The Procaccini and the Business of Painting in Early Modern Milan 2020032415, 2020032416, 9780367275389, 9780367275396

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Series
Title
Copyright
Contents
List of Figures
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
Introduction
1 Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini
2 Early Years in Bologna
3 A Change of Scenario: Moving to Milan
4 Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark
5 The Seventeenth Century: Milan and Beyond
6 Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market
Bibliography
Index

Citation preview

The Procaccini and the Business of Painting in Early Modern Milan

The book investigates the lives and careers of the Procaccini brothers: Camillo (1561–1629), Carlo Antonio (1571–1631) and Giulio Cesare (1574–1625), the most important family of painters working in northern Italy at the start of the seventeenth century. The Procaccinis’ work is here analysed by interconnecting their individual stories and understanding their success as the combination of mutual artistic choices, a high level of specialization and precise business organization. The book looks at this family of painters as entrepreneurs, emphasizing their conscious response to the requests of public and private patrons, as well as their ability to balance instances of originality and imitation in an era characterized by a wide range of artistic opportunities, including religious commissions, national and international patronage and multifaceted markets. This book will be of interest to scholars studying art history, early modern studies, the art market, Italian studies and Italian history. Angelo Lo Conte, PhD is Assistant Professor at Hong Kong Baptist University.

Cover image:  Camillo Procaccini, Rest on the Flight into Egypt. Etching, 17x25 cm., 1590–1593, Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven. Photo Credit: Yale University Art Gallery

Visual Culture in Early Modernity Series Editor: Kelley Di Dio University of Vermont

A forum for the critical inquiry of the visual arts in the early modern world, Visual Culture in Early Modernity promotes new models of inquiry and new narratives of early modern art and its history. The range of topics covered in this series includes, but is not limited to, painting, sculpture and architecture, as well as material objects, such as domestic furnishings, religious and/or ritual accessories, costume, scientific/medical apparata, erotica, ephemera and printed matter. Thresholds and Boundaries Liminality in Netherlandish Art (1385–1530) Lynn F. Jacobs Images of Sex and Desire in Renaissance Art and Modern Historiography Edited by Angeliki Pollali and Berthold Hub Art and Reform in the Late Renaissance After Trent Edited by Jesse M. Locker Artistic Circulation between Early Modern Spain and Italy Edited by Kelley Helmstutler Di Dio and Tommaso Mozzati Architectural Rhetoric and the Iconography of Authority in Colonial Mexico The Casa de Montejo C. Cody Barteet Women’s Patronage and Gendered Cultural Networks in Early Modern Europe Vittoria della Rovere, Grand Duchess of Tuscany Adelina Modesti Mannerism, Spirituality and Cognition The Art Of Enargeia Lynette M. F. Bosch The Procaccini and the Business of Painting in Early Modern Milan Angelo Lo Conte For a full list of titles in this series, please visit https://www.routledge.com/VisualCulture-in-Early-Modernity/book-series/ASHSER2107

The Procaccini and the Business of Painting in Early Modern Milan Angelo Lo Conte

First published 2021 by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 Taylor & Francis The right of Angelo Lo Conte to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Lo Conte, Angelo, author. Title: The Procaccini and the business of painting in early modern Milan / Angelo Lo Conte. Other titles: Anatomy of a workshop Description: New York : Routledge, 2021. | Edited version of the author’s thesis (Ph.D.)—University of Melbourne, 2016, under the title: Anatomy of a workshop : the Procaccini family in Milan. | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2020032415 (print) | LCCN 2020032416 (ebook) | ISBN 9780367275389 (hardback) | ISBN 9780367275396 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Procaccini family. | Artists’ studios—Italy—Milan—History— 17th century. | Painting—Economic aspects—Italy—Milan—History—17th century. Classification: LCC ND623.P85128 L6 2021 (print) | LCC ND623.P85128 (ebook) | DDC 759.5/211—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020032415 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020032416 ISBN: 978-0-367-27538-9 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-367-27539-6 (ebk) Typeset in Sabon by Apex CoVantage, LLC

Contents

List of Figuresvii Acknowledgementsxi Abbreviationsxii Introduction

1

1 Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini

9

2 Early Years in Bologna

27

3 A Change of Scenario: Moving to Milan

48

4 Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

65

5 The Seventeenth Century: Milan and Beyond

89

6 Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

113

Bibliography143 Index157

Figures

1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

1.5

1.6

2.1 2.2

2.3

2.4 2.5

Portrait of Camillo Procaccini. Woodcut. In C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, 1678 10 Portrait of Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Woodcut. In C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, 1678 11 Portrait of Carlo Antonio Procaccini. Woodcut. In C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, 1678 12 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Giovanni Battista Crespi (called Il Cerano), Pier Francesco Mazzucchelli (called Il Morazzone), Martyrdom of Sts Rufina and Seconda. Oil on canvas, 192x192 cm., 1622–1625, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan. Photo Credit: Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, De Agostini Picture Library. G. Cigolini/Bridgeman Images 18 Peter Paul Rubens, Circumcision. Oil on canvas, 400x225 cm., 1605, Church of the Gesù and Sts Ambrogio and Andrea, Genoa. Photo Credit: Chiesa del Gesù e dei Santi Ambrogio e Andrea, De Agostini Picture Library. L. Visconti/Bridgeman Images 24 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Circumcision with St Ignatius of Loyola and Francis Xavier. Oil on canvas, 525x314 cm., 1616, Galleria Estense, Modena. Photo Credit: Galleria e Museo Estense, Modena, Italy/Bridgeman Images 25 Ercole Procaccini the Elder, Virgin with the Child, the Baptist and Pope Stephen I. Oil on canvas, circa 1560, Church of San Giovanni Evangelista, Parma 29 Camillo Procaccini, St. John the Baptist. Oil on canvas, 217x147 cm., 1577, Galleria Estense, Modena. Photo Credit: Su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali e per il Turismo Archivio Fotografico delle Gallerie Estensi. Foto Carlo Vannini32 Camillo Procaccini, Last Judgment. Fresco, 1585, Basilica of San Prospero, Reggio Emilia. Photo Credit: Chiesa di San Prospero, Reggio Emilia, Emilia-Romagna, Italy. Ghigo Roli, Bridgeman Images40 Camillo Procaccini, Creation of Eve. Fresco, 1585–1586, Basilica of San Prospero, Reggio Emilia 41 Camillo Procaccini, Grotesques. Painted pebbles, 1587–1589, Villa Visconti Borromeo, Lainate. Photo Credit: Luca Torriani 44

viii  Figures 2.6

2.7 2.8 3.1 3.2 3.3

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8

4.9

Camillo Procaccini, Grotto with Satyr, Grotesques and Fantastic Animals. Red chalk drawing, 1587, Windsor Castle, The Royal Collection. Photo Credit: Royal Collection Trust/© Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2020 45 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Nymph. Marble, 1588–1591, Villa Visconti Borromeo, Lainate. Photo Credit: Luca Torriani 46 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, The Ostrich Hunt. Fresco, circa 1590, Villa Visconti Borromeo, Lainate. Photo Credit: Luca Torriani 47 Marco Antonio Barateri, La Gran Città di Milano. 1629. Civica raccolta delle stampe Achille Bertarelli, Milan. Photo Credit: Civica raccolta delle stampe Achille Bertarelli – Castello Sforzesco – Milano 51 Aurelio Luini, Martyrdom of St. Thecla. Oil on canvas, 343x179 cm., 1592, Milan Cathedral, Milan. Photo Credit: © Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo di Milano 56 Camillo Procaccini, Martyrdom of St. Agnes. Oil on canvas, 310x175 cm., 1591–1592, Borromeo Collection, Isola Bella. Photo Credit: Collezione Borromeo, Palazzo Borromeo, Isola Bella Stresa (VB) 58 Camillo Procaccini, Transfiguration. Etching, 58x34 cm., circa 1590, National Gallery of Art, Washington. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington 67 Camillo Procaccini, Rest on the Flight into Egypt. Etching, 22x27 cm., 1590–1593, National Gallery of Art, Washington. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington 68 Justus Sadeler (after Camillo Procaccini), The Stigmata of St. Francis. Engraving, 48x33 cm., circa 1600, Wellcome Collection, London. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of the Wellcome Collection, London 69 Camillo Procaccini, Coronation of the Virgin. Black pencil on white paper, 15x16 cm., 1591–1595, Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan. Photo Credit: © Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana/ Mondadori Portfolio76 Camillo Procaccini, Flight into Egypt. Oil on canvas, 240x147 cm., 1594–1596, Church of Santa Maria di Campagna, Pallanza 77 Camillo Procaccini, Flight into Egypt. Red chalk drawing, 181x101 mm., 1590–1595, Museo Palazzo d’Arco, Mantua. Photo Credit: Museo Palazzo d’Arco, Mantova 78 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Apparition of the Immaculate Conception to St Leonard. Oil on canvas, 312x234 cm., 1595, Collegiata of San Leonardo, Pallanza 79 Camillo Procaccini, Apparition of the Immaculate Conception to St. Francis. Brown ink and watercolour on paper, 44x35 cm., 1594–1596, Museo dei Beni Culturali Cappuccini, Milan. Photo Credit: Provincia di lombardia dei Frati Minori Cappuccini – Museo dei Cappuccini, Milano 80 Camillo Procaccini, Dream of Constantine. Oil on canvas, 322x474, 1592, Church of Santa Croce, Riva San Vitale. Photo Credit: Ufficio dei Beni Culturali – Bellinzona. Foto Roberto Pellegrini 82

Figures ix 4.10 Ercole Procaccini the Elder, Conversion of Saul. Oil on canvas, 307x200 cm., 1573, Church of San Giacomo Maggiore, Bologna. Photo Credit: Mario Bonotto/Foto Scala, Firenze 83 4.11 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Guardian Angel. Gilded wood, 1622, Pinacoteca Ala Ponzone, Cremona. Photo Credit: Museo Civico Pinacoteca Ala Ponzone, Cremona, Italy 87 5.1 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Ecce Homo. Oil on canvas, 157x113 cm., 1602–1603, private collection, Milan 90 5.2 Correggio, Ecce Homo. Oil on canvas, 99x80cm., 1525–1530, National Gallery, London. Photo Credit: National Gallery, London, UK/Bridgeman Images 91 5.3 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Martyrdom of St. Agnes. Oil on canvas, 124x86 cm., circa 1605, private collection. Photo Credit: Private collection. Photo © Christie’s Images/ Bridgeman Images 93 5.4 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Coronation of the Virgin with Sts Joseph and Francis. Oil on canvas, 97x72 cm., circa 1605, Getty Museum, Los Angeles. Photo Credit: Digital image courtesy of the Getty’s Open Content Program 94 5.5 Giulio Cesare and Camillo Procaccini, Beheading of the Baptist. Oil on canvas, 1602–1604, Church of St Eustorgio, Milan. Photo Credit: Guido Barbato 95 5.6 Camillo Procaccini, Death of the Virgin. Oil on canvas, 712x448 cm., 1607–1609, Piacenza Cathedral, Piacenza. Photo Credit: Ufficio per i Beni Culturali Ecclesiastici della Diocesi di Piacenza-Bobbio101 5.7 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Angel Guarding the Elect. Fresco, circa 1618, Church of St. Angelo, Milan 106 5.8 Cesare Bassani (after Carlo Antonio Procaccini), Padre Eterno, Choro d’Angeli. In G.B. Andreini, L’Adamo, 1613 107 5.9 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Orpheus Enchanting the Animals. Fresco, 1609, Castello Visconti di San Vito, Somma Lombardo 110 5.10 Cesare Bassani (after Carlo Antonio Procaccini), Adam Naming the 111 Animals. In G.B. Andreini, L’Adamo, 1613 6.1 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Holy Family with the Infant St. John and Angels. Oil on canvas, 189x124 cm., 1615–1616, Neilson-Atkins Museum, Kansas City. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of The NelsonAtkins Museum of Art, Media Services/Photo: Jamison Miller 117 6.2 Camillo Procaccini, Martyrdom of St. Agnes. Oil on canvas (grisaille), 43x28 cm., circa 1595, Pinacoteca del Castello Sforzesco, Milan. Photo Credit: Pinacoteca del Castello Sforzesco, Milano. Comune di Milano, tutti i diritti riservati. Foto Anelli 1997 118 6.3 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Landscape with St. Margaret. Oil on copper, 26x36 cm., 1605–1610, Pinacoteca Civica Ala Ponzone, Cremona. Photo Credit: Courtesy Museo Civico Ala Ponzone, Cremona, Italy 120 6.4 Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Venus and Amor. Oil on canvas, 135x101 cm., circa 1620, Didier Aaron, New York 123

x  Figures Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Rest on the Flight into Egypt. Oil on canvas, 1610–1615, private collection. Photo Credit: Private collection. Mondadori Portofolio/Electa/Sergio Anelli/Bridgeman Images125 6.6 Carlo Antoni Procaccini, Vase of Flowers, Oil on canvas, 30x25 cm., private collection. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of Sotheby’s 126 6.7 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Last Supper. Oil on canvas, 328x841 cm., 1618, Basilica della Santissima Annunziata del Vastato, Genoa. Photo Credit: Basilica della Santissima Annunziata del Vastato, Genoa, Liguria, Italy, Luisa Ricciardini/Bridgeman Images 130 6.8 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Agony in the Garden. Oil on canvas, 216x147 cm., 1616–1618, Prado Museum, Madrid. Photo Credit: Copyright immagine Museo Nacional del Prado © Foto MNP/Scala, Firenze133 6.9 Camillo Procaccini, Visitation. Oil on canvas, 213x146 cm., 1616–1618, Blanton Museum, Austin. Photo Credit: Blanton Museum of Art, The University of Texas at Austin, Purchase through the generosity of Suzan and Julius Glickman, M.K. Hage, Jr., Derek Johns, Lawrence Lawver, Susan Thomas, Julia Wilkinson, and Jimmy and Jessica Younger, 2005 135 6.10 Giulio Cesare Procaccini and Jan Brueghel the Elder. Garland with the Virgin and Child and Two Angels. Oil on copper, 48x36 cm., 1618–1620, Prado Museum, Madrid. Photo Credit: Prado, Madrid, Spain Photo ©AISA/Bridgeman Images 136 6.5

Acknowledgements

This book was developed out of my doctoral dissertation submitted in 2016 at the University of Melbourne. My thanks go first and foremost to Jaynie Anderson and Robert Gaston, my doctoral advisors. I am grateful for their mentoring and scholarly assistance, for their friendship and support. Jaynie and Robert shaped the way in which I think about art history and influenced my personal and professional life in the most unexpected ways. They have been the cornerstone of my antipodean years. To them, I owe my greatest debt. The writing and the images of this book were generously sponsored by the Academy of Visual Arts at Hong Kong Baptist University. I want to thank the University of Melbourne for funding my doctoral research and the Francis Haskell Memorial Fund for supporting research trips in Italy, Spain and Switzerland. A  three-month grant from the Australasian Centre for Italian Studies in autumn 2018 allowed me to visit the David Rosand Library and Study Centre at Save Venice and to write two chapters of this volume. I want to thank Melissa Conn, Catherine Kovesi and Leslie Contarini for their help and generosity during a very pleasant, productive and unforgettable stay in Venice. While undertaking my research, I was assisted by many institutions and people. I am especially grateful to the staff of the Archivio di Stato in Milan, the Biblioteca Correr and the David Rosand Library and Study Centre in Venice, the Baillieu Library and the State Library of Victoria in Melbourne, the Study Centre of the Museo Nacional del Prado in Madrid and the Au Shue Hung Memorial Library in Hong Kong. In the process of writing, I benefited greatly from the support of many colleagues. I am grateful to my doctoral examiners Peter Lukehart and Jesse Locker for their insightful comments and suggestions. Thanks are due to Anne Dunlop, Christopher Marshall and Luke Morgan for giving helpful feedback on early chapter drafts; to Giorgio Tagliaferro, Melissa Conn, Audrey Nassieu-Maupas and Louis Nixon for giving me the opportunity to present my research in New Orleans, Venice, Paris and Hong Kong; to Anthony White for his friendship, his wit and professional advice; and to Miya Tokumitsu and Callum Reid for sharing parts of this journey. I want to thank my parents Giuseppe Lo Conte and Lucia De Vitto and my sister Alessia for supporting me unconditionally, in every way possible. This book is dedicated to Paola, my travelling partner, my friend, my wife and invaluable critic.

Abbreviations

AAB ABIB ACTB ADMS ANP AOM ASB ASCM ASDM ASDN ASM ASRE AVFDM

Archivio Arcivescovile di Bologna Archivio Borromeo, Isola Bella Archivio Cantonale del Canton Ticino, Bellinzona Archivio Ducal de Medina Sidonia, Sanlúcar de Barrameda Archivio Notarile di Pallanza Archivio dell’Ospedale Maggiore di Milano Archivio di Stato di Bellinzona Archivio Storico Civico di Milano Archivio Storico Diocesano di Milano Archivio Storico Diocesano Novarese Archivio di Stato di Milano Archivio di Stato di Reggio Emilia Archivio della Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo di Milano

Introduction

In the autumn of 1629, a Lombard soldier entered Milan carrying a bundle of infected clothing purchased from a German infantryman, thus contributing to the diffusion of the greatest epidemics ever experienced in northern Italy. The tragedy and destruction that followed killed almost 25 percent of the Lombard population, marking the end of a three-decade period influenced by the spiritual guidance of cardinal Federico Borromeo. Characterised by economic, social and artistic growth, the age of Borromeo has lingered in the historical imagination thanks to the writings of the Italian novelist Alessandro Manzoni, who used it as the historical setting of his most famous novel, The Betrothed.1 Initially considered as a period of poverty and decadence, this phase of Milanese history was an era of many opportunities, enriched by an explosion of artistic activity that resulted in one of the most intense periods of spiritual expression ever seen in Italy.2 Among the artists active in Milan at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the Procaccini family from Bologna developed a highly effective artistic business that positioned them as one the most important families of painters working in northern Italy. Starting from these premises, this book retraces the conceptualization, establishment and evolution of their family business, proposing a new interpretation for their lives and the understanding of their professional careers. Comprising three brothers of diverse skills, personalities and artistic allure, the history of the Procaccini family has never been investigated in its entirety since previous studies have generally focused on the analysis of their individual careers. Following the example of seventeenth-century biographies of Italian art, in the past decades the lives of Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare Procaccini have been analysed separately, underestimating the mutual dynamics that characterise, in this particular case, the interactions between family members. Notwithstanding the fact that progress has been made, the individual stories of the Procaccini are still pieces of the same puzzle which has yet to be completed. To this end, a comprehensive approach to the study of their interlaced careers seems historically necessary, the means to unravelling the dynamics of their life stories and illuminating the strategy that allowed them to develop the most successful painting business in seventeenth-century Milan. Pioneering studies in family history by Tamara Hareven and Glen Elder have changed the historical perception of the family from a static unit to an entity that constantly evolves

  1. A. Manzoni, The Betrothed. Milan, 1842.   2. R. Longhi, ‘L’Assereto’. Dedalo, 7, 1926–1927, 355.

2  Introduction over the lives of its members.3 Theoretical developments have specifically drawn attention to the variation of family life, to the evolution of family dynamics over time and to the role played by the family in making choices in constrained situations. Among the different approaches to family history, the life-course approach exemplifies this dynamism by highlighting the interlocking nature of individual trajectories within the family, the formation and dissolution of family patterns over time and the relation between family and social change.4 These patterns provide insights into the process of decision making within the family, enabling historians to capture the complex interaction between individual life-transitions and collective family goals as they constantly evolve over time. To encapsulate the study of the Procaccini brothers under a family perspective allows to identify the relations of cause and effect that governed their lives and influenced their decision-making. A family approach indicates that the pater familias, Ercole Procaccini the Elder, prepared his sons for an artistic career, envisioning the development of the family business. It provides insights on the practical reasons that prompted the Procaccini to leave Bologna and relocate to Milan, as well as on the strategies enacted by the family members to settle in the new city. It presents an explanation for their multifaceted professional specialization, deliberately directed towards different but complementary artistic disciplines, and for the organisation of their workshop, finalised at addressing the shortcomings of the Lombard art market. Hence, in the family perspective lies the rationale of this study, which moves forward from the static analysis of Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare’s artistic journeys and encloses them in a single, dynamic conceptual structure, aimed at retracing the steps leading to the fulfilment of their business strategy. While doing so, the book looks at this family of painters as entrepreneurs, emphasizing their conscious response to the requests of public and private patrons, as well as their ability to balance instances of originality and imitation in an era deeply touched by a wide range of artistic opportunities, including religious commissions, national and international patronage and multifaceted markets. Investigating macro-areas of analysis such as the economic lives of early modern painters, family workshops, patronage and the art market, this volume intends to elevate the Procaccini as a paradigmatic example for our understanding of the commercial strategies enacted by families of painters in northern Italy at the start of the seventeenth century. In 1993, Richard Goldthwaite’s ground breaking Wealth and demand for art in Italy 1300–1600 introduced the discipline art history to the financial aspects of Renaissance art.5 Richard Spear, Philip Sohm, Raffaella Morselli,   3. G. Elder, ‘Family history and the Life Course’. In Transitions: the family and the life course in historical perspective, Tamara Hareven (ed.), New York, 1978, 17–64; T. Hareven, ‘Cycles, courses and cohorts: reflections on theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of family development’. Journal of Social History, 12, 1978, 97–109.   4. Hareven notes that the influence of the life-course approach on family history has been most powerful in understanding three areas of family behaviour: the synchronization of individual life transitions with collective family changes; the interaction of individual and collective family transitions with historical conditions; and the effect of earlier life transitions on later ones. See T. Hareven, ‘Family history at the crossroads’. In Family history at the crossroads: a journal of family history reader, Tamara Hareven and Andrejs Plakans (eds), Princeton, 1987, xi–xiii.   5. R. Goldthwaite, Wealth and demand for art in Italy 1300–1600. Baltimore, 1993.

Introduction 3 Christopher Marshall, Patrizia Cavazzini and Elena Fumagalli have since then studied the economic lives of Italian painters, demonstrating the role played by financial factors in telling stories about how painters lived and worked, how they perceived themselves within a professional and commercial community, how they were perceived by those outside that community and what they did to advance themselves.6 Their scholarship provided fundamental insights to understanding how seventeenthcentury painters marketed their work, how they cultivated personal relations with potential clients and what strategies they employed to be successful. Furthermore, they have clarified the key role played by the organisation of labour in the system of early modern art production and highlighted how the variation of economic conditions across different cities influenced migration patterns and artists’ movement. In relation to the Procaccini, a socio-economic approach is essential to understand the strategic choices made by Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare at different times in their careers, the way in which they selected their commissions, the structure as well as the geographic focus they assigned to their business. This approach assumes an even greater relevance if we consider that studies on the Milanese art market are practically inexistent and that despite its economic, politic and religious importance, Milan is still the least studied among the major early modern European cities. When in 1587 the Procaccini arrived in Milan, the Lombard capital was Europe’s fourth largest city. The city’s wealth lay on the rich agriculture of its hinterland, on its role as a commercial hub between northern and southern Europe and on the quality of the local manufactures, including wool, silk, arms and armours. Milan played a fundamental strategic role within the Spanish empire and was at the forefront of the Catholic reformation. Nonetheless, its importance has been long underestimated. Stefano D’Amico notes that the neglect of Milan as a subject of study finds its origin in the negative connotation that has characterised the period of Spanish rule over Italy since the Risorgimento.7 In this period the Spanish empire was a synonym of oppression, corruption and intolerance, and was seen as the main cause of a long lasting social and economic crisis that destroyed the economic power accumulated by the city in the late medieval and Renaissance periods. Persisting until the late 1970s, this bleak view of Spanish Milan was finally overturn by Domenico Sella, who recognised a phase of expansion of Milanese economy from the middle of the sixteenth century through the second decade of the seventeenth, and a subsequent period of decline began in the early 1620s and worsened with the plague of 1629–1631.8 Sella’s pioneering studies opened the field for more accurate investigations on Milanese social, economic and financial structures, which questioned the decline of Milanese economy in the second half of the sixteenth century and eventually culminated in the scholarship of Stefano D’Amico and Giovanna Tonelli, demonstrating that from around 1540 to 1620 Milan

  6. R. Spear and P. Sohm (eds), Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters. New Haven, 2010; P. Cavazzini, Painting as business in seventeenth century Rome. University Park, 2008; C. Marshall, Baroque Naples and the industry of painting. New Haven, 2016.   7. S. D’Amico, Spanish Milan: a city within the Empire 1535–1706. Basingstoke, 2012, 1–6.   8. D. Sella, Crisis and continuity: the economy of Spanish Lombardy in the seventeenth century. Cambridge, MA, 1979.

4  Introduction experienced a long period of prosperity, maintaining a primary economic and political role in Europe.9 At the dawn of the seventeenth century, Milan was an affluent city where opportunities for painters were numerous and potentially profitable. Artists could compete for ecclesiastic commissions, concentrate on sales to wealthy patrons, sell directly from stock to clients who visited their shop, or work as decorators of local aristocratic palaces and villas. As opposed to more competitive centres such as Rome and Venice, religious commissions were relatively easy to get in Milan. The extensive program of post-Tridentine reform devised by Carlo Borromeo and continued by his cousin Federico resulted in the renovation of many of the city’s churches, as well as in the erection of new chapels and altars that had to be decorated with frescoes and altarpieces. Additionally, parish churches, convents and monasteries in the extended rural areas of the State of Milan were restored or re-decorated, providing painters with a wide range of employment opportunities. Aside from working for ecclesiastic institutions, artists benefited from the informed collecting activity of a plethora of local patrons.10 Having accumulated wealth through commerce and land properties, collectors such as Pirro Visconti, Scipione Toso, Guido Mazenta and Manfredo Settala developed a distinct taste for modern art, preferring to invest in the creations of contemporary painters rather than in works by old masters. Local painters also profited from the purse of wealthy foreign aristocrats passing through or working in the city. To this end, Giovanni Carlo Doria, a wealthy Genoese nobleman, became Giulio Cesare Procaccini’s most important collector. Amid foreign patrons, a special place was occupied by the Spanish governors and diplomats who administered the city in the service of the Spanish crown. Constantly informed about the status of the local art market, they were keen to buy works of art for the sake of their own collections. In Milan not only wealthy aristocrats were interested in purchasing works of art, collecting by the middle and the lower-middle classes was indeed also common. Thanks to the florid commercial ties linking Milan to the Spanish and Flemish areas, local merchants, blacksmiths and weavers possessed the economic means to decorate their houses with paintings, be they devotional canvases, landscapes and still-lifes, or studio replicas of altarpieces exhibited in the city’s most prestigious churches. Operating in such a dynamic context, the Procaccini were among the artists who better exploited this favourable situation, maximising the opportunities offered by the Lombard market thanks to a combination of individual talent, powerful connections, business acumen and strategic organisation. Over the course of four decades, they accepted as many commissions as possible, with each of the brothers developing an individual stylistic signature that made their paintings easily recognizable for local and foreign patrons. The profitable Milanese market allowed them to demand prices much higher than those they could have expected in Bologna. Its low competitiveness enhanced even more the fortune of their family business.

  9. D’Amico 2012; G. Tonelli, ‘The economy in the 16th and 17th centuries’. In A companion to late medieval and early modern Milan: the distinctive features of an Italian state, Andrea Gamberini (ed.), Boston, 2015, 142–165. 10. For a comprehensive study on seventeenth-century Milanese collections, see A. Morandotti, Il collezionismo in lombardia: studi e ricerche tra ’600 e ’800. Milan, 2008.

Introduction 5 To appreciate how the Procaccini strategised their presence in Milan, it is critical to understand how they organised their family business. In the past decades, Peter Lukehart, Michelle O’Malley and Giorgio Tagliaferro have greatly expanded our understanding of the business-like quality of the painter’s workplace, grounding the artist’s work in a historical setting in which practical business concerns were reality rather than ancillary aspects of the artistic production.11 Conceived as places of artistic growth and stylistic innovation, artist’s workshops were regular businesses that hired labour, secured a business address and purchased equipment needed for artistic production. For the Procaccini, the workshop represented the key to access the Milanese market, foster the professional growth of the younger family members and expand the reach of their business. It was the vehicle through which the Procaccini asserted their status as non-Lombard artists working in Milan, placing them on the city map and providing a logistical structure that would facilitate their commissions. The workshop’s initial phase of expansion, dating from circa 1587 to 1600, was entirely orchestrated by Camillo. After the family’s arrival in Milan, Camillo captivated the interest of the Milanese public with a Transfiguration executed for the Church of San Fedele, and in 1592 became the first non-Lombard painter invited to work in Milan Cathedral, an honour that attested to his ranking as the most important artist working in the city. Amidst the 1590s, he decorated the most important Milanese ecclesiastic buildings, developing a trademark style that quickly spread across the extended area of the State of Milan. To comply with the increasing number of commissions, he hired assistants to imitate his designs following an organisational pattern already seen in the workshops owned by Perugino and Veronese.12 Camillo developed two strands of production: the first, comprising works commissioned by major ecclesiastic institutions, involved the creation of original designs and a high level of care in the application of paint. The second, including less important commissions, was delegated to the workshop and based on the recycle of designs and ideas already used in different contexts. Camillo’s pragmatism allowed the exponential growth of the family business and favoured the pictorial education of his younger brothers, especially of Carlo Antonio, who worked for years as a workshop collaborator and decorator of aristocratic villas before developing an independent career as a landscape and still-life painter. The second stage in the evolution of the Procaccini workshop dates from 1600 to 1625 and coincides with Giulio Cesare’s decision to abandon sculpture and start a career as a painter. In fewer than ten years, the youngest of the Procaccini grew to become the driving personality of the family, eventually replacing Camillo, who, although still highly regarded, had slowly exhausted his creative energy. In 1607, Giulio Cesare opened his own studio in the parish of San Pietro in Campo Lodigiano, attracting the attention of some of the most prestigious north Italian collectors.

11. P. Lukehart (ed.), The artist’s workshop: studies in the history of art. Washington, 1993; M. O’Malley, Painting under pressure: fame, reputation and demand in Renaissance Florence. New Haven, 2014; G. Tagliaferro and B. Aikema, Le botteghe di Tiziano. Florence, 2009. 12. On this organisational structure, see N. Penny, ‘Pittori e botteghe nell’Italia del Rinascimento’. In La bottega dell’artista tra Medioevo e Rinascimento, Roberto Cassanelli (ed.), Milan, 1998, 31–53.

6  Introduction While Camillo had structured his business to obtain as many public commissions as possible, from 1610 onwards Giulio Cesare demonstrated a preference for the possibilities offered by the rich private market. As opposed to Camillo, he kept a strict control over his autograph pictures, maintaining the highest standards of production. His assistants were called upon rarely, generally to execute variants and replicas destined to the open market. Whilst the family business eventually became a structure supporting the individual careers of three successful artists, the Procaccini continued to share clients and commissions. As a matter of fact, Camillo and Giulio Cesare travelled together to Genoa and Turin, and between 1616 and 1618 executed almost 30 pictures for the incumbent Spanish governor of Milan. Carlo Antonio, on the other hand, continued to collaborate in the family activities, decorating his brothers’ canvases with vedute and rare flowers. Retracing the history of the Procaccini family from its Bolognese beginnings to the Milanese success, this book is organised following a chronological structure and divided in six chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the Procaccini brothers, describes Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare’s artistic trajectories and develops a theoretical framework that justifies why we should look at them from a family perspective. Following in the footsteps of studies by Elizabeth Cropper, Charles Dempsey, Giovanna Perini, Babette Bohn and Lorenzo Pericolo (among others), it looks at this Bolognese family of painters under the lens of Malvasia’s Felsina pittrice, thus challenging the individual focus characterising modern studies about the Procaccini. The chapter provides a comprehensive literature review and positions the Procaccini in relation to the present scholarship concerning the artistic legacy of the Council of Trent. To this end, it argues that in striking contrast to the Carracci—with their fusion of Titian and Correggio, Michelangelo, Raphael and the antique—the Procaccini united northern Italian and Netherlandish artists, such as Fontana and Passerotti, Correggio and Parmigianino, Brueghel and Rubens, creating a different kind of artistic reform. Chapter 2 retraces the Emilian origins of the Procaccini family and focuses on their Bolognese years. Spanning the 1580s, it describes the preparatory steps for the development of the family business and outlines how Ercole the Elder consciously directed the training of his sons towards different but complementary artistic specialisations, adopting an approach typically used by family workshops to diversify expertise and develop knowledge of different techniques. The chapter describes the relationship between the Procaccini and the Carracci families in terms of friendship, rivalry and collaboration, disproving the notion indicating that competition with the Carracci was a major factor in persuading the Procaccini to leave Bologna and move to Milan. Finally, the chapter looks at commissions obtained by Camillo in Reggio Emilia and Lainate, both essential in setting the stage for the family’s relocation. Chapter 3 focusses on the circumstances surrounding the Procaccini’s arrival in Milan. Generally ascribed to either the rivalry with the Carracci or to the patronage of the Milanese nobleman Pirro Visconti Borromeo, the decision to leave Bologna represents the most important moment in the history of the Procaccini family. The chapter demonstrates that the move was not a gamble, but a reasoned step motivated by solid economic reasons. By looking at studies in socio-economic history, it describes Milan as a microcosm of international influences, providing an analysis of the rich possibilities offered by the local market. Aside from demonstrating that the Procaccini purposely

Introduction 7 elected to move to a more dynamic city, which was wealthier and better internationally connected than Bologna, the chapter emphasises that throughout the last decades of the sixteenth-century Milan was involved in the most important program of postTridentine diocesan reform ever enacted in Italy. Known as the ‘Second Rome’, the city had the largest diocese in Italy and one of the largest in Europe, counting over 2,000 churches and 200 monasteries. From 1580 onwards, many of these buildings were renovated, presenting profitable opportunities for capable artists. The Procaccini took advantage of this situation. By emphasising the Emilian roots of their art, they superseded local competition. The last three chapters in this volume detail the Lombard developments of the family business. Chapter  4 outlines the strategy behind the Procaccini’s Milanese success in the 1590s and demonstrates how multifaceted professionality allowed the family business to be competitive in different fields of artistic production. The chapter investigates the capillary diffusion of their pictures in both central and peripheral areas of northern Italy and highlights how, through the workshop, they succeeded in propagating a trademark style that strongly influenced the development of Milanese art. As the capobottega, Camillo made strategic decisions about how to promote their family name and ‘brand’. He used prints to advertise his works. His drawings, copied by assistants, became reference models for a remarkable series of commissions that altogether established the Lombard legacy of the Procaccini’s name as a synonym of excellence. Camillo not only decorated the most prestigious Milanese churches, but also projected works into the most remote areas of the State of Milan. Nonetheless, his tireless artistic output is still underappreciated. The chapter debunks the misconception of Camillo as a boring and repetitive artist and retraces Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare’s early contribution to the family success. Chapter  5 focuses on the public commissions completed by members of the Procaccini family within and outside the State of Milan. By factoring Giulio Cesare’s decision to partially abandon sculpture and start a career as a painter, the chapter investigates how from 1600 onwards the family business underwent a phase of progressive individualization, as the three brothers concentrated on working independently, developing the potential of their respective careers. Albeit unexpected, this dramatic turn in the evolution of Giulio Cesare’s career proved functional for the development of the family business, as it allowed Camillo to focus on working outside Milan, expanding the geographic focus of his workshop. Although the Procaccinis’ professional development eventually took different directions, they persevered in conducting a common commercial strategy and enjoying fruitful collaborations. With respect to this, the chapter looks at the decoration of the Milanese Church of Sant’Angelo, the most ambitious decorative campaign attempted by the Procaccini. Lasting for more than 20  years, the commission saw the participation of each of the Procaccini brothers and was imbued by high symbolic value. Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare were in fact donors of this church, which hosted their family grave. The sixth and final chapter investigates the evolution of the Procaccinis’ careers from circa 1610 to the plague of 1629–1631. The chapter looks at the family’s presence on the Milanese art market, detailing the strategies adopted by Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare to increase their commissions. While doing so, it elevates Carlo Antonio as the most important north Italian landscape painter of his era, detailing how his repertoire of landscapes and still-life paintings

8  Introduction expanded the workshops’ production to those genres monopolised by Flemish and Dutch painters. Aside from looking at how the Procaccini strategised their presence of the art market, the chapter looks at the relations they established with their most important patrons, namely Giovanni Carlo Doria and Pedro de Toledo Osorio. While the Doria’s patronage opened the doors of the rich Genoese art market, the commissions by Pedro de Toledo represent a fundamental case study to understanding the collecting activity by Spanish diplomats in Milan.

1 Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini

A Successful Family of Painters ‘Who changes country changes his fortune’, thus begins Malvasia’s account of the Procaccini family in the second volume of the Felsina pittrice.1 In 1667, the Bolognese scholar travelled to Milan to collect information about the Procaccini brothers, Camillo (1561–1629), Carlo Antonio (1571–1630) and Giulio Cesare (1574–1625), Emilian painters who in 1587 had left Bologna to find better opportunities in Lombardy. There, throughout four decades, they participated in the transformation of the local pictorial tradition, inaugurating an artistic period characterised by the spiritual patronage of Archbishops Carlo and Federico Borromeo. In Milan, Malvasia met Ercole the Younger, Carlo Antonio’s son and the only remaining member of this famous dynasty of painters.2 It was from him that Malvasia received information, allowing him to partially retrace the Procaccini biographies. While visiting Milan’s churches and collections, Malvasia described their achievements, highlighting the way in which the Procaccini made their way to becoming the most successful family of painters in the State of Milan during the first three decades of the seventeenth century. Read in modern terms, the Procaccini family story is an example of skilled migration. Having grown up in Bologna, where the pater familias Ercole the Elder was a respected painter, they relocated to Milan, developing an artistic business that fulfilled a variety of commissions including major religious works, paintings for the private market and decoration of aristocratic villas. As migrants, the Procaccini adapted to a new city, new regulations, new patrons and a different market. They took a structured organisational approach to establishing the family workshop in Milan, with each of the brothers practicing a distinct artistic specialisation. By each taking on a different but complementary specialisation, they not only optimised the artistic range of their workshop, they made it more competitive. Being the eldest brother, Camillo was head of the workshop. Together with Ercole the Elder, he encouraged his brothers’ training in sculpture and landscape painting, providing a springboard for the development of their careers. Although the Procaccinis’ professional lives eventually took different directions, the family connection forever remained the cornerstone of their work since they shared patrons, clients and commissions. Through professional versatility,

  1. ‘Chi muta paese cangia ventura’. C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice. Bologna, 1678, 275.   2. On Malvasia’s visit to Milan, see A. Arfelli, ‘Il viaggio del Malvasia a Milano e notizie su Ercole Procaccini il Giovane’. Arte antica e moderna, 4, 1961, 470–476.

10  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini

Figure 1.1  Portrait of Camillo Procaccini. Woodcut. In C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, 1678.

business acumen and ease in cultivating connections, they built a legacy that crossed the Lombard borders and gave their business international appeal. At the peak of their success, in the 1610s, the Procaccini were among the most requested artists in northern Italy. They had decorated Milanese churches, worked for Italian and Spanish patrons and disseminated their works over a large area including Lombardy, Emilia, Liguria, Piedmont, Veneto and Ticino. Camillo (fig. 1.1) was the best draftsman in Milan.3 He was publicly recognised as the artist who from 1590 had contributed to the transformation of the local pictorial tradition by introducing stylistic novelties learnt in his youth in Bologna, where he had trained in his father’s workshop and worked in close connection with Prospero Fontana, Ulisse Aldrovandi and the Carracci family. Remembered by Lanzi as the ‘Lombard Vasari’, he had executed altarpieces for each and every major religious site in Milan, completed decorative campaigns in cathedrals and basilicas in Bologna, Piacenza, Parma, Reggio Emilia, Genoa, Turin and Venice, and supervised his workshop in the decoration of countless parish

  3. ‘Ad ogni modo ha già ella costi i Procaccini, il più vecchio de’ quali nella sicurezza del disegno non trova oggi chi lo pareggi’. Borsieri’s letter to Scipione Toso, 1619. Published in L. Caramel, Arte e artisti nell’epistolario di Girolamo Borsieri. Milan, 1966, 174.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 11

Figure 1.2 Portrait of Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Woodcut. In C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, 1678.

churches scattered in peripheral areas of Lombardy.4 Famous for his magniloquent style and academic clarity, Camillo directed the busiest drawing school in Milan, which was located in a building adjacent to his house in the parish of San Calimero. Aside from major religious commissions, he was active on the private market serving the élite of the Milanese society. His clients included Manfredo Settala, Giovanni Francesco Arese, Gerolamo D’Adda, Giovanni Battista Visconti and Guido Mazenta. Giulio Cesare (fig. 1.2), the youngest member of the family, was the main protagonist of Milanese painting. After an apprenticeship as a sculptor and a pictorial education completed in the family workshop, in around 1600 he elected to focus on a career as a painter, achieving a progressive visibility culminating in 1609 with the commission of six large canvases for Milan Cathedral to celebrate the canonization of San Carlo Borromeo. The most modern artist in Milan, Giulio Cesare completed canvases for Pedro de Toledo Osorio, the Spanish Governor of Milan, and Giovanni Carlo Doria, one of Genoa’s preeminent collectors. His fame is echoed in the commendations received

  4. ‘Cognominato da molti il Vasari e lo Zuccaro della lombardia’. L. Lanzi, Storia pittorica della Italia dal Risorgimento delle belle arti fino apresso al fine del XVIII secolo. Milan, 1825, 558–559.

12  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini

Figure 1.3 Portrait of Carlo Antonio Procaccini. Woodcut. In C.C. Malvasia, Felsina pittrice, 1678.

from his contemporaries. In 1606, the poet Giovanni Soranzo noted that his drawings were ‘superior in value to any treasure’.5 Two decades later, the Neapolitan writer Giovanni Battista Marino included him among the excellence of Lombard painting.6 Giulio Cesare won the favour of the Milanese public with his interpretations of the art of Correggio and Parmigianino, answering to the growing taste for Emilian art among local collectors. The modernity of his style posthumously brought him to international attention, as he is the only seventeenth-century artist from Milan whose work is found in any quantity in eighteenth and nineteenth-century European collections.7 Quiet and erudite, Carlo Antonio (fig. 1.3) built a successful career as a landscape painter, being recognised by Borsieri as ‘skilled in landscape painting, a genre in which he acquired a remarkable reputation by following Brueghel’s accuracy and Bril’s

  5. ‘O Cesar fortunato ond’apprendesti far che’ l disegno spiri e che tue carte avanzino di pregio ogni tesoro?’ G. Soranzo, Delle rime. Milan, 1606, 44.   6. ‘Milano pareggia Urbino, Morazzone, e Serrano, e Procaccino’. G.B. Marino, L’Adone. Paris, 1623, canto VI, stanza 55.   7. O. D’Albo, ‘Sulla fama del “Correggio insubre”. Un primo sguardo alla fortuna di Giulio Cesare Procaccini nelle collezioni europee tra Seicento e Ottocento’. In lombardia in Europa: incroci di storia e cultura, Danilo Zardin (ed.), Milan, 2014, 189–217.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 13 pictorial energy’. Trained as a specialist to provide Camillo with reliable help in the workshop, from 1600 onwards he exploited cardinal Federico Borromeo’s interest in Flemish art, developing an artistic production inspired by the paintings by Jan Brueghel and Paul Bril conserved in the Ambrosiana Collection. Malvasia notes that Carlo Antonio’s works entered Lombard and Spanish collections, enriching the houses of noblemen and diplomats.9 Working both individually and in collaboration with his brothers, Carlo Antonio had an eclectic personality that found expression in disciplines such as music and drama. He was known as a skilled singer, while in 1613 he illustrated the theatrical piece L’Adamo, written by Giovanni Battista Andreini and considered by Voltaire as the drama that inspired Milton’s Paradise Lost.10 Although none of the Procaccini brothers survived the outbreak of bubonic plague that struck Milan in 1629–1631, the legacy of their workshop endured well beyond the second half of the seventeenth century. When on 24 September  1667 Malvasia visited Ercole the Younger, the heir of this dynasty of painters was still running the family’s school of drawing, in which he had trained with his father Carlo Antonio and his uncle Giulio Cesare, painting the elegant Flora once in Manfredo Settala’s collection and now at the Accademia Carrara, Bergamo.11 Acknowledged in seventeenthand eighteenth-century sources, the Procaccinis’ work has increasingly been studied following the interest generated by two exhibitions on the Lombard Seicento held in Milan and Birmingham in the 1970s.12 Although the understanding of their careers has greatly improved, an analysis of both their family history and family strategy is still a desideratum. Until now, Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare’s lives have been studied individually, overlooking the circumstances that convinced them relocate to Milan, develop a successful workshop and diversify their professional expertise. Reciprocal relations between family members have often been downplayed, while studies have placed little attention on the interlaced nature of their careers. In the past decades, studies in the field of family history have demonstrated that the examination of family strategies provides the essential key to understanding the interaction between family patterns and larger social economic processes such as migration, the management of family resources and the world of work.13 Specifically, social historians have clarified that families charted ad hoc strategies in response to the structures, constraints and opportunities dictated by life circumstances, adjusting or initiating change in response to these instances. In the case of the Procaccini, an analysis of their life and careers cannot be separated by the study and understanding of their family history and of the strategies they enacted to be successful. To emphasise concepts of collaborative 8

  8. ‘Valoroso oltra i paesi, ne’ quali ha acquisito un gran nome seguendo la diligenza trovata in Gio. Brueghel e la forza che si vede in quei del Brillo’. G. Borsieri, Il supplemento della nobiltà di Milano. Milan, 1619, 66.   9. Malvasia 1678, 289. 10. F. Voltaire, Essai sur la poésie épique. Paris, 1728, 94–96. Carlo Antonio’s drawings were engraved by Cesare Bassani. 11. The painting was initially identified as a collaboration between Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare, but later attributed to Carlo Antonio and his son Ercole. A. Morandotti, Milano profana. Milan, 2005, 234–235. 12. The Milanese exhibition catalogue was published in 1973: M. Valsecchi (ed.), Il Seicento lombardo: catalogo della mostra. Milan, 1973. For the Birmingham exhibition, see P. Cannon-Brookes, Lombard painting 1595–1630: the age of Federico Borromeo. Birmingham, 1974. 13. On family strategies, see Hareven 1987, xiii–xiv.

14  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini decision-making and strategic organization and family history may deviate from the biographical approach characterizing modern studies of the Procaccini. Yet a familybased approach to this subject matter is in fact not unprecedented. It permeates indeed the most important source we possess for this family of painters: Malvasia’s Felsina pittrice. Malvasia presents the Procaccini as a family unit rather than individual artists, highlighting a level of interconnection that represents the key to evaluating their artistic story and understanding their impact on the development of Milanese art.

Early Biographies In a seminal article published in 1987, Charles Dempsey and Elizabeth Cropper highlighted how studies on early Baroque art sometimes failed to face the challenge of analysing seventeenth-century painters as they are represented in the accounts of them given by early biographers and critics, considering those sources as fictional and unreliable.14 In the case of the Procaccini, Malvasia’s Felsina pittrice is not only the most complete source of information about their lives, but also the fundamental text on which later writers such as Luigi Lanzi and Pellegrino Orlandi based their subsequent investigations of Procaccinis’ careers. Conceived as the first detailed history of Bolognese art, Malvasia’s text is characterised by an approach that differs from the tradition of emphasizing the leading role of major artistic centres, concentrating on illuminating features of geographic areas usually neglected by Vasarian studies.15 Considered as the work of a letterato rather than that of a storico, Malvasia’s pages have often been dismissed, deemed as romanzi rather than historical accounts. In the past decades, studies by Giovanna Perini, Anne Summerscale, Elizabeth Cropper and Babette Bohn have restored the importance of Malvasia’s text as a fundamental instrument for the study of north Italian art and a touchstone for modern critical interpretation.16 The appreciation has resulted in a monumental translation project recently sponsored by the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC.17 Cropper notes that Malvasia’s method insisted upon the importance of ocular inspection and the verification of facts through experience.18 In doing so, the Bolognese scholar was inspired by the approach adopted in contemporary scientific academies such as the Royal Society of London, where his friends, the anatomist Marcello 14. C. Dempsey and E. Cropper, ‘The state of research in Italian painting of the seventeenth century’. The art bulletin, 69, 1987, 494–509. 15. On the Vasarian monocentric approach, see E. Castelnuovo and C. Ginzburg, ‘Centre and periphery’. In History of Italian art, 1, Oxford, 1994, 29–112. 16. G. Perini, Gli scritti dei Carracci (Ludovico, Annibale, Agostino, Giovanni Antonio). Bologna, 1990; A. Summerscale, Malvasia’s life of the Carracci: commentary and translation. University Park, 2000; E. Cropper, ‘Malvasia’s anti-Vasarian history of art: a tradition not a rebirth’. In Gifts in return: essays in honour of Charles Dempsey, Melinda Schlitt (ed.), Toronto, 2012, 415–443; B. Bohn and R. Morselli, ‘Introduction’. In Reframing seventeenth century Bolognese art, Babette Bohn and Raffaella Morselli (eds), Amsterdam, 2019, 13–28. 17. The translation will result in a series of 16 volumes edited by Elizabeth Cropper and Lorenzo Pericolo. So far, four volumes have been published: Volume I: early Bolognese painting. London, 2012; Volume thirteen: lives of Domenichino and Francesco Gessi. London, 2013; Volume two, part two: life of Marcantonio Raimondi and critical catalogue of prints by or after Bolognese masters. London, 2017; Volume nine: life of Guido Reni. London, 2019. 18. E. Cropper, ‘A plea for Malvasia’s Felsina Pittrice’. In Carlo Cesare Malvasia’s Felsina Pittrice: lives of the Bolognese painters. Volume 1: early Bolognese painting, Elizabeth Cropper and Lorenzo Pericolo (eds), London, 2012, 15.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 15 Malpighi and the astronomer Gian Domenico Cassini, worked in the last decades of the seventeenth century. In introducing the Felsina pittrice, Malvasia stressed that everything he writes is based on the most reliable foundations: either he will have witnessed something himself, or it will have been reported by a person involved.19 In retracing the past, he trusted faithful reports and ‘unimpeachable memoirs’ by those who were present, which he obtained through interviews with the relatives and friends of those artists whom he investigated. It was to abide by his method that Malvasia elected to travel to Milan. The same motivation prompted him to interview Ercole the Younger, as he was the last ocular witness of the family’s tradition. Malvasia’s account of the Procaccini is an essay on family history. The Bolognese scholar introduces the connections between Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare before focussing on their individual achievements. He confirms that the family members mutually agreed to leave Bologna and explains that it was the pater familias who orchestrated their training.20 ‘There were three of them’, writes Malvasia, who inks his pages not hiding his frustration for the lack of documentary sources, most of which were destroyed during the plague that a few decades earlier had decimated the Milanese population.21 In retracing the lives of the Procaccini, Malvasia relies on information provided by Ercole the Younger and on the direct observation of works on display in Milanese churches and private collections. Overcome by the sheer number of the Procaccinis’ works, Malvasia regrets not being able to provide the reader with a full catalogue. He hopes that in the foreseeable future a colleague would follow in his footsteps and draft a more comprehensive account. Outlined at the end of the biographical profile dedicated to Carlo Antonio, Malvasia’s plea encapsulates his unitarian vision of the Procaccinis’ lives. In his opinion, anyone who will endeavour to study this Bolognese family of painters should be able to describe the success achieved and the adversities faced, their personalities, their social status and how they behave; highlight how splendidly they lived, keeping a noble house, owning coach and servants, offering meals to patrons and friends and living by any means in a grand fashion.22

19. I write nothing that is not based on the most secure and true foundations. Either I have seen something and actually experienced it myself, or it has been reported to me by the very person who witnessed it, or by his family or servant. Either it derives from the most faithful reports, manuscripts, and unimpeachable memoirs, such as those by Francia, Lamberti Baldi, Cavazzoni, and others, or it stems from the infinite number of letters I have collected, not to mention the many others I have seen. Ibid., 35. 20. Malvasia 1678, 276. 21. Tre furono essi: Camillo che seguendo la professione del genitore, sotto la di lui disciplina attese a dipingere. Giulio Cesare bravo statuario, e Carlo Antonio eccellente musico; ancorché stancatosi il secondo nella fatica de’ marmi, e perciò passato al leggero peso de’ pennelli, e abbandonato quest’ultimo il concerto delle voci per l’armonia de’ colori seguissero ambi finalmente l’Arte e la fortuna insieme del maggior fratello; datisi Carlo Antonio a colorir fiori, e formar paesi, Giulio Cesare a far figure. Ibid., 276. 22. Saprà scoprire i primi lavori da’ particolari posseduti, e in tanto pregio tenuti, raccontare gli accidenti occorsi loro, le fortune e le disgrazie scorse: descrivere il loro temperamento, la statura i costumi: narrare la sincerità, la splendidezza e la magnificenza con che si trattassero, levando casa nobile e mantenendo carrozza e servitori, pasteggiando padroni e amici e in ogni conto nobilmente trattandosi, e grandeggiando.  Ibid., 289.

16  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini In compiling the biographies of the Procaccini, Malvasia includes excerpts from treatises written by Luigi Scaramuccia, Agostino Santagostino, Raffaele Soprani, Giovanni Soranzo, Francesco Scannelli, Giulio Cesare Gigli, Marco Boschini and Giovanni Battista Marino. He fails, however, to mention the account of Girolamo Borsieri, a contemporary of the Procaccini, who spent most of his life interacting with Milanese artists and patrons. The son of a wealthy merchant, Borsieri received a classical education.23 He was an expert connoisseur and as such developed influential contacts by working as a consultant for the art purchasing of the Milanese nobility. In 1619, he completed the Supplemento della nobiltà di Milano, a publication updating a much larger treatise written two decades earlier by Paolo Morigia.24 With this book, he aimed at describing the Lombard school of painting, celebrating the lively cultural and artistic milieu characterizing Milan at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Informed by privileged contacts, Borsieri’s account is an essential document for the study of Milanese art in the age of Federico Borromeo. Like Malvasia, Borsieri emphasises the connections between the members of the Procaccini family, acknowledging the mutual origins of their art and highlighting the celebrated position they achieved in Milan.25 The conceptual framework adopted by Malvasia dominated the earlier biographies of the Procaccini and was followed in the eighteenth century in two monumental histories of art: Luigi Lanzi’s Storia pittorica dell’Italia and Antoine Dé Dezallier D’Argenville’s Abrégé de la vie des plus fameaux peintres.26 Lanzi was one of Malvasia’s greatest admirers. He defined the Felsina pittrice as ‘a treasure of the most beautiful knowledge’ and celebrated its author by stating that ‘no other school in Italy was described by a more capable pen’.27 The Italian Jesuit recognised the Procaccini brothers as the most influential protagonists of the third era of Milanese painting. He celebrated not only their artistic achievements, but also the impact their teaching had on Milanese art. Diverging from Malvasia, Lanzi embedded the stories of the Procaccini within the Lombard tradition, detaching them from their Bolognese origin. His account offers an excellent framework for understanding their Lombard activity, but fails in addressing the preeminent role once attained by Camillo and Ercole the Elder in Bologna. Writing four decades before Lanzi, D’Argenville was the first scholar to present the Procaccini to an international public.28 In doing so, he referenced the 23. On Borsieri, see P. Vanoli, Il libro delle lettere di Girolamo Borsieri: arte antica e moderna nella lombardia del primo Seicento. Milan, 2015. 24. P. Morigia, La nobiltà di Milano. Milan, 1595. 25. Così apprezzati vi sono appresso Camillo e Giulio Cesare Procaccini, fratelli. Questi fu già scultore eccellente e dalla scultura passò al dipingere essendosi formata una maniera, la quale molto si accosta allo spirito del Parmigianino, particolarmente nel macchiare; quegli ha sempre atteso a dipingere havendo anzitutto il padre pittore, che fu Bolognese.   Borsieri 1619, 64. 26. Lanzi 1825; A.J. Dezallier d’Argenville, Abregé de la vie des plus fameux peintres. Paris, 1745–1752, vol. 1, 225–232. 27. Cropper 2012b, 19. 28. Nous avons dans l’histoire pictoresque cinq Procaccini de la même famille. Ercole Procaccini ètoit le pere, Camillo, Giulio Cesare, & Carlo Antonio Procaccini ses trois fils furent ses éléves, Carlo Antonio eut un fil qu’on nommoit Ercole Juniore & qui été allez bon peintre.   Dezallier d’Argenville 1745–1752, 225.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 17 Felsina pittrice, whose diffusion in France was attested since 1710, when Charles de la Fosse presented a reading of the Carraccis’ lives at the Académie Royale de Peinture et de Sculpture in Paris.29 In describing the Procaccini’s careers, D’Argenville adopted Malvasia’s leitmotifs highlighting their rivalry with the Carracci and their attempts to reinvigorate Lombard art through Correggio and Parmigianino. Although his biographies do not provide new information, they demonstrate that Malvasia’s book was considered as a key text for the study of Italian painting.30 Aside from the aforementioned sources, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century accounts of the Procaccini also include those publications defined by Schlosser as letteratura dei ciceroni.31 They are city guides and local histories of art written by artists, connoisseurs and historians that bear witness to the geographic diffusion of the Procaccinis’ work, exemplifying the public appreciation for their art. Popular in northern Italy, these sources represent a fundamental instrument for evaluating the contemporary art historical debate regarding this Bolognese family of painters, as well as for enumerating the many commissions accomplished. The guides of Milan written by Agostino Santagostino, Carlo Torre, Serviliano Latuada and Carlo Bianconi offer an overview of the decorative projects completed by the Procaccini in the Lombard capital.32 Francesco Scannelli, Luigi Scaramuccia and Giuseppe Campori inform us on the family’s activity in Emilia and in the southern regions of Lombardy.33 Onorato Derossi provides information on Piedmont.34 Marco Boschini details Camillo’s presence in Venice.35 Raffaele Soprani is the main source to investigate the Procaccinis’ ties in Liguria.36 Although not always impeccable, these sources provide valuable indications, especially in regard to commissions not fully substantiated by documentary evidence. Their geographic heterogeneity speaks to the Procaccinis’ reputation. Emilian texts give more space to Camillo, probably due to the success he enjoyed in the 1580s in Bologna and Reggio Emilia; Lombard accounts highlight instead a preference for Giulio Cesare, the main protagonist of Milanese painting in the second decade of the seventeenth century.

