The widespread practice of distributing portraits of [Fig. 3, showing Lanfranco’s and Sacchi’s cartoons members of the Church, aristocracy, and legendary hanging on the walls left and right, and Fig. 8], and famous men and women created a huge market for to Romanelli, his [Cortona’s] student, and that the copyists, though copies of portraits, like those of petitioner not only is satisfied with this same price, landscapes, tended to be relatively cheap, mirroring the but that for those [cartoons] for the pendentives and lower esteem and value of those genres in the hierar- lunettes he has on his own initiative reduced [the fee] chy of .200 Payments by the Chigi are charac- to 150 scudi. And because Your Lordship can with teristic: 90 scudi in 1662 to Giovanni Maria Morandi more certainty of fairness make the petitioner rejoice for eight portraits of various sizes of Cardinal Chigi, in your favors by treating him equal to the others three of which were copies; in 1673, 10 scudi for five . . . entreats you to consider that all the altarpieces portrait copies by the unknown Cintio Bocchi; and in done for St. Peter’s cost 1,000 scudi apiece, [even 1686, 1.8 scudi for an anonymous copy 3 palmi high though] they are not more than a fourth [in size] of (67 cm) of the “Ecc.ma Sig.ra D. Agnese Chigi.”201 one said cupola. As for the . . . single pendentive by Further examples could be cited of payments to the the Cavalier Lanfranco, it is equivalent to a portion endless copyists ignored by Mancini, Baglione, and the of a cartoon of the cupola made by the petitioner; other early biographers, but the prevailing pattern of and because if one alleges that in size there is a dif- prices would not be altered, nor would the impression ference of some palmi, the petitioner states he has of a thriving market for copies that kept many Roman never experienced that are bought and sold painters engaged. by the palmo and measurement. Undaunted by having contradicted himself on whether the size of a work should affect its value (the Big Business: palmo in was 22.35 cm), Cortona shifted focus and continued: It was probably in 1667 when Pietro Berretini da Cortona (1597–1669), Rome’s foremost painter, one of It further is said that [paintings] in oil are valued its chief architects, and a past principe of the Accademia more than those in . As for this, one replies that and still a crucial figure in its affairs, felt compelled to the same study and labor one puts into a work in oil draw up a petition to the pope in an effort to collect one puts into a fresco. Others say that the spaces the remainder of his fee for work in St. Peter’s. As of between one figure and another are a weakness, that date he had received only 5,200 of 7,900 scudi due [which] shows a lack of understanding of painting for 32 cartoons he made for in the basilica. Pay- because sometimes those spaces are necessary for ments had stopped in 1662, but the artist did not know artistic reasons, as the petitioner has done, and not to if it was through “the advice of those who lack expe- save labor. Moreover, to provide a modern example rience with this kind of work and cannot judge it, or regarding prices, recently 3,600 scudi were paid to for some other reason,” he wrote, although he suspected the Cavalier Bernini for only two clay models of two that his fee was considered excessive and accordingly figures for the Cathedra [Petri], whose labor it seems he was determined to prove otherwise.202 His frank should not be compared with a single cupola, for petition to the pope is remarkably informative about a which no more than 3,200 scudi is claimed; more variety of artistic and economic issues that he and his was paid [to Cortona], 4,000 scudi, for the cupola of high-profile colleagues faced in Rome’s competitive art the Chiesa Nuova; [thus] the petitioner has made the world and that are central to the issues raised through- price 800 scudi less. . . . Whence the petitioner, who out this book. does not ask for any gift, as is done by others, but 5 Pietro da Cortona (design by), A Priest Dispensing Ceremonial Bread, 1650s. (executed by Orazio Manenti). Chapel of the Holy Addressing the Most Blessed Father, he wrote: only suitable payment for his labors, humbly entreats Sacrament, St. Peter’s, Rome. His Holiness . . .203 Pietro Berretini, humblest servant of Your Lordship, having provided the bill for the