Authors: Félix Witting

M.L. Patrizi

Translation: Andrew Byrd

Marlena Metcalf

 

LAYOUT:

Baseline Co. Ltd

61A-63A Vo Van Tan Street

4th Floor

District 3, Ho Chi Minh City

Vietnam

 

© Parkstone Press International, New York

© Confidential Concepts, Worldwide, USA

The Royal Collection © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II

Photographic credit Pierre Mignot

© The Metropolitan Museum of Art (1, 2)

 

All rights of adaptation and reproduction are reserved in all countries.

No part of this work can be reproduced or adapted without permission of the worldwide rights holder. Except if mentioned to the contrary, the copyrights of works reproduced are the property of their respective photographers. Despite our efforts, it has been impossible for us to establish the rights of the author in certain cases. In case of a claim, please contact the publisher.

 

ISBN: 978-1-78310-757-5

Félix Witting and M.L. Patrizi

 

 

 

CARAVAGGIO

 

 

 

 

 

Contents

 

 

Introduction

His Fate

The Early Years and Departure for Rome

Milan

Venice

Departure for Rome

The First Roman Works and the Church of San Luigi dei Francesi

The First Roman Works

The Paintings of the Church of San Luigi dei Francesi

Condemned to Exile

Naples

Malta

The Face as a Reflection of the Soul

The Birth of a Style

The Painter of Pleasures and Taboos

Caravaggio or the Aesthetic Revolution

Caravaggio in a Different Light

The Life of Caravaggio by Giovanni Pietro Bellori

“Notizia” by Mancini

The Curriculum Vitae of a Criminal Painter

Letter of 29th July 1610 from the Bishop of Caserte to Cardinal Scipione Borghese

Conclusion

Biography

List of Illustrations

Bibliographical Notes

Ottavio Leoni, Portrait of Caravaggio.

Pastel on paper, 23.5 x 16 cm.

Biblioteca Marucelliana, Florence.

 

 

Introduction

 

 

Although Caravaggio and his art may have been forgotten for almost three hundred years, it can safely be said that since the beginning of the twentieth century this oversight has largely been compensated for. Despite his dismissal by critics (was it not Poussin who stated that he came in order to destroy painting?) and his fall into oblivion, his name seems to have reappeared in the collective memory during certain periods of history. Even in his own time a contemporary of Caravaggio, Giovanni Baglione, recognised the artist’s importance as a discoverer of a distinctly modern style.[1] Despite stating that Caravaggio had a great desire for the “approval of the public, who do not judge with their eyes, but look with their ears”, and that he had urged many younger artists to pay attention to the colouring alone instead of the composition of figures, Baglione described Caravaggio’s works as “made with the greatest diligence, in the most exquisite way”. Caravaggio’s patron, Marchese Vincenzio Giustiniani di Bassano (1564-1637), never doubted Caravaggio’s genius during the artist’s lifetime. In a letter to the advocate Teodoro Amideni he quotes the painter giving a point of view that he found decisive[2]: “as Caravaggio himself said, a painting of flowers requires as much care as one of people” — “of the highest class of painters — we have Caravaggio”. Caravaggio painted his “Cupido a sedere” (Amor Victorious) for him, and when the altar-piece of Saint Matthew for the Capella Contarelli in S. Luigi dei Francesi was rejected by the congregation, it was the Marchese who acquired it.[3] The art historian Giulio Cesare Gigli indulged in extravagant praise for Caravaggio in the pittura trionfante about his art: “This is the great Michelangelo Caravaggio, an awe-inspiring painter, the marvel of art, the miracle of nature.”[4] In the eighteenth century, the director of the Spanish Academy in Rome, Francisco Preziado, described the artist in a letter to Giambattista Ponfredi dated 20 October 1765 as the founder of a school to which Ribera and Zurbarán also belonged.[5] During the age of Classicism sporadic attention was paid to the artist and his tumultuous life, but it was during the Romantic era that particular interest in this pioneer of the Baroque was aroused. The great philosopher Schopenhauer (1788-1860) acknowledged the importance of his work[6], but from an expert point of view it was Waagen (1794-1868), professor of Art History, who sought to describe Caravaggio’s characteristics.[7] As an art historian, Manasse Unger (1802-1868) then carried out studies in a more academic vein on the artistic effects of the painter in his Kritische Forschungen (Critical Research) [8], and wrote Caravaggio’s biography[9], which was as complete as it could be at that time, according to J. Meyer’s historical judgement. It was the art historian Eisenmann who later tried to make sense of the fluctuating criticism concerning the importance of this artist.[10] A literary portrait of Caravaggio was published by the historians Woltmann (1841-1880) and Woermann (1844-1933), putting the artist within the historical development of painting.[11] Strangely reserved, but thus causing all the more excitement, were the few but grave words of art historian J. Burckhardt (1818-1897), which appeared in a dedication to the artist in the first edition of Cicerone, and which was barely altered in later adaptations of this work.[12] Meanwhile modern painters such as Théodule Ribot (1823-1891) had already sided with the master of the Baroque with their theories on art, deliberately searching for a way to preserve the intentions of their French Caravaggio, the master Valentin de Boulogne.[13] Only an objective historical look at the artist and his works and the recognition of a psychological dimension to his œuvre were missing in order to penetrate beyond literary enthusiasm to Caravaggio’s immortal merits.