29. G. Perini, ‘Central issues and peripheral debates in seventeenth-century art literature: Carlo Cesare Malvasia’s Felsina Pittrice’. In World art: themes of unity in diversity, Irving Lavin (ed.), University Park, 1989, 139–143. 30. C. Gauna, ‘M come Malvasia e Mariette: disegni, stampe e giudizi di stile tra Bologna, Parigi e Vienna’. Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Classe di lettere e filosofia, 3, 2011, 183. 31. J. von Schlosser, La letteratura artistica: manuale delle fonti della storia dell’arte moderna. Florence, 1964, 535–553. 32. A. Santagostino, L’immortalità e la gloria del pennello: catalogo delle pitture insigni che stanno esposte nella città di Milano. Milan, 1671; C. Torre, Il ritratto di Milano. Milan, 1674; S. Latuada, Descrizione di Milano: ornata con molti disegni in rame delle fabbriche più cospicue che si trovano in quella metropoli. Milan, 1737–1738; C. Bianconi, Nuova Guida di Milano: per gli amanti delle belle arti e delle sacre, e profane antichità milanesi. Milan, 1787. 33. F. Scannelli, Il microcosmo della pittura. Cesena, 1657; L. Scaramuccia, Le finezze dei pennelli italiani ammirate, e studiate da Girupeno sotto la scorta, e disciplina del genio di Raffaello d’Urbino. Pavia, 1674; G. Campori, Gli artisti italiani e stranieri negli Stati Estensi. Modena, 1855. 34. O. Derossi, Nuova guida per la città di Torino. Turin, 1781. 35. M. Boschini, Le ricche miniere della pittura veneziana. Venice, 1674. 36. R. Soprani, Le vite dei pittori, scultori e architetti genovesi. Genoa, 1674.

18  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini

Figure 1.4 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Giovanni Battista Crespi (called Il Cerano), Pier Francesco Mazzucchelli (called Il Morazzone), Martyrdom of Sts Rufina and Seconda. Oil on canvas, 192x192 cm., 1622–1625, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan. Photo Credit: Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, De Agostini Picture Library. G. Cigolini/Bridgeman Images.

Modern Interpretations In 1910, Milan celebrated the 300th anniversary of Carlo Borromeo’s canonisation. This presented the opportunity to look back at the artistic season that characterised the city between the end of the sixteenth and the start of the seventeenth century. Studies began to appear on the protagonists of the local Seicento, above all Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Cerano (called ‘Il Cerano’, and referred to as ‘Cerano’ in this volume) and Morazzone (called ‘Il Morazzone’, and referred to as ‘Morazzone’ in this volume), the three artists who between 1622 and 1625 had collaborated in executing the Martyrdom of Saints Rufina and Seconda (Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan) (fig. 1.4), also known as the Painting by the Three Hands, the most famous picture of the Borromean era.37 Commissioned by Scipione Toso after the suggestion

37. On this painting, see P. Sohm, ‘Painting together: “a terrestrial trinity” of painters in the Quadro delle tre mani’. In Artistic practices and cultural transfer in early modern Italy, Nebahat Avcıoglu (ed.),

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 19 of Girolamo Borsieri, the canvas was housed in the collection owned by cardinal Cesare Monti and in 1636 became the subject of a 32-page letter written by the Milanese organist Giovanni Pasta.38 Recognised by Malvasia as Giulio Cesare’s most popular cabinet picture, the painting solidifies the tradition that since Borsieri and Marino identified Procaccini, Cerano and Morazzone as the major artists active in Milan in the age of Federico Borromeo.39 Philip Sohm notes that the practice of canonising trinities of painters already became topical in the 1620s.40 To this end, in 1621 Ottavio Rossi referred to Annibale Carracci, Caravaggio and Cavaliere d’Arpino as the triumvirate of painting.41 A year earlier, Francesco Pona had identified Giorgione, Titian and Sebastiano del Piombo as the principal figures of Venetian painting.42 Following this well-established tradition, in 1926 Roberto Longhi elevated Procaccini, Cerano and Morazzone as the undisputed champions of the Lombard Seicento.43 Studies thus focused on these three painters, while other protagonists of Milanese seventeenth-century art were overlooked. The modern rediscovery of the Procaccini was inaugurated in 1929 by Nikolaus Pevsner, who wrote the first fundamental study on Giulio Cesare.44 Pevsner’s article was soon followed by an essay by Fernanda Wittgens, who clarified the chronology of the artist.45 It should be noted, however, that already in the 1920s the family-centred tradition inaugurated by Malvasia seemed to have been completely lost. To this end, in the catalogue of an exhibition held in 1922 in Palazzo Pitti, Florence, Ugo Ojetti, Luigi Dami and Nello Tarchiani noted: ‘the Procaccini excelled in Milan, especially Giulio Cesare. Little is known of what they did and on the other members of the family’.46 As a matter of fact, the neglect of Camillo and Carlo Antonio’s careers endured for decades. Still in 1955, Giovanni Testori defined Giulio Cesare as the only interesting figure among the Procaccini.47 It was only after Adriana Arfelli’s discoveries in Bolognese archives that a more precise idea of their family history of began to surface.48 In 1973, Camillo’s biographical profile was included in the catalogue of the exhibition dedicated to the Lombard Seicento.49 A few years earlier, Carlo Antonio’s name had been first mentioned in a brief essay written by Roberto Longhi.50 Farnham, 2015, 131–147. On Cerano and Morazzone, see M. Rosci, Il Cerano. Milan, 2000; J. Stoppa, Il Morazzone. Milan, 2003. 38. G. Pasta, Il quadro delle tre mani. Lettera del Sig. Gio. Pasta scritta al M. Illust. & Reverendissim. P. Martinengo Inquisitore di Cremona. Milan, 1636. 39. Malvasia 1678, 287. 40. Sohm 2015, 138. 41. S. Macioce, Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio. Documenti, fonti e inventari 1513–1875. Rome, 2010, 313. 42. F. Pona, Sileno, overo delle bellezze del luogo dell’ill.mo Sig. co. Gio. Giacomo Giusti. Verona, 1620, 45–47. 43. Longhi 1926–1927, 355. 44. N. Pevsner, ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Rivista d’arte, 11, 1929, 321–354. 45. F. Wittgens, ‘Per la cronologia di Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Rivista d’arte, 15, 1933, 483–487. 46. U. Ojetti, L. Dami and N. Tarchiani, Mostra della pittura italiana del Seicento e del Settecento. Milan, 1924. 47. G. Testori, Mostra del Manierismo piemontese e lombardo del Seicento. Turin, 1955, 17. 48. A. Arfelli, ‘Per la cronologia dei Procaccini (e dei figli di Bartolomeo Passerotti)’. Arte antica e moderna, 8, 1959, 457–461. 49. Valsecchi 1973, 20–22. 50. R. Longhi, ‘Un italiano sulla scia dell’Elsheimer: Carlo Antonio Procaccini’. Paragone, 185, 1965, 43–44.

20  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini In the past 40 years, several studies have contributed to shaping our understanding of the Procaccinis’ individual careers. In the 1970s, Giulio Cesare was the subject of a comprehensive survey by Hugh Brigstocke, who followed up a decade later with an analysis of the painter’s Genoese period.51 In the early 1990s, Berra focused on the artist’s career as a sculptor, while in the following years a monographic study was published by Marco Rosci.52 In 2002, the first exhibition dedicated to Giulio Cesare was held at the Nicholas Hall Gallery in New York.53 Titled Procaccini in America, it included works from North American collections and exemplified the preeminent position assigned by modern critics to the younger of the Procaccini over his family members. More recently, Odette d’Albo has revealed important information regarding the painter’s activity for the Spanish Governors of Milan and published a catalogue raisonné of his works.54 Enhanced by the biographical profile published in 1973, studies dedicated to Camillo Procaccini blossomed after 1977 when Nancy Neilson published an essay on the painter’s Emilian career.55 Neilson’s study played a fundamental role in revaluating Camillo’s modest fame as a draftsman and printmaker and was followed by a monograph including a complete catalogue of paintings and drawings.56 In recent years, the older of the Procaccini has been the subject of an exhibition held at the Pinacoteca Giovanni Zust in Rancate. Featuring a remarkable selection of early works, the exhibition has clarified the stylistic innovations he introduced in Lombardy and offered contributions on his influence on contemporary artists, especially Cerano.57 Compared with his brothers, Carlo Antonio is still largely unknown. After Longhi’s pioneering article, 25 years passed before Alessandro Morandotti developed the painter’s first biographical profile.58 In the last decade, three articles have provided additions to the painter’s oeuvre,59 while a more recent study details his collaboration within the family workshop.60 All things considered, modern contributions on the Procaccini are the product of art historical investigations that focus on their individual achievements rather than on the network of socio-economic relations that informed the development of their

51. H. Brigstocke, ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini reconsidered’. Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen, 18, 1976, 84–133; H. Brigstocke, ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini: ses attaches génoises et quelques autres faits nouveaux’. Revue de l’art, 85, 1989, 45–60. 52. G. Berra, L’attività scultorea di Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Milan, 1991; M. Rosci, Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Soncino, 1993. 53. H. Brigstocke, Procaccini in America. New York, 2002. 54. O. D’Albo, ‘I Governatori Spagnoli a Milano e le arti: Pedro de Toledo, Giulio Cesare Procaccini e le “historie grandi della vita di nostro Signore”’. Nuovi studi, 20, 2014, 145–164; O. D’Albo and H. Brigstocke, Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Catalogo generale delle opere. Turin, 2020. 55. N.W. Neilson, ‘Camillo Procaccini, towards a reconstruction of the Emilian years’. The art bulletin, 59, 1977, 362–374. 56. N.W. Neilson, Camillo Procaccini paintings and drawings. New York, 1979. 57. D. Cassinelli and P. Vanoli, Camillo Procaccini (1561–1629). Le sperimentazioni giovanili tra Emilia, lombardia e Canton Ticino. Milan, 2007. 58. A. Morandotti, ‘Carlo Antonio Procaccini’. In La Natura morta in Italia, Francesco Porzio (ed.), Milan, 1989, 233–237. 59. A. Crispo, ‘Carlo Antonio e l’eredità dei Procaccini’. Paragone, 54, 2003, 42–50; D. Dotti, ‘Carlo Antonio Procaccini, pittore di nature morte’. Paragone, 62, 2011, 35–41; A. Crispo, ‘Qualche proposta per Carlo Antonio Procaccini’. Parma per l’arte, 18, 2012, 69–72. 60. A. Lo Conte, ‘Carlo Antonio and the bottega Procaccini’. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 83, 2020, 5–30.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 21 careers. As a consequence, the narrative once imagined by Malvasia for this Bolognese family of painters has been radically changed. Questions regarding the organisation of their family business, the contingent reasons for their success and the implications of their decision to establish their family business in Lombardy rather than in Emilia remain unanswered. Furthermore, Ercole the Elder’s role in laying the foundations for his sons’ success is not appreciated, as it was Camillo’s decision to diversify his brothers’ specialisations, making the family business competitive in different artistic fields. Following the assumption that ‘while it is vitally important to understand the limitations and viewpoints of the sources, they are themselves part of the history and culture of the very period about which they write’, Malvasia’s lives of the Procaccini still represent the most important source we have for this family of painters.61 A new adherence to the Bolognese scholar’s original framework would allow us to redefine the history of the Procaccini family, analysing them with critical, historical eyes and re-establishing their dimension as a family of migrants, painters and entrepreneurs.

A Different Type of Artistic Reform Before delving into the study of the Procaccinis’ lives and careers, it is important to contextualise their work against the background of the changes that took place in Italian and European art between the end of the sixteenth and the start of the seventeenth century. In a seminal lecture titled ‘What is Baroque?’, Erwin Panofsky defined the Baroque style as deliberate reinstatement of classical principles and, at the same time, a reversion to nature, both stylistically and emotionally.62 In painting, the German scholar recognised two forces: the revolutionary effort of Caravaggio and the reformed endeavour of the Carracci. Caravaggio shattered the artificial world of Mannerism to build a new one made of solid three-dimensional bodies and chiaroscuro. Annibale Carracci synthetised the plastic values of classical antiquity, Michelangelo and Raphael with elements of Venetian colourism and the art of Correggio. Although radically different, the solutions proposed by Caravaggio and Annibale Carracci were innovative responses against the abstraction and artificiality of the maniera moderna (or modern style), the pictorial style championed by Vasari and prevalent in Rome, Florence and Bologna in the second half of the sixteenth century. Based on elaborate yet unnatural formal inventions, this style was seen by Panofsky as a product of the Counter Reformation and representative of the negative impact that the Council of Trent had on sixteenth-century art. Inspired by the earlier writings by Alois Riegl and Nikolaus Pevsner, Panofsky’s association between the intellectualism of the Mannerist style and the decrees of the Council of Trent was challenged in the post-war period by Arnold Hauser and Rudolf Wittkower, who convincingly explained that Mannerism did not represent the essential artistic requirements of the counter-reformatory Church, as it lacked clarity, realism and emotional intensity.63 While Panofsky saw the second half of the sixteenth century as a period of crisis and decline, Wittkower

61. Dempsey and Cropper 1987, 496. 62. E. Panofsky, ‘What is Baroque?’ Three essays on style, Irving Lavin (ed.), Cambridge, MA, 1995, 19–88. 63. R. Wittkower, Art and architecture in Italy, 1600–1750. Harmondsworth, 1958; A. Hauser, Mannerism: the crisis of the Renaissance and the origin of modern art. New York, 1965.

22  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini interpreted it as an era of experimentations that eventually culminated in the Roman works of Caravaggio and Annibale Carracci, who, encouraged by the post-Tridentine spirit of religious reform, turned against the artifice of Mannerism and sought to reinvigorate art by making it more emotional and naturalistic. For the past decades, the narrative informing studies on late-sixteenth-century art has continued to revolve around the work of the earliest ‘proto Baroque’ artists, namely Caravaggio and the Carracci. Countless analyses have however failed in demonstrating a direct correlation between the work of these artists and spirit of reform following the Council of Trent. On the one hand, Charles Dempsey’s studies on the Carracci family have explained that their reform had an artistic rather than a theological nature, being primarily a rejection of Mannerism rather than an assertion of post-Tridentine ideals.64 On the other hand, the revolutionary naturalism of Caravaggio’s painting has been seen in relation to the works of earlier Lombard artists, such as Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo and Moretto da Brescia.65 Present day studies on the artistic legacy of the Council of Trent have provided a much wider context for our understanding of this period, moving away from conventional periodization and approaches, and casting a new light on the aftermath of the Renaissance and the beginning of the Baroque. John O’Malley has explained that the Council’s mandate solely concerned doctrine and reform and that images were not a major issue discussed at Trent.66 As the Council did not produce an official, monolithic policy regarding images, interpretations of decorum became as varied as the artists themselves, leading to a period characterised by a dizzying artistic diversity.67 Jesse Locker has convincingly demonstrated that because the enforcement of the Council’s decrees was left entirely to the discretion of local bishops, the rigour and impact of the Counter Reformation differed substantially across different geographic regions.68 Furthermore, he has clarified that the notion of an artistic reform started in Rome by Annibale Carracci and Caravaggio and then spread to the Italian provinces and ultimately to France, the Netherlands, Spain and the New World, is the representation of a monocentric approach that has been increasingly questioned both by historians and art historians in favour of a more decentred model, focusing instead on local reforms.69 It is thus clear that the idea of a single Tridentine style can no longer be maintained and that the artistic developments that characterised the Catholic world between the end of the sixteenth and the start of the seventeenth century were instead the product of a series of lesser known artistic reforms that developed independently, outside the central fulcrum represented by Rome. As Annibale Carracci and Caravaggio did in Rome, artists in different areas of Italy, Europe and the rest of the world reacted to the new artistic and religious climate by developing responses informed by practical, economic and artistic concerns, dictated by the rigour adopted by local bishops to enforce the Council’s decrees, the artistic taste of their aristocratic patrons and the requests of

64. C. Dempsey, Annibale Carracci and the beginnings of the Baroque style. Florence, 1977. 65. R. Longhi, Me pinxit e quesiti caravaggeschi 1928–1934. Florence, 1985, 138. 66. J. O’Malley, ‘Trent, sacred images, and Catholics’ senses of the sensuous’. In The sensuous in the Counter-Reformation church, Marcia Hall and Tracy Cooper (eds), New York, 2013, 28–48. 67. R. Gaston, ‘The rhetoric of decorum in Counter-Reformation Italy’. Hall and Cooper 2013, 74–90. 68. J. Locker, ‘Rethinking art after the Council of Trent’. In Art and reform in the late Renaissance after Trent, Jesse Locker (ed.), New York, 2019, 1–18. 69. Ibid., 2. On this approach see Castelnuovo and Ginzburg 1994.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 23 the local markets. Seen in this perspective, the artistic output produced by Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare Procaccini assumes a renewed, enhanced relevance, as they spent the totality of their lives working in Bologna and Milan, two cities at the forefront of the Counter Reformation thanks to the efforts of cardinals Gabriele Paleotti, Carlo Borromeo and his cousin Federico Borromeo. Over the course of their careers, the Procaccini adopted a diverse range of stylistic references meant to appeal to both religious institutions and private patrons. The stagnant status of Lombard painting in the late 1580s, combined with the climate of religious reform established in Milan by Carlo and Federico Borromeo, persuaded them to elaborate on pictorial models drawn from their own Emilian tradition, namely the post-Vasarian Mannerist style championed by Prospero Fontana and Bartolomeo Passerotti, the naturalism of the Carracci and the elegant inventions of Correggio and Parmigianino. This approach had a twofold purpose: the allusions to Correggio and the Carracci emphasised the innovations that the Procaccini as foreigners brought to Milan; the references to Fontana demonstrated their familiarity with the guidelines on sacred art proposed in Bologna by cardinal Gabriele Paleotti.71 In the decade immediately following the family’s relocation to Milan, Camillo translated the knowledge acquired in Bologna working alongside Fontana and the Carracci in a trademark style that captivated the attention of Lombard religious institutions and allowed him to become the most sought-after artist working in the State of Milan. A decade later, when Giulio Cesare put his sculptural days on a long-term hiatus and decided to pursue a career as a painter, he modelled his style around that of Correggio, whose fortune had significantly grown among Lombard collectors since the 1570s.72 As did Camillo, Giulio Cesare quickly captivated the appreciation of Lombard patrons. The modernity of his style made him the rising star of Milanese painting, but also attracted occasional critics. To this end, in the summer of 1604 Federico Zuccari noted: 70

. . . the Procaccini, and Giulio Cesare in particular, introduce certain mincing faces and certain angels so vulgar, and without the least reverence in the presence of God and the Virgin, that I do not know how they are tolerated, unless they are executed by virtue of so many other praiseworthy aspects.73 70. For instance, in Spain, artists from Castile, Extremadura, Valencia and Toledo began experimenting with the reform of religious imagery even before the Council’s formal declarations. In Antwerp, Goltzius walked a fine line, refusing to fully embrace Tridentine ideals nor to overtly condemn them. In France, artistic patronage was dominated by a powerful monarchy who saw the requirements of Trent as secondary to their own political agenda. In Peru, the Italian Jesuit painter Bernardo Bitti adapted Mannerist composition and iconography to the needs of post-Tridentine Peru and Bolivia. 71. Clare Robertson has convincingly explained that although Paleotti’s art theory had little influence on the Carracci, his efforts to reform visual arts had a strong influence on Prospero Fontana, who was a lifelong friend of Ercole the Elder and had selected Camillo to work at the decoration of the Paleotti chapel in Bologna cathedral. C. Robertson, The invention of Annibale Carracci. Cinisello Balsamo, 2008, 20–21. 72. For a comprehensive account, see M. Spagnolo, Correggio: geografia e storia della fortuna: 1528–1657. Cinisello Balsamo, 2005, 66–107. 73. Zuccari’s letter to Antonio Chigi, 1604. Published in G. Bottari and S. Ticozzi, Raccolta di lettere sulla pittura, scultura ed architettura, vol. VII, Milan, 1822–1825, 513. In 1604 Zuccari travelled to Milan, invited by Federico Borromeo, his long-standing patron and friend. The pair had met in Rome at the end of 1593 when Borromeo served as Cardinal Protector of the Accademia di San Luca. See P. Lukehart, ‘Visions and divisions in the early history of the Accademia di San Luca’. In The Accademia Seminars: the Accademia di San Luca in Rome, c. 1590–1635, Peter Lukehart (ed.), New Haven, 2009, 177–185.

24  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini

Figure 1.5 Peter Paul Rubens, Circumcision. Oil on canvas, 400x225 cm., 1605, Church of the Gesù and Sts Ambrogio and Andrea, Genoa. Photo Credit: Chiesa del Gesù e dei Santi Ambrogio e Andrea, De Agostini Picture Library. L. Visconti/ Bridgeman Images.

The bitterness of Zuccari’s comments highlights an important and often underestimated aspect of Giulio Cesare’s career. Diverging from other publicly acclaimed artists active in Milan, such as Cerano and Morazzone, Giulio Cesare developed a remarkable ability in modulating his style in relation to the requests of different clients, walking a fine line between conservative public commissions and more flamboyant endeavours executed for his most cultivated patrons.74 This becomes increasingly evident in the 1610s, when, after meeting Giovanni Carlo Doria’s Genoese patronage, Procaccini gradually reduced the number of public commissions in Milan and began exploring the possibilities provided by the stylistic developments that began blossoming in Genoa at the dawn of the seventeenth century. There, between 1604 and 1607, Peter Paul Rubens had portrayed members of the Doria, Spinola and Imperiale families and completed the Circumcision (fig. 1.5) commissioned by the Pallavicini family for the 74. This was already noted by Rosci 1993, 37.

Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini 25

Figure 1.6 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Circumcision with St  Ignatius of Loyola and Francis Xavier. Oil on canvas, 525x314 cm., 1616, Galleria Estense, Modena. Photo Credit: Galleria e Museo Estense, Modena, Italy/Bridgeman Images.

Church of Sant’Ambrogio.75 Rubens’ influence prompted Giulio Cesare to rethink his treatment of the three-dimensional space. The Circumcision (fig. 1.6) he delivered in 1616 for the Church of San Bartolomeo in Modena is a paradigmatic example of this stylistic shift, in which a spacious and harmonious composition replaces the shallow and overcrowded settings employed only a few years earlier.76 Although it is not clear whether Giulio Cesare first saw Rubens’ work in Genoa or in Mantua, his admiration

75. On Rubens’ painting, see the entry by Anna Orlando in P. Boccardo (ed.), L’età di Rubens. Dimore, committenti e collezionisti genovesi. Milan, 2004, 56. 76. Campori details the commission and delivery of Giulio Cesare’s Circumcision: A 26 Giugno venne a Modena il S. Giulio Cesare Procacino Pittor Milanese invitato dal P. Girolamo Barisone col quale si concluse l’accordo del Quadro dell’Altar Maggiore della Circoncisione in scudi dugento cinquanta da lir sei l’uno. A due febraro venne da Milano il Quadro della Circoncisione che costò ducatoni 275. Campori 1855, 390.

26  Old and New Approaches to the Procaccini for the Flemish master highlights a conscious effort in selecting pictorial references not used in Rome by Annibale Carracci and Caravaggio, thus indicating the novelty of his approach. Giulio Cesare was not the only member of the Procaccini family inspired by the pictorial innovations brought to Italy by Flemish and Netherlandish artists. Since the mid1580s, Carlo Antonio had indeed started to familiarise himself with the productions of the north European painters employed at the Farnese court in Parma, developing skills that eventually allowed him to elaborate personal reinterpretations of the paesi executed by Paul Bril and Jan Brueghel for Federico Borromeo. A similar interest was shared by Camillo, who decorated his early altarpieces with Weltlandschaft inspired by the Flemish and Netherlandish tradition.77 Overall, the Procaccinis’ ability to integrate a heterogeneous range of pictorial references was a key factor in their quest to become the most successful family of artists active in northern Italy at the start of the seventeenth century. Having swapped Bologna for Milan, the Procaccini built their success as an alternate response to the Carracci tradition. In striking contrast to the Carracci—with their fusion of Titian and Correggio, Michelangelo, Raphael, and the antique—the Procaccini united northern Italian and Netherlandish artists, such as Fontana and Passerotti, Correggio and Parmigianino, Brueghel and Rubens, creating a very different kind of artistic reform. These innovations determined the success of their family business and proved to be essential for the evolution of Lombard art.

77. An example is the Flemish-style landscape surrounding the St. George and the dragon executed around 1595 by Camillo for the Church of San Martino in Lesa. On this painting, see the entry by Marina Dell’Omo in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 214–215. The term Weltlandschaft (‘world landscape’) was coined by German art historians of the early twentieth century to characterise the sixteenthcentury Flemish landscapes that seemed to reflect the scope and diversity of nature. See L. von Baldass, ‘Die Niederländische Landschaftsmalerei von Patinir bis Brueghel’. Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des allerhöschten Kaiserhauses, 34, 1918, 111–157.

2 Early Years in Bologna

Ercole Procaccini and the Development of the Family Business The history of the Procaccini family can be backtracked to the small village of San Giovanni in Persiceto, about 25 kilometres outside Bologna. There, in the fourteenth century, lived ‘Bernabò vocato Procaccino’, a lawyer whose nephews moved to Bologna before 1400, becoming citizens around halfway through the fifteenth century.1 In 1478, one Ercole di Ser Niccolò dè Procaccini was registered among the members of the Bolognese Società dei notai. His grandson was the painter Ercole Procaccini the Elder, who was baptised in Bologna on 23 February 1520.2 The first artist in the family, from the second half of the sixteenth century Ercole established a successful workshop in Bologna, being mentioned already around 1555 as one of the protagonists of Emilian painting. Indeed, his name comes up in a short poem titled Giuoco de l’imprese del Cavalier Alessio de gl’Orati, celebrating the triumphs, emblems and coat of arms of Bolognese aristocracy.3 Throughout his life, Ercole married three times. From his first wife, Ginevra, he had a son named Lorenzo (1550). The second wife, the Parmese Nera Sibilia, gave him Camillo, born in Parma on 3 March 1561. Ercole’s third wife, the Bolognese Cecilia Serva, was the mother of eight children: Carlo (1565), Ippolita (1567), Carlo Antonio (13 January 1571), Gerolamo (1573), Giulio Cesare (30 May 1574), Gerolamo (1575), Angelo Michele (1577) and Ippolita (1580). It is possible that Gerolamo and Ippolita died at a young age, as new-borns took up their names.4 Remembered by Orlandi as ‘the ancestor of the scuola procaccinesca’, Ercole enjoyed a successful career.5 He was a three-time massaro of the Bolognese Compagnia

  1. Arfelli 1959, 457.  2. Ibid.   3. S. Tumidei, ‘Alessandro Menganti e le arti a Bologna nella seconda metà del Cinquecento: alla ricerca di un contesto’. In Michelangelo incognito. Alessandro Menganti e le arti a Bologna nell’età della Controriforma, Andrea Bacchi and Stefano Tumidei (eds), Ferrara, 2002, 100, note 106.   4. On the practice of re-naming children after the deceased ones. See C. Klapish-Zuber, ‘The name remade: the transmission of given names in Florence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries’. In Women, family and ritual in Renaissance Italy, Christiane Klapish-Zuber (ed.), Chicago, 1985, 283–309.   5. ‘Il capoduce di quella gran scuola Procaccinesca che fiorisce fino al giorno d’oggi in Milano’. P. Orlandi, Abecedario pittorico. Bologna, 1704, 159. On Ercole the Elder, see A. Mazza, ‘Un san Giovanni Battista di Camillo Procaccini diciannovenne nella Galleria Estense. Dipinti di Ercole e Camillo Procaccini per i territori estensi’. In Pittura a Modena e a Reggio Emilia tra Cinque e Seicento: studi e ricerche, Angelo Mazza and Giorgia Mancini (eds), Modena, 1998, 52–64.

28  Early Years in Bologna dei pittori and from 1555 onwards he was an appreciated decorator of Emilian churches.6 After a short training in the workshop of Prospero Fontana, Ercole spent his formative years as a peripatetic artist. In this regard, in a letter dated 12 October 1562, Count Troilo Rossi di San Secondo wrote to cardinal Ercole Gonzaga: he painted much not only in Bologna but also in Rome and in Florence. In the past five or six years he has been in Parma, where he completed the organ shutters of the local cathedral, a commission valued by experts as noteworthy and rare.7 In 1552, Procaccini travelled to Rome to work alongside Fontana at the decoration of the Palazzo del Belvedere.8 Their collaboration was successful, as in the following years the pair was employed in Villa Giulia, where Procaccini was entrusted with the decoration of the porch’s vaults.9 Although it is not certain at what point Ercole elected to leave Rome, he certainly did so before the end of 1556. On his way back to Emilia he probably stopped in Florence, where he worked as a decorator of aristocratic residencies. As documented by Troilo Rossi’s letter, Ercole resided in Parma from 1556 to at least 1562. At that time, he seemed to have no intention to leave the city. To this end, the contract he signed for the decoration of the shutters of the local cathedral states: ‘Ercole lives in Parma with his family and aims to reside there continuously’.10 Nonetheless, two years after completing the commission, Procaccini left. A possible explanation would take into account the sudden death of Nera Sibilia that prompted Ercole to return to Bologna, remarry and relocate his business. The commission in Parma Cathedral represents one of the pinnacles of Ercole’s career. He painted the inner doors with two large pictures representing King David and Saint Cecilia, while the exterior was decorated with figures of a warrior and a Roman emperor. Completed before 1562, the shutters are inspired by Roman models and testify to the importance of Procaccini’s formative years. Aside from working in the cathedral, in Parma Ercole also executed a Virgin with the Child, the Baptist and Pope Stephen I (fig. 2.1) for the Church of San Giovanni Evangelista.11 Formerly attributed to either Rondani or Soens, the altarpiece is particularly important because it anticipates stylistic features

 6. Ercole was nominated massaro for the periods April–June 1574; January–March 1577; January– April 1985. See Arfelli 1959, 459, note 8.  7.



[Ercole] ha dipinto assai, non solamente in Bologna, ma et in Roma, et Firenze et da cinque o sei anni in qua in Parma dove ha fatto le portelle d’organo della chiesa maggiore di quella città che sono reputate da chi se ne intende cose degne et rare. M.C. Basteri and P. Rota, ‘Relazioni politiche e artistiche tra i Conti Rossi di San Secondo e i Gonzaga di Mantova nel XVI secolo’. Aurea Parma, 1994, 177–179.

  8. V. Fortunati Pietrantonio, ‘L’immaginario degli artisti bolognesi tra maniera e Controriforma: Prospero Fontana’. In Le arti a Bologna e in Emilia dal XVI al XVII secolo, Andrea Emiliani (ed.), Bologna, 1982, 109, note 50.   9. G. Cirillo and G. Godi, ‘Di Orazio Samacchini e altri pittori bolognesi a Parma’. Parma nell’arte, 14, 1982, 19. 10. ‘Essendo già molti anni che detto M.ro Hercole habita in Parma famigliarmente con animo di starvi continovamente, al qual levando questa opera saria un licentiarlo de questa Città’. A.R. Milstein, The paintings of Girolamo Mazzola Bedoli. Cambridge, MA, 1977, 305–306. 11. Mazza 1998, 59.

Early Years in Bologna 29

Figure 2.1 Ercole Procaccini the Elder, Virgin with the Child, the Baptist and Pope Stephen I. Oil on canvas, circa 1560, Church of San Giovanni Evangelista, Parma.

that Ercole transferred to his sons, since, as noted by Malvasia, he was responsible for their artistic education.12 Inspired by the landscape tradition developed in Antwerp by Joachim Patinir and diffused in Emilia by the works of Herri met de Bles, the veduta, enriched by minuscule figures, is indeed a prototype for Carlo Antonio’s development as a landscape painter. Similarly, the conflation of references drawn from both the Emilian and Roman tradition, as well as the compositional scheme organised on two horizontal levels, strongly influenced Camillo, who adopted it several times through the prosecution of his career. Ercole returned to Bologna before 1565, becoming a major figure on the local artistic scene. Malvasia notes that he obtained commissions in the churches of San Benedetto, Santa Maria Maggiore, San Giacomo Maggiore, San Giovanni Battista dei Celestini, San Tommaso del Mercato, Santa Lucia, Sant’Agostino, San Giovanni in Monte and Santo Stefano.13 In 1569, he was among the 30 members who founded the council 12. ‘Ercole padre e maestro di Camillo e Giulio Cesare Procaccini, emuli, e concorrenti co’ Carracci’. C.C. Malvasia, Le pitture di Bologna. Bologna, 1686, 66. 13. Ibid., 60, 66, 92, 96–97, 112, 197, 282, 321, 329.

30  Early Years in Bologna created when Bolognese painters were aggregated to the guild of the Bombasari.14 Two years later, on 23 May 1571, he enrolled his ten years old son Camillo in the Bolognese Compagnia dei Pittori,15 while during the following 15 years he ‘trained his three sons, who became masters of the new generation of Milanese painters’.16 Ercole’s decision to enrol his son in the Compagnia dei Pittori indicates a willingness to train him in the art he mastered and represents the first step towards the development of the Procaccini family business. That Camillo was enrolled at such young age should not come as a surprise. The sons of Bolognese painters were generally entitled to such privilege, as demonstrated by the case of Ventura and Passarotto Passerotti, the sons of Bartolomeo Passerotti, who in 1577 were enrolled at the age of 11 and 15 respectively.17 Privileges offered to the offspring of professional artists were praxis not only in Bologna but also elsewhere. In Venice, the son of a master did not undergo a regular apprenticeship and was not subjected to the compulsory exam needed to gain accession to the local Arte dei Pittori.18 Such privileges guaranteed continuity to the family business, playing an important role in facilitating dynastic families to take control of the artistic life of the Italian cities. Aside from inheriting the workshop, including the secrets of the trade, tools, colours, clients and commissions, the artist’s son inherited the technical knowledge accumulated by the father and the prestige associated with his career. Besides major advantages, to be born in an artistic family also bared minor inconveniences. Although the path towards professionalism was greatly facilitated, it was necessary for the father to retire in order to allow the son to take up the family business. As a consequence, while a young artist was ready to start to work independently around the age of 20, the sons of a master had to wait until their 30s. This is the case of Camillo Procaccini, who was emancipated only in 1591, a few days after his 30th birthday. Ercole Procaccini was aware of the substantial organisational advantages provided by running a family business. Family workshops were established on the bond between relatives and characterised by the passing of technical expertise from fathers to sons, cousins or even more distant members of the family. Structured following a hierarchical organisation, they identified families within the socio-economic texture of the city, linking their name to a specific profession, product or given level of expertise. Compared to other botteghe, these workshops were cheaper to run since they gathered together the economic resources of an entire family. Furthermore, they were considerably easier to organise, given that the capobottega could direct the professional training of his relatives, diversifying the workshop’s expertise and developing the knowledge of different techniques. As demonstrated by the business strategies enacted by many of Procaccini’s contemporaries, in sixteenth-century Bologna artists displayed a marked tendency to preserve the secrets of the trade within the family circle. It was indeed to favour the family

14. Arfelli 1959, 457–458. On the Bombasari guild, see M. Gualandi, Memorie originali italiane riguardanti le belle arti. Bologna, 1840–1845, I, 166. 15. ‘1571 - Adi 3 Maggio fu accettato nella compagnia Camillo, figliolo legittimo e naturale di Meser Ercole Percacino, cittadino bolognese, sotto nome del padre’. C.C. Malvasia, Scritti originali spettanti alla sua Felsina Pittrice. Bologna, 1667, Biblioteca Comunale dell’Archiginnasio, Ms. B. 17, f. 69v. 16. ‘Istruì anco alla pittura i suoi tre figli, maestri tutti della gioventù milanese’. Lanzi 1825, 558. 17. Arfelli 1959, 458. In 1571 Passerotti had already enrolled his first son, Tiburzio. 18. A. Segredo, Sulle consorterie delle arti edificative a Venezia. Venice, 1856, 52.

Early Years in Bologna 31 business that Bartolomeo Passerotti had enrolled his sons in the Compagnia dei Pittori. The same reason motivated Orazio Sammacchini, who in 1573 asked permission to enrol his brother Giulio Cesare, even though he was not a painter.19 The unusual request was motivated by the fact that Giulio Cesare helped Orazio as an accountant, and thus played an essential part in the family business. Sammacchini’s business model was not an isolated case. A similar organisational structure was adopted a few decades later in the workshop owned by Guercino, in which his brother Paolo Antonio was in charge of the accounting.20 Successful stories of well-run family workshops characterised the artistic life of many northern Italian cities. In Milan, the famous bottega owned by Bernardino Luini was eventually transferred to his sons Aurelio and Giovanni Pietro, remaining active until the end of the century.21 Still in the Lombard capital, the Campi brothers from Cremona developed careers that exemplify their success as peripatetic artists.22 The sons of a minor painter, Giulio, Antonio and Vincenzo Campi trained in the family workshop, and although they were mostly known as painters, they also worked as architects and sculptors. In Venice, dynasties of painters such as the Bellini, the Vivarini, the Bassano, the Vecellio, the Caliari and the Palma flourished thanks to the passing of knowledge from fathers to sons. To this end, Sohm notes that of those Venetian painters whose paternal profession is known, about half of them followed their fathers.23 To secure continuity to the family business was so important in Venice that childless artists sought to adopt apprentices to take over their work. Emblematic in this context is the case of the engraver Giulio Campagnola, who adopted his pupil Domenico.24 All things considered, it is evident that by enrolling Camillo in the Bolognese Compagnia dei Pittori Ercole Procaccini envisioned the possibility to create a long-lasting family business, a resolution he pursued by supervising the earliest stages of his son’s education. In his father’s bottega, Camillo was soon empowered with responsibilities, being allowed to intervene in the execution of altarpieces. In 1577, he collaborated to the St. John the Baptist (fig. 2.2) now at the Galleria Estense in Modena. Inspired by Raphael’s analogous painting (Uffizi, Florence) executed around 1518 for Cardinal Pompeo Colonna and donated to the Florentine physician Jacopo da Carpi, the canvas was initially attributed to a mysterious Camillo Erri due to a misinterpretation of the inscription in bottom left corner.25 Nonetheless, the painting is a collaboration between Camillo and his father, as the inscription correctly reads ‘Camillo Procaccini,

19. R. Morselli, ‘Artisti a Bologna nel Seicento: patrimoni personali ed eredità di bottega’. In Riflessi del collezionismo tra bilanci critici e nuovi contributi. Giovanna Perini and Anna Maria Ambrosini Massari (eds), Florence, 2014, 190. 20. Ibid., 190–191. 21. At the time of Bernardino’s death in 1532, his sons were underage. The control of the bottega was thus given to Giovanni Lomazzo, a cousin of Bernardino’s wife, who relinquished it after 1555. G. Agosti and J. Stoppa, Bernardino Luini e i suoi figli. Milan, 2014, I, 295–303. For an example of artistic practice in the Luini workshop, see L. Tantardini, ‘Nella bottega di Aurelio e Giovan Piero Luini: i disegni preparatori per gli affreschi della Cappella di Sant’Ippolito’. In Vigano Certosino: un borgo nell’arte e nella storia, Paolo Piccone Conti (ed.), Milan, 2010, 110–120. 22. B. de Klerck, The brothers Campi: images and devotion. Amsterdam, 1999. 23. P. Sohm, ‘Venice’. Spear and Sohm 2010, 227. 24. M. Muraro and D. Rosand, Tiziano e la silografia veneziana del Cinquecento. Vicenza, 1976, 93. 25. ‘S. Giovanni Battista sedente su di un sasso in atto di predicare, accenna la Croce: opera di Camillo degli Heri’. G.F. Pagani, Le pitture e le sculture di Modena. Modena, 1770.

32  Early Years in Bologna

Figure 2.2 Camillo Procaccini, St. John the Baptist. Oil on canvas, 217x147 cm., 1577, Galleria Estense, Modena. Photo Credit: Su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali e per il Turismo Archivio Fotografico delle Gallerie Estensi. Foto Carlo Vannini.

Early Years in Bologna 33 Ercole’s son, painted in Bologna at the age of nineteen’. Although Camillo was only 16 years old, he cleverly manipulated his age to increase his credibility. Three years later, Camillo and Ercole collaborated in painting an Adoration of the Shepherds (Galleria Estense, Modena) formerly attributed to Hans von Aachen.27 If Ercole executed the figures of the Virgin, Saint Joseph and the angels, Camillo completed the rest of the figurations, including the two grotesque figures in the bottom right of the corner. The influential role played by Ercole in the Bolognese Compagnia dei Pittori favoured the development of Camillo’s career. Already at the start of the 1580s, Camillo was selected by Prospero Fontana to be part of a cohort of talented young artists entrusted to work at the decoration of Bologna Cathedral.28 The commission was ordained in 1575 by Cardinal Gabriele Paleotti, the bishop of Bologna, one of the main protagonists of the later stages of the Council of Trent.29 A close friend of Carlo Borromeo, Paleotti developed a personal view of post tridentine art theory which he articulated in a partially published treatise titled Discorso intorno alle immagini sacre e profane. In Paleotti’s view, art must be useful, not just pleasurable, as its purpose was to edify and instruct the audience. The cardinal held in high regard education for artists, who were expected to know sacred texts and to avoid doctrinal errors, consulting experts when necessary. Paleotti did not invent an explicit general theory of the artist, but he developed rules and norms of behaviour for artists who should create sacred art.30 He believed that the focal point was the purpose of any artistic activity, not the art itself. Hence the abilities of the painter had to be restricted to their potential usefulness for the church. The principles outlined by Paleotti were the essential guidelines informing the artists working in Bologna Cathedral, as the cardinal intended the church’s decoration as a demonstration of his views on sacred art. Working under Fontana’s supervision, Camillo was entrusted with the decoration of the Paleotti chapel, which he frescoed with a Virgin Surrounded by a Glory of Angels. Described in a 1603 account written by Francesco Cavazzoni, the commission helped Camillo to familiarise with reformed rules on sacred art that proved essential for the prosecution of his career.31 A demonstrated knowledge of post tridentine art theory was indeed a prerequisite to obtain official commissions in Milan, where Paleotti’s views were shared by Carlo and Federico Borromeo. Paleotti sent the first copy of his Discorso to Carlo Borromeo 26

26. ‘Camillus/Her: per […]/ni fil.: Bon:/fac:ano E/tatis sue=/XIX/1577’. Mazza 1998, 58. 27. Ibid., 79–80. On this painting, see the entry by Angelo Mazza in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 136–137. 28. Camillo was employed alongside Cesare Aretusi, Giovan Battista Fiorini and Bartolomeo Cesi. Little survives of this commission except for the Blessing God with angels by Prospero Fontana and the Delivery of the keys, a collaborative work between Aretusi and Fiorini. For the chronology of the works see R. Greco Grassilli, ‘Da Annibale e Ludovico Carracci a Lazzario Cesari. I pagamenti agli artisti della Cappella Paleotti nella Cattedrale di San Pietro in Bologna’. Atti e memorie della deputazione di storia patria per le province di Romagna, LIV, 2005 (2006), 331–407. 29. On Paleotti and the Discorso, see P. Prodi and W. McCuaig, Discourse on sacred and profane images. Los Angeles, 2012. 30. B. Deen Schildgen, ‘Cardinal Paleotti and the Discorso intorno alle immagini sacre e profane’. In Sacred possessions: collecting Italian religious art 1500–1900, Gail Feigenbaum and Sybille EbertSchifferer (eds), Los Angeles, 2011, 8–16. 31. ‘La cappella dell’Illustrissimo signor Cardinale Paleotto adornata di molto pitture, là a fresco la Madonna con Gloria de Angioli sopra l’ancona è di Camillo Procaccini’. F. Cavazzoni, Pitture e sculture et altre cose notabili che sono a Bologna e dove si trovano. Bologna, 1603.

34  Early Years in Bologna in 1581.32 The treatise later became a model for Federico Borromeo’s own book on sacred painting, De pictura sacra, published in 1624 in Milan.33 In addition to the experience in Bologna Cathedral, Camillo’s early Bolognese years also included contacts with Ulisse Aldrovandi.34 The Bolognese naturalist quoted Camillo as one of his favourite young painters, commissioning from him an altarpiece representing the Assumption of the Virgin with Sts Protus, Hyacinth, Eugenia, Dominic and Francis for his residence in San Vitale.35 Although it is not certain how Camillo entered Aldrovandi’s circle, he probably did so through Prospero Fontana, who, according to Malvasia, was a friend of the Bolognese naturalist.36 In the early 1580s, Camillo was involved with painters of the older generation such as Fontana, Sammacchini and Passerotti, all friends and colleagues to his father. He was considered a promising artist, and there is no record of his work being criticised as artless. He also developed contacts with aristocratic families. For the Ghisilieri, he painted an Adoration of the Shepherds installed in the family’s chapel in the Church of San Francesco.37 Camillo’s ties with the Ghisilieri are reinforced by documentary evidence, as Gaspare Ghislieri was godfather to Camillo’s first son, Giovanni.38 Aside from working for the Bolognese aristocracy, Procaccini travelled to Florence and possibly to Rome to complete his education.39 In Florence he was accompanied by Giovan Paolo Bonconti, the son of a silk merchant, whom he taught in the Carracci’s Accademia dei Desiderosi. The formative journey was certainly useful, since Camillo, returned to Bologna, completed the decoration of the Collegio di Spagna, executing frescoes of the Annunciation and the Adoration of the Shepherds praised by Malvasia as ‘so touching and harmonious that perfectly accommodates the requirements of a good fresco’.40 32. Deen Schildgen 2011, 12. 33. Federico Borromeo and Gabriele Paleotti met in Bologna in 1579. For Paleotti’s influence on Borromeo, see P. Jones, Federico Borromeo and the Ambrosiana. Cambridge, 1993, 33–35. 34. On Aldrovandi and his connections within the Bolognese artistic scene, see G. Olmi, ‘Aldrovandi and the Bolognese painters in the second half of the XVI century’. In Emilian paintings of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: a symposium, Henry Millon (ed.), Bologna, 1987, 63–73. 35. ‘[Camillo Procaccini] depinxit in aedibus meis sacellum sancti Prothi et Jacinti’. U. Aldrovandi, Catalogus virorum illustrium ex variis diversisque nationibus multorumque Bononiensium, qui visitarunt nostrum naturae oceanum [. . .], Bologna, c. 1590, Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna, Ms. 136/XXIV, cc. Fols 21v–47v. Cited in M. Fanti, ‘La villeggiatura di Ulisse Aldrovandi’. Strenna storica Bolognese, 8, 1958, 17–43. 36. ‘Fu la sua casa di tutti i virtuosi di quel secolo in ridotto e l’emporio, particolarmente di Ulisse Aldrovandi e di Achille Bocchio ai quali fu carissimo’. Malvasia 1678, 216. 37. On this painting, see the entry by Angelo Mazza in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 146–149. 38. ‘1583, die 20 Aprilis, Johannes filius domini Camilli Percacini et Dominae Franciscae ab Oleo in Cappella S, Leonardi, die quo supra. Comparibus Dominus Gaspar de Ghislieris et Domina Ursolina Guidotta’. Archivio Arcivescovile di Bologna (AAB), Libri Battesimali. Cited in Aftelli, 1959, 460, note 20. 39. A line in the account book of Girolamo Bonconti states ‘del 1582, sovvenuto denari, e di ciò gli occorreva, esser lasciato andare a Fiorenza per la festa di San Giovanni con M. Camillo Procaccini’. Malva­ sia 1678, 573. Federico Bianchi notes that Camillo accompanied Pirro Visconti Borromeo in Rome. Arfelli 1959, 459. The hypothesis is reinforced by Ercole Procaccini’s contacts with Rome and by the formative journeys undertaken in the same period by the Carracci brothers. For a recent discussion on the topic, see G. Berra, ‘Appunti per le biografie di Camillo Procaccini e Panfilo Nuvolone’. Paragone, 46, 2002, 66–67. 40. ‘Un colorito così patetico ed armonioso, che poco più resta a desiderarsi a un vero e buon fresco’. Malvasia 1678, 277. The frescoes were partially photographed before their destruction in 1914. M. Lucco, ‘Gli affreschi di Camillo Procaccini nel Collegio di Spagna’. Studia albornotiana, 36, 1979, 217–223.

Early Years in Bologna 35 The commission was once again obtained in connection to his father Ercole the Elder, who frescoed the Last Supper in the dining hall.41

The Procaccini and the Carracci: Friendship or Rivalry? Camillo’s formative years coincide with the most fascinating period in the history of Bolognese painting. They indeed overlap with the foundation and development of the Carracci Academy, an institution destined to change the course of Italian art.42 In 1582, the brothers Agostino and Annibale Carracci, together with their cousin Ludovico, established a family academy in their workshop and set about remaking their painting by means of the observation and mastery of nature. Their art challenged the maniera moderna that prevailed in the city by the mid-sixteenth century, opening the doors for the beginning of the Baroque style.43 For over a decade, the Carracci and the Procaccini shared cultural environment, patrons and commissions. Nonetheless, their connection has never been investigated. Camillo Procaccini and Ludovico Carracci knew each other since they were young, they spent time in the same botteghe and shared a mutual respect that endured throughout their lives. For the period of 1567–1575, Ludovico was a pupil in Fontana’s workshop, a venue habitually frequented by Ercole the Elder, who had worked with the Bolognese master in Rome and with whom he shared a pronounced stylistic affinity.44 Considering that in his Vite Giovanni Pietro Bellori states that ‘Ludovico abandoned the maniera of Procaccino and from being Annibale’s master, turned into his pupil’, it is possible to clarify Carracci’s consciousness of Ercole’s art.45 Bellori’s ‘Procaccino’ must indeed correspond to Ercole the Elder. Six years younger than Ludovico, Camillo was too young to influence his pictorial style. Malvasia reports that in 1583 both Ercole and Camillo Procaccini occupied teach­ ing positions in the newly created Accademia dei Desiderosi, a private institution founded with the purpose of combining under one roof the activities of a school devoted to teaching and to critical speculation, together with the activities of a busy workshop.46 Gail Feigenbaum notes that the role played by Ercole and Camillo indicates that artists beside the Carracci had teaching duties in the academy, and that the

41. E. Cortese, ‘Artisti e artigiani al Collegio di Spagna nel Cinquecento’. Studia albornotiana, 36, 1979, 147–149. 42. The literature on the Carracci Academy is vast. Fundamental studies include Dempsey 1977, 36–60; C. Dempsey, ‘The Carracci Academy’. In Academies of art: between Renaissance and romanticism, Anton Boschloo (ed.), The Hague, 1989, 33–43; G. Feigenbaum, ‘Practice in the Carracci Academy’. Lukehart 1993, 58–76. 43. C. Dempsey, ‘Painting in Bologna from the Carracci to Crespi’. In Captured emotions. Baroque painting in Bologna, 1575–1725, Andreas Henning and Scott Schaefer (eds), Los Angeles, 2008, 1–13. 44. ‘Prospero Fontana, del nostro Lodovico primo direttore e maestro’. Malvasia 1678, 358. On Ludovico’s beginnings, see A. Brogi, Ludovico Carracci: 1555–1619. Bologna, 2001. The fact that Camillo worked under Fontana in Bologna Cathedral is an indication of Camillo’s occasional presence in his studio. 45. ‘Ludovico lasciò la maniera del Procaccino e di maestro divenne discepolo di Annibale’. G.P. Bellori, Le vite de pittori, scultori e architetti moderni. Rome, 1672, 24. 46. ‘Del medesimo anno, una castellata d’uva squisita mandata a donare da Ercole Procaccino e Camillo suo figliolo, per le fatiche c’usano ad insegnare a Gio. Paolo suo figlio nell’Accademia’. Malvasia 1678, 573. The Carracci Academy was later renamed Accademia degli Incamminati.

36  Early Years in Bologna members contributed toward what might be called their honoraria.47 This pedagogical program may have amounted to a system of preceptors analogous to the guest lecturers in fields outside of painting, such as Lanzoni, who performed anatomical dissections in the academy. Camillo’s ability as a draftsman and caricaturist perfectly matched the principles of the academy’s training program, which focused on theoretical lessons as well as the practice of disegno.48 In the academy, the Carracci and their followers pursued a course of study that included anatomy, architecture, perspective, philosophy and caricature, while particular attention was devoted to drawing the nude human figure from life. As noted by Malvasia ‘they studied day and night, not caring about inconveniences and discomforts; they used beautiful bodies to have perfect models to draw’.49 The organization of practice in the Carracci Academy has been the subject of passionate debate. Charles Dempsey understood the Accademia dei Desiderosi as a new setting inspired by the Accademia del Disegno in Florence, insisting on the relation between art and theory in the formation of painters’ individual styles.50 By attending closely to Malvasia’s account, Dempsey understood that the Carracci’s institution was not just a studio, but a place where intellectual matters were investigated, and teaching was combined with research. Opposing this view, Carl Goldstein postulated that the academy shared similarity with the Accademia del Disegno only for purposes of professional advancement and was instead informed by a study system that was unsystematic and thus not definable as academic.51 Differently from Dempsey and Goldstein, Donald Posner saw the academy as a well-organised workshop that, however, did not elaborate a systematic didactic program.52 In his writings, he refused to acknowledge the direct connection between theory and practice, deintellectualizing the academy and focusing on its role as a painting studio. Although the aforementioned views die hard, Gail Feigenbaum’s recent studies of the Carracci Academy in its intellectual, historical and theoretical form have explained how this institution was a rapidly evolving entity, whose activity can be understood as a cross between the traditional workshop and the new model of the Accademia del Disegno.53 The academy’s mission was to teach students what they needed to learn to become artists through the practice of art, the constant repetition of exercises and of course the study of theory. Even though Camillo Procaccini was not a follower of the Carracci but a colleague, a friend and a competitor, his time spent teaching in the academy left traces

47. Feigenbaum 1993, 62. 48. On the occasion of his visit to Ercole Procaccini the Younger, Malvasia wrote: ‘Non crede in altro che nel suo Camillo. Dice di essere stato il primo disegnatore del mondo; aveva un carro pieno dei suoi disegni, tutti levati dagli Oltremontani’. Arfelli 1961, 473. 49. ‘Qui studiavasi giorno e notte, senza verun risparmio di patimenti e disagi: qui non mancavano, fossero del maschio o della femmina, i meglio formati corpi, che servissero di risentito e giusto modello’. Malvasia 1678, 378. A document survives that amounts almost to a manifesto of what the Carracci believed: it is a copy of Vasari’s Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori, in which Agostino annotated that since the old masters took their inspiration from life, the training of a painter should have been focused on drawing from life and on the imitation of nature. J. Anderson, ‘Speculations on the Carracci Academy in Bologna’. Oxford art journal, 3, 1979, 17. 50. Dempsey 1989, 33–43. 51. C. Goldstein, Visual fact over verbal fiction: a study of the Carracci and the criticism, theory and practice of art in Renaissance and Baroque Italy. Cambridge, 1988. 52. D. Posner, Annibale Carracci: a study in the reform of Italian painting around 1590. London, 1971. 53. Feigenbaum 1993, 59–76.

Early Years in Bologna 37 in his approach to artists’ education, especially in regard to master/student relations.54 He employed those principles at first in Reggio Emilia, where he directed an academy for 20 artists,55 and later in Milan, where, as noted by Lanzi, ‘the Procaccini were regarded as caring and diligent masters, teaching to so many painters that it is impossible to mention them all’.56 Identified as equally caring teachers as the Carracci, the Procaccini were solicitous of their pupils’ sense of pride and dignity. To this end, in a letter sent to Federico Borromeo, Ludovico Carracci wrote that young students should not be discouraged, but rather encouraged to learn from their errors.57 This behaviour, shared by Camillo, differed from that of quick-tempered painters such as Denys Calvaert, and eventually favoured the popularity of the Procaccinis’ school in Milan. The collaboration between the Carracci and the Procaccini lasted for at least one year, as demonstrated by the Annunciation executed by Ludovico for the Compagnia del Santissimo Sacramento, which was completed by Camillo’s predella representing the scenes of Abraham and Melchizedek and Hebrews Celebrating Passover destroyed by the bombardment that devastated the Church of San Giorgio in Poggiale on 25 September 1943.58 After 1584 however, the reciprocal influence between the two families was abruptly interrupted probably due to an argument that occurred between Camillo and Annibale Carracci. Colourfully narrated by Malvasia, the episode was regarded by the Bolognese writer as the main reason that prompted the Procaccini to leave Bologna and relocate to Milan.59 Although Malvasia’s account may be slightly exaggerated, it is possible that rivalry eventually arose between the two families. Echoes of this competition were still vivid around 1753 in the inscription accompanying Giuseppe Camerata’s etching of Giulio Cesare Procaccini’s Holy Family with Two Angels, which reads ‘the Carracci and the Procaccini reciprocally feared their rivalry. The latter eventually decided to leave Bologna and find a new home elsewhere’.60 54. Feigenbaum notes that young artists who frequented the Carracci Academy found it a place of serious learning, but also of excitement and humour, where learning was fun. G. Feigenbaum, ‘Nature as teacher and subject: the Carracci family of painters’. Henning and Schaefer, 2008, 15–24. 55. On Camillo’s teaching experience in Reggio Emilia, see N. Artioli and E. Monducci, ‘Scuole e accademie reggiane di pittura nel Cinque e Seicento: documenti editi e inediti’. Strenna del Pio Istituto Artigianelli, 1973, 24. 56. ‘I Procaccini tennero scuola in Milano ed ebbon fama di amorevoli e diligenti maestri, sicché diedero a quella Città e a tutto lo Stato tanto numero di pittori, che raccoglierli tutti non è possibile’. Lanzi 1825, 562. 57. The letter, dated 1614, is published in G. Nicodemi, ‘L’accademia di pittura, scultura e architettura fondata dal Cardinal Federico Borromeo all’Ambrosiana’. In Studi in onore di Carlo Castiglione, Milan, 1957, 652–696. 58. G. Feigenbaum, ‘The early history of Lodovico Carracci’s ‘Annunciation Altarpiece’. The Burlington magazine, 132, 1990, 616–622. 59. ‘Ebbe a dire il Camillo con Annibale Carracci, e così vennero alle mani nell’Accademia che gli diede di matti pugni cagione che poi se n’andasse da Bologna’. Malvasia 1667, Ms. B. 17, f. 69v. The episode is also recalled in the Felsina pittrice: Ond’è che giovinetti [the Procaccini] ancora sapessero menar le mani né lasciarsi far torto; sì che motteggiati troppo e infastiditi dal piccoso Annibale Carracci, nel disegnar del nudo all’Accademia, malamente lo trattassero, rompendogli la testa; cagione vogliono alcuni e principio della loro alienazione d’affetto per la patria e risoluzione di abbandonarla per sempre.   Malvasia 1678, 289–290. 60. Non fu vana paura quella dei Carracci quando temettero di entrare in competizione con i Procaccini, i quali temendo anch’essi di rivali si valorosi, presero la risoluzione di abbandonare la città di Bologna e di cercare altra nuova patria e nuovo asilo. C.H. von Heineken, Recueil d’estampes d’après le plus célèbres tableaux de la Galerie Royale de Dresde. Dresden, 1753–1757, I, 17.

