THE ARTIST. No. VII. Including the Lives of living and deceased Painters, collected from authentic sources,-accompanied with OUTLINE ENGRAVINGS of their most celebrated Works, and explanatory Criticism upon the merits of their compositions; containing likewise original Lectures upon the different branches of the Fine Arts. THE LIFE OF DOMENICHINO ZAMPIERI be better found than in the works of Domeni chino. De Piles proceeds ::-" He had great choice of attitude, but was not skilful in the disposi tion of his figures, or in producing a pleasing ensemble. His drapery is very bad, badly displayed, and coarse to an extreme; his fleshcolouring is grey, and has nothing of truth in it; but what is this to his clare-obscure? His pencil is heavy, and his work hard and dry. But it may truly be said, that the province of painting which Domenichino possesses, was conquered by labour and not by genius. But labour or genius, whenever they produce any thing of excellence, naturally furnish models to succeeding painters." THOSE who, in paintings, look only for strong effect, and for what may be termed th striking and glaring, will be disappointed in a review of the works of Domenichino, of which the chief character is a judicious and tempered fancy, correct drawing, simplicity of colouring, appropriate attitude, and natural expression, in which latter excellence he was not inferior to Raphael himself. If any thing of dryness or labour sometimes appear in his touch, if the light be scattered, and the drapery negligent, it is only in some few of his paintings in oil. His paintings in fresco, of which the number is great, are for the most part exempt from these faults; the touch is bold, free, and light, and the flesh colour of such truth and freshness that it would do honour to a Titian. The authors who were cotemporary with this great painter, have not witheld justice from his fame. Some of the more modern, among whom are De Piles, and Raphael Mengs, writers of undoubted taste in every other re-excellencies of the art. All his heads have spect, have spoken of Domenichino with too much acrimony. It is useless to dwell much upon an opinion in which the judgment of the world does not correspond with theirs. The opinion of Mengs upon Domenichino is yet more bitterly expressed. "Domeni chino," says he, in his Reflections on the Works of the Ancients, "seems to have had more of expression and design than any other of the an expression, but it is difficult to say what this expression implies; whether it be not. a certain timid air which he has indiscriminately given to all his figures, which looks more like grimace than the effect of real passion. This air, likewise, appears more adapted to children than to grown persons; for it is not necessary that they should have a sprightly countenance; this may be well enough in chil De Piles, in his Reflections on the Works of the principal Painters, expresses himself as follows:-"I know not what to say of the genius of Domenichino; I know not whether there be any thing in his soul which entitles him to the name of a painter; but the soliditydren, but otherwise it is too unnatural, and has of his judgment and his indefatigable labour have supplied the place of genius, and hauded down his works to posterity." Before be pronounced upon this point, De Piles should have told us what he meant by genius. If genius consists, as assuredly it does, in a brilliant and active fancy, a warm and rapid execution, we know not where it can No. XXXIV. Vol. V. His too much of the character of sameness. nature is often common; and when he has started a lucky idea, he pursues it too far. In fine, it may be said, in regard to general composition, that Raphael should design the figures and dispose the groups; Poussin should furnish the back grounds and scenery; and Domenichino should be intrusted with chilB dren only. If the Carracci and Domenichino || had followed the plan I have marked out, we should not see in their works so many lines falsely correct, and their touch would have been in a style infinitely less timid and cold." It is remarkable that Meugs should express himself in this manner; for, of all the painters who have risen to eminence, none have ever been found who reproached the Carracci and Domenichino with a cold and timid style. Carracci, whose opinion is of great weight, knew better how to appreciate the talents of the most illustrious of his scholars. The following passage is found in a letter which he wrote to his cousin Louis-"I do not deny that Guido excels in a certain sweetness and peculiar majesty, in which I think him almost unrivalled; but Albano and Domenichino are not the less worthy of praise. If they do not compose with the same elegance and nobleness, they yet show a different, and, in some respect, a superior kiud of excellence." This extract being communicated by M. Zannotti, painter and secretary to the academy Clementini, to M. Bottari, he received from him the following answer:-"I perfectly agree in the judgment which Annibal Carracci has pronounced concerning the distinguishing excellencies of Gaido and Domenichiuo. Elegance, beauty, and, in a word, every thing which can render a work noble and captivating, are to be found in the compositions of Guido; but Domenichino possessed all the learning the depth, and solidity of the science." Paolo Falconeri, in a letter to the Count Laurentio Magalotti, says, in speaking of the Communion of St. Jerome, by Domenichino: "This picture is esteemed one of the most valuable in Rome; yet I was told by Pietro de Cortoni, that when it was first exhibited it was so underrated by the artists, in order that their own works might not be discredited, that they would not suffer them to appear in the same place; it was at Rome but a short time." "The pulpit of Saint Andrew