Citation
Il Baciccio: The Fashioning of a Deritative Artistic Identity through Portraiture

Material Information

Title:
Il Baciccio: The Fashioning of a Deritative Artistic Identity through Portraiture
Creator:
ANDERSON, LESLIE ANNE ( Author, Primary )
Copyright Date:
2008

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Art exhibitions ( jstor )
Artists ( jstor )
Baroque art ( jstor )
Death ( jstor )
Drawing ( jstor )
Fresco ( jstor )
Painting ( jstor )
Portraits ( jstor )
Self portraiture ( jstor )
Trucks ( jstor )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright Leslie Anne Anderson. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Embargo Date:
5/31/2010

Downloads

This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

IL BACICCIO: THE FASHIONING OF A DERIVATIVE ARTISTIC IDENTITY THROUGH PORTRAITURE By LESLIE ANNE ANDERSON A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006

PAGE 2

Copyright 2006 by Leslie Anne Anderson

PAGE 3

This thesis is dedicated to my parents.

PAGE 4

iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank my parents, Glenn and Vanessa Anderson, for their continued emotional and financ ial support throughout my academ ic career. From an early age, my parents helped to instill a deep appreciation for art in me through visits to museums, such as the Prado in Madrid, the Picasso Museum in Barcelona, the National Gallery in London, Kunsthalle in Hamburg, and the Statens Museum for Kunst in Copenhagen. They spared no expense to ensure that their daughter was well-traveled and highly educated. I am also greatly indebted to Dr. Robert Westin, who has guided me through the process of writing this thesis, offering many insightful ideas and comments along the way, Dr. Elizabeth Ross for serving on my thesis committee, and Dr. Eric Segal for his pearls of wisdom on graduate study in the field of art history.

PAGE 5

v TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................vii ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................x ii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 A Problematic Topic of Study......................................................................................3 The Goals, Organization, and Methodology of the Study............................................5 Figures........................................................................................................................ 10 2 BACICCIO AND BERNINI: A R ELATIONSHIP OF RECIPROCITY..................14 The Benefits of Bernini’s Favor.................................................................................15 Portrait Commissions..........................................................................................17 Frescoes: Sant’Agnese, Sant a Marta, and Il Gesù...............................................19 Altarpieces: The Altieri Chapel in San Francesco a Ripa and Sant’Andrea al Quirnale............................................................................................................25 Baciccio’s Role within Bernini’s Grand Design........................................................26 The Death of Bernini and the Decline of Baciccio.....................................................31 Analysis......................................................................................................................3 2 Figures........................................................................................................................ 34 3 THE PORTRAITS: BACICCIO’S ADOPTION OF THE “MOMENTARY MANNER”.................................................................................................................47 Bernini’s Portraiture Style..........................................................................................50 A Psychological Approach to Portraiture...................................................................52 The Dynamic Representation of the Garment............................................................65 The Veristic Portrait...................................................................................................66 Analysis......................................................................................................................6 7 Figures........................................................................................................................ 68

PAGE 6

vi 4 BACICCIOÂ’S ARTISTIC PRACTICE......................................................................97 Baciccio and the Business of Art................................................................................99 The Conspicuous Absence of a Fixed Aesthetic......................................................104 Analysis....................................................................................................................112 Figures......................................................................................................................11 4 5 CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................128 BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................130 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................135

PAGE 7

vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1.1. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Triumph in the Name of Jesus , 1676-79 ...........................10 1.2. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , c. 1673.........................11 1.3. Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Innocent X , 1650 ......................................................12 1.4. Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Innocent X ..................................................................13 1.5. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Pope Innocent X, 1671.......................................................13 2.1. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Pope Alexander VII , c. 1666-67.......................34 2.2. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Diana and Endymion , 1668...............................................35 2.3. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, A) Faith and Charity , B) Justice, Peace, and Truth , C) Temperance , D) Prudence , 1666-72 .........................................................................36 2.4.Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Fountain of the Four Rivers , 1648-51....................................37 2.5. Correggio, the “central view” of the dome, 1526-30..................................................38 2.6. Giovanni Battista Gaulli , nave vault, 1671-72 ...........................................................39 2.7. Giacomo da Vignola and Giacomo della Porta, Façade of Il Gesù, 1575-1584.........40 2.8. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Virgin and Child with Saint Anne , 1675............................41 2.9. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Blessed Ludovica Albertoni , 1672-74....................................42 2.10. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Façade of Sant’Andrea al Quirinale , 1670-71.....................43 2.11. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of head in Blessed Ludovica Albertoni , 1672-74.......44 2.12. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of Saint Anne in Virgin and Child with Saint Anne , 1675................................................................................................................44 2.13. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of hand in Blessed Ludovica Albertoni , 1672-74.......45

PAGE 8

viii 2.14. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of the Virgin in Virgin and Child with Saint Anne , 1675................................................................................................................45 2.15. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of the angel in The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa , 164552............................................................................................................................. .46 2.16. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of the apse of Il Gesù , after 1679...........................46 3.1. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of the hand in Pope Clement X , 1676..........................68 3.2. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Tomb of Pope Urban VIII , 1628-47.......................................68 3.3. Apulu from the roof of the Portonaccio Temple, Veii, ca. 510-500 BCE...................69 3.4. Sarcophagus of a Married Couple , from Cerveteri, ca. 530-520 BCE......................70 3.5. Sarcophagus with Reclining Couple from Cerveteri, ca. 520 BCE...........................70 3.6. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , c. 1673..........71 3.7. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Self-Portrait , 1665.................................................................72 3.8. Michelangelo, David , 1501-04...................................................................................73 3.9. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, David , 1623............................................................................73 3.10. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Anima Dannata , 1619..........................................................74 3.11. Caravaggio, Boy Bitten by a Lizard , c. 1593-94.......................................................74 3.12. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Cardinal Scipione Borghese , 1632......................................75 3.13. Caravaggio, Boy with a Basket of Fruit , c. 1593-94.................................................76 3.14. Caravaggio, The Musicians , c. 1595.........................................................................76 3.15. Caravaggio, The Lute Player , c. 1595-96 ................................................................76 3.16. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, sketch in black chalk of Cardinal Scipione Borghese, 1632..........................................................................................................................7 7 3.17. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Cardinal Leopoldo de’Medici , c. 1672-75.....78 3.18. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Clement IX , 1667-69......................................79 3.19. Carlo Maratti, Portrait of Clement IX , 1669.............................................................79 3.20. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Cardinal Giov anni Battista Spinola, the Elder , c. 1681-85......................................................................................................80

PAGE 9

ix 3.21. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Cardinal Jacopo Rospigliosi , 1667-68..........81 3.22. Carlo Maratti, Portrait of Cardinal Jacopo Rospigliosi , 1667-69............................81 3.23. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Cardinal Fabrizio Spada , c. 1675.................82 3.24. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pope Paul V , c. 1618...........................................................83 3.25. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pope Gregory XV , 1621.......................................................83 3.26. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Self-Portrait , 1620s..............................................................84 3.27. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Self-Portrait, c. 1667........................................................85 3.28. Albrecht Dürer, Self-Portrait , 1498..........................................................................85 3.29. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Self-Portrait, 1680 ...........................................................86 3.30. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of an Unknown Man , c. 1667-68........................87 3.31. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme , 1667-69...........87 3.32. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of a Man , late 1660s...........................................87 3.33. Raphael, Portrait of Pope Julius II , 1512.................................................................88 3.34. Raphael, Pope Leo X with Two Cardinals , c. 1518..................................................88 3.35. Titian, Pope Paul III, Cardinal Alessandr o Farnese, and Duke Ottavio Farnese , 1546..........................................................................................................................8 9 3.36. Guercino, Portrait of Pope Gregory XV , c. 1621-23................................................89 3.37. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Eleonora Boncampagni Borghese , c. 1675...90 3.38. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Verità , 1671-78....................................................................90 3.39. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Cardinal Paluzzo Paluzzi degli Altieri , c. 1666...............91 3.40. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Duke Francesco I d’Este of Modena , 1650-51....................92 3.41. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Louis XIV , 1665 ..................................................................92 3.42. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Giovanni Antonio De Rossi , c. 1666..............93 3.43. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of Cardinal Scipione Borghese , 1632........................94 3.44. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Portrait of Innocent X , c. 1647 ..........................................94 3.45. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Portrait of Pietro Bernini , c. 1640.......................................95

PAGE 10

x 3.46. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of Portrait of Clement IX , 1667-69........................96 3.47. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of Portrait of Alexander VII , c. 1666-67...............96 4.1. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Christ and the Woman of Samaria , c. 1676-77................114 4.2. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Table Clock , c. 1693........................................................115 4.3. Francesco Trevisani, Nocturnal Clock with the Flight into Egypt , c. 1680-90........116 4.4. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Portrait of Thomas Baker, 1638 .........................................117 4.5. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, A) Saint Martha in Glory , 1671-72, B) Saint Ignatius in Glory , 1672-75..................................................................................................... 118 4.6. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of Table Clock , c. 1675..........................................118 4.7. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Truth Unveiled by Time , 1645-52........................................119 4.8. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Venus and Adonis .............................................................120 4.9. Bernardo Strozzi, Madonna del Rosario tra san Domenico e san Carlo .................121 4.10. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Cardinal Giulio Spinola ..............................121 4.11. Bernardo Strozzi, Ritratto di Vescovo benedicente ................................................122 4.12. A) Anthony Van Dyck, Triple Portrait of Charles I , 1635-36, B) Thomas Adye (?), after Gian Lorenzo Bernini, 18th century ........................................................122 4.13. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Portrait of Giulia Massimo as Cleopatra ......................123 4.14. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of a Genoese Lady (T raditionally Identified as a Marchesa Balbi) , 1621-22......................................................................................123 4.15. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of Elena Grimaldi, Marchesa Cattaneo , 1623.........124 4.16. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of a Genoese Noblew oman (Formerly thought to be Paola Adorno, Marchesa Brignole-Sale) , 1623-25...............................................124 4.17. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, detail of Portrait of Clement IX , 1667-69......................125 4.18. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio , 1623......................125 4.19. Rembrandt van Rijn, Self-Portrait , 1629................................................................126 4.20. Nicholas Poussin, Self-Portrait , 1650.....................................................................126 4.21. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Pietà , 1667.....................................................................127

PAGE 11

xi 4.22. Giovanni Battista Gaulli, Adoration of the Shepherds , c. 1672..............................127

PAGE 12

xii Abstract of Thesis Presen ted to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts IL BACICCIO: THE FASHIONING OF A DERIVATIVE ARTISTIC IDENTITY THROUGH PORTRAITURE By Leslie Anne Anderson May 2006 Chair: Robert Westin Major Department: Art and Art History The memory of Giovanni Battista Gaul li (called il Bacicci o) (1639-1709) as a portraitist has largely been eclipsed by his contribution to the decorative program in the Jesuit ecclesiastical seat in Rome, Il Gesù. Although Bacicci o’s ceiling paintings for the church have been the subject of many sc holarly publications, these frescoes only represent a small portion of the artist’s extensive and diverse oeuvre . During his lifetime, Baciccio was best known as a portraitist, as he worked consistently in the genre throughout his artistic career , producing the likenesses of seven popes, numerous cardinals, and other figures of note. Celebrated for their ability to capture both the sitters’ physical and psychological characteristics, Baciccio’s portraits reveal a strong stylistic affinity with those of his mentor, Gian Lorenzo Bernini, which calls hi s perceived individuality as an artist into question. In this examination, it is held th at Baciccio’s professional relationship with Bernini allowed for many of the popular styl istic characteristics of Bernini’s work,

PAGE 13

xiii particularly those of his scul pted portraiture, to be imparted on the manner of the younger Genoese artist. It is also maintained that Baciccio’s financial success undoubtedly hinged on his close affiliation with Bernini, who orchestrated numerous commissions for his protégé. In addition to the deft translation of his mentor’s sc ulpted style into the medium of painting, Baciccio experimented with the st yles of other successful artists, such as Rubens, Van Dyck, Rembrandt, Velázquez, Maratti, and Poussin, among others. The motives for the arguably deliberate emulation of these artists’ styles are also weighed in the present study. It is ultimately dete rmined that Baciccio’s high productivity, willingness to execute works falling under the ru bric of “minor arts,” demonstrable reuse of popular compositions, businesslike approach to producing preparatory sketches, and experimentation with different aesthetics, all support the notion that Baciccio intentionally cultivated a derivative artisti c identity, which was likely fueled by an unwavering zeal for recognition a nd monetary success.

PAGE 14

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION One of the greatest portraitists of the la tter half of the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called il Baciccio) (1639-1709), is surprisingly not often remembered for his work in the genre.1 In a period when ‘the names of “Dutchmen, Flemings, and Spaniards” abound in the annals of portraiture and the great Italian portraitists worked in the me dium of sculpture’, B aciccio created a niche for himself in Rome, painting portraits of prominent figures that are marked by both incredible technical virtuosity and psychological intimacy.2 Taking this into account, it is quite puzzling that Baciccio’s name today, when heard, evokes images of paintings characterized by complex figural groupings, a vibrant palette, and intensely emotional religious or mythological s cenes, all of which epitomize the High Baroque, yet do not speak of his talent in the genr e of portraiture. This associatio n is due in large part to the popularity of Baciccio’s frescoes for the church of Il Gesù in Rome, namely Triumph of the Name of Jesus (1676-79), which is located on the ceiling of the nave. Triumph of the Name of Jesus (Fig. 1.1), according to Robert Enggass, “is generally accepted as one of the major monuments in the history of ceili ng painting,” and often overshadows the other 1 As Robert Enggass notes in Italian and Spanish Art, 1600-1750: Sources and Documents , “the Genoese diminutive of Giovanni Battista is “Baciccia,” not “Baci ccio,” but “Baciccio” seems to be what Gaulli was called in Rome.” Since this study is examining Gaulli’ s Roman works, he will be referred to as “Baciccio,” as it seems more appropriate. Robert Enggass and Jonathan Brown, Italian and Spanish Art, 1600-1750: Sources and Documents (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1992), p. 151. 2 Robert Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio: Giovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 (University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1964), p. 87. A similar statement was made by Wendy Wassyng Roworth. Wendy Wassyng Roworth, “Baro que Portraiture. Hartford, Connecticut,” The Burlington Magazine 127 (June 1985): 406.

PAGE 15

2 frescoes Baciccio painted for the church, spec ifically those located on the dome, the apse, and the pendentives.3 In fact, this work is often incl uded in art history survey textbooks, which further suggests its perceived impor tance among scholars as a high point in Baroque ceiling painting.4 Keeping in mind that this partic ular artist produced one of the most important ceiling frescoes ever painted and undeniably one of the best known works of the Italian Baroque, it is therefore difficult to believe that the remainder of his extensive oeuvre is largely forgotten. Perhaps an expl anation for the eclipse of Baciccio’s other works by his ceiling frescoes lies in the characterization of the last third of the Seicento and the dawn of the Settecento , as being the age of impre ssive ceiling frescoes in Rome.5 The validity of this statement can be se en by simply looking at other recognizable names of the Baroque, such as Pietro da Cortona and Andrea Pozzo, both of whom are best known for their ceiling frescoes.6 Aside from ceiling frescoes, Baciccio ’s extensive body of work includes altarpieces, religious and mythological compos itions on canvas, at least one looking glass and two clock-faces, and, the primary concentration in this study, portraits.7 In fact, soon 3 Robert Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303. 4 Two such textbooks are H.W. Janson’s History of Art (Fourth Edition) (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1991), p. 560, and Marilyn Stokstad, Art History (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1995), pp. 76566. 5 Francis Haskell, Patrons and Painters: A Study in the Relations between Italian Art and Society in the Age of the Baroque (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980), p. 12. 6 Although Pietro da Cortona died just prior to this classification of the period of great ceiling frescoes, his case serves as an illustration of this point. 7 M. E. Wieseman, “Giovanni Battista Gaulli (Baciccio),” Allen Memorial Art Museum (Oberlin Online) . 31 July 2005. . The looking glass and clock-face are no longer extant, yet documentation of the payments survives. Timothy Clifford, “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852.

PAGE 16

3 after arriving in Rome in 1657 at the age of eighteen from Genoa, following the deaths of his parents and siblings, presumably attributed to the plague, it is thought that Baciccio began his career as a portraitist.8 Lione Pascoli (1674-1744), an early biographer of Baciccio, suggests that his success in portraitu re was facilitated by his friendship with Gian Lorenzo Bernini (Fig. 1.2), as he stat es that Bernini’s introductions of him to various Roman patrons resulted in a number of portrait commissions.9 In the years following, Pascoli states that Baciccio was a prolific portraitist, producing likenesses of cardinals and other importan t figures in Rome, most not ably seven consecutive popes— Alexander VII, Clement IX, Clement X, Innoc ent XI, Alexander VIII, Innocent XII, and Clement XI.10 In addition to these original comm issioned works, he also produced a rendition of Velázquez’s Innocent X (Figs. 1.3-1.5).11 A Problematic Topic of Study A plethora of sources abound on Baciccio’s frescoes for Il Gesù compared to those that focus solely on his portraits, which seems, at first glance, to be a perplexing aspect of Baciccio scholarship, considering that the span of time Baciccio spent on the frescoes was much shorter than that sp ent on portraiture. Enggass’s monograph devotes chapters to the artist’s portrait s and his frescoes for Il Gesù; however, the text of the latter 8 Jean K. Westin and Robert H. Westin, Transformations of the Roman Baroque (Gainesville: University Gallery, College of Fine Arts, University of Florida, 1982), no. 11. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 1. 9 Lione Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 (Rome: E. Calzone, 1730), p. 198 and Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, pp. 147, 149. 10 Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 207. 11 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 82.

PAGE 17

4 is nearly quadruple the length of the former.12 Additionally, Baciccio, towards the end of his career, was known as one of the two great est portrait painters in Rome, the other being Carlo Maratti, which further comp licates this dispr oportionate interest.13 John T. Spike has encapsulated the two artists’ predom inance in the neglected genre in Rome in the observation that, in terms of latter seve nteenth century and early eighteenth century Roman portraitists, ‘only th eir works have been paid any scholarly attention’.14 Although the popularity of ceiling painti ng in Rome at this time ma y explain the eclipse of Baciccio’s portraiture and portra iture in general, an explanat ion for this scholarly neglect more appropriately lies in the many problems th at arise in the compilation of resources, from which to base a comprehensive study on Baciccio’s portraits. As Enggass has noted, from the assumed sizeable corpus of portraits produced by the artist, only a small number of extant works are known to scholars a nd safely attributed to Baciccio’s hand.15 Enggass firmly believed that the bulk of the works ha s survived to the present day as heirlooms passed down through the lineage of the original sitters, yet they remain dispersed in private collections because “families who have numbered among their members a cardinal are not often prone to part with th e visual reminder, and when they do other families are likely to snatch it up.”16 Further, when a work has been found, its status as 12 Ibid. 13 John T. Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy: Works from North American Collections (Sarasota: The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, 1984), p. 54. 14 Ibid., p. 58. 15 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 75. 16 Ibid., p. 75.