The inscription is written both in French and in Italian.

38  Early Years in Bologna Regardless of how the collaboration between the Procaccini and the Carracci ended, the relationship between Camillo and Ludovico did not deteriorate and still in the first decade of the seventeenth century Ludovico indicated Camillo’s absence as one of the reasons for decline in the Carracci Academy.61 Even after the Procaccini family relocated to Milan, the two painters had occasion to work together. In 1605, Claudio Rangoni, the Bishop of Piacenza, employed Camillo, Ludovico and their respective workshops for the decoration of the local cathedral.62 Camillo was awarded the main altarpiece, the Death of the Virgin, as well as the decoration of the apse and the choir ceiling, which he frescoed with the Assumption and the Coronation of the Virgin. As reported by Francesco Scannelli, Camillo’s altarpiece was in the centre of the apse, while Ludovico’s canvases representing the Funeral of the Virgin and the Apostles at the tomb of the Virgin were placed respectively to its left and right.63 The decoration in Piacenza Cathedral lasted four years and was immediately followed by Ludovico’s only Milanese commission, executed for the Church of Sant’Antonio, where Camillo and Giulio Cesare Procaccini worked from around 1610. There, Ludovico painted the Adoration of the Shepherds, a commission favoured by a donation of 500 scudi made by Emanuele Dal Pozzo.64 Carracci’s picture shows affinity with the canvases he painted in Piacenza and it is close to the style displayed by Procaccini in the first decade of the seventeenth century. Given the chronological proximity between these commissions, it is possible that while working in Lombardy Ludovico paid homage to old friend who, incidentally, had most likely been his main Milanese sponsor. It is in fact possible that Camillo pressed his Milanese contacts to recommend the name of Ludovico Carracci, reinvigorating a decennial friendship. The fact that Lorenzo Garbieri, one of Ludovico’s assistants in Piacenza, also worked in Sant’Antonio, may represent a further clue in this direction.65

Outside Bologna: Reggio Emilia and Lainate On 30 April 1585, after 16 years of activity in the Bolognese Compagnia dei Pittori, Ercole Procaccini completed his last term as massaro. A  few months earlier, 61. ‘Agostino is dead, Annibale is abroad, Procaccini is in Milan and in a word all of them have abandoned this once so flourishing academy’. Ludovico Carracci’s letter to Alessandro Tiarini. Cited in Dempsey 1989, 35. 62. C. Longeri, ‘Nuovi documenti per le decorazioni del Duomo di Piacenza in epoca Barocca’. Strenna piacentina, 2000, 64–90. 63. Dalle parti della sopracitata tavola del Procaccini le due virtù e l’altre due historie laterali della B. Vergine, e sopra l’Organo dell’Annunziata, con mezze figure, e la grande historia, che si ritrova vicina, della Natività della B. Vergine, essendo dipinta la volta verso il choro con historie varie, ed alternate al suddetto Procaccino, e del medesimo Ludovico Carracci [. . .].   Scannelli 1657, 338.

The original decorative complex was displaced between the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century. While Camillo’s Death of the Virgin was returned to the cathedral after World War I, Ludovico’s canvases are now in the Galleria Nazionale in Parma. 64. Documents pertinent to this commission have been published by L. Street, ‘Una natività di Ludovico Carracci’. Arte illustrata, 4, 1971, 52–55. 65. In Sant’Antonio, Garbieri executed three canvases representing the Lamentation, the Deposition and the Pietà. See the entry by Maria Cristina Terzaghi in M. Gregori (ed.), Pittura a Milano dal Seicento al neoclassicismo. Milan, 1999, 214–215.

Early Years in Bologna 39 while the Carracci had just finished the decoration of Palazzo Fava, his son Camillo received the first major commission of his career: the decoration of the Basilica di San Prospero in Reggio Emilia. Camillo’s employment was the result of at least two years of searching on the part of the part of the local Fabbrica di San Prospero. A letter sent on 30 March 1583 by Prospero Signoretti to Andrea Aliate mentions the intention to hire the local painter Lelio Orsi.66 A further document testifies to an attempt to give the commission to Federico Zuccari.67 In March 1584, local artist Flaminio Rotelli was given 360 lire to travel in search of possible candidates; a month later Camillo arrived in Reggio Emilia. Valued at 600 scudi (3,000 lire), the contract was finalised on 9 January 1585, while the frescoing was not begun until April, after the windows in the choir had been closed up. Comprising the decoration of the apse and the choir, the San Prospero commission bear witness to Camillo’s growing reputation. Recalled as an ‘eminent professor in the art of painting’, at 24 years of age he was the artist in charge of a major decorative project.68 He had an assistant, the Bolognese Lorenzo Franchi, and worked ahead of the Carracci in the importance of his commissions.69 In preparation for the decorative campaign, Camillo was granted permission to travel to Parma.70 In doing so, he returned to his hometown for the very first time since Ercole had left the city in 1564. Significantly, the Fabbrica di San Prospero paid for this trip in which Camillo was joined by his brother Carlo Antonio, who had just started to train as a landscape painter in the family workshop. That Carlo Antonio was directed towards such specialization should not come as a surprise. In the second half of the sixteenth century, landscape painting had become a respected subject both for paintings and prints. In Italy, artists and theorists discussed the new genre. In 1548, Paolo Pino recognised the superiority of northern European specialists.71 In 1580, a pamphlet titled Osservazioni sulla pittura, written by Cristoforo Sorte, provided the first systematic study for the treatment of landscape painting.72 While in northern Europe landscape painters competed on the open market, in Italy they could succeed only if accepted as specialists in larger workshops. An emblematic example in this regard is the Venetian bottega owned by Titian, which employed several specialists arrived from northern Europe.73 Seen in this perspective, the Procaccinis’ decision to direct Carlo Antonio towards a training as a landscape painter must be considered as part of their strategy aimed at enlarging the expertise of the family

66. N. Campanini, Gli affreschi di Bernardino Campi e di Camillo Procaccini nella Basilica di San Prospero in Reggio nell’Emilia. Modena, 1889, 8. Campanini’s book is extremely rare. The only surviving copy is conserved at the Biblioteca Estense in Modena. 67. Campori 1855, 493. 68. ‘Eximius artis picturae professor dominus Camillus, filius domini Erculis Precacini bononiensis, ibi presens, omni exceptione remota, promisit et se obligando solemniter convenit pingere et seu picturam facere cappelle magnae eiusdem Sancti Prosperi ecclesiae’. Archivio di Stato di Reggio Emilia (ASRE), Notarile, Ruggeri Dioniso, fil. 819. Cited in N. Artioli and E. Monducci, Gli affreschi di Camillo Procaccini e Bernardino Campi in San Prospero di Reggio Emilia. Reggio Emilia, 1986, 225–226. 69. Lorenzo Franchi’s presence in Reggio Emilia is recorded by Malvasia 1678, 293. 70. Neilson 1977, 367. 71. P. Pino, Dialogo di pittura. Venice, 1548, 29. 72. P. Barocchi, Trattati d’arte del Cinquecento fra Manierismo e Controriforma. Bari, 1960–1962, 27–301. 73. B.W. Meijer, ‘Titian and the North’. In Renaissance Venice and the north, Bernard Aikema (ed.), Venice, 1999, 498.

40  Early Years in Bologna

Figure 2.3 Camillo Procaccini, Last Judgment. Fresco, 1585, Basilica of San Prospero, Reggio Emilia. Photo Credit: Chiesa di San Prospero, Reggio Emilia, Emilia-Romagna, Italy. Ghigo Roli, Bridgeman Images.

business. As a 14-year-old apprentice, Carlo Antonio benefited from a visit to Parma, a city considered a must see thanks to the Farnese patronage of Flemish and Dutch masters.74 In the penultimate decade of the sixteenth century, the Farnese court painter was Jan Soens, a Dutch artist who is the clearest reference for the hunting and fishing scenes executed by Carlo Antonio in Pirro Visconti’s villa in Lainate, his first known decorative project. Accompanied by Carlo Antonio, Camillo studied Parmigianino and had the opportunity to visit the local cathedral, where he admired the Assumption of the Virgin frescoed by Correggio and saw the organ shutters painted by his father. The outcomes of Camillo’s journey are evident in the decoration of the apse of San Prospero, where he created a Last Judgment (fig. 2.3) characterised by ‘complicated foreshortening, surreal panorama and odd effects of anger, fear, desperation and pain’ that, as noted 74. B. Meijer, Parma e Bruxelles. Committenza e collezionismo farnesiani alle due corti. Parma, 1988, 11–31.

Early Years in Bologna 41

Figure 2.4 Camillo Procaccini, Creation of Eve. Fresco, 1585–1586, Basilica of San Prospero, Reggio Emilia.

by Malvasia, altogether formed ‘one of the most beautiful frescoes in Lombardy’.75 In Reggio, Procaccini modulated Correggio’s innovations with his knowledge of the Bolognese tradition, organizing an iconographic program culminating in the arch with the scenes of the Creation of Eve (fig. 2.4) and the Horsemen of the Apocalypse, both characterised by a repertoire of grotesque figures, fantastic animals and botanical curiosities drawn from Aldrovandi’s encyclopaedic studies. These images anticipate some of the Procaccini family’s later achievements, such as the nymphaeum of Pirro Visconti’s villa in Lainate, and the decoration of Castello Visconti di San Vito in Somma Lombardo, where Carlo Antonio worked at the end of the first decade of the seventeenth century. Completed in fewer than two years, the apse decoration should have 75. Avendo in essi introdotti difficili scorci, bizarre vedute, i più strani effetti d’ira, di timore, di disperazione e di dolore; ed avendoli così francamente battuti e superati, che con ragione quest’operone celebrato anch’egli come uno dei più bei freschi in lombardia.   Malvasia 1678, 277.

42  Early Years in Bologna been followed by the frescoing of the choir. However, in autumn 1587, Camillo and his family moved to Milan, employed by Lombard nobleman Pirro Visconti Borromeo to decorate his villa in Lainate. Malvasia notes that Camillo had met Pirro Visconti a few years earlier in Bologna.76 Impressed by the quality of Camillo’s drawings, Pirro persuaded him about the opportunities he and his family would have found in Milan. Thus, the Procaccini family left Bologna. From this moment onwards, Milan was the place they called home. The decoration of Pirro Visconti’s villa in Lainate identifies a crucial moment in the history of the Procaccini family as it represents the springboard for the Lombard development of the family business.77 In Lainate, Camillo completed one of the most imaginative works of his career, while Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio developed useful specialisations respectively training as a sculptor and as a landscape painter. Acknowledged by Paolo Morigia as one of the wealthiest citizens in Milan, Pirro Visconti was the eldest son of Fabio I Visconti, a modest landowner who owned properties in Robecco, Bissone and Lainate.78 Thanks to wise management of his assets and opportunistic marriages, from 1580 onwards he climbed the ranks of Milanese society. In 1591, he was awarded the Cavalierato di San Iacopo, a prestigious honorary position granted by the Spanish Government. In 1597, he was nominated as one of the 60 decurioni of the city of Milan, a council made up by members of the Milanese aristocracy and entrusted to make decisions in the fields of public administration and finance. Besides being involved in the political life of the city, Pirro was a keen collector and an affable orator. He developed a personal friendship with the local artist Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo and entertained contacts with powerful rulers such as the Grand Duke Ferdinando de Medici, who welcomed him in Florence in 1589, and the Duke of Mantua, Vincenzo I Gonzaga, for whom Visconti purchased artworks in Milan.79 Pirro’s friendship with Lomazzo is a key factor in understanding the cultural background of his commissions and his decision to employ Camillo Procaccini. The Milanese nobleman was a member of the Accademia dei Facchini della Val di Blenio, a cultural circle made up of artists, medallists, armorers and embroiderers, which had been founded in the 1560s with the intent of opposing the severe guidelines on art imposed by Carlo Borromeo.80 As the academy’s ideologist, in 1589 Lomazzo published Rabisch, a collection of verses written in the dialect of the Lombard valleys and characterised by an eccentric narrative including exotic animals, grotesque figures and fantastic creatures.81 Recognised as the principal reference for the decoration in Lainate, 76. Con l’occasione dell’signor Conte Pirro Visconti, Cittadino Milanese, passò di Bologna si come lui era amico della pittura, procurò di vedere diversi pittori é così vedendo il disegnio, é la maniera di Camillo Procaccini la quale, piacque al possibile, é l’disse si voleva venire à vedere la Cità di Milano, che haveva occasione di farlo operare.   Malvasia 1667, Ms. B. 17, f. 46r. 77. For a comprehensive study, see Morandotti 2005. 78. A. Morandotti, ‘Pirro Visconti Borromeo di Brebbia: mecenate nella Milano del tardo Cinquecento’. Archivio storico lombardo, 6, 1981, 115–162. 79. Ibid., 121–128. 80. A list of associated artists includes Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo, Giovanni Ambrogio Brambilla, Scipione Delfinone, Annibale Fontana, Paolo Camillo Landriani, Aurelio Luini, Ottavio Semino and Francesco Tortorino. D. Isella, lombardia stravagante. Turin, 2005, 77–101. 81. G.P. Lomazzo, Rabisch dra Academiglia dor compa Zavargna, nabad dra Vall d’Bregn, ed tucch i sù fidigl soghit. Milan, 1589.

Early Years in Bologna 43 Lomazzo’s verses encapsulate Camillo’s job description: to recreate the scenarios imagined in the academy’s meetings. Malvasia notes that Camillo was selected thanks to his drawing skills. Further reasons would include his proximity with Aldrovandi’s circle and his collaboration with the Carracci, whose predilection for the caricature and the grotesque is well documented.82 Camillo’s qualities had already been displayed in the Creation of Eve frescoed in San Prospero. There, a smiling lion in the bottom right corner shares the stage with monkeys, deer, lizards, unicorns and elephants. Camillo’s imaginative talent is furthermore demonstrated by his early drawings. A Study of Fantastic Animals of the National Gallery of Scotland displays his interest in creating creatures combining anatomical parts of the griffon, the lion and the dragon.83 The Temptation of St. Anthony of the British Museum includes anthropomorphic birds, fauns, satyrs, demons, lizards and snakes.84 Finally, a Nude Swinging a Club conserved in a British private collection further highlights Camillo’s studies on movement and the hybridization of the human figure.85 Procaccini’s major effort in Lainate took place in the nymphaeum, a building designed by the Milanese architect Martino Bassi and characterised by amusing waterworks provided for the entertainment of visitors. Defined by Borsieri as ‘an engineering miracle’, it was based on one of the most advanced fountain systems of northern Italy and created on a series of visual impressions based on the contrast between the exterior, monumental and without superfluous decoration, and the interior, which offered a cavern extremely rich in the representation of nature and in the inventions of art.86 The building was inspired by analogous constructions erected in palaces owned by the Italian nobility, such as Villa Giulia in Rome and the residencies owned by the Medici family in Florence. Pirro Visconti had visited many of these buildings travelling in central Italy during the penultimate decade of the sixteenth century. The nymphaeum welcomed the visitor with arabesque mosaics characterised by animals, fauns, harpies, dragons and mermaids which, by following Lomazzo’s conceptual organization, described an elaborate handbook of figures derived from classical art and medieval bestiaries. Intended as a recreational area for the landlord and his guests, the building hosted a collection of artworks, including marble and bronze statues; sacred and secular paintings by Correggio, Bronzino and Luini; medallions; decorative art produced in Europe and Asia; ethnographic finds; and zoological remains.87 In decorating the nymphaeum, Camillo painted figures in tempera on black and white cobblestones previously applied on fresh plaster (fig. 2.5). As in the process of fresco painting, he dusted in a line to mark the outline of the design, a mosaicista then filled the spaces indicated by the preliminary drawing with white stones, and on this background of pebbles Camillo applied tempera,

82. G. Berra, ‘Il ritratto caricato in forma strana e ridicolosa, e con tanta felicità di somiglianza. La nascita della caricatura e i suoi sviluppi in Italia fino al Settecento’. Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz, 3, 2009, 73–144. 83. Edinburgh, National Gallery of Scotland, D 780. Published in Neilson 1979, 131. 84. London, British Museum, inv. 1928–6-18–10. Published in Neilson 1979, 139. 85. London, formerly with Benjamin Weinreb. Published in Neilson 1979, 145. 86. ‘Questa è quella Fontana, che per la grandezza dell’artificio è stata uno dei miracoli di questi tempi’. Borsieri 1619, 60–61. 87. A. Morandotti, ‘Nuove tracce per il tardo Rinascimento italiano: il ninfeo-museo della Villa Borromeo, Visconti Borromeo, Litta, Toselli di Lainate’. Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, 1, 1985, 129–185.

44  Early Years in Bologna

Figure 2.5 Camillo Procaccini, Grotesques. Painted pebbles, 1587–1589, Villa Visconti Borromeo, Lainate. Photo Credit: Luca Torriani.

using contrasts of colour.88 Described in 1621 by Simon Vouet as ‘the most beautiful pictures to be found in Milan’, Camillo’s decorations were inspired by coeval ornaments with paint on stone diffused in the European courts of the second half of the sixteenth century.89 His images create an imaginative scenography which is captured in a drawing (Royal Collection, Windsor Castle) highlighting the rationale of Camillo’s project, and his efforts in recreating the subterranean atmospheres characterizing Lomazzo’s writings (fig. 2.6).90 In Lainate, Camillo collaborated with Francesco Brambilla, who was responsible for coordinating the work of sculptors and plasterers. Successor to Annibale Fontana’s tradition, he was one of the most successful Lombard artists, appointed as chief sculptor in Milan Cathedral from 1585 to 1599.91 Brambilla executed the models for the Bacchus and the Venus, two bronze sculptures donated in 1937 by Andrew 88. On the technique of painting on stone, see M. Chiarini and C. Acidini Luchinat, Pietre colorate. Capricci del XVII secolo dalle collezioni medicee. Cinisello Balsamo, 2000. 89. ‘Al mio favore Artificio di Acque tuto quelo che si pol Veder le piture di Camilo Porcacini più belle che in ninsonno in Altro loco di Milano’. A. Brejon de Lavergnèe, ‘Simon Vouet à Milan en 1621: une lettre inédite de l’artiste français’. Revue de l’art, 50, 1980, 58–65. 90. Windsor Castle, Royal Collection, inv. 5208. Published in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 57. 91. On Brambilla’s sculpting career, see M.T. Fiorio, ‘Brambilla, Francesco’. In The dictionary of art, Jane Turner (ed.), New York 1996, 654–655.

Early Years in Bologna 45

Figure 2.6 Camillo Procaccini, Grotto with Satyr, Grotesques and Fantastic Animals. Red chalk drawing, 1587, Windsor Castle, The Royal Collection. Photo Credit: Royal Collection Trust/© Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2020.

Mellon to the National Gallery in Washington.92 He also made wax and clay models for most of the statues decorating the nymphaeum and the gardens, which were eventually executed by his pupils. It was perhaps the opportunity to work with an accomplished master that persuaded the senior members of the Procaccini family to direct the 14-year-old Giulio Cesare towards a training as a sculptor. By following a common organisational pattern in family workshops, Camillo and Ercole the Elder directed a relative towards a specialization that would have allowed the growth of the bottega outside of the family’s strengths. By copying from Brambilla’s models, Giulio Cesare completed two female statues placed in the exedra built in the nymphaeum epicentre (fig. 2.7).93 This experience was paramount for the prosecution of his career, as a few years later he was selected to work at the sculptural decoration of Milan Cathedral. 92. G. Gentilini and A. Morandotti, ‘The sculptures of the Nymphaeum at Lainate: the origins of the Mellon Venus and Bacchus’. In Studies in the history of art, 24, 1990, 135–171. 93. The attribution is confirmed by two drawings, respectively conserved at the Getty Museum and the National Gallery in Washington. See N.W. Neilson, Giulio Cesare Procaccini disegnatore. Busto Arsizio, 2004, 51–52. A  further apprentice working in Lainate under Brambilla’s supervision was Marco Antonio Prestinari. See M. Becker Sawatzky, ‘The mediality of the nymph in the cultural context of Pirro Visconti’s villa at Lainate’. In The figure of the nymph in early modern culture, Karl Enenkel and Anita Traninger (eds), Leiden, 2018, 305–336.

46  Early Years in Bologna

Figure 2.7 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Nymph. Marble, 1588–1591, Villa Visconti Borromeo, Lainate. Photo Credit: Luca Torriani.

While the works in the nymphaeum were completed around 1589, the decoration of the main body of the villa lasted for more than a decade, until Pirro’s death in 1604.94 As supervisor of the pictorial decoration, Camillo was in charge of the ornamental project comprising five rooms on the ground floor which were embellished by pastoral, hunting and fishing scenes framed by grotesque figures and fantastic animals. Heterogeneous in stylistic quality, the frescoes were executed between 1590 and 1604 by an équipe of painters, certainly minor artists, who specialised in the decoration of aristocratic residencies. Two rooms, the sala degli specchi and the sala della stufa were frescoed by Carlo Antonio in what can be considered his official debut as a painter. Inspired by Soens’ Series of the Creation (Galleria Nazionale, Parma), Carlo Antonio set his figurations in the mountainous scenario of the Lombard Prealps, characterizing them with fairy-tale like representations exemplified by The Ostrich Hunt (fig. 2.8) and the Whaling. The ground floor decoration was completed around 1602–1603 by Agostino Lodola and Giovanni Battista Volpino, two of Camillo’s assistants, both 94. Morandotti 2005, 196.

Early Years in Bologna 47

Figure 2.8 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, The Ostrich Hunt. Fresco, circa 1590, Villa Visconti Borromeo, Lainate. Photo Credit: Luca Torriani.

mentioned in Pirro Visconti’s book of payments.95 Although no information is available to retrace Lodola’s artistic profile, Volpino is known for having participated with his brother Francesco at the decoration of Palazzo Ducale, redecorated in 1583–1584 to become the residence of the Spanish Governors in Milan.96 Supervised by Camillo, Lodola and Volpino completed hunting scenes characterised by a style that differs from Carlo Antonio’s in its vivid colours and in the minor precision devoted to the representation of the landscape. As confirmed by a letter dated 4 February 1605, at the end of the decorative campaign, Volpino was desperate for a new job.97 In this regard, he and Lodola were hired a few years later by the Procaccini for the decoration of Palazzo Rasini in Cavenago Brianza, a residence owned by Marcantonio Rasini, Pirro Visconti’s brother in law.98

95. Both painters were paid daily. Morandotti 1981, 124. 96. G. Bora, ‘Milano nell’età di Lomazzo e San Carlo: riaffermazione e difficoltà di sopravvivenza di una cultura’. In Rabish. Il grottesco nell’arte del Cinquecento. L’Accademia della Val di Blenio, Francesco Porzio, Giulio Bora and Manuela Kahn Rossi (eds), Milan, 1998, 48–51. 97. ‘Et così prego V.S. se li sarà giusto et bisogno che la si degni a favorirme, io povero pittore caricho di figliuoli, accettar me al suo servitio’. Volpino’s letter to Renato Borromeo, 4 February 1605. Archivio Borromeo, Isola Bella (ABIB). Cited in Morandotti 2005, 196. 98. On this commission, see G. Vergani, Il palazzo dei conti Rasini a Cavenago di Brianza. Un inedito episodio di residenza nobiliare nella lombardia d’antico regime (secolo XVI-XVIII). Cavenago Brianza, 1997.

3 A Change of Scenario Moving to Milan

A City Within the Spanish Empire Artistic competition with the Carracci was perhaps a reason that led the Procaccini to leave Bologna and relocate to Milan. However, it was not the only one and certainly not the most important. When on 5 November  1587 Camillo received permission to suspend the decoration of the choir of San Prospero in Reggio Emilia and accept Pirro Visconti Borromeo’s offer to supervise the decoration of his villa in Lainate, the Bolognese painter was aware of the importance of his decision, not only for himself but also for his family. As early as 1586 he had tried to relinquish his commitments in Reggio Emilia, repeatedly asking permission to leave the city. His motivation was so decisive that he even risked being arrested by the local podestà, who had been informed about Camillo’s desire to abandon a job he had already been paid for.1 After almost a year of discussion, Camillo was granted permission to travel to Milan. Even though he had promised to return in less than one year, he undertook the journey fully aware it was going to be permanent. As a matter of fact, Camillo completed his obligations with the Basilica of San Prospero only in 1597.2 By that time, he had already established himself as the most appreciated painter in Milan. The Procaccini family left Bologna between the end of 1587 and the beginning of 1588. They settled in the Milanese parish of Sant’Eusebio where their presence is recorded in the status animarum of 1590.3 The document confirms that Ercole the Elder cohabited with his wife Cecilia, his sons Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare, as well as his daughter Ippolita and two garzoni: Antonio and Jacopo Filippo.

  1. ‘Capitulum timeat de fuga, idcirco insistit maxime quia est forensis illum deteneri et committi arestari [. . .]’. ASRE, Giudiziario, Libri degli atti civili rogati davanti al Podestà, anno 1586, Semestre 2. Cited in Artioli and Monducci 1986, 227.   2. Camillo completed the decoration of vault on the top of the main altar. Ibid., 161–209.  3. Signor Hercole Procacino in casa dil riva d’anni 55. Depintore/ch. co. Signora Cecilia sua moglie d’anni 50./ch. co. Signor Camillo suo figliuolo d’anni 30./ch. co. Signor Carlo Antonio suo figliuolo di anni 28/Julio Cesare suo figliuolo d’anni 16/Hippolita sua figliola di anni 7./Antonio suo garzono di anni 12./ Jacobo Filippo suo garzone d’anni 12.

Archivio Storico Diocesano di Milano (ASDM), Archivio Spirituale, Sezione X, Santa Maria del Carmine II, ‘Stato delle anime per la parrocchia di Santo Eusebio di Milano per l’anno 1590’. Cited in B. Besta, ‘Alcune notizie per una storia degli artisti milanesi del Seicento’. Archivio storico lombardo, 6, 1933, 454. The document provides incorrect information regarding Ercole and Carlo Antonio’s age. In 1590 Ercole was 70 years old (baptised 23 February 1520); Carlo Antonio was 19 years old (born 13 January 1571).

A Change of Scenario 49 The parish of Sant’Eusebio was located in the residential zone near the Sforza Castle and hosted a heterogeneous population. Palaces owned by noble families and rich merchants were flanked by buildings hosting dozens of households of poor workers, most of whom were employed in the textile sector.4 Procaccini’s household hosted two garzoni, a term not always well-defined which could mean servants taking care of domestic chores as well as apprentices training in the workshop. D’Amico notes that many individuals identified as garzoni were actively involved in the productive activities of their masters, and that it was usually implied that apprentices living with their masters would also help with the maintenance of the house.5 The fact that Antonio and Jacopo Filippo were given a room in the house indicates their participation in the family’s activities: they were the first known apprentices to the Procaccini in Milan. To understand the most significant event in the history of the Procaccini family, it is important to evaluate the dynamics that determined the family’s relocation. At the end of 1587, Ercole was a 67-year-old painter fully integrated within the Bolognese artistic scene. He was close to the conclusion of a distinguished career and well-placed financially. His younger sons, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare, were 16 and 13 years old, certainly too young to be threatened by artistic competition. Camillo was in the middle of pursuing a promising career. He was regarded as a brilliant talent and outshone the Carracci in the importance of his commissions. All things considered, Malvasia’s implication that the Procaccini went to Milan because they were bested by the Carracci appears to be a misreading of historical hindsight. It is more plausible that Camillo and Ercole planned their life-changing decision with the aim of developing the family’s potential in a more favourable environment, that would allow better opportunities not only in the immediate future but also in the long-term perspective. Moving to Milan represented the opportunity to set up the family business foreshadowed by Ercole when he first enrolled Camillo as a member of the Bolognese Compagnia dei Pittori. Although it was Camillo who actually created the conditions for the Procaccini’s relocation, Ercole the Elder must have actively participated in the decision. The emancipatio signed by Camillo on 26 April 1591 demonstrates that before moving to Milan the Procaccini were under patria potestas.6 Hence, the entire family would have not relocated without the consensus of the pater familias. Procaccini’s decision to leave Bologna was not a gamble, but a reasoned step planned since Camillo first met Pirro Visconti who, impressed by his drawings, commissioned from him a portrait and a Sacrifice of Isaac cited by Lomazzo in his Delle rime.7 Even if   4. S. D’Amico, Le contrade e la città. Sistema produttivo e spazio urbano a Milano fra Cinque e Seicento. Milan, 1994, 42.   5. Accommodation and subsistence expenses were considered as adequate payment for the activities performed by the garzone and often replaced a salary. While young apprentices from the rural areas generally lived in their master’s house, garzoni born in Milan preferred to return home overnight in order to have a regular salary. Ibid., 114–123.  6. Berra 2002, 67–69. The emancipatio was an institute of Roman law consisting in the voluntary renouncing by the pater familias of the patria potestas of his sons. On relations between fathers and sons in early modern Italy, see S. Cavallo, ‘Fatherhood and the non-propertied classes in Renaissance and early modern Italian towns’. The history of the family, 17, 2012, 309–325.   7. ‘Camil Porcaccino pittor vero/al Conte Pir spiegò le ardent voglie/d’Abram al figlio in gesto humile e fiero’. G.P. Lomazzo, Rime di Gio. Paolo Lomazzo divise in sette libri… con la vita dell’autore descritta da lui stesso in rime sciolte. Milan, 1587, 350. Camillo’s portrait is mentioned by Malvasia: ‘Pirro Visconti capitando a Bologna dibattendosi dalla pittura capitò da Camillo, volentieri stava trattenendosi à vederlo dipigner, egli osservandolo passivo lo ritrahea, e facendo gli pose a vedere il ritratto’. Malvasia 1667, Ms. B. 17, f. 46v.

50  A Change of Scenario Pirro’s reassuring patronage convinced Camillo to abandon the work in San Prospero, the drastic consequences of moving the entire family from one city to another implies a high level of consciousness and forethought that surely Camillo would have discussed with both his father and his new patron.8 Although the Bolognese painter was initially employed to supervise the decoration of Pirro’s residence in Lainate, it is highly plausible that the Milanese noblemen reassured him about the numerous business opportunities that the Procaccini family would find in Milan. Furthermore, Pirro might have committed to supporting the Procaccinis’ artistic careers, as he did facilitate early Milanese commissions for Camillo, Carlo Antonio and Giulio Cesare.9 As time passed, the connection between Pirro Visconti and the members of the Procaccini family transcended the normal relation of patron-artist, developing into a friendship in which the Bolognese painters were almost considered as members of the patron’s famiglia. In fact, besides being Procaccini’s principal sponsor, in 1600 Pirro participated as testimonio at Giulio Cesare’s marriage with the Milanese noblewoman Isabella Visconti, while in December 1603, his heir, Fabio II Visconti, was named godfather of Camillo’s son Carlo Giusto Procaccini.10 In early modern Italy as well as in our day, the decision to migrate to a different state for business purposes involves essential requirements: good business contacts, a solid economic outlook, excellent practical skills and expertise. As one of the most powerful Milanese patrons, Pirro Visconti’s protection guaranteed the Procaccini guaranteed fundamental support. Nonetheless, this motivation alone would not have been enough to justify the entire family’s relocation. To fully understand Camillo and Ercole’s choice, one should consider that at the end of the sixteenth century Milan was by far a more profitable city than Bologna (fig. 3.1). The Spanish Government considered the Lombard capital as the principal centre for the commercial and military connections between Italy, Flanders and Spain and the local economy combined prosperous commerce, solid industries and flourishing agriculture.11 In 50 years, the Milanese population had grown from the 79,000 inhabitants of 1542 to the 112,000 of 1599, favouring the development of the local system of production. The number of merchants trading on the city market was constantly

  8. It has been hypothesised that Camillo may have visited Milan in the mid-1580s. Although plausible, the hypothesis is not supported by documentary evidence. Neilson 1977, 371–373.   9. Appointed in 1592 as deputato of the Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo, Pirro sponsored Camillo’s candidature to decorate the southern shutters of the Valvassori organ. Furthermore, he favoured Giulio Cesare, who from 1591 was employed to work on the Duomo’s sculptural decoration under the supervision of Francesco Brambilla. F. Ricardi, ‘Le ante d’organo del Duomo di Milano’. Archivio storico lombardo, 114, 1988, 90. 10. ‘Io Pirro Viceconte faci presente per testimonio’. ASM, Notarile, 20576, Notaio Bernardo Coerezzi, 14 May 1600. Carlo Giusto Procaccini’s baptism certificate is recorded in ASDM, Libro dei Battesimi. Terra Amara: 1582–1622. The padrinato translated as a form of social and economic protection constituting a publicly acknowledged bond, see A. Alfani and V. Gourdon, ‘Il ruolo economico del padrinato: un fenomeno osservabile?’ Cheiron, 46, 2006, 129–177. 11. In 1602 the Venetian Ambassador Francesco Soranzo wrote: Lo Stato di Milano è uno dei più importanti che abbia il re, perché impedisce i progressi dei francesi in Italia ed assicura il Regno di Napoli. E’ comodo questo Stato per sovvenire quelli di Fiandra, perché in esso si conducono li soldati spagnoli che poi passando per Savoja e di la per la Lorena, ed entrando nella Borgogna, passano sicuri in Fiandra. N. Barozzi and G. Berchet, Le relazioni degli stati europei lette al Senato dagli ambasciatori veneziani nel secolo decimosettimo. Serie, I (Spagna), vol. I. Venice, 1856, 103–104.

A Change of Scenario 51

Figure 3.1 Marco Antonio Barateri, La Gran Città di Milano. 1629. Civica raccolta delle stampe Achille Bertarelli, Milan. Photo Credit: Civica raccolta delle stampe Achille Bertarelli – Castello Sforzesco – Milano.

increasing, not only on the axis of Milan-Brussels-Antwerp-Madrid, but also in relation to the Reformed countries. The city exported silk to England, weapons to Germany and agricultural products to Switzerland, while thanks to Dutch and English merchants living in the city they imported fish from the Baltic area, as well as wool from both England and Germany.12 Among the local industries, the blacksmiths and weaving shops were so noteworthy that English traveller Thomas Coryat regarded them as ‘so good that they are not inferior to any of the Christian world’.13 12. The Milanese international exchange was enhanced by foreign merchants working in the city. For instance, the German brothers Cristoforo and Paolo Furtenbach had resided in Milan since 1605, trading with Spain, Germany and Switzerland. Similarly, Milanese merchants owned offices in the principal European markets. G. Tonelli, ‘Mercanti che hanno negozio grosso fra Milano e i Paesi riformati nel primo Seicento’. Storia economica, 1, 2015, 101–142. 13. T. Coryat, Crudities. London, 1611, 247.

52  A Change of Scenario Between the Duomo and Cordusio, in Via degli Orefici and Piazza dei Mercanti, shops owned by goldsmiths, silver workers, sword makers, gold merchants, weavers, perfumers and feather workers satisfied the luxury needs of the upper classes, be they within the city walls or living in other urban centres of Lombardy. Their clients also included those with high income in the neighbouring states and in the courts of Europe. A prosperous market and the abundance of merchandise were indications of a thriving metropolis that visitors such as Michel de Montaigne considered among the largest in Europe.14 Aside from being one of Europe’s leading commercial centres, Milan controlled the largest diocese in Italy.15 The Lombard capital hosted 238 churches, 30 monasteries for men and 34 convents, while the diocese of Milan extended over 753 parishes and over 560,000 souls. Throughout the second half of the sixteenth century, Milan had gradually asserted its leading role within the renewed Catholic Church, fashioning itself a model for every European Catholic city. This development began under the guidance of Archbishop Carlo Borromeo, whose life and work would mark the city’s life for decades.16 In accordance with the decrees of the Council of Trent, Borromeo devised an extensive program of cultural and diocesan reform that had a major impact, in terms of public, social and religious behaviour as well as for the city’s architectural and artistic development. Artistic imagery, in particular, played a key role in Borromeo’s vision of the reformed church. The bishop laid down strict guidelines concerning appropriate Christian iconography and promoted the reconstruction and decoration of churches, chapels, schools and confraternities. To give an example of this activity, in Milan alone the churches of San Vittore al Corpo, San Sebastiano, San Fedele and Santo Stefano in Brolo were rebuilt and redecorated, while works were planned to complete the Duomo’s façade. Outside the city walls and across the entire diocese, parish churches, convents and monasteries were restored or re-decorated, providing artists with a wide range of opportunities in an area stretching as far as the northern border of the Ticino region. Despite its economic, political and religious importance, Milan is the least studied of the major early modern European cities. The neglect is the product of a long historiographical tradition that goes back to the late eighteenth century and has portrayed the period of Spanish rule as a sharp, tragic turning point in the history of the State of Milan. In 1924, for instance, the author of an authoritative historical study wrote: ‘under the Spanish domination the oppression and misery grew […] the industries, once renowned in everywhere in Europe, were almost extinct […] the arts and culture were superseded by ignorance and superstition’.17 The notion of Spanish Milan as a dark and troubled city also influenced the perception of the local artistic scene. In 1957, Gian Alberto dell’Acqua emphasised the ‘painful human roots’ of the local visual culture which ‘insisted on oppression and agony […] revealing either memories

14. ‘This city is the most populous in Italy, large and full of all sorts of merchandise. It is not too much unlike Paris [. . .] and in its crowds of people it comes up to Venice’. M. de Montaigne, Complete works: essays, travel journal, letters. Stanford, 1957, 1035. 15. Morigia 1595, 50–51. 16. On Carlo Borromeo, see J.M. Headley and J.B. Tomaro, San Carlo Borromeo: Catholic reform and ecclesiastical politics in the second half of the sixteenth century. Washington, 1988. 17. S. Pugliese, Le condizioni economiche e finanziarie della lombardia nella prima metà del secolo XVIII. Turin, 1924, 3.

A Change of Scenario 53 of past calamities or the foreshadowing of ominous events’.18 The grim view of Spanish Milan as a city dominated by recession, cruelty and obscurantism was consolidated by the Antispagnolismo promulgated during the Italian Risorgimento and has lingered in the Italian public imagination thanks to Manzoni’s historical novel The Betrothed.19 Set during the outbreaks of bubonic plague that infested northern Italy in 1629–1631, Manzoni’s description of Milan as a city oppressed by disease, poverty, riots, egoist aristocrats and rapacious Spanish officials has cemented a misleading perception, currently subject to revision. To this end, extensive socio-economic investigations pioneered by Federico Chabod and continued by Domenico Sella, as well as recent studies by Stefano d’Amico and Giovanna Tonelli, have demonstrated that from around 1540 to 1620 the State of Milan experienced a long period of prosperity.20 In spite of being subjected by foreign military domination, Milan took advantage of its new important strategic and financial functions within the Spanish empire. The city managed to adjust to the new economic climate and promptly recovered from famine and warfare, preserving a leading role in the European economy.21 As in the case of Naples, Spanish rule, although not always well-tolerated, did not lead to decadence, but instead provided new opportunities for wealth and commerce. The Spanish imperial system supported the urban industrial sector, represented an enormous market for Milanese goods and provided military power to back the city’s commercial interests. In fact, after the start of the revolt of the Netherlands in 1567, the Spanish king poured monetary and military resources into Lombardy to deter threats against the Hapsburg empire and the Catholic Church. Since local tax revenues were not sufficient to pay these expenses, the regime engaged in massive deficit spending, with balances often made up by transfers from other Spanish lands.22

A Profitable Art Market In 1588, just a few months after the Procaccini family’s relocation, Giovanni Battista Guarini, Ambassador of Ferrara, described Milan as an affluent city where ‘wealth was shared by many and not limited to a few’.23 Although exaggerated, Guarini’s description is symptomatic of the information circulating in Emilia about the Lombard capital and must be taken into account while evaluating Procaccini’s decision to leave Bologna. Until now, consensus has been established that the event was exclusively related to Pirro Visconti’s patronage. This view, however, is not entirely

18. G.A. Dell’Acqua, ‘La pittura a Milano dalla metà del XVI secolo al 1630’. In Storia di Milano, vol. X, Milan, 1957, 723. 19. On anti-Spanish sentiment in Italy, see C. Mozzarelli, ‘Dall’antispagnolismo al revisionismo’. In Alle origini di una nazione. Antispagnolismo e identità italiana, Aurelio Musi (ed.), Milan, 2003, 345–368. 20. The problem of the Lombard economic decline in the second half of the sixteenth century has been at the centre of a vast historiographical debate. Federico Chabod was the first to challenge the old consensus. See F. Chabod, Lo stato e la vita religiosa a Milano nell’epoca di Carlo V. Turin, 1934. For modern developments attesting to the prosperity of the Milanese economy, see Sella 1979; D’Amico 2012; Tonelli 2015, 142–165. 21. D’Amico 2012, 6. 22. D. Sella, ‘Spanish rule in Milan in the sixteenth century: old and new perspectives’. In Italian Renaissance studies in Arizona, Jean Brink and Pier Raimondo Baldini (eds), River Forest, 1989, 204. 23. M. Tabarrini (ed.), ‘Relazione inedita dello stato di Milano di G. B. Guarini’. Archivio storico italiano, 5, 1867, 15.

54  A Change of Scenario accurate. Migration is based on economy and opportunity and while Pirro certainly represented opportunity, economic factors did play their part in the decision. Recent studies by Richard Spear, Philip Sohm, Raffaella Morselli, Christopher Marshall and Patrizia Cavazzini have unlocked our understanding of the economic lives of painters in this period.24 Their approach does not replace Francis Haskell’s investigation on the relations between patrons and artists, but broadens it, shifting the focus from the patron to the artist.25 Never adopted in relation to Milan, a socio-economic approach is essential to determining the motivations behind the Procaccini family’s relocation. From a historical perspective, the Procaccini were part of the large crowds that left Bologna between the second half of the 1580s and the start of the 1590s. Due to a combination of bad harvests, famine, worsening economic trends and higher mortality rates, Bologna, between 1587 and 1595, lost more than the 18 percent of its population, with numbers declining from 70,661 residents in 1581 to 58,941 in 1595.26 Those who left Bologna were not only the urban poor, beggars and farmers, but also merchants, artisans and artists, all of whom fled the city to find opportunities elsewhere.27 Some migrated north, where the crisis was less intense.28 Others went south, looking for employment in Rome. Although both Ercole and Camillo enjoyed solid reputation and excellent religious commissions in Bologna, economic dislocation, alongside the competition among local painters, represented strong points in favour of the family’s relocation. By evaluating the uncertainties in the Bolognese social and economic outlook, the Procaccini assumed that greatest wealth, combined with the support of Pirro Visconti and the abundance of employment opportunities generated by Borromeo’s reform of the Milanese Church, would, in the long run, prove advantageous to the development of their business. Thus, they moved to Milan to exploit the advantages of a better economic situation. They were not alone among artists in taking such a decision. In the following years many successful painters left Bologna to explore markets with greater earning potential. One notable example is Annibale Carracci, who went to Rome following the invitation of Cardinal Odoardo Farnese. Guido Reni also moved to the eternal city, where he charged prices higher than those he could have expected in Bologna. Morselli notes that Reni tried to hold his prices in line with Roman standards even after his return to Emilia.29 He eventually succeeded in this with the Pietà dei Mendicanti, executed in 1616 for the Bolognese Senate. It is undeniable that for the Procaccini family Milan opened the door to a superior market. This can be appreciated by investigating the documentation concerning one of Camillo’s early Milanese commissions: the decoration of the Immaculate Conception chapel in the Church of San Francesco Grande.30 Described by Torre and Latuada, 24. Spear and Sohm 2010; Cavazzini 2008; Marshall 2016. 25. F. Haskell, Patrons and painters: a study in the relations between Italian art and society in the age of Baroque. London, 1963. 26. A. Bellettini, La popolazione di Bologna dal secolo XV all’Unificazione. Bologna, 1961, 24–26. 27. On the economic crisis that struck Bologna from 1587 onwards, see G. Alfani, ‘The famine of the 1590s in northern Italy. An analysis of the greatest “system shock” of sixteenth century’. Histoire & mesure, 26, 2011, 17–49. 28. S. D’Amico, ‘Crisis and transformation: economic organisation and social structures in Milan, 1570–1610’. Social history, 25, 2000, 8. 29. R. Morselli, ‘Bologna’. Spear and Sohm 2010, 165. 30. For an overview, see D. Cassinelli, ‘Camillo Procaccini nella Cappella della Vergine delle Rocce’. Nuovi studi, 2004–2005, 11, 199–211.

A Change of Scenario 55 Camillo’s works were dismantled in 1809–1813, owing to the building’s demolition.31 Thanks to this work, the Bolognese painter achieved economic independence, taking control of the family business and laying the foundations for the Procaccinis’ success in Milan. Before looking at the financial details of commission, it is important to make some clarifications. First off, it is helpful to provide basic information on currency and exchange that would allow the conversion of other currencies into the lire imperiali used in Milan. The lira was the unit of account of the State of Milan; however, the scudo was the currency used in business transactions. One lira was made up of 20 soldi; 1 soldo equalled 12 denari; 1 scudo was worth 6 lire.32 As noted by Etro and Pagani, the silver coins in the major Italian cities were exchanged almost at parity between each other, and without increasing deviations over time.33 Hence, a comparison with prices in Bologna can be easily obtained by analysing the data provided by Morselli on the Bolognese market.34 To make the comparison even more accurate, it is worth noting that the cost of living in Milan was higher than in Bologna. At the end of the sixteenth century a kilogram of wheat cost an on average of 0.2 lire, a brenta of wine (approximately 75 litres) 7.5 lire and a kilogram of red meat 0.51 lire.35 The average annual rent paid by a household could be as low as 23 lire in the peripheral parish of San Primo in Floris and as high as 115 lire in a central residential parish like San Martino in Nosigia.36 In the parish of Sant’Eusebio, families of rich merchants and nobles paid more than 200 lire annually, while poor families sharing spaces rarely spent more than 15 lire a year.37 The annual food expenses for a merchant or a member of the low nobility amounted to approximately 300 lire.38 Conversely, a manual labourer earned less than 1 lira per day.39 On 28 November  1590, Camillo received payment of 380 lire for completing a canvas representing the Assumption of the Virgin (Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan).40 31. Torre 1674, 203; Latuada 1737–1738, IV, 247. For a chronological history of the Church of San Francesco Grande, see M.T. Fiorio, Le chiese di Milano. Milan, 1985, 57–59. 32. D’Amico 1994, 10. Hereafter, all costs, payments and revenues will be noted in lire to facilitate comparison. The scudo aureo and the ducatone d’argento (silver scudo), constituted the moneta grossa in Milan. Both coins had the same value. See G. Mulazzani, ‘Studi economici sulle monete di Milano’. Rivista italiana di numismatica, 3, 1888, 326–327. 33. F. Etro and L. Pagani, ‘The market for paintings in Italy during the Seventeenth Century’. The Journal of economic history, 72, 2012, 439. For the exchange value of currencies in the main Italian and European cities, see table 57 in J.G. Da Silva, Banque et crédit en Italie au XVII siècle. Paris, 1969, 1, 320. 34. Morselli, 2010, 148. In Bologna, 1 lira was made up of 20 soldi (or bolognini); 1 soldo equalled 12 denari; 1 scudo was worth 4 to 5 lire; and 1 ducatone was worth 5 to 8 lire. 35. Prices are calculated on the data presented in A. Agnati and R. Targetti, ‘Il movimento dei prezzi nel Ducato di Milano dal 1600 al 1700’. Giornale degli economisti e annali di economia, 23, 1964, 288–293. In Bologna, a kilogram of bread cost 0.1 lire on average. With 0.33 lire, one could purchase a kilo of meat and with 8 lire a corba (approximately 74 litres) of wine. A good dowry was worth 800 lire, while a family could live modestly on only 90 lire per year. Morselli 2010, 150. 36. D’Amico 2012, 30. 37. Ibid., 30. 38. D’Amico 1994, 136–137. 39. G. Aleati and C.M. Cipolla, ‘Contributo alla storia dei consumi e del costo della vita in lombardia agli inizi dell’età moderna’. In Éventail de l’histoire vivante, hommage à Lucien Febvre. Paris, 1953, 327. 40. ‘Scudi 63 soldi 39 al Sig. Camillo Procaccini per il saldo della fattura del quadro fatto dell’Ascensione’. Archivio dell’Ospedale Maggiore di Milano (AOM), Ms. 78, f. 95. Cited in Cassinelli 2004–2005, 200.

56  A Change of Scenario

Figure 3.2 Aurelio Luini, Martyrdom of St.  Thecla. Oil on canvas, 343x179  cm., 1592, Milan Cathedral, Milan. Photo Credit: © Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo di Milano.

The painting, retraced by Cassinelli in the deposit of the Pinacoteca di Brera, is signed ‘Camil Perc F/Ann AE XXIX’ (Camillo Procaccini fecit at the age of 29).41 The remuneration received by Camillo is lower than the salary that Milan’s most valued painters would have received. In fact, between 1581 and 1586 Ambrogio Figino was paid some total of 1,970 lire for completing the Madonna del Serpe and the Coronation of the Virgin for the Church of San Fedele.42 Similarly, in 1592, Aurelio Luini received 912 lire for the Martyrdom of St. Thecla in Milan Cathedral (fig. 3.2).43 Nonetheless, Camillo’s salary is comparable to those received in the same decade by major Bolognese painters: I  refer to Bartolomeo Passerotti, who received 240 lire for the Presentation of the Virgin for the Palazzo della Gabella, and Ludovico Carracci, who 41. Ibid., 204. 42. R.P. Ciardi, Giovan Ambrogio Figino. Milan, 1968, 93–94. 43. Archivio della Veneranda Fabbrica del Duomo di Milano (AVFDM), Archivio storico, Registro 2424, f. 150, 26 June 1592. Cited in Agosti and Stoppa 2014, 395–396.

A Change of Scenario 57 in 1594 was paid 250 lire for completing the Vision of St. Hyacinth in the Church of San Domenico.44 Camillo’s payment highlights his status as a newcomer in Milan and is indicative of the patron’s willingness to evaluate his skills. To this end, the Confraternita of the Immaculate Conception might have had doubts in lavishly paying a painter not yet fully established on the Milanese artistic scene. In turn, Camillo must have been inclined to accept a lower fee, as the commission represented an opportunity to showcase his skills. If there were doubts, however, they were soon dissipated. The Assumption of the Virgin was appreciated to such an extent that on 8 February  1591 the Confraternita commissioned four additional canvases meant to represent the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple, the Marriage of the Virgin, the Adoration of the Shepherds and the Adoration of the Magi45. This time, Camillo’s salary was in line with Milanese standards: the Bolognese painter received a total 600 scudi (3,600 lire), to be paid at the rate of 100 scudi a year. Two months later he signed the emancipatio. The payment received by Camillo is conspicuous if compared to late sixteenth century Bolognese standards and would be matched in the Emilian city only 17 years later, when Ludovico Carracci completed the Ascension of Christ for the church of Santa Cristina. To provide an indication of the sum’s purchasing power, in 1578 Domenico Tibaldi purchased a house in the Bolognese parish of Castel de’ Britti for 2,000 lire, while in 1583 Denys Calvaert spent 2,900 lire for a property in the central strada della Mascarella.46 Expected in two and a half years, Camillo’s canvases were eventually delivered in June 1594. The delay reflects the fact that he was simultaneously busy on other projects. Indeed, by that time, he had already completed a group of five large canvases for the Church of Santa Croce in the Ticinese village of Riva San Vitale and, more importantly, had been chosen to work in the Duomo, the most prestigious artistic site in the city. If the Ticinese commission earned Camillo 400 scudi (2,400 lire),47 the employment with the Fabbrica del Duomo was far more remunerative. Between 15 February and 24 May 1591, the Bolognese painter received payments for a total of 1,050 lire to complete the Martyrdom of St. Agnes (fig. 3.3) for the homonymous altar designed in 44. The prices for Passerotti and Carracci’s paintings are published in Morselli 2010, 149–150. While Camillo’s canvas was appreciated 28 lire per square meter, Passerotti and Carracci received 31 and 30 lire respectively. 45. Si è anco stabilito che si faccia la convenzione con il Camillo Procaccino pittore per li quattro quadri quali si stanno farsi nella nostra Cappella della Concettione e si faccia per instromento [. . .] E per mercede se li daranno scudi seicento in anni sei cioè scudi cento l’anno. Archivio di Stato di Milano (ASM), Notarile, 12006, Piedimonte Rabia. The Marriage of the Virgin is untraceable. Both the Adoration of the Magi and the Adoration of the Shepherds are in the deposit of the Pinacoteca di Brera. The Presentation of the Virgin at the Temple is in the deposit of the Pinacoteca di Pavia. 46. Morselli 2014, 193. 47. Mags. d. Camillus Procaccinus fil. d. Herculis hab. Mediolani dichiara aver ricevuto dal Rev. L. D. Dno. Jo. Andree a Cruce de Ripa scuta 400 auri Italia pro completa solutione unius contractus facti inter prefactos d. contrahenti pro quibusdam quadris pro Eccle. prefati Dni. Crucei descript. in contractus rogat. 16 VIII 1591.

The contract is dated 8 August 1591; Camillo received the payment on 24 July 1592. Archivio Cantonale del Canton Ticino, Bellinzona (ACTB), Rogiti, 2906. Cited in A. Lienhard-Riva, ‘Contributo alla storia artistica della Chiesa di Santa Croce di Riva S. Vitale’. Bollettino storico della Svizzera italiana, 4, 1940, 113–118.

58  A Change of Scenario

Figure 3.3 Camillo Procaccini, Martyrdom of St.  Agnes. Oil on canvas, 310x175  cm., 1591–1592, Borromeo Collection, Isola Bella. Photo Credit: Collezione Borromeo, Palazzo Borromeo, Isola Bella Stresa (VB).

A Change of Scenario 59 1572 by Pellegrino Tibaldi. One year later, in April 1592, he was selected to complete the decoration of the four southern shutters of the Valvassori organ, a commission worth 6,000 lire.49 Even on this occasion, Camillo conceded his employer a discount. In 1590, Figino had indeed received 9,000 lire to decorate the four northern shutters of the same organ.50 The lower fee not only highlights Camillo’s commitment to obtaining the most prestigious job in the city, but also demonstrates that he was already working without economic pressure, receiving sufficient income from other projects. Taking into account Camillo’s earnings for the triennium 1590–1592, it is possible to determine that he earnt from his commissions at least 14,050 lire, a wage that allowed the Procaccini family to enter the Milanese middle class just a few years after deciding to leave Bologna.51 To this end, archival research conducted by D’Amico and Tonelli demonstrates that at the beginning of the seventeenth century the purchase of a small house in the residential parish of San Bartolomeo cost around 2,000 lire,52 while a successful merchant operating between the Lombard capital and Antwerp earned about 6,000 lire per year.53 The early solidity of the Procaccini’s business is augmented even more by considering that on 24 November 1590, a few days before Camillo received the payment for the Assumption in San Francesco Grande, Ercole the Elder was paid 144 lire for a small copper painting representing the Rest on the Flight into Egypt to be installed in the chapel of the Immaculate Conception.54 The fact that the pater familias participated in this commission highlights the spirit of collaboration within the Procaccini family and demonstrates that, at least for a short period, he continued his career in Milan until his death occurred in 1595. Ercole’s active involvement in the early development of the family business is furthermore proved by the decoration of the Spinola-Rezzonico chapel in the Church of San Fedele, where in 1589 Camillo had completed his first Milanese altarpiece: the Transfiguration now part of the Borromeo Collection at Isola Bella. As noted by Neilson, the chapel hosts four canvases representing St. John the Baptist, St. Catherine of Alexandria, St. Michael and St. Cecilia, which, located on the arch, reflect Camillo’s style though they were executed by Ercole Procaccini.55 The commissions received by the Procaccini during their first five years in Lombardy, combined with major opportunities offered by the wealthy state of Milanese economy, reveal why Camillo and Ercole the Elder left Bologna. They anticipated 48

48. ‘Domino Camillo Procaccino Pittore, de’ dar’ adì 15 Febbraio 1591 lire 360 [. . .] a bon conto per la pittura dell’ancona ch’egli dipinge per l’altare di Santa Agnesa’. AVFDM, Archivio storico, R. 348, f. 95 (left). ‘Lire 690 in conto utsopra conti à lui per compito pagamento delli scudi 1175 a lui dovuti per haver dipinto il Misterio di Santa Agnesa’. Ibid., f. 95 (right). Cited in G. Berra, ‘Il Martirio di Sant’Agnese di Camillo Procaccini per il Duomo di Milano’. Valori Tattili, 5/6, 2015, 134. 49. Ricardi 1988, 90–92. 50. Ibid., 88. 51. The total income does not include payments related to the Transfiguration completed by Camillo in 1589 for the Church of San Fedele. For the commissions in San Francesco Grande and Milan Cathedral, Camillo received layaway payments. 52. D’Amico 1994, 88. 53. The merchant at issue is Giovanni Pietro Annoni. G. Tonelli, Investire con profitto e stile: strategie imprenditoriali a familiari a Milano tra Sei e Settecento. Milan, 2015, 30. 54. ‘24 scudi ad Ercole Procaccini per un quadro fatto sopra il rame del ritorno in Egitto’. AOM, Ms. 78, f. 94. Cited in Cassinelli 2004–2005, 200. 55. Neilson 1979, 18.

60  A Change of Scenario what Annibale Carracci and Guido Reni did in the following years: leave Emilia to find more profitable commissions elsewhere. Their early Milanese achievements were harbingers of the success to come. In the next three decades, the Procaccini family was able to attain an enviable position within Milanese society: ‘keeping a noble house, owning a coach and servants; offering meals to patrons and friends, and living by any means in a noble and grand fashion’.56 Table 3.1  Cost per square meter of Bolognese and Milanese altarpieces Artist and Date

Painting and Original Location

Dimensions (cm.)

