"" Accademia (Cigoli), 98; (Michelangelo), 543'°

Fiore, Giuseppe di, 571" Annunziata, Piazza, fountains, 133 statue (Giam- ;
Fischer von Erlach, J. B., 419, 527*', 564''^''' bologna and Tacca), 523^-
Fhpart, Giuseppe, 578"" Artichokes, Fountain of the, 132
BIBLOSARTE
641
Florence conttnued Fountains, 26, 37-8, 167 9, 456

Bargello(Bandinelli), 523'"; (Bernini), 166 (ill. 90), Fracanzano, .\lessandro, 359
167 Fracanzano, Cesare, 359, 552'°*
Biblioteca Laurenziana, 242 Fracanzano, Francesco, 325, 359, 552"^
Biblioteca Marucelliana (O. Leoni), 510*" Fracao, .Antonio, 292
Biblioteca Riccardiana (Giordano), 469 Fragonard, Jean Honore, 354
Boboli Gardens (Giambologna), 319; (Lorenzi), Francavilla Fontana, 399
525"*; (Naccherino), 523'"; (Parigi), 125, 132; Franca villa, Pietro, 132, 133, 319
(Pieratti, Salvestrini), 132 Franceschini, Baldassare, see Volterrano
8-"
Casino Mediceo, frescoes, 51 Franceschini, Marcantonio, 470, 471, 474, 496, 573^'
Contini Bonacossi Collection (Bernini), 144; Francis I d'Kste, 150. 152, 167, 318,525", 535-', sbS^-'
(Gentileschi), 514'' Francis II, Emperor, 560'"^
Meridiana, Circolo della (Gherardini), 471 (ill. Francis, St, 55
33O Francis Xavier, St, we Xavier

Museo deirOpera (Silvani), 300 Frangipani, Nicolo, 511'^
Ojetti Collection (Algardi), 535-^ Frascati
Petraia, Villa (Volterrano), 345, sso*"^ Camaldoli (Saraceni), 76
UflFizi (Batoni), 468 (ill. 329); (Caravaggio), 46-8 Cathedral, facjade, 376
(ill. 11), 71, 510', 511'''; (Carracci), 71 (ill. 2t,)\ Villas: .\ldobrandini, see Belvedere; Belvedere,
(Cortona),246,533'';(Dou),537'-;(I'"accini),95; 232; (Domenichino), 80, 516^''; (.Maderno), 520^;
(Foggini), 568^"; (.\. Gentileschi), 357 (ill. 242); Falconieri, 380, 531^'; frescoes, 548", 572'^;
(Maderno), 1 12 Mondragone, 36-7 (ill. 9), 114, soS^*-, 520", 531";
Foggini, Giovanni Battista, 3 16, 3 19, ^92, 436, 438, 447 Muti (Cortona), 247, 531", 533''; (Lanfranco),
(ill. 314), 542"^ 553'^ s^s*-' 517;"
Foix Montoya, Pedro de, 1 46 Fratellini, Giovanna, 573^'
Foligno, cathedral, baldacchino, 176 Fremin, Rene, 566''
Fonseca, Gabriele, 152, 313, 314 (ill. 203), 315 Frigimelica, Girolamo, 558'''
Fontana, Carlo, 180, 185, 195, 283, 284-5, 285-6, 299, Frisone, Battista, 534"'*
363. 369, 370, 371- 373-6 (ills. 249, 250), 379, 380, Fuga, Ferdinando, 369, 370, 377, 381 (ill. 256), 382,
392, 398, 401, 402, 414, 431, s^t\ 528'"', 532-", 383, 392, 393, 395, 527'^-'", 555^«, 556^-, 559'"-"-
538u..3.i4..7^ 53^.3^ 540", 554'-", 555^^.^', Fumiani, Giannantonio, 550*'
559^
564" Furini, Francesco, 339-40, 344 (ill. 226), 345, 359
Fontana, Domenico, 26, 38, iii, 115, 126, 140, 189, Fusali, Gaetano, 570"'
279, 304, 520-\ 542"

Fontana, Francesco, 376, 530^^, 555" Gabbiani, Anton Domenico, 469, 553'*, 573''--''
Fontana, Giovanni, 38, 508", 520' Gabbrielli, Camillo, 546'
Fontana, Girolamo, 376, 539"' Gaggini family, 458, 459

Fontana, Prospero, 513"' Gagliardi, Rosario, 401, 560'"*
Fontanesi, Francesco, 553" Galanino, 518"

Fontebasso, Francesco, 479, 482, 576™ Galatone, 399
Forabosco, Girolamo, 347, 495 Galeotti, Sebastiano, 470, 476, 573-"
Ford, Mrs Richard, Collection, formerly (Bernini), Galgario, Fra Vittore del, 476, 492 (ill. 348), 493,
526^8 578^
Forli Galiani, ^72
Palazzo Foschi (Bencovich), 482 Galilei, .\lessandro, 377, 382-3 (ill. 258), S56^'''*'"
Palazzo Reggiani, 554' Galilei, Galileo. 97, 518'*
Pinacoteca (Carracci), 512" Galizia, Fede, 509'"
Fornovo, 182, 537' Gallena Giusliniani, 38

Forte, Luca, 361, 552'-° Galletto, Giovanni, 432
Fortini, Giovacchino, 568^^'^' Galli, see Bibiena
Fossano Galli, Giovan .Antonio, 5o8-^ 515"

Cathedral, 565"- Galliari family, 575**
SS. Trinita, 564^^ Gallina, Ludovico, 576<*, 578'*
BIBLOSARTE
642
Gallipoli, 399 Genoa continued

Gallo, Francesco, 521-', 538', 564'^ Rosso, 392, 522^**, 559''
Gambarini, Giuseppe, 495, 496 Saluzzo, 559'"
Gandolfi, Gaetano, 292, 474 Serra, 522'"
Gandolfi, Ubaldo, 474 Spinola (Galeotti), 573^'
Garbieri, Lorenzo, 63, 518" Other secular buildings, galleries, collections
Gargiulo, Domenico, see Spadaro Accademia Ligustica (Assereto), 106; (Strozzi),
Garove, Michelangelo, 562'^ 563-' 352 235)
(ill.
Garzi, Luigi, 328, 467 Balbi, Via, 123-5

Gaspari, Antonio, 541^* Cairolo, Via, 392
Gaspari, Pietro, 579'-'' Ferrari, Duca Nicola de. Collection (V. Castello),
Gastaidi, Girolamo, 317 353 (ill-
237)
Gaulli, Giovan Battista, 139, 174, 217, 311, 328, 329 Garibaldi, Via, see Strada Nuova
(ill. 213), 332-4 (ill. 215), 337, 339, 351, 353, 366, Pammatone, Ospedale di, 392
467, 469, 526^", 547^", 548«'^\ 549^6^ 551", 57 1\ Private Collection (Assereto), 105 (ill. 48), 106
572'- Scuole Pie 10, Piazza, 392
Genazzano, Palazzo Colonna, 539^' Strada Nuova, 123
Gennaro, Benedetto, 573^^ University, 123-5 (il's. 60, 61), 522'"''; (Biggi,
Genoa Parodi), 569'''
Churches Genre-painting, 42 ff., 346, 491 ff.
Ambrogio, S., 117; (Reni), 85 (ill. 33), 146-50, Gentile, Michele, 319
519^"; (Rubens), 104 Gentileschi, Artemisia, 73, 357 (ill. 242), 358, 359,
Annunziata, SS., 522''* 552'"'
Carlo, S. (Algardi, Parodi), 448 Gentileschi, Orazio, 35,41,73-4(111. 24), 77, 105, 109,
515I'
Cathedral (Barocci), 105 357, 508^" ^5i3>, 5145",
Filippo Neri, Oratorio di S., 392 George III, 555-0
Giacomo della Marina, S. (Castiglione), 354 Gerolanuova, Villa Negroboni (now Feltrinelli), 558'^
Maddalena, della (Galeotti, Natali), 573-' Gessi, Francesco, 63, 341, 518"
Maria di Carignano, S., 521^^; (D. Carlone), Gherardi, Antonio, 328, 376, 547-', 548^'
569^; (Parodi), 448; (F. Schiaffino), 569" Gherardi, Filippo, 328, 330, 334, 336 (ill. 218), 349,
Maria della Cella, S. (Castiglione), 354 546', 547-^ 548"
Maria dei Servi, S. (Chiesa), 551** Gherardini, Alessandro, 470, 471 (ill. 331), 573'"
Maria della Vigna, S., 522^* Gherardini, Melchiorre, 519-"
Marta, S. (Parodi), 448 Ghezzi, Giuseppe, 467, 495
Pancratius, S., 569*" Ghezzi, Pier Leone, 467, 495, 531'°, 578'""""
Siro, S., 522^* Ghiberti, Lorenzo, 271, 319
Stefano, S. (Ferrari), 355, 356 (ill. 240) Ghislandi, Giuseppe, see Galgario
Torpete, S., 392 Ghisleri, Giovan Battista, 567-"
Palazzi Ghisolfi, Giovanni, 350, 498, 579'''
Balbi, Via Cairolo, 392 Giambologna, see Bologna, Giovanni
Balbi-Cattaneo, 559'" Giant order, use of, 186-7, 224
Balbi-Groppallo (Ferrari), 355 (ill. 239) Giaquinto, Corrado, 465 (ill. 326), 476, 571^, 572",
Balbi-Senarega, 125 575-^'
Carrega-Cataldi, gallery, 392, 559'' Gibbs, James, 376

Doria, fountain, 134 Giganti, Andrea, 401
Doria Tursi, 123 Gilardi, Pietro, 575^"
Durazzo, 559'"; (Colonna), 551"^; (Rusconi, Schi- Gilio, Giovanni Andrea, 507'
aflfino), 448 Gimignani, Giacinto, 250, 266, 321, 322, 3^0, 467,
=
Durazzo-Pallavicini, 125 546;-
Giustiniani, see Granello Gimignani, Lodovico, 467, 547-", 572'-
Granello, 559"" Ginnasi, Domenico, 305, 314
Lomellini, 522'" Giocondo, Fra, 521-''
Pallavicini, 522'" Gioffredo, Mario, 399
Reale, see Durazzo Gionima, .Antonio, 474
BIBLOSARTE
(>43
Giordano, I,uca, 250, 258, 266, 340, 347, 349, 357, Guerra, Gaspare, 218
360, 462-4 (ill. 324), 469, 470 (ill. 330), 479, 482, Guerra, Giovanni, 27
483, 484, 489, 493, 571-', 573-"-' Guerra, Giovan Battista, 509'"
Giorgetti, Antonio, 317, 545'"'*^ Guglielmi, Gregorio, 572'"
Giorgetti, Gioseppe, 317, 545*^ GiiiJa Spiniuale (WoWnos), 138
Giorgione, 347 Guidi, Domenico, 307, 308, 312 13 (ill. 202), 316,
Giosafatti, Giuseppe and Lazzaro, 545^" 3>7- 337. 434. 43'^. 443- 447. 45^ 536-'' -", 544-',
Giotto, 55, 57, 301 545"-*',566-, 568-""
Girardon, Francois, 456 Guidobono, Bartolomeo, 355, 476, ^5i)'\ 576'"
Gisberti, Michele, 507" Guidotti, Paolo, 508^"
Gismondi, Paolo, 321 Guilelmi, Bernardo, 276
Gisolfi, Onofrio, 542'- Guillain, Simon, 509*-
Giustiniani, Benedetto, 74
Giustiniani, V'incenzo, 38, 57, 79, 508*", 510* Haffner, .\nton Maria, 474
Goethe, Wolfgang von, 401 Haffner, Enrico, 333 (ill. 216), 334, 474, 574"
Goya, Francisco de, 71, 491 Hague, The (Netscher), 537'-
Gramatica, Antiveduto, 45, 73, 510' Hals, Frans, 107
Grammichele, 401 Hartford, Wadsworth .Athenaeum (Caravaggio), 55,
1-"
Grande, .Antonio del, 217, 289, S39-''-'' 51
Granja, La, 563^" Heintz, J., 519^"
Grassi, Nicola, 476, 577'' Heemskerck, .Marten van, 579'"
Grassi, Orazio, 507'% 540" Henry IV of France, 23, 133, 536-", 553'
Grassia, Francesco, 545*^ Hildebrandt, Johann Lucas von, 376
Gravina, 399 Hisloria enlestasltca (Niccphorus), 171
Gravina, Francesco Ferdinando, 401 Hogarth, William, 7 1 , 496
Graziani, Ercole, 472 Homer, 486
Greca, Felice della, 539''* Honthorst, Gerrit, 77, 78, 552""
Greca, Vincenzo della, 288-9, 539'^"^ Horace, 137, 263
Grechetto, see Castiglione, Giovanni Benedetto Houdon, Jean-.Antoine, 433
Greco, Gennaro, see Mascacotta Hypnerotomachia Pw/;///; (Colonna), 292-4, 579'"
Greenwich, Queen's House, formerly (Gentileschi),
74 Idea (Bellori), 327 (Zuccari), 39
;
Gregorini, Domenico, 377 Idea dell' Architettura L mversale (Sczmozzi), 115

Gregory XIII, z}, 27, 65, 438, 440-2 (ill. 308), 445 Ignatius of Loyola, St, 23, 24-5, 41, 56, 137, 139
Gregory Xl\, 25 Illusionism, 33, 174, 225, 250-2, 253, 332, 366, 486-7;
Gregory XV, 25, 78, 79, 146, 527"' see also Qtiadratura
Grignasco, Chiesa Parrocchiale, 565"' Imagery, religious, 21 ff., 138-9
Grimaldi, Fra Francesco, 126-7, 509^', 523"" Imitatiun 0/ Christ (Kempis). 139
Grimaldi, Giovan Francesco, 327, 330, 540'", 545^", Imparato, Gerolamo, 356
547^', 548", 553'^ Imperiali, Francesco, 572"
Groppelli, Giuseppe, Marino, and Paolo, 570" 'Impressionism', \ enetian, 91

Grossi, Giovanni Battista, 567"* Innocent X, 137, 138, 140, 141, 143, 170, 185, 190,
Grottaferrata, abbey (Domenichino), 79 212, 213, 217, 225, 256, 266, 269, 279, 527"', 535-'
Guala, Pier Francesco, 575'" Innocent XI, 364, 366, 440 (ill. 307), 442
Guarana, Jacopo, 577*^ Innocent XII, 185, 375, 442 (ill. 309), 443
Guardi, Francesco, 108, 367, 461, 478, 501, 503-5 Islruzioni diverse (Vittone), 427, 432
(in.356),579'^58o'^^'^" Istriizinm element an (Vittone), 432
Guardi, Gianantonio, 108, 503-5 (ill. 355), 580'-''-" Italia, Angelo, 400
Guarini, Guarino, 122, 227, 291, 403, 403 13 (ills. Ittar, Stefano, 402, 560'"*
274-83), 422, 424, 425, 427, 428, 430, 431, 547-',

Jacopo da Empoli, see Chimenti
554\ 55r\ 561'" .
565""
Guarino, Francesco, 358, 552'"^ Janssens, Jan, 78
Guercino, 33, 63, 78-9, 80, 88-9 (ill. 36), 96, 97, 101, Jesuits, see Society of Jesus
250, 261, 340, 360, 473, 5^7"'^ 552'"' 573" John of the Cross, St, 22, 25
BIBLOSARTE
644 INDEX
John V of Portugal, 414 Lazzarini, Gregorio, 485, 550"*'

-"^
Jolli, Antonio, 579' Lebrun, Charles, 171, 434, 566-', 577""
Jones, Inigo, 395 Leccc, 399, 560'"
Jordaens, Jacob, 107-8 Cathedral, 400
Joseph 1, 414 Chiesa del Rosario, 400
Julius II, 21, 133 Madonna del Carmine, 400
Juvarra, Filippo, 319, 367, 369, 370, 372, 376, 377, Prefettura, 400
393, 401, 403, 413-24 ('Us- -284-92), 424, 425, 427, S. Agostino, 400
428, 431, 527*'*«', 555-", 561", 562'", 563^^^, 5655''- S. Chiara, 400
S. Croce, facâde, 399-400
Kauflfmann, Angelica, 577"' S. Matteo, facade, 400
Keil, Bernardo,
495-6 SS. Nicola e Cataldo, fa9ade, 400
Kempis, Thomas a, 139 Seminario, 400
K.imbolton Castle (A. Pellegrini), 482-3 Lecchi, Giacomo, 575'*
Klesl, Melchior, 568-" Le Clerc, Jean, 514'^
Kokorinov, A. F., 397 Lecurt, Giusto, see Corte
Le Geay, Jean Laurent, 553''
Labacco, Antonio, 298, 541^" Leghorn, see Livorno