 

The life of Caravaggio has given rise to numerous biographical interpretations, all focused on the violent and extravagant personality of the painter. One of these, written in the form of a poem, is the famous Notizia by Mancini (the translation of which appears at the end of this book), which relates the major events in the life of Caravaggio. According to this poem and other various historical sources, Michelangelo Merisi was born in September 1571, probably the 29th, the feast of Saint Michael the Archangel, in Milan where his father worked as foreman and architect to Francesco I Sforza, Marchese of Caravaggio. The predisposition for painting which Caravaggio demonstrated at an early age could have been inherited from his father who was, as Mancini states, “foreman and architect to the Marchese of Caravaggio”. This contradicts the writings of Bellori (of which there is also a translation at the end of this book) according to whom Caravaggio, whose father was a mason, like his contemporary Polidoro, would have from a young age carried the buckets of lime and plaster used in the making of frescos. It seems rather probable that Caravaggio inherited a fine talent from his ancestors although certain biographers have minimised its significance.

 

His parents were honourable citizens. As an employee of the Marchese, his father enjoyed a certain protection, from which Caravaggio would benefit throughout his life. In 1576, the plague that swept the Duchy of Milan forced Michelangelo Merisi’s family to flee the city. They moved to the small town of Caravaggio where Michelangelo spent his childhood. Several months after their departure from Milan, Michelangelo Merisi, then aged six, lost his father.

 

Seven years later, on the 6th April 1584, Caravaggio began his apprenticeship in the studio of the painter Simone Peterzano in Milan, where he studied with diligence for four or five years. He already showed some signs of extravagance, caused, it is said, by his excessive and hot-tempered personality.

 

 

 

 

 

Sick Bacchus or Satyr with Grapes, c. 1593.

Oil on canvas, 67 x 53 cm.

Museo e Galleria Borghese, Rome.

His Fate

 

Boy with a Basket of Fruit, c. 1593.

Oil on canvas, 70 x 67 cm.

Museo e Galleria Borghese, Rome.

 

 

The Early Years and Departure for Rome

 

 

Milan

 

Some early works preserved in Milan from the time when Caravaggio lived in the city, and presumed to be his, have been somewhat neglected by research. Despite the fact that today their attribution to Caravaggio is contested, these works are nevertheless important to our investigation, as they demonstrate certain characteristics typical of his work. Caravaggio developed his tendency towards the monumental genre from the observation of work by the Bergamasque painter Giovanni Cariani (active between 1511 and 1541); in his group of merry companions on a terrace from the year 1519 and in his lute-player he touched on similar motifs to Caravaggio. Later Caravaggio would dedicate himself in a significant way to this imposing genre, though even at the beginning of his career he tended towards the grandiose. In certain of these Milanese works the hand of Michelangelo Merisi’s master can easily be perceived. This master was Bernardino Lanini[14], in whose work the influence of Gaudenzio Ferrari is clearly recognisable. At this time, Caravaggio seems to have concentrated solely on the physical form of the human figure, depicted simply against a neutral background. Setting aside the classical heritage, the figure takes over the painting. This would become gradually more and more apparent in his work, and eventually one of Caravaggio’s distinguishing features. Caravaggio was also noticeably inspired by the work of Butinone, in particular the evocative motif of Saint Anne surrounded by her family. A certain tautness in a number of his paintings evokes the works of the former Milanese School, and highlights the fact that the young Caravaggio had only a limited number of resources at his disposal, which forced him to fight his way towards the freedom to which he aspired from a young age.