Bartolomeo Passerotti, 1583

Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple, Palazzo della Gabella, Bologna Coronation of the Virgin, San Fedele, Milan Assumption of the Virgin, San Francesco Grande, Milan Adoration of the Shepherds, San Francesco Grande, Milan Martyrdom of St. Agnes, Duomo, Milan Martyrdom of St. Thecla, Duomo, Milan Resurrection, Duomo, Milan Vision of St. Hyacinth, San Domenico, Bologna St Gregory among the Plague-Stricken, San Vittore al Corpo, Milan St. Carlo Borromeo Sells the Princedom of Oria, Duomo, Milan Pietà, Santa Maria presso San Celso, Milan Annunciation, Santa Maria presso San Celso, Milan

390x198

240

31

170x265

846

188

387x350

380

28

388x348

900

66

310x175

1,050

193

343x179

912

149

679x324

2,000

91

375x223

250

30

400x215

1,200

139

475x600

600

21

200x140

750

267

215x118

575

227

Ascension of Christ, Santa Cristina, Bologna Pietà dei Mendicanti, Santa Maria dei Mendicanti, Bologna

412x268

645

58

St. Augustin disputing with St. Ambrose, San Marco, Milan

470x707

Ambrogio Figino, 1586 Camillo Procaccini, 1590 Camillo Procaccini, 1591 Camillo Procaccini, 1591 Aurelio Luini, 1592 Camillo Procaccini, 1592 Ludovico Carracci, 1594 Camillo Procaccini, 1602 Giovanni Battista Crespi, Il Cerano, 1602 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, 1604 Giovanni Battista Crespi, Il Cerano, 1606 Ludovico Carracci, 1608 Guido Reni, 1614–1616 Camillo Procaccini, 1615

56. Malvasia 1678, 289.

704x341

Price (lire)

3,600 + a gold chain worth 200 lire 3,000

Per Square Meter

131

90

A Change of Scenario 61

Rejuvenating Lombard Art In an authoritative nineteenth-century account of Lombard art, Luigi Malvezzi noted that at the end of the sixteenth century the Milanese school of painting abandoned the teachings of Leonardo, Bernardino Luini and Gaudenzio Ferrari, imitating different schools and moving into decline. Fortunately, the Procaccini arrived, and with their teachings rejuvenated Lombard art.57 The passage emphasises the Procaccini family’s impact on Milanese art and introduces the last elements we should consider in reflecting upon the family’s relocation: the artistic milieu and competition they found in Milan. Reassured about the opportunities available in the Lombard capital, Camillo and Ercole’s last concern before leaving Bologna should indeed have addressed how the family would fit into the Milanese artistic environment and what skills they had to develop in order to become successful. To this end, the Procaccini responded to the peculiarity of Milanese religious art, which had been restrained for more than a decade by the rigid precepts instituted by Carlo Borromeo, and was sheltered behind a curtain of didactic formulas, the repetition of conventional compositions represented in the art of Aurelio Luini, Ambrogio Figino and Simone Peterzano.58 Enforced by an extensive program of pastoral visits, Borromeo’s guidelines were canonised in the treatise Instructiones fabricae et suppellectilis ecclesiasticae (1577), a book well known in Bolognese circles since it inspired Paleotti’s Discorso intorno alle immagini sacre.59 Informed by the cardinal’s austere vision, the Instructiones dealt with problems concerning both church building and its decoration, understanding art as an institutionalised vehicle to be used for didactic purposes. Borromeo’s text included extensive iconographic guidelines concerning the representation of sacred narratives and suggested punishments for painters who deviated from the prescribed rules. Through them, the cardinal emphasised the importance of collaboration between theologicians and artists, articulating the concept that the art of making images is noble only if directed by Christian discipline.60 This emphasis on the moral function of art was embedded to such a degree in sixteenth-century Lombard culture that it became the subject of publications. Prominent among them is a treatise curiously taking its title from the most accomplished Milanese artist of the time: Il Figino.61 Written in 1591 by the Mantuan theologian Gregorio Comanini, Il Figino is cast as a dialogue between three friends: the painter Ambrogio Figino, the poet Stefano Guazzo and the prelate Ascanio Martinengo. Although Comanini’s work offered a plurality of perspectives beyond those narrowly focused on the path of Tridentine doctrine, the

57. L. Malvezzi, Le glorie dell’arte lombarda. Milan, 1882, 231. 58. For a general overview of Milanese art in the second half of the sixteenth century, see M. Gregori, ‘Notizie storiche sulla lombardia tra Cinque e Seicento’. Valsecchi 1973, 17–60; G. Bora, ‘La pittura del Seicento nelle province occidentali lombarde’. In La pittura in Italia. Il Seicento, Mina Gregori (ed.), Milan, 1989, 77–103; E. Welch, ‘Patrons artists and audiences in Renaissance Milan, 1300– 1600’. In The court cities of northern Italy. Milan, Parma, Piacenza, Urbino, Pesaro and Rimini, Charles Rosenberg (ed.), Cambridge, 2010, 58–70. 59. On the Instructiones, see M. Marinelli, S. Della Torre and F. Adorni, Instructiones fabricae et suppellectilis ecclesiasticae: libri II Carlo Borromei. Vatican City, 2000. 60. A. Blunt, Artistic theory in Italy, 1450–1600. Oxford, 1940, 131. 61. A. Doyle Anderson and G. Maiorino, The Figino, or the purpose of painting. Art theory in the late Renaissance. Toronto, 2001.

62  A Change of Scenario theoretical theme remains clear: art should aim at moral improvement by means of instructions that adhered to the principles of the church rather than encourage pleasure by means of aesthetic stimulus. The eloquent discussion illustrated by Il Figino highlights the challenges faced within the Milanese artistic community and explains the local emphasis on narratives informed by didactic clarity and emotional piety. Nonetheless, from the mid-1580s things started to change. Following Borromeo’s abrupt death at the age of 46, the Milanese Church underwent a transitional phase as the new bishop Gaspare Visconti was unable to sustain the leadership and force of his predecessor.62 While more progressive figures such as Pirro Visconti rose to prominence on the Milanese political and cultural scene, art theorists such as Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo advocated the importance of the study of nature and the rendering of lifelike images.63 Lomazzo and Visconti were close friends. They shared affiliation with colleagues in the cultural circle of the Accademia della Val di Blenio, opposed the rigid guidelines imposed by Carlo Borromeo and admired the art of Correggio rather than that of Tibaldi.64 In his private art collection, exhibited in the nymphaeum soon to be decorated by Camillo Procaccini, Pirro displayed Correggio’s Agony in the Garden (Apsley House, London), which he purchased based on Lomazzo’s suggestion for the price of 2,400 lire.65 Alessandro Morandotti has thoroughly detailed how the fascination for the sixteenth century Emilian master had a remarkable influence on the Lombard art market, generating a collecting interest that endured for decades.66 Hence, as soon as the authoritative austerity of Borromeo’s influence started to fade, Milan was ready to embrace pictorial novelties. It was at this moment that the Procaccini arrived, aware of being the bearers of the Emilian tradition. Mentored by Pirro Visconti, Camillo and Ercole knew they could change Milanese art by introducing elements from their own pictorial background. They rejuvenated the local rigid formulas with a more modern style, which was inspired by a combination of Correggio’s virtuosity, naturalistic concepts developed in the Carracci’s Accademia dei Desiderosi, together with Roman references imported to Bologna through Prospero Fontana and Bartolomeo Passerotti. The prestige and remuneration of their early commissions, culminating with Camillo’s employment in the Milan Cathedral, outline 62. D’Amico 2012, 112–113. 63. Lomazzo was a passionate believer in the study of nature and in the artist’s ability to capture emotions. In 1584 he wrote Il Trattato dell’arte della pittura and later, in 1590, the Idea del tempio della pittura. Both texts celebrated the pivotal role of Leonardo and identified northern Italian artists such as Mantegna, Gaudenzio Ferrari and Polidoro da Caravaggio as some of Italy’s greatest masters. See J.J. Chai, Idea of the temple of painting. Philadelphia, 2013. 64. Morandotti 1985, 129–185. 65. ‘Un Cristo che ora nell’orto, nel quale pose ogni sua diligenza per quattro o cinque scudi, il qual gli anni passati è stato venduto al conte Pirro Visconte per quattrocento scudi’. G.P. Lomazzo, Idea del tempio della pittura. Milan, 1590, 101. Correggio’s Agony in the Garden was on display in Pirro Visconti’s collection before being sold by his heirs to the Marquis of Caracena, Governor of Milan from 1648 to 1656. For the collecting history of Correggio’s painting, see Morandotti 2005, 77–78, note 15. 66. The heirs of the Milanese sculptor Pompeo Leoni owned Correggio’s Jupiter and Io (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna) and Danae (Galleria Borghese, Rome), both sold before 1619 to Rudolph II. Canvases by Correggio can be found in the inventories of the D’Adda and Archinto collections, while infinite copies from the Emilian master’s works are documented in Milanese early seventeenth-century collections. See M. Spagnolo, ‘L’Orazione nell’orto di Correggio e la sua precoce fortuna lombarda’. Arte lombarda, 136, 2002, 37–51.

A Change of Scenario 63 the effectiveness of their plan. Similarly, the fact that Sebastiano Resta defined the Scuola Procaccinesca as ‘the smartest as well as the most curious and innovative’ indicates the novelty brought by the family to Milan, highlighting how, in fewer than five years, Camillo had established himself as the leading artist in the city.67 Following this train of thought, it does not come as a surprise that, during the Procaccinis’ early Milanese years, their Emilian roots were on constant display. In 1590 Lomazzo recognised Ercole as a ‘skilled imitator of Correggio’s coloristic ability’, while a few months earlier Camillo adapted the nocturnal light of the Transfiguration painted for the Church of San Fedele from Correggio’s Adoration of the Shepherds (Dresden Gemäldegalerie), a painting he had admired while working in Reggio Emilia.68 Defined by Luigi Scaramuccia as ‘the most beautiful work of Camillo’s career’, the San Fedele altarpiece introduced Camillo to further Milanese public commissions, such as San Francesco Grande.69 The Procaccinis’ ostentation of their Emilian roots endured for decades: still in 1606 the young Giulio Cesare, soon to be critically acclaimed by Carlo Torre as ‘the new Correggio’, signed a Deposition painted for the Capuchin convent of Appenzell with the tag ‘Iulius Cesar Procacinus Bonon.[iensis] F.[ecit]’, a clear indication of his former status as a Bolognese citizen.70 To differentiate themselves from the conforming cohort of Lombard artists was just one aspect of the Procaccinis’ early affirmation strategy in Milan. The Bolognese family left Emilia with a clear understanding of the Lombard market and of the skills needed to succeed in it. Although Camillo and Ercole secured early commissions, and with it visibility, it is only by taking into account Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio’s specializations that we can appreciate the Procaccinis’ attempt to differentiate their individual expertises, developing knowledge of different techniques and making their family competitive in different fields of artistic production. To this end, after the apprenticeship in Lainate under the Duomo protostatuario Francesco Brambilla, Giulio Cesare worked as a sculptor, undertaking a promising career path that he pursued for over a decade. On 16 March 1591, he obtained his first payment from Milan Cathedral.71 He was only 17  years old, and already working independently while his father and older brother were actively engaged in the commission for San Francesco Grande. Similarly, Carlo Antonio perfected his skills as a landscape painter: a specialization that allowed him to undertake the tripartite role of collaborator of the bottega familiare, easel painter and decorator of aristocratic villas. Described by the sixteenth century Milanese lawyer Bartolomeo Taegio as places apt to magnify the quiet beauty of the campagna as opposed to the frantic activity of the city,72 Lombard villas were the product of investments by wealthy Milanese families who, while continuing to engage in lucrative commercial businesses, also showed interest in purchasing

67. Resta’s quote is cited in Gregori 1973, 36. 68. Lomazzo 1590, 142. Correggio’s painting was on display in the Basilica of San Prospero in Reggio Emilia when Camillo was working at the choir’s decoration. The painting was moved to Modena in 1640 to be incorporated in the d’Este Collection. D. Ekserdjian, Correggio. New Haven, 1997, 205–217. 69. Scaramuccia 1674, 144. 70. ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini chiamossi di Camillo germano, acclamato nuovo Antonio da Correggio [. . .]’. Torre 1674, 45. 71. The payment is dated 16 March 1591. Berra 1991, 22. 72. B. Taegio, La villa. Milan, 1559, 2.

64  A Change of Scenario land, building palaces that solidified their status as landowners.73 Decorated with landscapes, grotesques, allegorical scenes and mythological figures, these residences represented a valuable business alternative, not only for those painters excluded by major religious commissions, but also for workshops capable of coordinating large decorative projects. Having worked in Pirro Visconti’s villa, Carlo Antonio developed the expertise to accomplish such endeavours, which were certainly less prestigious than decorating major churches, but nevertheless provided sufficient income.74 It was not direct competition with the Carracci in Bologna, but instead the lack of competition in Milan, combined with the favourable economic outlook of the city and the patronage of Pirro Visconti, that persuaded the Procaccini to relocate. As it happens, Milan was the ideal location to establish the family business once envisioned by Ercole the Elder and thus, when Pirro Visconti summoned them, the Procaccini did not hesitate, exploiting an opportunity that radically changed the outcome of their careers. Their integration into the new city was eventually fulfilled in November 1594, when they were granted Milanese citizenship after the decree of King Phillip II of Spain.75

73. A. De Maddalena, ‘L’immobilizzazione della ricchezza nella Milano spagnola: movimenti, esperienza, interpretazioni’. Annali di storia economica e sociale, 4, 1965, 39–72. 74. Richard Spear has noted that in Rome, decorations of aristocratic villas were paid well. For instance, Paul Bril’s Roman fresco projects paid almost as much as his easel paintings. R. Spear, ‘Rome. Setting the stage’. Spear and Sohm 2010, 100. 75. The document, dated 7 November 1594, was published in Pevsner 1929, 323.

4 Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

The Most Excellent Among Painters It is undeniable that Camillo was the driving factor behind the Procaccini family success. The energy displayed in his early commissions testifies to how he captured the appreciation of the Lombard public, establishing himself as the most modern artist working in Milan at the end of the sixteenth century. Beginning with the employment in Lainate, his ascent took less than a decade. When on 31 May 1597 the Fabbrica del Duomo commissioned the decoration of the exterior wings of the Antegnani organ, the decision was made for the first time without an open competition. The work was given to Camillo Procaccini: ‘the most excellent among painters’.1 The surprising promptness of Camillo’s success has long been debated.2 Scholars have been puzzled by the prestige and sheer number of his early commissions, a resounding success that contrasts with the reputation as a tireless producer of reformed ecclesiastical decoration often associated with his name. Developed in the past century, the negative outlook on Camillo’s artistic stature pointed a finger at the disparity and monotony of his paintings, described as boring, repetitive, sometimes even sloppy.3 Motivated by a tendency of mid-twentieth century scholars to prefer the works of Cerano, Giulio Cesare Procaccini and Morazzone, the derogatory view of Camillo’s career has gradually been eroded by the acknowledgement of the pictorial novelties he introduced to Milan.4 Nonetheless, he is still considered a secondary figure in Lombard art. Camillo’s arrival in Lombardy marks the start of a new era for the Milanese school of painting. His reputation created expectations about his art that came to fruition just after the decoration of the nymphaeum in Lainate and endured throughout the

  1. Camillo’s employment was justified by the following resolution: ‘deliberano non doversi differire la pittura delle imposte d’organo, ed incaricarne il miglior pittore della città. [. . .] darne la commissione a Camillo Procaccini, il più eccellente dei pittori’. Annali della fabbrica del Duomo di Milano dall’origine al presente pubblicata a cura della sua amministrazione. Milan, 1877–1885, vol. IV, 31 May 1597, 317.   2. In 1984, Bona Castellotti observed: ‘a problem still unsolved is to understand the circumstances leading to Camillo’s Milanese success’. See the entry by Marco Bona Castellotti in C. Bertelli and G. Lopez (eds), Brera dispersa: quadri nascosti di una grande raccolta nazionale. Milan, 1984, 233. The concept was restated 15 years later by Zani, who defined Camillo’s early achievements as ‘difficult to explain’. See the entry by Vito Zani in Gregori 1999, 201–202.   3. ‘Disuguaglianza di qualità e monotone ripetizioni costituiscono l’inevitabile controparte negativa di un corpus così vasto e senza dubbio spesso affrettato come quello di Camillo’. Dell’Acqua 1957, 762.   4. A fundamental study in this direction is Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007.

66  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark last decade of the sixteenth century. Camillo took the spotlight away from Figino, Luini and Peterzano, paving the way for the growth of the new generation of artists, and notably for its two most representative exponents: Giulio Cesare Procaccini and Cerano. Giulio Cesare obviously looked to his older brother while receiving formal training within the family circle. Cerano, who from the end of 1591 resided permanently in Milan, carefully studied Camillo’s works, fascinated by the modernity of his painting. This is evident in the Conversion of Saul he frescoed around 1595 in the Church of San Francesco in Trecate, which is glaringly indebted to Camillo’s Vision of Constantine executed a few years earlier in Riva San Vitale.5 To be recognised as the principal innovator of Milanese art increased Camillo’s confidence in the probability of a successful outcome for his career, playing a fundamental role in the development of the Procaccini family business. He used his Emilian heritage as a manifesto to advertise his stylistic trademark. He imported elements from the Bolognese maniera and modulated them with the study of Correggio. He introduced modern concepts learned during his experience in the Carracci Academy. The enthusiastic reception of his works, combined with the support of Pirro Visconti and the accurately selected specializations of his brothers, put the Procaccini family in a privileged position in the Milanese artistic scene. In Lainate Camillo met Martino Bassi, the Lombard architect who introduced him to his first important Milanese commission: the Transfiguration painted for the Spinola-Rezzonico chapel in the Church of San Fedele.6 Completed before 1590, the altarpiece balances invention and religious tradition, representing a statement of the style that Camillo aimed to introduce in Milan. It exhibits the Bolognese roots of Procaccini’s art, as well as his connection to Correggio. To Milanese patrons, it demonstrated Camillo’s versatility, exemplifying how he was capable of mitigating his juvenile style, described by Malvasia as ‘energetic, magniloquent, unpredictable and innovative’ with the requirements of sacred art established by Borromeo.7 To this end, having worked in Bologna Cathedral under Prospero Fontana’s supervision, and in accordance with the precept of Gabriele Paleotti, had certainly familiarised Camillo with rules of composition and decorum considered essential for working in the major religious sites in Lombardy. That Camillo envisioned his first Milanese altarpiece as a stylistic manifesto is confirmed by his decision to reproduce it in an etching placed on the market to advertise his work (fig. 4.1). In doing so, he followed the example of one of his most beloved painters, Parmigianino, who first took up etching around the time he arrived in Bologna in 1527, having fled Rome at the time of the Sack.8 Drawing with freedom and variety, Camillo evoked the figure of Christ with short flicks of the etching needle, and quickly defined the strongly lit apostles with long strokes and modulated cross-hatching.9 Compared by Malvasia to the works by Guido Reni and Ludovico

  5. On Cerano’s work, see Rosci 2000, 80–85. Procaccini and Cerano shared appraiser duties. In 1611 they evaluated Della Rovere’s work in the Palazzo Reale. ASM, Fondo Autografi, 101, f. 50.   6. On Bassi’s intervention in San Fedele, see Fiorio 1985, 150.   7. ‘Camillo mostrossi più animoso, più grande, più capriccioso e più inventore’. Malvasia 1678, 276.   8. D. Landeau and P. Parshall, The Renaissance print 1470–1550. New Haven, 1994, 266.  9. N.W. Neilson, ‘Camillo Procaccini’s etched transfiguration’. The Burlington magazine, 118, 1976, 699–701.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 67

Figure 4.1 Camillo Procaccini, Transfiguration. Etching, 58x34 cm., circa 1590, National Gallery of Art, Washington. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington.

Carracci, Camillo’s etched Transfiguration was followed by four impressions representing the Rest on the Flight into Egypt (fig. 4.2), and one illustrating St.  Francis Receiving the Stigmata (fig. 4.3).10 Altogether, these works testify to the Bolognese painter’s willingness to publicise his art. Griffiths has recently explained that the European print trade of the second half of the sixteenth century should be considered as a unity, as it was held together by both the constant movement of artists and publishers from one city to another, and the shipment of goods between the main cities.11 Considering that Milan was among the largest commercial centres in Europe, Camillo succeeded in securing the wide diffusion of his prints. His etchings elicited indeed interest 10. Malvasia 1678, 293. For the catalogue of Camillo’s etchings, see B. Bohn (ed.), The illustrated Bartsch, Italian masters of the sixteenth century: Bartolomeo Passerotti, Domenico Tibaldi, Camillo Procaccini, Ludovico Carracci and Annibale Carracci. New York, 1996. 11. A. Griffiths, The print before photography. An introduction to European printmaking 1550–1820. London, 2016, 9.

68  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

Figure 4.2 Camillo Procaccini, Rest on the Flight into Egypt. Etching, 22x27 cm., 1590–1593, National Gallery of Art, Washington. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of the National Gallery of Art, Washington.

from the two most influential dynasties of European printmakers: the Sadeler and the Galle.12 Jan Sadeler I  used Camillo’s models for his own impression of the Rest on the Flight into Egypt (fig. 4.2), which was later imitated by Callot. Cornelis I Galle, engraved several of Camillo’s etchings in reverse, enhancing the Bolognese painter’s reputation in France and northern Europe. In this regard, in his notes to Orlandi’s Abecedario pittorico, father Sebastiano Resta recalls that several decades after Camillo’s death, Monsù Herar, a professor of painting at the French academy, confidently recognised his hand while attributing an unsigned drawing.13 The positive response to Camillo’s Transfiguration led to the commission in San Francesco Grande, and then to the employment in Milan Cathedral, at first with the Martyrdom of St. Agnes, then afterwards with the decoration of the shutters of the Valvassori and Antegnani organs. Publicly recognised as the best painter in Lombardy, 12. On Sadeler and Galle’s interest in Procaccini’s etchings, see P. Sénéchal, ‘La pratique de la copie chez les graveurs: a propos du Repos de la Sainte Famille de Jacques Callot’. Gazette des beaux-arts, 1501, 1994, 73–86. 13. ‘Tutti dicevano: bello, nessuno disse chi fosse. Monsù Herar Professore dell’Accademia di Francia disse: questo è di mano di Camillo Procaccino da Milano’. G. Nicodemi, ‘Le note di Sebastiano Resta ad un esemplare dell’Abecedario pittorico di Pellegrino Orlandi’. In Studi storici in memoria di Mons. Angelo Mercati: Prefetto dell’Archivio Vaticano. Milan, 1956, 315.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 69

Figure 4.3 Justus Sadeler (after Camillo Procaccini), The Stigmata of St.  Francis. Engraving, 48x33 cm., circa 1600, Wellcome Collection, London. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of the Wellcome Collection, London.

at the turn of the century Camillo was active in the sacristy of San Vittore al Corpo and in the Church of Sant’Angelo, where he decorated both the San Diego chapel and the choir.14 In San Vittore he was joined by Giulio Cesare, who executed the wax models for the sacristy handles.15 In Sant’Angelo, he was assisted by Carlo Antonio, who completed the landscapes enclosing altarpieces representing the Rest on the Flight into Egypt and the Apostles Visiting the Virgin’s Grave.16 To be in control of the most prestigious Milanese commissions, however, was just a part of Camillo’s strategy. Thanks 14. On 1 September  1601, Camillo received 150 lire to execute the Martyrdom of St.  Victor. On 6 April 1602 he was paid an additional 390 lire for the lateral canvases and the three oval frescoes decorating the chapel. L. Parvis Marino, ‘Camillo Procaccini: appunti e ricerche sui restauri della Sacrestia di San Vittore al Corpo’. Arte lombarda, 108–109, 1994, 75–77. 15. ‘Ducatoni doi al Procazino scultore per haver fatto un modello di cera per le maniglie della sacrestia’. Ibid., 76. 16. Morandotti 2005, 199.

70  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark to his friendship with Pirro Visconti, he favoured Giulio Cesare’s employment as a sculptor in Milan Cathedral, both providing him with a career path and enlarging the expertise of the family business. Furthermore, he used the plangent echo of his name to attract commissions from peripheral areas of the State of Milan, taking advantage of the role assigned to artistic imagery by Borromeo’s vision of the reformed Church. Paraphrasing Lanzi, he ‘did the work of ten painters’, not only decorating Milanese churches, but also projecting works into the most remote areas of Lombardy.17 It is a matter of an impressive number of commissions, which he could have never accomplished without the backup of an organised bottega committed to facilitating his works.

The Procaccini Workshop Camillo’s bottega allowed him to work on different projects, playing an essential role in the widespread diffusion of the Procaccini style. Although his use of collaborators enhanced his business strategy, this practice eventually became the main reason that persuaded modern scholars to interpret his artistic production in negative light. The repetition of iconographic models constantly displayed by his assistants shaped Camillo’s reputation as a tireless producer of reformed ecclesiastical decoration, overshadowing the novelty and modernity constituting the actual backbones of his Milanese success. Camillo’s pupils were not required to perform theoretical or stylistic investigations, but instead asked to comply with the stylistic canon represented by his drawings. In this regard, in 1608 Girolamo Borsieri defined Procaccini as the ‘master of modern draftsmen, the one who even in the most insignificant sketch follows the rules of movement and perspective’.18 Until now, scholarship has associated Camillo’s sheets with his desire to satisfy the collecting needs of Milanese aristocrats.19 Nevertheless, evidence suggests that many of his preparatory sketches and compositional studies served a specific didactic purpose, providing models to be reproduced by his workshop. This is proved by the conformity between Camillo’s drawings and many of the canvases and frescoes completed by his assistants in peripheral areas of the State of Milan, as well as by hints found in the older literature. To this end, in 1620 Giulio Mancini noted ‘the Procaccini are friendly people, in their house they host an accademia where many noblemen send their children to learn to draw’.20 The concept of a school of painting founded by the Procaccini family in Milan was proposed at the end of the 1950s, but never investigated in detail.21 Nonetheless, the Procaccinis’ involvement in teaching activities is written all over their family history. Malvasia states that in 1583 both Camillo and Ercole the Elder held teaching positions in the Carracci’s newly created Accademia dei Desiderosi, while it is known

17. ‘E fatte opere per dieci pittori’. Lanzi 1825, 558–559. 18. ‘Camillo è stimato il maestro de’ moderni dissegnatori, come quello che in un minimo schizzo osserva la regola della prospettiva e insieme i termini de’ movimenti’. Borsieri’s letter to Ferrando Simonetta, 1608–1609. Published in Caramel 1966, 108. 19. Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 79. 20. ‘I Procaccini son huomini di costume sociabili, et in casa loro si fa academia et molti padri nobili mandano i lor figli ad imparar a disegnar’. G. Mancini, Considerazioni sulla pittura. Rome, 1620 (edn 1956–1957), 247–248. 21. M. Mrozińska, I disegni del codice Bonola del Museo di Varsavia. Venice, 1959, 43; 57.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 71 that in 1586 Camillo was asked to direct an academy for about 20 artists in Reggio Emilia. If Mancini and Borsieri’s observations are coeval sources that should not be doubted, an account by Soprani confirms that in 1618, while in Genoa, Giulio Cesare participated in the teaching activity of Giovanni Carlo Doria’s Accademia del Disegno, where he enjoyed leading beginners on the path to perfection in draftsmanship, becoming a source of inspiration for Genoese painters.22 The existence of the Procaccini school has been questioned owing to difficulties in determining its physical spaces. The most common objection is based on the misguided belief that the family members never shared a house in Milan.23 From 1590 to 1595, however, the Procaccini lived together in the in the parish of Sant’Eusebio, while after Ercole’s death Camillo and Carlo Antonio shared a house in the parish of San Tommaso in Terra Amara.24 If the fact that Camillo remained in the family house until his father’s death confirms the pater familias’ involvement in the family business, Carlo Antonio’s choosing to cohabit with Camillo bears witness to his commitment to participating in the family activities.25 Initially located in the parish of Sant’Eusebio, then in San Tommaso in Terra Amara, in around 1609 the bottega was eventually relocated in a building adjacent to the house bought by Camillo in the parish of San Calimero.26 As proved by archival documents, the spaces were later on rented to the Lombard painter Daniele Crespi by Anna Pagani, Camillo’s second wife.27 After the plague, Ercole Procaccini the Younger continued the family’s legacy, taking over the school of painting which he transferred to his own residence in the parish of San Giovanni in Laterano. It was there that he hosted Malvasia, providing him with the information that represents the starting point for understanding the Procaccini family’s history. The Procaccinis’ Milanese teaching facility did not have the official investiture of accademia but was instead a school in which students were taught manual and technical procedures to develop their careers as painters. Its concept included the vertical structure of a Renaissance workshop mixed with the possibility, for students, of training and working outside the school. The rationale of developing such an organizational structure arose from reasons of prestige and convenience. If, on the one hand, the acknowledged success of the scuola attested to the Procaccini family’s major role in the development of Milanese art, on the other hand, following the assumption

22. Soprani 1674, 315. 23. N.W. Neilson, ‘The Procaccini: various ways of drawing’. In Dal disegno all’opera compiuta: atti del convegno internazionale di Perugia, Mario Di Giampaolo (ed.), Perugia, 1992, 136, note 16. 24. Camillo and Carlo Antonio cohabitated in the parish of San Tommaso in Terra Amara from circa 1595 to 1604. From 1605, Carlo Antonio was registered in San Giovanni in Laterano. Between 1607 and 1608 Camillo lived in San Martino in Noseggia, before purchasing a house in San Calimero. V. Caprara, ‘Nuovi reperimenti intorno ai Procaccini’. Paragone, 333, 1977, 96; 99, note 11. 25. Sandra Cavallo has explained that in the early modern period it was fairly common to live in extended families. Among the merchant classes, the custom of delaying the division of family assets between siblings frequently meant that brothers, often married, continued to live under the same roof. See S. Cavallo, ‘The artisan’s casa’. In At home in Renaissance Italy, Marta Ajmar Wollheim and Flora Dennis (eds), London, 2006, 65–75. 26. On 22 February 1609, Camillo purchased a house in San Calimero. ASM, Notarile, 22046. To put this into perspective, one should note that at the beginning of the seventeenth century over 90 percent of Milanese inhabitants were renters. R. Ago, ‘Five industrious cities’. Spear and Sohm 2010, 268. 27. L. Facchin, ‘Nuovi ritrovamenti documentari su Daniele Crespi e la sua famiglia’. In Daniele Crespi: un grande pittore del Seicento lombardo, Andrea Spiriti (ed.), Milan, 2006, 125–126.

72  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark that ‘to maintain their social success artists had to maintain complex workshops and a division of labour typical of the Age of Manufacture’, the Procaccini surrounded themselves with a solid équipe of painters, who could help them with the multiple commissions they obtained in a large area of northern Italy.28 Based on practical instructions and the constant practice of copying and drawing, the Procaccini family’s school should not be interpreted as an official and regulated institution.29 Differing from academies of art such as the Florentine Accademia del Disegno, the Roman Accademia di San Luca and the Milanese Accademia Ambrosiana, their teaching facility was an unofficial place of training and professional growth in which young artists could perfect their training and avoid the path of traditional apprenticeship that would have forced them to work for many years under the same master.30 Although terms such as ‘painter’s academies’ and ‘painting schools’ are sometimes used almost interchangeably in seventeenth-century literature, recent studies have demonstrated that the path to learning for young artists encompassed both official institutions with intellectual ambitions and private academies exemplified by those owned by Andrea Sacchi in Rome and Bernardo Baldi in Bologna.31 The Procaccinis’ school belonged to this second category and constituted one of the most prestigious places of training for young Milanese artists, being a separate entity from Borromeo’s Accademia Ambrosiana. Even though there is insufficient documentation to retrace the names of the Procaccinis’ pupils, some of them are mentioned in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century sources. Malvasia recognised Lorenzo Franchi, who assisted Camillo in Reggio Emilia.32 He also cited the names of Callisto Taccagni and Giacinto di Medea (both from Lodi) as well as the Genoese Simone Barabino, who collaborated with the Procaccini family in decorating the choir of Sant’Angelo in Milan.33 Lanzi mentions Giovanni Battista Discepoli, Carlo Biffi, Ambrogio Ciocca and Giovanni Battista Ciniselli, the latter also quoted by Torre.34 The list of the Procaccini family’s assistants continues with Bartolomeo Roverio (also known as the Genovesino), as well as with Agostino

28. B. Smith, The death of the artist as hero: essays in history and culture. Oxford, 1988, 17. 29. On the practice of drawing in Italian workshops, see C. Bambach, Drawing and painting in the Italian Renaissance workshop, theory and practice 1300–1600. Cambridge, 1999, 296–332. 30. In the second half of the sixteenth century, the redefinition of the role of artists was progressively accompanied by an increasing emphasis on academic education, resulting in 1563 in the foundation of the Florentine Accademia del Disegno, established by Giorgio Vasari under the guidelines of Cosimo I de’ Medici (K.E. Barzman, ‘The Florentine Accademia del Disegno, liberal education and the Renaissance artist’. In Academies of art: between Renaissance and romanticism, Anton Boschloo (ed.), The Hague, 1989, 14–32). The Accademia del Disegno inspired the foundation of the Accademia di San Luca in Rome (Lukehart 2009), and, later on, Federico Borromeo’s Accademia Ambrosiana in Milan, founded in 1620 but active from 1613 (Jones 1993). Additionally, the attention given to painters’ education fostered the progressive development of private academies of painting (art schools perhaps might be a more accurate term) descending from the tradition of Baccio Bandinelli’s school in Rome and well represented in northern Italy by the examples of Bernardo Baldi’s Accademia degli Indifferenti and by the Carracci’s Accademia degli Incamminati, in which Ercole and Camillo Procaccini had teaching duties for the period 1582–1583. 31. Cavazzini 2008, 70–80. 32. Malvasia 1678, 293. 33. Ibid., 280. 34. Lanzi 1825, 575–578; Torre 1674, 18. Ambrogio Ciocca’s name is incorrect. Lanzi refers instead to Marco Antonio Ciocca, who in 1625 married Cecilia Procaccini, Giulio Cesare’s daughter.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 73 Lodola and Giovanni Battista Volpino, two decorators employed in completing the decoration of Pirro Visconti’s villa in Lainate. The Procaccini workshop also hosted the Portuguese Amaro do Vale, who from 1612 gained a certain visibility as a court painter to Philip III of Spain.35 Finally, there is the extraordinary story of Luca Riva: a mute and deaf artist, who studied drawing with Camillo Procaccini and in 1624 made his testament via a set of drawings.36 Although older accounts may contain imprecisions, they are indicative of the sheer volume of collaborators gravitating around the Procaccini family. Malvezzi notes that Camillo’s pupils were allowed to work outside the workshop and some of them, such as Barabino, joined the bottega as adults, being already trained by other artists.37 Additionally, special arrangements were made for the children of Milanese aristocracy, since Mancini reports that many noblemen sent their sons to study in the Procaccinis’ school. In this regard, analogies can be found with the Genoese studio founded in 1600 by Giovanni Battista Paggi, in which participants were free. Peter Lukehart notes that Paggi, like many other contemporaries, must have summoned servants or garzoni to execute the manual labour for his free giovani, since the sons of financially independent fathers were obligated to do nothing except draw.38 As it was in Genoa, the coexistence of garzoni accartati and giovani sotto padre must have been praxis also in Milan.

Peripheral Commissions While working in the most prestigious Milanese religious buildings, Camillo accepted commissions in peripheral areas of Lombardy, which he mostly supervised, delegating part of the execution to the workshop. In understanding how the Procaccini took care of these opportunities, consideration must be given to the role played by Carlo Antonio, who, in the last decade of the sixteenth century, free of major duties, supported the early development of the family business. In doing so, he secured the reputation that in 1601 qualified him to have commissioned two canvases representing episodes from the life of St Raymond for the Milanese Basilica of St Eustorgio.39 Three years later, he was selected by cardinal Federico Borromeo to paint one of the quadroni celebrating the beatification of Carlo Borromeo.40 Thanks to this commission, he became the third member of the Procaccini family to be granted the honour of working in Milan Cathedral. In analysing the different commissions undertaken by the Procaccini workshop during the last decade of the sixteenth century, a geographical approach is preferable to a strictly chronological one. This would outline the capillary diffusion of Camillo’s 35. V. Serrão, ‘La peinture maniériste portugaise, entre la Flandre et Rome, 1550–1620’. In Fiamminghi a Roma 1508–1608: atti del convegno internazionale, Nicole Dacos (ed.), Rome, 1999, 271. 36. On Luca Riva and his testament, see M. Bendiscioli, ‘Vita sociale e culturale’. Storia di Milano, vol. X, Milan, 1957, 478–479. 37. ‘Camillo formò un maggior numero di eccellenti scolari, perchè dopo averli fondati nelle regole dell’arte, lasciava loro la libertà di agire e di scegliersi altri tipi e maestri’. Malvezzi 1882, 235. 38. P. Lukehart, ‘Delineating the Genoese studio: giovani accartati or sotto padre?’ Lukehart 1993, 37–57. 39. G. Bora, ‘La pittura: dalla fine del Quattrocento all’Ottocento’. In La basilica di Sant’Eustorgio a Milano, Gian Alberto Dell’Acqua (ed.), Milan, 1984, 185–186. 40. The series consisted of 20 large canvases representing episodes in the life of the Milanese saint. Carlo Antonio was commissioned for the episode representing St. Carlo Borromeo receiving the viaticum. M. Rosci, I quadroni di San Carlo del Duomo di Milano. Milan, 1965, 104–105.

74  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark style in the different areas of the State of Milan. In fact, on a closer look, these decorative projects form a triangular path that encloses the borders of the Lombard region, witnessing the diffusion of his models in an area including the South-Western regions of Piedmont and the parish churches located around the Lake Como and the Lake Maggiore, as well as the Ticinese villages of Riva San Vitale, Bellinzona and Biasca. In those regions, the project of reformation of the church initiated by Carlo Borromeo and continued by his cousin Federico had progressively resulted in the construction of new churches and chapels which needed to be decorated with canvases, frescoes and stuccoes.41 It was definitely a favourable situation, especially for a newly formed workshop, which Camillo profitably exploited by using his innovative pictorial style as a trademark that quickly became popular all over Lombardy. Even though he was mostly busy in Milan and unable to spend enough time at the building sites, the Bolognese painter accepted as many works as possible. As a consequence, he focused on painting major altarpieces, asking for the support of assistants for the execution of frescoes and minor canvases that were carefully copied from his drawings. Additionally, stucco and grotesque decorations were outsourced to the workshop owned by Giovanni Battista Lezeno and Francesco Sala, two local artisans who had collaborated with Camillo in the decorative campaigns of Sant’Angelo and San Vittore al Corpo.42 Through the bottega, Camillo assured a high volume of commissions, advertising his work and using the Emilian roots of his art to push the rigid boundaries of the Lombard maniera. The innovative features of his style attracted the favour of churchmen and aristocrats, encouraging imitation from local artists. Among them, Giovan Battista Discepoli, known as the cripple from Lugano, became Camillo’s most talented imitator.43 Although there is no validation of Ticozzi’s account attesting his training in the Procaccini’ school, Discepoli was profoundly inspired by the Bolognese painter in the earliest stages of his career.44 A relevant example is the Annunciation he executed around 1620 for the Church of Sant’Antonio in Lugano, which replicates the analogous canvas painted by Camillo’s assistants in the Luganese Church of San Lorenzo, signalling the diffusion of the Procaccinis’ stylistic canon in the northern regions of the State of Milan.45 Among the earliest decorative campaigns undertaken by the Procaccini workshop in peripheral areas of Lombardy, the one carried out for the chapel of St  Agnes in the Church of the Padri Francescani Minori in Tortona stands out.46 The commission was ordered in 1595 by Giustina Garofoli, the wife of Prospero Visconti, an influential figure in the Milanese cultural scene and expert connoisseur in the service

41. F. Frangi, ‘Vicende della pittura a Como e nel Canton Ticino nel secondo Cinquecento’. In Pittura a Como e nel Canton Ticino dal Mille al Settecento, Mina Gregori (ed.), Milan, 1994, 38–44. 42. On Lezeno and Sala, see Parvis Marino 1994, 78–79. 43. For a biographical profile, see F. Frangi, Giovan Battista Discepoli detto lo Zoppo da Lugano: un protagonista della pittura Barocca in lombardia. Milan, 2001. 44. ‘Discepoli, chiamato lo Zoppo da Lugano, nacque nel 1590 e frequentò in Milano la scuola di Camillo Procaccino’. S. Ticozzi, Dizionario degli architetti, scultori, pittori, intagliatori in rame ed in pietra, coniatori di medaglie, musaicisti, niellatori, intarsiatori d’ogni età e d’ogni nazione. Milan, 1833, vol. 2, 416–417. 45. Frangi 2001, 74–75. 46. A. Morandotti, ‘Per l’attività di Camillo Procaccini nell’antico stato di Milano: il ciclo di Torre Garofoli’. Arte lombarda, 70/71, 1984, 137–143.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 75 of the Dukes of Bavaria. Described in 1777 by Francesco Bartoli, the decoration was moved in around 1880 to the nearby village of Torre Garofoli and consists of 24 canvases representing the story of St. Agnes, episodes of the life of the Virgin, those of the life of Christ, the Doctors of the Church and the Prophets.48 The attribution to Camillo, mentioned by the local scholar Eustachio Bussa as ‘the famous Porcacino’, is confirmed by the central altarpiece representing the Martyrdom of St. Agnes, which is a replica of the canvas he had painted three years earlier for Milan Cathedral. In organising the work, Camillo took charge of the stories of St.  Agnes, the most important part of the cycle. His Apparition of St.  Agnes to her Family replicates a preparatory drawing in the Ambrosiana,49 while the Miracle of St. Agnes is based on a brown ink sketch conserved in the collection of the Duke of Devonshire at Chatsworth.50 The remaining 21 figurations are of inferior quality and were completed by assistants working on preorganised models selected by the capobottega. For instance, the Coronation of the Virgin is copied from a black chalk drawing of the Ambrosiana (fig. 4.4) and features a compositional scheme recycled by the workshop on at least four occasions.51 These include minor commissions, such as the altarpiece executed for the sanctuary in Ghiffa, as well as major projects, exemplified by the decoration of the presbytery of Piacenza Cathedral. On 20 November 1594, Camillo and his assistants travelled to Pallanza, on the west banks of the Lake Maggiore, to decorate the chapel dedicated to Maria delle Grazie in the Church of Santa Maria di Campagna.52 Built in 1526 to the plans of the architects Giovanni and Pietro Beretta, the church had been consecrated in 1547, while the pictorial decoration commenced around 1576–1577, when Aurelio Luini and Giovanni Pietro Gnocchi frescoed both the presbytery and the apse with the Assumption of the Virgin.53 The commission included two large paintings representing the Nativity and the Flight into Egypt (fig. 4.5), three smaller pieces decorating the vault and two standing figures representing St. Joseph and St. John the Evangelist. The fee was agreed at 47

47. ‘[Giustina Garofoli] fece erigere altra Cappella dedicata a S. Agnese con tale magnificenza che appare opera non di Femmina privata ma da Principe, e la fece dipingere dal celebrissimo Porcacino’. E. Bussa, Raccolta di notizie riguardanti Tortona. Tortona, 1780. On Prospero Visconti and his work for the Dukes of Bavaria, see H. Simonsfeld, ‘Mailänder Briefe zur bayerischen und allgemeinen Geschichte des 16 Jahrhunderts’. Abhandlungen der historischen Klasse der königlich, bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 23, 1901–1902, 223–560. 48. La Tavola dell’Altare esprimente il Martirio di S. Agnese, è opera di Camillo Procaccini Bolognese; di cui sono pure i due Quadri laterali. Quello a Cornu Evengelii esprime la Santa che vien posta nel Lupanario, e qui vedesi genuflessa attorniata da Celeste splendore [. . .]. L’altro, da parte dell’Epistola, mostra l’apparizione della Santa condotta da un angelo in compagnia di molte Vergini, a farsi vedere ai suoi Parenti con veste di Paradiso otto giorni dopo il di lei Martirio. F. Bartoli, Notizie delle pitture e sculture e architetture di tutte le piú rinomate città d’Italia. Venice, 1777, 87–88. Milan, Ambrosiana, F. 254 inf., note 1355. Published in Neilson 1979, 147. Chatsworth, Duke of Devonshire Collection, note 401. Published in Neilson 1979, 129. Milan, Ambrosiana, F. 235, inf., no. 985. Published in Neilson 1979, 146. ‘Il detto signor Camillo sia obbligato adornare la Cappella di detta Madonna a stucho et pitture [. . .], et che le pinture siano belle e ben fatte’. Archivio Notarile di Pallanza (ANP), Notarile, Francesco Boralli, 20 November 1594. Cited in F. Imbrico, ‘Contributo alla cronologia di Camillo Procaccini, un contratto ancora inedito’. Bollettino storico per la provincia di Novara, 1947, 142. 53. For Luini’s activity in Pallanza, see the entry by Stefano Martinella in Agosti and Stoppa 2014, 168–178. 49. 50. 51. 52.

76  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

Figure 4.4 Camillo Procaccini, Coronation of the Virgin. Black pencil on white paper, 15x16 cm., 1591–1595, Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan. Photo Credit: © Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana/ Mondadori Portfolio.

2,100 lire to be paid in four instalments, while the stuccoes were executed by Lezeno and Sala, who were directly employed by Camillo.54 Completed in 1596, the decoration was executed in the shop under Camillo’s supervision. Even the pictures on the curved vault are oil on canvas, implying a need to work quickly as well as an unwillingness to spend time on site.55 As in Tortona, Camillo’s assistants copied from drawings, ensuring stylistic uniformity and rapidity of execution. The Flight into Egypt is a replica of Camillo’s drawing conserved at Palazzo d’Arco in Mantua (fig. 4.6) and follows the composition employed in the choir of Sant’Angelo in Milan.56 54. ‘Signor Camillo sia tenuto et obbligato a mettere in opera li stuchatori’. ANP, Notarile, Francesco Boralli, 20 November 1594. Cited in Imbrico 1947, 142. 55. Neilson 1979, 52. 56. Mantua, Palazzo d’Arco, no. 4483 bis. Published in S. L’Occaso, ‘Unpublished drawings by Camillo Procaccini and Giuseppe Ghezzi in Mantua’. Master drawings, 49, 2011, 175–178. The drawing is furthermore copied in a sheet of the Prado Museum in Madrid (inventory no. D001752).

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 77

Figure 4.5 Camillo Procaccini, Flight into Egypt. Oil on canvas, 240x147  cm., 1594–1596, Church of Santa Maria di Campagna, Pallanza.

Similarly, the Holy Father reproduces a drawing from the Tylers Museum, replicating a composition with God the father blessing from the clouds also executed a few years later in Bellinzona.57 In Pallanza, the Procaccini workshop was also active in the Church of San Leonardo, where a large painting representing the Apparition of the Immaculate Conception to St. Leonard (fig. 4.7) is still in situ on the main altar.58 Completed in the last decade of the sixteenth century, the altarpiece testifies to how Carlo Antonio’s specialization as a landscape painter was functional to the family workshop, allowing the definition of the backgrounds of Camillo’s paintings with landscapes inspired by the Flemish tradition. Carlo Antonio’s intervention is identifiable by comparing the Pallanza altarpiece with a coeval preparatory drawing executed by Camillo for the Apparition of the Immaculate Conception to St. Francis (fig. 4.8), now in the Church of Ognissanti 57. Haarlem, Teylers Museum, B/82. Published in Neilson 1979, 137. 58. The canvas was mentioned by the Bishop Balbis Bertone in his pastoral visit of 1761. F.M. Ferro, D. Gnemmi and M. Dell’Omo, La pittura del Sei e Settecento nel novarese. Novara, 1996, 218.

78  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

Figure 4.6 Camillo Procaccini, Flight into Egypt. Red chalk drawing, 181x101 mm., 1590–1595, Museo Palazzo d’Arco, Mantua. Photo Credit: Museo Palazzo d’Arco, Mantova.

in Bergamo.59 A significant variant is represented by the veduta, in which Camillo’s customary flat background is reinvigorated by a composition gradually receding into the distance, where a small lakeside village, most likely a representation of Pallanza, constitutes the setting for the apparition of the Virgin. On the banks of the Lake Maggiore, Camillo and Carlo Antonio also collaborated in the Church of San Martino in Lesa, where they executed ‘two large canvases equipped with frames, depicting St.  Martin and St.  George riding horses’.60 Commissioned in the second half of the 1590s by Giovanni Battista Visconti, whose coat of arms is recognizable in the foreground of both paintings, the canvases were erroneously attributed to Giulio Cesare Procaccini before being recognised as works by 59. Milan, Museo dei Beni Culturali Cappuccini. Published in Cassinelli and Vanoli, 2007, 220–221. 60. ‘Due quadri grandi in tela et suoi cornice dipinto di mano del S. Procaccini et immagini l’uno S. Martino a cavallo l’altro S. Giorgio pure a cavallo et sono riposte nella Chiesa a fianchi dell’altare maggiore’. 1652 Inventory of the paintings conserved in the Church of San Martino. Archivio Storico Diocesano Novarese (ASDN), Lesa, 1.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 79

Figure 4.7 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Apparition of the Immaculate Conception to St Leonard. Oil on canvas, 312x234 cm., 1595, Collegiata of San Leonardo, Pallanza.

Camillo and his bottega.61 While the Saint George and the Dragon represents one of the four versions of this subject painted by Camillo, the Charity of St.  Martin was executed by Carlo Antonio.62 Under closer examination, the facial features of the saint are consistent with the sharp lineaments and winking expressions recognizable in a Virgin with Child, St. John the Baptist and St. Catherine (Borromeo Collection, Isola Bella) recently attributed to the painter.63 Furthermore, the landscape, although seriously damaged by oxidation, is consistent with the easel paintings introduced by Carlo Antonio on the Milanese market from the start of the seventeenth century. 61. M. Dell’Omo, ‘Dipinti del Seicento sul Lago Maggiore e sulla Riviera d’Orta. Nuove proposte per Camillo Procaccini, Giovanni Battista Discepoli e Giuseppe Nuvolone’. Arte lombarda, 113–115, 1995, 103. 62. Camillo’s versions of the St. George and the Dragon are conserved in the Galleria Nazionale di Arte Antica in Rome, the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana in Milan and the Church of San Giorgio in Bisuschio. The iconography served as the model for Carlo Antonio’s St. George and the Dragon, executed around 1610 and conserved at the Pinacoteca Malaspina in Pavia. 63. On the canvas now at Isola Bella, see the entry by Paolo Vanoli in A. Morandotti and M. Natale, Collezione Borromeo: la galleria dei quadri dell’Isola Bella. Milan, 2011, 278–280.

80  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

Figure 4.8 Camillo Procaccini, Apparition of the Immaculate Conception to St. Francis. Brown ink and watercolour on paper, 44x35 cm., 1594–1596, Museo dei Beni Culturali Cappuccini, Milan. Photo Credit: Provincia di lombardia dei Frati Minori Cappuccini – Museo dei Cappuccini, Milano.

The Procaccini in Switzerland As the main centre for the commercial and military connections between Italy, Flanders and Spain, from 1550 onwards the State of Milan faced the challenge of reformed ideas.64 People and books moved constantly between Milan and the centres of Lyon, Geneva and Zurich to the northwest, and Mantua, Venice and Ferrara to the southeast. Foreign merchants from Germany, Switzerland, England and the Baltic area regularly traded in the city, favouring the diffusion of the Protestant doctrines. Throughout his episcopacy, Carlo Borromeo exhibited an ironbound inflexibility against the threat of reformed ideas. Priests, teachers and doctors were compelled to make a profession of faith, which was soon extended to printers and publishers.65 Those who had a relationship with the protestant world were closely watched. Charlatans and mountebanks were forbidden 64. C. Di Filippo, ‘The Reformation and the Catholic Revival in the Borromeo’s age’. Gamberini 2015, 99. 65. D’Amico 2012, 97.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 81 to introduce any printed materials, songs and tales into the State of Milan without an official authorization of the inquisition of their place of provenance. In particular, Borromeo devoted attention to the regions of Ticino and Grigioni which, despite being outside the State of Milan, were considered a fundamental outpost against heresy.66 It is thus not surprising that just a few years after their arrival in Lombardy, Camillo and his workshop were already active in these regions. Their success was favoured by a combination of ideal timing and business acumen. Resistance to the directives outlined by Borromeo and economic difficulties caused by poor harvests delayed the implementation of the new ideas on sacred art to the late 1590s, when new confraternities and private contributions allowed for the refurbishment of local churches.67 At that time, Camillo had already sealed his reputation as the best painter in Lombardy and his style became the official vehicle for propagating Milanese reformed art. On 16 August 1591, Camillo was hired for the decoration of the Church of Santa Croce in Riva San Vitale, a small village on the shores of the Lago di Lugano.68 Built between 1582 and 1591 by the architect Giovanni Antonio Piotti, the church is characterised by an octagonal plan and includes three chapels dedicated respectively to the Holy Cross, the Virgin and St. Bernardino of Siena. The patron was local scholar Giovanni Andrea Della Croce, who contracted Camillo to paint five oil canvases which were completed in less than one year and delivered on 24 July 1592.69 The Bolognese painter arrived in Ticino from the Villa Pliniana in Torno, one of the properties of Pirro Visconti, and once there, together with Piotti, supervised the church’s decoration. Camillo was in charge of three large paintings decorating the chapel of the Holy Cross, namely the Adoration of the Cross, the Finding of the Cross and the Dream of Constantine (fig. 4.9). The latter, in particular, is one of the most successful works of his career. The energetic composition incorporates a myriad of figures and a plethora of naturalistic details including a nocturnal veduta recalling those painted by his father Ercole in the central stages of his career. The painting celebrates Camillo’s ingenuity at its highest and recalls the audacious inventions he executed in the choir of San Prospero. It showcases the powerful modernity of his style to the Ticino region and pays homage to the Bolognese roots of the Procaccini family. One notes that the figure of Constantine lying on the ground is copied from his father’s most celebrated painting: the Conversion of Saul (fig. 4.10), completed in 1573 for the Church of San Giacomo Maggiore in Bologna. In Riva San Vitale, Camillo also painted central altarpieces for the chapels dedicated to the Virgin and Bernardino of Siena, while the remaining pictures were executed by his collaborators and were probably completed at a later stage, as they employ iconographic models copied by Camillo’s assistants for the decoration of the Church of San Lorenzo in Lugano, which was completed around

66. Di Filippo 2015, 110–111. 67. L. Damiani Cabrini, ‘Strategie delle immagini e devozione nei baliaggi svizzeri in Italia tra Cinque e Seicento: alcuni spunti di riflessione’. Archivio storico ticinese, 115, 1994, 69–72. 68. For a recent contribution on the Church of Santa Croce, see L. Damiani Cabrini, ‘L’apparato decorativo di Santa Croce a Riva San Vitale’. Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 115–127. 69. Il prefato Sr. Procazino a sue spese abbia a far et consignar in una al pfato Monsr. Croce cinque quadri grandi [. . .] Il pfato Sr. Procazino adempia detta opera fra et cio precio di V. 400 d’oro de quali cento ne pigli immediatamente. Archivio di Stato di Bellinzona (ASB), Giovanni Oldelli, 2906. Cited in Lienhard-Riva 1940, 177.

82

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark

Figure 4.9 Camillo Procaccini, Dream of Constantine. Oil on canvas, 322x474, 1592, Church of Santa Croce, Riva San Vitale. Photo Credit: Ufficio dei Beni Culturali – Bellinzona. Foto Roberto Pellegrini.

1610.70 The chronological distance between these commissions highlights the success of Camillo’s models in Ticino and exemplifies how throughout his career he developed a set of iconographic models to be used when necessary, regardless of the importance of the commission. To this end, both the Visitations painted in Riva San Vitale and Lugano replicate the exact composition of a large canvas conserved at the Blanton Museum in Austin, which Camillo executed in 1616 for his most prestigious patron: Pedro de Toledo Osorio, the Spanish Governor of Milan. The Procaccini workshop returned to Ticino in 1601, when the confraternity of the Santissimo Sacramento in Bellinzona contacted Camillo to execute eight canvases to be placed in the homonymous chapel of the Collegiata of Santi Pietro e Paolo.71 In total, a payment of 2,370 lire was accorded to the painter, who was also in charge of the stucco decoration delegated to the workshop owned by Sala and Lezeno. Besides Camillo’s intervention, however, the Bellinzona commission is important for a further detail. In 1608, less than a year after the decoration had been finalised, the confraternity of Santa Marta commissioned a further chapel to Bartolomeo Roverio, 70. On this commission, see the entry by Federica Bianchi in M. Kahn-Rossi (ed.), Pier Francesco Mola 1612–1666. Milan, 1989, 326–227. Procaccini’s pictures are in the Curia Vescovile, Lugano. 71. For the documents related to the Bellinzona commission, see V. Gilardoni, ‘Bellinzona, nuove notizie e documenti inediti per la storiografia artistica’. Bollettino storico della Svizzera italiana, 1954, 125–168.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 83

Figure 4.10 Ercole Procaccini the Elder, Conversion of Saul. Oil on canvas, 307x200  cm., 1573, Church of San Giacomo Maggiore, Bologna. Photo Credit: Mario Bonotto/Foto Scala, Firenze.

also known as the Genovesino, one of Camillo’s pupils.72 Born in Milan in 1577, Roverio trained with Camillo and participated in his commissions. To this end, in 1618 he worked with the Bolognese painter in the Milanese Church of San Marco, while in around 1614 he is attested as accompanying Procaccini at the Certosa di Garegnano.73 An example of Roverio’s attention to Camillo’s art is documented by the Assumption of the Virgin, painted for the Sanctuary of Madonna della Riva in Angera, which is copied from a drawing used by Camillo’s assistants to decorate one of the chapels in Riva San Vitale.74 Recommended by Procaccini, Roverio decorated the Santa Marta chapel with four canvases representing the miracles the saint. 72. Ibid., 157–158. 73. F. Cavalieri, ‘Aggiunte al catalogo di Bartolomeo Roverio detto il Genovesino’. Arte lombarda, 113–115, 1995, 78–84. 74. Ligornetto, Museo Vela, no. 4220. Published in L. Damiani Cabrini, ‘La Chiesa di Santa Croce’. In Riva San Vitale. Il Battistero di San Giovanni e la Chiesa di Santa Croce, Rossana Cardani and Laura Damiani Cabrini (eds), Bern, 2006, 38.

84  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark Understood from the workshop perspective, Camillo’s decision to favour one of his pupils underlines his willingness to publicise his stylistic trademark and to solidify his legacy in the Ticino area. While working in Bellinzona, Camillo’s assistants, accompanied by stucco masters Sala and Lezeno, travelled to the northern areas of the region to complete the decoration of the Pellanda chapel in the Church of San Pietro in Biasca.75 Ordered by local aristocrat Giovanni Battista Pellanda, the commission included the fresco and stucco decoration of the chapel as well as three canvases representing the Apparition of the Virgin to St. Dominic, the Virgin of the Rosary and the Sermon of Carlo Borromeo. A terminus post quem is indicated by a commemorative stone placed on the right side of the chapel, which indicates the date 1600. Although an eighteenth-century document conserved by the Pellanda family mentions the name of ‘Porcacino Mediolanensi’, Camillo did not travel to Biasca, as proved by the mediocre quality of the canvases.76 Based on models already proposed in Bellinzona, the decoration was executed by Camillo’s assistants, possibly supervised by a member of the Procaccini family. In this context, the Virgin of the Rosary, with 15 medallions displaying the glorious, joyful and sorrowful mysteries, is comparable with the analogous picture painted and signed by Carlo Antonio for the Church of Santa Maria Assunta in Erve.77 That Camillo might have relied on his brother for this commission should not come as a surprise: from 1600 onwards, Carlo Antonio had secured a respectable artistic reputation and was soon to be invited by Federico Borromeo to work in Milan Cathedral.