PAGE 18

5 the original is dubious, at best.17 Consequently, any attempt to provide a scholarly examination of Baciccio’s portraits, with the exceptions of Enggass’s monograph and exhibition catalogues, such as the catalogue edited by Maurizio Fagiolo dell’Arco, Dieter Graf, and Francesco Petrucci for the Palazzo Chigi, has proven too daunting a task for those interested in these works.18 The effort made by the former publication to clarify this nebulous area of Baciccio’s oeuvre was treated somewhat criti cally by other scholars in the field. In a review of Enggass’s The Painting of Baciccio published in The Burlington Magazine in October 1965, Ellis Waterhouse found that Baciccio’s portraits, in particular, were presented almost one-dim ensionally in Enggass’s monograph, as “this chapter is filled out with biogr aphies of the sitters, whereas what is really needed is to define the lines of connoisseurship which distinguishes the port raits of Baciccio.”19 While Waterhouse presented a valid request to academ ics in the field, it is unlikely that it will be adequately answered until more portraits by Baciccio surface. The Goals, Organization, and Methodology of the Study Upon review of Baciccio’s known portr aits, the question of what can be determined from this paucity of visual source s about Baciccio’s style, as a portraitist and perhaps, in a more general sense, as an ar tist working in many di fferent genres, arises. The answer to this question, I believe, lies pr imarily in the relations hip between Baciccio and other artists, namely hi s mentor, Gian Lorenzo Bernin i. It seems as though, if one 17 Ibid., p. 75. 18 The exhibition catalogue referred to is Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 , edited by Maurizio Fagiolo dell’Arco, Dieter Graf, Francesco Pe trucci, for the Palazzo Chigi, Ariccia, December 11, 1999-March 12, 2000. 19 Ellis K. Waterhouse, “The Painting of Baciccio : Giovanni Battista Gau lli, 1639-1709 (review),” The Burlington Magazine 107 (October 1965): 530.

PAGE 19

6 looks at a juxtaposition of th e portraits produced by the two artists, that Baciccio’s works are oil derivations of Bernini’ s portraiture style in marble.20 An additional question is then posed concerning the orig inality, or lack there of, in the ‘bread and butter’ of Baciccio’s artistic practice and wh at it reveals about the painter’s artistic identity. In an attempt to understand precisely what imp act this relationship with Bernini had on Baciccio’s success in Rome, his style, and hi s reputation as a portr aitist, this study has three objectives. Following the introduction, the first section expl ores the formative relationship between Gian Lorenzo Bernini and Baciccio and establishes a trajectory for Baciccio’s career in Rome that takes into a ccount the instrumental role Bernini had on the rise of Baciccio’s popularity and its descent, following Bern ini’s death. This chapter will establish the circumstances and parameters of the artists’ professional relationship that account for Bernini’s stylistic hegemony over B aciccio’s portraits. Secondly, a significant portion of Baciccio’s oeuvre , his portraits, will be examined in light of their stylistic affinities with Bernini’s sculpted portraits. The final aims of this thesis are to conclusively determine what this relationshi p reveals about Baciccio, as an artist, to acknowledge the stylistic influence on Baciccio by other artists, as well, and to recognize particularly revelatory characteristics of Baciccio’s artistic pr actice. Including the introduction, the study consists of four chapters laid out in the aforementioned order, followed by a brief conclusion, which will recapitu late the main points of the argument. 20 Adolfo Venturi, “Di Alcune Opere de’Arte della Collezione Messinger,” Le Arte XVI (1913):147. Enggass notes that Baciccio used the “momentary manner” of depiction, popularized by Bernini. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 78.

PAGE 20

7 It is necessary that Baciccio’s portraits be examined in the context of his stylistic dependency on the Eternal City’s favored son, Be rnini, as opposed to Baciccio’s work in other genres, not only because an inadequate amount of scholarly attention has been focused on this significan t portion of the artist’s oeuvre , but also to demonstrate why Baciccio, one of the two most successful por trait painters of th e era in Rome, was working in the same manner. Also, Baciccio’s portraits are pe rhaps the most suitable of his works to be studied against those of hi s mentor because he produced these paintings in copious amounts throughout his career in Rome. Toward the end of the Seicento , papal patronage underwent a marked downturn a nd Innocent XII’s condemnation of nepotism eliminated another major source of commissions.21 As a result, Baciccio was forced to continue the production of sma ll commissions, such as portraits, to make a living, just as he had when he arrived in Rome.22 Thus, parallels may be observed between the portraiture styles of Baciccio and Bernini through an examination of works produced during different periods of Baciccio’s life. Additionall y, of all the different genres Baciccio worked in, his portrai ts most closely reflect Bernini’s artistic ideals, as Baciccio’s mythological and re ligious compositions, at times, seem to employ the principles espoused by the countercurrent to Bernini’s High Baroque, that of classicism. Any scholar embarking on a study of Bacicci o’s paintings is greatly indebted to Robert Enggass, who compiled the definitive catalogue raisonné of his works and published numerous articles and a monogra ph on the artist. Although Enggass wrote extensively on the artist, he did not sufficiently explore the stylistic relationship between 21 Robert Enggass, “Addenda to Baciccio: II,” The Burlington Magazine 106 (November 1964): 510. 22 Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy , Sarasota, 1984, p. 54.

PAGE 21

8 Bernini and Baciccio. Although Baciccio’s conne ction to Bernini is peppered throughout the text of the monograph a nd dealt with more specifica lly in his article entitled, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Ges ù,” these references are primarily concerned with the collaborative effort for the decora tion of Baciccio’s crowni ng achievement at Il Gesù.23 It is the primary interest of this study to elevate the status of Baciccio’s portraiture to that of his fr escoes for Il Gesù and to unde rstand the purpose of Baciccio’s deliberate application of Bernini’s style a nd, perhaps, the styles of other prominent artists, as well, rather than deve loping a wholly independent vision. Though Baciccio can be viewed as a deft translator of Bernini’s ideals through painted portraiture and, in many respects, a fo llower, he is worthy of scholarly interest. Baciccio’s works’ artistic sign ificance has been recognized by modern scholars, perhaps for the first time, at an exhibition organized at Oberlin College in 1967.24 Enggass characterized this exhibition as, “a milestone : Caravaggio excepted, this [was] the first major exhibition of the works of a Seicento painter ever held outside of Italy.”25 The Oberlin show aside, Baciccio’s style in portr aiture should not be seen as completely copied, but as based on that of Bernini, sp ecifically his prefer ence for simulating the illusion of life through artistic media, and then imbued with personal techniques, such as a superb handling of color, that combine to create stirringly masterful likenesses of his sitters. Baciccio’s painted portraits occupy a unique place in the seventeenth and early 23 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957). 24 Robert Enggass, “Baciccio at Oberlin: Some Reflections,” The Burlington Magazine 109 (March 1967): 184. 25 Ibid., p. 184.

PAGE 22

9 eighteenth century Italian sect of this genr e and are consequently, of great scholarly interest.

PAGE 23

10 Figures Figure 1.1. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Triumph in the Name of Jesus , 1676-79, Church of Il Gesù, Rome (Stokstad, Art History , p.766).

PAGE 24

11 Figure 1.2. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , c. 1673, Galleria Nazionale dÂ’Arte Antica, Rome (Fagiolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 106).

PAGE 25

12 Figure 1.3. Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Innocent X , 1650, Galleria Doria-Pamphili, Rome (José López-Rey, Velázquez: Catalogue Raisonné , no. 114).

PAGE 26

13 Figure 1.4. Diego Velázquez, Portrait of Innocent X , Apsley House, Wellington Museum, London (José López-Rey, Velázquez: Catalogue Raisonné , no. 115). Figure 1.5. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Pope Innocent X, 1671, Incisa della Rocchetta Collection, Rome (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 110).

PAGE 27

14 CHAPTER 2 BACICCIO AND BERNINI: A R ELATIONSHIP OF RECIPROCITY From a historiographic standpoint, Baciccio ’s career as a successful artist was practically nonexistent prior to his arrival in Rome in 1657 and since very little time transpired between this event and his introdu ction to Gian Lorenzo Bernini, one might conclude that Baciccio’s rec ognition as an artist was nearly concurrent with his entrance into the circle of Bernini.1 This notion is supported by th e absence of any paintings produced during his early year s in Genoa in his known oeuvre .2 Further, it is generally agreed among scholars in the field that Bern ini played an instrumental role in the advancement of Baciccio’s name during the firs t two decades of the artist’s residence in Rome. He may be credited with ‘granting Baciccio entrée into an elite group of artistic patrons’, imparting particularly popular elemen ts of his style onto Ba ciccio, and, in turn, utilizing Baciccio’s exquisite handling of color in his elaborate decorative schemas to the advantage of both artists.3 If the majority of Baciccio’s success as an artist can be attributed to Bernini’s assistance, then it is of no surprise that Bernini’s death was a devastating blow to Baciccio’ s career. After the passing of Be rnini, Baciccio’s overall style changed for the worse, in the opini on of many, including Lione Pascoli and, more 1 Enggass states “… [he] came to Rome when he wa s only eighteen years old, without money and as yet without reputation.” Enggass, “Bernini, Ga ulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303. 2 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 1. Particularly cogent explanations for the dearth of information on works produced by Baciccio in Genoa may be that his style, at that point, was unrecognizable next to works dating from his time spent in Rome or that he simply did not produce paintings, while in his native setting. 3 Ibid., p. 2.

PAGE 28

15 recently, Ellis K. Waterhouse.4 A trajectory may be discerned that marks the beginning of Baciccio’s career in Rome, the rise of his works to popular acclaim, and the eventual descent of his paintings from the favor of late seventeenth/early eighteenth century critics. Interestingly, this series of events parallels his association with Gian Lorenzo Bernini. The purpose of this section is to i ndicate the connections be tween the two artists, to precisely determine what was gained by both figures throug h their professional relationship, and to pinpoint wh at this association reveals about the artistic identity of Baciccio. The Benefits of Bernini’s Favor Eighteenth century biographe rs have provided modern scholars with a scant amount of information regarding Baciccio’s youth, which has been used to construct a general outline of events that offers little, if any, reliable details regarding his artistic training in the port city on the Ligurian Coast. One such biographer, Lione Pascoli, stated that Baciccio’s Genoese roots influenced hi s palette, which came to be his mark of recognition in Rome.5 Speaking in more specific terms, Carlo Giuseppe Ratti and Raffaello Soprani held that B aciccio had emulated the paintin gs of a particular Genoese artist during his formative years: Quindi le fue occupazioni in quella giovanile età furono di copiare i fuperbi dipinti di Perino del Vaga entro il palazzo del Principe Doria; nel che, concorrendo coll’industria l’ingegno, a maraviglia riusciva.6 4 Ellis K. Waterhouse, Italian Baroque Art (London: Phaidon Press, 1962), p. 70. Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 195. Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 150. 5 Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 147. 6 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 1. Carlo Giuseppe Ratti and Raffaello Soprani, Della Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Genovesi , Vol. 1 (Genova: Nella Stamperia Casamara, 1769), p. 75. In addition to Perino del Vaga, Luciano Borzone has also been offe red as a stylistic source and a similarity between Valerio Castello’s use of co lor and that of Baciccio has been noted; however,

PAGE 29

16 It may be inferred from the few details of B aciccio’s training that he arrived in Rome, not deeply entrenched in any one manner of pain ting, but, presumably, wa s open to stylistic inspiration.7 Baciccio was prompted to relocate to Rome during the late 1650s, after he was left an orphan with no surviving relati ves, and, once there, he made a connection with an art dealer that would serendipitous ly lead him to his future mentor, Bernini.8 The art dealer, Pellegrino Peri , was also from Genoa.9 According to Francis Haskell, this was a field that attracted Genoese natives, who often held a predilection for work of their brethren.10 Such was the case for Peri, who empl oyed Baciccio and soon facilitated the young painter’s acquaintance with the noted artist.11 Perhaps recognizing the potential of the novice painter, Bernini took Baciccio unde r his tutelage. Simply as a result of Baciccio’s affiliation with the established artist, the gates to artistic success in Rome opened. concrete evidence of these associations remains to be proven. Hugh Macandrew, “Baciccio’s Early Drawings: A Group from the Artis t’s First Decade in Rome,” Master Drawings X (1972): 114. Bertina Suida-Manning, “A Panorama of Italian Painting,” Apollo 111 (March 1980): 192. 7 Hugh Macandrew’s “Baciccio’s Early Drawings: A Group from the Artist’s First Decade in Rome” argued that Baciccio’s graphic styl e in Rome in 1657 exhibited a strong Genoese stylistic influence, particularly in the ‘lyrical mood’ and ‘flowing lines ’ of the works; however, Baciccio’s quick adoption of Bernini’s manner, which Macandrew acknowledged occu rred from 1598 to 1680, indicates the artist’s willingness to experiment with diffe rent styles. Macandrew, “Baciccio’ s Early Drawings: A Group from the Artist’s First Decade in Rome,” Master Drawings X (1972): 112, 114-15, 118-19. 8 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp.1-2. 9 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, pp. 121-22. Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 198. 10 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, pp. 121-22. 11 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 2.

PAGE 30

17 Portrait Commissions According to Pascoli, the first of many commissions orchestrated by Bernini for Baciccio came in the form of requests for painted portraits.12 Pascoli states that after producing a number of these works and, in the process, establishing a name for himself in the genre, Baciccio piqued the interest of Pope Alexander VII, who requested that Bernini bring the up-and-coming painter to meet him.13 Upon introduction, a portrait commission followed in 1666 that marked the first of seven papal portraits Baciccio would produce during his career (Fig. 2.1).14 Pascoli’s account portr ays Alexander VII as proactive in the hiring of Baciccio, yet a more convincing sequence of events would emphasize Bernini’s involvement in the selec tion of Baciccio for th e portrait commission. Although Alexander VII was known as an art en thusiast, his interests were focused on architecture and sculpture, which, understand ably, led him to retain Bernini for his artistic services; however, this does not offe r an explanation for his proposed interest in Baciccio.15 In The Rome of Alexander VII, 1655-1667 , Richard Krautheimer states “for painting [Alexander VII] apparently had little feeling” and consequently, “did not employ any of the leading painters of his day.”16 These statements suggest that perhap s Baciccio 12 Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 149. Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 198. 13 Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 199. 14 It should be noted that a more detailed discussion of Baciccio’s portraits will take place in the following chapter. The commission for the papal portrait of Alexa nder VII is included, at this point, because it is relevant to the principle argument of the chapter to illustrate Bernini’s involvement in the portrait commissions offered to Baciccio. Alexander VII’s portrait is presented as the precedent for future papal portraits. 15 Richard Krautheimer, The Rome of Alexander VII, 1655-1667 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985), p. 14. 16 Ibid.

PAGE 31

18 was chosen for the commission upon Bernini’ s recommendation, rather than Alexander VII actively seeking out the skil ls of the painter, as Pasco li had proposed. Also, the latter quote reveals Baciccio’s status as perhaps worthy of a papal commission, but not yet considered to be the leader in his medium. Because Alexander VII wa s at the end of his pontificate, it is plausible that he was concer ned with leaving visual reminders of his rule and simply entrusted Bernini to find a compet ent portraitist, working in the same manner, to fulfill this request.17 Speculations regarding the accuracy of Pascoli’s account aside, Bernini, the favored artist of Alexander VII, certainly assisted B aciccio in some capacity, namely in securing the first commission for a papal portrait that he would receive. In addition to catapulting Baciccio to the highest and most coveted stratum of artistic patronage, the commission to paint Alexander VII, originally Fabio Chigi, allowed the artist to establish a rapport with the pope ’s relatives, ‘the famed Chigi family, who continued to request Baciccio’s serv ices even after the pontiff had died’.18 From 1666 to 1667, Baciccio produced a portrait of Alexander VII’s brother, Don Mario Chigi.19 Unfortunately, this work, along with the original Alexander VII (1666), has since been misplaced following the 1918 sale of the Messinger Collection in Munich, according to Enggass.20 The family, clearly satisfied w ith the quality of Baciccio’s portraits, requested a renditi on of Velázquez’ popular Innocent X (Figs. 1.3-1.5) in 1671, 17 Richard P. McBrien, Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to John Paul II (San Francisco: Harper Collins Publishers, Inc., 1997), p. 306. 18 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 7. 19 Ibid., p. 131. 20 Ibid., p. 132.

PAGE 32

19 as was mentioned in the previous chapter.21 Perhaps aware of Baci ccio’s potential beyond the genre of portraiture, they also commissioned a mythological composition, Diana and Endymion (Fig. 2.2), in 1668.22 The initial papal portra it commission, facilitated by Bernini, triggered subsequent opportunities that allowed Baci ccio to both demonstrate his artistic worth to elite Roman patrons and broa den his repertoire to include other genres. Frescoes: Sant’Agnese, Santa Marta, and Il Gesù Bernini’s assistance with Baciccio’s car eer was not solely concentrated on exploiting his protégé’s talent for portraiture, but also nurturing his artistic capabilities in other genres and media, namely fresco. Bern ini’s involvement with Baciccio’s second major commission, the pendentives for Sant’A gnese (Fig. 2.3), ex tended beyond a mere recommendation of the artist’s name to also include the selection of the visual sources from which Baciccio would draw his inspirat ion from in the creation of the paintings.23 The Pamphili, who commissioned the decorativ e frescoes for their family church, had previously employed Bernini’s services. Bern ini had famously ingratiated himself with the powerful family with his design for the Fountain of the Four Rivers (Fig. 2.4), which was commissioned by Innocent X (who had al so financed the reconstruction of Sant’Agnese) as part of a larger e ffort to revitalize the Piazza Navona.24 When a painter was to be chosen for the ceiling decorations of the church, the Pamphili naturally 21 Ibid., pp. 82, 155. 22 Ibid., p. 7. 23 Baciccio’s first major commission was for the San Rocco Altarpiece (1663-66). 24 Charles Avery, Bernini: Genius of the Baroque (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1997), pp. 193-94, 196. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 9.

PAGE 33

20 requested Bernini’s advice on the selection of a suitable artist.25 The family’s offer to Baciccio demonstrates a tremendous achievement on Bernini’s part, as Baciccio had not worked in fresco prior to this endeavor , nor had he produced a composition on such a grand scale.26 Thus, the family clearly relied on Bernini’s word in their choice and, perhaps, implicit in the agreement, as in the latter commission for the Gesù, was close Bernini’s supervision of Baciccio’s decorative program. In the preparation for the frescoes, Bernini’ s contribution to the project may also be noted. Enggass cites avvisi that document Baciccio’s trip to Parma, at Bernini’s urging, to study the works of Correggio (Fig. 2.5).27 Bernini not only supplied Baciccio with sources of inspiration for the compositions, but also provided him with a letter of introduction to the Duke of Modena.28 This connection would have allowed Baciccio to expand the size of his wealthy clientele, as Bernini had proposed that while at court, Baciccio render his services in portraiture and broaden the geographic range of his name’s recognition.29 Additionally, the Duke, a well-know n patron of the arts, possessed the power to grant Baciccio access to his si zeable collection of paintings, which would 25 In Discovering the Italian Baroque: The Denis Mahon Collection , Gabrielle Finaldi and Michael Kitson suggest that Bernini’s role in the ultimate selec tion of Baciccio may have been more vociferous than offering Baciccio’s name, as a suggestion. They state “thanks to Bernini’s interv ention in 1666, he received the commission to paint the pendentiv es in the church of Sant’Agnese in Piazza Navona.” Gabrielle Finaldi and Michael Kitson, Discovering the Italian Baroqu e: The Denis Mahon Collection (London: National Gallery Publications, Ltd., 1997), p. 70. 26 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 9. 27 Ibid., Waterhouse, Italian Baroque Painting , London, 1962, p. 69. Westin and Westin, Transformations of the Roman Baroque , Gainesville, 1982, p. 6. Torgil Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini, Vol. II: From the Election of Innocent X to the Death of Innocent XI (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiskell, International, 1986), p. 317. Rudolf Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600-1750 (Volume II: The High Baroque, 1625-1675) (Sixth Edition) (New Haven: Yale Univer sity Press, 1999), p. 142. All of the aforementioned publications cite Baciccio’s trip to Parma. 28 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 9. 29 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303.