della Valle, is one of the finest productions in fresco which the art acknowledges; nevertheless, when it was shown, many of the painters, spoke of removing it, and substituting their own works. When Domenichino, on its completion, entered the church, he stopped frequently before these paintings with some of his pupils, and said to them, It seems to me that I have done something tolerable here.” These different passages are extracted from the Collection of Letters of the most celebrated Painters, Sculptors, and Architects; published at Rome, 1757. In the letter which Domenichino wrote from Naples, February 23, 1632, to the Chevalier dell Pozzo, who requested a painting from his hand, this great painter thus expresses his inability to comply with his entreaties :----“ On one side I see that I ought to conform to your wishes; on the other side, I have my hands bound with chains of iron, and know not which part to take. The gentlemen who now employ me wish to compel me to confine myself wholly to the works in the chapel of St. Januarius. They have likewise forced me to make this promise with great caution, and I should be exposed to much hazard by a breach of it. My rivals are on the watch to injure me: when they are lulled asleep the time is so short that I am in the greatest anxiety; and in this constant solicitude I scarcely think I shall be able to finish the work for which I have engaged." As Lanfranc was the great cause of these evils, it may be proper to extract some passages from one of his letters which show the duplicity of his character. This letter was written from Naples, April 19, 1641, to Signor Ferranti Carlo. "of Domenichino's death; he has left his work imperfect, and bequeathed much labour to his successor. His employers were discontented with him from the beginning." (Bellori, in his Life of Domenichino, assures us of the contrary, and pronounces against Lanfranc.) "They are going to examine every thing scrupulously. For my own part, when I shall review that work, and shall form an opinion upon it, I shall injure the author's fame as little as possible. I shall always treat him with kindness; I wish he had done the same towards me; though he merits nothing but that of having his life faithfully related. You know part of his conduct towards me. I did not hate him while living, and I hate him still less now he is dead. I desired his friendship; and his fame shall never want it. I am employed to finish his work." "You have heard," says he, Among the designs which are preserved at the Central Museum of France, there is one of great importance, as it presents a sketch of one of the pictures intended by Domenichino for the chapel of St.Januarius, in place of which, after his death, Lanfranc substituted one of his Own. The painting of Domenichino repre sents the Presence of St. Januarius arresting the Eruption of Vesuvius. We are assured that Domenichino, a faithful observer of nature at all times, studied the eruption of 1531, and sufficiently understood the phænomenon to render it on his canvass with all its accumulation of horrors. The Museum of France possesses few of the designs of this great master, although they are numerous. They are for the most part scattered in private collections, where they hold a distinguished rank. They are commonly executed on blue paper, with chalk, sometimes black, at other times white, and not unfrequently with a mere pencil or a pen. He painted landscapes well; his style, in this class of painting, was formed on that of the Carracci. On the whole, Domenichino most excelled in painting in fresco; and being chiefly employed in this, his best works ornament the interior of different edifices, and are to be seen at Rome, in the neighbourhood of that city, and at Naples. His best paintings in oil are, nevertheless, in France, and many valuable ones are in the different cabinets of Europe. Lucien Bonaparte, brother to the Emperor of France, and possessor of a rich collection, has lately acquired two capital works of Domenichino; the head of St. Jerome, in oil, painted for his celebrated picture of the Communion; and the head of St Agnes, for the picture of the martyrdom of that saiut, which he painted at Bologna. Only four scholars of this master attained any celebrity: Antonio Barba Longa, of Messina, who painted at Rome, in the church of the Theatius, and St. Andrew della Valle; Andrew Camassei, who ornamented the pictures of the palace of Palestrini; Francesco Cozza, a Sicilian, and G. Agnolo Cauini; these two last have produced many valuable works. ON PAINTING. || tion. The painter who is distinguished for noble and profound conceptions; who, by means of a perfect delineation, and colours more capable of fixing the attention than dazzling the eye, conveys to the spectators the sentiments with which he himself was inspired; who animates them with his genius, and makes a lasting impression on their minds; this artist is a poct, and worthy to share even in the glories PAINTING is the art of representing to merit in the style of embellishment and decora the eyes, by means of figures and colours, every object in nature that is discernible by the sight; and of sometimes expressing, according to the principles of physiognomy, and by the attitudes of the body, the various emotions of the mind A smooth surface, by means of lines and colours, represents objects in a state of projection; and may represent them in the most pleasant dress, and in a manner most capable of e..chanting the senses. Still farther, the objects which delight us by their animation and lively colours, speak to the soul, by giving us the image of what we hold most dear, or by indicating an action which inspires us with a taste for innocent pleasures, with courage, and with elevated sentiments. Such is the definition, and such are