 

It can be observed that the young artist turned towards portraiture, attracted – as his early works demonstrate – by the realistic representation of genre motifs. The grandeur of his style already marked him out from his contemporaries. On examination of the works of his masters, it can be supposed that it was the exhortations of Gaudenzio Ferrari and his Milanese successor Bernardino Lanini that encouraged him to imitate them.[15] The bright colours used by these two artists can also be found in Merisi’s early works, an aesthetic impression used to great and unusual effect in Caravaggio’s later works. However, Caravaggio demonstrated considerable skill in the modelling of the human form much earlier than the artists mentioned, and he revealed powers of observation only previously seen in another Lombard artist, Guido Mazzoni, who had displayed similar skill with his clay sculptures, notably those in the Church of Santa Anna dei Lombardi.[16] The head of Nicodemus in The Entombment in the Vatican Gallery indicates that he studied the sculptor’s work, which was striking in its naturalism. Likewise, it was probably Lanini who spoke to Caravaggio of Venice, where, after five or six years in Milan, the artist spent some time.

Boy with a Basket of Fruit (detail), c. 1593.

Oil on canvas, 70 x 67 cm.

Museo e Galleria Borghese, Rome.

Boy with a Basket of Fruit (detail), c. 1593.

Oil on canvas, 70 x 67 cm.

Museo e Galleria Borghese, Rome.

 

 

Venice

 

After such preparation, it was logical that Caravaggio would be fascinated by the Venetian artists. The glory of Giorgione and Titian, who had only recently died, was still radiant; Veronese’s modelling and the vibrant colours of Paris Bordone certainly attracted Caravaggio, but it was above all Tintoretto, with his striking artistic talent, who fascinated the young artist. Unger described the great Venetian artist, with respect to Caravaggio, in the following way: “Tintoretto, faced with the nature of man and his natural tendency to violence, depicts this characteristic somewhat simplistically without giving the opportunity to analyse the origin of these violent impulses.”[17]

 

“Eerie, threatening nights, where lightning streaks the sky and the smoky flames of blazing bonfires leap up to the sky, create a strong contrast to whole parts of his paintings which are in the dark, whereas others are spookily illuminated by greenish, glaring lights.”[18] The intense colouring, which had attracted Caravaggio so much to the work of Gaudenzio Ferrari and his successors, dazzled him in Tintoretto’s œuvre. He applied what he found there in a decided manner to the cycle of paintings of Saint Matthew for the church of San Luigi dei Francesi, producing an even more striking effect. But it was Tintoretto’s ability to synthesise multiple expressions within a single painting, thus bringing out the innermost feelings of the characters, which was very much the unifying element in his work that Caravaggio admiringly sought to adopt. Though the Milanese artist’s talent for three-dimensional modelling never tempted him into the exciting narrative elements that the Venetian artist had so remarkably mastered.

Boy Bitten by a Lizard, 1593. Oil on canvas,

65.8 x 52.3 cm. Longhi Collection, Florence.

Boy Bitten by a Lizard (detail), 1593.

Oil on canvas, 65.8 x 52.3 cm.

Longhi Collection, Florence.

Boy Bitten by a Lizard (detail), 1593.

Oil on canvas, 65.8 x 52.3 cm.

Longhi Collection, Florence.

Boy Peeling a Fruit (copy), c. 1592-1593.

Oil on canvas, 75.5 x 64.4 cm.

Private collection, Rome.

 

 

We may assume that, after leaving the Lombard capital, Caravaggio was in Venice around 1585. Although we cannot know for certain when he arrived in the city, there is no doubt that the death of his mother around that time would have strengthened his resolve to leave Milan. The artistic influence that Milan had on him was later assessed as central to his subsequent artistic development.[19] According to Baglione, Federigo Zucchero made a comment about Caravaggio’s work to which we owe the certain indication that in reality it was Giorgio Barbarelli, known as Giorgione, under whose spell the young artist fell. “I cannot look at them without seeing the influence of Giorgione,” the well-known mannerist of the Roman School commented on Caravaggio’s paintings in San Luigi dei Francesi[20], a judgement that did not really fit the works criticised, as they had already overcome the Venetian influence and displayed Caravaggio’s own characteristic style. In Roman artists’ circles at that time it was believed that Caravaggio had close links to Venice. From this period the young and susceptible artist indulged in the magic of Venetian painting, which was then at its peak. The painters of the time most admired by Caravaggio were attempting to characterise their subjects better by creating works of large dimensions on a restrained background. One thinks particularly of Giorgione’s portraits of men in Berlin and Brunswick[21], and of the portrait of a young man by Torbido at the Pinakothek in Munich[22]. Caravaggio’s own canvases reached almost gigantic proportions, beyond the works of Torbido and Giorgione. The idea of pure contemplation of the subject, which the Venetian artists preferred, was in this way surpassed by Caravaggio.