PAGE 34

21 have increased the young painter’s artistic vocabulary tremendously.30 Bernini’s watchful eye in the artistic education of his protégé is particularly evident in Baciccio’s visit to Parma, which was one of the two times the ar tist ventured outsid e of Rome since his move from Genoa.31 Baciccio’s frescoes for Sant’Agnese, Temperance , Prudence , Faith and Charity , and Justice, Peace, and Truth (1666-72), mark the first in a number of ceiling paintings that Baciccio had the opportunity to produce.32 Keeping in mind that ceiling frescoes represent the portion of Baciccio’s oeuvre that propelled his name in Rome to the forefront of the artistic community, it can be said that the receipt of the Sant’Agnese commission was a defining moment in the ar tist’s career. According to Pascoli, the paintings on the pendentives of Sant’Agne se were so impressive that Baciccio’s posthumous reputation would have thrived, if th ey had been produced at the close of his career, as a crowning achievemen t, rather than as a program so magnificent that he could not replicate it in the many years that followed.33 Although the opinion of the biographer, Pascoli’s statements indicate the perceived importance of the works, which would not have been completed without Bernini’s involvement. Following the success of his work at Sant ’Agnese, Baciccio received a commission from both the abbess of the convent of Santa Marta Collegio Romano, Sister Maria Eleonora Boncompagni and Sist er Maria Scolistica Colleoni, for the decoration of the 30 Ibid. 31 Westin and Westin, Transformations of the Roman Baroque , Gainesville, 1982, p. 6. 32 Ibid., p. 140. 33 Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 150. Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 195.

PAGE 35

22 nave vault (Fig. 2.6) of the church in exchange for 400 scudi .34 The commission was drawn up in October 1671 and was fi nished less than a year later.35 The extent of Bernini’s assistance with the Santa Marta co mmission, if existent, is unknown; however, the patrons of the project came from noble families and had probably been introduced to Baciccio’s style through other works, in which Bernini likely had a hand.36 Baciccio’s frescoes at Sant a Marta caught the attention of the Father General of the Jesuit order, Padre Gian Paolo Oliva, who subsequently placed Baciccio on the list of candidates for the decoration of the Jesuit ecclesiastical seat , Il Gesù (Fig. 2.7), built by Giacomo da Vignola and Giacomo della Porta.37 Santa Marta Collegio Romano had held an affiliation with the Jesuit order since its origins a century prior, contemporarily taking the form of administering th e nuns’ Spiritual Exercises, wh ich may account for Oliva’s immediate familiarity with the frescoes.38 Although Oliva’s additi on of Baciccio to his list of potential artists for the decoration of Il Gesù was based on the merit of the artist, his ultimate selection was attributed to hi s friendship with Bernini, who was a daily 34 While Enggass’s monograph lists Eleonora Boncam pagni as the sole benefactress of the decorative project, Marilyn Dunn has uncovered documents that suggest, contrary to popular belief, that Sister Maria Scolistica Colleoni bore the bulk of the expenses for the project. Marilyn Dunn, “Nuns as Art Patrons: The Decoration of S. Marta al Collegio Romano,” The Art Bulletin 70 (September 1988): 452, 455. 35 Ibid., pp. 455-57. Dunn offers more specific dates for the completion of the frescoes than Enggass’s monograph. Supported by her discovery of the contr act for the project dated October 1671, she places the project as produced after this date, but prio r to the August 1672 Gesù contract. 36 Ibid., p. 452. Dunn states that ‘Sister Mari a Eleonora Boncompagni was a member of the noted Bolognese line of the Boncompagni family that had proudly claimed Pope Gregory XIII as a member and that Sister Maria Scolastica Colleoni al so came from a recognized family’. 37 Ibid., p. 451. Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 149. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp. 18-19. 38 Dunn, “Nuns as Art Patrons,” The Art Bulletin 70 (September 1988): 452-53.

PAGE 36

23 congregant of the church.39 Pascoli noted that Oliva decisively selected Baciccio over fellow successful artists, Carlo Maratti, Ci ro Ferri, and Giacinto Brandi, only after Bernini had endorsed his protégé.40 Enggass expanded this oft-cited anecdote to include not only Bernini’s recommendation of Bacicci o, but also his personal ‘guarantee’ to Oliva that the works would be co mpleted up to his expectations.41 If Bernini had not intervened on Baciccio’s behalf, urging th e selection of the ar tist and ensuring the project’s ultimate success, the commission likely would have been given to Maratti, who was more popular at the time, or Ferri, who wa s the protégé of the fa med fresco painter, Pietro da Cortona.42 Out of the entire corpus of Baciccio’s works, Bernini was most closely involved in the laborious and lengthy creation of the decorative pr ogram for Il Gesù (1672-85), which, coincidentally, is the artistic endeavor that Baciccio is frequently remembered for undertaking. In Enggass’s “Bernini, Gaulli, a nd the Frescoes of the Gesù,” Bernini is credited with both ‘volunteering the servic es of Antonio Raggi to the project and enlarging the scale of the initial plans’.43 With the exception of actually painting the 39 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303. In her survey of art history, Marilyn Stokstad men tions Bernini’s daily attendance at the Gesù, while Magnuson recounts Domenico Bernini’s statement that his father ‘went to the Friday service, la divozione della buona morte , for forty years’. Stokstad, Art History , New York, 1995, p. 765. Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , Stockholm, 1986, p. 340. 40 Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 149. Pascoli, Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 , Rome, 1730, p. 200. 41 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 31. 42 Ibid. Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , Stockholm, 1986, p. 323. 43 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303-4. Jennifer Tonkovich found that Bernini even provided preparatory drawings for the decoration of the dome, Baciccio’s Vision of Heaven . Jennifer Tonkovich, “Two Studies for the Gesù and a “Quarantore” Design by Bernini,” The Burlington Magazine 140 (January 1998): 34.

PAGE 37

24 frescoes, Bernini was undoubtedly active in ev ery major facet of th e project, from the selection of Baciccio to the overall design of the compositions, until he deceased in 1680.44 Further, Oliva chose the subjects of the frescoes.45 Baciccio’s role in the project was, thus one concerned primarily with the paintings’ execution, rather than their planning and design. Bernini may also be credite d with the completion of the project, as the enlargement of the designs meant that more work would be necessary on Baciccio’s part.46 Consequently, Baciccio demanded ‘additiona l compensation that the Jesuit Order, after the death of Oliva, was reluctant to prov ide, so Bernini made a plea to the artist on the project’s behalf’.47 Not only are the frescoes for Il Gesù cons idered to be a highlight of the Italian Baroque today, but they were also praised by spectators, following their unveiling, during Baciccio’s time, as well.48 Wealthy patrons who had not been familiar with or convinced of Baciccio’s talent in the medium of painting became converts of his style. Notably, Queen Christina of Sweden was one such pa tron who quickly became enamored with the painter’s technique.49 The popularity of Baciccio’s fresco es for Il Gesù persisted even after their novelty had expire d, as indicated in a 1688 diary excerpt authored by Swedish 44 Ibid., p. 303. Ratti and Soprani, Della Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Genovesi , Vol. 1 , Genova, 1769, p. 78. 45 Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , Stockholm, 1986, p. 322. 46 Ibid. 47 Ibid. Ratti and Soprani, Della Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Genovesi , Vol. 1 , Genova, 1769, p. 79. 48 Baciccio’s favorable reception of the frescoes for Il Gesù was not unanimous. Avissi state that, ‘within certain circles, the frescoes for the church were met with hostility’; however, the recognition Baciccio received from the completion of the project greatly outwe ighs any criticism of the fr escoes and is of great concern in the present study. Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 160. 49 Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , Stockholm, 1986, p. 322.

PAGE 38

25 native Nicodemus Tessin.50 Bernini’s overall contributi on to Il Gesù ensured that Baciccio finished the project, continued to receive patronag e for his works, and allowed him a place within the modern art historical survey texts. Altarpieces: The Altieri Chapel in San Francesco a Ripa and Sant’Andrea al Quirnale The early years of the decorative project at the Gesù witnessed the contemporaneous producti on of two altarpieces, The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne (1675) (Fig. 2.8) and The Death of Saint Francis Xavier (1676), both of which were closely linked to projects undertaken by Bernin i. The former work was intended to serve as the backdrop of Bernini’s Blessed Ludovica Albertoni (1672-74) (Fig. 2.9) in the Altieri Chapel in San Francesco a Ripa.51 Because Baciccio’s work, an accompanying piece of the recessed altar’s decora tive schema, is dated soon after Blessed Ludovica Albertoni , it is likely that Bernini’s opinion on an appropriate artist to create the altarpiece had significant wort h, as it had in many prio r circumstances. Further, ‘Baciccio’s composition is contained within a frame of Bernini’s design’, which clearly indicates the collaborative nature of their professional relationship.52 Although Baciccio had previously provided decorations for the A ltieri Chapel in Santa Maria sopra Minerva and thus, held ties to the family, Bernini had agreed to work pro bono in order to 50 Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy , Sarasota, 1984, p. 54. 51 Perlove states that the terminus post quem for The Blessed Ludovica Albertoni is 1672, as the subject’s remains were removed from the chapel and an early st udy for the work was produced in this year, and the terminus ante quem is 1674 because a letter from this y ear stated that the work had been completed. Shelley Karen Perlove, Bernini and the Idealization of Death: The Blessed Ludovica Albertoni and the Altieri Chapel (University Park: Pennsylvania State University, 1990), p. 13. 52 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 52.

PAGE 39

26 ingratiate himself with Clement X and Cardinal Paluzzi Altieri.53 Bernini’s enormous contribution to the project probably clinched the decision to choose Baciccio for the altarpiece, though it is indisputab le that Baciccio’s fame had increased as a result of the commission for Il Gesù. Like Baciccio’s altarpiece for the Altieri chapel, The Death of Saint Francis Xavier was also in close proximity to a work by his mentor. The altarpiece, located in Sant’Andrea al Quirnale (Fig. 2.10), was executed for a church that Bernini had designed.54 These altarpieces, like the frescoes and portraits previously discussed, were highly received, which perhaps was the re sult of both Baciccio’s artistic talent and the pairing of his paintings with the works of Bernini.55 Baciccio’s Role within Bernini’s Grand Design During the period of their professional rela tionship, an associati on lasting nearly a quarter of a century, Baciccio had fully di gested Bernini’s artistic manner and was capable of conveying the principle points that characterized this popular style into painted form on canvas or through fresco.56 These ‘painted translations of Bernini’s ideas’ were not always singularly displaye d, but, as was mentioned earlier, they sometimes were shown adjacent to or, in the case of the al tarpiece for Sant’Andrea al Quirnale, even housed in structures designed by Bernini.57 Appropriately, the coupling of works produced by a mentor and his protégé resulted in the emergence of a cohesive aesthetic 53 Ibid., p. 21. Avery, Bernini , Boston, 1997, p. 151. 54 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 52. 55 Ibid., pp. 21, 25. Engga ss states that Baciccio’s The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne “is one of his finest altarpieces” and that The Death of Saint Francis Xavier is “one of his most successful altarpieces.” 56 Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy, Sarasota, 1984, p. 54. 57 Ibid. Spike states that w ith Baciccio, “Bernini had found a gifted artist who could translate his ideas into paintings.

PAGE 40

27 that reveals Bernini’s concerted effort to ensu re that he had access to a painter working in the same manner, so that his elaborate deco rative programs consisting of different media would be congruent. Also, it presents Bacicci o’s deliberate emulation of Bernini’s style in the interest of his own success. From the onset of their pairing, Bernini clearly had taken an interest in the cultivation of Baciccio’s styl e. In the discussion of B aciccio’s preparation for the pendentives of Sant’Agnese , Bernini’s advice to Baci ccio to study the works of Correggio was mentioned; however, the elde r artist’s involvement surely extended beyond a mere inspirational suggestion. Prep aratory sketches for the pendentives, particularly those of Justice, Peace, and Truth , reveal a stylistic dependency on Bernini’s own work, Verità , both in the figural types and re ndering of drapery, according to Maria Vittoria Brugnoli.58 Additionally, many scholars have acknowledged Pascoli’s recount of a proposed admission by Baciccio, wh ich stated that his style of portraiture was a product of Bernini’s teachings.59 In the same vein, Ratti claimed that Baciccio received a tutorial on compositional arrangement during his work at the Gesù; however, it should be noted that Enggass questioned the validity of the statement.60 Regardless of the authenticity of the last account, it has been determined that Bernini continually assisted his protégé through the orchestration of commissions. Bern ini’s close affiliation with Baciccio over the course of numerous artist ic projects would naturally s upport the notion that, in the 58 Maria Vittoria Brugnoli, “Inediti del Gaulli,” Paragone vii (1956): 22. 59 Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 150. 60 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303. Ratti and Soprani, Della Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Genovesi , Vol. 1 , Genova, 1769, p. 76.

PAGE 41

28 interest of maintaining his ow n reputation, strong ties to infl uential patrons, and financial success, he was actively involved in the training of the artist during his formative years. Bernini did not oversee B aciccio’s artistic development solely to guarantee the association of his name with ar tists of the highest caliber, but also to add a painter to his retinue of artists that executed his complex designs. It has been argued that Baciccio’s altarpiece for the Altieri Chapel was one piece of a larger decorative scheme headed by Bernini. In Shelley Karen Perlove’s Bernini and the Idealization of Death: The Blessed Ludovica Albertoni and the Altieri Chapel , the author convincingly finds that “the close connection between the painting and its chapel setting suggests, along with the drawing in Montpellier, that Baciccio, under Bernini’ s guidance, conceived of the altarpiece as part of an ensemble.”61 To support this proposed connec tion, Perlove points to numerous similarities between the two works. Among t hose listed, the physical appearance in the rendering of Saint Anne in th e altarpiece and the Ludovica in Bernini’s sculpture (Figs. 2.11-2.12) are believed to be nearly identical.62 Prior to Perlove’s study, Christopher M. S. Johns specifically cited the “the rath er long Roman nose, thickly-lidded eyes and parted lips” as features f ound on Bernini’s sculpture and re iterated in the rendering of Baciccio’s St. Anne.63 Additionally, ‘both the right hand of Ludovica and the left hand of the Virgin are depicted as clutching the ches t of the respective subject or Jesus, in the case of Baciccio’s altarpiece (F igs. 2.13-2.14), the rendering of folds in the two are nearly identical, the putti in the painting accompany the stucco winged heads of putti flanking 61 Perlove, Bernini and the Idealization of Death , University Park, 1990, p. 19. 62 Ibid. 63 Christopher M. S. Johns, “Some Observations on Collaborations and Patronage in the Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa: Bernini and Gaulli,” Storia dell’Arte 50 (January-April 1984): 45.

PAGE 42

29 the framing of the altarpiece, and, most convi ncingly, the sources of light in the painting correspond with those of the architectural recess’.64 Bernini had designed the extension of the chapel that housed both the altarp iece and the sculpture of Ludovica, which carefully took into account how the latter work would be lit.65 Baciccio’s demonstrable awareness of Bernini’s lighting scheme in The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne substantiates the notion of Baciccio’s work serving as part of a unified design. This notion has not been unanimously agreed upon by scholars, as Rudolf Wittkower proposed that Baciccio’s painting was not initially included in the design; however, the use of Bernini’s frame for the piece and the aforemen tioned enumeration of similarities between the two works seem to discount Wittkower’s claim.66 Further, Johns’ argument for the myriad connections between Bernini’s Ludovi ca and Baciccio’s St. Anne, serving as a reflection of the Altieri family’s desire to have their ancestor, th e figure honored by the chapel, canonized, also supports the notion of the integrati on of Baciccio’s painting with Bernini’s design as a product of careful forethought.67 Johns pointed to complementary thematic choices in the two works, in addition to visual similarities, as evidence for this close collaboration.68 Specifically, Hermann Hugo’s “theme s of divine bliss and ecstatic transport” link the two works, according to Johns, who found: 64 Perlove, Bernini and the Idealization of Death , University Park, 1990, pp. 19-20. 65 Avery, Bernini, Boston, 1997, p. 152. 66 Rudolf Wittkower, Gian Lorenzo Bernini: The Sculptor of the Roman Baroque (London: Phaidon Press, 1955), p. 237. 67 Johns, “Some Observations on Collaborations and Pa tronage in the Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa: Bernini and Gaulli,” Storia dell’Arte 50 (January-April 1984): 43-47. 68 Ibid., p. 46.

PAGE 43

30 The visual juxtaposition of Ludovica’s head a nd the painting suggests th at she is having a beatific vision, an immediate knowledge of Go d vouchsafed to the souls of the blessed, a spiritual gift not unrelated to ecstasy.69 This proposed clever orchestrat ion of Bernini’s sculptural design and Baciccio’s painting as a narrative unit solidifies the larger argument, adopted by many scholars, for Baciccio’s integral participation in hi s mentor’s decorative projects. Baciccio’s work for the Gesù, like the alta rpiece for the Altieri Chapel, has been classified as a component of a larger desi gn by Bernini encompassing painting, sculpture, and architecture. According to Enggass, Bernini’s assistance with the enlargement of the frescoes, his contribution of Antonio Raggi for the stucco sculptural decoration, and the illusionistic adaptations made to the surface of the plaster ceiling are suggestive of Bernini’s theatrical blending of different medi a to create a singular visual effect, known as “un bel composto.”70 Refuted in this claim, is the notion that Baciccio was solely responsible for the fresco program. The genera l interest in movement and emotion that may be observed in Baciccio’s ceiling paintings is typically High Baroque and thus, in keeping with Bernini’s style.71 Even more specific quali ties of Baciccio’s frescoes indicate a conscious effort by the artist to imitate Bern ini’s manner for the purpose of cohesiveness. ‘The sculptures que rendering of form and the borrowing of specific subject types from Bernini, particularly a blond infa nt and an angel’ (Figs. 2.15-2.16), according 69 Ibid. 70 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303-04. Dieter Graf found that B aciccio was not only aided by Raggi, but also Leonardo Retti, among others. Dieter Graf, Master Drawings of the Roman Baroque from the Kunstmuseum Düsseldorf (London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1973), pl. 50. Irving Lavin wrote extensively on the harmonious interplay of architecture, painting, and sculpture in Bernini’s artistic ideal. Irving Lavin, Bernini and the Unity of the Visual Arts (New York: Oxford University Press, 1980), pp. 6-15. 71 Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy, New Haven, 1999, p. 23.