Labisi, Paolo, 401 Legnani, Stefano Maria, 575'"
Ladatte, Francesco, 450, 569^" Legnano, S. Magno, 52 1-'
Laer, Pieter van, 77, 78 (ill. 28), 323, 515'* Legros, Pierre, the younger, 139, 433 (ill. 300), 436,
Lagomaggiore, Matteo, 392 447
La Grua, Laura, 401 Leningrad
Lama, Giulia, 482, 576*''-*' Academy of Art, 397; (Caravaggio), 510', 511'''
La Malgrange, chateau, 563''^ Marble Palais, 527*^'

Lamberti, Bonaventura, 468 Leo XI, 269-70 (ill. 165), 308, 318, 440, 442, 536-'*
Lampi, J. B., 479 Leonardo da Vinci, 48, 58, 69, 263, 423, 431
Lancret, Nicolas, 479, 496 Leone, Andrea de, 359, 552'"
Landscape-painting, 42 ff., 326-7, 497 flF. Leoni, Leone, 291
Lanfranchi, Carlo Emanuele, 561 -, 563-' Leoni, Ottavio, 510'*
Lanfranchi, Francesco, 282, 403, 561^ Leopold I, 343
Lanfranco, Giovanni, 33, 34, 38, 63, 78-9, 80, 81, Le Pautre, Antoine, 527'"
85-8 (ills. 34, 35), 96, 97, 98, 141, 146, 247, 258, 261, Lessing, G. E., 577**
263, 321, 322, 328, 332, 337, 339, 357, 464, 508-', Lestache, Pierre, 567'^
5132', 5i633-« 5175-- 5", 546^ 547-'-^', 57550 Leutner, A., 564'"'
Langetti, Giambattista, 341, 347 (ill. 229), 349, 550'- Leyden, Lucas van, 462
Lantana, G. B., 1 17, 121 Liberi, Pietro, 347
Lanzani, Andrea, 575^'' Libraries, 227
Laocoon (Lessing), 577** Ligari, Gian Pietro and Cesare, 575'^
-*
Lapi, Niccolo, 573-^- Light, useof(Bernini), 157-61, 182, 183; (Caravaggio),
Lasagni, G. P., 99, 134 54-6; (Juvarra), 419; (Tiepolo), 490
Lasso, Giulio, 560"' Ligorio, Pirro, 36
Lastman, Pieter, 78 Ligozzi, Jacopo, 97, 518'*"
Lateran Council (1512), 21 Lilio, Andrea, 27
Laugier, M.-A., 372 Lille, Musee Wicar (Duquesnoy), 536^*
Laureti, Tommaso, 65 Andrea, 91, 518'
Lilli,
Lauri, Filippo, 548^'' Lima, S. Domingo (Caffa), 307 8, 543'^

Lauri, Francesco, 265 Lingelbach, Johannes, 323
La Valletta Lint, Hendrik Frans van, 579"'
Cathedral (Caravaggio), 510*; (Mazzuoli), 544^^ Liotard, Jean Etienne, 578'*
Museum (Caffa), 307 (ill. 197) Lippi, Annibale de', 36
S. Giovanni (Preti), 361 Lippi, Lorenzo, 344
Laxism, 138, 524' Lironi, Giuseppe, 567'''
Lazzari, Dionisio, 542''*'''
BIBLOSARTE
^45
Lisbon Lucchesi, Mattco, 387, 557*"

Church and palace of the Patriarch, 563^'' Lucenti, Girolamo, 317, 543', 545*'*'
Lighthouse, 563'^ Ludovisi, Bernardo, 436, 566', 567'"
National Museum (Creti or Dufresnoy?), 574^* Ludovisi, Lodovico, 266-7, 276-8,
sss'**
S. Maria della Divina Providenza, 405-6 (ill. 276), Ludovisi, Niccolo, 527"'
562" Ludwig,J. F. andj. P., 563"
Lissandrino, see Magnasco Lugano
Livorno, monument to Ferdinand L 133, 523'^'" -Museo Civico (Scrodine), 77 (ill. 27), 515"'
Locatelli, Andrea, 498, 501, 579"' Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection (Bernini), 144;
Locatelli, Pietro, 546' (Caravaggio), 511'"
'"
Lodoli, Carlo, 372, 554"- Lurago, Rocco, 123, 522*"
Lomi, Aurelio, 104, 105 Luti, Benedetto, 467, 470, 476, 498, 553", 572'"
London Lys, Giovanni, 77,92, 106-7, 107-8 (ill. 50), 347, 351,
Bridgewater House (Carracci), 60, 513-'' 482,503, 5i9^«
Mahon Collection (Carracci), 513-"; (Giordano),
470 (ill. 330); (Guercino), 88; (Lys), 108 Maccaruzzi, Bernardo, 557"
Marlborough House (Gentileschi), 74 Maderno, Carlo, 26, 28, 29, 33, 37, 40, 41, 1 10 (ill. 51),
National Gallery (Bernini), 526^"; (Canaletto), 502 III ff. (ills. 52, 53), 118, 120, 130, 184, 190 (ill. 109),
(ill.354); (Caravaggio), 48, 49 (ill. 12), 511'"; 195, 197, 283 (ill. 179), 302, 382 (ill. 257), 520'" ,
(Carracci), 69; (Domenichino), 80, 516^''; (Dou), 539*, 540'"

537^-; (Giaquinto), 465 (ill. 326), 572'" Maderno, Stefano, 30, 41, 128 (ill. 63), 305, ô6,
Somerset House, 397 52364..
Victoria and Albert .Museum (.\lgardi), 535"-; Madrid

(.\prile), 315 (ill. 205); (Bernini), 145, 150, 168, Museo de .Artilleria (Juvarra), 563"*
525'^ 568-"; (Duquesnoy), 277 (ill. 173), 537^'; Prado (.\lbani etc.), 5 15-'; (Bernini), 73 (Duques- 1 ;
(Foggini), 568'" noy version), 537'''; (Gentileschi), 514"; (Rcni),

Westminster .-Vbbey (Roubiliac), 525'^ 85; (Titian), 276; (Velasquez), 523'"
Whitehall Palace (Jones's designs), 395 Royal Palace, 528'""; Juvarra's design, 414, 563"';
Longhena, Baldassare, 115,290-1,292-300(1115. 185- (Tiepolo), 486, 577»«'
90), 301 (ill. 191), 303, 366, 375, 386, 398, 412, 450, Statues: Philip IH, 523"-; Philip IV, 133 (ill. 69),
'»
541^1" ,557^-\ 558''^ S(^4'\ 569"" 458, 523"'-
Longhi, Alessandro, 387, 493, 578"' .Maestri, Giovan Battista, see Volpino
Longhi, .Martino (the elder), 26, 34, 36 7 (ill. 9), 40, Maffei, Francesco, 341, 347-8 (ill. 230), 349, 479,
115,288,509^'' 503- 550'"

Longhi, Martino (the vounger), 197, 242, 286-8 (ill. .Mafra
182), 538'-- Cathedral, decoration, 567"

Longhi, Onorio, 288, 314, 539-^ Palace (Juvarra's designs), 414, 563^
Longhi, Pietro, 484, 493, 496 7 (ill. 351), 578'"" Magatti, P. Antonio, 575^^
Lorenese, Carlo, see Mellin Magenta, Giovanni, 115, 122 (ill. 59), 127, 281, 522^*
Lorenzetti, 152 .Maggi, Paolo, 522*"
Lorenzi, Francesco, 577'^ Maggiotto, Francesco, 497

Lorenzi, Stoldo, 525'*' .Maggiotto, II, see Fedeli
Loreto, Santa Casa, tower, 395 .Magini, Carlo, 579""

'",
Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Collection (Gentileschi), .Maglia, .Michele, 312, 315, 316, 434, 544", 545"
74,514" 566'
*-'
Loth, Johan Karl, 347, 476 .Magnani, Giovan Battista, 122, 522*'
Lotto, Lorenzo, 45 Magnasco, Alessandro, 341, 353, 367, 473-4, 477 ('"•
336), 478, 479, 494. 501. 503, 575'\

576"- "•
Louis XIV, 143, 152, 167 (ill. 91), 169, 170 (ill. 94),
525" 568'- .Maille, Michel, see .Maglia

171, 363,
Loyola, Jesuit sanctuary, 299, 375, 554'*" .Maini, Giovanni
Battista, 366, 436, 438, 439 (ill. 305),
"
Lualdi, Michelangelo, 525-^ 442, 447, 567'-
Lucatelli, see Locatelli Maisons Laffitte (Spada), 94
Lucca, Palazzo Pubblico, 414, 563^- Malavisti, .Alessandro Neri, 542"
Luccherini, .Michele, 523"^ Malinconico, Nicola, 571^
BIBLOSARTE
646 INDEX
Malvasia, 3g, 71, g.v 94, 574'% 578"' Maser, church, 180, 557''''
Mancini, Francesco, 467, 572"' Massani, Giovanni Antonio, 38 9
Manduria, jigq Massari, Giorgio, 370, 385 (ill. 260), 386 (ill. 261),
Manetti, Rutilio, 98, 518-' 387, 452, 54i^5575<-5-, 558''-
Manfredi, Bartolomeo, 73, 74, 76, 77, 98, 513' .Massari, Lucio, 512^ 518"
Mangone, Fabio, 116 (ill. 54), 117, 120, 521-" .Mastelletta, 92, 94 (ill. 39), 95, 96, 473, 518''"'
Mannerism, zz, 26, 27-8, 48, 53, 57, 91, 125, 126, Masucci, .Agostino, 467, 572'''
237, 239, 288, 289, 370, 453, 461 Masuccio, Natale, 400
Mannheim, castle (A. Pellegrini), 483 Mattel, Asdrubale and Ciriaco, 38
Manozzi, Giovanni, iee San Giovanni Mattel, Tommaso, 558*''
Mansart, Francois, 561" Matteis, Paolo de, 571^

Mansart, Jules Hardouin, 1
17, 561" .Matteo da Castello, see Citta di Castello
Mantegna, 252, 511"* Maulpcrtsch, Franz .\nton, 576""
Mantua Mazarin, Cardinal, 288
Cathedral (Andreasi or Fetti), 107 Mazza, Camillo, 569''-
Palazzo Ducale (Fetti), 107; (Mantegna), 252 Mazza, Giuseppe, 449 (ill. 316), 450, 569^**
S. Sebastiano, 244 Mazzanti, Lodovico, 467, 572"
Marabitti, Ignazio, 459, 571"" Mazzoni, Sebastiano, 341, 347-8, 349 (ill. 231), 473,
Maragliano, Anton Maria, 450 479,550""
Maratti, Carlo, 266, 321, 327, 330, 334, 337-9 (ills. Mazzucchelli, Pier Francesco, see Morazzone
219, 220), 363, 366, 436, 438, 461, 467, 469, 471, 483, Mazzuoli, Giuseppe, 316, 319, 434-5 (ill. 301), 544'\
549ô.^-«-o, 55191,
484, 493, 548-'% 566^ 572^", 545^\ 566'
'"
573", 575"- McSwiny, Owen, 573^^, 576"
Marcellini, Carlo, 542"-, 568^^-^* Meda, Giuseppe, 120
Marchetti, Giovan Battista and Antonio, 558'^ Medici, Cosimo de', see Cosimo
Marchionni, Carlo, 364, 377, 383, 55638-^8, 567'' Medici, Ferdinando de', 568^'
Marchionni, Filippo, 556*" Medici, Giovanni de', 125, 126 (ill. 62), 302
Marchiori, Giovanni, 453-4 (ill. 320), 570"' Medrano, Giovanni x'Vntonio, 559**'
Marchis, Tommaso de, 290 Mehus, Lieven, 550"'

Marcola, Giovan Battista, 576^" Melk, 422
Marcola, Marco, 578'"" xMellin, Charles, 358, 55210^
Mari, Giovan Antonio, 308, 544'' Mellone, Carlo Francesco, 448
Maria de' Medici, 553' Memmo, Andrea, 554''
Maria Carolina, Queen of Naples, 560"'- Mendrisio (Torriani), 549^^
Maria Theresa, Empress, 560'"- Menescardi, Giustino, 577'^
Mariani, Camillo, 30, 41, 128, 129-30 (ill. 65), 523''^ Menghini, Nicolo, 306, 543'"
Mariani, Giuseppe, 560"' Mengozzi-Colonna, Girolamo, 474, 487, 577*''"
Marieschi, Michele, 501, 503 Mengs, Anton Raphael, 266, 270, 364, 462, 465, 468-9,
Mariette, P. J., 368 486,491,493, 572-1
Marinali, Orazio, 452, 570^^ Menicucci, Giovan Battista, 539-^
Marinetti, Antonio, 576^" Merate, Villa Belgioioso (now Trivulzio), 558'^'
Marino, SS. Rosario, 555^^ Merenda, Ippolito, 167, 526^^

Marino, Cavaliere, 231, 531' Merisi, Michelangelo, see Caravaggio
Mariotti, Giambattista, 577*" Merli, Carlo Giuseppe, 391, 558'^
Marot, Jean, 188, 529'' Merlini, Lorenzo, 566", 568"
Marracci, Giovanni, 546' Messina, Vincenzo di, 459
Martelli, Tommaso, 122 Messina
Martinelli, Domenico, 527*' Church of the Padri Somaschi (Guarini's design),
Martinelli, Giovanni, 345 404-5 (ill. 274), 412, 561"
Maruscelli, Paolo, 222, 540^' Museo Nazionale (Caravaggio), 50, 51 (ill. 14), 53,
Masaccio, 57 54, 55, 5I0^5II-"
Masaniello, 312, 360 Orion Fountain, 134
Mascacotta, 498 Royal Palace, Juvarra's plans for, 563^^
Mascherino, Ottaviano, 65, 11 1, 1
14, 522*" SS. .Annunziata, 404, 561*
BIBLOSARTE
647
Messina cotitinued Milan continued

S. Gregorio, 561"* Brera, 20- 1 522 '"'
1
, (Caravaggio), 49 (C^ vallino),
; ;
Theatine palace, 404

359 (ill. 244); (Cerano), 99 (ill. 43), 101 ;(Cx)rtona),
Meucci, \ incenzo, 573-' 258; (Gentilcschi), 514*; (Longhi), 497 (ill. 351);
Meyring, Heinrich, 557", 569'" (Mantegna), 511'"; (Morazzone), loi, 340 (ill.
Michela, Costanzo, 565'-
221); (Procaccini), 101 (ill. 45). 103; (Rcni).
Michelangelo, 22, 28, 54-5, 57, 63, 66, 68, 81 , r 1
1 , u 2, 517''; (Tiepolo), 485
115, "7, 133. 134, i43> '45i 154, 164, i75< "78, 186, Castello Sforzesco (Cairo), 340 (ill. 222) (Clerano), ;
190, 203, 210, 217, 224, 237, 242, 253, 265, 289, 317,
99; (Cortona), 532-'; (Procaccini), 103
382, 395, 422, 436, 446, 469, 489, 507", 513"', 520\ Cxjilegio Elvetico, 16
1 (ill. 54), 121 (ill. 58), 521^"
53i«, 532--'-\534"-, 543'" Fassati Collection (Procaccini), 103
Michetti, Niccolo, 572"' Museo deirOpcra (Cerano), 99
Miel, Jan, 323, 548^^ Ospedale Maggiore, 120, 521^"
Mieris, Frans van, 537*- Poldo Pezzoli, Museo (Guardi), 505 (ill. 356)
Migliori, Francesco, 482 Scala, La, 391
Milan Milani, .-Kurelio, 472
Churches Milizia, Francesco, 372, 387
Alessandro, S., 1 16-18 (ill. 55), 120, 521-^ Millini, Giovanni Garzia, 267
Ambrogio, S.,419 Millini, .Mario, 535-'
Angelo, S., Oratory of (Gilardi), 575'" Minneapolis Institute of .^rts (.Mgardi), 536-^
Bernardino dei Morti, S. (Ricci), 479 Mirandolesi, 474
Cathedral, 116, 212; decoration, 134; fa9ade Miteli, Giuseppe de, sto""
(Ricchino's design), 118; (\'anvitelli's design), Mitelli, .Agostino, 343 4 (ill. 225), 474, 476, 549"
395; (Cerano, Morazzone, Procaccini), 98-9, Mitelli, Giuseppe Maria, 496
116, 5i9-'';(Mangone, Ricchino), ii6;(Rusnati), Mochi, Francesco, 30, 128, 130-2 (ills. 66-8), 305, 306,
523'"' ""
447;(Volpino), 134
Certosa di Garegnano (Crespi), 104 Modena
Francesco di Paola, S., facade, 391 Galleria Estense (Bernini), 130; (Bonone), 96;
Giuseppe, S., 1 18-20 (ills. 56, 57), 292, 521-*"' (Carracci), 512" (Duquesnoy ), 536"" (Gucrcino),
; ;
Lorenzo, S., 244 88; (Procaccini), 10