The Young Sculptor The business model established by the Procaccini was completed by the specialization of the family’s youngest member, Giulio Cesare, who was directed towards a career as a sculptor.78 In understanding the early development of his career, consideration must be given to Pirro Visconti and Francesco Brambilla, who both facilitated his employment in Milan Cathedral. From 1591, at the age of 17, Giulio Cesare was involved in the renovation of the interior furniture of the church. This consisted in removing old aristocratic tombs and replacing them with new altars decorated by saints’ statues. The fact that such a young artist was chosen to work in Milan’s most prestigious building makes it evident that he benefited from the support of Pirro Visconti, who in 1592 was elected as deputato of the Fabbrica del Duomo.79 Regardless of the friendship linking the Milanese nobleman to the Procaccini family, documentary evidence attests his ties with Giulio Cesare. Pirro was in fact testimonio on the occasion of the

75. M. Foletti, ‘L’opera di Camillo Procaccini e della sua bottega nella Cappella Pellanda a Biasca’. Arte e architettura in Svizzera, 3, 2006, 62. 76. ‘Capellam Beata Virginis de Sanctissimo Rosario, famoso pictore Mediolanensi Porcacino, quotidie pro 3 horas labore victum geminosque aureos pacto extrusit’. Genealogia Universale Domus Pellandae A.S.R.E. Equite Aurato D. Petri Ioanne Baptista deducta, 1722. The document, owned by the Pellanda family, was published in Foletti 2006, 62. 77. On the Erve painting, see M.C. Rodeschini Galati, ‘Presenze cremonesi, milanesi, e cremasche (1570– 1630)’. In I pittori bergamaschi dal XIII al XIX secolo. Il Seicento, Gian Alberto Dell’Acqua (ed.), Bergamo, 1984, 11. 78. On Giulio Cesare’s sculpting career, see Berra 1991. 79. Morandotti 1981, 115–162.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 85 signing of Giulio Cesare’s dowry agreement, dated 17 May 1600. Issued by Bernardo Coerezzi, Pirro’s most trusted notary, the document highlights the Milanese nobleman’s involvement in Giulio Cesare’s personal life. Giulio Cesare’s first commission in Milan Cathedral included two minor statues representing St.  Marcellina and St.  Euphemia, for which he was paid a total of 1,200 lire. According to rate tables, minor statues were located on the altar’s gable and were worth 600 lire, while major statues were placed in the niches at the sides of the altar and were worth 800 lire.80 The St. Marcellina was executed first and completed before 1592, as Giulio Cesare received payments from 16 March 1591 to 14 September 1592.81 The St. Euphemia, however, took much longer and was completed only in Autumn 1595.82 Although it is impossible to determine why Giulio Cesare took so long to complete the statue, it is plausible that he was delayed by his participation in other activities of the family business. In this regard, it has been noted that in the mid-1590s he collaborated in preparing the drawings and models for the stucco decoration of the San Diego chapel in the Church Sant’Angelo.83 This collaboration would explain why in a document dated 13 August 1595 he is already mentioned as both ‘painter and sculptor’, providing a further indication on the complexity of his artistic education.84 In Milan Cathedral, Giulio Cesare copied models prepared by chief sculptor Francesco Brambilla and consequently produced artworks representative of his master’s style. In order to maintain the stylistic uniformity of the sculptural decoration, Brambilla supplied clay and wax models to his assistants who then had to copy the sculptures from them. This is specified in a document issued on 6 December  1593, which invites appraisals to ‘to carefully inspect any statue and its figures and verify that they comply with Brambilla’s style’.85 Thus, the decoration of Milan Cathedral shares organisational similarities with that of the nave of the Basilica of San Pietro in Rome, where no fewer than 31 sculptors were working under the direction of Gian Lorenzo Bernini.86 As Brambilla did, Bernini provided models to his assistants to determine both iconography and style. Having completed the statues dedicated to St.  Marcellina and St.  Euphemia, in 1596 Giulio Cesare reappears in the cathedral’s book of payments being commissioned to execute two caryatid-like angels supporting the entablature of the altar

80. 81. 82. 83.

Berra 1991, 22–25. Ibid., 22–25. Ibid., 22–25. M. Magni, ‘Singolarità nella decorazione di Sant’Angelo a Milano’. Arte lombarda, 116, 1996, 62–73. Magni highlights decisive analogies between the stucco decoration in Sant’Angelo and those executed by Giulio Cesare in the chapels dedicated to the Pietà and Sts Nazarius and Celsus in Santa Maria presso San Celso. 84. The document refers to the commission of two marble reliefs for the Church of Santa Maria presso San Celso: ‘havevano trattato con il Procaccino pittore e scultore, se harebbe tolto a fare di scultura le due storie’. ASDM, Sedute, Registri, 1592–1599, 13 August 1595. 85. ‘Quascunque statuas et seu figuras visitare, et diligenter inspicere an sint conformes exemplis sculptoribus ab ipso Brambilla traditis’. AVFDM, Ordinazioni capitolari 1591–1593, XVI, ff. 168v.-169r., 6 December 1593. On the use of wax and clay models in sculpture and the practice of young sculptors see R. Wittkower, Sculpture. Processes and principles. London, 1977, 150–151. 86. J. Montagu, Roman Baroque sculpture: the industry of art. New Haven, 1989, 128–134.

86  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark dedicated to St.  Joseph.87 Additionally, from 1594 to 1599, he completed a major statue of St. Ambrose, which was eventually located on the altar of St. Agnes, where Camillo’s Martyrdom of St.  Agnes was on display.88 The work in Milan Cathedral propelled Giulio Cesare’s career, provoking new commissions. On 13 August 1595, he was hired by the sanctuary of Santa Maria presso San Celso to execute two marble reliefs representing the Visitation and the Nativity of the Virgin, which were completed in December 1597 and appraised by Francesco Brambilla.89 Outside Milan, in 1597, Giulio Cesare signed a contract with Cremona Cathedral for the execution of two lifesize statues representing the Evangelists Matthew and John. The Cremonese commission was part of the project of renovation of the local cathedral and was specifically related to the completion of a new altar which had to be decorated with statues of the four Evangelists.90 It was perhaps to add more prestige to the decoration that the local deputati decided to employ Milanese sculptors already working in Milan Cathedral, and therefore Giulio Cesare, together with colleagues Andrea Rinaldi and Pietro Daverio, was hired to execute two of the Evangelist sculptures while Cesare Villa was entrusted to construct the altar. Whereas Villa, Rinaldi and Daverio completed their respective works before 1610, the delivery of Giulio Cesare’s statues, initially scheduled in two years, took way longer, since in 1600 the Bolognese painter married the Milanese noblewoman Isabella Visconti and decided to abandon sculpture to focus on a career as a painter. It is possible that his new status as a married man encouraged Giulio Cesare to put aside his specialization as a sculptor and look for a more remunerative profession, because in Milan the demand for paintings far exceeded that of sculpture. This was suggested already in 1841 by Antonio Bolognini Amorini, who noted: ‘Giulio Cesare saw the profits and the praises received by his brother Camillo and thus decided to abandon sculpture and start a career as a painter’.91 As a consequence of Giulio Cesare’s decision to focus on painting, the Cremonese commission continued on and off for over 28years, being completed in 1625 when the two statues were eventually delivered. Evaluated by the Milanese sculptor Gaspare Vismara, the works were considered as cosa de scola and therefore paid 600 lire, less than the amount initially stipulated.92 It seems thus plausible that Procaccini made the 87. M. Valsecchi, ‘Camillo Procaccini e l’altare di Sant’Agnese per il Duomo di Milano’. Paragone, 45, 1968, 53. 88. Berra 1991, 28. 89. Archival documents state that Giulio Cesare was commissioned to execute an Assumption and a Visitation. This is a transcription error since an Assumption had already been sculpted by Annibale Fontana. Berra 1991, 39–40. The primary dates for Giulio Cesare’s work in Santa Maria presso San Celso were first published in S. Vigezzi, ‘I primi anni di attività di Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Rivista d’arte, 15, 1933, 483–487. 90. For the project of renovation of the Cremona Cathedral, see A. Tomei and F. Gandolfo, La Cattedrale di Cremona affreschi e sculture (Milan, 2001). 91. Giulio Cesare Procaccini, noto pure in Bologna, attese prima alla Scultura, nella quale si rese Valente; ma andato colla famiglia tutta a Milano veggendo i gran guadagni e gli applause che riceveva il fratel suo, lasciata la scultura, diedesi alla pittura. A. Bolognini Amorini, Vite dei pittori ed artefici bolognesi. Bologna, 1841, 138–139. 92. Io Gaspare Vismara hò visitate le due statue de vangilista quale sono state fabricatte dal s. Giulio Cesare Procacino scultore et pittore ecl.te per la bontà del disegno si per la fineteza et fature et lavorature del marmo dico in consenza mia che per la sua mercede protrano darlene scudi sei Cento benche dovevano valese scudi 700 per essere Cosa de scola. Vismara’s account, Berra 1991, 59.

Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark 87

Figure 4.11 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Guardian Angel. Gilded wood, 1622, Pinacoteca Ala Ponzone, Cremona. Photo Credit: Museo Civico Pinacoteca Ala Ponzone, Cremona, Italy.

models for the two statues, delegating the execution to one of his pupils, following the method already adopted by his former master Francesco Brambilla. The 28-year span of the Cremonese commission indicates that even after 1600 Giulio Cesare continued to be interested in sculpture. This is confirmed by the account written by Giulio Cesare Gigli, who still in 1615 defined him as excellent in sculpture and painting.93 In 1612 the younger of the Procaccini was contacted by the city of Piacenza to participate in a competition for executing the equestrian statues of Alessandro and Ranuccio Farnese, together with the Florentine sculptor Francesco Mochi who was eventually chosen for completing the commission.94 The fact that Giulio Cesare was shortlisted to compete with a renowned sculptor such as Mochi highlights his ongoing reputation as a sculptor, an estimation furthermore confirmed in 1617 when the Fabbrica del Duomo commissioned him for the execution of two marble slabs for the exterior part of the choir 93. ‘Per iscolpir e per colorir divino, quegli è colà, che va innanzi d’ognuno, di chi gli si attraversa nel cammino’. G.C. Gigli, La pittura trionfante. Venice, 1615, 19. 94. M. De Luca Savelli, Francesco Mochi 1580–1654. Florence, 1981, 111.

88  Dissemination of a Stylistic Trademark of Milan Cathedral, referring to the him as a ‘skilful and famous sculptor’.95 Although Giulio Cesare withdrew from this task due to the piling up of duties in Milan and Genoa, it seems clear that even after 1600 he continued to supervise the completion of statues in the family workshop, creating clay models to be executed by his pupils. A further validation of this hypothesis is provided by a wooden sculpture representing the Guardian Angel (fig. 4.11), completed for the Church of Santa Monica in Cremona, which is dated 1622 and described by the Cremonese scholar Pellegrino Merula as a ‘creation by Giulio Cesare Procaccino, renowned sculptor and painter’.96

95. Pevsner 1929, 323–324. 96. ‘Inventione di Giulio Cesare Procaccino, famosissimo scultore e pittore’. P. Merula, Santuario di Cremona… con l’origine de’ monasteri, ospedali, e luoghi Pij di detta città. Cremona, 1627, 120–121. Tardito notes that in the Church of Santi Rustico and Fermo in Caravaggio two wooden sculptures sharing similarities with the statue painted by Giulio Cesare in Cremona are conserved. The building hosts Giulio Cesare’s Madonna and Child with St. Fermo and St. Rustico, signed and dated 1615. R. Tardito, ‘Note sul Seicento lombardo. Restauri nella parrocchiale di Caravaggio e nella Chiesa Barnabita di S. Alessandro a Milano’. Arte lombarda, 151, 1979, 43.

5 The Seventeenth Century Milan and Beyond

A New Painter in the Family Giulio Cesare’s transition from sculpture to painting marks a decisive moment in the history of the Procaccini family. While for the last ten years of the sixteenth century the Procaccini’s success was predicated on the combination of Camillo’s pictorial skills and entrepreneurial perspicacity, the start of the seventeenth century saw Giulio Cesare’s rise as the most innovative painter in Milan, a circumstance that shifted the internal equilibrium of the workshop and provided further business opportunities. In 1600 Giulio Cesare married Isabella Visconti and begun a formative journey to Rome, passing by Florence, Venice, Bologna and Parma. As confirmed by an autograph letter dating from 1602, he was out of the city for most of 1601.1 Returning to Milan by the end of the year, he was determined to start his career as a painter. His motivation is displayed by a confident Self-Portrait (Koelliker Collection, Milan) purposely made to present himself to the Milanese public.2 The change of focus in Giulio Cesare’s career represents a decisive step towards a phase of progressive reorganisation of the Procaccini family business, in which the two younger brothers focused on developing their individual potential. Both in their late 20s, Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio were ready to step out from Camillo’s shadow and take their careers in different directions. In doing so, they were favoured by the contacts and reputation built by their older brother in the last decade of the sixteenth century. The Procaccini soon became the wealthiest family of artists working in Milan and their style was appreciated by public and private patrons. Thus, when in 1604 Federico Zuccari passed through the Lombard capital on his way to Pavia to complete the decoration of the Collegio Borromeo, he noted ‘lives in Milan, earns much and is appreciated a Bolognese family of painters named Procaccini’.3

 1. ‘Supp.ca anchora le S.V. à ordinare che essendo egli sempre stato prontissimo à servirle in tutte le occasioni che gl’è occorso escetto quel poco tempo che è stato absente da cotesta città’. Berra 1991, 69. Giulio Cesare left Milan after receiving payment for executing the wax models for the sacristy in San Vittore al Corpo (February 1601). A document dated 29 October 1601 confirms that he had not yet returned. G. Bora and D. Dotti, Ecce Homo: l’anello mancante. Milan, 2012, 21.   2. On the canvas, see the entry by Odette D’Albo in A. Morandotti (ed.), L’ultimo Caravaggio. Eredi e nuovi maestri. Napoli, Genova e Milano a confronto (1610–1640). Milan, 2017, 132–133. Giulio Cesare painted four additional self-portraits respectively conserved at the Uffizi in Florence, the Museo Lechi in Montichiari, the Cerralbo Collection in Madrid and the Pinacoteca di Brera in Milan.   3. ‘Vive in Milano e guadagna molto ed è molto accarezzata una famiglia di pittori bolognesi de’ Procaccini’. Bottari–Ticozzi 1822–1825, 512–513.

90

The Seventeenth Century

Figure 5.1 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Ecce Homo. Oil on canvas, 157x113  cm., 1602–1603, private collection, Milan.

Malvasia reports that Giulio Cesare’s journey allowed him to study works by Michelangelo and Raphael in Rome, Veronese and Tintoretto in Venice and Correggio in Parma.4 Correggio, in particular, became the main inspiration for his work, a purposeful and self-conscious reference to his native Emilian roots. Procaccini’s link with the Emilian master is evident in his first known individual commission, the Ecce Homo (private collection, Milan) (fig. 5.1) completed a few months after his return to Milan.5 Inspired by Correggio’s Ecce Homo (National Gallery, London) (fig. 5.2), at that time in the Prati Collection in Parma, the painting is an essential document to understand the references informing Giulio Cesare’s early pictorial activity. These included not only Correggio, but also the Carracci and his brother Camillo. Borsieri certainly exaggerates in stating that Procaccini’s pictorial style blossomed almost 4. ‘Diedesi a un lungo viaggio per vedere le cose del Buonarota e di Rafaelle in Roma, quelle del Tiziano, di Paolo e del Tentoretto in Venezia, e quelle del Correggio in Parma’. Malvasia 1678, 289. 5. Bora and Dotti 2012.

The Seventeenth Century 91

Figure 5.2 Correggio, Ecce Homo. Oil on canvas, 99x80cm., 1525–1530, National Gallery, London. Photo Credit: National Gallery, London, UK/Bridgeman Images.

overnight.6 On the contrary, his painting career was the culmination of years of training in the family workshop, where he studied drawing and participated in decorative campaigns. Agosti has noted that Giulio Cesare owned a signed copy of Lomazzo’s treatise on painting.7 Considering that Lomazzo died in 1592, Giulio Cesare must have received the volume as a teenager, while working in Lainate. The ownership of Lomazzo’s treatise disproves the supposition that Giulio Cesare was illiterate until the start of the seventeenth century.8 Furthermore, it demonstrates that his interest in  6. Ad ogni modo ha già ella costì i Procaccini, il più vecchio de’quali nella sicurezza del disegno non trova oggi chi lo pareggi, e il più giovane che, con l’esser passato dalla scoltura alla pittura pur ha potuto in pochi giorni rendersi prattico nelle maniere illustrate dal Parmigiano e dal Correggio.   Borsieri’s letter to Scipione Toso. Caramel 1966, 174.   7. ‘Di Giulio Cesare Procasino donato dal Autore’. Agosti and Stoppa 2014, 301. The volume was purchased in 1590 by the Biblioteca dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, University of Florence.   8. Brigstocke 2002, 6. The connection with the cultural circle of Lomazzo and Pirro Visconti, and the years spent in Bologna in contact with the Carracci Academy are further elements indicating that Giulio Cesare had at least a rough understanding of letters and numbers.

92  The Seventeenth Century painting and drawing dates back to the family’s relocation to Milan, confirming his involvement as a draftsman and collaborator in the family workshop. Around 1595, il Procaccino pittore e scultore collaborated in preparing the drawings and models for the stucco decoration in the San Diego chapel in Sant’Angelo.9 Additionally, in April 1597, he accompanied Camillo in Reggio Emilia to assist him with the frescoing of the choir in the Basilica di San Prospero, a commission abruptly interrupted a decade earlier when the Procaccini followed Pirro Visconti to Milan.10 Although there is no documentary evidence attesting Giulio Cesare’s presence in San Prospero, the fact that from 9 March to 14 December 1597 he did not receive payments for his sculptural work in Santa Maria presso San Celso indicates that he was out of Milan at least for part of the year.11 Procaccini’s sojourn in Reggio would explain the knowledge of Correggio and Parmigianino showcased in his early commissions. Furthermore, it provides context for his employment as a sculptor in Cremona Cathedral where Giulio Cesare signed the contract on 9 December 1597, on his way back to Milan. Giulio Cesare’s education was complex and far reaching.12 It started in Bologna, when Camillo and Ercole the Elder served as teachers in the Carracci Academy, and continued in Milan within the family business. Having grown up with a brother considered by the Milanese public as the most excellent of painters, it would seem rather unlikely that Giulio Cesare would have not looked for Camillo’s guidance while collaborating in the family workshop. Until now, critics have generally focused on the differences characterising Camillo and Giulio Cesare’s stylistic approaches. Nonetheless, it is not difficult to find traces of Camillo’s work in Giulio Cesare’s art, especially if analysis is restricted to those canvases executed in the period 1602–1606. In the early stages of his pictorial career, Giulio Cesare occasionally relied on models developed in the workshop.13 This was graphic material used by Camillo to organise the labour in the bottega, train assistants and ensure consistent standards of production. Camillo’s drawings provided a supply of compositional ideas, a form of quality control similar to the one adopted in the bottega owned by the Caliari family in Venice.14 Considering

  9. Magni 1996, 68. Giulio Cesare’s early efforts as a designer and decorator are further proved by his involvement from 1602–1607 with the fresco decoration and the design for two chapels in Santa Maria presso San Celso. 10. N.W. Neilson, ‘An altarpiece by Giulio Cesare Procaccini and some further remarks’. Arte lombarda, 17, 1972, 23. On this topic, see also, Rosci 1993, 16. The decoration of San Prospero’s choir was concluded on 22 October 1598. 11. Between 1595 and 1597 Giulio Cesare executed the marble reliefs representing the Visitation and the Nativity. He received payments from 13 August 1595 to 9 March 1597 and from 14 December 1597 to 28 December 1597. 12. Neilson 1992, 134. 13. The adaptation of models developed within the family workshop is a recurring feature that endures throughout the entire span of the Procaccinis’ careers. Case in point, Giulio Cesare still continued to look with interest at compositions created by his older brother after 1620. This is proved by a signed Sacrifice of Isaac (private collection), which is based on a model developed by Camillo and replicated in three canvases housed at the Pinacoteca Varallo Sesia, Varallo; private collection, Milan; Residenzgalerie, Salzburg. Camillo’s original drawing is at the Museo Diocesano in Milan and has been published in Neilson 1979, 155. On Giulio Cesare’s painting, see U. Ruggeri, ‘Aggiunte al corpus di Camillo Procaccini’. Critica d’Arte, 67, 2004, 52. 14. On the practice of drawing in Veronese’s workshop, see T. Dalla Costa, ‘Paolo Veronese e la bottega. Le botteghe dei Caliari’. In Paolo Veronese: l’illusione della realtà, Paola Marini and Bernard Aikema (eds), Milan, 2014, 314–326.

The Seventeenth Century 93

Figure 5.3 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Martyrdom of St. Agnes. Oil on canvas, 124x86 cm., circa 1605, private collection. Photo Credit: Private collection. Photo © Christie’s Images/ Bridgeman Images.

that Procaccini and Veronese were among the most prolific draftsmen of the second half of the sixteenth century, it does not come as a surprise that their sheets played an essential role in the day-to-day activities of their respective businesses. Giulio Cesare’s interest in Camillo’s models is evident in the Martyrdom of St. Agnes (private collection) (fig. 5.3), which is based on Camillo’s interpretation of the same subject executed for Milan Cathedral and located on the same altar for which Giulio Cesare had sculpted a major statue representing St. Ambrose.15 In particular, Giulio Cesare borrowed the figure of the angel plunging from the sky holding the martyr’s crown and palm. A further example is the Coronation of the Virgin with Saints Joseph and Francis (Getty Museum, Los Angeles) dating from 1602–1605 (fig. 5.4).16 In this small devotional canvas, the central group echoes Camillo’s drawing (Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan) copied by the workshop’s assistants to complete altarpieces in 15. Brigstocke 2002, 80–81. 16. Ibid., 76–79.

94  The Seventeenth Century

Figure 5.4 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Coronation of the Virgin with Sts Joseph and Francis. Oil on canvas, 97x72 cm., circa 1605, Getty Museum, Los Angeles. Photo Credit: Digital image courtesy of the Getty’s Open Content Program.

Riva san Vitale and Tortona and replicated by the capobottega in decorating the presbytery of Piacenza Cathedral.17 The kneeling St Francis is instead inspired by Camillo’s etched Stigmata of St. Francis, a model adopted by the bottega in the Swiss village of Balerna.18 It is worth noting that Camillo’s etching also inspired Carlo Antonio’s Landscape with the Ecstasy of St. Francis (private collection, Milan), dated to the start of the century and representing one of his earliest efforts as an easel painter.19 Giulio

17. Milan, Ambrosiana, F. 235, inf., no. 985. Published in Neilson 1979, 146. 18. Camillo’s etching is dated 1593. See the entry by Paolo Vanoli in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 218–219. The Balerna altarpiece was commissioned in 1613 by a local member of the Torriani family. See G. Martinola, Inventario delle cose d’arte e di antichità del distretto di Mendrisio. Lugano, 1975, 43. Camillo’s composition is further replicated in the St. Francis Receiving the Stigmata executed by one of his assistants for the Milanese Church of Santa Maria della Passione. 19. On Carlo Antonio’s painting, see Morandotti 2005, 200.

The Seventeenth Century 95

Figure 5.5 Giulio Cesare and Camillo Procaccini, Beheading of the Baptist. Oil on canvas, 1602–1604, Church of St Eustorgio, Milan. Photo Credit: Guido Barbato.

Cesare and Camillo also collaborated, a common practice in family workshops. Before 1604, they worked side-by-side in the Basilica of Sant’Eustorgio completing a Beheading of the Baptist, mentioned by Torre in 1674 (fig. 5.5).20 Giulio Cesare executed the central group as proved through stylistic comparison with the figure of Christ in the coeval Flagellation painted for the Church of Santa Prassede.21 Camillo took charge of the soldiers, for which the preparatory drawing is in the Uffizi.22 It might be possible that this ‘painting by two hands’ was part of a larger commission. Carlo Antonio was indeed contacted around the same time to paint two canvases with episodes from the life of St Raymond in the Basilica. The fact that Giulio Cesare had already trained within the family workshop and was supported by Pirro Visconti favoured the early development of his career, giving him a credibility that justifies the otherwise inexplicable prestige attached to his early commissions. Procaccini’s rise as one of major protagonists of Milanese art began in Santa Maria presso San Celso. This building was a focal point of Milanese religious life. It was consecrated to the Madonna dei Miracoli and subjected to an

20. ‘Una decollazione di S. Gio. Battista fatta dai due fratelli Camillo e Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Torre 1674, 91. The painting, restored in 2009, is conserved in St. Eustorgio’s Priest Apartment. 21. On this commission, see M. Rosci, ‘Cerano e Procaccini a Santa Maria presso San Celso e a Santa Prassede’. In Il Seicento lombardo. Giornata di studi, Mina Gregori and Marco Rosci (eds), Turin, 1996, 43–49. Giulio Cesare’s painting passed to Santa Maria della Passione in 1885. 22. Florence, Uffizi, no. 1500 F. Published in Neilson 1979, 131.

96  The Seventeenth Century extensive renovation that made it one of the most active artistic sites in the city.23 As documented by a memorandum dated 9 July 1607, Giulio Cesare was involved in the decoration of two chapels dedicated to the Pietà and Sts Nazarius and Celsus.24 The commission also involved Giovanni Mauro della Rovere and Cerano, the latter entrusted with the first two chapels located on each side of the church. The Pietà chapel was the first to near completion. The ceiling and frescoes were executed in 1602, while the main altarpiece was delivered on 25 March 1604.25 Although the first chapel was completed in a short time, the works for the chapel dedicated to Sts Nazarius and Celsus were longer in execution. Began in 1604, the fresco decoration was completed within three years, while the altarpiece, illustrating the martyrdom of the saints, was delivered on 23 August 1607.26 The delay in the delivery of Giulio Cesare’s picture can be explained by the demands of two further commissions: the large Deposition from the Cross painted for the Capuchin convent in Appenzel in Switzerland, and the Virgin and Child with Sts Peter and Paul, executed for the Church of San Bartolomeo in Domaso.27 Destined to peripheral areas, both paintings indicate that Giulio Cesare adopted a strategic approach not dissimilar to the one employed in the previous decade by Camillo: he advertised his style through the dissemination of canvases in minor churches of the Milan diocese. Once finalised, the commission in Santa Maria presso San Celso earned Giulio Cesare a total of 4,930 lire, of which 1610 were for the pictures and 3,320 were for the stucco and fresco decoration.28 These earnings, together with the 6,000 lire received through the dowry agreement with Isabella Visconti, assured him and his wife independence and economic stability.29 As a result, in 1607 they moved to the parish of San Pietro in Campo Lodigiano, in a house previously owned by Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo.30

23. On Santa Maria presso San Celso in Milan, see Fiorio 1985, 260–268. 24. Sin l’anno 1601 d’ordine del Ven.do Cap.lo si deliberò di abelire, ornare e compiere con stucchi, oro e pitture le cappelle laterali d’essa chiesa e per così fare si fece elletione di tre pittori tra quali v’era Giulio Cesare Procaccino a quale fu datto lordine che a lui spese facesse li ornamenti de due delle d.e cappelle, dar compite cosi de stucchi et oro come da Pitture sopra, dedicate una a N.ro Sig.re di Piettà, et l’altra a Santi Nazaro e Celso che il tutto le sarebbe statto pagato conforme a quanto dal Ven.do Cap.lo fosse statto dechiarato.   Published in Vigezzi 1933, 483–487. 25. Ibid., 486. 26. Ibid., 486 27. The Appenzell picture was ordered by Count Kaspar von Hohenems and his first wife, Eleanor Welsberg-Primor, niece of Carlo Borromeo. Brigstocke 2002, 16. In Domaso, Giulio Cesare’s altarpiece was housed in the chapel dedicated to Sts Peter and Paul which was decorated in 1605 by local painter Domenico Carasana, a follower of Camillo Procaccini. Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 76–77. 28. Vigezzi 1933, 485. On 31 May 1609, the fabbricieri of Santa Maria presso San Celso commissioned Giulio Cesare for a further canvas: the Martyrdom of San Sebastian now in Brussels, Musées Royaux. The altarpiece was installed by September 1610. 29. In 1605, Giulio Cesare was commissioned for the execution of ten canvases for the chapel of the Tribunale di Provvisione, together with Cerano. For this commission, he received 780 lire. Only three pictures can be identified, and all are now at the Castello Sforzesco in Milan. Brigstocke 2002, 121–122. 30. Besta 1933, 454–455. Giulio Cesare and his wife were renters. After Lomazzo’s death in 1592, the house was inherited by Giovanni Angelo Gallarati. See M. Giuliani and R. Sacchi, ‘Per una lettura dei documenti su Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo’. In Porzio, Bora and Kahn Rossi 1998, 326, 329, note 65.

The Seventeenth Century 97 There, Giulio Cesare opened his own studio, which in a few years drew attention from local and international collectors. After the delivery of the altarpiece for the Pietà chapel in Santa Maria presso San Celso, Giulio Cesare was employed by the Church of Santa Prassede to complete a Flagellation recalled by Latuada as one of his most praised works.31 For the second time in his career, he worked side-by-side with Cerano, who completed the altarpiece in the opposite chapel.32 The most celebrated painters active in seventeenth-century Milan, Giulio Cesare and Cerano were both friends and rivals. After their collaborations in the early 1610s, they developed a decennial friendship that endured until the end of Procaccini’s life in 1625.33 Inspired by Titian’s Crowning with Thorns (Louvre, Paris), at that time in the Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Giulio Cesare’s Flagellation showcases the complexity of his pictorial education and attests to his status as the most innovative painter active in Milan.34 The modernity of his painting is further attested by the Transfiguration with Sts Basilides, Cirinus and Naborus (Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan, erroneously recognised by Santagostino as the very first picture of Giulio Cesare’s career.35 Commissioned by Cesare Marino, the cousin of Camilla Marino, Pirro Visconti’s wife, the altarpiece is inspired by Camillo’s etched Transfiguration as well as by the homonymous canvas painted by Raphael before 1520 for Pope Clement VII (Pinacoteca Vaticana, Rome). Recent studies have also indicated Rubens’ Transfiguration (Musée des Beaux-Arts, Nancy), painted in Mantua for Duke Vincenzo I Gonzaga, as a possible reference for this picture.36 Though a letter dated 4 January 1606 confirms the presence of a ‘Procaccino’ in Mantua for the appraisal of a painting by Gaudenzio Ferrari, it is not possible to determine if the document refers to either Camillo or Giulio Cesare.37 Giulio Cesare’s rise as a major protagonist of Milanese painting culminated in 1609, when he was chosen by Federico Borromeo to paint six large canvases representing the Miracles of St Carlo Borromeo for Milan Cathedral. Arguably the most significant commission issued by the cardinal during his episcopacy, the Miracles celebrated Carlo Borromeo’s canonisation and followed in the footsteps of the previous cycle dedicated five years earlier to the Life of St Carlo, for which Carlo Antonio painted 31. ‘Nell’altra cappella si vede il Signore legato alla Colonna, una delle opere più lodate del famoso Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Latuada 1737–1738, I, 263. 32. Cerano painted the Crowning with Thorns. See the entry by Paolo Vanoli in Morandotti 2017, 138–139. 33. Cerano was a trusted friend of the Procaccini family. In 1625, he was chosen to divide into lots the pictures left in Giulio Cesare’s studio after the painter’s death. ASM, Notarile, 27634. Published in Caprara 1977, 98–99. 34. In analysing the commission in Santa Prassede, Rosci emphasises Giulio Cesare’s Baroque energy as opposed to Cerano’s openly Mannerist style. Rosci 1996, 47. On Titian’s painting, see P. Humfrey, Titian: the complete paintings. Ghent, 2007, 181. 35. ‘Una transfigurazione di Christo sul Monte Tabor di Giulio Cesare Procaccino, e questa fu la prima opera, che egli fece dopo aver cambiato lo scalpello in pennello’. Santagostino 1671, 71. See O. D’Albo, ‘La trasfigurazione con i santi martiri di Giulio Cesare Procaccini a Brera: la datazione e il committente ritrovati’. Nuovi studi, 22, 2017, 87–92. 36. Giulio Cesare’s awareness of Rubens’ work in Mantua was first hypothesised by Rosci 1996, 48. 37. ‘Ho fatto vedere il quadro da due periti et in particolare dal Procaccino’. Bellone’s letter to Cheppio, 4 January 1606. Published in A. Luzio, La galleria dei Gonzaga di Mantova venduta all’Inghilterra nel 1627–1628. Milan, 1913, 103.

98  The Seventeenth Century the St Carlo Receiving the Viaticum.38 Procaccini and Cerano were the main protagonists of this commission, for which they were granted a special allowance of 300 lire on top of the agreed price of 300 lire per canvas. Inspired by the coeval biography of Carlo Borromeo published by Giovanni Pietro Giussano, the quadroni were first exhibited on 4 November  1610, the day dedicated to the saint’s celebration.39 As for Camillo a decade earlier, the prestige associated to the Duomo commission gave Giulio Cesare’s career a decisive impetus. He was recognised as a brilliant artist, the equal to anyone, including Cerano, working in the State of Milan.

A Larger Geographic Focus At the start of the seventeenth century, while Giulio Cesare was establishing his new identity as a painter, Camillo was still the most requested artist in Milan. When on 6 April 1602 he negotiated with Abbot Missironi the price for executing the decoration of the chapel dedicated to St.  Gregory in San Vittore al Corpo, he agreed to receive 1,200 lire for the altarpiece representing St Gregory among the PlagueStricken, 600 lire for the lateral canvases and 330 lire for the ceiling frescoes.40 These figures were higher than those received by any other artist in the city.41 Following the approach already adopted in the previous decade, Camillo accepted as many commissions as possible, relying on the bottega for the coordination of different projects. An integral factor in the economy of Camillo’s artistic production, the bottega allowed him to take charge of large decorative campaigns and supervise multiple commissions. Camillo’s assistants executed frescoes and minor canvases. They copied models provided by the capobottega, following an organisational structure also recognizable in the Venetian botteghe owned by Tintoretto and Veronese.42 Camillo’s modus operandi ensured quality control, sped up the productive process and allowed for the capillary diffusion of his paintings within and outside the State of Milan. His business strategy was extremely successful, and the sheer number of his commissions was so overwhelming that Malvasia famously referred to them as a ‘phalanx of innumerable works’.43 By virtue of the success achieved in Milan, at the turn of the century Procaccini won commissions in Reggio Emilia, Venice, Piacenza and Turin. As a consequence, he focused on attracting jobs from those centres, delegating peripheral works to the 38. The commission included 24 paintings by Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Cerano, Camillo Landriani, Carlo Buzzi, Alessandro Viaiani and Giorgio Noyes. Giulio Cesare painted the miracles of Carlino Nava, Girolamo Baio, Giovan Battista Tirone, Sister Paola Giustina Casati, Domenico Brusatore and Marta de Vergi. See Rosci 1965. 39. On Giussano’s biography, see W. De Boer, The conquest of the soul: confession, discipline and public order in Counter-Reformation Milan. Leiden, 2001, 5–7. 40. Neilson 1979, 47. 41. A well-fitting comparison is the payment of 600 lire received by Cerano in the same year for the execution of a large canvas representing St. Carlo Borromeo sells the Princedom of Oria in Milan Cathedral. Camillo’s St Gregory among the Plague-Stricken was appreciated at 139 lire per square meter. Conversely, Cerano received 21 lire. On Cerano’s paintings, see Rosci 2000, 100–102. 42. C. Brooke, ‘The re-use of drawings in the workshop of Jacopo Tintoretto’. The Burlington magazine, 150, 2008, 677–680. Also, Della Costa 2014, 314–326. 43.



E qui veramente confesso sentirmi mancare nel maggior bisogno il talento, troppo assalito per ogni parte, e sopraffatto da una falange d’opere innumerabili, e brave per ogni Chiesa, in ogni luogo, in ogni angolo da sì ferace pennello sparse. Malvasia 1678, 278.

The Seventeenth Century 99 bottega. The change of geographic focus indicates Camillo’s aim to expand his business outside Lombardy. Nonetheless, although in the 1600s he was often out of Milan, the blooming of Giulio Cesare’s pictorial career ensured continuity to the Procaccinis’ presence in the city’s most important artistic sites. On 23 April 1597, Camillo returned to Reggio Emilia to decorate the choir in the Basilica di San Prospero. He travelled with at least one assistant as the scaffolding was built to accommodate more than one painter.45 Illustrating Christ in Glory with Saints and Music-Making Angels, the frescoing lasted for 18 months and was eventually completed on 22 October  1598. The time was used by Camillo to attract further jobs in the city. On 30 September  1598, he was commissioned for a painting representing the Virgin and Child with Sts Vitalis, Jerome and Francis (Galleria Estense, Modena) for the local Confraternita of San Girolamo.46 Three weeks later, he was contacted by the Arte della Seta to paint an Adoration of the Magi for its chapel in Santa Maria della Ghiara. Characterised by delays and ambiguous behaviour, this commission highlights Camillo’s relentless entrepreneurial spirit demonstrating that he often accepted more commissions that he could actually complete. As proved by a letter of complaint sent in 1606 to the Governor of Milan, on 20 October 1598 Camillo received 360 lire to execute a picture with the Adoration of the Magi.47 Eight years later the painting had yet to be delivered. Occupied by multiple projects, Procaccini fulfilled this commission only in 1608 by replicating a compositional model used in two coeval pictures respectively in Santa Maria alla Porta and Venegono.48 Not only did Camillo complete the canvas a decade after the original commission, he also sold it to a different customer. The painting was indeed acquired by Annibale Squadroni, a nobleman from Reggio Emilia who purchased it for his family chapel in San Pietro. As part of the agreement, Squadroni returned 360 lire to the Arte della Seta. Furthermore, he paid 300 lire to Filippo Riva, Camillo’s agent in Reggio, and an additional 150 lire directly to Camillo on the occasion of his visit to Milan.49 The total of 810 lire doubled the sum agreed by Procaccini with the Arte della 44

44. An example of peripheral commissions left to the bottega is the Coronation of the Virgin with Sts Maurice, Bernardino da Siena, Gaudentius and Carlo Borromeo executed for the Sanctuary of the Trinity at the Sacro Monte in Ghiffa. On this occasion, Camillo’s assistants replicated models already used for analogous decorations in Riva san Vitale, Tortona and Piacenza. See M. Dell’Omo, ‘Camillo Procaccini a Ghiffa’. In L’Iconografia della SS. Trinità nel Sacro Monte a Ghiffa, Claudio Silvestri (ed.), Ghiffa, 2008, 103–113. 45. Artioli and Monducci 1986, 169. 46. On the San Girolamo painting, see A. Cadoppi, ‘Nuove notizie per la pala di Camillo Procaccini nella Chiesa di San Vitale (poi San Girolamo)’. Reggio storia, 142, 2014, 15–23. 47. L’anno 1598 20 Ottobre, il Sig.r Cammillo Procaccini pittore bolognese habitante in Milano s’obbligò per instromento agli huomini dell’Arte della Seta di Reggio di dipingere di sua mano un Quadro con l’Adorazione dei Magi […] et hebbe a buon conto sessanta ducatoni. Hora che sono già passati otto anni, et che non si è potuto avere una minima soddisfazione […].   The letter is published in Campori 1855, 387. 48. Neilson 1979, 40 and 71. 49. Camillo del fu Ercole Procaccini abitante in Milano in Porta nuova parrocchia di San Martino confessa aver ricevuto da Annibale del fu Girolamo Squadroni abitante in Reggio 135 ducatoni della stampa di Milano per prezzo di una tavola o ancona, su la quale è dipinta l’Adorazione dei Magi.   Campori 1855, 387.

100  The Seventeenth Century Seta. As a savvy businessman, Camillo knew his growing reputation allowed him to demand a higher price than the one agreed ten years earlier. After completing the decoration in Reggio, Camillo returned to Milan. He did not stay long, as on 4 October 1600 he is registered in Piacenza signing a contract for two pictures representing the Martyrdom of Sts Sixtus and Lawrence and the Massacre of the Innocents for the Church of San Sisto.50 Valued at the price of 2,400 lire, the commission was left partially incomplete as concurrent obligations in Milan forced Camillo to give up the Martyrdom and focus on the Massacre, which he delivered on 17 March 1605.51 Although not entirely fulfilled, the San Sisto commission was a prelude to Camillo’s further accomplishments in the city. In 1605, he was contacted by Duke Ranuccio Farnese and Bishop Claudio Rangoni to decorate the choir and the apse of Piacenza Cathedral. A fervent admirer of the Borromeos, Rangoni held artistic imagery in high regard and by selecting Camillo he aimed at creating a parallel between cathedrals in Piacenza and Milan.52 To complete the cycle, Camillo was joined by an old friend and colleague: Ludovico Carracci, with whom he had worked 20  years earlier in Bologna. Procaccini probably held the principal role in this commission as his enormous Death of the Virgin (fig. 5.6) was the centrepiece of the entire decorative campaign.53 Having trained in the same bottega and grew up in the same environment, Ludovico and Camillo arrived in Piacenza as head of their workshops. While Ludovico was joined by assistants Lorenzo Garbieri and Girolamo Cavadini, Camillo was assisted by Giovanni Mauro della Rovere and Francesco Sala, who respectively completed the frescoes and stuccoes for the chapels dedicated to St Martin and St Alexius.54 A letter sent by Carracci to the Bolognese musician Gioseffo Guidetti confirms that the decorative campaign lasted until August 1609, thus preventing Camillo from being present in Milan for the commission of the quadroni celebrating the canonisation of Carlo Borromeo.55 As he had previously done in Reggio, before leaving Piacenza, Camillo racked up further commissions. In 1610, he accepted to paint three canvases for the Church

50. ‘D’altra parte s’obbliga detto Rev. pagare a detto Sig. Camillo per detti quadri ducatoni quattrocento, divisi in tre rate, cioè sessanta hoggi per caparra, cento a Pasqua prossima, il restante in fine d’opera’. Collegio Morigi Piacenza, Carte Pancotti. Published in R. Arisi, La Chiesa e il Monastero di S. Sisto a Piacenza. Piacenza, 1977, 282. 51. Neilson 1979, 60. The Martyrdom of Sts Sixtus and Lawrence was eventually commissioned to Gian Paolo Cavagna who completed it on 6 August 1604. Arisi 1977, 286. 52. D. Ponzini, ‘Organizzazione ecclesiastica e vita religiosa’. In Storia di Piacenza, vol. IV, Piacenza, 1999, 212–213. 53. For the bozzetto and further discussion, see Ruggeri 2004, 48–50. 54. On 18 August 1609, Camillo was paid 381 lire out of 100 ducati (600 lire) for the frescoes of the chapels of St Martin and St Alexius. Neilson 1979, 58. The attribution to Giovanni Mauro della Rovere was first confirmed by Carasi. C. Carasi, Le pubbliche pitture di Piacenza. Piacenza, 1780, 16. 55. Io poi ó fornito l’opera di quatro anni principiate co’ satisfazione granda di chi mi à comandato co’ tutta la Città, che lo posso dire co’ verità il Sig. Procazino ancora lui V.S. se lo puó immaginare essendo il valentuomo che è.  Ludovico Carracci’s letter to Gioseffo Guidetti, 24 August 1609.

Published in Malvasia 1678, 446. Although Camillo’s commitments in Piacenza prevented him from being selected to illustrate the miracles of Borromeo, in 1610 he was commissioned for the designs of several banners with images of the saint which were to be carried in the procession during the ceremonies for Borromeo’s canonisation in Rome. Payments related to these banners were made to Camillo in January, March and August 1610. E. Arslan, Le pitture del Duomo di Milano. Milan, 1960, 103.

The Seventeenth Century

101

Figure 5.6 Camillo Procaccini, Death of the Virgin. Oil on canvas, 712x448 cm., 1607–1609, Piacenza Cathedral, Piacenza. Photo Credit: Ufficio per i Beni Culturali Ecclesiastici della Diocesi di Piacenza-Bobbio.

of Santa Maria di Campagna.56 Later that year, he completed a Virgin and Child with Sts Thomas and Carlo Borromeo for the Church of San Tommaso, which he based on a compositional model already employed by his assistants for pictures in Sant’Eustorgio and Biasca.57 Camillo’s quest to expand the geographic horizons of his business also brought him to Venice, where in around 1600 he completed a Martyrdom of St  Cecilia for the Foscari chapel in San Nicola dei Tolentini. Mentioned by Boschini in 1664, the painting was inspired by the Martyrdom of St Agnes executed a few years earlier for Milan Cathedral and characterised by the customary angel plunging from the sky holding the martyr’s crown.58 Camillo’s picture was well-received, as in 1618 he was contacted by local aristocrats Vincenzo and Elisabetta Pisani to decorate a further chapel at the Tolentini.59 On this occasion, the decorative program included three 56. A. Corna, Storia ed arte in Santa Maria di Campagna. Piacenza, 1908, 155. 57. Neilson 1979, 59–60. 58. ‘Nella terza Cappella di Casa Foscari, v’è la tavola di Camillo Procaccino, con il martirio di Santa Cecilia, e un angelo che le porge una ghirlanda di fiori, & una palma’. Boschini 1664, 54. 59. M. Valsecchi, ‘Camillo Procaccini a Venezia’. Arte veneta, 28, 1974, 261–266.

102  The Seventeenth Century paintings dedicated to the glory and the miracles of Borromeo as well as the ceiling decoration, which was completed by Camillo’s assistants with angels in glory and two monochrome scenes. Aside from documenting the reach of the Procaccini business, Camillo’s Venetian connection is relevant because it exposed the workshop to a repertoire of Flemish and Netherlandish printed sources that were essential for the development of Carlo Antonio’s career, and were used for the decoration of local palaces and aristocratic residencies. To this end, one should note that the interest for northern prints in Milan was on the rise, as demonstrated by the arrival in 1587 of more than 5,000 impressions, including many by Cornelis Cort, shipped from the Roman shop owned by Marcello Clodio.60 Once in Venice, it might be possible that Camillo visited the print shop owned by the Sadeler family, the largest and most successful of the dynasties of Flemish engravers that were dominant in northern European printmaking in the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.61 At that time the Venetian branch of the Sadeler business was directed by Justus Sadeler, the son of Jan Sadeler I, who arrived in Venice in 1596.62 Sénéchal notes that Justus’s print stock included a sticking predominance of impressions engraved after Marten de Vos, Hans Rottenhammer and Paul Bril, all recognised as main references in Carlo Antonio’s artistic production.63 After all, contacts already existed between the Sadeler and the Procaccini.64 A  few years earlier, Jan Sadeler I had indeed copied one of Camillo’s engravings representing the Rest on the Flight into Egypt. The last major centre reached by the Procaccini business in the 1600s was Turin.65 An inventory drafted in 1635 by the painter Antonio Mariani della Corna confirms indeed that both Camillo and Giulio Cesare were selected alongside fellow Lombard artists Cerano and Morazzone to execute a series of large canvases celebrating allegories of the Savoy provinces.66 Commissioned in 1607 by Carlo Emanuele I to celebrate the wedding of his two daughters Margherita and Isabella, these 15 paintings, most of which are lost, were escorted in Turin on 19 February 1608 by Milanese painter Carlo Buzzi.67 Camillo was selected to execute the allegory of the Aosta Province, which he resolved by using the standard compositional model selected by Carlo Emanuele

60. G. Romano, ‘Uso, diffusione e commercio dei modelli grafici’. In Maiolica e incisione. Tre secoli di rapporti iconografici, catalogo della mostra, Grazia Bisconti Ugolini and Jacqueline Petruzzelli Scherer (eds), Vicenza, 1992, 15–18. 61. On the Sadeler family, see P. Sénéchal, Les Sadeler: entremise et enterprise. PhD dissertation, Université de Paris-Sorbonne, 1987. 62. P. Sénéchal, ‘Justus Sadeler: print publisher and art dealer in early Seicento Venice’. Print quarterly, 7, 1990, 22–35. 63. Ibid., 28–29. 64. While visiting the collection owned by Manfredo Settala, Malvasia saw a copy of Camillo’s St. Francis Receiving the Stigmata etched by Justus Sadeler: ‘il bellissimo S. Francesco in paese foglio intiero di un bellissimo bolino intagliato da Iusto Sadeler, et in un sasso di quel deserto queste parole Camillo Procacino Bol. Invent’. Malvasia 1667, f. 61r. 65. On the Procaccinis’ presence in Turin, see O. D’Albo, ‘I lombardi, “primi maestri che sieno in Europa”: il ciclo delle province sabaude e altre imprese per Carlo Emanuele I’. In Scambi artistici tra Torino e Milano, Alessandro Morandotti and Gelsomina Spione (eds), Milan, 2016, 39–55. 66. A. Baudi di Vesme, ‘La Regia Pinacoteca di Torino’. In Le gallerie nazionali italiane. Notizie e documenti, vol. III, Rome, 1897, 35–68. 67. ‘S’è mandato n. 15 quadri grandi sopra due carri, compri qui per detti, quali si son consignati al signor Carlo Busso pittore’. Published in F. Varallo, Il duca e la corte. Cerimonie al tempo di Carlo Emanuele I di Savoia. Geneva, 1991, 173, note 9.

The Seventeenth Century 103 I for all canvases in the series: an allegoric figure holding a coat of arms accompanied by river allegories.68 Giulio Cesare was assigned the allegories of Savoy and Piedmont. The fact that the younger of the Procaccini was selected for such a prestigious commission bears witness to the reputation he had already built in his first decade working as a painter in Milan. If in 1608 the Procaccinis’ presence in Turin was not required, Camillo and Giulio Cesare did eventually travel to the Duchy of Savoy in June 1619, when they were invited to execute the lost decoration for the ceiling of one of the private rooms of princess Cristina of France, who was expected in Piedmont for her marriage with Duke Vittorio Amedeo I.69 As often happened in Camillo’s career, he managed to attract commissions from local ecclesiastic institutions. As noted by Onorato Derossi, he executed an oval painting representing the Virgin and Child with Carlo Borromeo for the Church of San Tommaso.70 Furthermore, Camillo is the author of two canvases representing the Annunciation once registered in the monastery of the Vergine del Suffragio.71

Collaborative Projects in Milan While the new geographic focus adopted by Camillo penalised small peripheral commissions, which from 1600 onwards were progressively assigned to the bottega and greatly diminished in number, large decorative campaigns in Milan remained Procaccini’s priority. Although accepting works outside Milan, as in the previous decade Camillo remained active in the Lombard capital orchestrating decorative campaigns that often involved his family members. Amongst them, the most ambitious project undertaken by the Procaccini workshop in Milan was the decoration of the Church of Sant’Angelo, where Camillo and his assistants worked in the chapel of San Diego, the choir and the two cloisters.72 Lasting more than 20 years, this campaign can be considered as an ongoing working site similar to what Pirro Visconti’s villa had been for the Procaccini in the last decade of the sixteenth century. Sant’Angelo was the residence of the Franciscan monks and a significant place for the Procaccini. Malvasia recognises Camillo as one of the donors of this church, which was designated to host the Procaccini family’s tomb.73 Although the lack of direct documentation makes it difficult to establish a definitive chronology for the works, the decoration probably started with the San Diego chapel, purchased in 1588 by the silk merchant Giovanni

68. A copy of Camillo’s allegory has been published by Romano. G. Romano, ‘Artisti alla corte di Carlo Emanuele I: la costruzione di una nuova tradizione figurativa’. In Le collezioni di Carlo Emanuele I di Savoia, Giovanni Romano (ed.), Turin, 1995, 27. 69. ‘A Giulio Cesare et Camillo Procacini pittori milanesi, a bon conto delli quadri della soffitta del gabinetto di Madama Serenissima; l. 301’. Published in A. Baudi di Vesme, ‘L’arte negli stati sabaudi’. Atti della Società Piemontese di archeologia e belle arti, 14, 1932, 443. 70. Derossi 1781, 66. 71. Ibid., 68. The Annunciation was probably painted for Carlo Emanuele I  and later donated to the monastery which was founded in 1624 after an explicit request by the Duke’s daughters Maria and Francesca Caterina of Savoy. 72. On this building, see M.C. Chiusa, Sant’Angelo a Milano. I cicli pittorici dei Procaccini. Milan, 1990. 73. Malvasia 1678, 279. Ticozzi informs us about the ‘gentilizia tomba della famiglia Procaccini’. Ticozzi 1833, III, 196. A document attests the requiem mass dedicated to Giulio Cesare’s memory after the painter’s death. ASM, Notarile, Notaio Melchiorre Appiani, 27634.

104  The Seventeenth Century Battista Tauro and his wife Lucia Omati.74 Cassinelli notes that both the stucco and fresco decoration, together with the altarpiece representing St. Diego Curing a Blind Boy, were completed in the period 1595–1603.75 While the stuccoes were executed by Sala and Lezeno, the frescoes, except for the Glory of the St Diego, were made by Camillo’s assistants. A contract stipulated between the Cremonese painter Panfilo Nuvolone and Giuseppe Besozzo indicates that on 30 March 1610 the chapel’s decoration had yet to be completed.76 This significant delay is ascribable to the piling up of Camillo’s commitments within and outside Milan, as well as to the scarce interest demonstrated by Tauro’s heirs in the commission. As a result, the remaining pictures, including two large compositions with St. Diego Saves a Child Shut in an Oven and the Healing of Woman as the Saint’s Body is Carried Past, were delivered only in the second decade of the seventeenth century. The decoration of the choir started almost simultaneously with the works in the San Diego chapel. It comprised three altarpieces representing the Annunciation, the Apostles Before the Tomb of the Virgin and the Flight into Egypt, four lateral frescoes with the Stories of the Virgin and a ceiling fresco celebrating the Assumption of the Virgin Surrounded by Music-Making Angels. Ordered by countess Porzia Landi Gallarati, the works began around 1595 as demonstrated through stylistic comparison with coeval pictures executed by Camillo and his assistants in Pallanza and Bergamo.77 While for the Apostles Before the Tomb of the Virgin and the Flight into Egypt Camillo asked for Carlo Antonio’s help to execute the landscapes in the background, the ceiling frescoes were completed by his assistants, who replicated compositional models adopted in analogous decorations in Piacenza Cathedral and in San Prospero in Reggio Emilia. Interrupted for more than a decade in the 1600s, the decoration was eventually completed in the second decade of the seventeenth century by Camillo’s pupil Simone Barabino, who executed the four Marian episodes on the lateral walls. Educated in Genoa in the workshop of Bernardo Castello, Barabino arrived in Milan around 1616.78 Thanks to his connection with the Procaccini family, in November 1619 he was commissioned for a Virgin and Child with the Infant St. John for the sacristy of Milan Cathedral, while in the following year he was entrusted with the decoration of the oratory dedicated to Santa Margherita in Villa Torretta, a suburban residence located in Sesto San Giovanni.79 Ordered by Giovan Girolamo Marino, Pirro Visconti’s brother-in-law, this commission exemplifies one of the lesser known specialisations of the Procaccini business: the decoration of residencies owned by the Milanese nobility. Although Barabino’s intervention in Sant’Angelo brought him visibility, he seemingly decided to quit 74. The date of 1588, recorded by a plaque, indicates the construction year of the chapel and not, as believed by some scholars, that of Camillo’s decoration. 75. Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 64. On the chronology of the San Diego chapel see also the entry by Vito Zani in Gregori 1999, 208–209. 76. Neilson 1979, 30. 77. Ibid., 32. The commission is confirmed by Borsieri: In questa guisa ancora si sono ridotti a compiuta vaghezza i chori di molti monasteri di Frati e di Monaci, massimamente quello di Sant’Angiolo dipinto da Camillo Procaccini per la liberarità della Contessa Portia, la quale ordinò nel testamento suo che ciò si facesse.   Borsieri 1619, 20. 78. On Barabino, see I. Rega Castro, Simone Barabino. Resurrección de Lázaro: una pintura de escuela lombarda en la antiqua colleción del Deán Lópezs Cepero. Lleida, 2013. 79. For this commission, see S. Coppa, lombardia Barocca. Milan, 2009, 196–198.

The Seventeenth Century 105 his profession and turned to the business of selling pigments.80 He did not succeed, as he got into debt and eventually died in prison after 1620. The decorative campaign orchestrated by the Procaccini in Sant’Angelo ended with the decoration of the cloisters, which is mentioned by Borsieri in 1619.81 Very few of the pictures still survive, since the architectural structures were demolished in 1938 and most of the decorations, temporarily in storage, were destroyed in 1943 during an air raid.82 Accurately described by Malvasia, the first cloister was decorated with Endeavours of the Angels and is the only one of which a little survives.83 Conversely, the second cloister’s decoration, devoted to the Life of St.  Francis, is lost and only recalled in a 1716 manuscript written by Bernardino Burocco.84 The cloisters were connected by a door on which a lunette with Giulio Cesare’s Dead Christ with the Magdalen and Angels was on display. Dating from the early 1610s, the picture faced a Flagellation by Morazzone and has now been moved to the sacristy.85 In decorating the cloisters, Camillo was assisted by a number of collaborators including his brother Carlo Antonio. To this end, of the 21 scenes narrating the Endeavours of the Angels, five are recognizable as his works.86 Mentioned by Borsieri and confirmed by Torre, the attribution to Carlo Antonio is corroborated by comparison with the painter’s illustrations for the theatrical play L’Adamo and with the decorations of Castello Visconti in Somma Lombardo. Case in point, the Angel Guarding the Elect (fig. 5.7) frescoed in Sant’Angelo is identifiable as the central figure populating the scene titled Padre Eterno, Choro d’Angeli (fig. 5.8) illustrating the first act of Andreini’s play.87 Burocco notes that the cloister decorated with the Life of St Francis included 48 scenes, each with a poem to identify it. Given that it was such an enormous undertaking, it is possible that the frescoing may have gone on for years under Camillo’s direction. Borsieri identifies Camillo and Carlo Antonio and Morazzone as the artists active in 80. Avido poi di maggiori ricchezze, lasciò poi la professione per applicarsi a mercantare colori per i Pittori, ma indebitato di grossa somma, per opera del suo corrispondente fu carcerato; non potendo soffrire quei disagi, repentinemente infermossi, e lasciò las spoglia mortale in fresca età.   Orlandi 1704, 393. 81. Borsieri 1619, 64–66. The decoration is described by Torre: Il monastero è poi ornato da due vasti cortili a Portici per ogni lato con Colonne di marmo, le cui pareti sono tutte dipinte da varij Pittori, tra quali nel secondo cortile veggonsi tre Quadri à tempra datti dal Morazzoni della Vita di San Francesco; a mezzo il Verone, che stassi tra l’un Cortile, e l’altro nei Campi sopra le Porte à fresco dipinse Giulio Cesare Procaccini il Cristo morto, ed il Cristo flagellato a rimpetto il Morazzoni. Carlo Antonio Procaccini, fratello di Camillo, e di Giulio Cesare dipinse tutta la parete del portico subito, che s’esce di Chiesa, effigiando varie imprese operate dagli Angeli.   Torre 1674, 264–265. 82. N. Neilson, ‘Camillo Procaccini: some partial reconstructions’. Arte lombarda, 50, 1978, 98. 83. Malvasia 1678, 279. The surviving frescoes, conserved in the Franciscan convent adjacent to the church, were first published in A. Mosconi and F. Olgiati, Chiesa di Sant’Angelo dei frati minori: guida storico-artistica. Milan, 1972. 84. B. Burocco, Chronologia serafica. Milan, 1716, 2, ff. 38–46. A photocopy of Burocco’s manuscript is conserved in the Biblioteca Francescana of Sant’Angelo, Milan. 85. For a recent account on this painting, see M. Tanzi, ‘Due esercitazioni lombarde: Bernardino Campi e Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Storia dell’arte, 1, 2018, 9–30. 86. The Breaking of the Seventh Seal, the First Trumpet Sound, the Angel Guarding the Elect, the Expulsion from Paradise, and the Three Angels appearing to Abraham. See Lo Conte 2020, 15. 87. A. Ruffino, L’Adamo. Trento, 2007, 24.