PAGE 44

31 to Enggass, convey Baciccio’s indebtedness to his mentor.72 In instances when Baciccio and Bernini collaborated on decorative projects , the visual evidence of a stylistic unity would suggest that Baciccio’s works were not afterthoughts in Bernini’s design, but carefully considered as part of an overall aesthetic. The Death of Bernini and the Decline of Baciccio Some scholars disagree with the notion that the shift in Baciccio’s style and the subsequent decline in his works’ popularity were attributed to the death of Bernini. They note that his style shifted later, around 1685, a nd that the suicide of Baciccio’s son may have spurred the change.73 Enggass suggested the shift was sy mptomatic of a larger issue, the rising dominance of Baroque Classicism, wh ich forced Baciccio to submit to a style for which he possessed no passion.74 A connection between these two ideas may provide a more convincing explanation. Baciccio’s transition from the High Baroque to the opposite contemporary stylistic cu rrent, Baroque Classicism, may be attributed to the fact that the driving force of the former style, Bernini, had passed and that Baciccio was not “vigorous enough to assume the leadership of the movement.”75 Thus, in an effort to maintain his success, the artist wholehear tedly switched to a style that he had experimented with in previous years. Baci ccio no longer was able to enjoy the success 72 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp. 23, 39-4 0. Ann T. Lurie specified that the figure next to Saint Matthew was an angel, though En ggass had initially attributed the stylistic link in the figure to Bernini’s decoration for the Cornaro Chap el. Ann T. Lurie, “A Sh ort Notice on Baciccio’s Pendentives in the Gesù a propos a New Bozzetto in Cleveland,” The Burlington Magazine 114 (March 1972): 170. 73 Enggass suggested that the lapse of five years between the two dates does not support the notion and Pascoli attributed the shift to his son’s death. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp. 93, 103. 74 Ibid., p. 104. 75 Francis H. Dowley, “The Painting of Baciccio , Giovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 (Review),” The Art Bulletin 47 (June 1965): 298.

PAGE 45

32 that came from hanging on the coattails of Be rnini and was forced to independently face his artistic rival, Mara tti. It should be mentioned that Baciccio was still somewhat successful despite the decline of patronage, as Francis Haskell found that Baciccio was still able to command 100 scudi for a portrait when Maratti was charging 150 scudi ; however, scholars agree, acro ss the board, that the dynamism that had characterized previous work was gone and replaced with a style he was less adept at handling.76 Analysis During a professional relationship that last ed over twenty years, Bernini was made the godfather of Baciccio’s son and his will revealed that he had a painting by his protégé in his possession until death, when it was bequeathed to the pope.77 Both of these anecdotes, while seemingly disparate, express the closeness of the artists’ association. Under Bernini’s tutelage and w ith the aid of his connections to the wealthy patrons of Rome, Baciccio was able to ach ieve a hint of the success en joyed by his mentor, and, in turn, Bernini was able to transmit his ideas through the masterful painting of Baciccio. The relationship was one of reciprocity, though Baciccio’s gain was arguably greater than Bernini’s. Baciccio, perhaps opportunistically, affiliated himself with Bernini, the leader of the High Baroque, at the beginn ing of his stay in Rome and reaped the benefits of this relationship until the death of Bernini, at which point he modified his style to emulate the popularity of Maratti. It is undoubtedly cer tain that Baciccio’s success during his residence in Rome was not a result of his individual artistic vi sion, but due to his 76 Haskell, Patrons and Painters, New Haven, 1980, p. 17. 77 Enggass, “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesù,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303. Irving Lavin, “Bernini’s Death,” The Art Bulletin 54 (June 1972): 162.

PAGE 46

33 dependent relationship with Bernini and his remarkable ability to replicate popular elements of BerniniÂ’s style th rough the medium of painting.

PAGE 47

34 Figures Figure 2.1. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Pope Alexander VII (now lost), c. 1666-67, Messinger Collection, Munich (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 111).

PAGE 48

35 Figure 2.2. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Diana and Endymion , 1668, Palazzo Chigi, Rome (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 5).

PAGE 49

36 A B C D Figure 2.3. Giovanni Battista Ga ulli (called Baciccio), A) Faith and Charity , B) Justice, Peace, and Truth , C) Temperance , D) Prudence , 1666-72, SantÂ’Agnese, Rome, (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Figs. 13-16).

PAGE 50

37 Figure 2.4.Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Fountain of the Four Rivers , 1648-51, Piazza Navona, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 276).

PAGE 51

38 Figure 2.5. Correggio, the “central view” of the dome, 1526-30, Parma Cathedral, Parma (Smyth, Correggio’s Frescoes in Parma Cathedral , Fig. 8).

PAGE 52

39 Figure 2.6. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called B aciccio), nave vault, 1671-72, Santa Marta al Collegio Romano, Rome (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 23).

PAGE 53

40 Figure 2.7. Giacomo da Vignola and Giacomo de lla Porta, Façade of Il Gesù, 1575-84, Rome (Stokstad, Art History, p. 754).

PAGE 54

41 Figure 2.8. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Virgin and Child with Saint Anne , 1675, Altieri Chapel, San Frances co a Ripa, Rome (Avery, Bernini , detail of Fig. 199).

PAGE 55

42 Figure 2.9. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Blessed Ludovica Albertoni (with BaciccioÂ’s altarpiece in the background), 1672-74, Altieri Ch apel, San Francesco a Ripa, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 199).

PAGE 56

43 Figure 2.10. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Façade of Sant’Andrea al Quirinale , 1670-71, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 320).

PAGE 57

44 Figure 2.11. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of head in Blessed Ludovica Albertoni , 167274, Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 198). Figure 2.12. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of Saint Anne in Virgin and Child with Saint Anne , 1675, Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa, Rome (Perlove, Bernini and the Idealization of Death , pl. 20).

PAGE 58

45 Figure 2.13. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of hand in Blessed Ludovica Albertoni , 167274, Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 198). Figure 2.14. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of the Virgin in Virgin and Child with Saint Anne , 1675, Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa, Rome (Perlove, Bernini and the Idealization of Death , pl. 20).

PAGE 59

46 Figure 2.15. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of the angel in The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa , 1645-52, Cornaro Chapel, Santa Maria della Vittoria, Rome (Avery Bernini , Fig. 193). Figure 2.16. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of angel in the apse fresco of Il Gesù , after 1679, Rome (Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy , Fig. 177).

PAGE 60

47 CHAPTER 3 THE PORTRAITS: BACICCI O’S ADOPTION OF THE “MOMENTARY MANNER” In the genre of portraiture, Baciccio’s Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini (c. 1673) (Fig. 1.2) in the Galleria Naziona le d’Arte Antica in Rome sta nds apart, in that it serves as a tribute to the artist’s mentor both in the obvious choice of subject and, more importantly, in the style of representation used. Interestingly, the “momentary” style exhibited in the portrait was popularized by the subject of the work, Bernini. The gesture of the figure’s right hand, an outstretched palm and extended thumb with the remaining digits curled inward at varying degrees, re calls that of figures in Bernini’s sculpted portraits, such as the right hand of Pope Cl ement X in his bust of the pontiff (Fig. 3.1) and the gestural benediction Urban VIII is de picted giving in the bronze likeness Bernini designed to sit atop the Pope’s elaborate to mb (Fig. 3.2). It should be noted that the rendering of movement in a subject’s hand is not specific to the two aforementioned works by the artist, but is characteristic of nearly every human representation Bernini executed, in which the hands are depicted. An exhibition catalogue for Baciccio’s works mentioned the connection between Bernini’s style and the gesture of the sitter in Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , stating “l’artista è ritratto in atto di agire, non in una posa statica, secondo i dettami dell a ritrattistica berniniana, ch e erano seguiti dal Gaulli.”103 Although this attribute of Bacicci o’s portrait is highly reminis cent of Bernini’s preference in the rendering of hands, it, by no means, orig inated in Bernini’s work. The interest in 103 Lorenza Mochi Onori in Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 (Milan: Skira Editore, 1999), p. 106.

PAGE 61

48 representing gesticulations st retched back to much earlier inhabitants of the Italian peninsula, such as the Etruscans, and can be noted in such highly acclaimed works as the acroterial sculpture Apulu (Fig. 3.3) from Veii or in sarcophagi topped with human figures (Figs. 3.4-3.5), also dating from the Archaic period of Etruscan art.104 If examined alone, without consideration of the remaining stylistic characteristics, the hand gesture depicted in Baciccio’s portrai t of Bernini would not strongly indicate the master’s influence over the style of his prot égé; however, a number of other smaller aspects of the piece may be noted that poi nt to the significant impact of Bernini’s portraiture style on Baciccio. The upturned co rner and small crease on the right portion of the sitter’s white lapel (Fig. 3.6) also speak of Bernini’s disdain for static representation in portraiture and his interest in capturing a mo ment that is, perhaps, fraught with visual imperfections.105 Additionally, the sitter is not idealized, but rather, is shown to have lost some facial elasticity in the skin folds on his ne ck and the crow’s feet near his eyes. He is marked with age spots, a receding hairline , and is graying. While the sitter’s seventyeight years are made quite palpable to th e viewer through the inclusion of features characteristic of advanced age, the mental alertness of the figure, as indicated by the eyes’ engagement with those of the sp ectator, signals his enduring vitality.106 A selfportrait by Bernini (Fig. 3.7) in the Royal Collection displays the same characteristics noted in Baciccio’s portrait, including the penetr ating gaze, signs of age, and rumpled collar, which further suggest that the arti sts, indeed, embraced the same manner of 104 Sybille Haynes, Etruscan Civilization: A Cultural History (Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 2000), pp. 206, 214-15. 105 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 83. 106 Onori in Giovan Battista Gaulli , Milan, 1999, p. 106.

PAGE 62

49 portraiture.107 It should be mentioned, however , that Enggass found Baciccio’s interpretation of the subject’s appearance to be “more flatte ring” and “more aristocratic” than Bernini’s self-portrait, which implies that either the mentor’s portraits may have been more honest than his protégé’s or that Baciccio allowed his re verence for the sitter to slightly cloud his vision.108 As a work produced during the phase of Baciccio’s portraiture that Enggass classified as “full maturity,” the Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini serves as, perhaps, one of the most convincing examples of Baciccio’ s mastery of Bernini’ s portraiture style; however, it, demonstrably, does not mark a si ngular instance in wh ich Baciccio drew inspiration from the acclaimed artist.109 Enggass’s monograph held that Baciccio’s first major portrait commission, Portrait of Pope Alexander VII (Fig. 2.1), set a precedent in Baciccio’s oeuvre , in that it exhibits the earliest implementation of Bernini’s technique.110 This point was also suggested in Adol fo Venturi’s article “Di Alcune Opere de’Arte della Collezione Messinger,” which found that particular stylistic characteristics of the likeness were traceable to Bernini and could also be seen in later portraits.111 Of Baciccio’s Alexander VII and subsequent portraits, Venturi stated: La sensabilità cromatica è il risultato de lla nervosità dell’artista, la quale si comunica all’effigie dipinta, infondendole vi ta. Il ritratto di Clement IX della galleria Rospigliosi, quello d’Innocenzo XI della galleria di San Luca, del cardinale 107 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 83. 108 Ibid. 109 Ibid. 110 Ibid. Maria Perotti found ‘the new sobriety of color’ visible in this portrait to be representative of Baciccio’s works of late maturity. Maria Perotti, “L’Opera di Gian Battista Gaulli in Roma,” L’arte XIX (1916): 220. 111 Venturi, “Di Alcune Opere de’Arte della Collezione Messinger,” Le Arte XVI (1913):147.

PAGE 63

50 Leopoldo de’Medici della galler ia degli Uffizi, hanno assunto un simile effetto di nervosità spirituale e di vivacità cromatica: il piacere di una tavolozza brilliante, la vita, sia pure effimera, prodotta de quella nervosità, spiegnano più che a sufficienza la fortuna di tali ritratto ufficiali.112 Significantly, Venturi also observe d that while the entire corp us of Baciccio’s portraits possesses elements found in those by his ment or with the exception of the artist’s later pieces, which seemed to fit qualitatively with the style of Baroque Classicism, the artist employed his painterly skills to translate Bernini’s manner in a novel and alluring way.113 In the previous chapter, we established th e decisive role Bernin i played in securing commissions for Baciccio. Instead of focusi ng on Bernini’s hand in the popularity and financial success of Baciccio, this chapter s eeks to assess Baciccio’ s stylistic dependency on Bernini’s portraits and to precisely determ ine which features found their way into the artist’s repertoire. While acknowledging Bern ini’s influence on the portraits, this examination will also consider portraits produced by Baciccio’s contemporaries, in order to further demonstrate the shared ideals in the genre of Bernini and Baciccio. After a systematic evaluation of the stylistic similari ties between the sculpted works of Bernini and the painted portraits of Baciccio, the final aim of this examination will consider what Baciccio’s portraits reveal a bout his artistic practice. Bernini’s Portraiture Style Richard Brilliant’s study of the genre f ound that while “most portraits exhibit a formal stillness, a heightened degree of self -composure that responds to the formality of the portrait-making situation,” Be rnini’s atypical works adhere d to the notion that a sitter caught in the act of movement reveals liveliness, which ma y replicated in a likeness, 112 Ibid. 113 Ibid.

PAGE 64

51 masking the contrived pretenses a nd overall composition of a portrait.114 Pointing to Bernini’s comments on his somewhat unorthodox a pproach to portraiture as clarification for the purpose and effect of his style, Brillia nt then implied that the seemingly truthful nature of Bernini’s sculpted portraits may be viewed as a precurso r to the capacity for candidness in portraiture or, mo re precisely, the illusion of veracity that the photographic medium possesses.115 Though this style of portraiture di d not originate with Bernini and was not practiced by the artist exclusively, Enggass stated that “it still had about it an aura of novelty” during the early years of the artists’ profe ssional relationship.116 It was, undoubtedly, Bernini who perfected this ma nner and popularized it. Bernini was so closely associated with this style that Enggass found there to be no ambiguity in assigning the source of Baciccio’s po rtraiture style to his mentor.117 Bernini was particularly concerned with combating the deleterious effects that a marble portrait posed to the representation of the natural appear ance of a sitter and, perhaps, he employed movement in his work, just as he manipulated shadows and light, to imbue life into a medium that was otherwise sterile and spiritless.118 John Rupert Martin observed that ‘naturalism is the most essential characteris tic of baroque art’, which is clearly a statement with great applicabil ity to Bernini’s style, particularly that of 114 Richard Brilliant, Portraiture (London: Reaktion Books Limited, 1991), p. 10. 115 Ibid. Bernini’s comments are relayed through his son, Domenico. 116 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 78. 117 Ibid. 118 Chantelou’s diary relayed Bernini’s statements regarding the difficulty marble of one color posed to the execution of a figure’s likeness. Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 123.

PAGE 65

52 his portraiture.119 Bernini’s increased interest in movement, as opposed to that of his predecessors, did not restrict it self to portraiture, but was also made manifest in his mythologicaland religious-ins pired works. A comparison of Michelangelo’s relatively static David (Fig. 3.8) with Bernini’s expression of bodily torsion in his treatment of the same subject (Fig. 3.9) illustrates the latter ’s focused attention on the animation of a figure. Chantelou found that Bernini, himself, was a particularly animated person, using his hands and a variety of facial expressions as supplemental tools in conversations to convey emotions, which, if true, might accoun t for his fascination with the expressive capabilities of the human form.120 Four principle techniques Bernini employed in the enlivening of his subject’s sculpted form included the rendering of facial expression through an intense gaze or a simulation of th e sitter speaking, an active representation of the sitter’s hands, the natural folds of a garmen t, and the deliberate inclusion of almost inconspicuous visual flaws, which reveal th e humanity of the figure portrayed. Although these traits were mentioned briefly in the examination of Baciccio’s Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , they will be discussed at length to document their presence within Baciccio’s portraiture style. A Psychological Approach to Portraiture The portraiture of the Baroque, according to John Rupert Martin, “evinces a deep interest in psychology.”121 Clearly falling under the rubric of portraiture that Martin referred to in this statement, Baciccio’s portraits, like those of his mentor, exhibit 119 John Rupert Martin, “The Baroque from th e Point of View of the Art Historian,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 14 (December 1955): 165. 120 Enggass and Brown, Italian and Spanish Art , Evanston, 1992, p. 123. 121 Martin, “The Baroque from the Poin t of View of the Art Historian,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 14 (December 1955): 167.

PAGE 66

53 tremendous virtuosity in both capturing the spir it of a sitter and establishing a visual dialogue between the subject of the work a nd its viewer. This is accomplished through eye contact, pronounced facial expressions, and through the us e of Bernini’s “speaking” portrait style, which emphasizes the epheme ral nature of spoken communication through the display of a subject’s parted lip s, as if in the act of talking.122 After examining Baciccio’s portraits, one can clearly designate the techni ques listed above into two categories—overt facial expression a nd subtle visual communication. Bernini’s oeuvre provided his protégé with a nu mber of models, in which the exploration of facial ex pression was of primary c oncern to the artist. His Anima Dannata (Fig. 3.10), although not truly a sel f-portrait, serves as, perhaps, the finest display of the artist’s ability to render the physiognomy of a subject.123 The subject, a representation of a damned soul, is a tour de force of facial expression, as the mouth is agape, possibly in a scream, and the brow is furrowed. The work clearly reveals Bernini’s interest in capturing the moment, specifically a moment in which the subject is particularly enlivened. In Howard Hibbard’s monograph of Bernini, a source for the energy and temporality of the figure’s reaction is traced to Caravaggio’s Boy Bitten by a Lizard (Fig. 3.11), finding that: The search for truth in the instantaneous, the inquiry into man’s looks and reactions under changing circumstances and, in partic ular, the studies of expressions of 122 While many scholars refer to Bernini’s candid approach to portraiture as the “momentary manner,” Spike refers to it as a “speaking likeness.” Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy, Sarasota, 1984, p. 56. 123 Although Bernini is thought to have used his own likeness for Anima Dannata , it is not technically a self-portrait in that the purpose of the work is both a phy siognomic study and a companion piece to his Anima Beata , rather than a deliberate attempt to replicate hi s individual characteristics. The features are, perhaps, interchangeable, in this sense. Howard Hibbard, Bernini (London: Penguin Books, Ltd., 1965), pp. 31-33. Avery, Bernini, Boston, 1997, p. 66.

PAGE 67

54 surprise, horror, and alarm, were all hallmarks of the painter Caravaggio (15711610) and his followers.124 Although the model for Boy Bitten by a Lizard was Caravaggio’s companion, Mario Minniti, the work, like Bernini’s Anima Dannata , was not meant to serve as a portrait, but was studied from life.125 The oft-cited Bernini busts of Scipione Borghese, though not as animated as the aforementioned Bernini sculpture, (Fig. 3.12) are likely to have inspired Baciccio’s portraiture style.126 The portraits depict Scipione, one of Bernini’s most generous and faithful patrons, in the ac t of speaking, which Hibbard suggested is an invitation for interaction with the viewer.127 Though the parted lips of a figure was not unique to Bernini’s work and could be found in Caravaggio’s Boy with a Basket of Fruit , The Musicians , and The Lute Player (Fig. 3.13-3.15), to name a few examples, Bernini’s bust depicts the sitter conversing, rather than posing se nsually. According to Hibbard, ‘Bernini took a number of preliminary sketch es of the cardinal participating in normal acts, of which one has survived (Fig. 3.16)’, in order to precisely replicate the natural appearance of this action in his bust.128 Baciccio’s most inspired use of Bernini’ s manner in the rendering of a figure’s mouth may be seen in his Portrait of Cardinal Leopoldo de’Medici (c. 1672-75) (Fig. 124 Hibbard, Bernini , London, 1965, pp. 31-33. There seems to be some disagreement with regard to the dating of Boy Bitten by a Lizard . Timothy Wilson-Smith dates the work to 1593-94, while Hibbard and Peter Robb place its execution at a la ter date, 1596. Timothy Wilson-Smith, Caravaggio (London: Phaidon Press, 1998), p. 34. Peter Robb, M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio (New York: Picador, 1998), p. 500. 125 Robb, M, New York, 1998, p. 74. 126 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 78. Due to a flaw in the veins of the marble used for Bernini’s original bust of Scipione Borghese, the artist was forced to make a duplicate copy of the work. Hibbard, Bernini , London, 1965, pp. 89-90. 127 Ibid., p. 90. 128 Ibid., p. 92.