Marco, S. (Cerano), 99 Palazzo Ducale, 184, 291, 527'", 537', 541"
Maria Podone, S., 116 S. Bartolomeo, facade, 371 (Barbieri), 548*^ ;
Maria alia Porta, S., 120 S. Biagio (Preti), 360, 552""

Maria presso S. Satiro, S., 225 S. Domenico, 558"'
Nazaro e Celso, SS. (Procaccini), loi S.Vincenzo, 404
Pace, della (Tanzio), 103 Town Hall (Schedoni), 96
Passione, della (Crespi), 103 (ill. 47), 104 Modica, 401 S. Giorgio, 560"^
;
Pietro Celestino, S., facade, 391 Mola, Giovan Battista, 540"

Vittore, S. (Crespi, xMoncalvo), 103 4 Mola, Pier Francesco, 80, ^23-4 (ill. 209), ^27, 3^0,
^- 546'">',548'^
other churches, 522'"-
Palazzi Molanus, 21, 30
Annoni, 120 Molina, Luis de, 24
Archinto (Tiepolo), 485 Molinari, .\ntonio, 349, 350 (ill. 233), 481, 550"
Casati-Dugna (Tiepolo), 485 Molinos, .Miguel de, 138, 337
Clerici (Tiepolo), 485, 577*^ Momper, Josse de, 509''-
Cusani, 391 Monaldi, Carlo, 442, 567'^

Durini, 120, 522** Moncalvo, 103, 519^^
Litta, 391, 5S3^ 554^ 558" Mondo, Domenico, 572'
Marino, 121 Mondovi
Omenoni, degli, 291 Chiesa della Misericordia, 564**
Spinola, 120 Duomo S. Uonato, 521-'", 564^*
Visconti, 120 see also Vicoforte and Villanova

Other secular hiiildings, galleries, collections Monnot, Pietro Stefano, 366, 433, 436, 440 (ill. 307),
Ambrosiana, 116; (Caravaggio), 43, 511'^ 442, 553"> 566-\ 568-"
BIBLOSARTE
648
Monreale, cathedral, Cappella del Crocifisso, 400 Naples

Monrealese, see Novelli, Pietro Churches
Montalto, Cardinal, 145 Agostino alia Zecca, S., 542'^
Montalto, villa, formerly (Bernini), 145, 168 .Agostino degli Scalzi, S., 127
Montano, G. B., 521-', 530^- Angelo a Nilo, S., tombs, 571''^
Montauti, Antonio, 568''* Annunziata, dell', 395, 398 9, 559"
Monte, Francesco Maria del, 38, 45, 510' Apostoli, SS., 127; (Borromini), 530'''; (Duques-
Monte Berico, Sanctuary, 557"' ;
(Marinali), 570'*' noy), 278 (ill. 174), 537^\ 543^; (Finelli), 543';
Montecassino, decoration, 447 (Lanfranco), 357
Monte Compatri, cathedral, 34, 538'" Arcangelo a Segno, S. (Vouet), 357, 551'""
Montecchio Maggiore, Villa Cordellina, 558"- Ascensione a Chiaia, dell', 304, 542"^
Montelatici, Francesco, see Bravo Carlo all'Arena, S., 127
Monti, Francesco, 472, 474, 574"" Carmine, del, 127
Monti, Francesco (of Brescia), 574^''''* Cathedral (Domenichino), 81-2, 357, 516^"; (Lan-
Monticello di Fara, La Favorita, 557" franco), 357 Cappella del Tesoro, 1 27 (Fanzago),
; ;
Monticiano, S. Agostino (Manetti), 98 319; (Finelli), 543'^; (Solimena), 393

Montirone, Villa Lechi (C. Carloni and Lecchi), 575^'' Crocelle, delle, 559"^
Montorsoli, 134 Diego airOspedaletto, S. (Caracciolo), 358
Montreal, private collection (Canaletto), 501 Domenico Maggiore, S. (Caravaggio), 52, 510*
Moor Park (Amigoni), 483 Domenico Soriano, S. (Preti), 552""
Morandi, Giovanni Maria, 549^*^ Donnaregina (Sanfelice), 559*^
Morari, Giovan Battista Maria, 565'^ Filippo Neri, S. (Reni), 55 1"*
Moratti, Francesco, 436, 447 Gerolamini, dei, 383

Morazzone, 98-9, 99-101 (ill. 44), 339, 340 (ill. 221), Gesii Nuovo, 117; (Fanzago), 319; (Lanfranco),
^78, 5 19^'. ^7.^^54951 357; (Solimena), 571''
''' '"'
Morelli, Lazzaro, 317,318, 434, 528'"', 543', 545"' Giacomo degli Spagnuoli, S. (Naccherino), 523'''
Moretti, Giuseppe, 503 Giorgio dei Genovesi, S., 542'
Moretto, 45 Giorgio Maggiore, S., 542'"
Morlaiter, Gian Maria, 453, 57o"'-^' Giovanni Battista, S., 543'^
Morlaiter, Michelangelo, 557"", 577" Giuseppe degli Scalzi, S., 304
Moroni, Giovanni Battista, 493 Giuseppe dei Vecchi a S. Potito, S.,
303
Morosini, Francesco, 448 (ill. 315) Lorenzo, S., facade, 559*''; (Bolgi), 543'
Mostaert, see Pippi, Nicolo Maria degli Angeli, S., 127
Mozart, W. A., 505 Maria degli Angeli alle Croci, S., 542'"
Mulier, Pieter, 575'' Maria di Costantinopoli, S., 127
Munich Maria Egiziaca, S., 303, 304 (ill. 194), 542*'
Alte Pinakothek (F. Guardi), 503 Maria Maggiore, S., 542"'
Graphische Sammlung (Cortona), 532-' Maria Mater Domini, S. (Naccherino), 543'
St Michael, 419 Maria dei Aliracoli, S., 543''
Mura, Francesco de, 393, 465, 476, 572", 575'^ Maria dei Monti, S., 542""
Murgia, Francesco, 548^'' Maria la Nova, S. (Caracciolo), 358
Musso, Nicolo, 515" Maria dei Pellegrini, S. (Naccherino), 134
Muti, G. A. G., 443-4 (ill. 311) Maria della Pazienza, S. (Naccherino), 134
Muttone, Giacomo, 558'^ Maria della Sanita, S., 117, 127
Muttoni, Francesco, 389, 557*^ Maria della Sapienza, S., 127, 304, 542''
Muttoni, Pietro, see Vecchia Maria succurre mis^ris, S., 559**^
Muziano, Girolamo, 27-8, 43 Martino, S., 127; (Caracciolo),
358; (Dosio),
Mysticism, 139, 337 542""'''; (Fanzago), 302, 303 (ill. 193), 319,
542"'; (Finoglia), 552""; (Giordano), 463 (ill.
Naccherino, Michelangelo, 128, 134, 305, 523''-*°, 324); (Juvarra's altar projects), 414; (Lanfranco),
543-"'
357; (Reni), 551"**; (Ribera), 552'"-; (Ruoppolo),
Naldini, Paolo, 312, 317, 319, 366, 544-", 54S^^*^''" 361 (ill. 246); (Stanzioni), 55-2""; (Vaccaro),
Nancy, theatre, 574'" 571"; (Vouet), 551'""
BIBLOSARTE i
649
Naples continued Nebbia, Cesare, 27, 28, 507'"

Monte della Misericordia, del, 543'^; (Caracci- Negrctti, Jacopo, see Palma Giovane
olo),356 (ill. 241 ); (Caravaggio), 53, 54, 356, 510- Negri, Pietro, 347
Nicola alia Carita, S., facjade, 393 Neri, St Philip, 22, 23, 25, 40, 41, 56, 26c), 507^
Nunziatelle, delle, 393; (De Mura), 572" Netscher, Caspar, 537'-
Ospedaletto, dell" (Solimena), 393 Newton, Sir Isaac, 432
Paolo Maggiore, S., 126-7; (Finelli), 543''; (Soli- New ^'ork
mena), 464 (ill. 325), 571^"; (Stanzioni), 358 (ill. .Altman Côllection (Dou), 537*-
243), 532'""' .Metropolitan .Museum (Algardi), 535-'; (Caffa),
Pieta dei Turchini, della (Do), 551"' 544"; (Caravaggio), 510"; (Fctti), 107 (ill. 49)
PP. delle .Missioni, dei, 370, 527"^ Pierpont .Morgan Library (Tiepolo), 489 (ill. 345),
Reale, Cappella (Fanzago), 319 577"'
Sansevero de' Sangri, Cappella, decoration, 450, Nicaea, Council of, 507
454-6(111. 321), 570"-, 571"* Nice, S. Gaetano, 428, 565"*"
Sebastiano, S., 127 Nicephorus, 171
Severino e Sosio, SS. (Fanzago), 319; (Nac- Nicholas V, 567'"
cherino), 134 Nieulandt, Willem van, 509'-
Severo al Pendino, S., 127 Nigetti, .\latteo, 125, 126 (ill. 62), 301, 523", 542"-'
Spirito Santo, 399 Nightingale, Lady Klizabeth, 525"

Teresa, S., 127 Nogari, Giuseppe, 476, 484, 493, 577"'
Teresa a Chiaia, S., 542"" Nogari, Paris, 27
Trinita delle Monache, S., 542"'* Nollekens, Joseph, 537*-
Palazzi NoUi, G. B., 379
Donn' .\nna, 304, 542'- Nome, Fran(;ois, 359 60
Fernandez, staircase, 559*^ Nono, .Andrea, 554^
Firrao, facâde, 542^' Nolo, 401, 560'"^
Maddaloni, 304 Noiiveau Traite (Cordemoy), 372
Majo, Bartolomeo di, staircase, 394-5 Novara
Monte della Misericordia, 543' Museo Civico (Tanzio), 103
Reale, 126; (Stanzioni), 358 S. Gaudenzio (.Morazzone), loi ; (Tanzio), 103
Sanfelice, 394 (ill. 269) Novelli, Pier .\ntonio, 577''
Serra Cassano, 394 Novelli, Pietro, 340, 549"^"
Via Foria, in, 394 (ill. 270), 559"' Novello, Giovanni Battista, 557""
Other secular buildings, galleries, collections Nuvolo, Fra, 117, 127
.\cquedotto Carolino, 399 Nuvolone, Carlo Francesco, 339, 350, 550"-
Albergo de" Poveri, 383, 393 Nuvolone, Giuseppe, 350
Cavalry barracks, 399 Nymphenburg (Amigoni), 483
Fontana Medina, 134
Foro Carolino, see Piazza Dante Odazzi, Giovanni, 467, 547*'
Granary, 383, 393 Oliva, Gian Paolo, 137, 138
Guglia di S. Domenico, 543"' di ; S. Gennaro, 304; Olivarez, Duke, 133
deirimmacolata, 571"'' Olivieri, Pietro Paolo, 40
Museo Nazionale (Carracci), 69, 512'-, 513-''; Omodei, Cardinal, 539^'
(Preti), 360 (ill. 245); (Saraceni), 514'^ (Sche- Onofri, Crescenzio, 547-"
doni), 96 (ill. 41); (Spada). 94 Oratory of St Philip Neri, 23 4, 25, 40
Piazza Dante, 399 Orbetto, see Turchi
Teatro S. Carlo, 393, 559"' Orgiano, Comune di, \ ilia Fracanzan, 557"-
Napoli, Tommaso Maria, 401 Oria, 399

5-^ Orizzonte, 498
Nappi, Francesco, 5 1
Nardo, 399 Orlandi, Stefano, 474
Natali, G. B., 573-' Oropa, sanctuary, 561'-

Nauclerio, Giambattista, 393, 559" Orsini, Fulvio, 63, 512'-
Navona, F., 555-" Orsolino, .\ndrea, 392
Nazari, Bartolomeo, 479, 578"" Orsoni, Gioseffo, 474
BIBLOSARTE
650 • INDEX
Orta, Sacro Monte (Morazzone), 10 Palladio, Andrea, 115, 116, 123, 175, 180, 182, 187,
Orvieto 1H8, 224, 225, 229, 232, 2947, 297, 298, 299, 370,
Cathedral (Cornacchini), 436 8 (ill. 304) 382, 386-7, 387, 389, 412, 417, 420, 427, 431, 531 '«,
Museo deirOpera (Mochi), 130 (ill. 66), 132 541'', 556^', 55-752. 54. 58. SX^ g^^HU
Osuna, Duke of, 357 Palma, Andrea, 538''
Ottino, Pasquale, 5o8-\ 515'", 520'" Palma Giovane, 106, 519'"'
Ottobeuren (.^migoni), 483 Palma Vecchio, 347

Ottoboni, Cardinal, 401, 414, 566" Paltronieri, Pietro, see Mirandolesi
Ottonelli, 265 Pamphili, Camillo, 139, 181, 217, 268 (ill. 164)
Ottoni, Lorenzo, 316, 435, 436, 447, 545^\ $66*, 567-5 Pamphili, Panfilo(.'),'268 (ill. 164), 535-^
Oxford Panfilo, see Nuvolone, Carlo Francesco
Ashmolean Museum (Bernini), 526^** Pannini, Gian Paolo, 498, 499 (ill. 352), 501, 553",
Christ Church (Carracci), 71, 513^"
Pannini, Giuseppe, 377, 556^', 567'*
Padovanino, 106, 347, 519'"' Paolini, Pietro, 519-'
Padua Paracca, Giovan Antonio, see Valsoldo
Palazzo Papafava, 557"° Parigi, Alfonso, 125, 132, 523'^
Santo, Cappella del Tesoro, 569^'; (de Corte), Parigi, Giulio, 125, 132, 301, 359, 523", 54260
570M Paris
S. Maria del Pianto, 558" Bibliotheque Nationale (Bernini), 171, 525-*
Pagani, Paolo, 482, 576'''' Fontaine de Grenelle, 246
Pagano, Francesco, 571"' Henry IV, statue (destroyed), 133, 523''-
Paggi, Giovanni Battista, 104, 105 Hotel Mazarin (Romanelli), 321
Palazzotto, Giuseppe, 560^''" Invalides, 117, 561"
Paleotti, Gabriele, 21, 27, 345 Louvre, 395; Bernini's projects, 185, 187-9 ('l'-
Palermo 108), 527**", 562'^, 563'"; Candiani's project,
Churches 527***; Cortona's project, 246, 527**, 533^^; Rai-
Agostino, S. (Serpotta), 459 naldi's project, 527**, 533^^; (Caravaggio), 510'*;
Anna, S., fafade, 401, 560"" (Carracci), 62, 69, 70, 513-*; (Champaigne), 438;
Caterina aH'Olivella, Oratorio di S. (Serpotta), 459 (Cortona), 246, 258; (Dou), 537*-; (Gentileschi),
Cita, Oratorio di S. (Serpotta), 458 74, 514''; (Guercino), 88; (Michelangelo), 317;
Domenico, S., Oratorio del Rosario (Serpotta), (Raphael), 58; (Reni), 517^'; (Romanelli), 321;
458-9 (ill- 323) (Titian), 48
Francesco d'Assisi, S. (Serpotta), 459 Notre-Dame (Raggi), 544--
"^'''
Gesii, decoration, 507" Sainte-Anne-la-Royale, 405 (ill. 275), 561
Lorenzo, Oratorio di S. (Caravaggio), 510**; (Ser- Val-de-Grace,baldacchino, 176, 526'*;domedesign,
potta), 458 561"
Orsola, S. (Serpotta), 458 Parma
Ospedale dei Sacerdoti, dell' (Serpotta), 458 Cathedral (Correggio), 62
Pieta, della, facade, 400 Gallery (Correggio), 536^^' ;
(Schedoni), 96 (Spada),
;
Salvatore, S., 400 94, 95

Stimmate, delle (Serpotta), 458 Palazzo del Giardino (Carracci), 68
Teresa della Kalsa, S., facade, 400 Palazzo del Municipio, 522^'
Secular buildings S. Alessandro, 522^'
Arsenal, 400 S. Antonio (Bibiena), 554^
Bonagia, Palazzo, staircase, 401 S. Maria dell'Annunziata, 182; (G. Rainaldi), 537'
Museo Nazionale (Serpotta), 458 S. Maria del Quartiere, 122, 522'-
Pretoria, Piazza, fountain, 134 Teatro Farnese, 123
Quattro Canti, 400, 560"^ Parmigianino, 103, 348, 5i8"'\ 537^^
Santa Croce, Palazzo (formerly, Giaquinto), 572'" Parodi, Domenico, 575^''
Statue of Charles H, 458 ..^36, 448 (ill. 315), 450, 569'"-, 570"
Parodi, Filippo,
Palestrina, see Praeneste Partanna, church (V. di Messina), 459
Paliano, Palazzo Colonna, 539-"* Pasinelli, Lorenzo, 343, 471, 474, 549^*
Palladino, see Zabarclli Pasqualino, 496
BIBLOSARTE
651
Passalacqua, Pietro, 377, 556^' Piamontini, Giuseppe, 568"' **