106  The Seventeenth Century

Figure 5.7 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Angel Guarding the Elect. Fresco, circa 1618, Church of St. Angelo, Milan.

the cloister.88 His account is confirmed by Gregori, who recognised three frescoes by Morazzone, and by Neilson, who published five of Camillo’s drawings related to this cycle.89 A further drawing might add a fascinating piece to the puzzle. It is a copy of St. Francis before the Crucifix inscribed on the verso ‘à S. Angelo à Milano di Giulio C. Procacino diseg. Del J. Manin’.90 Conserved at Christ Church, Oxford, the copy by Jacopo Mannini could indicate Giulio Cesare’s participation in the project. This was mentioned already in 1657 by Scannelli, who stated that ‘in the cloister of the convent in Sant’Angelo there are frescoes by Giulio Cesare Procaccini’.91 While the decorative campaign in Sant’Angelo lasted for two decades, in around 1610 the Procaccinis were involved in the decoration of another Milanese church: Sant’Antonio, which from 1584 to 1632 underwent a process of comprehensive renovation.92 There, the Procaccini were involved in a twofold commission: Camillo, with the possible help of Carlo Antonio, was employed in the choir’s decoration; Giulio 88. Borsieri 1619, 64–66. 89. St Francis Renounces his Father (Windsor Castle); St Francis Vesting his Followers (Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum); The Death of St.  Francis (Columbia, University of Missouri); Pope Nicholas V at the tomb of St Francis (Modena, Galleria Estense); Pope Honorius III Confirming the Franciscan Order (Frankfurt, Städelschles Kunstinstitut). Neilson 1978, 98–102. On Morazzone’s frescoes, see M. Gregori, Il Morazzone: catalogo della mostra. Milan, 1962, 34, 157. 90. Oxford, Christ Church, 1700. Published in Neilson 1978, 101. 91. ‘Nel claustro dl convento di S. Angelo si trovano diverse operationi a fresco del medesimo Giulio Cesare’. Scannelli 1957, 330–331. 92. Coppa 2009, 66.

The Seventeenth Century 107

Figure 5.8 Cesare Bassani (after Carlo Antonio Procaccini), Padre Eterno, Choro d’Angeli. In G.B. Andreini, L’Adamo, 1613.

Cesare decorated the newly built Acerbi chapel. Following the success obtained in the first decade of the seventeenth century which and culminated with the commission of the quadroni for Milan Cathedral, in 1610 Giulio Cesare was hired to decorate the Acerbi chapel, which had been built one year earlier thanks to a 3,116 lire donation by senator Ludovico Acerbi.93 Procaccini supplied the main altarpiece representing the Annunciation, flanked by two pictures of identical height with the Visitation and the Flight into Egypt. He also included a canvas showing three angels above the altar and an illusionistic design of God the Father in Glory for the vault. Characterised by overcrowding and horror vacui, Giulio Cesare’s paintings highlight a systematic and self-conscious approach to the Emilian tradition, foreshadowing those qualities that made him the most appreciated painter in Milan. While Giulio Cesare worked for Acerbi, Camillo was involved in the decoration of the choir. Funded by countess Olimpia Trivulzio, the decoration comprised a large altarpiece painted by Procaccini with the Deliverance of St Anthony, as well as four canvases representing the Arrival of 93. For the chronology of Giulio Cesare’s work in the Acerbi Chapel, see S. Coppa, ‘La cronologia della Cappella Acerbi in Sant’Antonio Abate a Milano’. Arte lombarda, 58/59, 1981, 85–99.

108  The Seventeenth Century the Emperor Theodosius to Persecute the Christians, St Anthony Comforting Martyrs, St Anthony Tempted by Women and St Anthony Beaten by Devils.94 Over the years, the attribution of the four canvases has been debated and tentatively bestowed upon Camillo Procaccini, Guglielmo Caccia, Domenico Pellegrini and Fede Galizia.95 Vanoli has recently proposed the name of Carlo Antonio Procaccini, offering a hypothesis that, if confirmed, would add a new element to the study of the painter’s activity during the first decade of the seventeenth century.96 Although it is impossible to attest Carlo Antonio’s participation in the absence of documentary evidence, one should note that the large canvas representing the Arrival of the Emperor Theodosius to Persecute the Christians shows interesting similarities with a small Landscape with St  Margaret (Pinacoteca Ala Ponzone, Cremona) completed by Carlo Antonio just before 1610.

Decoration of Nobiliar Residencies The final aspect to consider when investigating the expansion of the Procaccini business in the first decade of the seventeenth century is the decoration of residences owned by the Lombard nobility. Managed by Carlo Antonio, whose participation in such endeavours is attested since 1595, when he frescoed a Landscape with St. Francis in Villa Frisiani Merighetti, Corbetta, these decorative campaigns were conducted thanks to the know-how developed in Lainate and facilitated by coeval developments in Milanese economy.97 At the end of the sixteenth century, demographic expansion and artisanal production became vehicles for the development of the Lombard farmland as the demand for foodstuffs and raw materials, especially leather and linen, was constantly increasing.98 As a consequence, migrants arriving in Milan relocated to the countryside, while wealthy families invested in purchasing land, building palaces that solidified their status as landowners. Armenini notes that these residencies were embellished with allegoric figures, landscapes and exotic animals.99 Their decorations provided job opportunities for minor painters, as well as for botteghe with the adequate structure and reputation to supervise manpower. As demonstrated by a date inscribed in the staircase’s vault, in 1609 Carlo Antonio completed the decoration of Castello Visconti di San Vito in the village of Somma

94. ‘Che l’Ill.ma Sig.a Contessa Olimpia Trivulzia possi e gli sia lecito abbellire il coro della chiesa […] con spendere in Detto coro qualsivoglia somma di denari’. ASM, Fondo religione, S. Antonio Abate, cart. 970. Published in Neilson 1979, 35. 95. Torre mentioned the name of Domenico Pellegrini (Torre 1674, 46). Dezallier d’Argenville proposed an attribution to Camillo (D’Argenville 1745–1752, 1, 229–232). Bartoli credited the work to Fede Galizia (Bartoli 1977, 143). 96. See Vanoli in Morandotti–Natale 2011, 280. In the catalogue of Camillo’s works, Neilson recognised the canvases as a product of Camillo’s bottega. Neilson 1979, 35. 97. Morandotti 2005, 200. In Corbetta, Carlo Antonio also executed a pastoral scene. 98. Sella 1979, 100. 99. In queste vi si fanno fregi con partimenti di stucchi, e dentro istorie di cose poetiche, e di materie abondevoli, dove vi entrano co molta satisfattione de’ buoni, le figure di bellissime femine, di vaghi giovani e di puttini, con paesi, festoni, et grotesche, casamenti, et animali.   G.B. Armenini, De’ veri precetti della pittura. Ravenna, 1587, 197.

The Seventeenth Century 109 Lombardo. First mentioned in 1251 as allodium of the Visconti family and residence of the local nobleman Pietro Visconti, the castle underwent massive renovations when the brothers Francesco and Guido Visconti returned to Somma Lombardo in 1448.101 The decorative program was commissioned by Ermes Visconti, Francesco Visconti’s nephew, who fought in Flanders under the command of Alessandro Farnese and concluded diplomatic missions for the Spanish governors of Milan in the courts of Savoy, Lorena, Parma and Mantua.102 In 1583, Ermes married Margherita Taverna, a sister of Cardinal Ferdinando Taverna and a descendant of one of the most powerful Milanese families. It was to celebrate Taverna’s election as a cardinal that Ermes decorated his castle with opulent allegories, probably envisaging for his sons a destiny as descendants of a future pope.103 Carlo Antonio’s effort in Somma Lombardo included the frescoes of the staircase as well as those of the chapel dedicated to the Virgin. Starting from the ground level, the staircase was decorated by frescoes representing Orpheus Enchanting the Animals and the Three Graces, both comparable with the illustrations made by Carlo Antonio for L’Adamo.104 To this end, the Orpheus Enchanting the Animals (fig. 5.9) replicates the compositional structure and decorative abundance observed in the drawing for the scene Adam Naming the Animals (fig. 5.10), illustrating the second act of Andreini’s play. While Carlo Antonio’s landscape is inspired by Soens’ Series of the Creation (Galleria Nazionale, Parma), the variety of animals recalls the Creation of Eve frescoed by Camillo in San Prospero. Filled with monkeys, elephants, a bear, a dromedary and a dragon, the scene is also informed by Brueghel’s Element of Earth (Louvre, Paris), executed in 1608 for Federico Borromeo and copied by Carlo Antonio in the autograph Garden of Eden seen at Sotheby’s New York in 1988.105 As for the Orpheus, references to L’Adamo can also be traced to the Three Graces, as the three female figures reproduce the exact pose of the nymphs sketched in the drawing Choro di Donzelle, illustrating the fifth act of Andreini’s play. Carlo Antonio also executed two frescoes in the chapel of the Virgin, both inspired by printed sources. The Annunciation to the Shepherds replicates Jacopo Bassano’s interpretation of the same subject (Washington, National Gallery of Art) engraved in 1595 by Aegidius Sadeler. The Rest on the Flight to Egypt is loosely inspired by Cort’s engraving of Barocci’s picture executed in 1573 for art collector Simonetto Anastagi and now in the Pinacoteca Vaticana. Both pictures flanked an altarpiece with the Annunciation, recognised by Rosci as a work 100

100. On this commission, see A. Lo Conte, ‘Sadeler and Procaccini: the secular decoration of Castello Visconti di San Vito in Somma Lombardo’. Explorations in Renaissance culture, 44, 2018, 27–46. 101. L. Melzi, Somma Lombardo. Storia, descrizione e illustrazione. Milan, 1880, 119–120. 102. G.G. Priorato, Vite et azzioni di personaggi militari, e politici. Vienna, 1674, 748–749. Ermes Visconti owned a palace in the Milanese parish of San Tommaso in Terra Amara, where Camillo and Carlo Antonio lived from 1595 to 1600. Considering his connection with the Farnese court in Parma, it is not surprising that he decided to rely on the Procaccini to decorate his own castle. Lo Conte 2018, 31. 103. F. Arese Lucini, ‘Introduzione all’età patrizia’. Storia di Milano, vol. IX, Milan, 1957, 15. 104. On Carlo Antonio’s illustrations, see Ruffino 2007, 71 and 216. 105. Sotheby’s New York, Old Master Paintings, 14 January 1988, lot 31. Jan Brueghel’s Element of Earth was part of a series of the Four Elements painted for Borromeo. In 1796, the pictures formed part of Napoleon’s booty from Italy, and thus two of them (Earth and Air), are now in the Louvre.

110  The Seventeenth Century

Figure 5.9 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Orpheus Enchanting the Animals. Fresco, 1609, Castello Visconti di San Vito, Somma Lombardo.

from Cerano’s bottega.106 The remaining figurations in Somma Lombardo are colourful allegories, decorating the rooms and the main hall. Characterised by minor quality, they were executed by Carlo Antonio’s assistants, who copied engravings by Jan and Raphael Sadeler after drawings by Dirk Barendsz and Maarten de Vos.107 Although their names are still untraceable, Spiriti has tentatively identified them as members of the Avogadro family, a local workshop that also participated in decorative campaigns in Bisuschio and Frascarolo Induno.108 A further decorative project orchestrated by the Procaccini family is Palazzo Rasini in Cavenago Brianza.109 Designed by Martino Bassi, who collaborated with Camillo in 106. Rosci 2000, 120. The painting is a copy of the Annunciation painted in 1606 for Santa Maria presso San Celso. 107. On the Sadelers’ series, see D. De Hoop Scheffer, ‘Aegidius Sadeler to Raphael Sadeler II’. In Hollstein’s Dutch and Flemish etching and woodcuts ca. 1450–1700, Dieuwke de Hoop Scheffer (ed.), Amsterdam, 1980, notes 194–197; 198–202; 493–496; 499–502; 509–512. 108. A. Spiriti, ‘La nascita delle consorterie pittoriche: Avogadro e Pozzi in area varesina tra Morazzone e Daniele Crespi’. Rivista della società storica varesina, 24, 2007, 164. 109. Vergani 1997.

The Seventeenth Century 111

Figure 5.10 Cesare Bassani (after Carlo Antonio Procaccini), Adam Naming the Animals. In G.B. Andreini, L’Adamo, 1613.

Lainate, the building was completed before 1598 and owned by Marcantonio Rasini, the count of Castelnovetto, who in 1580 married Claudia Visconti Borromeo, Pirro Visconti’s sister.110 After Marcantonio ’s death in 1604, the palace was inherited by his son Carlo, who financed the completion of the façade and commissioned the fresco decoration of the two main rooms of the ground floor: the sala delle fontane and the sala di Giove. Much like his uncle Pirro, Carlo was a passionate art collector.111 He owned 150 paintings displayed in his palaces in Milan and Cavenago Brianza. Among them, four landscape and 41 still lifes highlight a predilection for the genres pioneered in Milan by Carlo Antonio Procaccini. Inspired by the landscapes, grotesques and fantastic animals populating Pirro’s nymphaeum in Lainate, the decoration of Palazzo Rasini began in the sala delle fontane, where the central Perseus Carrying the Head of Medusa matches the analogous representation frescoed by Carlo Antonio’s collaborators in the staircase vault of Castello Visconti in Somma Lombardo. In the corners, several mythological creatures copied from printed sources surrounded four 110. Throughout her life, Claudia maintained a strong connection with her brother. She and her children were habitual guest in Lainate. Claudia’s testament includes a ‘quadro grande con sopra il sig. Pirro Ves(cont)e a cavallo’. The painting was on display in the hall of the Rasini palace in Milan. ASM, Notarile, 27414, 17 February 1631. 111. Vergani 1997, 109.

112  The Seventeenth Century monumental fountains, while in the arches Flemish-style landscapes described scenic vedute also constituting the main decoration in the sala di Giove. A terminus post quem for the decoration is represented by Paul Bril’s painting Landscape with Hermits (Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan), dated 1605–1607 and copied by Carlo Antonio’s collaborators in the ceiling of the sala di Giove. Completed either just before or right after the decorative campaign in Somma Lombardo, the frescoes were executed by Agostino Lodola and Giovanni Battista Volpino, painters who had already worked with Camillo in Lainate. To this end, the images in Cavenago are comparable to the hunting scenes completed around 1604 in Pirro Visconti’s residence.

6 Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

Controlling the Market At the start of the 1610s Camillo was 49 years of age. His younger brothers were in their mid and late 30s respectively. Milanese citizens since 1594, the Procaccini were married, had children and settled in different areas of the city. They were among the most requested artists in northern Italy and enjoyed substantial earnings. As Giulio Cesare gradually became the driving personality of the family, the organisation of the family business did not change. The relationships remained excellent, and while Camillo remained in control of the workshop, Carlo Antonio continued to contribute to the family activities. What did change, however, was the prestige that the evolution of Giulio Cesare’s pictorial career added to the family business. Propelled by Giulio Cesare’s fame, awareness of the Procaccini name eventually crossed the Lombard and Emilian borders, reaching a larger geographic area exemplified by the patronage of Giovanni Carlo Doria in Genoa, as well as by the interest of those patrons eager to integrate their collections with the latest developments of Lombard art. Among them, the Spanish Governors of Milan were informed on the artistic novelties available on the local market.1 Their appreciation introduced the Procaccini into a new dimension, widening even more the influence of the family business. In the second decade of the seventeenth century, while participating in public endeavours, the Procaccini increasingly focused on private commissions, exploiting the local demand for paintings encouraged by the growth of Milanese economy. Between 1613 and 1619, the State of Milan indeed witnessed a further period of economic expansion, which was fostered by the exportation of Lombard manufacturing products and the growth of the public expenditure related to the war of succession in Monferrato.2 A local report dated 26 February 1620 indicates that local merchants grew rich from the battles, and some even doubled their capitals.3 The influx of money inserted into

  1. For the collecting activity of the Spanish governors of Milan, see A. Vannugli, ‘Collezionismo spagnolo nello stato di Milano: la quadreria del marchese di Caracena’. Arte lombarda, 117, 1996, 5–36; O. D’Albo, ‘Il collezionismo dei governatori spagnoli a Milano durante l’episcopato di Federico Borromeo: alcune aperture’. Studia Borromaica, 32, 2019, 287–312.   2. G. Vigo, ‘L’estate di San Martino dell’economia milanese’. Rivista milanese di economia, 12, 1984.  3. ‘La guerra di Piemonte e Monferrato ha dato occasione à mercanti ne tempi addietro, non solo di far, ma anco di accrescer nuovi negotij et artificij, perché spendendo il danaro delle paghe […] pareva ch’allora si facessero faccende’. Archivio Storico Civico di Milano (ASCM), Materie, 267, 26 February 1620.

114  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market the Lombard economy generated an increase in demand for paintings, not only from the local nobility but also from the growing local middle-class made up of doctors, lawyers and merchants. Studies by Giovanna Tonelli have demonstrated that it was common practice among merchants in Milan to decorate their houses with devotional pictures, portraits or landscapes.4 As elsewhere in Italy, the demand for pictures grew together with the transformation of the house from a place subdivided into a few sparsely furnished multifunctional spaces to one broken up into a much more articulated complex of rooms, each with its appropriate furnishings, including pictures.5 Case in point, the house owned by Giovanni Pietro Annoni, a prominent merchant specialising in buying and selling goods between Milan and Antwerp, included 11 rooms decorated with expensive furnishings and original paintings.6 Aside from the rampant middle-class, a new generation of connoisseurs descending from the Milanese nobility built in their houses exhibition spaces, defined by Vincenzo Scamozzi as gallerie.7 Mentioned by Borsieri, this group of art-loving noblemen included Scipione Toso, Giovanni Andrea Dardanone, Carlo Rasini, Manfredo Settala, Giovanni Maria Visconti, Francesco Arese, Giovanni Battista Salimbene, Gerolamo d’Adda, Guido Mazenta and brothers Paolo and Ferrando Simonetta.8 Altogether, these collectors favoured the diffusion of a taste for novelty. They were interested in purchasing creations by contemporary artists, rather than works from traditional masters such as Bernardino Luini and Gaudenzio Ferrari. Responding to the growing requests from the private market, from 1610 onwards the Procaccinis organised their workshop as a factory of images with a precisely recognizable style, concentrating on reproducing holy families, episodes from the life of Christ and devotional landscapes. The production of variants and replicas of given subjects is an indication of their market strategy, which is comparable to the one employed in Titian’s workshop in the second half of the sixteenth century.9 A large group of holy families scattered in museums and private collections indicates that Giulio Cesare focused on this particular iconography, which was popular among local collectors thanks to Federico Borromeo, who owned several pictures of this kind including Bernardino Luini’s Holy Family with Sts Anne and John the Baptist (Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan).10 Susan Merriam has noted that in the early modern   4. G. Tonelli ‘The Annoni and the Carenna in seventeenth-century Milan’. In Rubens’s Massacre of the Innocents. The Thomson Collection at the Art Gallery of Ontario, David Jaffé (ed.), Toronto, 2009, 154–192.   5. R. Goldthwaite, ‘The painting industry in early modern Italy’. Spear and Sohm 2010, 278.   6. Tonelli 2009, 158.   7. ‘Hoggidi si usano molto á Roma & á Genova & in altre città quel genere di fabriche che si dicono Gallerie’. V. Scamozzi, L’idea della architettura universale. Venice, 1615, 305.  8. Cominciano hora a farne di nove diversi Cavalieri, che si compiacciono estremamante della pittura e della scoltura. Questi sono fra gli altri Scipione Toso, Gio. Andrea Dardanone, Lodovico Gavatio, Gio. Maria Visconte, Gio. Battista Salinbene, M. Antonio Cairo, Ludovico Lattuada, Galeazzo Arconate e i conti Paolo e Ferrando Simonetti, in ciò degni di molta loda, che cercano, nò, i quadri vecchi del Lovino, nè quei di Gaudéntio, ma ne procurano di moderni da Procaccini, dal Cerano, dal Morazzone.   Borsieri 1619, 69–70. For a comprehensive study on seventeenth-century Milanese collections, see Morandotti 2008.   9. On Titian’s variants and replicas, see G. Tagliaferro, ‘Una fabbrica di immagini: l’impresa tizianesca tra invenzioni, repliche e varianti’. Tagliaferro and Aikema 2009, 223–272. 10. On Borromeo’s interest in collecting holy families, see Jones 1993, 60.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 115 economy of devotional images, pictures of the Virgin and Child derived value from the connection to earlier miracle-working images, such as the icon believed to be painted by saint Luke.11 Those figurations were especially useful to the church in the aftermath of the Reformation, as they offered divine proof in support of the cult of images. Cloaked as devotional objects, Giulio Cesare’s holy families were coveted collector’s pieces. Among them, the picture conserved at the Statens Museum in Copenhagen, and its exact replica in the Borromeo Collection at Isola Bella, indicate that Procaccini reproduced his own paintings, a habit typical of his brother Camillo who adopted this method with his versions of the Martyrdom of St. Agnes.12 As did Camillo, Giulio Cesare executed prints to advertise his work. To this end, an etched Holy Family, once attributed to Andrea Camassei, indicates his willingness to advertise a recognisable trademark style for private collectors.13 Giulio Cesare’s holy families are characterised by exalted glances, complex poses and emotional intensity. They witness the evolution of his style throughout the second and third decades of the century, demonstrating how he adapted his language to a standardised iconographic repertoire destined for the private market. Exemplifying this, both the Virgin and Child with an Angel (Museo di Capodimonte, Naples) and the Holy Family with an Angel (private collection), formerly in the Roman Church of San Luigi dei Francesi, are characterised by deliberate borrowings from Parmigianino and Correggio intended to appeal to the taste for the Emilian school growing among collectors.14 To this end, one should note that the Capodimonte canvas was once attributed to Parmigianino, while the picture formerly in San Luigi dei Francesi was thought to be a work by Correggio.15 While many of Giulio Cesare’s holy families referenced the Emilian roots of his painting, pictures such as the Virgin and the Child with the Infant St. John (National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh), executed for Genoese patrons, are characterised by a Rubensian dynamism and bear witness to Giulio Cesare’s response to the Flemish master’s work.16 Finally, devotional canvases painted after 1620, such as the Holy Family with Angels (Staatliche Kunstsammlungen, Dresden) and the Holy Family with St Anne and the Baptist (Bayerisches Staatsgemäldesammlungen, Munich), are representative of the last phase of Procaccini’s career,

11. S. Merriam, ‘The reception of garland pictures in seventeenth century Flanders and Italy’. In Domestic institutional interiors in early modern Europe, Sandra Cavallo and Silvia Evangelisti (eds), New York, 2017, 204. 12. On the Copenhagen canvas and its replica, see the entry by Alessandro Morandotti in Morandotti and Natale 2011, 284. The practice is furthermore confirmed by the three replicas of Giulio Cesare’s Holy Family and Angel (private collection) once in San Luigi dei Francesi, Rome. The replicas are conserved in the Museo Poldi Pezzoli, Milan; Museo Civico, Correggio, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Grenoble. 13. U. Ruggeri, ‘Three etchings by Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Print quarterly, 2, 1987, 162–166. Malvasia saw one of Giulio Cesare’s etched holy families: ‘Di Giulio Cesare altro non ho mai veduto, che una piccola Madonna col Signore intagliata quasi di ponti con le lettere sotto: I. C. Proc. in Mal. M.’. Malvasia 1678, 293. 14. Neilson 2004, 18. 15. On the Capodimonte canvas, see the entry by Odette d’Albo in Morandotti 2017, 180–181. On the Holy Family with an Angel once in San Luigi dei Francesi, see P. Carofano, ‘“Dilectus meus mihi et ego illi”. Una sacra famiglia molto correggesca di Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Arte Cristiana, 887, 2015, 123–130. 16. The painting can be recognized as the ‘Madonna, con S. Gio: che baccia li piedi a Christo di Giulio Cesare Procacino’ listed in the 1625 inventory of Giovanni Carlo Doria’s collection. See Brigstocke 2002, 53.

116  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market characterised by a more classical approach characterised by a rediscovered sculptural monumentality of the figures.17 Among the works created by Giulio Cesare for his private clients, there is a particular group made up of autonomous oil-sketches, also defined as macchie, small canvases executed quickly, not finished, characterised by thin criss-crossed brush strokes that define the physiognomy of the figures. Recognised by Roberto Longhi as abbozzi autonomi, those pictures were destined to Giulio Cesare’s most refined and discerning patrons and appreciated for their dexterity, creative energy and speed of execution.18 In executing those pieces, Giulio Cesare followed in the footsteps of Tintoretto and most notably of Parmigianino, who was the first painter to use oil sketches not as preparatory study but rather as a freely handled yet finished work of art.19 Parmigianino’s sketched pictures attracted a widespread approbation and, as a consequence, a market. To this end, Vasari himself stated that he had purchased a painting by Parmigianino that had been done in this style, noting that the artist ‘sketched the painting of a Virgin which was sold in Bologna to Giorgio Vasari from Arezzo’.20 Although a Virgin with the Child and a Bishop (private collection, Milan) indicates that Giulio Cesare had already began experimenting with oil sketches in the first decade of the century, it was only after 1611, when he encountered the patronage of Giovanni Carlo Doria, that he devoted himself to this genre.21 The inventories of the Doria Collection indeed include a series of references to these priced oil-sketches, which had a remarkable influence on Genoese artists such as Giovanni Benedetto Castiglione, Bernardo Strozzi and Valerio Castello. Among them, ‘una Madonna del Percacchino grande del naturale fatta in due giorni’ has been recognised by Brigstocke as the Holy Family with the Infant St John and Angel (fig. 6.1), conserved at the Neilson-Atkins Museum in Kansas City.22 The picture suggests Doria’s fascination with the prestezza and artistic dexterity of Giulio Cesare’s creations. The concept of a ‘factory of images’, understood as the organization of a repertoire through the use of combinable standards adaptable to the different requests of the art market, not only defines a specific feature of Giulio Cesare’s work, but can be also applied to the strategy employed by other members of the Procaccini family. In 1619, when Borsieri wrote his Supplemento, Camillo was still regarded as the best draftsman 17. The proliferation of alternative versions of Giulio Cesare’s holy families is a clear indication of the market strategy pursued by Procaccini at the peak of his career. The Dresden painting, engraved by Camerata in 1753, is copied in a Holy Family with Angels (private collection) seen at Dorotheum (Vienna), Old Master Painting, 18 October 2016, lot. 63. Still in Dresden, there is another canvas with the same composition in counterpart, which is a studio work (Brigstocke 2002, 149). The picture replicates another of Giulio Cesare’s holy families currently at the Maison d’Art in Lugano (Rosci 1993, 53). Giulio Cesare’s Holy Family with Sts Anne and the Baptist replicates a close-up picture conserved in the Royal Collection, London (Brigstocke 2002, 159). The original idea for these compositions can be retraced to a drawing representing a Holy Family with Four Figures, seen at Christie’s (London), Old Master Drawings, 7 July 1992, lot. 166, and published by Neilson 2004, 164. 18. R. Longhi, ‘L’inizio dell’abbozzo autonomo’. Paragone, 195, 1966, 25–29. 19. D. Ekserdjian, Parmigianino. New Haven, 2006, 6–7. 20. V. Gheroldi, ‘Painting a calce and sprezzatura in the 1530s: a technical context for Dosso’. In Dosso’s fate: painting court and culture in Renaissance Italy, Lucia Ciammitti, Steven Ostrow and Salvatore Settis (eds), Los Angeles, 1998, 124. 21. On this painting, see the entry in Morandotti 2017, 176–177. 22. Inventario dei quadri. circa 1617. Number [284]. Published in V. Farina, Giovan Carlo Doria: promotore delle arti a Genova nel primo Seicento. Florence, 2002, 196. On the Kansas painting, see Brigstocke 2002, 86–87.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 117

Figure 6.1 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Holy Family with the Infant St. John and Angels. Oil on canvas, 189x124 cm., 1615–1616, Neilson-Atkins Museum, Kansas City. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of The Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, Media Services/Photo: Jamison Miller.

in Milan and as a respected decorator of Lombard ecclesiastic buildings. His magniloquent pictorial language continued to win important commissions, and the prices of his paintings remained comparable to those asked by the top artists working in the city. To this end, when on 1 September 1615 he was commissioned to execute a large canvas representing St Augustine Disputing with St Ambrose for the presbytery of the Church of San Marco, Procaccini received 3,000 lire, the same sum accorded to Cerano to paint the Baptism of St Augustine on the opposite wall.23 While Camillo and his workshop continued to take charge of large decorative projects in Milan exemplified by the decoration of the Carmine chapel in Santa Maria del Carmine and the lost frescoing of the presbytery in San Nazario Maggiore, the capobottega also produced bozzetti of his most famous compositions to be sold on the private market.24

23. G. Berra, ‘I teleri agostiniani di San Marco a Milano’. Nuovi studi, 6, 1998, 105–124. 24. Both commissions were completed in the period 1616–1619. See Neilson 1979, 38–39 and Neilson 1978, 95–103 respectively.

118  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

Figure 6.2 Camillo Procaccini, Martyrdom of St. Agnes. Oil on canvas (grisaille), 43x28 cm., circa 1595, Pinacoteca del Castello Sforzesco, Milan. Photo Credit: Pinacoteca del Castello Sforzesco, Milano. Comune di Milano, tutti i diritti riservati. Foto Anelli 1997.

Made for Camillo’s most refined patrons, these monochromes are represented by a Martyrdom of Sts Nazarius and Celsus conserved at the Galleria Arcivescovile in Milan, a Raising of Lazarus (Galleria Arcivescovile, Milan) seen by Santagostino in 1671, three monochromes replicating the Martyrdom of St Agnes once executed for Milan Cathedral (fig.6.2), two small oil on canvas replicating the Death of the Virgin executed for Piacenza Cathedral and a signed Virgin and Child with Four Saints seen on the art market in 2006.25 Aside from satisfying the collecting needs of distinguished

25. The Martyrdom of Sts Nazarius and Celsus is a copy of the lost fresco executed by Camillo on the left side of the presbytery in San Nazario Maggiore; the canvas was once housed in the collection owned by the Milanese cardinal Cesare Monti. See P. Buffa and G. Lonza (eds), Le stanze del Cardinale Monti 1635–1650: la collezione ricomposta. Milan, 1994, 189. The bozzetti for the Martyrdom of St Agnes are in the Borromeo Collection, Isola Bella; Castello Sforzesco, Milan; Lynch Collection, New York. The Virgin and Child with Four Saints was auctioned at Sotheby’s Milan, Old Master Paintings, 30 May 2006, lot. 2. The monochromes with the Death of the Virgin are in the Credem Collection, Reggio Emilia; Museo d’Arte Moderna e Contemporanea, Varese.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 119 patrons, these canvases en grisaille were used in the workshop, copied by Camillo’s assistants to make replicas sold on the local market. To this end, the Crowning with Thorns of the Fondazione Manodori in Reggio Emilia, recognised by Cassinelli as ‘lavoro di bottega’, is copied from an autograph monochrome executed by Camillo around 1620.26 As documented by a 1632 inventory of Federico Borromeo’s collection, ‘una Assunzione della Madonna Cavata da un disegno di Camillo Procaccini’, ‘una gloria d’angelini cavata dal disegno del s.r. Camillo Procaccino’, ‘un quadro con cinque angeli in atto di adorare Christo nato cavato dal disegno del Camillo Procaccino’, ‘la presa di Christo con molte figure cavato da un disegno del Camillo Procaccino’ and ‘un Christo all’horto cavato dal disegno del Procaccino’ demonstrate that this standardised production was well-received by patrons eager to collect copies of Camillo’s works.27 The replicas were executed by assistants gravitating towards the school inaugurated by Camillo in the parish of San Calimero and mentioned in ­seventeenth-century sources about the Procaccini. A standardised repertoire adaptable to the different requests of the local market was also adopted by Carlo Antonio, who exploited the collecting interest of Lombard patrons willing to purchase Flemish art.28 Carlo Antonio developed an independent career as an easel painter, executing ‘delightful landscapes as well as flowers and fruits so naturally painted that every collector in Milan was eager to have them’.29 The decisive moment for the evolution of Carlo Antonio’s career can be traced to 1601, when Federico Borromeo returned permanently to Milan. Raised as a patrician, educated as a humanist and tutored by two saints, Borromeo was created cardinal in 1587 in Rome by Pope Sixtus V.30 Before returning to Lombardy, he moved in both religious and secular Roman circles, mixing with scholars, patrons and artists, and developing an interest in the Roman cultural world. In Rome, Borromeo began collecting works by Flemish artists such as Jan Brueghel, Paul Bril and Hans Rottenhammer, purchasing a group of landscapes and still-life paintings that formed the first nucleus of the Ambrosiana, his private collection.31 Brought to Milan, these canvases influenced the development of Lombard collecting taste, informing the activity of local aristocrats and inspiring Carlo Antonio to develop a personal repertoire related to these genres. Aside from Borromeo’s collecting interest, the Lombard fascination with the landscape and the still-life genres was greatly facilitated by the commercial ties existing between Antwerp, Brussels and Milan. Among the merchants trading in this area, Ercole Bianchi was Borromeo’s trusted man and agent for the Flemish purchases of some of the most important local collectors.32 Counselled by Bianchi, these patrons acquired landscapes and still lifes, opening the way for local painters who specialised

26. See the entry by Daniele Cassinelli in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 226–227. 27. A. Morandotti, ‘Il revival leonardesco nell’età di Federico Borromeo’. In I leonardeschi a Milano: fortuna e collezionismo, Maria Teresa Fiorio and Pietro Marani (eds), Milan, 1991, 181, note 60. 28. On Milanese collectors’ interest in Flemish art, see S. Bedoni, Jan Brueghel e il collezionismo del Seicento. Florence, 1982, 146–151. 29. Orlandi 1704, 110. 30. For a comprehensive account on Federico Borromeo, see Jones 1993. 31. The collection included 39 landscapes and still lifes. P. Jones, ‘Federico Borromeo as a patron of landscapes and still-lifes: Christian optimism in Italy ca. 1600’. The art bulletin, 70, 1988, 261–272. 32. On Bianchi, see M. Comincini, Jan Brueghel accanto a Figino. La quadreria di Ercole Bianchi. Corbetta 2010.

120  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

Figure 6.3 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Landscape with St. Margaret. Oil on copper, 26x36 cm., 1605–1610, Pinacoteca Civica Ala Ponzone, Cremona. Photo Credit: Courtesy Museo Civico Ala Ponzone, Cremona, Italy.

in a repertoire inspired by Flemish genres.33 Their collecting not only resulted in some of the richest gatherings of artworks ever assembled in Milan, but also triggered art purchasing by noblemen living in peripheral areas of Lombardy, expanding the boundaries of the local market and enhancing the production of small-scale pictures destined for palaces and private houses.

Landscapes and Still-Lifes Carlo Antonio presented himself to the Milanese public by executing a Landscape with the Ecstasy of St. Francis (private collection) and a Landscape with St. Margaret (Pinacoteca Civica, Cremona) (fig. 6.3), both inspired by the works of Jan Brueghel.34 A  native of Antwerp, Brueghel was Borromeo’s favourite artist, recognised by the cardinal as a ‘friend who imitates not only the colours of the natural world but also his facilità, which is the highest glory of art and of its nature’.35 Aware of Borromeo’s 33. Aside from Carlo Antonio, the diffusion of Flemish paintings in Lombard collections influenced local artists such as Fede Galizia, Panfilo Nuvolone and Francesco Codino. 34. Lo Conte 2020, 11–12. 35. P. Jones and K. Rothwell, Sacred painting: museum. Cambridge, MA, 2010, 167.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 121 interest in Brueghel’s art and of the influence that his taste had on local collectors, Carlo Antonio used printed sources to replicate his works. To this end, the Landscape with St. Francis is copied from a drawing by the Flemish master engraved by Aegidius Sadeler.36 Similarly, the Landscape with St. Margaret is inspired by a Brueghel canvas seen in 2008 in London.37 It should be noted that Carlo Antonio’s easel production of the first decade of the seventeenth century was exclusively devoted to imitating Brueghel’s and Bril’s paintings conserved in Borromeo’s collection. This strategy had a twofold purpose: it appealed to Lombard collectors’ interest in Flemish art and it allowed him to build a reputation as a landscape painter. It was only after having established himself as the best Lombard imitator of the Flemish masters that Carlo Antonio developed a personal artistic production. This occurred after 1610, when he executed devotional canvases in which episodes from the New Testament were set in pastoral landscapes. Malvasia states that Carlo Antonio’s easel paintings were widely appreciated by Lombard collectors and that his repertoire of landscapes and still lifes expanded the workshop’s artistic output to those genres monopolised by Flemish and Dutch painters.38 If in Europe the collecting interest directed toward the minor genres was thought to have been a consequence of the religious crisis that followed the Counter-Reformation, the Lombard appreciation of landscapes and still lifes was instead deeply connected to Federico Borromeo’s art theory and, more specifically, to the value he attributed to the representation of nature. Informed by an optimistic approach shared with fellow Italian theologians such as Filippo Neri and Roberto Bellarmino, Borromeo regarded nature as a manifestation of God’s goodness and considered the artistic representation of the natural world as a visual means to a spiritual end.39 Because purchasing original Flemish paintings was rather expensive, a plethora of opportunities developed for local landscape painters.40 Among them, Carlo Antonio was the one who achieved notable success, developing a repertoire of devotional landscapes that was unprecedented in the history of Lombard art. Having worked for 20 years within the family workshop, Carlo Antonio had a thorough understanding of the Milanese market and of the commercial strategies necessary to succeed within it. As opposed to other local landscape painters, he relied on a multifaceted preparation, influential contacts, and a specific pictorial identity. His canvases were sold as products of the city’s most popular workshop, while he was already known by local collectors for his efforts in decorating aristocratic villas and for his occasional participation in decorative campaigns orchestrated by his brothers. Carlo Antonio also worked as a specialist, executing the landscapes decorating his brothers’ pictures destined to the private market. His hand is recognizable in Camillo’s Susanna and the Elders (private collection) painted around 1600, as well as

36. London, British Museum, inventory no. 1946.7.13.117. 37. Sotheby’s London, Old Master Paintings, 3 December 2008, lot. 9. Brueghel’s painting was first published in K. Ertz, Jan Brueghel der Ältere, 1568–1625: kritischer Katalog del Gemälde. Lingen, 2010, 644–646. 38. ‘Fece altresì frutta e fiori in eccellenza e così al naturale li ritrasse che invaghitesene tutti, poche furono quelle case in Milano che di qualche pezzo adornar non ne volessero le private mura’. Malvasia 1678, 289. 39. On the theological approach informing Borromeo’s art collecting, see Jones 1988. 40. Spear notes that original landscapes by leading specialists such as Paul Bril, Nicolas Poussin, Gaspard Dughet, Claude Lorrain and other oltramontani were expensive. Spear 2010, 97.

122  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market in the Assumption of the Magdalen (private collection), completed a few years later in collaboration with Giulio Cesare.41 Carlo Antonio did not simply imitate Flemish art; conversely, he integrated Brueghel’s and Bril’s models with elements drawn from the Lombard and Emilian tradition, creating a stylistic signature easily recognizable to local collectors. Moreover, he experimented with ideas, displaying imagination and business acumen. For instance, the study of the garlands of flowers executed by Jan Brueghel for Federico Borromeo led him to inscribe devotional landscapes and mythological allegories in garlands of flowers, developing what amounted to a new iconographic genre.42 Charles Sterling notes that Carlo Antonio was one of the earliest Italian developers of flower painting as an independent genre.43 His selections of flowers not only fascinated Milanese collectors, but were highly valued within the Procaccini workshop. Thus, while Carlo Antonio’s skills as a landscape painter were generally employed for the naturalistic decoration of Camillo’s paintings, his floral compositions are instead recognizable in canvases painted by Giulio Cesare, who often asked for his brother’s help to provide a touch of originality to his pictures. This can be seen in the elegant Venus and Amor (Didier Aaron, New York) (fig. 6.4) executed around 1620 for Fabio II Visconti Borromeo; the Annunciation acquired in 1987 by the Louvre; the cartoon for an altar frontal, weaved in 1619 by the Milanese nun Ludovica Pellegrini and representing the Annunciation and the Birth of the Virgin (National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa); and the elegant Flora (Bergamo, Accademia Carrara), completed as a collaboration with Ercole the Younger and recorded as ‘mulier creditor meretrix, opus magni illius pictoris Leonardi de Vincio’ in the Settala Collection.44 Completed in the period of 1615–1625, these canvases bear witness to the relevance of Carlo Antonio’s skills for the workshop’s production and highlight the appreciation for his floral paintings. His pictures entered the D’Adda, Trivulzio, Durini, Latuada, Pertusati, Visconti, and Mazenta Collections in Milan, as well as the Maffei Collection in Brescia and the Savoy Collection in Turin.45 Moreover, as recalled by Malvasia, many of Carlo Antonio’s paintings were delivered to Spain, where they joined pictures executed by Camillo and Giulio Cesare for Madrilenian collectors.46 Although ‘a golden vase painted by Procaccini’ recorded in the Marqués del Carpio’s collection is by now the only canvas certainly ascribable to the diffusion of Carlo Antonio’s works in Spain, 41. On Camillo’s painting, see Ruggeri 2004, 52. For the Assumption of the Magdalen, see Morandotti 1989, 213. A further example of collaboration between Camillo and Carlo Antonio is the small oil on panel representing Tobit and his Son Tobias Giving a Proper Burial (private collection). The picture was seen at Sotheby’s New York, Important Old Master Paintings including European Works of Art, 24–25 January 2008, lot. 213. 42. A. Lo Conte, ‘Federico Borromeo e l’invenzione della ghirlanda di fiori: evoluzione italiana di un genere pittorico’. Italian studies, 71, 2016, 67–81. 43. C. Sterling, La nature morte de l’antiquitè à nos jours. Paris, 1952, 56. 44. Carlo Antonio’s hand in Giulio Cesare’s paintings was first identified in Morandotti 1989, 233–237. 45. On the diffusion of Carlo Antonio’s paintings in Lombard collections, see G.B. Carboni, Le pitture e sculture di Brescia che sono esposte al pubblico con un’appendice di alcune private gallerie. Brescia, 1760, 156; E. Verga, ‘La famiglia Mazenta e le sue collezioni d’arte’. Archivio storico lombardo, 45, 1918, 267–195; E. Bertoldi, ‘Per il collezionismo milanese tra Seicento e Settecento: i D’Adda’. Arte lombarda, 40, 1974, 197–204; C. Geddo, ‘Collezionisti e mecenati tra Sei e Settecento: i Durini conti di Monza’. Artes, 9, 2001, 41–124; Morandotti 2008, 18; S. Monferrini, I Borromeo d’Angera. Collezionisti e mecenati nella Milano del Seicento. Milan, 2012, ad indicem. 46. ‘Lo stesso procurando i Governatori pro tempore, portandoli poi con essi loro nel ritorno in Madrite, e regalandone Sua Maesta, ne Quarti Reali della quale anch’oggi molti si vedono’. Malvasia 1678, 289.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 123

Figure 6.4 Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Venus and Amor. Oil on canvas, 135x101 cm., circa 1620, Didier Aaron, New York.

the recent discovery of the commissions ordered by the governors of Milan to the Procaccini encourage further research in this direction.47 As the only Lombard artist following the Flemish masters’ footsteps, Carlo Antonio enjoyed a lack of competition that turned the collectors’ interest in his favour. Nevertheless, after 1610, he gradually moved toward a more personal interpretation of the devotional landscape, which he achieved by giving conscious attention to his Emilian background and incorporating artistic references developed in Rome and Parma.48 The new repertoire was celebrated by an interesting marketing move: a pair of rabbits

47. ‘Un vaso pinto d’oro del Procaccino’. Inventario simple de las pinturas que quedaron en Nápoles a la muerte del marqués del Carpio, note 716. Published in M.J. Muñoz Gonzalez, El mercado español de pinturas en el Siglo XVII. Madrid, 2008, 374. 48. Although it is uncertain whether Carlo Antonio saw Annibale Carracci’s Landscape with the Flight into Egypt, commissioned in 1603 by Cardinal Aldobrandini for Palazzo Doria Pamphili, he was aware of the idyllic realism of Adam Elsheimer, since two of his pictures from the mid-1610s, a Christ Healing the Blind Man and Mercury with Cecrops’s Daughters, are clearly touched by the German master’s influence. See Longhi 1965, 43–44.

124  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market began appearing in the foreground of Carlo Antonio’s paintings, serving as a replacement for his signature. From 1610 onwards, Procaccini completed devotional landscapes referencing models developed within the family workshop. For instance, his Landscape with the Rest on the Flight into Egypt (private collection) (fig. 6.5) includes a holy family copied from one of Camillo’s signed etchings dedicated to the same subject.49 Similarly, the coeval Landscape with Christ and the Samaritan Woman at the Well (private collection, Milan) is inspired by an analogous interpretation by Camillo recently seen on the London market.50 Yet to be rescued from oblivion, Carlo Antonio’s landscapes are reappearing in public and private collections, evidence of a successful artistic production too long forgotten. One should consider here that a Landscape with the First Temptation of Christ was seen in 2004 in Vienna with the correct attribution to Carlo Antonio,51 while a group of allegories currently in the deposit of the Pinacoteca Ambrosiana can be identified with the ‘four elements by Procaccino’ mentioned in the 1759 inventory of Giuseppe D’Adda’s collection.52 Encompassing the Allegory of the Air, the Allegory of the Fire and the Allegory of the Water, these paintings can be associated with an Allegory of the Earth, recently seen on the Milanese market and attributable to Carlo Antonio for the lion in the foreground as well as the ever-present pair of rabbits.53 Aside from being the most important Lombard landscape painter of his era, Carlo Antonio was a renowned still life painter. Informed by botanic observations performed from the time he worked in Pirro Visconti’s villa in Lainate, his talent as a florist was first advertised to the Milanese public through floral compositions included in Giulio Cesare’s paintings.54 Characterised by bouquets of carnations, narcissuses, roses, tulips, lilies and peonies, Carlo Antonio’s still lifes highlight awareness of Bosschaert’s works and are set in metallic vases decorated with zoomorphic handles and glazed with golden leaves. Among them, the earliest example is a Vase of Flowers (fig. 6.6) seen at Sotheby’s in 2009, in which the bouquet is set in a pitcher recalling the one executed for Giulio Cesare’s Louvre Annunciation.55 Also ascribable to Carlo Antonio is a Vase of Flowers (Fondazione Puglisi Cosentino, Catania), in which the flowers are characterised by exaggerated openings of the petals.56 Carlo Antonio’s approach towards floral painting transcended his artistic specialisation and delved into the symbolic meaning assigned to flowers by Borromeo’s art theory.57 His fully blossomed flowers, defined by rich impastos, grow almost independently in scale and perspective. Painted with painstaking detail, they emphasised the beauty of God’s creation, defining figures that Borromeo considered as substitutes for the real specimens when these

49. For Carlo Antonio’s painting, see Morandotti 2005, 200. On Camillo’s etching, see the entry by Paolo Vanoli in Cassinelli and Vanoli 2007, 198–199. 50. Christie’s London, Old Master & British Paintings, 4 July 2012, lot. 118. 51. Crispo 2012, 71. 52. ‘Quattro elementi sopra tavola di Antonio Procaccino’. For the 1759 inventory of the D’Adda Collection, see Bertoldi 1974, 203. Number [933]. The series was first recognised by Crispo 2012, 69–72. 53. Porro Milan, Dipinti antichi e del XIX secolo, 13 May 2009, lot. 34. 54. Pirro owned a large collection of rare plants, which were on display in the gardens of his villa in Lainate. 55. Sotheby’s Milan, Old Master Paintings, 15 December 2009, lot. 46. 56. On this canvas, see the entry by Alessandro Morandotti in D. Benati, F. Mazzocca and A. Morandotti (eds), Fiori, natura e simbolo dal Seicento a Van Gogh. Cinisello Balsamo, 2010, 66–67. 57. On Borromeo’s appreciation of still-life painting, see Jones 1988, 268–270.

Photo Credit: Private collection. Mondadori Portofolio/Electa/Sergio Anelli/Bridgeman Images.

Figure 6.5 Carlo Antonio Procaccini, Rest on the Flight into Egypt. Oil on canvas, 1610–1615, private collection.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 125

126  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

Figure 6.6 Carlo Antoni Procaccini, Vase of Flowers, Oil on canvas, 30x25 cm., private collection. Photo Credit: Image courtesy of Sotheby’s.

were unavailable. Painted flowers would indeed never fade and die: their beauties were permanent. Thus, they could be used for meditation and spiritual exercises, especially during the winter season, when it was not possible to meditate outside. ‘When winter encumbers and restrict everything with ice’, Borromeo noted in Pro suis studiis: I have enjoyed from sight–and even imagined odour, if not real–fake flowers expressed in painting […] and in these flowers I have wanted to see the variety of colours, not fleeting, as some of the flowers that are found [in nature], but stable and very endurable.58 Carlo Antonio’s skills as a floral painter allowed him to diversify his artistic production and experiment with new ideas. Thus, it was through the combination of his abilities as a landscape and still-life painter that he developed a repertoire of devotional landscapes in garlands of flowers: a new iconographic genre inspired by the 58. F. Borromeo, Pro suis studiis. Milan, 1628, Fol. 254.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 127 garlands executed by Brueghel for Federico Borromeo.59 Although it is impossible to determine whether Carlo Antonio saw one of the garlands owned by the cardinal, it must be noted that a garland painted by the Flemish master was available in the Procaccini workshop, since it had to be decorated by Giulio Cesare as requested by Pedro de Toledo. Recognizable as the Garland with the Virgin and Child and Two Angels (Prado Museum, Madrid), this painting corresponds to the ‘Guirnalda de flores con una Nuestra Señora con el Niño y dos angeles a los lados’ mentioned in the 1627 inventory of the Spanish nobleman’s possessions, and represents the archetype that inspired Carlo Antonio to conceive his devotional landscapes in garlands of flowers.60 Carlo Antonio’s hybridization of the landscape and still life genres is exemplified by a Garland of Flowers with the Rest on the Flight into Egypt (private collection), identifiable with the analogous garland recorded in the 1759 inventory of the D’Adda Collection.61 Decorated by a selection of flowers comparable to that of the Venus and Amor, it was executed around 1620 and, together with a Garland of Flowers with the Samaritan Woman at the Well (private collection), should be recognized as perhaps the earliest example of its kind ever painted. Carlo Antonio’s garlands were not only devotional objects, as they also included allegories and mythological figures. If two floral compositions encircling the Allegory of Water and Allegory of Earth (location unknown), recently recognized in the Fototeca Zeri, can be identified as re-interpretations of the ‘four elements by Procaccino’ once recorded in the D’Adda Collection,62 a Garland of Flowers with Venus and Amor testifies to Carlo Antonio’s collaboration with his son Ercole the Younger, who, following in Giulio Cesare’s footsteps, carried the family’s pictorial legacy after the plague that devastated Milan in 1630.63 Carlo Antonio’s ability to imitate and re-elaborate the works of the Flemish masters earned him a prominent position in Milan. As noted in 1613 by Giovanni Battista Andreini, ‘through grace and virtue, he secured a path to immortality’.64

Genoese Collectors and Spanish Diplomats As recorded in a letter sent on 2 February 1611 to Federico Borromeo, in the autumn of 1610 the Genoese nobleman Giovanni Carlo Doria visited the Milanese palace of Fabio II Visconti, his brother-in-law.65 It was on this occasion that he first met Giulio Cesare Procaccini, to whom he made his first payment on 8 April 1611.66 Doria was an avid art collector and the main protagonist of the cultural connections between

59. ‘Dapprincipio lavorava pei divoti pingendo grosse corone di fiori nel cui mezzo poneva un busto della Vergine, o di Cristo, o di santi’. Malvezzi 1882, 234. 60. Archivio Ducal de Medina Sidonia (ADMS), Sanlúcar de Barrameda, Villafranca, leg. 4885. On the Prado painting, see D’Albo 2014b, 155–156. 61. ‘Riposo d’Egitto in mezzo a ghirlanda de’ fiori di Antonio Procaccini’. Bertoldi 1974, 203, Number [931]. The painting was first published in Morandotti 1989, 234. 62. A. Morandotti, ‘Natura morta lombarda (e piemontese) delle origini. Alcuni spunti nella Fototeca Zeri’. In La Natura morta di Federico Zeri, Andrea Bacchi (ed.), Ferrara, 2015, 65–67. 63. Crispo 2003, 44. 64. Ruffino 2007, 20. 65. Doria’s Letter to Federico Borromeo, 2 February 1611. Published in Farina 2002, 173. 66. Brigstocke 1989, 51.

128  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market Milan and Genoa in the first quarter of the seventeenth century.67 A descendant of one of the most prestigious Genoese families, he was the son of the doge Agostino Doria and brother of Marcantonio, administrator of the family’s affairs in the Kingdom of Naples. After his father’s death in 1607, Doria abandoned the family’s commercial activities to pursue a life devoted to otium and patronage. In the following years, he developed contacts with Federico Borromeo, the Savoy court in Turin, the Grand Duke of Tuscany and the Farnese court in Parma. In 1608, he married Veronica Spinola, sister of Bianca Spinola, the wife of Fabio II Visconti.68 The heir to Pirro Visconti, Fabio was the godfather to Camillo’s son and a good friend of the Procaccini. Ultimately, it was he who introduced Giulio Cesare to the Doria patronage, opening for him and his family the doors of a profitable market. Although smaller than Milan, in the seventeenth-century Genoa was one of Europe’s banking capitals.69 The city’s wealth relied upon the conspicuous financial reserves of a group of local families, some, like the Doria, the Grimaldi, the Spinola and the Lomellini, representative of the old nobility, while others, such as the Balbi, the Durazzo, the Giustiniani and the Sauli, ascended to prominence from the second half of the sixteenth century. Genoese bankers generated revenues by landing money to the Spanish crown, through the collection of financial fees and the management of the exchange rates. Their profits enhanced competition and ostentatious expenses, especially in the fields of art collecting and patronage.70 Case in point, Genoese painting collections were among the most appreciated in Europe. The one assembled by Giovanni Carlo Doria was described by Flemish lawyer Franz Schott as ‘comprehensive to such a degree that no private citizen in Europe owns a collection of the same value’.71 Since their first meeting in 1610, Doria was fascinated by the modernity of Procaccini’s style. In 1614, he visited Giulio Cesare’s Milanese studio, accompanied by his picture buying agent Luciano Borzone.72 In the following years, he kept track of Giulio Cesare’s activity through his correspondence with Fabio Visconti.73 At the time of his death, the Genoese nobleman owned 65 paintings by Giulio Cesare, a number in excess of any other Lombard artist, in his collection.74 Doria’s patronage elevated Procaccini, as the protagonist of one of Europe’s most important collections, and provided him

67. For a comprehensive study on Giovanni Carlo Doria, see Farina 2002. On the cultural connections between Genoa and Milan, see P. Vanoli, ‘Genova pittrice. Le relazioni con Milano’. Morandotti 2017, 59–70. 68. Veronica Spinola might be identified as the noblewoman portrayed in Giulio Cesare’s Double Portrait seen at Dorotheum (Vienna), Old Master Painting, 21 April 2010, lot. 44. F.M. Ferro, ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini: aggiunte agli ultimi anni milanesi’. Rivista d’arte, 2, 2012, 292–293. 69. On the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Genoese economy, see M.H. Sánchez, ‘La finanza genovese e il Sistema imperiale spagnolo’. Rivista di storia finanziaria, 19, 2007, 27–60. 70. On Genoese patronage, see Boccardo 2004. 71. ‘Il Sig. Gioan Carlo Doria non ha statue, ma quanto alle pitture egli n’hà fatto tanta raccolta & in gran parte buona, che forse lontano di qui un pezzo niun’altro gentilhuomo privato n’hà un’altra simile’. F. Schott, Itinerario overo nova descrittione de’viaggi principali d’Italia di Andrea Scotto. Vicenza, 1615, 152–153. 72. Brigstocke 1989, 51. 73. For the correspondence between Doria and Fabio Visconti, see Farina 2002, 174–176. 74. The inventories of the Doria Collection, the first dated 1610–1616; the second 1617–1621; the third drawn up after 1625, have been published in Farina 2002, 192–236. The collection included pictures by Genoese, Lombard, Venetian and Flemish artists, as well as Renaissance works by Giorgione, Raphael and Leonardo.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 129 with the opportunity to visit Genoa. With respect to this, in 1618, both Giulio Cesare and Camillo travelled to Liguria where they were involved in public and private commissions.75 As noted by Soprani, Giulio Cesare resided in Doria’s palace. Painter and patron established a relationship of servitù particolare, a concept formulated by Francis Haskell and represented by an artist who was regularly employed by a particular patron and often accommodatedin his palace.76 In Genoa, Procaccini participated in the learning activities of Doria’s Accademia del Disegno, teaching drawing and earning the admiration of local masters.77 His sojourn was predominantly related to the execution of an extremely large Last Supper (fig. 6.7), still in situ above the entrance of the Basilica della Santissima Annunziata del Vastato.78 Commissioned by friar Girolamo da Nervi, this eight-meter long canvas was initially created for the refectory of the annexed Franciscan convent, but was later moved to the Basilica. Inspired by Leonardo’s fresco in Santa Maria delle Grazie, Procaccini’s painting highlights his understanding of Rubens’ rendering of the three-dimensional space and his fascination with the palette of Venetian artists, especially Titian, Veronese and Tintoretto. To gratify Doria’s interest in his creative process, Giulio Cesare made an oil-sketch of the composition, Last Supper, which is recorded in the 1621 inventory of the Doria Collection and currently conserved in Palazzo Spinola.79 Giulio Cesare’s Genoese public commissions also included an untraceable Circumcision executed for the Church of San Domenico and a Martyrdom of St.  Bartholomew (Soprintendenza, Genoa) painted for the local oratory dedicated to the saint.80 As for the Last Supper, oil-sketches associated with these works can be traced to the 1621 inventory of Doria Collection, indicating that Giulio Cesare made the preliminary studies for both altarpieces while living in Giovanni Carlo’s palace.81 Outside religious buildings, eighteenth- and nineteenth-century guides testify to the large demand for Giulio Cesare’s paintings in Genoese private collections.82 To this end,

75. ‘Venne in Genova circa l’anno 1618, invitato dal Sig. Gio. Carlo Doria gran Protettore de’ begl’ ingegni, nel cui palazzo alcuno tempo abitò, e vi fece pitture di singolare maestria’. ‘Nel tempo stesso avemmo in Genova anche Cammillo Procaccino, similmente pittore fratello di Giulio Cesare’. R. Soprani and C.G. Ratti, Le vite dei pittori, scultori e architetti genovesi…rivedute e accresciute di note da Carlo Giuseppe Ratti. Genoa, 1768–1769, 441–443. 76. On the concept of servitù particolare, see Haskell 1963, 3–23. 77. ‘Fu il Procaccino eccellente non meno nel disegnare […] perciò ebbe molti concorrenti, ed allievi, a’ quali con grandissimo amore sempre insegnò; perocchè egli era dotato di un animo cortese, caritatevole e rispettoso, anche verso i nostri genovesi maestri’. Soprani–Ratti 1768–1769, 443. Opinions on Doria’s Accademia del Disegno are discordant. Lukehart believes it was modelled on the Florentine Accademia del Disegno (P. Lukehart, Contending ideals: the nobility of G.B. Paggi and the nobility of painting. PhD dissertation, John Hopkins University, 1987, 99). Farina states that it was a private school inspired by Doria’s artistic taste (Farina 2002, 104). 78. On this painting, see the entry in Morandotti 2017, 194–197. 79. The picture is listed as number [444] in the 1621 inventory of the Doria Collection. Ibid., 182–183. 80. Brigstocke 2002, 32–33. Giulio Cesare also completed a Virgin and Child with Sts Carlo and Francis, still in situ in the Basilica of Santa Maria di Carignano, and a St. Carlo in Glory now at Brera, Milan. 81. Giulio Cesare’s sketches are listed as numbers [565] and [609] in the 1621 inventory of the Doria Collection. 82. C.G. Ratti, Instruzione di quanto può vedersi di più bello in Genova in pittura, scultura ed architettura. Genoa, 1766; G. Brusco, Description des beautés de Genes et de ses environs: ornée de differentes vuës, de tailles douce, et de la carte topographique de la ville. Genoa, 1781; F. Alizieri, Guida artistica per la città di Genova. Genoa, 1846.