PAGE 68

55 3.17).129 The portrait of the cardinal and art en thusiast, who established the well-known collection of self-portraits at the Uffizi, is, according to Enggass, the most famous of Baciccio’s many works in the genre.130 Noted for its uncomplimentary honesty in the representation of the subject’s facial features , particularly in the “great Hapsburg jaw,” long, bulbous nose, and deeply-set eyes within the figure’s ocular cavities, the work is, perhaps, more significant for its emulat ion of Bernini’s “speaking likenesses.”131 The subject is depicted with his lips noticeably parted either in the act of breathing or, perhaps, commencing to speak. In the case of either of the two possi bilities, the figure certainly appears to be alive, caught in a passing moment, albeit somewhat subdued. Though the prominent jaw of the figure may be credited with Baciccio’s rendering of the subject’s open mouth, an engraving of Le opoldo by Giusto Sustermans does not display the teeth of the figure, as Baciccio’s work does.132 A rival of Baciccio’s Portrait of Cardinal Leopoldo de’Medici , in terms of the work’s popularity and perceived mastery of the genre, the portraitist’ s likeness of Giulio Rosigliosi, Pope Clement IX, also employs Be rniniesque attention to the figure’s mouth, in addition to other techniques that present a more realistic portrayal of the sitter. Baciccio’s Portrait of Clement IX (1667-69) (Fig. 3.18) serves as a less obvious example of the artist’s experimentation with the “sp eaking” portraiture styl e; however, the likeness does convey a glimmer of life hidden beneath the sitter’s advanced age and frailty 129 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 84. 130 Caterina Caneva, “The History of a Collection” in Painters by Painters (Wisbech: Balding & Mansell International Limited, 1988), pp. 9-10. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 83. 131 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 84. 132 Maurizio Fagiolo dell-Arco in Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 (Milan: Skira Editore, 1999), p. 111.

PAGE 69

56 through the careful rend ering of the mouth.133 The figure’s lips are parted slightly, which is suggestive of speech, and a hint of simulated moisture may be detected on their surface, as well as on the eyes.134 In addition to these signals of vitality in Baciccio’s Portrait of Clement IX , Maria Perotti remarked: Il pittore ha messo all’un isono l’inquietudine nevrotica del tipo col movimento tortuoso, lampeggiante fug ace del berretto acciaccato, de lla mantella di velluto spiegazzata, del colletto cartaceo: lo studi o sintetico del tipo scompare; il pennello del Baciccio, come lo scalpello del Bernin i, si affretta a cogliere, con rapidità istantanea, un atteggiamento fugace della fisionomia.135 The overall effect of the work is one that en livens a figure that “forba de any discussion of his health at his court, [though] it was gene ral knowledge that he suffered from hernia and had worrying attacks of dizziness.”136 The weak Pope only served two years before his death, which happened to be the same tw o years that are ascribed to Baciccio’s portrait thus, the artist produced the work wh en the sitter was at the end of his life.137 Baciccio’s ability to reveal the vitality of a subject that was noticeably ill may be seen when compared to a portrait of the same figure painted by Carlo Maratti. Maratti’s Portrait of Pope Clement IX (Fig. 3.19) depicts the pontiff at a further distance with his lips pressed firmly together, a solemn expression , and sitting stiffly upr ight. In this piece, the subject’s age and resultant infirmities are quite palpable and nothing of his temperament is revealed, creating an image th at is both solemn and impersonal. On the 133 Ibid., p. 80. Although there are a number of extant copies of this portrait, Enggass contends that ‘the work in the collection of the Galleria Nazionale in Rome is the original, while an autographed copy is the in possession of the Accademia di San Luca’. 134 Ibid., p. 81. 135 Perotti, “L’Opera di Gian Battista Gaulli in Roma,” L’arte XIX (1916): 219. 136 Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , Stockholm, 1986, p. 256. 137 McBrien, Lives of the Popes , San Francisco, 1997, p. 308.

PAGE 70

57 other hand, BaciccioÂ’s treatment of the figure not only displays the figureÂ’s presence, but also conveys a noticeable tenderness in the slight smile and soulful eyes, which is congruent with the general characterization of the pontiff as a compassionate and selfless individual.138 According to Enggass, the artistic ai ms of both Baciccio and Maratti were expressed in their repres entations of the Pope: Â…BaciccioÂ’s portrait underlines , even in its minor details, the pulse of life that flows through the frail pontiff, while Maratti, probably quite intentionally, shows in his painting of the Pope the erosio ns of age and its corrosive power.139 Though the artists clearly sought to emphasize different aspects of the Pope and his life (Baciccio chose the disposition of the figure, while Maratti selected the power of the papal seat), MarattiÂ’s portrait does not re veal any individual traits of the figure underneath the trappings of his position and is, consequently, interchangeable with many other papal portraits. Conversely, BaciccioÂ’s portrait is a more unique work that intimately presents the psychological characteristics of Clement IX. In addition to replicating the appearan ce of a subject in the act of verbal communication, Baciccio often de picted the pronounced facial expressions of his sitters in order to achieve a marked verisimilitude in his portraits. For example, BaciccioÂ’s Portrait of Cardinal Giovanni Battista Spinola, the Elder (c. 1681-1685) (Fig. 3.20), of which two copies exist, presents the sitt er with arched eyebrows and pursed lips.140 This facial expression is one of discernible tension, which clear ly attempts to capture the emotion of the sitter, rather than relaxing the musculature of the face to simply depict the 138 Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , Stockholm, 1986, p. 256. 139 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 81. 140 Ibid., Fig. 112. Cecilia Grilli in Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 (Milan: Skira Editore, 1999), p. 121.

PAGE 71

58 cardinal’s features. A similar effect is created in Portrait of Cardinal Jacopo Rospigliosi (1667-69) (Fig. 3.21); however, though the eyebro ws are arched, the face is relatively relaxed.141 In comparison to Maratti’s portrayal of the same figure (Fig. 3.22), who was the nephew of Pope Clement IX, Bacicc io’s likeness closely focuses on the distinguishing features and expressiveness of th e cardinal’s face, rather than the regalia of his profession. Although the eyebrows of the figure clearly have a natural pointed arch, Baciccio’s portrait brings them to the fore and makes them appear more pronounced than in Maratti’s work. Additionally, the figure appears to have the faintest trace of a smile on his face, whereas in Maratti’s painting th e figure’s mouth is clearly turned downward.142 Another portrait that accentuates the e xpressive power of one’s eyebrows is Portrait of Cardinal Fabrizio Spada (c. 1675) (Fig. 3.23), which depicts one eyebrow of the sitter raised inquisitively.143 In Maurizio Fagiolo dell’Arco’ s catalogue entry of the work, the connection to Bernini’s animated portraits is articulated in the characterization of this piece as “una decisa risposta ai vitali busti scolpiti dal suo maestro Bernini.”144 Just as the parted lips of a figure is suggestive of verbal communication, expressive eyebrows indicate communication of a non-verbal nature. Aside from the aforementioned Anima Dannata and Portrait of Scipione Borghese , sources for Baciccio’s interest in facial expres sion may also be noted in Bernini’s busts of 141 Westin and Westin, Transformations of the Roman Baroque , Gainesville, 1982, no. 11. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 159. At the time Enggass’s monograph had been published, the sitter of the portrait had not b een identified; however, the exhibitio n catalogue by Westin and Westin found the subject to be Jacopo Rospigliosi. 142 Ibid. 143 Maurizio Fagiolo dell-Arco in Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 (Milan: Skira Editore, 1999), p. 116. 144 Ibid.

PAGE 72

59 Pope Paul V (Fig. 3.24) and Pope Gregory XV (Fig. 3.25). Both the marble bust of Paul V at the Villa Borghese in Rome and the bronze at Copenhagen’s Statens Museum for Kunst depict a noticeable tension that runs across the sitter’s forehead.145 Similarly, Pope Gregory XV presents a number of creases on the forehead of the subject that are a result of the figure’s raised eyebrows. It is quite pl ausible that Baciccio would have been able to view Bernini’s portrait of Paul V, as the bronze bust might have been cast from a fullscale likeness that was once housed in Il Ge sù, but has since been lost, according to Charles Avery.146 Another facet of Bernini’s portraits that was emulated by Baciccio is the visual engagement of the subj ect with the viewer.147 A predecessor to the self-portrait drawing already discussed, a painted youthful self-por trait by Bernini (Fig. 3.26) exemplifies the artist’s awareness of the eyes ’ communicative ability. Firmly fixed on a spectator that is clearly outside of the picture plane, the figur e’s piercing glance is one of confidence and psychological intimacy, in keeping with the ad age that ‘the eyes are the window to the soul’. Bernini’s apparent interest in the portr ayal of the eyes of a sitter was not limited to his drawings and paintings, but can also be seen in his marble busts. Charles Avery recounted that it was Bernini’s practice to di fferentiate between light er and darker iris shades.148 In a detailed description of the arti st’s busts of Innocent X, Avery states: 145 Though it might be assumed that both the marble bust and bronze bust have identical features, that is simply not the case. Differences between the two may be noted in the dimensions of the works, the articulation of the collars, and the papal vestments that the subject dons. The bronze is, in fact, a cast made from a different bust. Thus, it is necessa ry when noting a feature of Bernini’s Pope Paul V to consider it’s presence in both works. 146 Avery, Bernini, Boston, 1997, p. 39. 147 Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy , Sarasota, 1984, p. 54. 148 Avery, Bernini, Boston, 1997, p. 90.

PAGE 73

60 Innocent’s rather small eyes are excavated deeply, so there are no dark areas caused by shadow. This was intended either to conve y the lighter colour of blue irises, as the sculptor explained was his pr actice, or to give a myopic look.149 This concern clearly expresse s a desire to make the s ubject appear realistic and approachable, despite the restrictions imposed on the medium in these areas of artistic expression. Conversely, the eyes on Bernini’s Pope Paul V were not articulated, in a deliberate attempt to not “make the pope seem too human and accessible.”150 Baciccio’s self-portraits, like those of Be rnini, express a preoccupation with the depiction of the eyes. The youthful self-portrai t that is located in the Uffizi’s collection (c. 1667-68) (Fig. 3.27), of which at least two copies were made, presents the artist’s head in three-quarters view and framed by a curly mane. The somber expression of the artist, the elegant dress of an Italian dandy, the carefully detailed curl s, and, most importantly, the intense gaze coming from th e corners of the sitt er’s eyes are all reminiscent of Albrecht Dürer’s Self-Portrait at age twenty-six (F ig. 3.28); however, in Baciccio’s work, the composition is cut off ju st below the shoulder and the background is devoid of an elaborate, yet distracting lands cape. These aspects of the work seem to emphasize the visual engagement between the sitt er and the viewer, an effect that is more characteristic of Bernini’s self-portraits than Dürer’s work, which represented the artist at roughly the same age. The artist’s gaze is a ccentuated even more in Baciccio’s selfportrait of 1674 (Fig. 3.29), which is located in the Accademia Naziona le di San Luca in Rome.151 In comparison to the more youthful re presentation, this work does not depict 149 Ibid. 150 Ibid., p. 37. 151 Francesco Petrucci in Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 (Milan: Skira Editore, 1999), p. 105. Though the painting states the date of execution is 1680, Petrucci found “come i ritratti seicenteschi di Morandi o Lauri donati in tempi rece nti, non presenta un’incorniciatura ovale e la scritta è un’aggiunta

PAGE 74

61 the subject’s gaze as coyly originating in the co rner of his eyes, but as an assertive frontal stare. Further, this work presents the artist in attire that is relatively simple and with a hair style that is comparatively tame, thus cl osely achieving the una ffected, perspicacious portraits of Bernini. Three portraits even less complex than Baciccio’s self-portraits, in which the accentuation of the figures’ eyes seems to be a primary goal in each work, are Portrait of an Unknown Man (c. 1667-68) (Fig. 3.30), Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme (c. 1667-69) (Fig. 3.31), and the chalk sketch, Portrait of a Man (late 1660s) (Fig. 3.32).152 Of the simplicity of the composition in Portrait of an Unknown Man , Enggass found that “because it attempts less it achieves more.”153 In this statement, Enggass clearly referred to the plain attire of the figure, the ne utral background, and the single source of light seemingly stemming from outside the picture plane and directly ont o the sitter’s face, drawing the viewer’s attention to the subject’s dark-hued eyes. Little is revealed about the sitter of this work through the painting and the lack of information regarding the commission of the piece or even the name of th e subject contributes to the cryptic nature of the portrait; however, it may be determined, by examining the eyes of the figure, that he was meant to be portrayed w ith a noticeable intensity. Both Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme and Portrait of a Man present close-ups of the si tter’s heads, which occupy the majority of the frame, allowing for compos itions that are even less ambitious than the successiva. Infatti è addirittura riportato anche un clamoroso errore nell’indicazione dell’anno del principato, che non fu il 1680 ma 1674!” 152 John T. Spike’s catalogue concurred with Mary Newcome’s dating of the sketch, Portrait of a Man , to the latter part of the 1660s. Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy , Sarasota, 1984, p. 54. Mary Newcome, Genoese Baroque Drawings (Binghamton: Niles & Phipps, Lithographers, 1972), p. 42. 153 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 79.

PAGE 75

62 Portrait of an Unknown Man . It is thought that Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme , like Portrait of a Man , is a preliminary sketch, which is quite telling a bout the artist’s main concentration in his portraiture, as eye co ntact is the most prominent feature of each work.154 Baciccio frequently utilized a tec hnique that emphasized the defining characteristics of his sitters through figural isolation. The ar tist’s predilection for stark backgrounds and a paucity of props has been noted, particularly in the comparison between Baciccio’s Portrait of Clement IX and Maratti’s treatment of the same subject. In addition to these aspects of Baciccio’s wo rks, a deliberate avoidance of full-length portraiture, for the most part, and group portra iture is also of concern. As was previously mentioned, Maratti’s Portrait of Clement IX , which depicts the pontiff in a decorated room, seated in an ornate chair, and finge ring the pages of a book, presents an impersonal image of the pope, whereas Baciccio’s portrait simply highlights the facial features and expressions of Clement IX, allowing for an intimate glimpse of a highly powerful individual. Similarly, Velázquez’ Portrait of Innocent X (Fig. 1.3), located in the Galleria Doria-Pamphili, displays the pontiff nearly full -length, seated in a chair with a high back, and holding a folded letter with the artist’ s signature, while Baci ccio’s copy of the painting (Fig. 1.5) omits the chair and is half-length.155 As in his likeness of Clement IX, Baciccio’s central focus is on the facial expr ession and gaze of Innocent X. A feature of the work that is discernible in Velázquez’ portr ait, yet not accentuated to the extent that it 154 Ibid., p. 82. Enggass’s monograph stated that the Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme was “only a small sketch in oils, not a formal portrait.” 155 Gridley McKim-Smith, “On Velazquez’s Working Method,” The Art Bulletin 61 (December 1979): 596.

PAGE 76

63 is in Baciccio’s portrait, is the sitter’s hard ened expression, which is consistent with the Pope’s persona as “the powerful and not altogether lovable” public figure.156 Although Velázquez did convey this character trait in his portrait, the large scale of the piece detracts the viewer’s attention from the revealing expression of the sitter, while Baciccio’s work magnifies the Pope’s aloof and, perhaps, disagreeable nature in the halflength format. Although a copy of the original portrait by Velázquez’ hand (Fig. 1.4) is known, the catalogue raisonné of the artist’s oeuvre , compiled by José López-Rey, found that the copy, which frames the work in the same manner, is likely to have come to Spain with Velazquez after his Roman sojourn.157 Since, Velázquez’ departure predates Baciccio’s arrival by slightly over five years, debatably, it might be assumed that the artist’s take on the famous portrait was orig inal and exposed his own interest in the character of the sitte r, rather than the Pope’s lofty position. Both the papal portraits by Maratti an d Velázquez were not atypical in their depictions of the respective pontiff seated in an elaborate chair and shown in threequarters length. Prior to Baciccio’s pain tings, noteworthy papal portraits, included Raphael’s Portrait of Pope Julius II (Fig. 3.33), Pope Leo X with Two Cardinals (Fig. 3.34) and Titian’s Pope Paul III, Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, and Duke Ottavio Farnese (Fig. 3.35), which Shearer West suggested was inspired by Ra phael’s likeness of Leo X.158 All three works display the pontiffs s eated, as “there seems to have been a 156 Ibid., p. 595. 157 José López-Rey, Velázquez: A Catalogue Raisonné (Köln: Benedikt Taschen Verlag GmbH, 1999), p. 284. López-Rey stated, “A portrait of the Pope Inno cent X was in Velázquez’ rooms at the time of his death; this portrait might have been the copy, presumably by his own hand, that he had brought from Italy.” 158 Shearer West, Portraiture (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 107.

PAGE 77

64 tradition of representing fi gures of high rank full-size on a throne or chair.”159 Additionally, the latte r two paintings serve as group portraits, which, like the threequarter length that was common in the work s where the figure is seated, divert the viewer’s attention away from the primary s ubject of the work and emphasize the official duties of the pontiff, rather than offering a glimpse of the sitter’s personality. A portrait that represents a transition from the Rena issance papal likenesses listed above to Baciccio’s portraits is Guercino’s Portrait of Pope Gregory XV (Fig. 3.36), which depicts the pontiff seated at his desk, in the traditi onal manner, yet also e vokes the psychological interest that would be perf ected in Baciccio’s works.160 The shadows prevalent in the piece, which prefigure those in Baciccio’s portraits, have an emotive quality. This painting, according to Spike, joined only a ha ndful of works “that fully broke with the stylistic abstractions of late sixteenth-century portraiture.”161 Baciccio’s portraits, particularly hi s papal portraits, often did not employ distracting background d ecoration or other indicators of the sitter’s position, with the exception of papal and clerical attire, but inst ead focused on the disti nguishing features of the individual. Producing an eff ect that, perhaps, mirrored his mentor’s sculpted portraits, Baciccio’s likenesses may be seen as oil translat ions of the marble bus ts in their isolation of the figure from the background and in the scale that often extends to the sitt er’s chest. Another characteristic of Baciccio’s portr aits that combat an awkwardly posed static portrayal is the representation of hand gestures. When a figure’s hands are 159 Konrad Oberhuber, “Raphael and the St ate Portrait-I: The Portrait of Julius II,” The Burlington Magazine 113 (March 1971): 130. 160 Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy , Sarasota, 1984, p. 94. 161 Ibid.