Passante, Bartolomeo, 551**' Pianca, Giuseppe .\ntonio, 576"
Passardi, Giovanni, 392 Plane,Giovan .Maria dellc, 575"
Passariano, Villa Manin, 389, 558"* Piazzetta,Giovanni Battista, 340, 349, 461, 462, 474,
Passarotti, Bartolommeo, 512", 513^" 481-2 (ill. 339), 483. 485, 494, 503, 575^ 576'*,
Passeri,Giovanni Battista, 174, 231, 266, 325 578'""
Passeri,Giuseppe, 467 Picchiati, Bartolomeo, 542'-"
Passignano, Domenico, 27, 28, ^3, ^4, 35, 97, 98, 141, Picchiati, Francesco .Antonio, 542"
5o8-'«,55i'" Picherali, Pompeo, 401, 538", 560'"^
Patronage, 28 ff., 140-2, 363, 524'" Pieratti, Domenico, t,2 i
Paul III, 24, 157, 164, 364 Piermarini, Giuseppe, 391, 558'*
Paul IV, 23, 25 Pieroni, .Messandro, 126 (ill. 62)
Paul V, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28-33 (ill- 3). 34. 40, 41 . 42. Pietrasanta, Federico, 558'
43, 56, 128, 138, 146, 148 (ill. 75), 520" Pigneto, Villa del, 2^2 4 (ills. 1^9, 140), 2^9, 242,
Paulus Diaconus, 261 246,289,531""
Pavia Pignoni, Simone, 345, 550"'
Certosa, decoration, i34;(Cerano),99;(Crespi), 104 Pimentel, Cardinal, 308, 544"
Palazzo Mezzabarba, 371, 527*', 553' Pincellotti, Bartolomeo, 567'<'«"
S. Marco, faiâde, 554' Pini, Francesco, 563^-
S. Maria di Canepanova, 297, 521-'', 541^' Pio, .\ngelo, 569^"
Pavona, Francesco, 578"" Piola, Domenico, 354-5, 450, 474, 551"-, 573-", 575"
Pedrini, Domenico, 474 Piola, Paolo Girolamo, 575''''
Pellegrini, Antonio, 479, 482-3, 483, 576"''^ Piola, Pellegro (Pellegrino), 551""
Pellegrini, Carlo, 141, 173 Piombino Dese, \'illa Cornaro (Bortoloni), 577""
Pellegrini, Ignazio, 559*" Pippi, Nicolo, 27
Penna, Cesare, 400 Piranesi, Giovanni Battista, 364-6 (ill. 247), 383, 498,
'Pensionante del Saraceni', 514'^ 553"'''
. 554- ,
556'"
Penso, Francesco, see Cabianca Pisa, 301 ; S. Stefano dei Cavalieri, 125
Peranda, Sante, 519^" Pistoia, S. .Maria degli .Angeli (formerly, now Univer-
Permoser, Balthasar, 317, 542"' sitaPopolare) (Gherardini), 470
Peroni, Giuseppe, 310-11, 536-', 543' Pitochetto, II, see Ceruti
Perrier, Francois, 517'" Pittoni, Francesco, 483
Persico, Paolo, 57
it's « Pittoni, Giovanni Battista, 462, 474, 476, 483, 484,
Perspectiva pictorum et architectnrum (Pozzo), 366 575'', ST?'-"''-'
Perugia Pittiira di macchia, 341

Palazzo Antinori (or Gallenga Stuart), 556^" Pillura di tocco, 341, 462, 503, 505
S. Angelo, baldacchino, 176 Pius IV, 21, 25
Peruzzi, Baldassare, 36, 65, 1 14, 206 Pius V, 23, 25
Pescocostanzo, Collegiata (Tanzio), 103, 519^' Pius IX, 529"
Pessina, G. B., 120 Pizzocaro, Antonio, 387, 557"'
Peterzano, Simone, 45, 510- Placila philosnphica (Guarini), 405
Petondi, Gregorio, 392 Planteri, Gian Giacomo, 564''^
Petrarch, 579'" Planzoni, Filippo, 524"-

Petrini, Giuseppe Antonio, 575'", 576'''' Pliny, 43
Phelypeaux de la Vrilliere, Louis, 568-" Plura, Carlo Giuseppe and Giovan Battista, 450,
Philip IV of Spain, 133 (ill. 69), 317, 458, 527«" 569^^
Philip V of Spain, 393, 414 Po, Giacomo del, 571^
Philip Neri, St, see Neri Poccetti, Bernardino, 27, 97
Piacentini, G. B., 390 (ill. 266) Puettcs (.Aristotle), 535"
Piacenza Poggio a Caiano (Gabbiani), 573"

Cathedral (Gucrcino, Morazzone), loi Polazzo, Francesco, 482
Museum (Lanfranco), 86 Polidoro da Caravaggio, 518'", 524', 533"
Statues of .'Messandro and Ranuccio Farnese, 130, Polignac, Cardinal, 498
131 (ill. 67)
BIBLOSARTE
652 •
INDEX
Pomarancio, Nicolo, 27, 34, 38; see also Roncalli, Quadrio, Giovan Battista, 558'^
Cristoforo Quadrio, Girolamo, 521-"
Pompei, Alessandro, 558"' Quadrio, Giuseppe, 120, 522^', 553^
Domenico, 448
Ponsonelli, Qiiaglio, Giulio, 573"
Ponsonelli, Giacomo Antonio, 448 Qiiaini, Luigi, 573-"
Pontecorvo, S. Maria dclle Pcriclitanti, T,()ji Qiiarantini, Bernardo Maria, 558"
Pontormo, y7 Quarini, Mario, 565"-
Ponzio, P'laminio, 26, 29, 30 (ill. 2), 33, 34-5 (ills. 6, 7), Qucirolo, Francesco, ^66, 448 50, 454 6 (ill. 321),
35, 37-8 (ill. 10), HI, 507'", 508^ 520' 567'"
Ponzone, Matteo, 519^" Quentin de la Tour, Maurice, 578'"'
Popoli, Giacinto de, 552"" Querini, Antonio Maria, 122

Poppelmann, M. D., 376 Quietism, 138, 337
Pordenone, 93, 99
Porpora, Paolo, 361, 552'-" Racconigi
Porta, Giacomo della, 26, 40, 41, 206, 210, 289, 529' Castle, Guarini's designs, 562"
Porta, Guglielmo della, 127, 157, 164 S. Giovanni, 564''^
Possevino, Antonio, 21 Raggi, Antonio, 182, 205 (ill. 120), 307, 308, 310-12
Poussin, Claude, 566' 200, 201), 316, 317, 319, 366, 392, 435, 436,
(ills.
Poussin, Nicolas, 43,63,68,69, 70, 141, 171, 172, 173, 448, 459, 533^ 543', 544''-''-"", 545'"-^', 568'"
250, 259, 261, 263, 265, 266, 267, 272, 278, 322, 325, Raggi, Giovanni, 577'^^
327, 340, 347, 354, 497, 534''''', 535", 537'' Raggi, Maria, 150, 160, 167
Pozzi, Stefano, 467 Ragusa, 401
Pozzo, Andrea, 140, 328, 334, 335 (ill. 217), 366, 419, Cathedral, 560'"''
507^ 524'^ 548«, 553", 564^\ 566% 575^" S. Giuseppe, 560'"*

Pozzo, Cassiano del, 231, 246, 247, 272, 325, 531", Raguzzini, Filippo, 370, 377, 379-80 (ill. 253), 393,
537'' 555", 556^" -^ 567^^
Pozzo, Jacopo Antonio, 557'- Rainaldi, Carlo, in, 197, 213-18 (ill. 128), 279-86
Praeneste (Palestrina) 175-81), 315, 328, 370, 375, 390, 399, 527S088,
(ills.
S. Rosalia (Cametti), 567-' 533'\537'-^"-, 545'",564'^-''

Temple, 232, 246, 532'* Rainaldi, Girolamo, 213-14 (ill. 128), 225, 279, 281,
Prague 289, 291, 52o5, 522*', 527«^ 537>'-'"
Czernin Palace, 528"-" Raineri, F. M., see Schivenoglia

St Mary of Altotting, 405-6 Rana, Andrea, 430-1, 565''''"'
Prato, 301 Rancate, Zijst Collection (Serodine), 77

Bacchino fountain, 319 Raphael, 27,34, 57, 58,63, 65, 68, 80,81, 82,83,84, 178,
Madonna delle Carceri, 178 231, 252, 259, 261, 263, 265, 270, 275, 321, 324, 462,
Preti, Francesco Maria, 372, 389 (ill. 264), 558" 465, 468, 469, 489, 507", 513^", 5I6^^ 567-', 57I^
Preti, Mattia, 139, 322, 328, 330, 341, 357, 360-1 (ill. 572'"
245),464,S48^«, 552"'- Ravenna

Probabilism, 138 Palazzo Baronio (now Rasponi Bonanzi), 558''''
Procaccini, Camillo, 10 Pinacoteca (Bravo), 349 (ill. 232), 550"'

Procaccini, Giulio Cesare, 92, 98 9, 101-3 (ill. 45), S. Maria in Porto, 554*
5i9'-i'^J'3o
104, S. Vitale, 292
Provaglia, Bartolomeo, 291 Recchi, Giovan Paolo and Giovan Antonio, 574'"
Puget, Pierre, 317, 447, 448, 545-*" Recco, Giacomo, 361, 552'-"
Puglieschi, Antonio, 573-* Recco, Giovan Battista, 361
Pynas, Jan Symonsz., 78 Recco, Giuseppe, 361, 362, 5521^°
Pyramid, use on tombs, 444 Redi, Tomaso, 573--
Reggio Emilia, Madonna della Ghiara, 122-3
Quadratura, 33, 65-6, 88, 174, 250-2, 292, 334, 343-4, Regnier, Nicolas, 108, 515", 520^"
366, 474-6, 487, 498 Reiff, Peter Paul, 566"
Quadri, Bernardino, 562" Rembrandt, 54, 77, 78, 346, 354, 462, 489, 490, 496,
Qiiadri nporlali, 66, 80, 88, 263 579"'
Quadrio, Carlo Giulio, 555"
BIBLOSARTE
653
Reni, Guido, 32 (ill. 4), î, 34, 35, 63, 78-9, 79, 80, 82, Rome
83-s 31-3), 92, 93, 105, 146, 265, 269, 322, 334,
(ills. Churches
337- 339< 34 1 -3 ('Hs. 223, 224), 344, 359, 360, 47 1 , 496, Adriano, S. (Longhi), 288, 539"
5i5^\ 516^ 517"-'', 5i8», 519-'^ 524\ 549''-"-'\ Agnese in Piazza Navona, S., 141, 212, 213 18
55i« 572", 573" 127-9), 279, 280, 303, 328, 420, 420-1,
(ills.
Renieri, Niccolo, see Regnier 529--", 564^'; (Bernini), 529-"; (Caffa), 307,
Resani, Arcangelo, 578"" 543"; (Ferrata), 308 10 (ills. 198, 543'^
199),
Reschi, Pandolfo, 579"' (Ferri), 217. 328; (Gaulli), 217. 328; (Grande),
Retti, Leonardo, 309 (ill. 199), 310, 312, 316, 544-% 539-"; (Raggi), 310- 1 1 (ill. 200)
545'" Agostino, S., 395; (.Abbatini), 173; (Bergondi),
Reynolds, Sir Joshua, 326, 577"* 308; (Bernini), 174, 526''; (Caffa), 307, 308;
Rhetoric, 140, 524"" (Caravaggio), 5 10"; (Ferrata), 543'\ 544'''; (Lan-
Rhetoric (.\ristotle), 140 franco), 80, 86, 516", 517'"'; convent of (Ro-
Rho (Morazzone), loi manelli), 308
1'"*'^',
Ribera, Jusepe de, 340, 356-7, 358, 360, 462, 55 Anastasia, S., ^70; facade, 540''; (Aprile, Ferrata),
552"'-'"' 316
Ricca, Antonio, 392 Andrea delle Fratte, S., 40, 212, 218 19 (ill. 130);
Riccardi, Gabrielc, 400 (Bernini), 151 (ills. 78, 79), 545^' ; (Bracci), 444
Ricchi, Pietro, 550"' 5 (ill. 3i2);(Cozza), 546-
Ricchino, Francesco Maria, 115, 116, 1 18-21 (ills. .\ndrea al Quirinale, S., 141, 160, 176, 181 4 (ills.
56-8), 290, 292, 52I-'*"', 554^ 102-5), '88, 195, 242, 280, 289, 303, 328, i,~o,
Ricchino, Gian Domenico, 522*'' 527'" " ; (Cortese), 527" ; (Legros), 1 39 (Raggi),
" ;
Ricci, Giovan Battista, 27, 28-9 182,544"

Ricci, Marco, 476, 478, 479, 498-501 (ill. 353), 503, Andrea della Valle, S., 40, 41, 507'", 509'"; (P.
576", 579'-" Bernini), 129 (ill. 64); (Borromini), 197; (Do-

Ricci, Sebastiano, 349, 46 1 , 469, 470, 476, 478, 479-8 menichino), 81,83, 275, 516'" "';(Fontana), 375,
(ill. 338), 482, 483, 484, 498, 500 (ill. 353), 503, 573", 538'^ (Grimaldi), 127; (Lantranco). 81, 87 (ill.
576"^- 35), 88, 321, 328, 517'*"; (.Maderno), in, 400;
Ricciolini, Niccolo,
372 (Preti), T,22, 328; (Raggi), 310; (Rainaldi), 279,
"'^
Richardson, Jonathan, 367 283 (ill. 179),' 400, 538'"-
Richter, Johan, 579'-- Angeli Custodi, SS. (Rainaldi), 538"'
Rieti, cathedral (Bernini), 526^^ Antonio de' Portoghesi, S., 539-'
Rigaud, Hyacinthe, 575" .ApoUinare, S., design by Fuga, 383; fa9ade, 538'
Riminaldi, Orazio, 519-' Apostoli, SS., 376; (Gaulli). 328; (Odazzi), 547*"
Riva di Chieri, church, 430 Bernardo alle Terme, S., 40; (Fancelli), 545*";
Riviera, Egidio della, 27 (Mariani), 129 30 (ill. 65)
Rivoli, castle, 563^" Biagio in Campitelli, S., 373
Robert, Hubert, 456, 498 Bibiana, S., 174-5 (>" 95). '84. 526"'; (Bernini),
Robilant, Fihppo di, 565'- 145-6 (ill. 73), 154, 169, 274; (Ciampclli), 247;
Rocaille, 372 (Cortona), 175, 231, 247, 248 (ill. 151), 249, 262,
Rocca, Michele, 467 533'"

Roccatagliata, Nicolo, 450, 569-''' Carlo ai Catinari, S., 40, 4 7, 52 '\ (Gherardi), 1
, 1
1
1
Roccatagliata, Sebastiano, 569^'' 376, 555-'; (Gimignani), 322; (Lanfranco), 328;

'Rococo, Italian', 371-2 (Preti), 552"' ;
(Rainaldi), 286; (Sacchi), 534^
Carlo al Corso, S., 40, 41, 288, 539-- (Brandi),
Rodi, Faustino, 554^ ;
Rodrigues dos Santos, Manoel, 377, 555" 328; (Cavallini), 316; (Cortona), 232, 237, 245
Rodriguez, .^lonso, 515'' (ill. 150), 399, 533^*, 539-^ (C Fancelli), 316,
RoUi, Giuseppe, 549'" 539"

Carlo alle Quattro F'ontanc, S. earlier church, 40;
Romanelli, Giovanni Francesco, 80, 141, 142, 173,
266, 308, 321, 322, 546\ 548" Borromini's church, 198 206 (ills. 115 20), 212,
Romano, Gaspare, 458 218, 219, 222, 235, 288, 395. 404, 405, 528'" ,
Rombouts, Theodoor, 78 529-^ 530'", 532-'", 562'" ; (Borgianni), 41, 75 (ill.