cartoons for the As Cortona strove to refute the possible reasons for deserved as much; even so, he was willing “on his own that the new altarpieces in St. Peter’s could (though mosaics in the chapel of the Holy Sacrament [Fig. 5] which payments had been suspended, he sought to initiative” to give a 25 percent discount. Cortona was not always did) cost 1,000 scudi, but he disregarded and that of St. Sebastian in St. Peter’s, for which . . . cover himself on all fronts. Foremost was his con- correctly informed that a few decades earlier Lan- the fact that those exceptionally high payments were 2,700 scudi remain due . . . [considers] himself obli- tention that his pricing was fair in market terms: that franco, Sacchi, and Romanelli had received 200 scudi for enormous paintings and included pigment costs. gated to demonstrate to Your Lordship that similar important painters like himself, notably Lanfranco and for similar cartoons. He further maintained that his For the Death of Sapphira, for instance, Cristofano cartoons have always been paid at 200 scudi each, for Sacchi, and even his own student Romanelli, were paid price was fair in terms of labor expended as deter- Roncalli spent 111.5 scudi of his 800 scudi fee on instance to the Cavalier Lanfranco, to a certain fee for comparable work and therefore he mined by size. Again he was generally right in arguing ultramarine.204

18 19 Thus, only part of the story really was told when expected to finish the job, himself was belittled by Cortona argued for equity by saying that he, Lanfranco, envious rivals as a painter of small Madonnas unfit for Sacchi, and Romanelli deserved to be paid the same. large commissions and as a procrastinator who “took Evidence is slight for estimating with accuracy any a long time without ever reaching the end of his of those painters’ annual production, though Sacchi’s labors.”305 Documents cited below back up the latter undoubtedly was the smallest. Thanks to data in claim. Guercino’s Libro dei conti, it appears that, in peak years ’s problem was out of the ordinary. (1637, 1648–50), the painter turned out between 15 and Accordingly to Pascoli, when the artist finished deco- 20 canvases.299 While Maratta gained a reputation for rating S. Ignazio in three years (1694), he feared that being “dilatory and irresolute in completing his works,” the work’s merits would be lessened if it became Bellori tried to refute the charge by asserting that “in known how quickly he had painted his grand project, the space of two years he made so much progress in which amounted to some 1,000 square meters of painting that he completed twenty-two pictures in a fresco. In an effort to forestall negative criticism, Pozzo short time, large and small.”300 would have liked to delay the unveiling by a couple of Speed of execution had another financial dimension: years.306 satisfying a buyer by delivering on time and gaining One more money matter relates to speed of execu- a reputation of being “available.” Giulio Rospigliosi’s tion: the debates over the superiority of colore versus letter of 1646 to his brother encapsulates this issue. He disegno, given that the former generally relied on recommended that his brother consider hiring Andrea swifter brushwork.307 If buyers in general would pay Camassei or some foreign painters such as Monsù more for disegno-based art (which is only a hypothe- Lomer (Lemaire), Monsù Mignard, Monsù Giusto (Juste sis since data are lacking), the knotty question is, de Pape) “because I expect they would provide much would that have been due to the greater labor seem- satisfaction and at a reasonable price. . . . Sig.r Pietro da ingly expended or to aesthetic preference, assuming Cortona, Monsù Pusino and il Sig.r Andrea Sacco are that those are separable criteria? In a rare comment more famous, but I don’t know if they are in Rome on the issue, Pascoli said that the opposite was true, now and, anyway, I doubt that you could get a work that colore-based paintings sold for more due to their from their hands for many, many years.”301 Bellori, too, effortless attractiveness. Disegno-based work, on the was sensitive to this question, as his opening lines of other hand, “remains behind” because it is appreciated Lanfranco’s vita indicate: “A great advantage and very only by experts (Bellori had remarked in his lecture great profit does accrue to a person who accomplishes