PAGE 78

65 represented in Baciccio’s portraits, they are animated, as has been noted in his Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , Portrait of Clement IX , and Portrait of Alexander VII . The latter two works depict the figures making a gesture of formal address, as was the practice of Bernini in his full-scale papal portrai ts. In other portraits, such as Eleonora Boncampagni Borghese (Fig. 3.37), not only does Baciccio’s emulation of Bernini’s deliberate inclusion of hand gestures become apparent, bu t also the plasticity of the representation signals Bernini’s influence.162 Francesco Petrucci’s catal ogue entry of the work found models for the figure’s hands in Bernini’s Verità (Fig. 3.38), which is part of the sculptural decoration of the tomb of Alexander VII, and Blessed Ludovica Albertoni (Fig. 2.13).163 The Dynamic Representation of the Garment Baciccio’s portraits, and the remainder of his works, for that matter, express incredible technical virtuosity in the rendering of folds. A lthough it has been stated that Baciccio’s mastery of the technique is not a literal interpretati on of sculptural folds, but a fluid, painterly approach to th eir rendering, the influence of Bernini’s sculpted portraits as model should not be discounted.164 Of Baciccio’s Portrait of Pope Alexander VII , Enggass noted: It is in the handling of the cape that B aciccio allows himself the greatest freedom and brings his painterly instincts to the fore. The garment folds provide an excuse for flashing ridges of impasto which irre gularly transverse the undulant surfaces, breaking and inters ecting at will.165 162 Francesco Petrucci in Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 (Milan: Skira Editore, 1999), p. 119. 163 Ibid. 164 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 78. 165 Ibid.

PAGE 79

66 The soft, almost tactile quality of the folds in works like Portrait of Cardinal Paluzzo Paluzzi degli Altieri (Fig. 3.39), Portrait of Cardinal Fabrizio Spada , and Portrait of Cardinal Leopoldo de’Medici contribute to the animation of the painting and, in this respect, reveal the influence of Bernini’s sculpted portraits.166 The sense of dynamism created by Baciccio’s depiction of folds is reminiscent of Bernini’s Duke Francesco I d’Este of Modena (Fig. 3.40) and Louis XIV (Fig. 3.41). The Veristic Portrait A facet of Bernini’s “momentary manner” that was wholly embraced by Baciccio was the deliberate inclusion of visual flaws and realistic imperfections. The aforementioned collar with upturned edge s and rumpled appearance in Baciccio’s Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini may also be noted in the artist’s Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme and Portrait of Giovanni Antonio De Rossi (Fig. 3.42). The slightly unkempt appearance of the figures’ collars, pa rticularly in the former painting, conveys both the innate fallibility of the sitters and combats the timeless quality of an idealized representation. A frequently cite d feature of Bernini’s portraits that may also be observed in Baciccio’s portraits is th e neglected button that has, unbe knownst to the sitter, slipped through buttonhole of the garment. Bernini’s bu sts of Scipione Borghese (Fig. 3.43) and Innocent X (Fig. 3.44) display this technique pr ominently, while the ar tist’s portrait of his father, Pietro Bernini (Fig. 3.45), presents the ex treme effect of this visual device, as the fastening of the figure’s top button is comp letely neglected. Baci ccio’s portraits of Alexander VII (Fig. 3.46) and Clement IX (Fig. 3.47) both display buttons that 166 Ibid., p. 84.

PAGE 80

67 precariously positioned only a portion of the way through the buttonhole.167 Although Enggass acknowledged that techni ques of this sort “were fast becoming conventions,” their inclusion in Baciccio’s portraits offers a small, yet cogent piece of the larger argument at hand.168 Analysis Baciccio’s adoption of the “momentary ma nner” involved the mastery of a number of different components present in Bernini’s wo rks, including a keen ability to visually articulate the key ch aracter traits of th e subject, a dynamic rendering of the figure’s garment that both activates the sitter and stre sses the ephemeral, and the representation of small, yet telling details that reveal on e’s humanity through a genre that has the propensity to immortalize its subjects.169 Baciccio did not merely record the sitters’ likenesses in a wholly formulaic manner, acc entuating the positions and professions of the figures represented, but rather, unam biguously concentrated on expressing the individuality of the subject. Clearly emulating an approach to portraiture that had been perfected and popularized by his mentor, Baciccio was able to utilize his painterly talent and capitalize on a style that had not yet beco me stale in the circles of wealthy Roman patrons. 167 Ibid., p. 81. 168 Ibid. 169 In keeping with the argument of the previous chap ter, it should be noted that the examples provided from Baciccio’s oeuvre that demonstrate a close dependency on the “momentary manner” of Bernini date prior to 1685, when his style underwent a marked shift.

PAGE 81

68 Figures Figure 3.1. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of the hand in Pope Clement X , 1676, Palazzo Altieri, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 382). Figure 3.2. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Tomb of Pope Urban VIII , 1628-47, St. PeterÂ’s Basilica, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 147).

PAGE 82

69 Figure 3.3. Apulu from the roof of the Portonaccio Temple, Veii, ca. 510-500 BCE, Museo Nazionale di Villa Giulia , Rome (Kleiner and Mamiya, GardenerÂ’s Art through the Ages , Fig. 6-3).

PAGE 83

70 Figure 3.4. Sarcophagus of a Married Couple from the Banditaccia necropolis, Cerveteri, ca. 530-520 BCE, Musée du Louvre, Paris (Haynes, Etruscan Civilization , Fig. 176b). Figure 3.5. Sarcophagus with Reclining Couple from Cerveteri, ca. 520 BCE, Museo Nazionale di Villa Giulia, Rome (Kleiner and Mamiya, Gardener’s Art through the Ages , Fig. 6-4).

PAGE 84

71 Figure 3.6. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of Portrait of Gian Lorenzo Bernini , c. 1673, Galleria Nazionale dÂ’Arte Antica, Rome (Fagiolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 106).

PAGE 85

72 Figure 3.7. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Self-Portrait , 1665, Windsor Castle (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 239).

PAGE 86

73 Figure 3.8. Michelangelo, David , 1501-04, Galleria dellÂ’Accad emia, Florence (Stokstad, Art History , p. 689). Figure 3.9. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, David , 1623, Galleria Borghese, Rome (Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy , Fig. 3).

PAGE 87

74 Figure 3.10. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Anima Dannata , 1619, Santa Maria di Monserrato, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 71). Figure 3.11. Caravaggio, Boy Bitten by a Lizard , c. 1593-94, National Gallery, London (Wilson-Smith, Caravaggio , Pl. 2).

PAGE 88

75 Figure 3.12. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Cardinal Scipione Borghese , 1632, Villa Borghese, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 98).

PAGE 89

76 Figure 3.13. Caravaggio, Boy with a Basket of Fruit , c. 1593-94, Galleria Borghese, Rome (Wilson-Smith, Caravaggio , Pl. 3). Figure 3.14. Caravaggio, The Musicians , c. 1595, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (Wilson-Smith, Caravaggio, Pl. 6). Figure 3.15. Caravaggio, The Lute Player , c. 1595-96, The Hermitage, St. Petersburg (Wilson-Smith, Caravaggio, Pl. 7).

PAGE 90

77 Figure 3.16. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, sketch in bl ack chalk of Cardinal Scipione Borghese, 1632, Pierpont Morgan Library, New York (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 96).

PAGE 91

78 Figure 3.17. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Cardinal Leopoldo deÂ’Medici , c. 1672-75, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 109).

PAGE 92

79 Figure 3.18. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Clement IX , 1667-69, Galleria Nazionale, Rome (Minor, Baroque and Rococo , p. 226). Figure 3.19. Carlo Maratti, Portrait of Clement IX , 1669, Pinacoteca Vaticana (Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini , p. 257).

PAGE 93

80 Figure 3.20. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Cardinal Giovanni Battista Spinola, the Elder , c. 1681-85, Private Collection (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 112).

PAGE 94

81 Figure 3.21. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Cardinal Jacopo Rospigliosi , 1667-68, Private Collection (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 108). Figure 3.22. Carlo Maratti, Portrait of Cardinal Jacopo Rospigliosi , 1667-69, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge (Westin, Westin, Transformations of the Baroque , Fig. 11a).

PAGE 95

82 Figure 3.23. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Cardinal Fabrizio Spada , c. 1675, Walpole Gallery, London (Fag iolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 116).

PAGE 96

83 A B Figure 3.24. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pope Paul V , c. 1618, A) Villa Borghese, Rome, B) Statens Museum for Kunst, Copenhagen (Avery, Bernini , Figs. 37-38). Figure 3.25. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Pope Gregory XV , 1621, Private Collection, Toronto (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 40).

PAGE 97

84 Figure 3.26. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Self-Portrait , 1620s, Villa Borghese, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 72).

PAGE 98

85 Figure 3.27. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called B aciccio), Self-Portra it, c. 1667, Galleria degli Uffizi (Fagiolo dell’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 104). Figure 3.28. Albrecht Dürer, Self-Portrait , 1498, Museo del Prado, Madrid (Smith, The Northern Renaissance , Fig. 62).

PAGE 99

86 Figure 3.29. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called B aciccio), Self-Portrait, 1680, Accademia Nazionale di San Luca, Rome (Fagiolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 105).

PAGE 100

87 Figure 3.30. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of an Unknown Man , c. 1667-68, Palazzo Bianco, Genoa (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 107). Figure 3.31. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Cardinal Louis de Vendôme , 1667-69, Museo di Capodimonte, Naples (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 114). Figure 3.32. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of a Man , late 1660s, Private Collection, Princeton (Spike, Baroque Portraiture , p. 54).

PAGE 101

88 Figure 3.33. Raphael, Portrait of Pope Julius II , 1512, National Gallery, London (Partridge, A Renaissance Likeness , pl. 1). Figure 3.34. Raphael, Pope Leo X with Two Cardinals , c. 1518, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (Stokstad, Art History , p. 693).

PAGE 102

89 Figure 3.35. Titian, Pope Paul III, Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, and Duke Ottavio Farnese , 1546, Galleria Nazionale di Ca podimonte, Naples/Bridgeman Art Library, London (West, Portraiture , Fig. 60). Figure 3.36. Guercino, Portrait of Pope Gregory XV , c. 1621-23, National Museum of American Art, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. (Spike, Baroque Portraiture , p. 94).

PAGE 103

90 Figure 3.37. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Eleonora Boncampagni Borghese , c. 1675, Private Collection, London (Fagiolo dell’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 117). Figure 3.38. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Verità , 1671-78, St. Peter’s Ba silica, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 182).

PAGE 104

91 Figure 3.39. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Cardinal Paluzzo Paluzzi degli Altieri , c. 1666, Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 104).

PAGE 105

92 Figure 3.40. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Duke Francesco I d’Este of Modena , 1650-51, Galleria Estense, Modena (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 106). Figure 3.41. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Louis XIV , 1665, Château de Vers ailles, Paris (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 380).

PAGE 106

93 Figure 3.42. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Giova nni Antonio De Rossi , c. 1666, Ospedale di Santo Spirito in Sassia, Rome (Fagiolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 107).

PAGE 107

94 Figure 3.43. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, detail of Cardinal Scipione Borghese , 1632, Villa Borghese, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 98). Figure 3.44. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Portrait of Innocent X , c. 1647, Palazzo Doria, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 103).

PAGE 108

95 Figure 3.45. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Portrait of Pietro Bernini , c. 1640, Antichi Maestri Pittori, Turin (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 8).

PAGE 109

96 Figure 3.46. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of Portrait of Clement IX , 1667-69, Galleria Nazionale, Rome (Minor, Baroque and Rococo , p. 226). Figure 3.47. Giovanni Battista Gaul li (called Baciccio), detail of Portrait of Alexander VII (now lost), c. 1666-67, Messinger Collection, Munich (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 111).

PAGE 110

97 CHAPTER 4 BACICCIO’S ARTISTIC PRACTICE Seicento Rome was a site of artistic proliferation and, as a re sult, the city attracted droves of artists from across Europe who aspi red to refine their ta lent and ingratiate themselves with the numerous resident patrons. The papacy and those affiliated with the papacy, particularly ‘papal ne phews and their affluent entour age’, had considerable sums of money at their disposal and voracious a ppetites for conspicuous displays of wealth, namely art.1 Both the aesthetic pomp of the Count er-Reformation and, in the case of those figures benefiting from the embraced practice of nepotism, the temporal unpredictability of wealth fueled the commission of artworks.2 ‘Figures associated with the ecclesiastical order were not alone in their artistic patronage; however, they did represent the force behind th e bulk of the commissions extended and were undoubtedly the tastemakers of the era’, according to Francis Haskell’s Patrons and Painters .3 At this point, it should be noted that the profligate expenditure on art had reached its peak under the papacy of Urban VIII (1623-44), yet the following years, until the close of the seventeenth century, still offered a myriad of opportunities for artists.4 It was this climate 1 Vernon Hyde Minor, Baroque and Rococo: Art & Culture (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1999), p. 51. 2 Ibid. 3 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 3. Certainly, those affiliated with the Church represented a significant portion of Baciccio’s clientele. 4 Ibid.

PAGE 111

98 of artistic validation and monetary promise that initi ally attracted and ultimately sustained the orphaned Genoe se native, Baciccio. Upon his arrival in Rome until the artistÂ’ s death, Baciccio did not simply eke out a meager existence, but rather, was able to command a hefty sum for his portraits.5 After nearly five years in Rome, Baciccio was in the position to acquire a house, which is a testament to the artistÂ’s rapid success.6 Further, even after the level of patronage markedly diminished at the dawn of th e eighteenth century, Baciccio remained financially stable.7 In the previous chapters , it has firmly been esta blished that BaciccioÂ’s success as a painter can, in large part, be attr ibuted to his advantageous relationship with Bernini and his ability to deftly translate th e artistic ideals of his mentorÂ’s primarily sculpted style into painted works. Additiona l factors that undoubtedly accounted for the artistÂ’s continued productivity and financial gain may be attributed to a work ethic almost parallel to that of Bernini, an openness to ward not only producing works that were highly visible, but also ones that would receive little exposure and might fall into the less prestigious category of decora tive arts, and the experimentation with styles closely associated with other highly acclaimed arti sts. These aspects of BaciccioÂ’s artistic practice will be considered at length in this section with the intention of determining what they reveal about his artistic identity. It is my contention that Baci ccioÂ’s deliberate efforts 5 Ibid., p. 17. 6 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 2. 7 Ibid., p. 86. Jean K. Westin and Robert H. Westin, Carlo Maratti and His Contemporaries: Figurative Drawings from the Roman Baroque (University Park: The Pennsylvania St ate University Press, 1975), p. 5. As was previously mentioned, the decline in patronage began, according to Haskell, in the mid-seventeenth century with the War of Castro; however, it was close of the century that witnessed the most obvious drop in commissions. Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 146.

PAGE 112

99 to maximize his income expose a figure whose primary concerns were, perhaps, focused on monetary success, rather than the cu ltivation of an individual style. Baciccio and the Business of Art A close examination of Baciccio’s paintings reveals not only the transfer of certain stylistic elements popularized by his mentor, but also the in fluence of Bern ini’s artistic practices on those of Baciccio. Though Baciccio’s sizeable oeuvre pales in comparison to the immense corpus of his mentor’s work s, the productivity of Bernini indubitably inspired his Genoese protégé. Bernini was ab le to take on countless projects because he was a dedicatedly quick worker, as the hyper bolic anecdote about his completion of the second bust of Scipione Borghese (Fig. 3.12) in little over a fort night illustrated, and, more importantly, because he had nu mber of artists working under him.8 Without the assistance of an artistic retinue, Baciccio was able to produce a remarkable number of paintings.9 In that same vein, when one examines the dates attributed to his works, it becomes apparent that the arti st undertook different projects at the same time, which was also characteristic of Bern ini’s production practices. Fo r example, during Baciccio’s work at Il Gesù, which spanned thirt een years, the artist also painted The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne (1675) (Fig. 2.8), The Death of Saint Francis Xavier (1676), and Christ and the Woman of Samaria (c.1676-77) (Fig. 4.1), in a ddition to a number of portraits and other compositions. Just as Bernini did not limit himself to a single artistic medium, Baciccio exhibited his versatility as an artist, producing painti ngs of different types, genres, scales, and 8 Hibbard recounted Baldinucci’s story that the second bust took only fifteen nights to complete. Hibbard, Bernini , London, 1965, p. 90. 9 Westin and Westin, Transformations of the Roman Baroque , Gainesville, 1982, no. 11.

PAGE 113

100 levels of visibility. Of special interest, are the paintings done for small decorative clocks (Fig. 4.2), or tipo ad altare , which would fall under the cat egory of ‘applied arts’ and often were used to both enhance the aesthetic of ecclesiastical and domestic settings and serve as a conspicuous marker of social standing.10 These projects foreshadowed the elegant domestic applicability of Rococo ar t and were, according to Stefanie Walker, “one of the most attractive and original cont ributions of Baroque Rome to the decorative arts.”11 According to Timothy Clifford, they were also undertaken by other highly acclaimed artists, such as Carlo Maratti and Francesco Trevisani (Fig. 4.3).12 Because these luxury items were quite costly, the attr action to produce works of this sort was likely monetary in nature.13 Further, Maratti’s embrace of this relatively new medium suggests that its propensity for profit wa s widely understood among artists, as he was renowned for being “an exceedingly expensive painter.”14 Though only one decorated table clock by Baciccio has surfaced, the object does not represent the artist’s isolated experimentation with the medium. On the c ontrary, the surviving payment documentation for a night clock, or orologio notturno , commissioned by the Chigi family in 1670 and the dating of the extant clock, located in Mi lan, to the 1690s by Mary Newcome Schleier, suggest that the artist may ha ve fulfilled these requests sporadically throughout his 10 Clifford, “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852. Mary Newcome Schleier accounted fo r both the ecclesiastical and dome stic appropriateness of these decorative clocks, stating that “the wood frame, often of ebony, resembled a portable altar.” Mary Newcome Schleier, “Clock Designs by Genoese Artists,” Artibus et Historiae 20 (1999): 125. 11 Minor, Baroque and Rococo , New York, 1999, pp. 31-2. Stefanie Walker in Life and the Arts in the Baroque Palaces of Rome: Ambiente Barocco (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999), p. 197. 12 Clifford, “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852. Walker in Life and the Arts in the Baroque Palaces of Rome , New Haven, 1999, pp. 197-8. 13 Ibid. 14 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 17.

PAGE 114

101 career.15 In addition to decorating diminutive tim epieces, a sketch for a larger, standing clock in the possession of a collection in Berlin is also attributed to Baciccio.16 Perhaps occupying the lowest rung on the hierarchy of artistic value, thes e decorative clocks reveal the artist’s willingness to produce works that were high-ticket items, but not necessarily considered a distingu ished form of artistic expression.17 Traditionally considered a “minor art,” portr aiture was also known to be a lucrative genre, though it did not receive the highest level of critical praise.18 Haskell found that Baciccio was able to command a consid erable amount for his portraits, 100 scudi , which may account for the artist’s continued work in the genre even after he had proven his competency with more prestigious commi ssions depicting mythological episodes or biblical stories.19 It was Baciccio’s mentor, Bernini, who set a precedent in the genre for an exorbitant payment of 6000 scudi for the bust of Thomas Baker (Fig. 4.4).20 Though this amount was unusually high for a portrait bust, Baciccio, through Bernini’s dealings, must have been aware of the moneta ry potential portraiture held. A facet of Baciccio’s artist ic practice that suggests a greater concern for the commodification of art, rather than the i ndividual expression the profession offered, was the deliberate reuse of popular compositio ns. The subject on the aforementioned clock15 Schleier, “Clock Designs by Genoese Artists,” Artibus et Historiae 20 (1999): 125-26. 16 Ibid., pp. 127-28. 17 These decorative clocks must be differentiated from the more prestigious commission of a clock located in a frescoed tondo attributed to Baciccio in the Aula Magna of the Cancelleria. Enggass, “Baciccio: A New Fresco and Two Modelli,” The Burlington Magazine 118 (August 1976): 589. 18 Minor, Baroque and Rococo , New York, 1999, p. 211. Minor states that André Félibien placed portraiture “above animal painting and landscapes,” yet below the elevated genre of history painting. 19 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 17. 20 Ibid.