25); (Cerrini). 322
Caterina della Ruota, S., facade, 538'
BIBLOSARTE
654 INDEX
Rome: Clhurchcs mminuccl Rome: Churches cimliiiucJ

Caterina da Siena a Monte Magnanapoli, S. Girolamo della Carita, S. (Borromini), 530^';
(Bracci), 544'^ (Cafta), 307-8 (ill. 196), 543", (Castelli), 540''
544'^ '^ (Finelli). 543"; (Garzi), 328 Girolamo dei Schiavoni, S., 26
Cecilia, S., 40; (Conca), 466 (ill. 327), 467, 572"*; Giuseppe a Capo le Case, S., 40
(P'uga), 377; (S. .Vladerno), 128, 523" Giuseppe dei Falegnami, S. (.Maratti), 337
Celso e Giuliano, SS., 377, 555^' Gregorio Magno, S. (Costanzi), 572'"; (Domeni-
Costanza, S., 292, 528* chino), 79, 80; (Lanfranco), 85 (N. Pomarancio), ;
Crisogono, S., 40 34; (Reni), 79, 83; (Soria), 34 (ill. 5)

Croce in Gerusalemme, S., 377 Ignazio, S., 40, 41, 540"; Domenichino's project,
Croce dei Lucchesi, S. (Coli, Gherardi), 547-" 540^'; (Algardi), 536-^ (Legros), 433 (ill. 300),
Domenico e Sisto, SS. (Canuti), 328, 333 (ill. 216), 438; (Pozzo), 140, 328, 334, 335 (ill. 217), 548^',
334; (Greca), 288-9, 539"'; (Raggi), 544-; (Tur- 575'"; (Rusconi), 436; (Valle), 438
riani), 289, 539-'' Isidore, S., fa9ade, 376; (Bernini), 526^' ; (Sacchi),
Eligio dei Orefici, S., 178 261
Francesca Romana, S., 40 Ivo della Sapienza, S., 206-12 (ills. 121-5), 218,
Francesco a Ripa, S., facade, 540^^ ;
(Bernini), 152, 219, 328, 529'" , 564'", 565"
155(111.81) Lorenzo in Damaso, S. (Bernini), 167, 444, 525'\
Gallicano, S., 377 526^-^ (Cortona), 235
Gesii, 40, 41; altar of St Ignatius, 435-6, 553", Lorenzo in Lucina, S. (Bernini), 152, 313-14 (ill.
566^ (Bernini), 313-14; (Cortona), 245, 533^'' 203); (Rainaldi), 286, 538"'; (Saraceni), 41-2, 76;
(Gaulli), 139, 174, 311, 328, 329 (ill. 213), 332-3 (Stanzioni), 552'"^
(ill. 215), 366, 547-^ 548''-; (Maglia, Naldini), Lorenzo in Miranda, S. (Cortona), 258-9
312, 544-^ (Raggi), 310, 311-12 (ill. 201), 366, Lorenzo fuori le Mura, S. (Duquesnoy), 276, 537^'
544^5. (Retti), 312 Lucia dei Ginnasi, S. (Finelli), 314-15, 544^-
Gesu e Maria, 315; decoration, 315-16, 316, 328, Lucia in Selci, S. (Borromini), 530''
5U"-^\ 571"; (Rainaldi), 286, 315 Luigi de' Francesi, S. (.\rpino), 507"; (Caravag-
Giacomodegli Incurabili, S., 183, 280, 520-, 527'''; 52-3 (ill. 15), 55, 55-6, 86, 510",
gio), 45, 49, 50,
(Buzio), 127 511^-; (Domenichino), 79, 80-1 (ill. 29), 247,
Giacomo alia Lungarna, S. (Bernini), 167, 444, 311, 516-8
525", 526« Marcello al Corso, S., fa(pade, 373-5 (ill. 249), 383,
Giacomo degli Spagnuoli, S. (Albani, Badalocchio, 399, 402, 554'\ 555'' ; (Algardi), 535-^ (Cametti), ;
Lanfranco), 78-9, 51 5-' 443-4 (ill. 311)

Giovanni Calibita, S., facade project (Longhi), Maria degli Angeh, S., 395; (Houdon), 433;
538'^ (Romanelli), 322
Giovanni dei Fiorentini, S., fafade, 377, 555^-; Maria dell'Anima, S. (Duquesnoy), 275-6 (ill.
Sangallo's project, 541^"; (Borromini), 530^^; 171), 277 (ill. 172), 278, 537^'; (Saraceni), 76
(Cortona), 530^^. (Raggi), 310 Maria in Araceli, S. (Bernini), 150; (Maglia), 316;
Giovanni in Fonte, S. (Sacchi), 263 (Rainaldi), 286
Giovanni in Laterano, S., 40, 122; Cappella Maria in Campitelli, S., 279-83 (ills. 175-8), 288,
Corsini, 382; decoration, 438, 567", 568^'; 328, 375, 390, 399, 537''' ,
564"
facade, 363, 377, 382-3 (ill. 258), 556«'«; Maria in Campo Marzo, S., 289, 539^'
facade (Juvarra's project), 563^'; frescoes, 26; Maria della Concezione, S., decoration, 322;
Santori Chapel, 40 ;Algardi), 536-"* (Borromini),
( ;
(Cortona), 258-9
212-13 (i'l- 126), 392, 529'"''^-*; (Camassei), Maria in Cosmedin, S. (Maratti), 366, 553"'
321 ; (Carcani), 435 (ill. 302), 566'^; (Duca), 313; Maria Liberatrice, S., 40
(Finelli), 314 (ill. 204); (Galilei), 377; (Gimi- Maria di Loreto, S. (Duquesnoy), 272-5 (ills. 168,
gnani), 321 ; (Longhi), 314; (S. Maderno), 523*''; 169), 536-"'^'^; (Finelli), 543^; (S. Maderno),
(Maini), 438, 439 (ill. 305), 442, 567'^; (Maratti), 523'''
32 1 366, 553" 566" (Monaldi), 442 (Montauti),

, , ; ;
Maria Maddalena, S., facade, 377, 380, 402, 555";
568^'; (Rossi), 289, 539-"'; (Rusconi), 436, 437 (G. .\mato), 400; (Monaldi), 567'^
(ill. 303), 447, 566**; (Sacchi), 321; (Valle), 275, Maria Maggiore, S., apse, 286; apse (Bernini's
438-9 (ill. 306); (Volterra), 212 project), 286, 527**"; Chapel of Paul \', 26, 27, 28,
Giovanni in Oleo, S., 530'^ 29-33 (ills- 2-4), 79, 85, 98, 127-8, 143, 286,
BIBLOSARTE
Rome Churches
; continued Rome Churches
: continued
508'" -'; Chapel ofSixtus V, 27, 2g, 33, 127, 286, -Maria in Via Lata, S., 232, 244 5 (ills. 148. 149),
525"; fa(;ade, 377, 383; sacristy, frescoes, 508-"; 280, 530", 533J" *'; (Fancelli). 316
Sforza Chapel, 289; (Algardi), 267; (Arpino), 32 Maria della Vittoria, S., 34, 40, in; (.Abbatini),
(ill.4), 33; (P. Bernini), 128, i43;(Carcani), 566'; 173; (Bernini), 150, 154 3, 157 60 (ills. 84, 85),
(Cigoli), q8; (Fancelli, Ferrata), 545^"; (Guidi), 174, 308, 315, 328, 419, 525""
T,],, *';
161, 169,
443; (Lanfranco), 85; (Lucenti), 317; (S. Ma- (Cerrini), 547-"
demo), 523"^; (Rainaldi), 286, 538'"; (Reni), 32 Martina e Luca, SS., 141, i(>9, 213 15, 232, 235-
(ill. 79; (Valsoldo), 27, 127
4), 33, 41 (ills. 142-5), 244, 245, 253, 280, 283, 288, 328,
Maria sopra Minerva, S., decoration, 40, 41 390, 532-"" , 560"; (Fancelli), 316; (Nlcnghini),
(Bernini), 144, 150, i6o;(Bianchi),567-';(Bracci), 306
439, 443 (ill. 310), 567-'; (Carcani), 566' ; (Celio), Martino ai .Monti, S. (Dughct), 327, 547-";
34; (Cordier), 127; (Ferrata), 308, 544'"; (S. (Grimaldi), 547-'; (Naldini), 544-''
Maderno), 523'"*; (Marchionni), 567-'; (Mari), Mercedari, Chiesa della Casa Gencralizia dci
308; (Pincellotti), 567-'; (Raggi), 308, 544--; Padri (Borgianni), 75; (Saraceni), 76 (ill. 26),
(Raguzzini), 567-'; (Rainaldi), 538'" 5 '4"
Maria de' Miracoli, S., 283 6 (ills. 180, 181), 375, Monte di Pieta, Cappella (Guidi), 312-13 (ill.
538'- '^ (Lucenti), 317; (Raggi), 310 202); (Rossi), 289, 540'-'
Maria di Monserrato, S. (Bernini), 146 Nereo and .Achilleo, SS., 40, 509*"
Maria di Monte Santo, S., 283-6 (ills. 180, 181), Niccolo inCarcere, S., 40
538'- '^
; (Maratti), 339 (ill. 220) (Teodoli),
; sss-^" Nicolo da Tolentino, S., 40; (.Mgardi), 308,
Maria della .Morte, S., facade, 370, 383; (Lan- 536"^^\ 540^'; (Baratta), 308, 536-^ (Côli,
franco), 86 Gherardi), 547-"; (Cortona), 245, 533'"; (Fancel-

Maria della Neve, S., facade, 555-- li), 316, 533^"; (Ferrata), 308, 533'", 536'*;
Maria dell'Orazione e Morte, S., 377, 527*^, 555^" (Ferri), 533^"; (Guidi), 308, 536-' ; (Raggi), 533"
Maria deU'Orto, S. (Baglione), 514"; (Calan- Nome di .Maria, SS., 377, 555'^
drucci), 328 Nuova, Chiesa, see .Maria in Vallicella, S.
Maria della Pace, S., 141, 184, 188, 232, 241-2 (ill. Orazione e .Morte, Chiesa delP, see .Maria dell'
146), 243 (ill. 147), 244, 528»», 532-*-, 538^ Orazione e .Morte, S.
(Albani), 79; (Fancelli), 316, 545^"; (Ferrata), Pantaleo, S. (Gherardi), 328

545^"; (S. Maderno), 523-^ Paolo fuori le Mura, S. (Lanfranco, destroyed),
Maria del Popolo, S. (Algardi), 267, 314, 535-',
544" (Bernini),
; 151, 152-4 (ill. 80), 526", 568-'; Peter's St, altarpieces, 28, 508""; baldacchino
(Caravaggio), 49, 50 (ill. 13), 53, 55, 510"; (Car- (Bernini), 141, 143, 144, 155, 161, 162 (ill. 86),
racci), 68-9(ill. 21), 79;(Ferrata), 544"~;(Fontana), 172, 174, 175-6, 272, 305, 525-', 526*""";
375 (Ghisleri), 567-" (Guidi), 312; (Lorenzetti),
; ;
(Borromini), 197; (Duquesnoy), 272, 536**;
152; (Raggi), 544"; (Raphael), 567-'; (Tacconi), (G. .\. F'ancelli), 316; (Finelli), 536"; baptismal
79; (Valsoldo), 313 chapel (Fontana), 375 (Trevisani), 572"" Bene- ; ;
.Maria del Priorato, S., 556^'' diction Loggia (Lanfranco), 517** Cappella del ;
Maria in Publicolis, S., 539^" Sacramento (Bernini), 152, 160-1; (Lucenti),

Maria della Quercia, S., facâde, 556^^ 545^*; cathedra (Bernini), 141, 144, 151, 155, 160,
Maria della Scala, S., 40; (Slodtz, Valle), 438; 161-4 (ills. 87, 88), 169, 170, 174, 308, 311,
(Stanzioni, formerly), 552'"' 525-" -'; (Ferrata), 544'"; (Morclli), 318, 434;
Maria dei Sette Dolori, S., 219 (ill. 131), 221, 235, (Raggi), 544" ;
(Retti), 544-" ; clock-tower, former
(Ferrabosco), 29, 528""; decoration, 141, 305,
Maria del Suffragio, S., 40 543-, 566^; designs for, 117, 520'';dome, 299,
Maria in Trastevere, S., 40; (Domenichino), 516^""; 541"; (Arpino), 28; (Fontana), 376; (Ncbbia,
(Gherardi), 376 Roncalli), 507" facade (.Maderno), 28, 29 (ill. ),
;
i
Maria in Trivio, S. (Gherardi), 328 III, 112, 175, 190 3 382 (ill.
(ills. 109, 1 10), 198,
Maria in Vallicella, S., 23, 40, 41, 509^" ;

(Algardi), 257), 383; (Rainaldi's project), 537'; nave (.Ma-
269; (Cortona), 232, 256 8 (ill. 157), 328, 534", derno), 28, 112; pilasters (Raggi), 310; portico
547-"; (Fancelli), 316; (Reni), 269 (Bernini's project), 286; (Bonvicino, .Maderno,
Maria delle Vergini, S. (Gimignani), 547"' Ricci), 28-9; reliefs (Algardi), 270 i (ill. 166),
Maria in Via, S., fa9ade, 538'" 272, 308, 536-*; (Bernini), 150; (Guidi), 536-";
BIBLOSARTE
656 • INDEX
Rome: Churches conlimifd Rome: (Churches Kiiilintied
sacristy, ss^)*"; Ouvarra's project), 563'' ; statues (Romanelii), 173; (Sale), 566'
(Algardi), 268 9 (Bernini), 144, 146, 147
;
(ill. 74), Prasscdc, S. (.\rpino), 507"; (Bernini), 144
154, 155 (ill. 82), 160, 167, 169, 171, 275, 306, Propaganda Fide, church (Bernini's), 182, 184,
317, 525-'"; (L. Bernini), 543-; (Bolgi), 305, 219, 227; (Borromini's), 219 22 (ills. 132, 133),
305 f) (ill. ig5);(Cornacchini),436;(Duquesnoy), 235, 530" *'; (Pellegrini), 1 73 collcgio,
; .«cc 0//;fr
266, 272, 275 (ill. 170), 306, 536^"; (Mochi), 130- Secular Buildings, etc.
2, 306; (Slodtz), 446 (ill. 313), 568-"*; tombs Pudenziana, S., 40

(Algardi), 266, 269-70 (ill. 165), 308, 318, 442, Quattro Coronati, SS., 40; (San Giovanni), 344
536-'", 567-'; (Bernini), 141, 144, 150, 156 (ill. Sabina, S. (Sassoferrato), 322
83), 157, r64, 165 (ill. 89), 171, 172, 269, 270, Salvatore in Lauro, S., 522''"
525i"'\ 526^^"-, le Mura, S., 34, 35 (ills. 6, 7), 40,
308, 434, 440, 442, 443, 521'-, Sebastiano luori
527"', 566', 567-- (Canova), 443, 567-* ; (Ferrata),
;
508"'; (Fontana), 375; (Giorgetti), 317
443;(Fontana), 554"';(Lucenti), 545^';(Monnot), Silvestro in Capite, S. (Brandi), 328 ; (Morazzone),
440 (ill. 307), 442, 567'^ (Morelli), 318, 434; 99
(della Porta), 157, 164; (Retti), 544-"; (Rossi), Silvestro al Quirinale, S. (.\lgardi), 267 (ill. 162);
440; (Rusconi), 440-2 (ill. 308), 445, 567-«'^»; (Finelli), 543^
(Speranza), 305 ( Valle), 442 (ill. 309), 443, 567^2