the effects of 'painting. By an admirable effort of human genius, painting offers to our eyes every thing which is most valuable in the universe. Its empire extends over every age and country. It presents to us the heroic deeds of ancient times as well as the facts in which we are more conversant, and distant objects as well as those which we daily see.. In this respect it may be considered as a supplement to nature, which gives us only a view of present objects. The art of painting is extremely difficult in the execution; and its merit can only be appreciated by those who profess the art. The painter who invents, composes, and colours conceptions which are only agreeable, and which speak merely to the eye of the spectator, may be reckoned to possess the first of Homer. It is in forming this great idea of his art that the painter himself becomes great. But if he seek only to please or astonish by the illusion of colours, he must rest contented with the secondary merit of flattering the eye with the variety and opposition of tints, or of making an industrious assemblage of a great multiplicity of objects. It is in painting as it is in poetry. The man who clothes trivial or common ideas in verse, exercises the profession of twisting syllables into a certain measure. The poet who clothes in good verse ideas and sentiments, that are merely agreeable, professes an agreeable art. But he who, by the magic of verse, of ideas, of imagery, or of colours, adds sublimity to the sublime objects of nature, is a great poet and a great painter. He deserves the crown which the nations have decreed to Homer, Virgil, Milton, Raphael, and the statuary who modelled the antique Apollo. It is reasonable to place in the same class those who have expressed the same ideas, whether it be in verse or in colours, in brass or in marble. The painter and statuary, who excel in their professions, deserve all the respect due to genius: they are of the number of those men whom nature, sparing of her best gifts, grants but occasionally to the inhabitauts of the earth. If they are sublime, they elevate the human race; if they are agreeable only, they excite those sweet sensations necessary to our happiness. In laying before our readers a snecinet necount of this noble art, we shall, first, give the history of painting, including its rise, progress, and decline, in ancient and modern times, an account of the schools, and of the different merits of painters; and a compari. son between ancient and modern painting. Secondly, we shall lay down the principles of the art, and the order in which the artist conducts his studies. Thirdly, we shall enuinerate the different classes of painting, with ob-¦¦ servations on each. And, fourthly, we shall treat of œconomical or house-painting. RISE, PROGRESS, AND DECLINE OF PAINT- It is to be imagined that men must naturally, and very early, have conceived an idea of the first principles of the art of painting; the shadow of each plant and animal, and of every object in nature, must have afforded them the means of conceiving, and pointed out the possibility of imitating, the figures of all bodies. Thus the savage natious, an emblem of what men were in the infancy of society, possess the first rudiments of this art, even before those which are useful and almost necessary to existence; their naked bodies are covered with punctures of various forms, into which they infuse indelible colours. The next demand for this art, is, to preserve the memory of warlike exploits. It is more natural to form some representation of an action, than to give an account of it by means of arbitrary characters. Hence the picture-writing of the Mexicans, and the more ingenious hieroglyphics of Egypt. plished by covering the different parts of the figure with different colours in the same way that we colour maps; and several natious, as the Egyptians, the Chinese, and the different nations of India, have never painted in a better manner. Other nations, more ingenious aud more attentive to the arts, observing that the objects of nature have relievo, have invented what is ca led claro obscuro. The Greeks, the most ingenious, penetrating, and delicate of all, invented this part antecedent to colours; than which there cannot be a greater proof of their exquisite taste, as the giare of colours without judgment excites more admiration in the minds of the vulgar and ignorant, than the camaieu or drawings of one colour executed by the most skilful artist. These general observations concerning the gradual improvement of this art, will be best illustrated by a more part cular attention to the ancient uations in which it flourished. Plato, who lived four hundred years before the Christian era, informs us that painting had been practised in Egypt for ten thousand years; that some of the productions of that high antiquity were in existence; and that they bore an exact resemblance to those which the Egyptians executed in his time. Without regarding the period of ten thousand years mentioned by Plato, it is reasonable to consider it as an indefinite period, which carries us back to very remote antiquity. The figures both in the painting and sculp ture of Egypt were extremely stiff; the legs were drawn together, and their arms were glued to their sides. It appears that their only model was their mummies, and that their skill in anatomy was derived from embalming them. They were extremely incorrect in every part of the head; they placed the ears much higher than the nose. Besides, they gave the face the form of a circle instead of an oval; the chin was short and rounded; the cheeks excessively so; and they turned upwards the corners of the mouth and eyes. Many of these faults may be ascribed to the formation of the human face in Egypt; but the placing of the ears could only be