PAGE 115

102 face, Endymion, had already been depicted on the composition, Diana and Endymion , also for the Chigi family.21 Though the patron often chose the subject for the painter, which was likely the case with the Chigi clock, assuming they were pleased by the original treatment of the subject, the artist could still visually reinterpret the subject or modify the composition.22 We cannot be sure that Bacicc io did not rethink his initial composition in the case of the table clock because it has not been found; however, there are extant examples of instances when Baciccio merely copied preexisting works.23 Two paintings from the Zeri Collection in Mentana, Justice with Peace and Truth and Allegory of Temperance , present such a case. As an article by Enggass pointed out, ‘these works are clearly based on earlier compositions for the pendentives of Sant’Agnese’.24 The paintings on canvas, as opposed to fresco, exhi bit subtle differences from the originals, particularly in the faces of the figures, but ar e exact replicas in the figural arrangement of the pendentives. Another example of the reus e of figural arrangements established in previous works, is the positioning of the central figure in the tondo of Saint Martha in Glory and later, in Saint Ignatius in Glory (Fig. 4.5) in Il Gesù.25 Though these works display a marked departure in certain facets of the composition, they remain similar in the most conspicuous part of the painting. Return ing to the Chigi table clock, it is likely that the painting was a mere reiteration of the form er composition considering that an extant 21 Clifford, “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852. 22 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 8. 23 Clifford, “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852. 24 Enggass, “Baciccio: A New Fresco and Two Modelli,” The Burlington Magazine 118 (August 1976): 590. 25 Dunn, “Nuns as Art Patrons: The Decoration of S. Marta al Collegio Romano,” The Art Bulletin 70 (September 1988): 468.

PAGE 116

103 clock, attributed to Baciccio, is highly deri vative from works both by Baciccio, himself, and Bernini.26 Clifford noted that the clock in th e possession of the Museo Poldi-Pezzoli in Milan (Fig. 4.6) ‘is reminiscent of Bernini’s Truth Unveiled (Fig. 4.7), Baciccio’s bozzetti for Justice, Peace, and Truth in Sant’Agnese, and for a similar composition in Santa Marta Collegio Romano’.27 In the same way that he would repeat subjects, Baciccio readily made copies of his works. Fo r example, two autographed versions of his Portrait of Clement IX (Fig. 3.18) exist in Galleria Naziona le (Palazzo Barberini) and in the Accademia di San Luca in Rome.28 According to Enggass, ‘Baciccio produced a number of copies from each version’.29 These demonstrable incidences of Baciccio unabashedly copying compositions or reusi ng certain motifs and arrangements suggest that the artist may have developed a standa rd repertory of popul ar imagery, which he could repeatedly draw from in the fulfillment of commissions. Further, this reveals both a lack of imaginative interest in the explorati on of new artistic forms and structures and an acquiescence to reproduce works by demand that had proven popular. Another aspect of Baciccio’s artistic practice that is quite telling, assuming one subscribes to the theory that the artist’s working methods express a discernible creative disinterest, concerns his approach to producing prep aratory drawings.30 Hugh 26 Clifford, “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852. 27 Ibid. 28 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp. 150-51. 29 Ibid., p. 150. 30 Hugh Macandrew and Dieter Graf , “Baciccio’s Later Drawings: A Rediscovered Group Acquired by the Ashmolean Museum,” Master Drawings X (1972): 236. Hanno-Walter Kruft, “Drawings by Borgognone and Baciccia in the Dusseld orf Kupferstichkabinett,” The Burlington Magazine 119 (February 1977): 142.

PAGE 117

104 Macandrew’s “Baciccio’s Later Drawi ngs: A Rediscovered Group Acquired by the Ashmolean Museum,” published in Master Drawings , stated: He seems to have drawn only for a pur pose and rarely for his own amusement; there are no landscapes in his oeuvre and few portraits, and th ere is a record of only one sheet which could be considered to come within the category of “presentation drawing.” The artist in fact obviously rega rded drawing only as a means to an end in the production of wall decorati ons, easel pictures, and engravings…31 This assessment and the paucity of extant representative drawings from every genre embraced by the artist, in conjunction with his demonstrable reuse of particular compositions, suggest that Baciccio lacked the creative tendencies exhibited by other artists who produced copious co mpositions in, arguably, the mo st expressive phase of the artistic process. It has also been observed that in the execution of figure studies for complex compositions, Baciccio did not bother to include body parts or clothing that would have been obscured in the figura l arrangement of the completed work.32 Further, Macandrew described Baciccio as “a businessman artist” with respect to his adherence to formality in the execution of preliminary sketches, which seems to be a fitting characterization that corresponds with the rema inder the artist’s technical and procedural approaches under review in this study. The Conspicuous Absence of a Fixed Aesthetic In an article for The Burlington Magazine , “Three Bozzetti by Gaulli for the Gesù,” Enggass fittingly described Baciccio, upon his receiving the commission for the frescoes 31 Macandrew and Graf, “Baciccio’s Later Drawings: A Rediscovered Group Acquired by the Ashmolean Museum,” Master Drawings X (1972): 236. 32 Graf makes this observation in the figure studies for Joseph telling his Dreams . Dieter Graf, “Two Paintings by Giovanni Battista Gaulli called Il Baciccio and Some Related Drawings,” The Burlington Magazine 113 (November 1971): 653.

PAGE 118

105 at Il Gesù, as “a moderately successful, somewhat eclectic artist.”33 Implicit in this statement, is an evident inconsistency in the artist’s oeuvre . Furthermore, while Baciccio was largely influenced by Bernini more than any other artist, it ca nnot be assumed that his style was inspired by a singular source. Se veral discernable elem ents in Baciccio’s paintings may be traced to the styles of artis ts that had received a considerable amount of contemporary recognition, such as Van Dy ck, Rembrandt, Velázquez, Maratti, Correggio, Brandi, Rubens, Strozzi, and Poussin.34 Though John Rupert Martin noted that “the very diversity of styles [is] one of the distinguishing featur es of the seventeenth century,” it was a statement that considered the disparate stylis tic trends among many artists, not the display of numerous popular, ye t distinctly different techniques within one artist’s oeuvre .35 In an attempt to reconcile Ba ciccio’s motive for embracing many different approaches to painti ng, the experimentation with va rious artistic manners must be demonstrated through stylistic comparis ons and the extent to which Baciccio may have had access to these styles must also be determined. 33 Enggass, “Three Bozzetti by Gaulli for the Gesù,” The Burlington Magazine 99 (February 1957): 51. Macandrew also noted that the artist “varied his pr actices from one picture to another.” Macandrew and Graf, “Baciccio’s Later Drawings: A Rediscovered Group Acquired by the Ashmolean Museum,” Master Drawings X (1972): 235. Of an altarpiece attr ibuted to Baciccio’s last phase, Presentation of the Christ Child in the Temple , Enggass noted the presence of an amalgam of different stylistic elements. Robert Enggass, “An Unpublished Altar-piece by Baciccio,” The Burlington Magazine 100 (October 1958): 359. 34 Enggass suggested the influence of Rembrandt and Poussin. Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp. 27, 80. Westin and Wes tin pointed to Baciccio’s direct interpretation of Venus and Adonis by Rubens. Westin and Westin, Carlo Maratti and His Contemporaries: Figurative Drawings from the Roman Baroque , University Park, 1975, p. 17. Wittkower and Waterhouse acknowledge the influence of Strozzi and Van Dyck. Waterhouse, Italian Baroque Art , London, 1962, p. 69. Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy, New Haven, 1999, p. 142. The link between Maratti, Correggio, and Velázquez with Baciccio has been referenced in previous chapters. 35 Martin, “The Baroque from the Poin t of View of the Art Historian,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 14 (December 1955): 165.

PAGE 119

106 In an effort to recapitulate the previously discussed relationship of Baciccio with the works of Correggio and Velázquez, it must be noted that the frescoes of Il Gesù reflect the style of the former artist, while the portrait of Innocent X (Fig. 1.3) is a copy of the latter’s famed likeness of the pontiff. Baciccio undoubtedly had access to both artists’ works, as Bernini sent the artist to Parma expressly to study Correggi o’s frescoes in the Parma Cathedral and Velázquez’ original po rtrait was likely accessible to the artist in Rome.36 Further, not only did Velázquez spend approximately eighteen months in Rome, but he also visited Genoa twice prior to Baciccio’s move to the Eternal City.37 Baciccio’s study of both artists was spurre d by commissions that dictated his familiarity with their styles. Naturally, Baciccio’s preliminary sketches often prefigure a stylistic dependency on the compositions of established artists that is more commonly detected in the painter’s later works. This suggests that, even in th e nascent stages of th e artistic process, Baciccio’s style was strongly affected. In an ar ticle written by Ursula V. Fischer Pace, a striking similarity has been observed both in a preparatory sketch for Baciccio’s first public commission, the altarpiece for San Rocc o, and the finished composition, itself, with Giacinto Brandi’s St. Roch in Glory , which is located on the main altar of the same church.38 Noting that the identical content of th e foregrounds in each altarpiece, Pace 36 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 9. Waterhouse, Italian Baroque Painting , London, 1962, p. 69. Westin and Westin, Transformations of the Roman Baroque , Gainesville, 1982, p. 6. Magnuson, Rome in the Age of Bernini, Stockholm, 1986, p. 317. Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600-1750, New Haven, 1999, p. 142. All of the aforementioned publications cite Baciccio’s trip to Parma. 37 López-Rey, Velázquez: A Catalogue Raisonné , Köln, 1999, p. 180. Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600-1750, New Haven, 1999, p. 156. Wittkower stated th at the dates for these visits were 1629 and 1649. 38 Ursula V. Fischer Pace, “An Early Drawing by Giovanni Battista Gaulli,” Master Drawings 31 (Winter 1993): 439.

PAGE 120

107 argued that the younger, relatively obscure ar tist, Baciccio, turned to a thematically linked painting by “one of the most eminent and successful painters in Rome” for his inspiration.39 Another work that has been direc tly traced to a preexisting work by a successful artist is Baciccio’s drawing, Venus and Adonis (Fig. 4.8).40 The resemblance between this work, which was a preliminary sk etch for later compositions, and Peter Paul Rubens’ Venus and Adonis at The Hague is uncanny.41 Rubens, like Velázquez, spent time both in Genoa, where he painted portraits of Genoese ladies, and in Rome at the beginning of the seventeenth century, so B aciccio might have been exposed to his works.42 Clearly, in the preparation for these projects, Baciccio expressed his willingness to seek outside inspiration for important commissions. Two of the most praised aspects of Bacicci o’s works, the occasional warmth of his early palette and the dynamism of his portraits , most likely had their origins in the style of Bernardo Strozzi.43 Baciccio’s painterly style, which c ontributes to the lively nature of his works, is also highly re miniscent of the style of Stro zzi, a fellow Genoese native. The slightly restrained fluidity of the brushstroke s and the animated gesture of Saint Carlo in Strozzi’s Madonna del Rosario tra san Domenico e san Carlo (Fig. 4.9) are qualities that 39 Ibid. 40 Westin and Westin, Carlo Maratti and His Contemporaries: Figurative Drawings from the Roman Baroque , University Park, 1975, p. 17. 41 Anthony Blunt and Lester Cooke, The Roman Drawings of the XVII & XVIII Centuries in the Collection of Her Majesty the Queen at Windsor Castle (London: Phaidon Press, Ltd., 1960), p. 40. According to Dieter Graf, Richard E. Spear first noted the co mparison between Baciccio’s drawing and Ruben’s painting. Graf, Master Drawings of the Roman Baroque from the Kunstmuseum Düsseldorf , London, 1973, pl. 53. 42 Hans Vlieghe, Rubens Portraits of Identified Sitters Painted in Antwerp (London: Harvey Miller Limited, 1987), pp. 21-22. 43 Waterhouse, Italian Baroque Art , London, 1962, p. 69.

PAGE 121

108 may be noted in works like Baciccio’s portrait of Clement IX. Concerni ng this painting in an exhibition catalogue of Strozzi’s works, Giuliana Algeri found “significative le differenze anche per quanto riguar da i colori,” which is a statement that may also apply to Baciccio’s Portrait of Cardinal Giulio Spinola (Fig. 4.10), as this piece displays the striking juxtaposition of vibrant re ds with white in the same manner. 44 Also, Baciccio’s Portrait of Cardinal Fabrizio Spada (Fig. 3.23) may have had its source in Strozzi’s painting, as it incorporates the golden tones often seen in the Genoese artist’s works. Strozzi’s portraiture exhibits a strong interest in the rendering of hand gestures and other signals of vitality. Ritratto di Vescovo benedicente (Fig. 4.11), currently at the Art Institute of Chicago, in particular, displays an exaggerated hand gesture and uses the “speaking portrait” style.45 Because Baciccio’s later style is often noted to have become more restrained and utilize a cooler palette, it is likely that Bacicc io brought this style with him from Genoa, where he first must ha ve encountered it, to Rome and eventually shifted away from it, as he became exposed to various new styles. According to Francesco Petrucci, Baciccio ’s successful portraiture style was a product not only of Bernini’ s influence, but also that of Flemish painters.46 Rudolf Wittkower observed that Baciccio’s portraits re veal a particular inde btedness to the pupil of Rubens, Anthony Van Dyck, as they repr esent the successors to the ‘aristocratic 44 Giuliani Algeri in Bernardo Strozzi: Genova 1581/82-Venezia 1644 (Milan: Electa, 1995), p. 114. 45 Luisa Mortari, Bernardo Strozzi (Rome: De Luca, 1995), p. 212. 46 “Nella ritrattistica del Gaulli è evidente, ancor più che nelle grandi composizioni e nelle pittura da cavalletto, il vincente sincretismo tra la cultura fiamminga e il berninismo, componenti che determinarono la rapida affermazione del pittore a Roma come protagonista indiscusso nel genere.” Francesco Petrucci, “La Ritrattistica,” in Giovan Battista Gaulli , Milan, 1999, p. 89. In that same vein, Maria Perotti suggested that Baciccio’s Portrait of Clement IX exhibits both the legacy of Van Dyck’s portraiture and the influence of Bernini’s sculpted manner. Perotti, “L’Opera di Gian Battista Gaulli in Roma,” L’arte XIX (1916): 219.

PAGE 122

109 Baroque’ popularized by the portr aits of the Flemish master.47 Like Rubens, Van Dyck spent a considerable length of time in Genoa in the 1620s, painting countless portraits for the wealthy, and in Rome.48 In the late eighteenth centur y, ‘over seventy portraits by Van Dyck were housed in different Genoese collections’.49 Further, Bernini was asked to create a marble bust from Van Dyck’s pa inting of Charles I (Fig. 4.12) in 1636, which undoubtedly ensured Baciccio’s familiarity with Van Dyck’s ma nner of portraiture.50 Van Dyck’s portraits exhibit a predilection for elaborate interiors and an interest in the combination of various luxurious fabrics, char acteristics that may seem incongruent with Baciccio’s portraits; however , Baciccio’s few likenesses of women do possess these qualities. Baciccio’s Portrait of Giulia Massimo as Cleopatra (Fig. 4.13) depicts the ruddy complexion of the figure, signaling vitality , an intricate, yet painterly rendering of the sitter’s garments, and a landscape b ackground, which is an unusual feature in consideration of Baciccio’s ot her portraits. Van Dyck’s likenesses of Genoese ladies, especially Portrait of a Genoese Lady (Traditionally Identified as a Marchesa Balbi) (Fig. 4.14), Portrait of Elena Grimaldi, Marchesa Cattaneo (Fig. 4.15), and Portrait of a Genoese Noblewoman (Formerly thought to be Paola Adorno, Marchesa Brignole-Sale) (Fig. 4.16), each possess one or all of the qualities mentioned above. Further, though these portraits are full-l ength, the half-length of Portrait of Giulia Massimo as Cleopatra marks a compromise between the disparate pref erences of the two artists or, perhaps, the commission simply involved less compensati on and the length portrayed was decided 47 Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600-1750, New Haven, 1999, p. 156. 48 Alfred Moir, Anthony Van Dyck (New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1994), pp. 22, 25. 49 Ibid. 50 Ibid., p. 42.

PAGE 123

110 accordingly. The detailed, yet painterly re ndering of the lacework on the cuffs of Alexander VII and Clement IX (4.17) in B aciccio’s portraits is reminiscent of Van Dyck’s Portrait of Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio (4.18). It is quite pl ausible that in the fashioning of an aesthetic for the portraiture of ladies, in particular, but not exclusively, Baciccio took a cue from th e popular Flemish portraitist. Self-portraits, according to Haskell, allow th e spectator to “see the artists of the day as they saw themselves.”51 This statement is quite problematic when applied to Baciccio’s self-portraits because they exhibit strong stylistic affinities with those of other artists, conveying the notion that he may have acknowledged this artistic dependency. A similarity between Dürer’s Self-Portrait at age twenty-six (F ig. 3.28) and Baciccio’s youthful self-portrait has been discussed in th e previous chapter, yet a parallel may also be drawn between Baciccio’s painting and Rembrandt van Rijn’s Self-Portrait at age twenty-three (Fig. 4.19).52 While Baciccio’s likeness presents the trappings of success and beauty like Dürer’s painti ng, it also expresses an interest in the interplay of shadow and light, which is closer to Rembrandt’s self -portrait. Also, the placement of the figure facing right with the head turned at a th ree-quarter angle links the two works. Though Rembrandt’s face is cloaked in darkness and Ba ciccio’s face is only slightly affected by the inconsistent lighting, a similar enigmatic effect is created to varying degrees.53 Enggass speculated that Baciccio may have, in fact, been introduced to Rembrandt’s work through an etching.54 A mature portrait by Bacicc io (Fig. 3.29) abandons the 51 Haskell, Patrons and Painters , New Haven, 1980, p. 19. 52 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, p. 80. 53 Ibid. Enggass found Baciccio’s use of less shadow to be an indication of the artist’s vanity. 54 Ibid.

PAGE 124

111 elegant garb of his youth a nd exhibits a stern expressi on in the manner of Nicolas Poussin’s famous self-por trait (Fig. 4.20). Though Baci ccio’s portrait lacks the background of Poussin’s painting, the facial expressions, lighting, and the way the figures’ hair frames their faces are nearly identical. Poussin’s por trait was executed “at the height of his powers” in Rome and, thus , would have been an appropriate source for Baciccio’s composition, as he was already quite successful at the time this work was painted.55 Though it is probable that Baciccio envisioned the compositions of his selfportraits on his own, the striki ng similarities between his wo rks and those of Rembrandt or Poussin present his likenesses as meta phors for his stylistic dependency on other artists. In effect, the identity he is fashioning in these works is borrowed. A perplexing facet of Baciccio’s artistic pr actice may be seen in the brief interlude of Baroque classicism that his oeuvre prominently reveals in an early work like his Pietà (1667) (Fig. 4.21).56 Though, as was mentioned earlier, Baciccio’s style exhibited a distinct turn away from the High Baroque to the Baroque classici sm of Maratti after 1685, his exploration of the style during the fo rmative years of his career is far more puzzling than his later a doption of it. Baciccio’s Pietà ‘omits techniques that distinguish the bulk of his work produced under Bernini’s tutelage, such as the liberal use of warm hues and painterly brushstrokes, and employs many of the features found in paintings by Baroque classicists, like the sc ulpturesque rendering of figures, a marked calmness, and a palette consisting of cool blues, purple, and green’.57 Clearly taking note of Annibale 55 Minor, Baroque and Rococo , New York, 1999, p. 241. 56 Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , University Park, 1964, pp.5-6. 57 Ibid., p. 6.