;
Stefano Rotondo, S. (Pomarancio), 27
towers, 112, 190, 198, 520", 528""', 537\ 538^^, Sudario, S., 538"'
543- ; \ atican, see Palazzi Susanna, S., 26, 40, no (ill. 51), in, 120, 130,
Artists: (.\lgardi), 266, 268-71 (ills. 165, 166), $20'
536-^ff Trinita de' Pellegrini, SS., 40, 522*"; facade, 377
272. 308, 318, 442, ,
567-'; (Arpino), 28;
(Bernini), 141, 142, 143, 144, 146, 147 (ill. 74), Trinita in Via Condotti, SS., 377, 555^'; faipade,
150, 151, 152, 154, 155 (ill. 82), 156 (ill. 83), 157, 538"
160, 160-1, i6i-4(ills. 86-8), i65(ill. 89), 167,169, Venanzio, S. (Rainaldi), 538'«'
170, 171, 172,174, 175-6, iSgfF. (ills, no, in), 269, Vincenzo ed Anastasio, SS., fa9ade, 242, 287 (ill.
270, 272, 275, 305, 306, 308, 311, 434, 436, 440, 182), 288, 538'^" ;
539^'
442,443,52I'-,525"''*-l-•'•-'^^526^^•^5.52fr..62^ Fountains
S2t\ 566', 567-- ;
(L. Bernini), 305, 543- ; (Bolgi), Acetosa, Acqua, 540^'
305, 305-6 (ill. 195); (Bonvicino), 28; (Bor- Barcaccia, 525-''
romini), 197, 203, 528-; (Canova), 443, 567^''; Felice,Acqua, 38
(Cornacchini), 436, 566"; (Duquesnoy), 266, Four Rivers, 150, 168-9 (ill. 93), 169-70,306,400,
272, 274, 273 (ill. 170), 305, 306, 536''-'"; (G. A. 525-"-\544--, 566'
Fancelli), 305, 316; (Ferrabosco), 29, 526'*, Moro, del, 168, 544^'
528""; (Ferrata), 308, 443, 544"*; (Finelli), 305, Paola, Acqua, 37-8 (ill. 10), 508^'
536"; (Fontana), 375, 376, 554'^ (Guidi), 536^*; 'Ponte Sisto, di\ 508^'
(Lanfranco), 517'"; (Lucenti), 545^'; (Maderno), Trevi, 246, 363, 377, 380, 381 (ill. 255), 382, 439-
28-9 (ill. i), 111-12, 190-3 (ill. 109), 198, 382 40, 556-'5, 567>«
(ill. 257), 383, 52o5; (S. Maderno), 305; (Maglia), Triton, 168 (ill. 92), 525'"*
566'; (.Marchionni), 556^*; (Menghini), 306; and Collections
Galleries
(Mochi), 130-2, 306; (Monnot), 440 (ill. 307), Borghese Gallery (Albani), 517^"; (Bernini), 144-5
442, 567'"; (.Morelli), 318, 434; (Nebbia), 507'^; (ills. 71, 72), 146, 148 (ill. 75), 149 (ill. 76), 150,
(Ottoni), 566^; (della Porta), 157, 164; (Raggi), 152, 167, 173, 267-8, 524\ 526^"-^' (Caravaggio),
;
310, 544--; (Rainaldi), 537^ (Retti), 544^"; 510"*, 511^^-'; (Carracci), 71; (Domenichino),
(Ricci), 28-9; (Roncalli), 507'''; (Rossi), 440; 82, 516*' ; see also Villa Borghese
(Rusconi), 440-2 (ill. 308), 445, 567-"-' ; (Sale), Capitoline Museum (Palazzo dei Conservatori)
566'; (Slodtz), 446 (ill. 313), 568-'*; (Speranza), (Algardi), 269, 536-'' ; (Bernini), 1 50, 526^' (Cara-
;
305; (Trevisani), 572""; (Valle), 442 (ill. 309), vaggio), 51 1-"; (Cortona), 249-50 (ill. 152);
443. 567" (Guercino), 89; (Reni), 341 (ill. 223); see also
Philip Neri, Oratory of St, 212, 221, 222-5 ('"s. Palazzi
36fr
134, 135), 227, 229, 239, 404, 530^5. Coppi, Casa (Caravaggio), 50
Pietro e Marcellino, SS., 377 Doria-Pamphili Gallery (Caravaggio), 54,
Pietro in Montorio, S. (.Abbatini), 173; (Baratta), Sii'"-^-"; (Carracci), 70 (ill. 22), 513-''; (Lan-
160, 306; (Bernini), 150, 160, 269, 526""-; franco), 80
BIBLOSARTE
657
Rome: Galleries and Collections continued Rome; Palazzi continued

Gabinetto Nazionale delle Stampe (Cortona), Corsini, 377, 383
533*' Costaguti (Dughet), 327; (Badalocchio, Do-
Incisa della Rocchetta Collection (Bernini), 526^" menichino, Guercino, Lanfranco), 80, 516"'" ;
Mercedari, Convento dei (Borgianni), 75 (Mola, Romanelli), 80
Nazionale, Galleria (Cortona copy), 534'' (I.aer), D'.^ste-Bonaparte, 289. 290
; (ill. 183), 540^*
78 (ill. 28). sis"*; (Serodinc), 77 Doria-Pamphili (.Algardi), 268 (ill. 164), 535^';
Pala/.zi, works in other, see Palazzi (Ameli), 377; (Dughet), 327; (Grande), 289.
Pallavicini Collection (Ccrquozzi, Codazzi), 323 539-»; (Valvassori), 371, 377, 380 (ill. 254), 382.
(ill. 208) 553'
Petriano, Museo (Pellegrini), 173 Falconieri (Borromini), 212, 225, 226 (ill. 156),
Roma, Museo di (Cigoli),
q8 530", 53'"
S. Luca, .\ccademia di (Cortona), 531* Farnese, 26, 34, 112, 186, 187, 188, 189, 369;
Vallicelliana, Biblioteca (.\lgardi), 536-'* (Badalocchio), 5 3-' (C^rracci), 42, 57, 63 ff. (ills.
;
1
Vatican, works in, see Palazzi 18-20), 109, 130, 145, 247, 250, 512'-", 524^;
Villas, works in, see Villas (Domenichino), 38, 78, 512'^", 513-', 515-";
Palazzi (Lanfranco), 38, 85-6, 88, 513-' (Salviati), ;
534"-'
.\lmagia, see Gaetani-Ruspoli Gaetani-Ruspoli, 539-'; (Perrier), 517^
.\ltieri, 289 go, 540"; (Carlone), 551'"; (Maratti Giustiniani, 508'"
etc.), 330, 334, 337, 338 (ill. 2iq), 467, 549" Grillo (Rainaldi), 538'"
Banco di S. Spirito, del, 527'*'' Lante (Romanelli), 321, 548^'
Barberini, 112 14 (ills. 52, 53), 140, 141, 187-8, Lateran, 26, 140
227, 520*'^'^, 532'"; (Bernini), 184, (formerly, Ludovisi, see Montecitorio
Bernini), 526^"'; (Borromini), 197, 198 (ill. 114), Madama, 540'"
521'^ (Cortona), 232, 234-5 (iH- HO, 235> 237, Mancini-Salviati al Corso, 538""
250-3 (ill. 153), 253, 321, 532'*'^^, 534"""; Mattei di Giove, 112, 302, 515-', 520' '-, 521'^;
(formerly, Cortona), 258 (ill. 158), 259; (.\la- (Albani), 79, 82, 516*^ (Bonzi), 533^-; (Celio),
derno), 112-14, 520'*" ; (Menghini), 306; (Ro- 515-'; (Cortona), 247, 531", 533'*-; (Lanfranco),
manelli), 321, 548^' ;
(Sacchi), 263, 264 (ill. 161), 80, 5i6-";(Nappi), 515-'
534' Millini-Cagiati, 290
Barberini alli Giubbonari, 531^' Montecitorio, i85-6(ill. 106), 188, 527"*' "^( Fon-
Bigazzini, 540^^ tana),375
Borghese, 34, 140, 508^', 522**; fountains, 545^"; Naro (.\. Gherardi), 548^'
(Domenichino), 82, 516+^; (Fancelli), 545^°, Pamphili, 141, 225, 279, 289, 291; Borromini's
553'- ; (Grimaldi), 545^", 547-', 553' ' ; (Maderno), project, 530", 531^"^; (Cortona), 225, i^^z, 256 8,
52i>-;(Rainaldi), 538^545« 330; (Cozza etc.), 330, 331 (ill. 214); (F. Rosa),
Caetani, see Gaetani-Ruspoli 547''
Capitoline Palaces and Museum, 175, 186 7, 203, Quirinal, 28, 33; decoration, 33, 141, 142, 508^^" ;
221, 224, 283, 364, 382, 531^", 538"; Juvarra's (Albani), 82; (Bernini), 184, 527""; (Fuga), 383;
plans, 414; see also Galleries and Collections (Lanfranco), 80, 85, 517'*"; (Mola etc.), 323-4
Carolis, de, 290, 376 (ill. 209), 330, 546'-, 548^"; (Pannini), 499 (ill.
Carpegna, 227, 531*", 562'' 352);(Reni),79,82,83

Cavallerini a via dei Barbieri (Gimignani), 546^ Rondanini, 556'"
Cenci-Bolognetti, 383, 527'*' Rospigliosi-Pallavicini, 34 5, 508'^ (Reni), 35, 79,
Chigi, 289, 539^^; Cortona's design, 188, 246, 80, 84 (ill. 32), 88, 549^"
528"^ Ruspoli, see Gaetani-Ruspoli
Chigi-Odescalchi, 140, 185, 186-7 (iH- 'O?)' 395. S. Luigi de' Francesi, 555-'
52785-7 Santacroce (Grimaldi), 547-'
Colonna (Coli-Gherardi), 330, 334, 336 (ill. 218), Sanseverino (Giaquinto), 465 (ill. 326), 572'"
548**; (Dughet), 327; (G. Fontana), 539-'; Sciarra (formerly, Caravaggio), 510"
(Grande), 289; (.Mancini, Michetti), 572'" Senatorio, 527'*"
Conservatori, dei, see Capitoline Museum Spada (Borromini), 225, 531^' (Duquesnoy), 537*''
;
Consulta, della, 377, 381 (ill. 256), 382, 383, 555'', Spagna, di, 531^' ;
(Grande), 539-"
559"' Vatican (Brill), 27, 507"; Belvedere, 232, 399;
BIBLOSARTE
658
Rome: Palazzi coiilitmcd Rome: Other Secular Buildings, etc. continued

Borghi, 375; Cortile S. Damaso, fountain (Al- Rospigliosi, Loggctta (Baglione), 514'; (Cigoli),
gardi), 536-^; Galleria Lapidaria, 364; Library, see Galleries and Collections: Roma, Museo di
frescoes, 26; (Bernini), 191 (ill. no); Logge S. Spirito, Hospital of, 185, 527**'
(Raphael) 65, 80, 252, 513"'; Museum of Early Sicpe, Tempio di, 529"
Christian Antiquities, 364; Pinacoteca (Caravag- 'Sixtus V, House of (.Arpino), 507"
gio), 4c), 50, 53, 510", 511'"; (Domenichino), 82; Spanish Stairs, 288, 363, 372, 377, 378 (ill. 251),
(Poussin), 173; (Reni), 83, 517^' ;
(Sacchi), 261 3 ^79 (ill. 2S2), SS"?"''. 556^'; Juvarra's project,
(ills. 159, 160), 534'; Sala Clementina (Alberti),
65 Sala della Contessa Matilda (Romanelli), 42

; 1 Strada Felice, 26, 114
Sala delle Dame (Reni), 79; Sala Ducale (Raggi), Teatro Alibcrti, 574^'
544--; Sala delle Nozze Aldobrandini (Reni), 79; Tcatro Argentina, SSS"**
Scala Regia, 150 i, 155, 160, 169, 171, 192 (ill. Trajan's Column, 533'''
Ill), 193, 528'", 544-"; Sistine Chapel (Michel- Villas

angelo), 513^", 534'- Albani, 364, 377, 383, 556^*; (Mengs), 5722'
Venezia (Caffa), 543'- Borghese, 35-6 (ill. 8), 112, 114; (Bernini), 143;
Verospi (Albani), 80, 82, 516'^ (Lanfranco), 86-8 (ill. 34), 5 1755. s.
Piazzas Doria-Pamphili, 370, 534"'*, 540^'; Borromini's
Barberini, see Fountains: Triton project for, 531^'; (.Algardi), 536-\ 544-'; (Du-
Colonna, 539-* quesnoy), 537^^ (Grimaldi), 547-' (Raggi), 544-'
;
Navona, see Fountains Four Rivers and Moro, del

: Farnesina, 36, 65, 114; (Raphael), 63, 80
Popolo, del, 26, 141, 283-6 (ills. 180, 181) Medici, 36, 112, 232
Quirinale, Bernini's project, 527**" Patrizi (Pannini), 498
379-80 (ill. 253)
S. Ignazio, 370, 377, Rome, Sack of, 2
S. Maria Maggiore, 26 Roncalli, Cristoforo, 28, 38, 507''"', 515^'

S. Maria sopra Minerva, Elephant carrying the Rondanini, Paolo, 535-'
Obelisk, 170, 544'* Rondinelli, Francesco, 253
StPeter's, 29(ill. 0,37, 141, 189-96(1115. 1 12, 1
13), Rondinini, Natale, 312
242, 246, 286, 528"" " ; Fontana's project, 375-6 Roomer, Caspar, 553''^
(ill. 250); Rainaldi's project, 537^; (Maderno), Roos, Jan, 104, 354
37; (MoreUi), 318 Rosa, Cristoforo, 549^'
Other Secular Buildings, etc. Rosa, Francesco, 347, 547^^
Biblioteca Alessandrina, 227 Rosa, Giovanni, see Roos
Biblioteca Angelica, 227 Rosa, Pacecco de, 358, 360, 551'"
Cancelleria, theatre, 414, 563^' Rosa, Salvator, 43, 323, 325-7 (ills. 211, 212), 327,
Carceri Nuovi, 289 341, 360, 364, 478, 497, 498, 501, 546''^^, 579"5
Collegio Romano (Sacchi), 534- Rosa, Stefano, 549"
Colosseum, Fontana's plan for, 376 Rosati, Rosato, 117, 122, 521''
Corso, 379 Rosis, G. de, 507''
Credito Italiano, Corso, see Palazzo Verospi Rosselli,Matteo, 98, 344, 347
Ludovisi, Casino (Guercino), 88, 89 (ill. 36); Rossi, Angelo de', 436, 440, 448, 566'' '"
(formerly, Titian), 534''' Rossi, Domenico, 386, 452, 556^", 557°'-

Pantheon, 237, 369, 387, 422; Bernini's project Rossi, Giovan Antonio de', 286 8, 289-90 (ill. 183),
for, 180, 527"' 539;'"", 555"
Pedacchia, Via della, Cortona's house, 246, 533^- Rossi, Giovan Francesco, 543'^
Pius IV, Casino of, 36 Rossi, Mattia de', 189, 528"", 540"
Ponte Molle, statues, 132 (ill. 68) Rossi, Pasquale, see Pasqualino
Ponte S. Angelo, angels, 151 2, 154, 171-2, 316- Rossi, Vincenzo de', 134
525J\ 544'"--, 545-"
17 (ill. 206), 524\ Rosso, G., 562'"
Porta del Popolo, 283, 284 (Bernini), 185; (Mochi),
; Rosso, Zanobi Filippo del, 392-3
132 Rossone, Pietro Giorgio, 522^'
Propaganda Fide, Collegio di, 184, 212, 227-9 Rotari, Pietro, 484, 578'""
(ills. 137, 138) Roubiliac, Louis Francôis, 525'^
Ripetta, Port of the, 289, 377, 379 Rovere, Francesco Maria della, 392
BIBLOSARTE
^59
Rubens, Sir P. P., 56, 68, 74, 78, qi, 103, 104, 105, Sanmicheli, Micheic, 115, 299, 541"
107, 108, 253, 276, 278, 352, 352 3, 354, 462, 478, San Pier d'Arena, Palazzo C^rpanetto (Strozzi). 106
1"'
489, 509^-^,523'", 537^\ 55 Sanquirico, Paolo, 127
Rubertini, Zambattista, 292 Sansovino, Jacopo, 1 15, 188, 299, 450.
454
Rubini, 129 Santafede, Fabrizio, 356
Ruer, Thomas, 569'*", 570*-' ^* Santa Giustina, parish church (Le Clerc), 514"
Ruggeri, Giovanni, 391, 558" Santa Maria di Sala, Villa Farsetii, 554"'
Ruggieri, Fcrdinando, 392 Santarelli, Odoardo, 267, 5^5-'
Ruggieri, Giovan Battista, 38 Santcn, Jan van, sir \'asanzio
Ruggieri, Giuseppe, 542"" Santoni, 144, 524-'
Rughesi, Fausto, 40, 509^'' Santorio, Giulio .Antonio, 314 15 (ill. 204)
Ruins, 364, 497 fl,, 579'" Saraceni, C^rlo, î, 41 2, 73,
74, 75 6 (ill. 26), 77,
Ruoppolo, Giovan Battista, ^61 2 (ill. 246), 55V"' 107, 109, 358, 514^"", 519*"
578"" Saragossa, cathedral, dome, 562''; (Coniini),
376
Rusconi, Camillo, 316, 436, 437 (ill. 30^), 4:58, 440-2 Sardi, Giuseppe (Roman architect),
377, 555", 556"
(ill. 308), 445, 447, 448, 545^^ 566\ 576'^-"^', Sardi, Giuseppe (Venetian architect), 386,
452, 538"
569^" Sarto, Andrea del, 97
Rusconi, Giuseppe, 438, 450, 567" Sartorio, M. and P. G., 558"
Rusnati, Giuseppe, 316, 438, 447, 566" Sarzana, see F'iasella
Rustici, Francesco, 5 18-' Sassi, Ludovico Rusconi, 556*"
Sassoferrato, 73, 266, 321, 322 (ill. 207), 345
Sabbioneta, S. Maria .\ssunta, chapel, 554^ Sassuolo, Ducal Palace, 541'"
Sacchetti, Giovanni Battista, 528'"", 563"', 564^'' Savelli, Elena, 313
Sacchetti, Giulio, 232, 532'- Savelli, Giulio, 178
Sacchetti, Marcello, 231, 232, 249, 531^, 532'-, 534'" Savigliano
Sacchi, Andrea, 138, 140, 141, 173, 249, 250, 261-6 Chiesa della Pieta, 564'*^
(ills. 159-61), 267, 268, 270, 272, 274, 321, 322, 323, S. .Maria dell'Assunta, 564*'
330, 334. 340, 360, 4fty- 524". 533"', 540", 546", Savoldo, 45
552'", 572''' Savona
Sagrestani,Giovan Camillo, 469, 573-^ Cappella Siri (Bernini), 526*
Saint-Denis, Bourbon Chapel, 561" Misericordia (Borgianni), 75
Saint-Maximin, church (Algardi), 568-" Scalfarotto, Giovanni .\ntonio, ^87 (ill. 262), ^88 (ill.
Salamanca, Church of the Agustinas Recoletas 263), 557""