 

According to Eisenmann, there is a painting of the biblical Judith from Caravaggio’s Venetian period, formerly in the La Motta Collection in the Treviso region, which is now said to be in English private possession. Waagen, who otherwise conveys a precise knowledge of these collections, does not mention the painting. There is one work depicting Judith and Holofernes, painted around 1597-1598, that can be found today in the Palazzo Barberini in Rome. According to Baglione, Caravaggio may have painted another of the same subject for the Signori Costi in Rome. It is difficult to judge whether he is referring to the same work, but there is nevertheless another depiction of Judith, painted several years later in 1607, that is currently in Naples. It seems likely that Baglione was referring to a copy.

 

 

Departure for Rome

 

Some years later, aged twenty-one, Caravaggio went to Rome where, undoubtedly helped by his uncle who already lived in the city, he lodged with a landlord who lived a modest life, Fr Pandolfo Pucci de Recanati, an acquaintance of Monsignor Pucci, beneficiary of St Peter’s Basilica in Rome. A document left by the historian W. Kallab indicates that the artist lived in comfortable conditions, but complained about certain aspects of domestic life, in particular about the meals which consisted of salad and chicory as starter, main dish and dessert. This is partly why after some months he left the home of Pandolfo Pucci, to whom he gave the nickname “Monsignor Insalata”. This same document indicates that the host commissioned from the young painter several works with religious subjects which were intended for his home town. It was at this time that Caravaggio fell ill and, having no money, he was admitted to the hospital of Santa Maria della Consolazione where during his convalescence he painted numerous canvases for the Prior.

 

Caravaggio’s experiences in Venice were still strongly influencing him whilst in Rome, and he continued to concentrate on acquiring his own majestic style. That was the aim behind, and the result of, his apprenticeship in the studio of the Cavalier d’Arpino. In 1593 Caravaggio entered the studio of the successful painter Giuseppe Cesari d’Arpino, also known as the Cavalier d’Arpino. Baglione tells us that “he stayed with the Cavalier Giuseppe Cesari d’Arpino for several months.”[23] Caravaggio turned to him in order to find connections to artistic circles in the Eternal City. Guiseppe Cesari has left frescos in the Trinità de’ Monti, in the chapel of the Palazzo di Monte Cavallo and – his best work – in the Capella Olgiati in San Prassede. In the Capella Contarelli in San Luigi de’ Francesi, where he started the frescos, Caravaggio was to become his successor[24].

 

D’Arpino worked mostly as a fresco painter, and tried to pass on to his pupil the somewhat grandiose side of Romanesque art, from which base he could expand the means and resources at his disposal. Caravaggio’s works show that he neither ignored the advice of his artistic masters, nor the works of other artists, often even those of a heterogeneous style. He studied Antique art with diligence and emulated Michelangelo Buonarotti. He even undertook the painting of the sign of his brother Frangiabigio Angelo’s perfumery, in this way further developing genre painting[25], as we can see in The Fortune Teller.

The Ecstasy of Saint Francis, c. 1594-1595.

Oil on canvas, 92.5 x 128 cm. Wadsworth Atheneum

Museum of Art, Hartford (Connecticut).

The Cardsharps, c. 1594.

Oil on canvas, 94.2 x 130.9 cm.

Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth.

The Cardsharps (detail), c. 1594.

Oil on canvas, 94.2 x 130.9 cm.

Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth.