PAGE 125

112 Carracci’s treatment of the same subject, E nggass noted that Baci ccio’s early classical inspiration likely stemmed from the popular Bolognese painter.58 The scholar suggested that the Pietà represented the first, of many, auto-didactic quests Baciccio undertook for solutions on how to understand and resolve “t he conflict between classical Baroque and full Baroque.”59 Baroque classicists like Carracci, Poussin, and Vouet left an indelible mark on the Roman art scene, a presence th at Baciccio must have duly noted. The presence of Baciccio’s Pietà in an early oeuvre that includes his Adoration of the Shepherds (c. 1672) (Fig. 4.22) signifies not only th e lack of a fixed aesthetic, but also the ability to transition in and out of disp arate stylistic movements with remarkable ease.60 Analysis The incredible breadth of Baciccio’ s body of work, the contemporaneous fulfillment of separate commissions, and the utilization of different media all seem to be artistic principles practiced by Bernini and wholly espoused by his protégé. These ideals, in addition to Baciccio’s interest in genres that held great lucrative potential, but were considered qualitatively inferior to the elevated genre of hi story painting, and his unabashed reuse of popular compositions suggest that the artist embr aced the business of art, rather than the intellectual, indi vidualistic expression of the profession. 58 Ibid. 59 Ibid. 60 The decorations for the pendentives of Sant’Agnese al so provide an interesting example of the “tension between classic and baroque that is perceptible throughou t Gaulli’s career,” as they were “painted when his classicism was at its height,” yet exhibit elements of the High Baroque. John Rupert Martin, “The Painting of Baciccio: Giovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 (review),” Art Journal 24 (Spring 1965): 308.

PAGE 126

113 In support of this notion, a consideration of BaciccioÂ’s legacy, or lack there of, becomes important. It has been observed that though Baciccio enjoyed a healthy career, he had few artistic followers, which is not surprising considering what has been determined about his style.61 A close examination of the artistÂ’s oeuvre reveals the strong influence not only of Bernini, but also a slew of other artists. In this way, Baciccio emerges as a figure without an originally di stinctive artistic identity; however, he may also be seen as an artist w ho was able to construct a car eer from his superb technical versatility. 61 Spike, Baroque Portraiture in Italy , Sarasota, 1984, p. 54. Ratti and Soprani, Della Vite deÂ’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Genovesi , Vol. 1 , Genova, 1769, pp. 88-89.

PAGE 127

114 Figures Figure 4.1. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Christ and the Woman of Samaria , c. 1676-77, Galleria Spada, Rome (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 36).

PAGE 128

115 Figure 4.2. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Table Clock , c. 1693, Museo Poldi Pezzoli, Milan (Fagiolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 202).

PAGE 129

116 Figure 4.3. Francesco Trevisani and Pier Tommaso Campani, Nocturnal Clock with the Flight into Egypt , c. 1680-90, Pinacoteca Capitolina, Rome (Walker, Hammond, Life and the Arts in the Baroque Palaces of Rome , pl. 62).

PAGE 130

117 Figure 4.4. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Portrait of Thomas Baker, 1638, Victoria and Albert Museum, London (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 332).

PAGE 131

118 A B Figure 4.5. Giovanni Battista Ga ulli (called Baciccio), A) Saint Martha in Glory , 167172, Santa Marta al Colleg io Romano, Rome (Enggass, The Painting of Baciccio , Fig. 23). B) Saint Ignatius in Glory , 1672-75 Church of Il Gesù, Rome (Fagiolo dell’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 143). Figure 4.6. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of Table Clock , c. 1675, Museo Poldi Pezzoli, Milan (Fag iolo dell’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 202).

PAGE 132

119 Figure 4.7. Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Truth Unveiled by Time , 1645-52, Villa Borghese, Rome (Avery, Bernini , Fig. 340).

PAGE 133

120 Figure 4.8. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Venus and Adonis , Windsor Castle Royal Library (Westin and Westin, Carlo Maratti , Fig. 2).

PAGE 134

121 Figure 4.9. Bernardo Strozzi, Madonna del Rosario tra san Domenico e san Carlo , Private Collection, Genoa (Algeri, Bernardo Strozzi , p. 115). Figure 4.10. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Cardinal Giulio Spinola , Sgarbi Collection, Rome (Fag iolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 112).

PAGE 135

122 Figure 4.11. Bernardo Strozzi, Ritratto di Vescovo benedicente , The Art Institute of Chicago (Mortari, Bernardo Strozzi , Fig. 2.12). A B Figure 4.12. A) Anthony Van Dyck, Triple Portrait of Charles I , 1635-36, B) Thomas Adye (?), after Gian Lorenzo Bernini, 18th century, Royal Collection, St. James Place (Moir, Van Dyck , Figs. 59, 74).

PAGE 136

123 Figure 4.13. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Portrait of Giulia Massimo as Cleopatra , Collection Zerbone, Genoa (Fag iolo dellÂ’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 118). Figure 4.14. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of a Genoese Lady (Traditionally Identified as a Marchesa Balbi) , 1621-22, National Gallery of Art, Washington D. C. (Moir, Van Dyck , Pl. 12).

PAGE 137

124 Figure 4.15. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of Elena Grimaldi, Marchesa Cattaneo , 1623, National Gallery of Art, Washington D. C. (Moir, Van Dyck , Pl. 14). Figure 4.16. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of a Genoese Noblewoman (Formerly thought to be Paola Adorno, Marchesa Brignole-Sale) , 1623-25, The Frick Collection, New York (Moir, Van Dyck , Pl. 15).

PAGE 138

125 Figure 4.17. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), detail of Portrait of Clement IX , 1667-69, Galleria Nazionale, Rome (Minor, Baroque and Rococo , p. 226). Figure 4.18. Anthony Van Dyck, Portrait of Cardinal Guido Bentivoglio , 1623, Palazzo Pitti, Florence (Moir, Van Dyck , Pl. 16).

PAGE 139

126 Figure 4.19. Rembrandt van Rijn, Self-Portrait , 1629, Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston (Minor, Baroque and Rococo , p. 237). Figure 4.20. Nicholas Poussin, Self-Portrait , 1650, Louvre, Paris (Blunt, Poussin , Pl. 1).

PAGE 140

127 Figure 4.21. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Pietà , 1667, Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Antica, Rome (Fagiolo dell’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 204). Figure 4.22. Giovanni Battista Gaulli (called Baciccio), Adoration of the Shepherds , c. 1672, Santa Maria del Carmine, Fermo (Fagiolo dell’Arco, Graf, Petru, Giovan Battista Gaulli , p. 174).

PAGE 141

128 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION Interestingly, a portraitist, who was know n for the masterful articulation of a sitter’s individuality, both psychologically a nd physically, chose not to cultivate his own identity as an artist. Heralded as one of the finest portraitists of his day, Baciccio’s success in the genre was, in large part, facilitated by his mentor, Bernini, who orchestrated numerous commissions for the ar tist and imparted his trademark style on the younger Genoese orphan. Baciccio’s portraiture held a position of great importance in this study because it was the ge nre that the artist worked c ontinuously in from his arrival in Rome until his death, it was arguably the most derivative facet of Baciccio’s oeuvre from Bernini’s style, and it was the genre he was most closely associ ated with during the Seicento . As was previously recognized, Bern ini’s influence on the artist extended beyond portraiture; however, as a result of Baciccio’s skilled oil translation of Bernini’s sculpted style in the genre, it was portraiture that catapulted the artist to fame and led to other, more prestigious comm issions, namely the frescoes for Il Gesù. Thus, it is my contention that the artist’s portraiture, in particular, reveals a general stylistic dependency, fueled by a demonstrable desi re for success, which defines Baciccio. A presumably impecunious youth, Baciccio settled in a site where the artistic profession had been embraced and rewarde d, as Bernini’s unprecedented wealth and success had proven. Once established in the Eter nal City, Baciccio’s artistic practice, a highly productive nature coupled with the a doption of different popul ar styles, greatly reflected his unwavering zeal for recogniti on. The painter’s willingness to submit not

PAGE 142

129 only to BerniniÂ’s style, but also that of other artists, rather than cultivate an individual aesthetic suggest that he was more interested in the lucrative potential of art. In closing, though Baciccio may be seen as an artistic ch ameleon, transforming his style to emulate those of artists with establis hed and recognized careers, in the hope of rep licating their success, it was his incredible talent in the craft, ambition, and business sense that sustained him.

PAGE 143

130 BIBLIOGRAPHY Algeri, Giuliana. Bernardo Strozzi: Genova 1581/82-Venezia 1644 . Milan: Electa, 1995. Avery, Charles. Bernini: Genius of the Baroque . Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1997. Blunt, Anthony. Nicolas Poussin . London: Pallas Athene, 1995. Blunt, Anthony, and Cooke, Lester. The Roman Drawings of the XVII & XVIII Centuries in the Collection of Her Majest y the Queen at Windsor Castle . London: Phaidon Press, Ltd., 1960. Brilliant, Richard. Portraiture . London: Reaktion Books Limited, 1991. Brugnoli, Maria Vittoria. “Contributi a Giovan Battista Gaulli,” Bollettino D’Arte XXXIV (1949): 225-239. ________. “Inediti del Gaulli,” Paragone vii, No. 81 (1956): 21-32. Caneva, Caterina. “The Hist ory of a Collection,” in Painters by Painters . Wisbech: Balding & Mansell Inte rnational Limited, 1988. Chiovenda, Beatrice Canestro. “G. B. Gaulli called Baciccio,” The Burlington Magazine 114 (July 1972): 479-480. Clifford, Timothy. “Another Clock Painted by Baciccio?” The Burlington Magazine 118 (December 1976): 852, 854-855. Dowley, Francis H. “The Painting of B aciccio: Giovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 (Review),” The Art Bulletin 47 (June 1965): 294-300. Dunn, Marilyn R. “Nuns as Art Patrons: The Decoration of S. Marta al Collegio Romano,” The Art Bulletin 70 (September 1988): 451-477. Enggass, Robert. “Addenda to Baciccio: I,” The Burlington Magazine 106 (February 1964): 76, 78-79. ________. “Addenda to Baciccio: II,” The Burlington Magazine 106 (November 1964): 510, 512. ________. “Addenda to Baciccio: III,” The Burlington Magazine 108 (July 1966): 363, 365-366.

PAGE 144

131 ________. “An Unpublished Altar-Piece by Baciccio,” The Burlington Magazine 100 (October 1958): 356, 358-359. ________. “Baciccio: A New Fresco and Two Modelli,” The Burlington Magazine 118 (August 1976): 587-590. ________. “Baciccio at Oberlin: Some Reflections,” The Burlington Magazine 109 (March 1967): 184-185, 187-188. ________. “Bernini, Gaulli, and the Frescoes of the Gesu,” The Art Bulletin 39 (December 1957): 303-305. ________. The Painting of Baciccio: Gi ovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 . University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1964. ________. “Three Bozzetti by Gaulli for the Gesu,” The Burlington Magazine 99 (February 1957): 49-53. Enggass, Robert, and Brown, Jonathan. Italian and Spanish Art, 1600-1750 . Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1992. Fagiolo dell’Arco, Maurizio, Graf, Di eter, and Petru, Francesco (eds.) Giovan Battista Gaulli: Il Baciccio, 1639-1709 . Milan: Skira Editore, 1999. Finaldi, Gabrielle, and Kitson, Michael. Discovering the Italian Baroque: The Denis Mahon Collection . London: National Gallery Publications, Ltd., 1997. Graf, Dieter. “Two Paintings by Giovanni Batt ista Gaulli called Il Baciccio and Some Related Drawings,” The Burlington Magazine 113 (November 1971): 648, 650657. ________. Master Drawings of the Roman Baro que from the Kunstmuseum Düsseldorf . London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1973. Gregori, Luigi de. “Mostra di Roma Secentesca,” Capitolium VI (1930): 328-333. Haskell, Francis. Patrons and Painters: A Study in the Relations between Italian Art and Society in the Age of the Baroque . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1980. Haynes, Sybille. Etruscan Civilization: A Cultural History . Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Trust, 2000. Hibbard, Howard. Bernini . London: Penguin Books Limited, 1965. Janson, H. W. History of Art (Fourth Edition). New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1991. Johns, Christopher M. S. Papal Art and Cultural Politics: Rome in the Age of Clement XI . Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1993.

PAGE 145

132 ________. “Some Observations on Collaboration a nd Patronage in the Altieri Chapel, San Francesco a Ripa: Bernini and Gaulli,” Storia dell’Arte 50 (January-April 1984): 43-47. Kleiner, Fred S., and Mamiya, Christin. Gardener’s Art through the Ages, the Western Perspective, Vol. 1 (Twelfth Edition). Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing, 2005. Krautheimer, Richard. The Rome of Alexander VII, 1655-1667 . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985. Kruft, Hanno-Walter. “Drawings by Bor gognone and Baciccia in the Dusseldorf Kupferstichkabinett,” The Burlington Magazine 119 (February 1977): 141-143. Lavin, Irving. Bernini and the Unity of the Visual Arts . New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. ________. “Bernini’s Death,” The Art Bulletin 54 (June 1972): 158-186. López-Rey, José. Velázquez: Catalogue Raisonné . Köln: Benedikt Taschen Verlag GmbH, 1999. Lurie, Ann T. “A Short Notice on Baciccio’s Pendentives in the Gesu a propos a New Bozzetto in Cleveland,” The Burlington Magazine 114 (March 1972): 167-168; 170-173. Macandrew, Hugh. “Baciccio’s Early Drawings: A Group from the Artist’s First Decade in Rome,” Master Drawings X (1972): 111-125. Macandrew, Hugh, and Graf, Dieter. “Baciccio ’s Later Drawings: A Rediscovered Group Acquired by the Ashmolean Museum,” Master Drawings X (1972): 231-259. Magnuson, Torgil. Rome in the Age of Bernini, Vol. II: From the Election of Innocent X to the Death of Innocent XI . Stockholm: Almqvist & Wi ksell International, 1986. Martin, John Rupert. “The Baroque from th e Point of View of the Art Historian,” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 14, Second Special Issue on Baroque Style in Various Arts (December 1955): 164-171. ________. “The Painting of Baciccio: Giovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 (Review),” Art Journal 24 (Spring 1965): 308, 310. McBrien, Richard P. Lives of the Popes: The Pontiffs from St. Peter to John Paul II . San Francisco: Harper Collin s Publishers Inc., 1997. McKim-Smith, Gridley. “On Velazquez’s Working Methods,” The Art Bulletin 61 (December 1979): 589-603.

PAGE 146

133 Minor, Vernon Hyde. Baroque and Rococo: Art & Culture . New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999. Moir, Alfred. Anthony Van Dyck . New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1994. Mortari, Luisa. Bernardo Strozzi . Rome: De Lucca, 1995. Newcome, Mary. Genoese Baroque Drawings . Binghamton: Niles & Phipps, Lithographers, 1972. Oberhuber, Konrad. “Raphael and the Stat e Portrait-I: The Po rtrait of Julius II,” The Burlington Magazine 113 (March 1971): 124-131. Pace, Ursula V. Fischer. “An Earl y Drawing by Giovanni Battista Gaulli,” Master Drawings 31 (Winter 1993): 436-441. Partridge, Loren W. A Renaissance Likeness: Art and Culture in Raphael’s Julius II . Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980. Pascoli, Lione. Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Moderni, Vol. 1 . Roma: E. Calzone, 1933. Perlove, Shelley Karen. Bernini and the Idealization of Death: The Blessed Ludovica Albertoni and th e Altieri Chapel . University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1990. Perotti, Maria. “L’Opera di Gi an Battista Gaulli in Roma,” L’arte XIX (1916): 207-233. Ratti, Carlo Giuseppe, ed., and Soprani, Raffaello. Delle Vite de’Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti Genovesi, Vol. 1 . Genova: Nella Stamperia Casamara, 1769. Robb, Peter. M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio . New York: Picador, 1998. Roworth, Wendy Wassyng. “Baroque Portra iture. Hartford, Connecticut,” The Burlington Magazine 127 (June 1985): 376, 406-407. Schleier, Mary Newcome. “Clock Designs by Genoese Artists,” Artibus et Historiae 20 (1999): 125-130. Smith, Jeffrey Chipps. The Northern Renaissance (Art & Ideas) . London: Phaidon Press Limited, 2004. Smyth, Carolyn. Correggio’s Frescoes in Parma Cathedral . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997. Spike, John T. Baroque Portraiture in Italy: Wo rks from North American Collections . Sarasota: The John and Mable Ringling Museum of Art, 1984. Stokstad, Marilyn. Art History . New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1995.

PAGE 147

134 Suida-Manning, Bertina. “A Pa norama of Italian Painting,” Apollo (March 1980): 180195. Tonkovich, Jennifer. “Two Studies for the Ge su and a “Quarantore” Design by Bernini,” The Burlington Magazine 140 (January 1998): 34-37. Venturi, Adolfo. “Di Alcune Opere de’Arte della Collezione Messinger,” L’Arte XVI (1913): 144-148. Vlieghe, Hans. Rubens Portraits of Identifi ed Sitters Painted in Antwerp . London: Harvey Miller Limited, 1987. Walker, Stefanie, and Hammond, Frederick, eds. Life and the Arts in the Baroque Palaces of Rome: Ambiente Barocco . New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. Waterhouse, Ellis K. Italian Baroque Painting . London: Phaidon Press, 1962. ________. “The Painting of Baciccio: Giovanni Battista Gaulli, 1639-1709 (review),” The Burlington Magazine 107 (October 1965): 530-531. West, Shearer. Portraiture . Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Westin, Jean K., and Westin, Robert H. Carlo Maratti and His Contemporaries: Figurative Drawings from the Roman Baroque . University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1975. ________. Transformations of the Roman Baroque . Gainesville: University Gallery, College of Fine Arts, Un iversity of Florida, 1982. Wieseman, M. E. “Giovanni Battista Gaulli (Baciccio),” Allen Memorial Art Museum (Oberlin Online) . 31 July 2005 . Wilson-Smith, Timothy. Caravaggio . London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1998. Wittkower, Rudolf. Art and Architecture in Italy, 1600-1750 (Volume II: The High Baroque, 1625-1675) (Sixth Edition). New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999. ________. Gian Lorenzo Bernini: The Sc ulptor of the Roman Baroque . London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1955.

PAGE 148

135 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Leslie Anne Anderson was born in Winter Haven, Florida, and is of Cuban and Danish descent. She began her college e xperience at the Harvard Summer School Program in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 2000. She graduated cum laude with a B.A. in history and a minor in art hi story from the University of Florida in June 2004. She continued at the University of Florida for her masterÂ’s degr ee in art history the following semester and graduated in Spring 2006. Her primary area of study is Renaissance and Baroque Art, but more specifically, Italian Ba roque painting and sculpture. Leslie plans to pursue a Ph.D. in art histor y and eventually would like to work as a museum curator.