(FineUi), 543-^ Scamozzi, Vincenzo, 115, 12^, 299, ^70, ^86, ^87,
Sale, Niccolo, 543', 566' 521"- '\ 557"'
Salimbeni, Ventura, 27, 91, 98, 104, 51 8^'* Scandellari, Filippo, 569'"'
Salini, Tommaso, 509'' Scarsellino, 95, 517*', 518''
Salvestrini, Cosimo, 132, 534"" Siena per angola, 366, 574*'
Salvetti, Lodovico, 523"' Stenography, 297-8, 376, 398
Salvi, Nicola, 186 (ill. 107), 377, 380, 381 (ill. 255), Schedoni, Bartolommeo, 86, 92, 9^, 95, 96 (ill. 41),
382, 395, 556'', 567'* 517". 5'8"'^
Samarra, great mosque, 210 Schiaffino, Bernardo, 448, 450
Sammartino, Giuseppe, 456, 571''^ Schiaffino, Francesco, 448, 450, 569^'
San Benigno, abbey church, baldacchino, 176 Schildersbent, 323
Sanctis, Francesco de, 377, 378 (ill. 251), 379 (ill. 252), Schivenoglia, Francesco .Maria, 576'"'
Schleissheim (.Amigoni), 483
Sandrart, J. von, 38, 534'" Schbnfeld, Johann Hcinrich, 552'"
Sanfelice, Ferdinando, 370, 393-5 (ills. 269, 270), Schor, Cristoforo, 330, 539'', 566'
559"" Schor, Egidio, 547"
Sangallo, Antonio da, 527"'', 541^" Schor, Giovan Paolo, 330, 334, 539-', 545"'> 547".
Sangallo, Giuliano da, 178, 245 566'
San Germano \ ercellese, church, 565'^ Schulenburg, Marshal von der, 453, 570""
San Giovanni, Giovanni da, 344-5, 550""''^ Schwerin, .Museum (Bernini), 158 (ill. 84)
Sangro, Raimondo del, 454 Scorza, Sinibaldo, 354
BIBLOSARTE
66o • INDEX
Segaloni, Matteo, 542"' Spello, S. Lorenzo, baldacchino, 176

Scghcrs, Gerard, 78, 57c)"* Spcranza, Stefano, 305
Seiter, Daniel, 476, 574^" Spinazzi, Innocenzo, 447
Selva,G. Antonio, 387 Spinelli, Giovan Battista, 551'"
Sementi, Giovan Giacomo, 341 Spiritual Exercises (St Ignatius), 24-5, 56, 139
Senago, Villa Borromeo d'Adda (Cerano), 519^^ Spoleto, cathedral, 370; (Bernini), 136 (ill. 70)
Serlio, Sebastiano, 1 15, 203, 528", 529" Spranger, Bartholomeus, 99
Serodine, Giovanni, 73, 76-7 (ill. 27), 515"' Squinch, use of, 212, 430
Serpotta, Giacomo, 454, 458 9 (ill. 323) Stamford, St Martin (Monnot), 568-"
Serpotta, Procopio, 459 Stanzioni, Massimo, 340, 358-9 (ill. 243), 360,
Town 552'"s.io^
Sezze Romano, Hall (Borgianni), 75
Stondratc, Cardinal, 40 Stati, Cristoforo, 30, 127, 523'''
Shaftesbury, Lord, 571' 42 flF., 350, 511'^, 578""
Still-life painting,
Siena Stockholm, Royal Palace, 528'""

Cathedral (Bernini), 1 50 (ill. 77), 1 5 1 -2, 526", 544"* Stomer, Matthias, 552""
(Caffa), 319, 543'^; (Ferrata), 319, 543'^ 544"*; Stone, Nicholas, 317
(Raggi), 319, 544'«-- Stra
Gallery (Manetti), 98 Villa 'La Barbariga', 554'
S. Martino (Mazzuoli), 434 (ill. 301), 435 Villa Pisani, 389 (ill. 264), 558^-% (Tiepolo), 389,
Silva, Francesco, 523*' 486
Silvani, Gherardo, 125, 291, 300-1, 301-2 (ill. 192), Stradanus, 43
Strambino, Chiesa del Rosario, 431
Silvani, Pier Francesco, 392, 559''' Strassengel, church, high altar, 564''^
Simon, Norton, Inc., Museum of Art (Romanelli), Strozzi, Bernardo, 77, 92, 105, 106, 107, 109, 332,
19^9' '",
546' 347. 348, 351-2 (ills. 235, 236), 355, 482, 503, 5
551H4.H.
Simonetta, Carlo, 447
Simonini, Francesco, 578'"^ Studius, 43
Sinatra, Vincenzo, 401 Stupinigi, Castle, 414, 415-16 (ill. 285), 417 (ill. 286),
Sirani, Elisabetta, 341 423-4 (ill. 292), 425, 428, 563^"-"-, 5755^; (Crosato),
Sirani, Giovanni Andrea, 341 476; (Valeriani), 575'^
Siscara, Matteo, 571' 'Style Sixtus V, 26 ff.
Sixtus V, 2^, 25, 26 ff., 39, 41, 379 Subleyras, Pierre, 468
Slodtz, Michelangelo, 433, 438, 446 (ill. 313), 568-" Suger, Abbot, 55
Smiriglio, Mariano, 400, 560'^ Superga, 420-2 (ills. 289, 290), 424, S2-j''\ 564^"^''-;
Smith, Joseph, Consul, 502, 578"", 579'"'* (Cametti, Cornacchini), 446; (Conca), 575^'
Snyders, Franz, 104, 354 Susini, Antonio, 132
Society of Jesus, 23-5, 27, 40, 137, 138, 139, 227, 363, Susini, Francesco, 132, 523'"
507^''-'-, 509« Sustermans, Justus, 345-6
Solari, Pietro, 571"" Syracuse
Soldani, Massimiliano, 447, 568^-'^^ Cathedral, facade, 401, 538'
Sole, Gian Gioseffo dal, 471, 479, 573"^' ^-, 575'^ Palazzo Beneventano, 560'"^
Solimena, Francesco, 357, 366, 393, 399, 462-5 (ill. Palazzo Comunale, 400, 560""
325), 469, 476, 483, 493, 571^-', 578'"" S. Lucia (Caravaggio), 50, 53, 510**
Soria, Giovan Battista, 34 (ill. 5),

521'''
Sorri, Pietro, 104, 105 Tacca, Ferdinando, 319, 523'""

Sorrisi, Giovanni Maria, 534"** Tacca, Pietro, 132-3 (ill. 69), 305, 319, 458, 523'"'
Spada, Leonello, 92, 94-5, 96, 518"' Tacconi, Innocenzo, 79, 515--
Spada family, 530''' Tadolini, Francesco, 391, 558"'*
Spadarino, see Galli Tagliafichi, Andrea, 125, 392
Spadaro, Micco, 323, 359, 360, 501, 552^^^ Tagliapietra, .Îvise and Carlo, 570-^''
Spagnuolo, see Crespi, G. M. Talman, John, 533^''
Spalato, 244 Tanzio da Varallo, loi, 102 (ill. 46), 103, 519^'"^
Specchi, Alessandro, 289, 290, 376-7, 379, 555-^-" Tarsia, Antonio, 5'7o'-'^''^''
BIBLOSARTE
66
Tassi, Agostino, ^^, ^s, 4^, 80, 88, 125, ^27, 497, Torri, Giuseppe .Antonio, 558'^
5o8---'>-^\509^\5i6"\547-« Torriani, Francesco, 549'*
Tassi, Giambattisia, 330 Torrigiani, Ottavio, 520"'
Tasso, 486 Toulouse, Câpitole, 397
Taurine brothers, 507" Trapani
Tavarone, Lazzaro, 104 Jesuit College and church, 400
Tavella, Carlo Antonio, 575^' Museum (Serpotta), 458
Tavigliano, Ignazio, 564*^- '^
Trattalo della Pittura (Agucchi), 39, 509*-'; (Cortona),
Temanza, Tomaso, 387, 557^° 265, 535"
Tempesta, Antonio, 35, 43, 128, 508^* Traversi, Gaspare, 494 5 (ill. 350), 578""
Tcmplum Vaticanum (F"ontana), 376 Travi, Antonio, 551""
Teodoli, Girolamo, 377, 555-* Tremignon, .Alessandro, 386, 452, 557*'"''
Tcrbrugghen, Hendrik, 78 Trent, cathedral, baldacchino, 176
Teresa, St, 25, 41, 157, 169, 171 Trent, Council ot, 21 3, 34, 137
Termessus, 244 Trevisani, .\ngelo, 484
Tesi, Mauro, 574*" Trevisani, Francesco, 467, 478, 572"* "*, 578""
Tessin, N., 528'"" Treviso, 369
Testa, Pietro, 323, 324-5 (ill. 210), 327, 546"' '\ 547- Trezzi, .Aurelio, 118
Testi, Fulvio, 536^-' Trissino, Villa Trissino, 558"
Theatine Order, 40, 137 Tristano, G., 507"
Theatres, 123, 3^)4-6, 476 Tronchi, Bartolomeo, 507"
Theodoli, see Teodoli Tubertini, Giuseppe, 541'"
Theodon, G. B., 433, 436, 566* Turbini, .Antonio and Gaspare, 558"*
Thomism, 24 Turchi, .Alessandro, t,22, 5o8-\ 515'", 520'"
Tiarini, Alessandro, 92-3 (ill. 37), 96, 518"" Turin
Tibaldi, Domenico, 122 Churches
Tibaldi, Pellegrino, 64, 99, 115, 117, 134 Carmine, 416 19 (ills. 287, 288), 423, 424, 427,
Ticciati, Girolamo, 568'' 428, 564*^
Tiepolo, Giambattista, 341, 354, 366, 367, 389, 461, Cathedral, Juvarra's projects, 423 (ill. 291), 428;
474, 479, 481, 482, 484-91 (ills- 343-6), 493, 497, Cappella della SS. Sindone,4o6 io(ills. 277 80),
577"''''' 562'-" -^
503, 550«', 553", 576'",
Tiepolo, Gian Domenico, 491 (ill. 347), 577**' Chierici Rcgolari, Collegio dei, church, 565''
Tiepolo, Lorenzo, 577'*" Consolata, La, 406, 562'"; (Alberoni), 565'*^
Timanthes ofSikyon, 577*" Corpus Domini, 125-6

Tineili, Tiberio, 520^' Cristina, S., fa(;ade, 414, 415, 555-'
Tintoretto, Domenico, 106, 519''" Croce, S., 563^'*
Tintoretto, Jacopo, 52, 54, 62, 75, 91, 98, 106, 107, Filippo N'eri, S. (Guarini), 406, 562'*; (^luvarra),
348, 360, 505 416-17,564"

Lorenzo, 406, 410 281 562-'"
Tirali, Andrea, 370, 384 (ill. 259), 386-7, 452, 557'' S., 12 (ills. 3),
Titian, 34, 45, 48, 53, 54, 60, 60-2, 69, 91, 106, 107, Lucento, di, 561'
250, 276-8, 462, 489, 505, 5345^ 537'^ .Maria di Piazza, S., 430 (ill. 298)
Tito, Santi di, 97, 130 Maurizio e Lazzaro, SS., 561-
Tivoli .Michele, S., 431
Hadrian's Villa, Piazza d'Oro, 203, 529" Scrapcum, ; Pelagia, S., 565'-
210 Raffaello, S., 564"

Villa d'Este, 507'" Rocco, S., 282, 561-'
Todeschini, see Cipper Salvario in Via Nizza, S., 561'

Torelli, Felice, 573-*^ Spirito Santo, 565"-
Torelli, Giacomo, 541'** Teresa, S. (Giaquinto), 575"
Toronto, R. Ontario Museum (Cortona), 533'' Trinita, SS., 206
Torre, Pietro .Andrea, 524-- Venaria Reale, 420, 563^", 564*"; (Conca), 575"
Torreggiani, .\lfonso, 122, 389, 390 i, 554' Visitazione, 561-
Torretti, Giuseppe, see Bernardi, Giuseppe Palazzi

Torri, Flaminio, 549''^ Barolo, 563-"'
BIBLOSARTE
662 • INDEX
Turin cnntinui'd Vaga, Picrino del, 534"-

Belgrano, 563*" Valadier, Giuseppe, 26, 383
Birago, see Valle, della Valentin, 73, 76, 77, 98, 141, 5i4\ 515"
C-araglio, 565'- Valeriani, Domenico, 575^*
Carignano, 227, 406, 562''''"'
Valeriani, Giuseppe, 575*''
Citta, di, 561- Valeriano, Giuseppe, S. J., 1
17, 521-''
Curia Maxima, della, 561' Valesio, 554'"
Graneri, 563-" Valle, Filippo della, 275, 366, 436, 438-9 (ill. 306),
'«-;^
Guarene, see Ormea, d' 442 (ill. 309), 443, 459, 567'^-
15-
Madama, 372, 414, 415 (ill. 284), 563^^'^' Valletta, see La Valletta
Martini di Cigala, see Belgrano 424-8 (ills. 293-5), 565'" ^'"•**
Vallinotto, Sanctuary,
Ormea, d', 527"', 563^" Valmontone, Palazzo Doria-Pamphili, decoration,
Reale, 561'; (Alfieri), 565'-; (Beaumont), 478, 330,548^'-'^
575"; (Crosato), 476, 575'^; (Conca), 5755'; Valperga, Maurizio, 563-"
(Mura), 465, 5755' Valsoldo, 27, 30, 41, 127, 313
Richa di Covasolo, 563*" Valtrini, Alessandro, 167, 526^'
Saluzzo-Paesana, 564-''''
Valvassori, Gabriele, 370, 371, 377, 380 (ill. 254), 382,
"'
Valle, della, 563^" 390,393, 556""
Other Secular Buildings, etc. Van Dyck, Sir Anthony, 74, 104, 105, 332, 340, 346,
Accademia Filarmonica, see Palazzo Caraglio 352, 353, 354, 478, 514", 535", 552""
Castello Sforzesco (Cairo), 549'' Vanloo, Charles Andre (Carlo .\ndrea), 476, 575^"-^''
Castello del Valentino, 561^ Vanloo, G. B., 575'"

Collegio dei Nobili, 406 Vanni, Francesco, 28, 91, 98, 104, 518^, 546'
Corso Valdocco, 414 Vanni, Raffaello, 546'
Hospital of S. Giovanni, 561' Vannini, Ottavio, 344
Piazza Emanuele Filiberto, 414 Vanvitelli, Carlo, 456, 559**
Piazza S. Carlo, 403 VanvitelH, Luigi, 186, 369, 370, 372, 391, 392, 393,
Pinacoteca ( Albani), 82 (ill. 30), 83 ; (G. M. Crespi), 395 9 (ills. 271-3), 456, 457 (ill. 322), 527", 556^*,
472 (ill. T,T,i,)\ (Gentileschi), 74 (ill. 24) 559"'" ; see also Wittel, Caspar van
Replanning, 403, 561^ Varallo
Via del Carmine, 414 Pinacoteca (Tanzio), 102 (ill. 46), 103
Via Milano, 414 Sacro Monte (Morazzone), 100 (ill. 44), loi
Via Roma, 403 Varese
Villa Regina (Crosato), 476; (Giaquinto), 575" Lizza-Bassi Collection (Gentileschi), 514^
Turriani, Nicola, 289, 539-' Sacro Monte, 121, 522^"; (Bussola), 523**'; (Mo-
Turriani, Orazio, 539-^ razzone), loi ; (Silva), 523*'
S. Vittore (Morazzone), loi