 

 

However, save a tendency for grandness, the Cavalier d’Arpino, with his more generalistic style, had very little to pass on to the painter from northern Italy. Even so, at that time Giuseppe Cesari was considered one of the most influential artists in Rome. One imagines that an unknown protector recommended Caravaggio to Cesari, opening the door to his prestigious studio. Whilst the Cavalier d’Arpino concentrated on frescos, Caravaggio, as Baglione clearly states, devoted himself first and foremost to oil painting.[26] He was employed “to paint flowers and fruit”. The still-life genre, which was very fashionable in Lombardy, began to evolve towards a very realistic representation where each detail was highlighted as if it had been magnified by an optical lens. The representation of natural elements predominated in the first works of Caravaggio: Boy with a Basket of Fruit, Boy Peeling a Fruit, and Basket of Fruit. The sensuality of the two boys in these works is evident, though the declaration by certain critics that these paintings are odes to homosexuality seems somewhat exaggerated and simplistic. It is true, however, that slightly parted lips charge a painting with eroticism, and Caravaggio did at times hide messages within his works. Thus the fruit that the boy is peeling could be a bergamot, a bitter orange, the symbol of Universal Love. During the Middle Ages, it was not unusual for a husband to put on vermillion robes, which Goethe declared in his treatise “represent the colour of extreme ardour as well as the gentlest reflection of the setting sun.”[27] Therefore this painting could symbolise the transition from child to adult, with the bitter taste of the fruit representing the end of innocence.

 

Nevertheless, Nature was not, for Caravaggio, the great protector and dominator of mankind that so many other artists took it to be. Nature provided him with no feelings of exaltation nor of lyrical depression, it did not flood his soul with joy or fear, it inspired neither adoration nor meditation within him. It offered him simply a framework, a theatrical scene within which to place his characters or a series of objects, which he could reproduce faithfully on the canvas, conforming to the fundamental principles of naturalists. He was aiming, according to his own words, “to imitate the things of nature,” while at the same time conforming to the standards set by his Lombard masters. As previously noted, Caravaggio himself said on this subject: “A painting of flowers requires as much care as one of people.” Although Merisi pronounced this himself, he did later admit, conforming to the general opinion of the time, that the human form could never be compared to simple fruit and vegetables. Beyond the prevalence of vegetables, Caravaggio’s contemporaries must have been impressed by the realism of his paintings. The sensuality which emanates from Caravaggio’s early works deeply moves the spectator from the first viewing. However, his first masterpiece, the soft and luminous landscape of the Rest on the Flight to Egypt – which clearly reminds us of the style of Giorgione – evokes more than the simple sensory impressions of the outside world. The serene sky reflected in the calm water, the caress of light on the oak tree, the cherry laurel and the white poplars; the tender flair of the marshland reeds with their frayed leaves surrounding the three-leaved brambles have been brought together in order to create a harmony, a source of beauty to which the young artist was sensitive. In addition, Caravaggio paid particular attention to the expression of the face, as one can see in the apparent pain of the child in Boy Bitten by a Lizard. The instantaneousness of the boy’s reaction and the mask of pain on his face are so unmistakeably realistic and accurate that they cannot help but evoke feeling in the viewer. The working of the facial expression is remarkable and the intensity of feeling within the work is extraordinary. Throughout his career, Caravaggio worked ceaselessly at the expressions of feeling of his subjects.

The Musicians, c. 1595. Oil on canvas, 92.1 x 118.4 cm.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

The Musicians (detail), c. 1595.

Oil on canvas, 92.1 x 118.4 cm.

The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

The Fortune Teller (first version), c. 1595.

Oil on canvas, 115 x 150 cm. Musei Capitolini, Rome.

The Fortune Teller (second version), c. 1595-1598.

Oil on canvas, 99 x 131 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

 

 

After several months, according to Baglione, Caravaggio became independent and occupied himself with painting some self-portraits in the mirror. There are several works today which could be examples of these, but their attributions are still debatable.[28] Amongst the impressions collected in Venice, for example, there was a painted self-portrait made up of warm tones, essentially brown in colouring, with which the thick white paint of the collar and clothes contrasted strikingly, and a soft, gentle face despite his noted temper; the sword “which sat so loosely in its sheath”. The somewhat heroic golden tone sets the painting within his early Roman period. Another self-portrait, at one time in the collection of the Duke of Orleans, is currently missing.[29] It showed the artist in a beggar-like outfit, seen almost entirely from behind in a lost profile pose, holding a mirror in front of him, in which his weathered but not unattractive face is reflected; next to him is a skull. He next painted Baglione as Bacchus with grapes “with much diligence, but little sentiment”.[30]contrapposto