Photo Credit: Basilica della Santissima Annunziata del Vastato, Genoa, Liguria, Italy, Luisa Ricciardini/Bridgeman Images.

Figure 6.7 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Last Supper. Oil on canvas, 328x841 cm., 1618, Basilica della Santissima Annunziata del Vastato, Genoa.

130  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 131 ‘un San Giuseppe col Bambino’, ‘un giovane che suona la zampogna’ and ‘un giovane che suona la lira’ are recorded in the gallery owned by Vincenzo Imperiale, who in 1623 visited Procaccini’s studio in Milan.83 Giulio Cesare’s paintings are furthermore recorded in the palaces owned by the De Mari, Balbi, Serra, Durazzo, Brignole and Pallavicini families, demonstrating a collecting success that endured until the painter’s death. While many of those canvases were executed in loco, others, such as the series of 12 Apostles, painted for Giovanni Carlo Doria and mentioned in a 1621 letter written by Simon Vouet, were sent to Genoa from Milan.84 An overlooked statement by Malvasia confirms that Camillo sent Giulio Cesare’s paintings to Liguria, highlighting one of the practical reasons that eventually convinced the capobottega to travel to Genoa.85 Camillo and Giulio Cesare’s concurrent presence in Liguria highlights once again the crucial role played by family connections in the management of the Procaccini business. In Genoa, Camillo received commissions for executing a Resurrection for the Church of Santa Brigida and a Perdono d’Assisi for the Church of San Francesco in Castelletto.86 If the Resurrection was dispersed after the suppression of the church in 1797, the Perdono d’Assisi was recorded in 1805 in the Monastery of San Leonardo but then lost after having been transferred to the hospital of Pammatone. As with Giulio Cesare’s works, Camillo’s paintings entered Genoese private collections. Five of his pictures are recorded in the inventories of the Doria Collection and one of them, ‘un San Francesco di Camillo Procaccini’, is mentioned by Giovanni Battista Marino in the Galeria, a miscellanea of poems dedicated to works of art seen by the Neapolitan writer in prestigious Italian collections.87 Local guides also include references to canvases representing ‘il fratricidio di Caino’ and ‘la famiglia di Adamo’ in the collection of Filippo Dongo, a ‘Notre Dame & l’Enfant Jesus’ in the house of Francesco Balbi, a ‘Gesù colla Madre’ and ‘un ovale della Madonna col Bambino’ in the collection of Marcello Durazzo and a ‘Gesù morto fra le braccia degli angeli’ in the palace of Filippo Carrega.88 Altogether, these pictures demonstrate that Camillo’s sojourn in Liguria was highly productive, representing a relevant moment in the conclusive stages of his career. The correspondence between Giovanni Carlo Doria and Fabio II Visconti is not only essential to retrace key dates for the Procaccinis’ stay in Genoa, but also provides vital information on their interaction with their most illustrious patron: Pedro de Toledo Osorio, Marquis of Villafranca, Governor of Milan from 1616 to 1618. On 31 January 1616, Fabio II Visconti informed Doria that Giulio Cesare was working on a series of large canvases representing episodes of the life of Christ, which had been commissioned by the incumbent Governor of Milan.89 The information supports Malvasia’s 83. R. Martinoni, Gian Vincenzo Imperiale, politico, letterato e collezionista genovese del Seicento. Padova, 1983, 232–233. 84. ‘Ci fece vedere in casa del sig.re Gio. Maria Visconti assai belle cose di sua mano et poi in casa sua gli Apostoli che dipinge per V.S. Ill.ma, dice di mandargli il touto anzi Natale’. Vouet’s letter to Doria, 21 November 1621. Published in Farina 2002, 177–178. 85. ‘L’altre poi fatte dallo stesso non solo in Genova, ma mandatevi da Camillo vedo uscir fuori alle stampe dalla affaticata penna del già Sig. Soprani’. Malvasia 1678, 287. 86. M.C. Galassi, ‘I lombardi e i loro amici genovesi. Pittori e collezionisti fra Genova e Milano 1610– 1630’. In Procaccini, Cerano, Morazzone: dipinti lombardi del primo Seicento dalle civiche collezioni genovesi, Clario Di Fabio (ed.), Genoa, 1992, 19, note 40. 87. G.B. Marino, La Galeria del Cavalier Marino distinta in Pitture e Sculture. Milan, 1620, 62. 88. On the presence of Camillo’s pictures in Genoese collections, see respectively: Alizieri 1846, vol. I, 438; Brusco 1781, 61; Alizieri 1846, vol. II, 252; Ratti 1766, 189; Alizieri 1846, vol. II, 659. 89. ‘Da Questo S.r. Governatore ha avuto incarico di pingere in quadri grandi la vitta di Nostro S.re’. Visconti’s letter to Doria. Published in Farina 2002, 174.

132  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market speculations on the diffusion of Procaccini’s paintings in Spain,90 and it is confirmed by a 1625 inventory of Toledo’s collection which lists ‘treçe quadros grandes de la Pasión de Nuestro Señor del Procachin’, ‘doce quadros grandes de la vida de Nuestra Señora del Procachin’ and ‘siete quadros grandes de la vida ed San Carlos del Procachin’.91 Recognized at the end of the eighteenth century by Antonio Pons in the Villafranca Collection, the pictures testify to an unprecedented commission made by the Spanish governor to members of the Procaccini family.92 Pedro de Toledo was the son of Vittoria Colonna and Don Garcia de Toledo, the Viceroy of Sicily from 1564 to 1566.93 A former commander of the Spanish galleys in Naples, he was the owner of a substantial painting collection which included 400 portraits by Wenzel Cobergher; 80 landscapes by Paul Bril, Willem II van Nieuland and Jacob Franckaert I; and a group of mythological scenes and devotional holy families.94 In January 1616, a few months after his arrival in Milan, he commissioned to the bottega Procaccini two series of paintings totalling 25 pictures: the first narrating episodes from the life of Christ and the second stories from the life of the Virgin. The middleperson for this commission was Muzio II Sforza Colonna, Marquis of Caravaggio, an influential figure in the Milanese cultural scene and Pedro de Toledo’s distant relative. A note of payment issued by the governor confirms that Camillo and Giulio Cesare received a deposit of 1,200 lire each.95

90. Malvasia notes that Giulio Cesare and Camillo executed a group of canvases for the governors of Milan. Brought to Spain, those pictures earned them fame and honours: ‘infiniti quadri figurati de gli altri duo [Camillo and Giulio Cesare] molti accetti e stimati in quella corte’. Malvasia 1678, 289. 91. ADMS, Villafranca, leg. 4885. Published in J. Bosh Balbona, ‘Retazos del sueño tardorenacentista de Don Pedro de Toledo Osorio y Colonna en el Monasterio de la Anunciada de Villafranca del Bierzo’. Anuario del departamento de Historia y Teoria de l’Arte, 21, 2009, 121–146. The inventory also includes a Nativity, an Adoration of the Magi and a Christ among the Doctors, all executed by Giulio Cesare Procaccini. The ‘siete quadros grandes de la vida de San Carlos’ are copies of the quadroni illustrating the life and the miracles of Carlo Borromeo executed by Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio Procaccini for Milan Cathedral. A 1627 appraisal document of Pedro de Toledo’s properties confirms that he owned replicas of all the 44 quadroni conserved in Milan Cathedral (D’Albo 2014b, 156). 92. El marqués de Villafranca tiene una colección de cuadros grandes que representan asuntos Jesuscristo, Nuestra Señora y otros santos. Son obras de mérito, y atestiguan que su autor Julio Cesar Procacini, había estudiato en las de los principales maestros de Italia, particularmente en las de Correggio. S. Blasco Castiñera, ‘“El Viaje de España” de don Antonio Ponz. Compendio de las alteraciones introducidas por el autor en todas las ediciones de su obra’. Anales de historia del arte, 2, 1990, 283–284. 93. On Pedro de Toledo, see V. Fernández Vásquez, El señorío y marquesado de Villafranca del Bierzo a través de la documentación del Archivio Ducal de Medina Sidonia. Ponferrada, 2007, 69–81. 94. J. Bosch Balbona, ‘Paul Bril, Wenzel Cobergher, Jacob Franckaert I, Willem I van Nieulandt y los ermitaños de Pedro de Toledo, V marqués de Villafranca’. Locus Amoenus, 9, 2007–2008, 9, 127–154. 95. Julio Cesar Penachin pintor Mil y ducientas libras a buena q[uen]ta de los cuadros q[ue] para servicio de su Ex[celen] cia haze los quales se le an cargado/Camilo Penachin pintor se le dieron otras mil y docientas libras es por la d[ic]ha razón y q[uen]ta los quales le estan cargados. ADMS, Villafranca, leg. 5483, El marqués de Caravaggio sería Muzio Sforza Colonna (1576–1628). Published in J. Bosh Balbona, ‘Sobre el quinto marqués de Villafranca, Camillo y Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Locus Amoenus, 14, 2016, 98.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 133

Figure 6.8 Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Agony in the Garden. Oil on canvas, 216x147 cm., 1616– 1618, Prado Museum, Madrid. Photo Credit: Copyright immagine Museo Nacional del Prado © Foto MNP/Scala, Firenze.

Made up of 13 autograph canvases signed ‘GCP’ and measuring approximately 220x150cm., Giulio Cesare’s series has attracted scholarly interest since the late 1970s, when a group of these pictures appeared on the European market.96 Thought to have been the product of a Genoese commission, or of an unfinished project for Juan de Mendoza, Marquis de la Hinojosa, the Governor of Milan from 1612 to 1616, the series was sold between 1636 and 1639 alongside other properties of Pedro de Toledo.97 An uncertain number of paintings remained in Spain until the late eighteenth century, while others were dispersed before appearing in England around the midnineteenth century. So far, eight pictures have been recognised. The Baptism of Christ (Národná Galeria, Bratislava), the Transfiguration of St. James Church in Whitehaven and the Agony in the Garden (fig. 6.8), previously in the Vizcondes Roda Collection and now in the Prado Museum, form the pericope of the theophany of Jesus: the 96. For a comprehensive overview, see D’Albo 2014b, 145–164. 97. Ibid., 154.

134  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market manifestation of the divine Trinity.98 The Capture of Christ (Worchester Art Museum, Worchester), the Mocking of Christ (Graves Art Gallery, Sheffield), the Flagellation (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), the Rising of the Cross (National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh) and a Christ Carrying the Cross (private collection) seen at Christie’s describe episodes from Christ’s passion. Although five canvases are still untraceable, a 1821–1823 inventory detailing the presence of Procaccini’s paintings in the collection of the twelfth Marquis of Villafranca, Francisco de Borja Àlvarez de Toledo, allows us to identify the remaining pictures.99 These correspond to ‘la Cena del Señor’, ‘el Discendimento del Señor’, ‘la Negacion de Sn Pedro’, ‘un Cristo resuscitado’ and ‘la Ascension del Señor’. The series was completed in under 30 months, as demonstrated by a shipment record indicating that his canvases left Milan in July 1618.100 After this date, Giulio Cesare travelled to Genoa. The second series commissioned by Pedro de Toledo to the Procaccini was painted by Camillo. Dedicated to the stories of the Virgin, it comprised 12 canvases consistent in dimensions with those executed by Giulio Cesare. To date, four pictures have been identified: the Visitation (Blanton Museum of Art, Austin) (fig. 6.9), the Presentation at the Temple once recorded in the Villafranca Collection and purchased in 2007 by the Prado, a Marriage of the Virgin (Coll&Cortes, Madrid) seen in 2015 on the Spanish market and the Assumption of the Virgin currently in the Granados Collection, Madrid.101 In executing those pictures, Camillo relied on models used within the workshop and clearly identifiable in his earlier production. To this end, the Visitation is copied from a drawing in the Ambrosiana used by Procaccini’s assistants for decorations in Riva San Vitale and Lugano.102 The Presentation at the Temple is inspired by an analogous figuration painted by Camillo and assistants on the left ceiling of the chapel dedicated to the Madonna delle Grazie in Pallanza. The Assumption of the Virgin replicates the altarpiece executed by Camillo in Santa Maria presso San Celso and reproduced in a bozzetto seen in London in 1967.103 The Marriage of the Virgin looks to the analogous canvas painted for the Milanese Church of San Simpliciano around 1618, as well as to the altarpiece executed between 1616 and 1619 in Santa Maria del Carmine.104 As for Giulio Cesare’s series, the 1821–1823 inventory of Francisco de Borja Àlvarez de Toledo’s collection allows us to identify Camillo’s missing pictures. The document mentions ‘la Circuncision del Señor’, ‘la huida in Egypto’, ‘la Presentacion de Ntra Señora’ and ‘l’Anunciacion de Ntra Señora’. It is worth noting the difference in price assigned to Camillo and Giulio Cesare’s canvases. If Giulio Cesare’s pictures are valued between 2,000–3,000 reales, Camillo’s are cheaper and valued at 500–1,500. The visual references for Camillo’s missing pictures can be inferred from the catalogue of his works. The analogies with Pallanza indicate that ‘la huida de Egypto’ might replicate the Rest on the Flight into Egypt executed by Camillo in the choir of Sant’Angelo and copied in Pallanza at the end of the sixteenth century.

 98. L. Réau, Iconographie de l’árt chrétien, vol. 2, Paris, 1955–1957, 575–576.  99. ADMS, leg. 5396. Published in Bosh Balbona 2016, 105. 100. O. D’Albo, ‘Camillo y Giulio Cesare Procaccini al servicio del los gobernadores españoles en Milan’. Boletín del Museo del Prado, 53, 2017, 69. 101. Ibid., 66–75. 102. Milan, Ambrosiana, F. 235, inf., no. 981. Published in Neilson 1979, 145. 103. See Neilson 1979, 41–42. 104. See Neilson 1979, 44–45 and 38–39 respectively.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 135

Figure 6.9 Camillo Procaccini, Visitation. Oil on canvas, 213x146 cm., 1616–1618, Blanton Museum, Austin. Photo Credit: Blanton Museum of Art, The University of Texas at Austin, Purchase through the generosity of Suzan and Julius Glickman, M.K. Hage, Jr., Derek Johns, Lawrence Lawver, Susan Thomas, Julia Wilkinson, and Jimmy and Jessica Younger, 2005.

Similarly, ‘la Presentacion de Ntra Señora’ might share similarities with the canvas painted after 1616 in Santa Maria del Carmine and based on a compositional model adopted by Camillo in the 1606 decoration of the Immaculate chapel in the Church of San Francesco, Lodi.105 Camillo and Giulio Cesare’s series were respectively exhibited in the gallery and the main hall of the palace owned by Pedro de Toledo in Madrid. Shipped out of Milan in July 1618, they testify to the international reach of the Procaccini business. As confirmed by a 1627 appraisal list of the Spanish nobleman’s possessions, Giulio Cesare’s paintings were valued at 1,200 lire each, Camillo’s 600.106 Although the exact financial 105. On Camillo’s presence in Lodi, see A. Casati, ‘Addenda al catalogo di Camillo Procaccini’. Artes, 13, 2005–2007, 151–160. 106. ‘Diez y ocho cuadros de la vida de Nuestro Señor Jesus Christo, 200 ducados cadauno cuenta 39600 reales’. ‘Doce cuatros de la vida de Maria a 100 ducados cadauno cuenta 13200 reales. ADMS, Villafranca, leg. 4885. Published in D’Albo 2014b, 153.

136  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market

Figure 6.10 Giulio Cesare Procaccini and Jan Brueghel the Elder. Garland with the Virgin and Child and Two Angels. Oil on copper, 48x36 cm., 1618–1620, Prado Museum, Madrid. Photo Credit: Prado, Madrid, Spain Photo ©AISA/Bridgeman Images.

details of the commission are not known, Giulio Cesare must have received a total of 15,600 lire, a remarkable sum that justifies Malvasia’s statement: ‘had he not died so young, he would have accumulated treasures’.107 Thanks to his episodes of the life of Christ, Giulio Cesare became the most important artist working in northern Italy in the second decade of the seventeenth century. This is confirmed by the economic details of his commission, Doria’s patronage, by the invitations he received after 1619 in Turin and Florence and by the staggering value of 5,500 reales assigned to ‘una guirnalda de flores con una Nuestra Señora con el Niño y dos angeles a los lados’, traced to the 1627 list of Pedro de Toledo’s possessions and executed by Procaccini in collaboration with Jan Brueghel.108 Commissioned by the Spanish governor to emulate the devotional garlands in Borromeo’s collection, the picture can be identified with the Garland with the Virgin and Child and Two Angels (fig. 6.10) currently at the Prado. 107. ‘Fece stupire tutti di sì bella maniera onde cominciarono a concorrere le opre in abbondanza, et avria fatto tesori se così presto non moriva’. Malvasia 1667, f. 53v. 108. ADMS, Villafranca, leg. 4885.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 137 While Borromeo selected Hendrick van Balen and Peter Paul Rubens to decorate Brueghel’s floral compositions, Pedro de Toledo assigned this task to his favourite Lombard painter, whom he appreciated for his ability to imitate the style of Parmigianino.109 To this end, the record book detailing the sale of the Spanish nobleman’s collection refers to the canvas as ‘Una imagen de Nostra Señora cuadros pequeño con el Niño desnudo entro flores original del Parmesano’, emphasising the Emilian roots of Giulio Cesare’s style.110 Quantifiable in 3,000 lire, the monetary value assigned to this small oil on copper doubles the amount bestowed to Giulio Cesare’s canvases dedicated to the life of Jesus and it can be only partially justified by the enormous interest generated by Brueghel’s paintings among European collectors.111 The picture sat in the Procaccini workshop for several months, providing inspiration for Carlo Antonio to develop his own devotional landscapes in garlands of flowers. Although Pedro de Toledo’s tenure ended in 1618, in the following years the Procaccini continued to work for the incumbent Spanish governors of Milan. An engraving by Cesare Bassano after drawing by Camillo Procaccini indicates that Camillo executed the effigy for Gómez Suárez de Figueroa, Duke of Feria, who held office in Milan between 1618 and 1625.112 A few years later, in 1627, King Philip IV requested the incumbent governor Gónzalo Fernández de Córdoba to ‘have painted in Milan by the best artists who are there, two paintings: one representing the sacrifice of Abel and his death, the other, the victory of Samson over the Philistines’.113 The paintings were to be exhibited in the Salón Nuevo of the Alcazár alongside Domenichino’s Sacrifice of Isaac, which was commissioned in the same year by the Spanish ambassador in Rome Iñigo Vélez de Guevara.114 Once again, Gónzalo Fernández de Córdoba selected Camillo, who completed both pictures before 1629. Malvasia notes that ‘crates full of Camillo’s drawings were shipped to Spain, where they were copied by skilled engravers and amateur painters’.115 The suggestion is confirmed by a grey-brown ink on paper of the Prado Museum, which is copied after Camillo and represents a version of the Flight into Egypt employed by Procaccini for decorations in Sant’Angelo in Milan and in Pallanza.116 The collecting activity of the Spanish governors of Milan also constitutes fertile ground to study the diffusion of Carlo Antonio’s paintings in Spain. To this end, Malvasia repeatedly stated that his landscapes and still-life paintings were highly sought after by the Spanish governors, while Lanzi perhaps exaggerated in noting how his popularity among collectors eventually surpassed that of his more

109. Federico Borromeo owned three paintings of this kind. The earliest, possessed by the Ambrosiana, was painted in 1608 as a collaborative work between Brueghel and Hendrik van Balen. The others were collaborative efforts between Brueghel and Rubens and are respectively conserved in the Museo del Prado, Madrid, and the Louvre, Paris. See Jones 1993, 84–87. 110. ADMS, Villafranca, leg. 4885. 111. Eleven reales equalled 1 ducato; 1 ducato was worth 6 lire. It is worth noting that in describing Brueghel’s Vase of flowers with jewel, coins and shells (Pinacoteca Ambrosiana, Milan), Borromeo wrote: ‘Brueghel painted a diamond jewel at the bottom of the vase. The price I paid for this painting equals the value of the jewel’. Jones and Rothwell 2010, 183. 112. D’Albo 2017, 71. 113. V. Gerard, ‘Philip’s early Italian commissions’. Oxford art journal, 5, 1982, 9–14. 114. Ibid., 13. 115. Malvasia 1678, 293. 116. Madrid, Prado Museum, no. D001752. Published in N. Turner, From Michelangelo to Annibale Carracci. A century of Italian drawings from the Prado. Chicago, 2008, 371.

138  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market accomplished brothers.117 Although there is still no indication of Carlo Antonio’s paintings in the collections of the Spanish governors, Juan Pérez Preciado has noted that some of the replicas of Brueghel’s and Bril’s paintings in the collection owned by the Marquis de Leganés could be connected to his artistic production.118 This idea, still to be proven, could re-open the debate around an intuition by John Spike, who, already in 1983, recognised Procaccini as one of the inspirators for the development of the still life genre in Spain.119

The Final Years in Milan On 21 November 1621, Simon Vouet wrote to Giovanni Carlo Doria providing an account of his visit to Milan.120 Sponsored by the Genoese nobleman, he toured the Lombard capital accompanied by Giulio Cesare Procaccini, whom he had met in Genoa and for whom he had a sincere admiration. Together, the two painters visited the nymphaeum in Lainate, where Vouet was impressed by the beauty of Camillo’s decoration. Additionally, they saw Titian’s Mocking of Christ in Santa Maria delle Grazie and visited the gallerie owned by Milan’s most prestigious collectors, where many of the Procaccinis’ canvases were on display. While at the end of November Vouet left Milan to continue his journey to Pavia and Parma en route to Rome, on 2 December 1621 Doria received a further letter. On this occasion the sender was Orazio Fregoso, who communicated that Giulio Cesare was ill due to the harsh weather that had affected Milan in the autumn of 1621.121 Although on 1 April 1622 Procaccini had recovered sufficiently to send his patron a painting, from the end of 1621 his health gradually deteriorated, leading to his death occurred on 14 November 1625.122 Notwithstanding health problems, the last five years of Giulio Cesare’s life were highly productive. Torre reports that around 1620 he completed a Samson and the Philistines (Prado Museum. Madrid), for Gran Duke of Tuscany Cosimo II de Medici, who rewarded him with a gold medal worth 1,000 scudi.123 Registered in a 1621 inventory of the Medici Collection as ‘il Sansone con una mascilla in mano contro a Filistei di mano del Procaccino milanese’, the painting was sold to the Spanish ambassador in Florence before entering the royal Spanish collection in 1794.124 117. Carlantonio Procaccini lavorò assaissimi quadri per le gallerie di Milano; i quali piaciuti a Corte, che a quel dì era spagnuola, n’ebbe frequenti commissioni per la Spagna; ond’egli, che era il pittore più debole della famiglia, divenne per questa via il più conosciuto.   Lanzi 1825, 562. 118. J.J. Pérez Preciado, El Marqués de Leganés y las artes. PhD dissertation, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2010, 317. 119. J.T. Spike, Italian still life paintings from three centuries. Florence, 1983, 12. 120. Brejon de Lavergnèe 1980, 58–65. 121. Fragoso’s letter to Doria, 2 December 1621. Published in Farina 2002, 178. 122. ‘Doveria con la presente mandargli un quadro fatto di mio gusto qual so certo che li piacerà’. Giulio Cesare Procaccini’s letter to Doria, 1 April 1622. Published in Farina 2002, 179. 123. Ambizioso fu il Gran Duca di Firenze, d’havere di lui una tela per ornamento di sua Galeria, facegli un Sansone di tanta sua sodisfatione, che gli inviò per donatio, non per mercede una Collana con medaglia al valore di mille scudi. Torre 1674, 45. 124. O. D’Albo, ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini “per Fiorenza”: la destinazione del San Carlo Borromeo e San Michele Arcangelo di Dublino’. Paragone, 137, 2018, 80.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 139 Torre’s account is confirmed by the presence of a ‘gold medal with the effigy of the Duke of Florence and a small chain’ listed in the 1625 inventory of goods drawn up in Giulio Cesare’s house after his death.125 Procaccini was very proud of this gift, as he wears it in two self-portraits respectively dated 1620 and 1624.126 Late in his career, Giulio Cesare executed the Martyrdom of Sts Rufina and Seconda (Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan), a collaborative work with Cerano and Morazzone commissioned by Scipione Toso, and continued to inundate the Milanese art market with countless variants of his celebrated holy families. Furthermore, he resumed commissions left unfinished due to the piling up of duties in the first and second decade of the century. To this end, he delivered the Constantine Receiving the Instruments of Passion (Castello Sforzesco, Milan) for the chapel of the Tribunale di Provvisione, which had been commissioned in 1605. Similarly, with the help of assistants, he finally executed the two life-size sculptures representing the evangelists Matthew and John commissioned in 1597 for the main altar of Cremona Cathedral. An essential source to evaluate the last stages of Giulio Cesare’s career is the inventory of pictures drawn up in his studio on 19 November  1625, five days after his death.127 Comprising 44 canvases, it was divided into four lots by Cerano, who separated the inheritance entitled to Procaccini’s wife Isabella and his three daughters Cecilia, Prassede and Virginia. The inventory includes a miscellanea of religious paintings, mythological scenes, oil-sketches, portraits and landscapes that altogether provide a clear indication of what left Giulio Cesare’s studio in the last years of his life.  Ten pictures, identified as sbozo and macchia, are recognisable as those oilsketches and brush drawings executed by Procaccini for his Genoese patrons and specifically Giovanni Carlo Doria. Giulio Cesare’s letter to Doria dated April  1622 demonstrates indeed that he continued to send his creations to Genoa even after he left the city. These included small-size sketches as well as larger paintings such as the dynamic Virgin and Child with Sts Francis and Carlo Borromeo, now in the Genoese Church of Santa Maria di Carignano but once registered in the 1625 inventory of the Doria Collection as ‘una Madonna con San Carlo e San Francesco quadro grande del Procaccino’.128 Five pictures representing the Virgin and Child accompanied by either by St. Joseph, St. Elizabeth or angels are examples of Giulio Cesare’s much coveted holy families. While ‘un quadro di un paese piccolo’ and ‘un quadro d’un paese’ might well be identified as Carlo Antonio’s works exhibited in his brother’s studio,129 the list of Giulio Cesare’s paintings also includes five portraits, which highlight a preference for this genre probably developed while studying Rubens in Genoa.130 Testifying to Giulio Cesare’s influential contacts, these portraits were soon picked up by their buyers and therefore are excluded from Cerano’s lots. Among them, a ‘retrato di Don Pedro’ can be identified with a portrait of Pedro de Toledo, while pictures of Giovanni

125. ‘Una medaglia d’oro con l’immagine del Signor Duca di Firenze e catenelle’. ASM, Notarile, Notaio Melchiorre Appiani, 27634. 126. Giulio Cesare’s self-portraits are at the Uffizi, Florence (1620) and Brera, Milan (1624). 127. ASM, Notarile, Notaio Melchiorre Appiani, 27634. Published in Caprara 1977, 98–99. 128. The picture is listed as number [106] in the 1625 inventory of the Doria Collection. Farina 2002, 206. 129. This may be confirmed by the fact that both landscapes were excluded from Cerano’s lots. 130. For a brief overview on Giulio Cesare’s interest in portraiture, see A. Morandotti, ‘La Milano di Federico Borromeo: da Fede Galizia a Daniele Crespi’. In Il ritratto in lombardia: da Moroni a Ceruti, Francesco Frangi and Alessandro Morandotti (eds), Milan, 2002, 95–99.

140  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market Maria Visconti and Giovanni Andrea Dardanone emphasize Giulio Cesare’s role as a portraitist of the Milanese nobility. The list of pictures left in Giulio Cesare’s studio includes ‘un quadro grande del rapimento di Elena’ that was acquired in 1635 by Francesco I d’Este and subsequently arrived in Dresden, where it was destroyed in World War II. The painting pairs up with a ‘quadreto bislongo del giuditio di Paride’, identified as the Judgement of Paris (private collection, Milan) donated in 1663 by the Milanese collector Giovanni Battista Marone to the Basilica of St. Eustorgio’.131 Characterised by mythological subjects, something unusual in Giulio Cesare’s artistic production, these paintings feature sculptural modelling, twisted figures, direct gestures and eroticised female bodies that can be seen in a group of pictures all dated from the last years of Procaccini’s career. I refer to the Susanna and the Elders (Christ Church Gallery, Oxford); the Rape of the Sabines published by Fernanda Wittgens in 1933; and, now in private collection, the Christ and the Adulteress at Potsdam, the Mary Magdalen of the Hermitage and of course the Venus and Amor (Didier Aaron, New York), executed by Giulio Cesare in collaboration with Carlo Antonio. Inspired by Bronzino’s Allegory with Venus and Cupid (National Gallery, London), the Venus and Amor was commissioned by Fabio II Visconti, who built on his father’s collection that famously included Bronzino’s Flaying of Marsyas (Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg).132 The Judgement of Paris recognised in Giulio Cesare’s studio shares its dimensions and horizontal format with Bronzino’s Flaying of Marsyas and might well be a pendant commissioned by Fabio Visconti to Giulio Cesare Procaccini. In the third decade of the seventeenth century both Camillo and Carlo Antonio enjoyed plenty of commissions, as did Giulio Cesare. While Carlo Antonio was recognised as the most important Lombard landscape painter of his era, Camillo remained true to his reputation as an indefatigable decorator of Milanese ecclesiastic buildings, accepting commissions which he completed with the help of the bottega. Between 1623 and 1626, he completed the Crucifixion with the Virgin, St. John and Mary Magdalen for the Church of Sant’Alessandro, where he had worked a few years earlier painting an Adoration of the Shepherds and an Assumption of the Virgin.133 As was customary practice in Procaccini’s workshop, this painting was copied by assistants to be sold on the art market.134 On 3 July 1924, Camillo signed the contract for the fresco decoration of the choir ceiling of the Church of Santi Paolo and Barnaba.135 Funded by aristocrat Marcantonio della Croce, the decoration comprised a glory of music-making angels, for which a preparatory drawing is conserved at the British Museum.136 Recalled in 1671 by Santagostino, Camillo’s effort should have also included the decoration of the apse, which was enriched by a scene of Christ Triumphant, Surrounded by Patriarchs, Appearing to his Mother covered in 1832 by Carlo Bellosio. Although this picture is not mentioned in the contract, a drawing of the same composition exists in the Louvre, lending support to the

131. On this painting, see the entry by Odette D’Albo in Morandotti 2017, 188–189. 132. Inherited from his father Pirro, Fabio Visconti’s collection also included Bernardino Luini’s Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine (Museo Poldi Pezzoli, Milan) and Correggio’s Agony in the Garden (Apsley House, London). See Morandotti 1985, 157–174. 133. Neilson 1979, 28–29. 134. Crispo 2008, 25. 135. N. Houghton Brown, ‘The Church of San Barnaba in Milan’. Arte lombarda, 11, 1964, 85–87. 136. London, British Museum, inv. 1872–10–12–3304. Published in Neilson 1979, 43.

Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market 141 tradition that Camillo also completed the apse decoration.137 Camillo continued to work even after 1627, when Gónzalo Fernández de Córdoba commissioned from him two canvases for the Salón Nuevo of the Alcazár. A letter dated 26 October 1629, sent by Francesco Maganza to the Count of Novellara Camillo II Gonzaga, indicates indeed that the Emilian nobleman commissioned from Camillo a picture representing St. Martha that was left unfinished as a result of the painter’s death.138 Camillo died of gout on 21 August 1629 at the age of 68. A month later, the plague devastated northern Italy, killing Carlo Antonio and ending de facto the age of Carlo and Federico Borromeo. Carried by the French and German troops travelling through Lombardy, the epidemic annihilated more than 25 percent of the population in the State of Milan. After it was eventually eradicated, Ercole the Younger, Carlo Antonio’s son, continued the Procaccini legacy, taking over the family business and progressively enjoying public and private commissions.139 Enrolled as one of the nine students in the first session of the Ambrosiana, Ercole studied with Camillo and Giulio Cesare, occasionally participating in the workshop’s activity, as demonstrated by the Flora (Accademia Carrara, Bergamo), painted in 1625–1630 as a collaborative work with his father.140 Thought to have been a painting by Leonardo, the picture was included in the Settala Collection and represents a hybrid composition made up of classical figures and flowers, comparable to the Venus and Amor executed a decade earlier by Giulio Cesare and Carlo Antonio for Fabio II Visconti. Indifferent to the stylistic changes that informed Lombard art from 1640 onwards, Ercole based his career on the rhetorical imitation of Emilian models, finding inspiration in the pictures and drawings executed by his celebrated uncles. Although he produced altarpieces for prestigious Milanese churches, such as San Vittore al Corpo and San Marco, and decorated aristocratic residencies, such as Palazzo Durini in Milan and Palazzo Arese in Cesano Maderno, he never deviated from the imitation of Camillo and Giulio Cesare’s style and, as noted by Lanzi, he probably achieved a reputation superior to his real artistic value.141 Following in Camillo and Giulio Cesare’s footsteps, Ercole was a prolific draftsman and, more importantly, an appreciated teacher. A  group of over 30 of his drawings conserved in the Ambrosiana bear witness to his teaching activity, which influenced the pictorial careers of Antonio Busca, Federico Bianchi and Cristoforo Storer.142 In this role, Ercole took control of the Procaccini’s school of painting, which he transferred from Camillo’s home 137. Paris, Louvre Museum, inv. 6267. Published in Neilson 1978, 9. 138. Il Sig. Camillo Procaccini è morto: Dio lo abbia in gloria. Il Quadro di V. E. stà nella disposizione medesimo che alcuni giorni fa io scrissi, cioè a dire incominciato nè meno che abbozzato in modo che l’abbozzatura sia godibile. Maganza’s Letter to Camillo II Gonzaga, 26 October 1629. Published in Campori 1855, 389. Maganza’s letter provides interesting information on Camillo’s life earnings which appear to have amounted to 50,000 scudi (over 300,000 lire). Much of this fortune was dilapidated through Camillo’s reckless spending: ‘anzi ho inteso che lascia molto male le cose sue, huomo che ha guadagnato 50m. scudi e più’. 139. For a biographical profile, see O. D’Albo, ‘Ercole Procaccini detto il Giovane’. In Dizionario biografico degli italiani, vol. 85, Rome, 2016, 466–469. 140. On Ercole’s presence in the Ambrosiana, see Nicodemi 1957, 653–696. 141. ‘Si agevolò la via ad una stima che superava forse il suo merito’. Lanzi 1825, 573. 142. S. Modena, ‘Disegni di maestri dell’Accademia Ambrosiana’. Arte lombarda, 4, 1959, 92–122.

142  Illustrious Patrons and the Art Market in San Calimero and relocated to his own residence in the parish of San Giovanni in Laterano.143 It was there that, on 24 September 1667, he received Carlo Cesare Malvasia, providing the Bolognese scholar with information that represents the essential starting point for retracing the Procaccini family’s story and the remarkable impact it had on the history of Lombard art.

143. Egl’è bell’uomo tutto canuto, anzi picciolo che grande, non discorre troppo aggiustato. Ha molti giovani, sta in credito e fa l’accademia del nudo. Mi ha mostrato suoi dissegni di lapis rosso e nero di testine di donne fatte per sua memoria molto ben dissegnate. […] Sta presso S. Giovanni Laterano e ha bellissime giovani in casa che credo sue figlie.   Malvasia 1667, f. 53r.

Bibliography

Agnati, Achille and Targetti, Raimondo. ‘Il movimento dei prezzi nel Ducato di Milano dal 1600 al 1700’. Giornale degli economisti e annali di economia, 23, 1964, 282–346. Ago, Renata. ‘Five industrious cities’. In Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters, Richard Spear and Philip Sohm (eds), New Haven, 2010, 255–273. Agosti, Giovanni and Stoppa, Jacopo, Bernardino Luini e i suoi figli. Milan, 2014. Aleati, Giuseppe and Cipolla, Carlo. ‘Contributo alla storia dei consumi e del costo della vita in lombardia agli inizi dell’età moderna’. In Éventail de l’histoire vivante, hommage à Lucien Febvre. Paris, 1953, 317–341. Alfani, Guido and Gourdon, Vincent. ‘Il ruolo economico del padrinato: un fenomeno osservabile?’ Cheiron, 46, 2006, 129–177. ——— ‘The famine of the 1590s in northern Italy. An analysis of the greatest “system shock” of sixteenth century’. Histoire & mesure, 26, 2011, 17–49. Alizieri, Federigo. Guida artistica per la città di Genova. Genoa, 1846. Anderson, Jaynie. ‘Speculations on the Carracci Academy in Bologna’. Oxford art journal, 3, 1979, 15–20. Annali della fabbrica del Duomo di Milano dall’origine al presente pubblicata a cura della sua amministrazione. 9 vols, Milan, 1877–1885. Arese Lucini, Francesco. ‘Introduzione all’età patrizia’. In Storia di Milano, vol. IX, Milan, 1957, 3–26. Arfelli, Adriana. ‘Per la cronologia dei Procaccini (e dei figli di Bartolomeo Passerotti)’. Arte antica e moderne, 8, 1959, 457–461. ——— ‘Il viaggio del Malvasia a Milano e notizie su Ercole Procaccini il Giovane’. Arte antica e moderna, 4, 1961, 470–476. Arisi, Raffaella. La Chiesa e il Monastero di S. Sisto a Piacenza. Piacenza, 1977. Armenini, Giovanni Battista. De’ veri precetti della pittura. Ravenna, 1587. Arslan, Edoardo. Le pitture del Duomo di Milano. Milan, 1960. Artioli, Nerio and Monducci, Elio. ‘Scuole e accademie reggiane di pittura nel Cinque e Seicento: documenti editi e inediti’. Strenna del Pio Istituto Artigianelli, 1973. ——— Gli affreschi di Camillo Procaccini e Bernardino Campi in San Prospero di Reggio Emilia. Reggio Emilia, 1986. Bambach, Carmen. Drawing and painting in the Italian Renaissance workshop: theory and practice 1300–1600. Cambridge, 1999. Barocchi, Paola. Trattati d’arte del Cinquecento fra Manierismo e Controriforma. Bari, 1960–1962. Barozzi, Nicolò and Berchet, Guglielmo. Le relazioni degli stati europei lette al Senato dagli ambasciatori veneziani nel secolo decimosettimo. Serie, I (Spagna), vol. I, Venice, 1856. Bartoli, Francesco. Notizie delle pitture e sculture e architetture di tutte le piú rinomate città d’Italia. Venice, 1777.

144  Bibliography Barzman, Karen-edis. ‘The Florentine Accademia del Disegno, liberal education and the Renaissance artist’. In Academies of art: between Renaissance and romanticism, Anton Boschloo (ed.), The Hague, 1989, 14–32. Basteri, Maria Cristina and Rota, Patrizia. ‘Relazioni politiche e artistiche tra i Conti Rossi di San Secondo e i Gonzaga di Mantova nel XVI secolo’. Aurea Parma, 1994, 159–179. Baudi di Vesme, Alessandro. ‘La Regia Pinacoteca di Torino’. In Le Gallerie Nazionali Italiane. Notizie e documenti, vol. III, Rome, 1897, 35–68. ——— ‘L’arte negli stati sabaudi’. Atti della Società Piemontese di archeologia e belle arti, 14, 1932. Becker Sawatzky, Mira. ‘The mediality of the nymph in the cultural context of Pirro Visconti’s villa at Lainate’. In The figure of the nymph in early modern culture, Karl Enenkel and Anita Traninger (eds), Leiden, 2018, 305–336. Bedoni, Stefania. Jan Brueghel e il collezionismo del Seicento. Florence, 1982. Bellettini, Athos. La popolazione di Bologna dal secolo XV all’Unificazione. Bologna, 1961. Bellori, Giovanni Pietro. Le vite de pittori scultori e architetti moderni. Rome, 1672. Benati, Daniele, Mazzocca Fernando and Morandotti Alessandro (eds). Fiori, natura e simbolo dal Seicento a Van Gogh. Cinisello Balsamo, 2010. Bendiscioli, Mario. ‘Vita sociale e culturale’. Storia di Milano, vol. X, Milan, 1957, 351–495. Bertelli, Carlo and Lopez, Guido (eds). Brera dispersa: quadri nascosti di una grande raccolta nazionale. Milan, 1984. Bertoldi, Elisa. ‘Per il collezionismo milanese tra Seicento e Settecento: i D’Adda’. Arte lombarda, 40, 1974, 197–204. Besta, Bice. ‘Alcune notizie per una storia degli artisti milanesi del Seicento’. Archivio storico lombardo, 6, 1933, 447–471. Berra, Giacomo. L’attività scultorea di Giulio Cesare Procaccini, Milan, 1991. ——— ‘I teleri agostiniani di San Marco a Milano’. Nuovi studi, 6, 1998, 105–124. ——— ‘Appunti per le biografie di Camillo Procaccini e Panfilo Nuvolone’. Paragone, 46, 2002, 58–85. ——— ‘Il ritratto caricato in forma strana e ridicolosa, e con tanta felicità di somiglianza. La nascita della caricatura e i suoi sviluppi in Italia fino al Settecento’. Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz, 3, 2009, 73–144. ——— ‘Il Martirio di Sant’Agnese di Camillo Procaccini per il Duomo di Milano’. Valori Tattili, 5/6, 2015, 131–143. Bianconi, Carlo. Nuova guida di Milano: per gli amanti delle belle arti e delle sacre, e profane antichità milanesi. Milan, 1787. Blasco Castiñera, Selina. ‘“El Viaje de España” de don Antonio Ponz. Compendio de las alteraciones introducidas por el autor en todas las ediciones de su obra’. Anales de historia del arte, 2, 1990, 223–304. Blunt, Anthony. Artistic theory in Italy, 1450–1600. Oxford, 1940. Boccardo, Piero (ed.). L’età di Rubens. Dimore, committenti e collezionisti genovesi. Milan, 2004. Bohn, Babette (ed.). The illustrated Bartsch, Italian masters of the sixteenth century: Bartolomeo Passerotti, Domenico Tibaldi, Camillo Procaccini, Ludovico Carracci and Annibale Carracci. New York, 1996. ——— and Morselli, Raffaella. ‘Introduction’. In Reframing seventeenth century Bolognese art, Babette Bohn and Raffaella Morselli (eds), Amsterdam, 2019, 13–28. Bolognini Amorini, Antonio. Vite dei pittori ed artefici bolognesi. Bologna, 1841. Bora, Giulio. ‘La pittura: dalla fine del Quattrocento all’Ottocento’. In La basilica di Sant’Eustorgio a Milano, Gian Alberto Dell’Acqua (ed.), Milan, 1984, 175–206. ——— ‘La pittura del Seicento nelle province occidentali lombarde’. La pittura in Italia. Il Seicento, Mina Gregori (ed.), Milan, 1989, 77–103.

Bibliography 145 ——— ‘Milano nell’età di Lomazzo e San Carlo: riaffermazione e difficoltà di sopravvivenza di una cultura’. In Rabisch. Il grottesco nell’arte del Cinquecento. L’Accademia della Val di Blenio, Francesco Porzio, Giulio Bora and Manuela Kahn-Rossi (eds), Milan, 1998, 57–67. ——— and Dotti, Davide. Ecce Homo: l’anello mancante. Milan, 2012. Borromeo, Federico. Pro suis studiis. Milan, 1628. Borsieri, Girolamo. Il supplemento della nobiltà di Milano. Milan, 1619. Boschini, Marco. Le ricche miniere della pittura veneziana. Venice, 1674. Bosch Balbona, Joan. ‘Paul Bril, Wenzel Cobergher, Jacob Franckaert I, Willem I  van Nieulandt y los ermitaños de Pedro de Toledo, V marqués de Villafranca’. Locus amoenus, 9, 2007–2008, 127–154. ——— ‘Retazos del sueño tardorenacentista de Don Pedro de Toledo Osorio y Colonna en el Monasterio de la Anunciada de Villafranca del Bierzo’. Anuario del departamento de historia y teoria de l’arte, 21, 2009, 121–146. ——— ‘Sobre el quinto marqués de Villafranca, Camillo y Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Locus Amoenus, 14, 2016, 91–108. Bottari Giovanni and Ticozzi, Stefano. Raccolta di lettere sulla pittura, scultura ed architettura. Milan, 1822–1825. Brejon de Lavergnèe, Arnauld. ‘Simon Vouet à Milan en 1621: une lettre inédite de l’artiste français’. Revue de l’art, 50, 1980, 58–65. Brigstocke, Hugh. ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini reconsidered’. Jahrbuch der Berliner Museen, 18, 1976, 84–133. ——— ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini: ses attaches génoises et quelques autres faits nouveaux’. Revue de l’art, 85, 1989, 45–60. ——— Procaccini in America. New York, 2002. Brogi, Alessandro. Ludovico Carracci: 1555–1619. Bologna, 2001. Brooke, Carolina. ‘The re-use of drawings in the workshop of Jacopo Tintoretto’. The Burlington Magazine, 150, 2008, 677–680. Brusco, Giacomo. Description des beautés de Genes et de ses environs: ornée de differentes vuës, de tailles douce, et de la carte topographique de la ville. Genoa, 1781. Buffa Paolo and Lonza, Gianna (eds). Le stanze del Cardinale Monti 1635–1650: la collezione ricomposta. Milan, 1994. Burocco, Bernardino. Chronologia serafica. Milan, 1716. Bussa, Eustachio. Raccolta di notizie riguardanti Tortona. Tortona, 1780. Cadoppi, Alberto. ‘Nuove notizie per la pala di Camillo Procaccini nella Chiesa di San Vitale (poi San Girolamo)’. Reggio Storia, 142, 2014, 15–23. Campanini, Naborre. Gli affreschi di Bernardino Campi e di Camillo Procaccini nella Basilica di San Prospero in Reggio nell’Emilia. Modena, 1889. Campori, Giuseppe. Gli artisti italiani e stranieri negli Stati Estensi. Modena, 1855. Cannon-Brookes, Peter. Lombard painting 1595–1630: the age of Federico Borromeo. Birmingham, 1974. Caprara, Vittorio. ‘Nuovi reperimenti intorno ai Procaccini’. Paragone, 333, 1977, 95–100. Caramel, Luciano. Arte e artisti nell’epistolario di Girolamo Borsieri. Milan, 1966. Carasi, Carlo. Le pubbliche pitture di Piacenza. Piacenza, 1780. Carboni, Giovanni Battista. Le pitture e sculture di Brescia che sono esposte al pubblico con un’appendice di alcune private gallerie. Brescia, 1760. Carofano, Pierluigi. ‘“Dilectus meus mihi et ego illi”. Una sacra famiglia molto correggesca di Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Arte cristiana, 887, 2015, 123–130. Casati, Alessandra. ‘Addenda al catalogo di Camillo Procaccini’. Artes, 13, 2005–2007, 151–160. Cassinelli, Daniele. ‘Camillo Procaccini nella Cappella della Vergine delle Rocce’. Nuovi studi, 2004–2005, 11, 199–211.

146  Bibliography ——— and Vanoli, Paolo. Camillo Procaccini (1561–1629). Le sperimentazioni giovanili tra Emilia, lombardia e Canton Ticino, Milan, 2007. Castelnuovo Enrico and Ginzburg, Carlo. ‘Centre and periphery’. In History of Italian art, 1, Oxford, 1994, 29–112. Cavalieri, Federico. ‘Aggiunte al catalogo di Bartolomeo Roverio detto il Genovesino’. Arte lombarda, 113–115, 1995, 78–84. Cavallo, Sandra. ‘The artisan’s casa’. In At home in Renaissance Italy, Marta Ajmar Wollheim and Flora Dennis (eds), London, 2006, 65–75. ——— ‘Fatherhood and the non-propertied classes in Renaissance and early modern Italian towns’. The history of the family, 17, 2012, 309–325. Cavazzoni, Francesco. Pitture e sculture et altre cose notabili che sono a Bologna e dove si trovano. Bologna, 1603. Cavazzini, Patrizia. Painting as business in seventeenth century Rome. University Park, 2008. Chabod, Federico. Lo stato e la vita religiosa a Milano nell’epoca di Carlo V. Turin, 1934. Chai, Jean Julia. Idea of the temple of painting. Philadelphia, 2013. Chiarini, Marco and Acidini Luchinat, Christina. Pietre colorate. Capricci del XVII secolo dalle collezioni medicee. Cinisello Balsamo, 2000. Chiusa, Maria Cristina. Sant’Angelo a Milano. I cicli pittorici dei Procaccini. Milan, 1990. Ciardi, Roberto Paolo. Giovan Ambrogio Figino. Milan, 1968. Cirillo, Giuseppe and Godi, Giovanni. ‘Di Orazio Samacchini e altri pittori bolognesi a Parma’. Parma nell’arte, 14, 1982, 7–46. Comincini, Mario. Jan Brueghel accanto a Figino. La quadreria di Ercole Bianchi. Corbetta, 2010. Coppa, Simonetta. ‘La cronologia della Cappella Acerbi in Sant’Antonio Abate a Milano’. Arte lombarda, 58/59, 1981, 85–99. ——— lombardia Barocca. Milan, 2009. Corna, Andrea. Storia ed arte in Santa Maria di Campagna. Piacenza, 1908. Cortese, Ennio. ‘Artisti e artigiani al Collegio di Spagna nel Cinquecento’. Studia albornotiana, 36, 1979, 77–181. Coryat, Thomas. Crudities. London, 1611. Crispo, Alberto. ‘Carlo Antonio e l’eredità dei Procaccini’. Paragone, 54, 2003, 42–50. ——— ‘Qualche proposta per Carlo Antonio Procaccini’. Parma per l’arte, 18, 2012, 69–72. Cropper, Elizabeth. ‘Malvasia’s anti-Vasarian history of art: a tradition not a rebirth’. In Gifts in return: essays in honour of Charles Dempsey, Melinda Schlitt (ed.), Toronto, 2012, 415–443 (cit. 2012a). ——— ‘A plea for Malvasia’s Felsina Pittrice’. In Carlo Cesare Malvasia’s Felsina Pittrice: lives of the Bolognese painters. Volume I: early Bolognese painting, Elizabeth Cropper and Lorenzo Pericolo (eds), London, 2012, 1–47 (cit. 2012b). D’Albo, Odette. ‘Sulla fama del “Correggio insubre”. Un primo sguardo alla fortuna di Giulio Cesare Procaccini nelle collezioni europee tra Seicento e Ottocento’. In lombardia in Europa: incroci di storia e cultura, Danilo Zardin (ed.), Milan, 2014, 189–217 (cit. 2014a). ——— ‘I Governatori Spagnoli a Milano e le arti: Pedro de Toledo, Giulio Cesare Procaccini e le “historie grandi della vita di nostro Signore”’. Nuovi studi, 20, 2014, 145–164 (cit. 2014b). ——— ‘I lombardi, “primi maestri che sieno in Europa”: il ciclo delle province sabaude e altre imprese per Carlo Emanuele I’. In Scambi artistici tra Torino e Milano, Alessandro Morandotti and Gelsomina Spione (eds), Milan, 2016, 39–55. ——— ‘Ercole Procaccini detto il Giovane’. In Dizionario biografico degli italiani, vol.  85, Rome, 2016, 466–469. ——— ‘La trasfigurazione con i santi martiri di Giulio Cesare Procaccini a Brera: la datazione e il committente ritrovati’. Nuovi studi, 22, 2017, 87–92. ——— ‘Camillo y Giulio Cesare Procaccini al servicio del los gobernadores españoles en Milan’. Boletín del Museo del Prado, 53, 2017, 66–75.

Bibliography 147 ——— ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini “per Fiorenza”: la destinazione del Sam Carlo Borromeo e San Michele Arcangelo di Dublino’. Paragone, 137, 2018, 74–85. ——— ‘Il collezionismo dei governatori spagnoli a Milano durante l’episcopato di Federico Borromeo: alcune aperture’. Studia Borromaica, 32, 2019, 287–312. ——— and Brigstocke, Hugh. Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Catalogo generale delle opere. Turin, 2020. Dalla Costa, Thomas. ‘Paolo Veronese e la bottega. Le botteghe dei Caliari’. In Paolo Veronese: l’illusione della realtà, Paola Marini and Bernard Aikema (eds), Milan, 2014, 314–326. Damiani Cabrini, Laura. ‘Strategie delle immagini e devozione nei baliaggi svizzeri in Italia tra Cinque e Seicento: alcuni spunti di riflessione’. Archivio storico ticinese, 115, 1994, 69–84. ——— ‘La Chiesa di Santa Croce’. In Riva San Vitale. Il Battistero di San Giovanni e la Chiesa di Santa Croce, Rossana Cardani and Laura Damiani Cabrini (eds), Bern, 2006, 22–38. ——— ‘L’apparato decorativo di Santa Croce a Riva San Vitale’. In Camillo Procaccini (1561– 1629). Le sperimentazioni giovanili tra Emilia, lombardia e Canton Ticino, Daniele Cassinelli and Paolo Vanoli (eds), Milan, 2007, 115–127. D’Amico, Stefano. Le contrade e la città. Sistema produttivo e spazio urbano a Milano fra Cinque e Seicento. Milan, 1994. ——— ‘Crisis and transformation: economic organisation and social structures in Milan, 1570– 1610’. Social history, 25, 2000, 1–21. ——— Spanish Milan: a city within the Empire 1535–1706. Basingstoke, 2012. Da Silva, José Gentil. Banque et crédit en Italie au XVII siècle. Paris, 1969. De Boer, Wietse. The conquest of the soul: confession, discipline and public order in CounterReformation Milan. Leiden, 2001. Deen Schildgen, Brenda. ‘Cardinal Paleotti and the Discorso intorno alle immagini sacre e profane’. In Sacred possessions: collecting Italian religious art 1500–1900, Gail Feigenbaum and Sybille Ebert-Schifferer (eds), Los Angeles, 2011, 8–16. De Hoop Scheffer, Dieuwke. ‘Aegidius Sadeler to Raphael Sadeler II’. In Hollstein’s Dutch and Flemish etching and woodcuts ca. 1450–1700. Dieuwke de Hoop Scheffer (ed.), Amsterdam, 1980. de Klerck, Bram. The brothers Campi: images and devotion. Amsterdam, 1999. Dell’Acqua, Gian Alberto. ‘La pittura a Milano dalla metà del XVI secolo al 1630’. In Storia di Milano, vol. X, Milan, 1957, 671–782. Dell’Omo, Marina. ‘Dipinti del Seicento sul Lago Maggiore e sulla Riviera d’Orta. Nuove proposte per Camillo Procaccini, Giovanni Battista Discepoli e Giuseppe Nuvolone’. Arte lombarda, 113–155, 1995, 103–106. ——— ‘Camillo Procaccini a Ghiffa’. In L’iconografia della SS. Trinità nel Sacro Monte a Ghiffa, Claudio Silvestri (ed.), Ghiffa, 2008, 103–113. De Luca Savelli, Maddalena. Francesco Mochi 1580–1654. Florence, 1981. De Maddalena, Aldo. ‘L’immobilizzazione della ricchezza nella Milano spagnola: movimenti, esperienza, interpretazioni’. Annali di storia economica e sociale, 4, 1965, 39–72. de Montaigne, Michel. Complete works: essays, travel journal, letters. Stanford, 1957. Dempsey, Charles. Annibale Carracci and the beginnings of the Baroque style. Florence, 1977. ——— and Cropper Elizabeth. ‘The state of research in Italian painting of the seventeenth ­century’. The art bulletin, 69, 1987, 494–509. ——— ‘The Carracci Academy’. In Academies of art: between Renaissance and romanticism, Anton Boschloo (ed.), The Hague, 1989, 33–43. ——— ‘Painting in Bologna from the Carracci to Crespi’. In Captured emotions. Baroque painting in Bologna, 1575–1725, Andreas Henning and Scott Schaefer (eds), Los Angeles, 2008, 1–13. Derossi, Onorato. Nuova guida per la città di Torino. Turin, 1781. Dezallier d’Argenville, Antoine Joseph. Abregé de la vie des plus fameux peintres. Paris, 1745–1752.