founded in caprice or ignorance. Painting consisted of simple outlines long before the expression of relievo or the application of colour. It was simply drawing; and the master-pieces of painting in that rude period were not superior to the sports of chilThe exactness of the Egyptian proportion is dren. Although occupied about a single point, much celebrated; but although we graut that it was not brought to perfection; for constant they observed the proper length of the differexperience instructs us that men never excel" ent parts of the human body, they were still in the inferior parts of an art till they are defective artists, since they did not observe capable of carrying the whole to perfection. the breadth, and were moreover ignorant altoAfter employing for a long time those sim-gether of the shape and size of the muscles. ple outlings, the next step in the art of paint- Works converted to religious purposes chiefly ing was to make the imitation more complete occupied the Egyptian painters. They had by applying colours: this was first accomfigures for imitation from which they would in this point of view. The workmen in Russia who paint our Saviour holding the globe in one hand, and blessing the people with the other, are not members of the imperial aca not depart, and those figures were monstrous; The monuments of Egyptian painting with which we are best acquainted (says Winkelmanu) are the chests of mummies. These, works have resisted the injuries of time, and are still submitted to the examination of the curious. The white, made of white lead, is spread over the ground of the piece; the outhines of the figure are traced with black strokes and the colours are four in number; namely, blue, red, yellow, and green, laid on without any mixture or shading. The red and blue prevail most; and those colours seem to have been prepared in the coarsest manner. The light is formed by leaving those parts of the ground where it is necessary covered with the white lead, as it is formed by the white paper in some of our drawings. This description is sufficient to convince us that the whole art of painting in Egypt consisted in colouring; but every person knows, that without tints and the mixture of colours painting can never arrive at great perfection. In Upper Egypt there seems to have existed a kind of colossal painting, which has never been examined except by travellers who were no great critics in the art. Winkelmann bad some reason to express a desire that those remains of antiquity, with regard to the manner of working, the style, and the character, had been accurately explored. Walls of twenty-four feet in height, and pillars of thirtytwo feet in circumference, are wholly covered with those colossal figures. According to Norden they are coloured in the same manner with the mummies: the colours are applied to a ground prepared in manner of fresco; and they have retained their freshness for many thousand years. Winkelmann adds, that all the efforts of human skill and industry could make as little impression on them as the injuries of time. His enthusiasm for antiquity has perhaps led him into this extravagant exaggeration. Pliny informs us that the Egyptian artists painted also the precious metals; that is to say, they varnished or enameled them. It is doubtful what this art was, but most probably it consisted in covering gold or silver with a single colour. The Egyptians are supposed to have coutinued this coarse style till the reign of the Ptolemies. The Persians were so far from excelling in the arts, that the paintings of Egypt were highly esteemed among them after they had conquered that country. The carpets of Persia were of great value in Greece, even in the time of Alexander the Great, and these were adorned with various figures; but this is no proof that they were well executed, any more than a demand for several of the Chinese productions is at present a proof of the taste of that people in the arts. It was the fabrication of the silk, and not the truth of the representation, which made the Greeks admire the carpets of Persia. The Persians, as well as the Arabians, had some knowledge of mosaic work. This is only valuable when it copies, in a manner that can not be destroyed, the works of a great master; but if the Pe sians had no good pictures to copy into mosaic, it was of no consequence to be able to arrange, in a solid manner, pieces of flint one beside another. There is only one Persian painter whose name has descended to posterity; and he is preserved, not because he was a painter, but because he accommodated the ancient doctrine of the two principles to the Christian religion Besides, it is doubted whether Mancs was a Persian or a Greek, and it is still less known whether he was a painter. He is praised in Asia for drawing straight lines without a ruler. The modern Persians paint on cloth, and the artists in India are their rivals in this branch of industry; but their paintings are purely capricious. They represent plants and flowers which have no existence in nature; and their only merit consists in the brightness and the strength of their colours It appears that the great employment of the Egyptian painters was on earthen vessels, on drinking cups, in ornamenting barges, and in covering with figures the chests of mummies. They painted also on cloth; but pamting, as an industrious occupation, supposes a workman, not an artist; the decoration of temples, house-painting, and that of the figures relative to religion, are to be considered only, portions. Besides this, the art in India, as it existed in the most remote antiquity, is confined to moustrous figures connected with their religion, animals not to be found in the world, and idols with a multitude of arms and heads, which have neither exactness in their forms nor pro |