Udine Varotari, Alessandro, see Padovanino
Archiepiscopal Palace (Tiepolo), 485, 490 Vasanzio, Giovanni, 34-7 (ills. 6-9), 114, 508^"'^',
Cappella Manin (Torretti), 570"" 531''
Cathedral (Corradini), 571"^; (Tiepolo), 485, 490 Vasari, Giorgio, 367
Chiesa della Purita (Tiepolo), 486 Vassallo, Anton Maria, 354
S.Giacomo (Corradini), 453, 570''-' Vecchia, Pietro della, 347, 550*'
Urban VIII, 25, 41, 112, 136 (ill. 70), 137, 138, 139, Vedute di Roma (Piranesi), 364
140, 141, 141-2, 143, 144, 146, 150, 156 (ill. 83), 157, Velasquez, 78, 105, 173, 352, 495, 523'*
172, 190, 252-3, 269, 270, 311, 526^' Velletri, Palazzo Ginetti, staircase hall, 539-'
Urbino, 28 see Turin
Venaria Reale,
Utrecht, Peace of, 393 Vendramin, Francesco, 569^"
Veneroni, Gianantonio, 371, 527*", 553^
Vaccarini, Giovan Battista, 401-2, 560'"^ Venice
Vaccaro, Andrea, 359, 552'"** Churches
Vaccaro, Domenico Antonio, 393, 395, 456, 543"', Andrea della Zirada, S. (Corte), 570''
559*', 571" AngeloRaffaelle, deir(Guardi), 50^, 504 (ill.
355),
Vaccaro, Lorenzo, 366, 571" 580'^"
BIBLOSARTE
663
\ en ice continued Venice continued

Benedetto, S. (Mazzoni), 348 Ducale, 256; (Le Clerc-Saraceni), 514"; (Vero-
Clemente alPIsola, S. (Cortc), 452 (ill. 318) nese), 252
Frari (Longhena), 557*' Foscarini, stuccoes, 554"
Geremia, S., 521-", 557'* Giustinian-Lolin, 54 1"
Gesuati, dei, 385 (ill. 260), 387, 452, 453, 570'*"; Grassi-Stucky, 386 (ill. 261), 387, 557»'-
(Tiepolo), 485 Labia, 557''"; (Tiepolo). 486, 487
Gesuiti, dei, 386, 557'-; favade, 452, 557''-; A. Oro, Ca
(J. d' (S. Maderno), 128
Pozzo), 557^-; (Torretti), 570'" Pesaro, 299 300 (ill. 190), 541'"
Giorgio Maggiore, S.. 2^5, 387, 541 ^'; (Lon- Rezzonico, 299 300, 541"'"; stuccoes, 554"; (F.
ghena), 300, 301 (ill. 191), 398, 558""; (S. Ricci), Guardi), 503; (Langctti), 347 (ill. 229); (Moli-
479 nari), 350 (ill. 233); (Tiepolo), 486
Giovanni Evangelista, S., 557'' Vendramin, stuccoes, 554"
Giovanni e Paolo, SS., Cappella del Rosario, 453, Other secular huildings. galleries, collections
570'"; (Mazza). 449 (ill. 316), 450; (Piazzetta), .•\ccademia (Cignaroli),
485 (ill. 342), 577'"*;
481 (Tirali), 386, 452, 557'", 570"
; (Mazzoni), 349 (ill. 231); (Piazzetta), 482, 576"
Lazzaro dei .Mendicanti, S. (Bushnell, Corte), Brass Collection (Traversi), 495 (ill. 350)
569-^" Carmini, Scuola dei (Tiepolo), 485
Marco, S., 299 Cini Foundation (Zanetti), 578""
Maria del Carmine, S. (Corradini), 453 (ill. 319) Correr, .Museo (Corradini), 570"'
Maria della Fava, S. (Piazzetta), 481 (ill. 339) Library, 188
Maria del Giglio, S., facade, 452 Ospedaletto (Tiepolo), 485
Maria .Maddalena, S., 387 Querini Stampalia Gallery (Frangipani), 511'^
Maria della Salute, S., 292-9 (ills. 185-9), 375, Venier, Casino, stuccoes, 554"
387, 398, 541^-", 547-^ 554'\ 559"", 564''; ex- Venturoli, .\ngelo, 558'*
terior decoration, 452; (Corte), 450-2 (ill. 317), Vercelli
570'' ; (Giordano), 349 Cathedral (Garove), 563-"*
Maria degli Scalzi, S., 299, 541''; facade, 452, Padri Gesuiti, 564**
538" (.Meyring), 569*" (Pozzo),
; ;
564^'' ; (Tiepolo), S. Chiara, 565"'
485, 485-6, 577*^' Vermeer, Jan, 78

Marziale, S. (S. Ricci), 479 Vermexio, Giovanni, 400, 560'""
Moise, S., facade, 386, 452, 557" ;

(Meyring), Verona
557*' ;
(Roccatagliata), 569^- Museo di Castelvecchio (MafFei), 348 (ill. 230)
Nicolo da Tolentino, S., facâde, 384 (ill. 259), Museo Civico (Bassetti), 520^'
386-7; Palladio's project, ^87, 557*''; (Lvs), 108 Palazzo Canossa (Tiepolo), 486
(ill. 5o);(Parodi),448(ill. 315) Palazzo della Gran Guardia, 1
1
Ospedaletto, dell', 299, 541'''' S.Maria di Campagna, 541*'

Pieta, della (Tiepolo), 486 Teatro Filarmonico, 574''
Pietro di Castello, S. (Fabris, Longhena), 569^" Veronese, Paolo, 27, 34, 58, 60, 62, 91, 93, 96, 98, 99,
Redentore, II, 225, 295, 297, 298, 387, 417, 420 106, 250, 252, 258, u^' Wh ^S", ^60, 462, 479, 484,
Rocco, S. (Marchiori), 454 (ill. 320) 480
Simeone e Giuda, SS., ^87 (ill. 262), 388 (ill. 263), Verrocchio, 319
557^" Versailles, 395, 398, 415, 456; (Bernini), 152, 167
Stae, S., facade, 452-3, 557^-, 570"; (Piazzetta), (ill. 91), 169, 171 ;(Girardon), 456;(Guidi), 434, 566-
481 Vetralla, S. .Andrea (Bencfial), 468 (ill. 328), 572'"

Vidal (Vitale), S., facade, 386 7, 557" Vicenza
Zaccaria, S. (Balestra), 484 (ill. 341) Churches
Zitelle, delle, 299 .•\raceli, dcIT, 557"'
Palazzt Gaetano, S., 427, 561"

Barbarigo, stuccoes, 554" Nicola da Tolentino, Oratory of S. (.Maflei), 348
Contarini dagli Scrigni, 1 15, 521'"
Zitelle, Oratorio delle (Maffei), 348
Corner, 299 1 5, Palazzi
1
Corner della Regina, 386 Barbieri-Piovene, 557"'

Piovini-Beltrame, 557*'
BIBLOSARTE
664
V'icenza lonlimwd Volpino, 134

Forto-Cx)llconi, 224 Volterra, 301
Repeta, 558"- Volterra, Daniele da, 212
Valmarana, 187, 53 1''* Volterra, Francesco da, 1 1 1, 183, 280, 520-
Other secular buildings Volterrano, 344, 345
Basilica, 225 Vouet, Simon, 78, 105, 141, 357, 515'", 519^"
Biblioteca Bertoliana, 389 Vranx, Sebastian, 509''-
Loggia del Capitano, 188, 531^"* Vryburch, Andricn, 275-6, 277 (ill. 172), 278
Museum (Maftei), 348; (Marinali), 570^^
Proti, Istituto dei, 557"' Wael, Cornelius de, 104
Teatro Olimpico, 225, 299 Waldsassen, Stittskirchc, 564^''
Villa Valmarana (G.B. Tiepolo), 486, 487 (ill. 343), Washington, National Gallery (Bernini), 146; (Ricci),
487-g, 490 (ill. 346), 491, 577"'" (G. D. Tie- ; 500 ('"• 35.1)
polo), 491 (ill. 347) Watteau, .\ntoine, 479, 496
Vicoforte di Mondovi, Sanctuary, 564'^ ;
(Bortoloni), VVeingarten, 422
476 Werft, Adriaen van der, 537^^
Vienna Westphalia, Peace of, 142
Academy (Guglielmi), 572" Wiener Neustadt, cathedral (Bernini), 568^''
Albertina (Borromini), 199; (Fischer von Erlach), Winckelmann, J. J., 266, 364, 468, 469, 572^'
564"; (M. Longhi), 538''; (Rainaldi), 279 Windsor Castle (Bernini copy), 525"'; (Fontana),
Jesuit church (Pozzo), 548^', 564^' 555'"
Karlskirche, 564'' Wittel, Caspar van, 395, 498, 501, 579'"*"^
Kunsthistorisches Museum (Caravaggio), 510'*; Wood, John, the younger, 399
(Chimenti), 97; (Dou), 537^-; (Gentileschi), 74, Worms, Heylshof Collection Werff), ( 537^'
514"; (Guercino), 88; (Lanfranco), 86, 517^^; Wren, Sir Christopher, 382
(Parmigianino), 537^^ Wurzburg, Residenz (Tiepolo), 486, 487, 577"'
Liechtenstein Palace, 527'*' ;
(Pozzo), 548''^
Opera House, 574^" 'X, Monsu', 579'"
Prince Eugen, Palace of, 527*' Xavier, St Francis, 25, 41
Vierhouten, Van Beuningen Coll. (Strozzi), 352 (ill.
236) Zabarelli, .\driano, 546'

Viggiii, Silla da, 30, 33, 127 Zaccagni, Bernardino, 522^'
Vignali, Jacopo, 344 Zacchia, Laudivio, 267-8 (ill. 163), 535-'-^
Vignola, 37, 400, 508", 555^* Zais, Giuseppe, 501
Villadeati, Castello, 246, 533^' Zamboni, Orazio, 535'^
Villanova di Mondovi, S. Croce, 430, 431 (ill. 299), Zanchi, .\ntonio, 347, 349, 467
Zanchi, Francesco, 557'"°
Villa Pasquali, church, 554-'' Zanetti, Antonio Maria, the elder, 578'"'
Villas, Venetian, 389 Zanoli, Tommaso, 539"^
Villaverla, Villa Ghellini dalFOlmo, 557"' Zarabatta, Francesco, 447
Virgil, 486, 525'*, 537« Zianigo, Tiepolo's house, 389
Visentini, Antonio, 579'-^ Ziborghi, Giovanni, 558"'
Vismara, Gaspare, 99, 134 Zimbalo, Giuseppe, 400
Vita, Giuseppe de, 543'^ Zola, Giuseppe, 574'"*
Vitale, .\lessandro, 91 Zola Predosa, Villa Albergati-Theodoli (Colonna,
Vitelleschi, Muzio, 138 Alboresi), 549'"
Vitruvius, 386, 422 Zompini, Gaetano, 482, 576""
Vittone, Bernardo, 370, 372, 403, 404, 424-32 (ills. Zuccarelli, Francesco, 478, 501
293-9), 556'", 5'>4'''"" Zuccari, Federigo, 27, 28, 39

Vittoria, Alessandro, 128, 129, 450, 453, 454 Zucchi, .Antonio, 577^^
Vittorio Amedeo H, 355, 403, 414, 446, 364^" Zugno, Francesco, 577''^
Vittozzi, .Ascanio, 115, 125, 206, 403, 561', 564'^ Zumbo, Gaetano Giulio, 571"'
Viviani, Antonio, 27, 91 Zurbaran, 97, 104
Vliete, Gillis van den, see Riviera Zurich, private collection (Lys), 108
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
BIBLOSARTE
The Pelican History of Art
United Kingdom C7. 50
Australia S19.50 (recomnnended)
Canada S12. 95
U.S.A. S12. 95
ISBN0140561161
For scholarship, readability, and the range of its illustrations The Pelican History
of Arthas come to be recognized as a unique enterprise in the field of art history.
Forty volumes have already appeared in a work which is planned to cover the
art and architecture of all ages in about fifty volumes. Written by authorities whose
international standing is unquestioned, they have notably maintained the strict
standards set by the Editor, Sir Nikolaus Pevsner.
This is one of the integrated editions which are now being offered at a price that
students of art and general readers can afford. Newly printed n a compact format
i
which is particularly suitable for art books, these editions add qualities of theirown
to the excellence of the cloth-bound originals. Not only is the same lavish collec-
tion of plates included, but these have been incorporated into the text, which
- far from being abridged - has where necessary been revised and updated.
itself
The integrated editions make available, at the lowest price possible, volumes
from a series which has been called 'a landmark in the history of art publishing'
and 'one of the cornerstones of twentieth-century scholarship'.
Art and Architecture in Italy 1600-1750

Shortly before his death Professor Wittkower again thoroughly revised this im-
portant study, about which the Spectator, dubbing the book a classic, wrote: 'Not
only is it the first serious work in English on one of the greatest creative periods
in the history of Italian art, but whole sections of it-the chapters on Borromini and
the great Piedmontese architects especially- either supersede anything on them
in any language or are totally new contributions to knowledge.'
From the dark, monumental canvases of Caravaggio and the more traditional
work of the Carracci, painting, during this period, seemed to leap a century to the
prodigious ceilings and frescoes of Tiepolo and leave little impression. To these
masters Professor Wittkower does full justice, just as he describes the progress
of the arts in every centre between Venice and Sicily in each of the three periods
into which his book falls. But the heart of this splendid volume lies in the fields of
architecture and sculpture during the exhilarating years of Roman High Baroque,
when Bernini, Borromini, and Cortona were all at work under a series of enlight-
ened popes.
The cover, designed by Gerald Cinamon, shows a detail of the fresco of 1633-9 by Pietro da
Cortona representing the Glorification of the Reign of Urban Vill on the ceiling uf the Gran
Salone of the Palazzo Barberini, Rome (photo Scala)
BIBLOSARTE

Wittkower - Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600 To 1750

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wittkower - Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600 To 1750

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Pelican History of Art

Art and Architecture

ART AND ARCHITECTL RE IN ITALY 1600 TO 1750

he was Chairman of the Department of Art History and Archaeology at Columbia

ART AND ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY

Penguin Books Australia Ltd, Ringwood, Victoria, Australia

Copyright © the Estate of Rudolf Wittkower, ig^S, 1965, ig6g, igjs

First published igs8

Set in Monophoto Ehrhardt

Part One : The Period of Transition and the Early Baroque

1. Rome: Sixtus V to Paul V (i 585-1 621) 21

The 'Style Sixtus V and its Transformation -

4. Caravaggio's Followers and the Carracci School in Rome 73

5. Painting outside Rome 91

Bologna and Neighbouring Cities 92

6. Architecture and Sculpture 1 1

Rome: Carlo Maderno ( iss^~^^-^9) ~ Architecture outside Rome

Rhetoric and Baroque Procedure - Patronage

8. Gianlorenzo Bernini (1598- 1680) 143

9. Francesco Borromini (1599- 1667) 197

10. Pietro da Cortona (1596-1669) 231

The Frescoes of the Palazzo Pitti and the Late Work

11. 'High Baroque Classicism': Sacchi, Algardi, and Duquesnoy 261

13. Trends in High Baroque Sculpture 305

14. High Baroque Painting and its Aftermath 321

Part Three : Late Baroque and Rococo

15. Introduction 363

16. Architecture 369

17. Architecture in Piedmont 403

19. Painting 461

Giambattista Tiepolo ( ibgb-ijyo)

Abbreviations Used in the Notes and Bibliography 506

FOREWORD TO THE SECOND EDITION

saving time to students who might otherwise be

FOREWORD TO THE THIRD EDITIO.N

only survive if the process of bringing it up to my intention) to aim at anything approaching

previous editions. And once again I have to Podere La Vescina, Lucignano,

Rivo]i»''Z<*^\, ' Cremona

THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION

ROME: SIXTUS V TO PAUL V

to further Catholic orthodoxy. Leaving all details aside, the recommenda-

figure represented. The relevant literature formalistic, anti-classical, and anti-naturalistic

transcend the spoken word. derogatory meaning to the term. Virtuosity of

prayer. had hardly the power to stir religious emotions

coursed spontaneously, following only their

their Catholic position or even returned to the death."

I. Rome, piazza and fa9ade of St Peter's

2. Flaminio Ponzio: Rome,

ofClement VIII and Paul V. (1616-17)-' was apparently designed by Ago-

(1610-12). In addition, the Florentine Passi- capacity he collaborated with Domenichino

the Pauline era. Jovial, vivacious, worldly in his

a remarkably early period the genius of Bernini. 5. Giovan Battista Soria:

In his munificent commissions of works in Rome, S. Gregorio Magno, 1629-33

fresco, both for private and public buildings,

laborator and successor as papal architect, took

the beginning of the second decade.

6 and 7. Flaminio Ponzio and Giovanni \ asanzio:

the structure which rose between 161 3 and

of the Roman villa suburbana, established a

But where Peruzzi used a classical severity,

late example of that Mannerist horror vacui

10. Flaminio Ponzio; Rome, Acqua Paola, 1610-14

under Annibale Carracci's influence. Thus beginnings.'''"