148  Bibliography Di Filippo, Claudia. ‘The Reformation and the Catholic Revival in the Borromeo’s age’. In A companion to late medieval and early modern Milan. The distinctive features of an Italian state, Andrea Gamberini (ed.), Boston, 2015, 93–117. Dotti, Davide. ‘Carlo Antonio Procaccini, pittore di nature morte’. Paragone, 62, 2011, 35–41. Doyle Anderson, Ann and Maiorino, Giancarlo. The Figino, or the purpose of painting. Art theory in the late Renaissance. Toronto, 2001. Ekserdjian, David. Correggio. New Haven, 1997. ——— Parmigianino. New Haven, 2006. Elder, Glen. ‘Family history and the life course’. In Transitions: the family and the life course in historical perspective, Tamara Hareven (ed.), New York, 1978, 17–64. Ertz, Klaus. Jan Brueghel der Ältere, 1568–1625: kritischer Katalog del Gemälde. Lingen, 2010. Etro, Federico and Pagani, Laura. ‘The market for paintings in Italy during the seventeenth century’. The journal of economic history, 72, 2012, 423–447. Facchin, Laura. ‘Nuovi ritrovamenti documentari su Daniele Crespi e la sua famiglia’. In Daniele Crespi: un grande pittore del Seicento lombardo, Andrea Spiriti (ed.), Milan, 2006, 113–137. Fanti, Mario. ‘La villeggiatura di Ulisse Aldrovandi’. Strenna storica bolognese, 8, 1958, 17–43. Farina, Viviana. Giovan Carlo Doria: promotore delle arti a Genova nel primo Seicento. Florence, 2002. Feigenbaum, Gail. ‘The early history of Lodovico Carracci’s ‘Annunciation Altarpiece’. The Burlington magazine, 132, 1990, 616–622. ——— ‘Practice in the Carracci Academy’. In The artist’s workshop: studies in the history of art, Peter Lukehart (ed.), Washington, 1993, 58–76. ——— ‘Nature as teacher and subject: the Carracci family of painters’. In Captured emotions. Baroque painting in Bologna, 1575–1725, Andreas Henning and Scott Schaefer (eds), Los Angeles, 2008, 15–24. Fernández Vásquez, Vicente. El señorío y marquesado de Villafranca del Bierzo a través de la documentación del Archivio Ducal de Medina Sidonia. Ponferrada, 2007. Ferro, Filippo Maria, Gnemmi, Dario and Dell’Omo, Marina. La pittura del Sei e Settecento nel novarese. Novara, 1996. ——— ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini: aggiunte agli ultimi anni milanesi’. Rivista d’arte, 2, 2012, 273–296. Fiorio, Maria Teresa. Le chiese di Milano. Milan, 1985. ——— ‘Brambilla, Francesco’. In The dictionary of art, Jane Turner (ed.), New York, 1996, 654–655. Foletti, Maria. ‘L’opera di Camillo Procaccini e della sua bottega nella Cappella Pellanda a Biasca’. Arte e architettura in Svizzera, 3, 2006, 62. Fortunati Pietrantonio, Vera. ‘L’immaginario degli artisti bolognesi tra maniera e Controriforma: Prospero Fontana’. In Le arti a Bologna e in Emilia dal XVI al XVII secolo, Andrea Emiliani (ed.), Bologna, 1982, 97–111. Frangi, Francesco. ‘Vicende della pittura a Como e nel Canton Ticino nel secondo Cinquecento’. In Pittura a Como e nel Canton Ticino dal Mille al Settecento, Mina Gregori (ed.), Milan, 1994, 38–44. ——— Giovan Battista Discepoli detto lo Zoppo da Lugano: un protagonista della pittura Barocca in lombardia. Milan, 2001. Galassi, Maria Clelia. ‘I lombardi e i loro amici genovesi. Pittori e collezionisti fra Genova e Milano 1610–1630’. In Procaccini, Cerano, Morazzone: dipinti lombardi del primo Seicento dalle civiche collezioni genovesi, Clario Di Fabio (ed.), Genoa, 1992, 11–20. Gaston, Robert. ‘The rhetoric of decorum in Counter-Reformation Italy’. In The sensuous in the Counter-Reformation church, Marcia Hall and Tracy Cooper (eds), New York, 2013, 74–90.

Bibliography 149 Gauna, Chiara. ‘M come Malvasia e Mariette: disegni, stampe e giudizi di stile tra Bologna, Parigi e Vienna’. Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Classe di lettere e filosofia, 3, 2011, 159–292. Geddo, Christina. ‘Collezionisti e mecenati tra Sei e Settecento: i Durini conti di Monza’. Artes, 9, 2001, 41–124. Gentilini, Giancarlo and Morandotti, Alessandro. ‘The sculptures of the Nymphaeum at Lainate: the origins of the Mellon Venus and Bacchus’. In Studies in the history of art, 24, 1990, 135–171. Gerard, Véronique. ‘Philip’s early Italian commissions’. Oxford art journal, 5, 1982, 9–14. Gheroldi, Vincenzo. ‘Painting a calce and sprezzatura in the 1530s: a technical context for Dosso’. In Dosso’s fate: painting court and culture in Renaissance Italy, Lucia Ciammitti, Steven Ostrow and Salvatore Settis (eds), Los Angeles, 1998, 113–139. Gigli, Giulio Cesare. La pittura trionfante. Venice, 1615. Gilardoni, Virgilio. ‘Bellinzona, nuove notizie e documenti inediti per la storiografia artistica’. Bollettino storico della Svizzera italiana, 1954, 125–168. Giuliani, Marzia and Sacchi, Rossana. ‘Per una lettura dei documenti su Giovanni Paolo Lomazzo’. In Rabisch. Il grottesco nell’arte del Cinquecento. L’Accademia della Val di Blenio, Francesco Porzio, Giulio Bora and Manuela Kahn-Rossi (eds), Milan, 1998, 323–335. Goldstein, Carl. Visual fact over verbal fiction: a study of the Carracci and the criticism, theory and practice of art in Renaissance and Baroque Italy. Cambridge, 1988. Goldthwaite, Richard. Wealth and demand for art in Italy 1300–1600. Baltimore, 1993. ——— ‘The painting industry in early modern Italy’. In Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters, Richard Spear and Philip Sohm (eds), New Haven, 2010, 275–301. Greco Grassilli, Rosaria. ‘Da Annibale e Ludovico Carracci a Lazzario Cesari. I pagamenti agli artisti della Cappella Paleotti nella Cattedrale di San Pietro in Bologna’. Atti e memorie della Deputazione di Storia Patria per le Province di Romagna, LIV, 2005, 331–407. Gregori, Mina. Il Morazzone: catalogo della mostra. Milan, 1962. ——— ‘Notizie storiche sulla lombardia tra Cinque e Seicento’. In Il Seicento lombardo: catalogo della mostra, Marco Valsecchi (ed.), Milan, 1973, 17–60. ——— (ed.). Pittura a Milano dal Seicento al neoclassicismo. Milan, 1999. Griffiths, Anthony. The print before photography. An introduction to European printmaking 1550–1820. London, 2016. Gualandi, Michelangelo. Memorie originali italiane riguardanti le belle arti. Bologna, 1840–1845. Hareven, Tamara. ‘Cycles, courses and cohorts: reflections on theoretical and methodological approaches to the study of family development’. Journal of social history, 12, 1978, 97–109. ——— ‘Family history at the crossroads’. In Family history at the crossroads: a journal of family history reader, Tamara Hareven and Andrejs Plakans (eds), Princeton, 1987, vii–xxi. Haskell, Francis. Patrons and painters: a study in the relations between Italian art and society in the age of Baroque. London, 1963. Hauser, Arnold. Mannerism: the crisis of the Renaissance and the origin of modern art. New York, 1965. Headley, John and Tomaro, John. San Carlo Borromeo: Catholic reform and ecclesiastical politics in the second half of the sixteenth century. Washington, 1988. Houghton Brown, Nancy. ‘The Church of San Barnaba in Milan’. Arte lombarda, 11, 1964, 65–98. Humfrey, Peter. Titian: the complete paintings. Ghent, 2007. Imbrico, Felicina. ‘Contributo alla cronologia di Camillo Procaccini, un contratto ancora inedito’. Bollettino storico per la provincia di Novara, 1947, 135–143. Isella, Dante. lombardia stravagante. Turin, 2005.

150  Bibliography Jones, Pamela. ‘Federico Borromeo as a patron of landscapes and still-lifes: Christian optimism in Italy ca. 1600’. The art bulletin, 70, 1988, 261–272. ——— Federico Borromeo and the Ambrosiana. Cambridge, 1993. ——— and Rothwell, Kenneth. Sacred painting: museum. Cambridge, MA, 2010. Kahn-Rossi, Manuela (ed.). Pier Francesco Mola 1612–1666. Milan, 1989. Klapish-Zuber, Christiane. ‘The name remade: the transmission of given names in Florence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries’. In Women, family and ritual in Renaissance Italy, Christiane Klapish-Zuber (ed.), Chicago, 1985, 283–309. Landeau, David and Parshall, Peter. The Renaissance print 1470–1550. New Haven, 1994. Lanzi, Luigi. Storia pittorica della Italia dal Risorgimento delle belle arti fino apresso al fine del XVIII secolo. Milan, 1825. Latuada, Serviliano. Descrizione di Milano: ornata con molti disegni in rame delle fabbriche più cospicue che si trovano in questa metropoli. Milan, 1737–1738. Lienhard-Riva, Alfredo. ‘Contributo alla storia artistica della Chiesa di Santa Croce di Riva S. Vitale’. Bollettino storico della Svizzera italiana, 4, 1940, 113–118. L’Occaso, Stefano. ‘Unpublished drawings by Camillo Procaccini and Giuseppe Ghezzi in Mantua’. Master drawings, 49, 2011, 175–178. Locker, Jesse (ed.). ‘Rethinking art after the Council of Trent’. In Art and reform in the late Renaissance after Trent. Jesse Locker (ed.), New York, 2019, 1–18. Lo Conte, Angelo. ‘Federico Borromeo e l’invenzione della ghirlanda di fiori: evoluzione italiana di un genere pittorico’. Italian Studies, 71, 2016, 67–81. ——— ‘Sadeler and Procaccini: the secular decoration of Castello Visconti di San Vito in Somma Lombardo’. Explorations in Renaissance Culture, 44, 2018, 27–46. ——— ‘Carlo Antonio and the bottega Procaccini’. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 83, 2020, 5–30. Lomazzo, Giovanni Paolo. Rime di Gio. Paolo Lomazzo divise in sette libri… con la vita dell’autore descritta da lui stesso in rime sciolte. Milan, 1587. ——— Rabish dra Academiglia dor compa Zavargna, nabad dra Vall d’Bregn, ed tucch i sù fidigl soghit. Milan, 1589. ——— Idea del tempio della pittura. Milan, 1590. Longeri, Carla. ‘Nuovi documenti per le decorazioni del Duomo di Piacenza in epoca Barocca’. Strenna piacentina, 2000, 64–90. Longhi, Roberto. ‘L’Assereto’. Dedalo, 7, 1926–1927, 354–375. ——— ‘Un italiano sulla scia dell’Elsheimer: Carlo Antonio Procaccini’. Paragone, 185, 1965, 43–44. ——— ‘L’inizio dell’abbozzo autonomo’. Paragone, 195, 1966, 25–29. ——— ‘Me pinxit e quesiti caravaggeschi 1928–1934. Florence, 1985. Lucco, Mauro. ‘Gli affreschi di Camillo Procaccini nel Collegio di Spagna’. Studia albornotiana, 36, 1979, 217–223. Lukehart, Peter. Contending ideals: the nobility of G.B. Paggi and the nobility of painting. PhD dissertation, John Hopkins University, 1987. ——— (ed.). The artist’s workshop: studies in the history of art. Washington, 1993. ——— ‘Delineating the Genoese studio: giovani accartati or sotto padre?’. In The artist’s workshop: studies in the history of art, Peter Lukehart (ed.), Washington, 1993, 37–57. ——— ‘Visions and divisions in the early history of the Accademia di San Luca’. In The Accademia Seminars: the Accademia di San Luca in Rome, c. 1590–1635, Peter Lukehart (ed.), New Haven, 2009, 161–195. Luzio, Alessandro. La galleria dei Gonzaga di Mantova venduta all’Inghilterra nel 1627–1628. Milan, 1913. Macioce, Stefania (ed.). Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio. Documenti, fonti e inventari 1513–1875. Rome, 2010. Magni, Mariaclotilde. ‘Singolarità nella decorazione di Sant’Angelo a Milano’. Arte lombarda, 116, 1996, 62–73.

Bibliography 151 Malvasia, Carlo Cesare. Scritti originali spettanti alla sua Felsina Pittrice. Bologna, 1667. ——— Felsina pittrice. Bologna, 1678. ——— Le pitture di Bologna. Bologna, 1686. Malvezzi, Luigi. Le glorie dell’arte lombarda. Luigi. Milan, 1882. Mancini, Giulio. Considerazioni sulla pittura. Rome, 1620 (edn 1956–1957). Manzoni, Alessandro, The betrothed. Milan, 1842. Marinelli, Massimo, Della Torre, Stefano and Adorni, Francesco. Instructiones fabricae et suppellectilis ecclesiasticae: libri II Carlo Borromei. Vatican City, 2000. Marino, Giovanni Battista. La Galeria del Cavalier Marino distinta in pitture e sculture. Milan, 1620. ——— L’Adone. Paris, 1623. Marshall, Christopher. Baroque Naples and the industry of painting. New Haven, 2016. Martinola, Giuseppe. Inventario delle cose d’arte e di antichità del distretto di Mendrisio. Lugano, 1975. Martinoni, Renato. Gian Vincenzo Imperiale, politico, letterato e collezionista genovese del Seicento. Padova, 1983. Mazza, Angelo. ‘Un san Giovanni Battista di Camillo Procaccini diciannovenne nella Galleria Estense. Dipinti di Ercole e Camillo Procaccini per i territori estensi’. In Pittura a Modena e a Reggio Emilia tra Cinque e Seicento: studi e ricerche, Angelo Mazza and Giorgia Mancini (eds), Modena, 1998, 52–64. Melzi, Lodovico. Somma Lombardo. Storia, descrizione e illustrazione. Milan, 1880. Meijer, Bert W. Parma e Bruxelles. Committenza e collezionismo farnesiani alle due corti. Parma, 1988. ——— ‘Titian and the north’. In Renaissance Venice and the north, Bernard Aikema (ed.), Venice, 1999, 498–505. Merriam, Susan. ‘The reception of garland pictures in seventeenth century Flanders and Italy’. In Domestic institutional interiors in early modern Europe, Sandra Cavallo and Silvia Evangelisti (eds), New York, 2017, 201–220. Merula, Pellegrino. Santuario di Cremona… con l’origine de’ monasteri, ospedali, e luoghi Pij di detta città. Cremona, 1627. Milstein, Ann Rebecca. The paintings of Girolamo Mazzola Bedoli. Cambridge, MA, 1977. Modena, Silvana. ‘Disegni di maestri dell’Accademia Ambrosiana’. Arte lombarda, 4, 1959, 92–122. Monferrini, Sergio. I Borromeo d’Angera. Collezionisti e mecenati nella Milano del Seicento. Milan, 2012. Montagu, Jennifer. Roman Baroque sculpture: the industry of art. New Haven: 1989. Morandotti, Alessandro. ‘Pirro Visconti Borromeo di Brebbia: mecenate nella Milano del tardo Cinquecento’. Archivio storico lombardo, 6, 1981, 115–162. ——— ‘Per l’attività di Camillo Procaccini nell’antico stato di Milano: il ciclo di Torre Garofoli’. Arte lombarda, 70/71, 1984, 137–143. ——— ‘Nuove tracce per il tardo Rinascimento italiano: il ninfeo-museo della Villa Borromeo, Visconti Borromeo, Litta, Toselli di Lainate’. Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, 1, 1985, 129–185. ——— ‘Carlo Antonio Procaccini’. In La natura morta in Italia, Francesco Porzio (ed.), Milan, 1989, 233–237. ——— ‘Il revival leonardesco nell’età di Federico Borromeo’. In I leonardeschi a Milano: fortuna e collezionismo, Mario Teresa Fiorio and Pietro Marani (eds), Milan, 1991, 166–182. ——— ‘La Milano di Federico Borromeo: da Fede Galizia a Daniele Crespi’. In Il ritratto in lombardia: da Moroni a Ceruti, Francesco Frangi and Alessandro Morandotti (eds), Milan, 2002, 95–99. ——— Milano profana. Milan, 2005.

152  Bibliography ——— Il collezionismo in lombardia: studi e ricerche tra ’600 e ’800. Milan, 2008. ——— and Natale, Mauro. Collezione Borromeo: la galleria dei quadri dell’Isola Bella. Milan, 2011. ——— ‘Natura morta lombarda (e piemontese) delle origini. Alcuni spunti nella Fototeca Zeri’. In La natura morta di Federico Zeri, Andrea Bacchi (ed.), Ferrara, 2015, 57–69. ——— (ed.). L’ultimo Caravaggio. Eredi e nuovi maestri. Napoli, Genova e Milano a confronto (1610–1640). Milan, 2017. Morigia, Paolo. La nobiltà di Milano. Milan, 1595. Morselli, Raffaella. ‘Bologna’. In Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters, Richard Spear and Philip Sohm (eds), New Haven, 2010, 145–171. ——— ‘Artisti a Bologna nel Seicento: patrimoni personali ed eredità di bottega’. In Riflessi del collezionismo tra bilanci critici e nuovi contributi. Giovanna Perini and Anna Maria Ambrosini Massari (eds), Florence, 2014, 189–2015. Mosconi, Anacleto and Olgiati, Feliciano. Chiesa di Sant’Angelo dei frati minori: guida storicoartistica. Milan, 1972. Mozzarelli, Cesare. ‘Dall’antispagnolismo al revisionismo’. In Alle origini di una nazione. Antispagnolismo e identità italiana, Aurelio Musi (ed.), Milan, 2003, 345–368. Mrozińska, Maria. I disegni del codice Bonola del Museo di Varsavia. Venice, 1959. Mulazzani, Giovanni. ‘Studi economici sulle monete di Milano’. Rivista italiana di numismatica, 3, 1888, 299–332. Muñoz Gonzalez, Maria Jesús. El mercado español de pinturas en el Siglo XVII. Madrid, 2008. Muraro, Michelangelo and Rosand, David. Tiziano e la silografia veneziana del Cinquecento. Vicenza, 1976. Neilson, Nancy W. ‘An altarpiece by Giulio Cesare Procaccini and some further remarks’. Arte lombarda, 17, 1972, 22–-25. ——— ‘Camillo Procaccini’s etched Transfiguration’. The Burlington Magazine, 118, 1976, 699–701. ——— ‘Camillo Procaccini, towards a reconstruction of the Emilian years’. The art bulletin, 59, 1977, 362–374. ——— ‘Camillo Procaccini: some partial reconstructions’. Arte lombarda, 50, 1978, 95–103. ——— Camillo Procaccini paintings and drawings. New York, 1979. ——— ‘The Procaccini: various ways of drawing’. In Dal disegno all’opera compiuta: atti del convegno internazionale di Perugia, Mario Di Giampaolo (ed.), Perugia, 1992. ——— Giulio Cesare Procaccini disegnatore. Busto Arsizio, 2004. Nicodemi, Giorgio. ‘Le note di Sebastiano Resta ad un esemplare dell’Abecedario pittorico di Pellegrino Orlandi’. In Studi storici in memoria di Mons. Angelo Mercati: Prefetto dell’Archivio Vaticano. Milan, 1956, 263–326. ——— ‘L’accademia di pittura, scultura e architettura fondata dal Cardinal Federico Borromeo all’Ambrosiana’. In Studi in onore di Carlo Castiglione, Milan, 1957, 652–696. O’Malley, John. ‘Trent, sacred images, and Catholics’ senses of the sensuous’. In The sensuous in the Counter-Reformation church, Marcia Hall and Tracy Cooper (eds), New York, 2013, 28–48. O’Malley, Michelle. Painting under pressure: fame, reputation and demand in Renaissance Florence. New Haven, 2014. Ojetti, Ugo, Dami, Luigi and Tarchiani, Nello. Mostra della pittura italiana del Seicento e del Settecento. Milan, 1924. Olmi, Giuseppe. ‘Aldrovandi and the Bolognese painters in the second half of the XVI century’. In Emilian paintings of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries: a symposium, Henry Millon (ed.), Bologna, 1987, 63–73. Orlandi, Pellegrino. Abecedario pittorico. Bologna, 1704. Pagani, Gian Filiberto. Le pitture e le sculture di Modena. Modena, 1770.

Bibliography 153 Panofsky, Erwin. ‘What is Baroque?’ In Three essays on style, Irving Lavin (ed.), Cambridge, MA, 1995, 19–88. Parvis Marino, Licia. ‘Camillo Procaccini: appunti e ricerche sui restauri della Sacrestia di San Vittore al Corpo’. Arte lombarda, 108–109, 1994, 75–83. Pasta, Giovanni. Il quadro delle tre mani. Lettera del Sig. Gio. Pasta scritta al M. Illust.  & Reverendissim. P. Martinengo Inquisitore di Cremona. Milan, 1636. Penny, Nicolas. ‘Pittori e botteghe nell’Italia del Rinascimento’. In La bottega dell’artista tra Medioevo e Rinascimento, Roberto Cassanelli (ed.), Milan, 1998, 31–53. Pérez Preciado, José Juan. El Marqués de Leganés y las artes. PhD dissertation, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2010, 317. Perini, Giovanna. ‘Central issues and peripheral debates in seventeenth-century art literature: Carlo Cesare Malvasia’s Felsina Pittrice’. In World art: themes of unity in diversity, Irving Lavin (ed.), University Park, 1989, 139–143. ——— Gli scritti dei Carracci (Ludovico, Annibale, Agostino, Giovanni Antonio). Bologna, 1990. Pevsner, Nikolaus. ‘Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Rivista d’arte, 11, 1929, 321–354. Pino, Paolo. Dialogo di pittura. Venice, 1548. Pona, Francesco. Sileno, overo delle bellezze del luogo dell’ill.mo Sig. co. Gio. Giacomo Giusti. Verona, 1620. Ponzini, Domenico. ‘Organizzazione ecclesiastica e vita religiosa’. In Storia di Piacenza, vol. IV, Piacenza, 1999, 207–264. Posner, Donald. Annibale Carracci: a study in the reform of Italian painting around 1590. London, 1971. Priorato, Galeazzo Gualdo. Vite et azzioni di personaggi militari, e politici. Vienna, 1674. Prodi, Paolo and McCuaig, William. Discourse on sacred and profane images. Los Angeles, 2012. Pugliese, Salvatore. Le condizioni economiche e finanziarie della lombardia nella prima metà del secolo XVIII. Turin, 1924. Ratti, Carlo Giuseppe. Instruzione  di quanto può vedersi di più bello in Genova in pittura, scultura ed architettura. Genoa, 1766. Réau, Louis. Iconographie de l’árt chrétien. Paris, 1955–1957. Rega Castro, Ivan. Simone Barabino. Resurrección de Lázaro: una pintura de escuela lombarda en la antiqua colleción del Deán Lópezs Cepero. Lleida, 2013. Ricardi, Francesca. ‘Le ante d’organo del Duomo di Milano’. Archivio storico lombardo, 114, 1988, 77–98. Robertson, Clare. The invention of Annibale Carracci. Cinisello Balsamo, 2008. Rodeschini Galati, Maria Cristina. ‘Presenze cremonesi, milanesi, e cremasche (1570–1630)’. In I pittori bergamaschi dal XIII al XIX secolo. Il Seicento, Gian Alberto Dell’Acqua (ed.), Bergamo, 1984, 1–49. Romano, Giovanni. ‘Uso, diffusione e commercio dei modelli grafici’. In Maiolica e incisione. Tre secoli di rapporti iconografici, catalogo della mostra, Grazia Bisconti Ugolini and Jacqueline Petruzzelli Scherer (eds), Vicenza, 1992, 15–18. ——— ‘Artisti alla corte di Carlo Emanuele I: la costruzione di una nuova tradizione figurativa’. In Le collezioni di Carlo Emanuele I di Savoia, Giovanni Romano (ed.), Turin, 1995, 13–62. Rosci, Marco. I quadroni di San Carlo del Duomo di Milano. Milan, 1965. ——— Giulio Cesare Procaccini. Soncino, 1993. ——— ‘Cerano e Procaccini a Santa Maria presso San Celso e a Santa Prassede’. In Il Seicento lombardo. Giornata di studi, Mina Gregori and Marco Rosci (eds), Turin, 1996, 43–49. ——— Il Cerano. Milan, 2000. Ruffino, Alessandra. L’Adamo. Trento, 2007.

154  Bibliography Ruggeri, Ugo. ‘Three etchings by Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Print quarterly, 2, 1987, 162–166. ——— ‘Aggiunte al corpus di Camillo Procaccini’. Critica d’arte, 67, 2004, 46–53. Sánchez, Manuel Herrero. ‘La finanza genovese e il sistema imperiale spagnolo’. Rivista di storia finanziaria, 19, 2007, 27–60. Santagostino, Agostino. L’immortalità e la gloria del pennello: catalogo delle pitture insigni che stanno esposte nella città di Milano. Milan, 1671. Scamozzi, Vincenzo. L’idea della architettura universale. Venice, 1615. Scannelli, Francesco. Il microcosmo della pittura. Cesena, 1657. Scaramuccia, Luigi. Le finezze dei pennelli italiani ammirate, e studiate da Girupeno sotto la scorta, e disciplina del genio di Raffaello d’Urbino. Pavia, 1674. Schott, Franciscus. Itinerario overo nova descrittione de’viaggi principali d’Italia di Andrea Scotto. Vicenza, 1615. Segredo, Agostino. Sulle consorterie delle arti edificative a Venezia. Venice, 1856. Sella, Domenico. Crisis and continuity: the economy of Spanish Lombardy in the seventeenth century. Cambridge, MA, 1979. ——— ‘Spanish rule in Milan in the sixteenth century: old and new perspectives’. In Italian Renaissance studies in Arizona, Jean Brink and Pier Raimondo Baldini (eds), River Forest, 1989, 199–211. Smith, Bernard. The death of the artist as hero: essays in history and culture. Oxford, 1988. Sénéchal, Philippe. Les Sadeler: entremise et enterprise. PhD dissertation, Université de ParisSorbonne, 1987. ——— ‘Justus Sadeler: print publisher and art dealer in early Seicento Venice’. Print quarterly, 7, 1990, 22–35. ——— ‘La pratique de la copie chez les graveurs: a propos du Repos de la Sainte Famille de Jacques Callot’. Gazette des beaux-arts, 1501, 1994, 73–86. Serrão, Vitor. ‘La peinture maniériste portugaise, entre la Flandre et Rome, 1550–1620’. In Fiamminghi a Roma 1508–1608: atti del convegno internazionale, Nicole Dacos (ed.), Rome, 1999, 263–276. Simonsfeld, Henry. ‘Mailänder Briefe zur bayerischen und allgemeinen Geschichte des 16 Jahrhunderts’. Abhandlungen der historischen Klasse der königlich, bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 23, 1901–1902, 223–560. Sohm, Philip. ‘Venice’. In Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters, Richard Spear and Philip Sohm (eds), New Haven, 2010, 205–254. ——— ‘Painting together: “a terrestrial trinity” of painters in the Quadro delle tre mani’. In Artistic practices and cultural transfer in early modern Italy, Nebahat Avcıoglu (ed.), Farnham, 2015, 131–147. Soprani, Raffaele. Le vite dei pittori, scultori e architetti genovesi. Genoa, 1674. ——— and Ratti, Carlo Giuseppe. Le vite dei pittori, scultori e architetti genovesi…rivedute e accresciute di note da Carlo Giuseppe Ratti. Genoa, 1768–1769. Soranzo, Giovanni. Delle rime. Milan, 1606. Spagnolo, Maddalena. ‘L’orazione nell’orto di Correggio e la sua precoce fortuna lombarda’. Arte lombarda, 136, 2002, 37–51. ——— Correggio: geografia e storia della fortuna: 1528–1657. Cinisello Balsamo, 2005. Spear, Richard and Sohm, Philip (eds). Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters. New Haven, 2010. ——— ‘Rome. Setting the stage’. In Painting for profit: the economic lives of seventeenth century Italian painters, Richard Spear and Philip Sohm (eds), New Haven, 2010, 33–113. Spike, John T. Italian still life paintings from three centuries. Florence, 1983. Spiriti, Andrea. ‘La nascita delle consorterie pittoriche: Avogadro e Pozzi in area varesina tra Morazzone e Daniele Crespi’. Rivista della società storica varesina, 24, 2007, 153–170. Sterling, Charles. La nature morte de l’antiquitè à nos jours. Paris, 1952.

Bibliography 155 Stoppa, Jacopo. Il Morazzone. Milan, 2003. Street, Lenora. ‘Una natività di Ludovico Carracci’. Arte illustrata, 4, 1971, 52–55. Summerscale, Anne. Malvasia’s life of the Carracci: commentary and translation. University Park, 2000. Tabarrini, Marco. ‘Relazione inedita dello stato di Milano di G. B. Guarini’. Archivio storico italiano, 5, 1867, 15. Taegio, Bartolomeo. La villa. Milan, 1559. Tagliaferro, Giorgio. ‘Una fabbrica di immagini: l’impresa tizianesca tra invenzioni, repliche e varianti’. In Le botteghe di Tiziano, Giorgio Tagliaferro and Bernard Aikema (eds), Florence, 2009, 223–272. ——— and Aikema, Bernard. Le botteghe di Tiziano. Florence, 2009. Tantardini, Lucia. ‘Nella bottega di Aurelio e Giovan Piero Luini: i disegni preparatori per gli affreschi della Cappella di Sant’Ippolito’. In Vigano Certosino: un borgo nell’arte e nella storia, Paolo Piccone Conti (ed.), Milan, 2010, 110–120. Tanzi, Marco. ‘Due esercitazioni lombarde: Bernardino Campi e Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Storia dell’arte, 1, 2018, 9–30. Tardito, Rosalba. ‘Note sul Seicento lombardo. Restauri nella parrocchiale di Caravaggio e nella Chiesa Barnabita di S. Alessandro a Milano’. Arte lombarda, 151, 1979, 42–48. Testori, Giovanni. Mostra del Manierismo piemontese e lombardo del Seicento. Turin, 1955. Ticozzi, Stefano. Dizionario degli architetti, scultori, pittori, intagliatori in rame ed in pietra, coniatori di medaglie, musaicisti, niellatori, intarsiatori d’ogni età e d’ogni nazione. Milan, 1833. Tomei, Alessandro and Gandolfo, Francesco. La Cattedrale di Cremona affreschi e sculture. Milan, 2001. Tonelli, Giovanna. ‘The Annoni and the Carenna in seventeenth-century Milan’. In Rubens’s Massacre of the Innocents. The Thomson Collection at the Art Gallery of Ontario, David Jaffé (ed.), Toronto, 2009, 154–192. ——— ‘Mercanti che hanno negozio grosso fra Milano e i paesi riformati nel primo Seicento’. Storia economica, 1, 2015, 101–142. ——— ‘The economy in the 16th and 17th centuries’. In A companion to late medieval and early modern Milan. The distinctive features of an Italian state, Andrea Gamberini (ed.), Boston, 2015, 142–165. ——— Investire con profitto e stile: strategie imprenditoriali a familiari a Milano tra Sei e Settecento. Milan, 2015. Torre, Carlo. Il ritratto di Milano. Milan, 1674. Tumidei, Stefano. ‘Alessandro Menganti e le arti a Bologna nella seconda metà del Cinquecento: alla ricerca di un contesto’. In Michelangelo incognito. Alessandro Menganti e le arti a Bologna nell’età della Controriforma, Andrea Bacchi and Stefano Tumidei (eds), Ferrara, 2002, 100, 55–110. Turner, Nicholas. From Michelangelo to Annibale Carracci. A century of Italian drawings from the Prado. Chicago, 2008. Valsecchi, Marco. ‘Camillo Procaccini e l’altare di Sant’Agnese per il Duomo di Milano’. Paragone, 45, 1968, 47–63. ——— (ed.). Il Seicento lombardo: catalogo della mostra. 3 vols, Milan, 1973. ——— ‘Camillo Procaccini a Venezia’. Arte veneta, 28, 1974, 261–266. Vannugli, Antonio. ‘Collezionismo spagnolo nello stato di Milano: la quadreria del marchese di Caracena’. Arte lombarda, 117, 1996, 5–36. Vanoli, Paolo. Il libro delle lettere di Girolamo Borsieri: arte antica e moderna nella lombardia del primo Seicento. Milan, 2015. ——— ‘Genova pittrice. Le relazioni con Milano’. In L’ultimo Caravaggio. Eredi e nuovi maestri. Napoli, Genova e Milano a confronto (1610–1640), Alessandro Morandotti (ed.), Milan, 2017, 59–70.

156  Bibliography Varallo, Franca. Il duca e la corte. Cerimonie al tempo di Carlo Emanuele I di Savoia. Geneva, 1991. Verga, Ettore. ‘La famiglia Mazenta e le sue collezioni d’arte’. Archivio storico lombardo, 45, 1918, 267–295. Vergani, Graziano. Il palazzo dei conti Rasini a Cavenago di Brianza. Un inedito episodio di residenza nobiliare nella lombardia d’antico regime (secolo XVI-XVIII). Cavenago Brianza, 1997. Vigezzi, Silvio. ‘I primi anni di attività di Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Rivista d’Arte, 15, 1933, 483–487. Vigo, Giovanni. ‘L’estate di San Martino dell’economia milanese’. Rivista milanese di economia, 12, 1984. Voltaire, François. Essai sur la poésie épique. Paris, 1728. von Baldass, Ludwig. ‘Die Niederländische Landschaftsmalerei von Patinir bis Brueghel’. Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des allerhöschten Kaiserhauses, 34, 1918, 111–157. von Heineken, Carl Heinrich. Recueil d’estampes d’après le plus célèbres tableaux de la Galerie Royale de Dresde. Dresden, 1753–1757. von Schlosser, Julius. La letteratura artistica: manuale delle fonti della storia dell’arte moderna. Florence, 1964. Welch, Evelyn. ‘Patrons artists and audiences in Renaissance Milan, 1300–1600’. In The court cities of northern Italy. Milan, Parma, Piacenza, Urbino, Pesaro and Rimini, Charles Rosenberg (ed.), Cambridge, 2010, 21–70. Wittgens, Fernanda. ‘Per la cronologia di Giulio Cesare Procaccini’. Rivista d’arte. 15, 1933, 483–487. Wittkower, Rudolf. Art and architecture in Italy, 1600–1750. Harmondsworth, 1958. ——— Sculpture. Processes and principles. London, 1977.

Index

Aachen, Hans von 33 Académie Royale de Peinture et de Sculpture (Paris) 17 Accademia Ambrosiana (Milan) 72, 141 Accademia dei Facchini della Val di Blenio 42, 62 Accademia del Disegno (Florence) 36, 72 Accademia di San Luca (Rome) 72 Acerbi, Ludovico 107 Aldrovandi, Ulisse 10, 34, 41, 43 Aliate, Andrea 39 Anastagi, Simonetto 109 Andreini, Giovanni Battista 13, 105, 109, 127 Angera, Madonna della Riva 83 Annoni, Giovanni Pietro 114 Antispagnolismo 53 Antwerp 29, 51, 59, 114, 119 – 120 Appenzell, Capuchin Convent 63, 96 Arese, Giovanni Francesco 11, 114 Armenini, Giovanni Battista 108 Arpino, Giuseppe Cesari d’ 19 Arte dei Pittori (Venice) 30 Arte della Seta (Reggio Emilia) 99 – 100 Avogadro (family) 110 Balbi (family) 128, 131 Balbi, Francesco 131 Baldi, Bernardo 72 Balen, Hendrick van 137 Balerna 94 Barabino, Simone 72 – 73, 104 Barbieri, Paolo Antonio 31 Barendsz, Dirk 110 Barocci, Federico 109 Bartoli, Francesco 75 Bassano (family) 31 Bassano, Cesare 137 Bassano, Jacopo 109 Bassi, Martino 43, 66, 110 Bellarmino, Roberto 121 Bellini (family) 31 Bellinzona 74, 77, 82, 84; churches (Collegiata Santi Pietro e Paolo 82)

Bellori, Giovanni Pietro 35 Bellosio, Carlo 140 Beretta, Giovanni 75 Beretta, Pietro 75 Bergamo 104; churches (Ognissanti 77 – 78) Bernini, Gian Lorenzo 85 Besozzo, Giuseppe 104 Bianchi, Ercole 119 Bianchi, Federico 141 Bianconi, Carlo 17 Biasca 74, 84, 101; churches (San Pietro 84) Biffi, Carlo 72 Birmingham 13 Bissone 42 Bisuschio 110 Bologna 1 – 2, 4, 6 – 7, 9 – 10, 15 – 17, 21, 23, 26 – 30, 33 – 34, 37 – 38, 42, 48 – 50, 53 – 55, 59, 61 – 62, 64, 66, 72, 89, 92, 100, 116; churches (Cathedral 33 – 34, 66; San Benedetto 29; San Domenico 57, 60; San Francesco 34; San Giacomo Maggiore 29, 81; San Giorgio in Poggiale 37; San Giovanni Battista dei Celestini 29; San Giovanni in Monte 29; San Tommaso al Mercato 29; Sant’Agostino 29; Santa Cristina 57, 60; Santa Lucia 29; Santa Maria dei Mendicanti 60; Santa Maria Maggiore 29; Santo Stefano 29); palaces (Collegio di Spagna 34 – 35; Palazzo della Gabella 56, 60; Palazzo Fava 39); parishes (Castel de’ Britti 57; Mascarella 57). Bolognini Amorini, Antonio 86 Bonconti, Giovanni Paolo 34 Borja Àlvarez de Toledo, Francisco 134 Borromeo, Carlo 4, 9, 11, 18, 23, 33, 42, 52, 54, 61 – 62, 66, 70, 73 – 74, 80 – 81, 97 – 98, 100, 141 Borromeo, Federico 1, 4, 9, 13, 16, 19, 23, 26, 33 – 34, 37, 72 – 73, 84, 97, 109, 114, 119 – 124, 126 – 128, 136 – 137, 141 Borsieri, Girolamo 12, 16, 19, 43, 70, 71, 90, 105, 114, 116 Borzone, Luciano 128 Boschini, Marco 16 – 17, 101

158

Index

Bosschaert, Ambrosius 124 Brambilla, Francesco 44 – 45, 63, 84 – 87 Brescia 122 Brignole (family) 131 Bril, Paul 12 – 13, 26, 102, 112, 119, 121 – 122, 132, 138 Bronzino, Agnolo 43, 140 Brueghel, Jan the Elder 6, 12 – 13, 26, 109, 119 – 122, 127, 136 – 138 Brussels 51, 119 Burocco, Bernardino 105 Busca, Antonio 141 Bussa, Eustachio 75 Buzzi, Carlo 102 Caccia, Guglielmo 108 Caliari (family) 31, 92 Callot, Jacques 68 Calvaert, Denis 37, 57 Camassei, Andrea 115 Camerata, Giuseppe 37 Campagnola, Domenico 31 Campagnola, Giulio 31 Campi family (family) 31 Campi, Antonio 31 Campi, Giulio 31 Campi, Vincenzo 31 Campori, Giuseppe 17 Caravaggio, Michelangelo Merisi da 19, 21, 22, 26 Carlo Emanuele I, Duke of Savoy 102 – 103 Carpi, Jacopo da 31 Carracci (family) 6, 10, 17, 21 – 23, 26, 35 – 39, 43, 48 – 49, 64, 90 Carracci Academy 34 – 36, 38, 62, 66, 70, 92 Carracci, Agostino 35 Carracci, Annibale 19, 21 – 22, 26, 35, 37, 54, 60 Carracci, Ludovico 35, 37 – 38, 56 – 57, 60, 66 – 67, 100 Carrega, Filippo 131 Cassini, Gian Domenico 15 Castello, Bernardo 104 Castello, Valerio 116 Castiglione, Benedetto 116 Cavadini, Girolamo 100 Cavazzoni, Francesco 33 Cavenago di Brianza 111; palaces (Palazzo Rasini 47, 110 – 112) Cerano, Il (Giovanni Battista Crespi) 12, 18 – 20, 24, 60, 65 – 66, 96 – 98, 102, 110, 117, 139 Cesano Maderno, Palazzo Arese 141 Ciniselli, Giovanni Battista 72 Ciocca, Marco Antonio 72 Clement VII, Pope (Giulio di Giuliano de Medici) 97

Clodio, Marcello 102 Cobergher, Wenzel 132 Coerezzi, Bernardo 85 Collegio Borromeo (Pavia) 89 Colonna, Pompeo 31 Colonna, Vittoria 132 Comanini, Gregorio 61 Compagnia dei Pittori (Bologna) 27, 28, 30 – 31, 33, 38, 49 Corbetta, Villa Frisiani Merighetti 108 Cordoba, Gonzalo Fernández de 137, 141 Correggio, Antonio Allegri da 6, 12, 17, 21, 23, 26, 40 – 41, 43, 62 – 63, 66, 90, 92, 115 Cort, Cornelis 102, 109 Coryat, Thomas 51 Council of Trent 6, 21 – 22, 33, 52 Cremona 31; churches (Cathedral 86 – 87, 92, 139; Santa Monica 88) Crespi, Daniele 71 D’Adda (family) 122, 127 D’Adda, Gerolamo 11, 114 D’Adda, Giuseppe 124 Dal Pozzo, Emanuele 38 Dardanone, Giovanni Andrea 114, 140 Daverio, Pietro 86 De Mari (family) 131 De Vos, Marten 102, 110 Della Croce, Marcantonio 140 Della Croce, Giovanni Andrea 81 Derossi, Onorato 17, 103 Dezallier D’Argenville, Antoine de 16 – 17 Discepoli, Giovanni Battista 72, 74 Do Vale, Amaro 73 Domaso, San Bartolomeo 96 Domenichino 137 Dongo, Filippo 131 Doria (family) 24, 128 Doria, Agostino 128 Doria, Giovanni Carlo 4, 8, 11, 24, 71, 113, 116, 127 – 129, 131, 138 – 139 Doria, Marcantonio 128 Dresden 140 Durazzo (family) 128, 131 Durazzo, Marcello 131 Durini (family) 122 Erve, Santa Maria dell’Assunta 84 Este, Francesco I d’, Duke of Modena 140 Farnese, Alessandro, Duke of Parma 109 Farnese, Odoardo 54 Farnese, Ranuccio, Duke of Parma 100 Ferrara 80 Ferrari, Gaudenzio 61, 97, 114 Figino, Giovanni Ambrogio 56, 59 – 61, 66 Florence 21, 28, 34, 42 – 43, 89, 136, 138

Index Fontana, Annibale 44 Fontana, Prospero 6, 10, 23, 26, 28, 33 – 35, 62, 66 Fosse, Charles de la 17 Fragoso, Orazio 138 Franchi, Lorenzo 72 Franckaert, Jacob I 132 Frascarolo Induno 110 Galizia, Fede 108 Gallarati, Porzia Landi 104 Galle (family) 68 Galle, Cornelis I 68 Garbieri, Lorenzo 38, 100 Garofoli, Giustina 74 Geneva 80 Genoa 6, 10 – 11, 24 – 25, 71, 73, 88, 104, 113, 128 – 129, 131, 134, 138 – 139; churches (San Domenico 129; San Francesco in Castelletto 131; Sant’Ambrogio 25; Santa Brigida 131; Santa Maria di Carignano 139; Santissima Annunziata del Vastato 129). Ghiffa, Sacro Monte 75 Ghislieri (family) 34 Ghislieri, Gaspare 34 Gigli, Giulio Cesare 16, 87 Giorgione 19 Giussano, Giovanni Pietro 98 Giustiniani (family) 128 Gnocchi, Giovanni Pietro 75 Gonzaga, Camillo II Count of Novellara 141 Gonzaga, Ercole 20 Gonzaga, Vincenzo I, Duke of Mantua 42, 97 Grimaldi (family) 128 Guarini, Giovanni Battista 53 Guazzo, Stefano 61 Guercino, Giovanni Francesco Barbieri 31 Guidetti, Gioseffo 100 Imperiale (family) 24 Imperiale, Vincenzo 131 Lainate 6, 38, 42 – 44, 63, 65 – 66, 91, 108, 111 – 112, 124; palaces (Villa Visconti Borromeo Litta 40 – 48, 50, 62, 65, 73, 111, 124, 138) Lanzi, Luigi 10, 14,16, 37, 70, 72, 137, 141 Lanzoni, Domenico 36 Latuada (family) 122 Latuada, Serviliano 17, 54, 97 Leonardo da Vinci 61, 122, 129, 141 Lesa, San Martino 78 Lezeno, Giovanni Battista 74, 76, 82, 84, 104 Lodi 72; churches (San Francesco 135)

159

Lodola, Agostino 46 – 47, 72 – 73, 112 Lomazzo, Giovanni Paolo 42 – 44, 49, 62 – 63, 91, 96 Lomellini (family) 128 Lugano 74, 82, 134; churches (San Lorenzo 74, 81; Sant’Antonio 74) Luini, Aurelio 31, 56, 60 – 61, 66, 75 Luini, Bernardino 31, 43, 61, 114 Luini, Giovanni Pietro 31 Lyon 80 Madrid 51, 135 Maffei (family) 122 Maganza, Francesco 141 Malpighi, Marcello 14 – 15 Malvasia, Carlo Cesare 6, 9, 13 – 17, 19, 21, 28 – 29, 34 – 37, 41 – 43, 66, 70 – 72, 90, 98, 103, 105, 121 – 122, 131 – 132, 136 – 137, 142 Malvezzi, Luigi 61, 73 Mancini, Giulio 70 – 71, 73 Mannini, Jacopo 106 Mantua 25, 80, 97, 109 Manzoni, Alessandro 1, 53 Mariani della Corna, Antonio 102 Marino, Camilla 97 Marino, Cesare 97 Marino, Giovanni Battista 12, 16, 19, 131 Marino, Giovanni Girolamo 104 Marone, Giovanni Battista 140 Martinengo, Ascanio 61 Mazenta (family) 122 Mazenta, Guido 4, 11, 114 Medea, Giacinto di 72 Medici (family) 43 Medici, Cosimo II de’, Grand Duke of Tuscany 138 Medici, Ferdinando I de’, Grand Duke of Tuscany, 42 Mellon, Andrew 44 – 45 Mendoza, Juan de 133 Merula, Pellegrino 88 Met de Bles, Herri 29 Michelangelo 6, 21, 26, 90 Milan 1 – 13, 15 – 20, 23 – 24, 26, 31, 33 – 35, 37 – 38, 42, 44, 48 – 57, 59, 61 – 67, 70 – 74, 80, 83 – 84, 86, 88 – 90, 92, 96 – 100, 102 – 104, 107 – 108, 111, 113 – 114, 117, 119 – 120, 122, 127 – 128, 131 – 132, 134 – 135, 137 – 138, 141; churches (Cathedral (Duomo) 5, 11, 44 – 45, 52, 56 – 57, 60, 62 – 63, 65, 68, 70, 73, 75, 84 – 86, 88, 93, 97 – 98, 101, 104, 107, 118; Certosa di Garegnano 83; San Fedele 5, 52, 56, 59 – 60, 63, 66; San Francesco Grande 54, 59 – 60, 63, 68; San Marco 60, 83, 117, 141; San Nazario Maggiore 117;

160

Index

San Sebastiano 52; San Simpliciano 134; San Vittore al Corpo 52, 60, 69, 74, 98, 141; Sant’Alessandro 140; Sant’Angelo 7, 69, 72, 74, 76, 85, 92, 103 – 106, 134, 137; Sant’Antonio Abate 38, 1067 – 108; Sant’Eustorgio 73, 95, 101, 140; Santa Maria alla Porta 99; Santa Maria del Carmine 117, 134 – 135; Santa Maria delle Grazie 97, 129, 138; Santa Maria presso San Celso 60, 86, 92, 95 – 97, 134; Santa Prassede 95, 97; Santi Paolo e Barnaba 140; Santo Stefano in Brolo 52); diocese of Milan 7, 52, 96; palaces (Palazzo Ducale 47; Palazzo Durini 141); parishes (San Bartolomeo 59; San Calimero 11, 71, 119, 142; San Giovanni in Laterano 71, 142; San Martino in Nosigia 55; San Primo in Floris 55; San Pietro in Campo Lodigiano 5, 96; San Tommaso in Terra Amara 71; Sant’Eusebio 48 – 49, 55, 71); Spanish governors of Milan 6, 11, 20, 47. 82, 99, 109, 113, 123, 131 – 133, 137; State of Milan 4 – 5, 7, 9, 23, 52 – 53, 55, 70, 74, 80 – 81, 98, 113, 141. Milton, John 13 Mochi, Francesco 87 Modena, San Bartolomeo 25 Montaigne, Michel de 51 Monti, Cesare 19 Morazzone, Il (Pier Francesco Mazzucchelli) 12, 18 – 19, 24, 65, 102, 105 – 106,139 Moretto da Brescia 22 Morigia, Paolo 16, 42 Naples 53, 128, 132 Neri, Filippo 121 Nervi, Girolamo da 129 Nieuland, Willem II van 132 Nuvolone, Panfilo 104 Omati, Lucia 104 Orlandi, Pellegrino 14, 27, 68 Orsi, Lelio 39 Pagani, Anna 71 Paggi, Giovanni Battista 73 Paleotti, Gabriele 23, 33, 61, 66 Pallanza 75, 77 – 78, 104, 134, 137; churches (San Leonardo 77; Santa Maria di Campagna, 75) Pallavicini (family) 24, 131 Palma (family) 31 Parma 10, 26 – 28, 39 – 40, 89 – 90, 109, 123, 128, 138; churches (Cathedral 28; San Giovanni Evangelista 28) Parmigianino 6, 12, 17, 23, 26, 40, 66, 92, 115 – 116, 137

Passerotti, Bartolomeo 6, 23, 26, 30 – 31, 34, 56, 60, 62 Passerotti, Passarotto 30 Passerotti, Ventura 30 Pasta, Giovanni 19 Patinir, Joachim 29 Pellanda, Giovanni Battista 84 Pellegrini, Domenico 108 Pellegrini, Ludovica 122 Pertusati (family) 122 Perugino, Pietro 5 Peterzano, Simone 61, 66 Philip II of Spain 64 Philip IV of Spain 137 Piacenza 10, 38, 87, 98, 100; churches (Cathedral 38, 75, 94, 100, 104, 118; San Sisto 100; San Tommaso 101; Santa Maria di Campagna 100) Pino, Paolo 39 Piombo, Sebastiano del 19 Piotti, Giovanni Antonio 81 Pisani Elisabetta 101 Pisani, Vincenzo 101 Pona, Francesco 19 Pons, Antonio 132 Procaccini (family) 1, 6 – 7, 9, 16, 21, 26 – 27, 30, 38, 41 – 42, 45, 48 – 50, 53 – 54, 59 – 61, 65 – 66, 70 – 73, 81, 84, 89, 97, 103 – 104, 110, 116, 142 Procaccini (workshop) 5, 70, 73 – 74, 77, 82, 103, 122, 127, 137 Procaccini, Camillo 1 – 3, 5 – 7, 9 – 13, 15 – 17, 19 – 21, 23, 26 – 27, 29 – 31, 33 – 50, 54 – 57, 59 – 63, 65 – 79, 81 – 84, 86, 89, 92 – 108,110, 112 – 113, 115 – 119, 122, 128 – 129, 131 – 132, 134 – 135, 137, 140 – 141 Procaccini, Carlo Antonio 1 – 3, 5 – 7, 9, 12 – 15, 19 – 20, 23, 26 – 27, 29, 39 – 42, 46 – 50, 63 – 64, 69, 71, 73, 77 – 79, 84, 89, 94 – 95, 97, 102, 104 – 106, 108 – 113, 119 – 124, 126 – 127, 137 – 141 Procaccini, Ercole di Ser Niccolò de 27 Procaccini, Ercole the Elder 2, 6, 9, 16, 21, 27 – 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 48 – 50, 54, 59, 61 – 64, 70 – 71, 81, 92, 106 Procaccini, Ercole the Younger 9, 13, 15, 71, 122, 127, 141 Procaccini, Giulio Cesare 1 – 7, 9, 11 – 13, 15, 17 – 20, 23 – 27, 37, 42, 45, 48 – 50, 60, 63, 65 – 66, 69 – 71, 78, 84 – 99, 102 – 103, 105 – 107, 113, 115 – 116, 122, 124, 127 – 129, 131 – 141 Rangoni, Claudio 38, 100 Raphael 6, 21, 26, 31, 90, 97 Rasini, Marcantonio 47, 111

Index Rasini, Carlo 111, 114 Reggio Emilia 6, 10, 17, 37 – 39, 48, 50, 63, 71 – 72, 92, 98 – 100; churches (San Girolamo 99; Santa Maria della Ghiara 99, San Prospero 39, 40, 43, 48, 81, 92, 99, 104, 109) Reni, Guido 54, 60, 66 Resta, Sebastiano 63, 68 Rinaldi, Andrea 86 Risorgimento 3, 53 Riva, Filippo 99 Riva, Luca 73 Riva San Vitale 57, 66, 74, 81 – 83, 94, 134; churches (Santa Croce 57, 81 – 82) Robecco 42 Rome 4, 21 – 22, 26, 28, 34 – 35, 54, 66, 72, 89, 90, 119, 123, 137 – 138; churches (Basilica di San Pietro 85; San Luigi dei Francesi 115); palaces (Palazzo del Belvedere 28; Villa Giulia 28, 43) Rondani, Francesco Maria 28 Rossi di San Secondo, Troilo 28 Rossi, Ottavio 19 Rotelli, Flaminio 39 Rottenhammer, Hans 102, 119 Rovere, Giovanni Mauro della 96, 100 Roverio, Bartolomeo 72, 82 – 83 Royal Society of London (London) 14 Rubens 6, 24 – 26, 97, 115, 129, 137, 139 Sacchi, Andrea 72 Sadeler (family) 68, 102 Sadeler, Aegidius 109,121 Sadeler, Jan I 68, 102, 110 Sadeler, Justus 102 Sadeler, Raphael 110 Sala, Francesco 74, 76, 82, 84, 104 Salimbene, Giovanni Battista 114 Sammacchini, Giulio Cesare 34 Sammacchini, Orazio 31, 34 San Giovanni in Persiceto 27 Santagostino, Agostino 16 – 17, 97, 118, 140 Sauli (family) 128 Savoldo, Giovanni Girolamo 22 Scamozzi, Vincenzo 114 Scannelli, Francesco 16 – 17, 38, 106 Scaramuccia, Luigi 16,17, 63 Schott, Franz 128 Serra (family) 131 Serva, Cecilia 27, 48 Sesto San Giovanni, Oratorio di Santa Margherita 104 Settala (family) 122, 141 Settala, Manfredo 4, 11, 13, 114 Sforza Colonna II, Muzio 132 Sibilia, Nera 27 – 28 Signoretti, Prospero 39

161

Simonetta, Ferrando 114 Simonetta, Paolo 114 Sixtus V, Pope (Felice Piergentile) 119 Soens, Jan 28, 40, 46, 109 Somma Lombardo 41, 108 – 109, 102; palaces (Castello Visconti di San Vito 41, 105, 108 – 111) Soprani, Raffaele 16 – 17, 71, 129 Soranzo, Giovanni 12, 16 Sorte, Cristoforo 39 Spinola (family) 24, 128 Spinola, Bianca 128 Spinola, Veronica 128 Squadroni, Annibale 99 Storer, Cristoforo 141 Strozzi, Bernardo 116 Suárez de Figueroa y Cordoba, Gómez 137 Taccagni, Callisto 72 Taegio, Bartolomeo 63 Tauro, Giovanni Battista 104 Taverna, Ferdinando 109 Taverna, Margherita 109 Tibaldi, Domenico 57 Tibaldi, Pellegrino 59, 62 Ticozzi, Stefano 74 Tintoretto, Jacopo 90, 98,116,129 Titian 6, 19, 26, 39, 97, 114, 129, 138 Toledo, Garcia Àlvarez de 132 Toledo Osorio y Colonna, Pedro de 8, 11, 82, 127, 131 – 137, 139 Torre, Carlo 17, 54, 63, 72, 95, 105, 138 Torre Garofoli 75 Tortona 76, 94; churches (Padri Francescani Minori 74) Toso, Scipione 4, 18, 114, 139 Trecate, San Francesco 66 Trivulzio (family) 122 Trivulzio, Olimpia 107 Turin 6, 10, 98, 102, 103, 122, 128, 136; churches (San Tommaso 103; Vergine del Suffragio 103) Vasari, Giorgio 21, 116 Vecellio (family) 31 Vélez de Guevara, Iñigo 137 Venegono, Seminario Arcivescovile 99 Venice 4, 10, 17, 30 – 31, 80, 89, 90, 92, 98, 101 – 102; churches (San Nicola dei Tolentini 101) Veronese, Paolo 5, 90, 93, 98, 129 Villa, Cesare 86 Villa Pliniana (Torno) 81 Visconti (family) 122 Visconti, Gaspare 62 Visconti, Giovanni Battista 11, 78 Visconti, Giovanni Maria 114, 139 – 140

162

Index

Visconti, Isabella 50, 86, 89, 96, 139 Visconti, Prospero 74 Visconti Borromeo, Claudia 111 Visconti Borromeo, Fabio I 42 Visconti Borromeo, Fabio II 50, 122, 127 – 128, 131, 140 – 141 Visconti Borromeo, Pirro 4, 6, 40 – 43, 46 – 50, 53 – 54, 62, 64, 66, 70, 73, 81, 84 – 85, 92, 95, 97, 103 – 104, 111 – 112, 128 Visconti di San Vito (family) 109 Visconti di San Vito, Ermes 109

Visconti di San Vito, Francesco 109 Visconti di San Vito, Guido 109 Visconti di San Vito, Pietro 109 Vismara, Gaspare 86 Vittorio Amedeo I, Duke of Savoy 103 Vivarini (family) 31 Volpino, Giovanni Battista 46 – 47, 73, 112 Voltaire, François 13 Vouet, Simon 44, 131, 138 Zuccari, Federico 23 – 24, 39, 89 Zurich 80