on the Idea that “the common people refer everything with ease what he undertakes, for there is someone we to the sense of sight. . . . they appreciate beautiful have seen who, by deferring works through excessive colors, not beautiful forms”).308 Salvator Rosa thought ponderation, ended by having them remain on his the same, observing that prices for Tintoretto’s imper- hands unfinished, without any reward for his extensive fectly drawn portraits, like those by other north Ital- labors, and having allowed others to overtake him in ians, were higher than prices for portraits by Santi di profits and in esteem. never had Tito, even though the latter’s were faultless in disegno. reason to repent of slowness.”302 “Something which I have clearly come to recognize,” Working quickly also could avert penalties though, Baldinucci quotes Rosa as saying, “is that an excellent like contract jobs today, late fees were rarely collected. style of coloring is valued more than an excellent In a classic case, in 1679 Maratta was obligated to finish outline.”309 More data are needed to evaluate Pascoli’s his Virgin Appearing to St. Stanislas Kostka in S. Andrea and Rosa’s contention and to correlate the colore– al Quirinale within a year or refund his 100 scudi disegno question with the reputations and prices of advance and any further payments that had been made individual painters. toward his 400 scudi fee. Despite the stipulation, he delayed and delivered the altarpiece only in 1687 without retribution.303 Quite different was Sacchi’s dis- Pigments astrous experience with decorating the ceiling of S. Luigi dei Francesi. Due to his slowness and declining Prices of nearly all art supplies are documented, but health, and being fundamentally unsuited to organizing there is an insurmountable problem regarding the most a team for complex fresco work, he had to give up the important material, pigments, which were traded most commission after erecting scaffolding and doing a bit widely in . Without evidence of how many 9 Giacinto Brandi, Assumption of the Virgin, 1682–83. Fresco. S. Silvestro in Capite, Rome. of painting.304 Ironically, his star pupil Maratta, who was ounces of which particular colors were used in a given

33 5 (left) Paolo Finoglio, The Circumcision, 1626. Oil on canvas, 255 ¥ 170 cm. Certosa di S. Martino, Naples.

6 (above) Massimo Stanzione, Pietà, 1638. Oil on canvas, 240 ¥ 320 cm. Certosa di S. Martino, Naples.

relative to pre-1611 exchange rates.63 In effect, and as a subject in 1637 (Fig. 7), and 200 ducats for Andrea result of this coming together of the combined factors Vaccaro’s altarpiece of St. Hugh in 1652.65 of taste and economics, the 1620s and 1630s constituted All four of these paintings compare reasonably well the key moment when prices for Neapolitan painting in their size and number of figures. Caracciolo’s shifted from a belated continuation of sixteenth-century Assumption contains the equivalent of around seven price structures toward relatively more generous prices figures and measures 244 ¥ 170 cm, Stanzione’s Pietà that were comparable to those commanded for similar contains six and measures 240 ¥ 320 cm, and Vaccaro’s work in other cities. contains the equivalent of around seven figures while This can be readily demonstrated from the scores of measuring 205 ¥ 305 cm. Only Ribera’s picture was payments for altarpieces over the course of the seven- more expensive in relation to its size and number of teenth century as tabulated below (Table 1). In the figures: containing the equivalent of just under six 1620s it was still reasonably common for well-known figures and measuring 264 ¥ 170 cm, it cost 400 ducats. painters to receive 100 ducat commissions for altar- Conversely, Finoglio’s Circumcision of 1626 seems a pieces: this was the amount paid to Paolo Finoglio, for bargain at just 100 ducats for a painting measuring 255 example, for an altarpiece at the Certosa di S. Martino ¥ 170 cm and containing the equivalent of six figures. in 1626 (Fig. 5).64 From the 1630s onwards, however, Altarpieces constitute a particularly useful standard this became less and less the case. Altarpieces commis- for assessing price trends across time since, unlike fres- sioned at the Certosa di S. Martino testify to this coes, they are reasonably standardized in their dimen- change. Accordingly, 251 ducats were paid in 1631 for sions (being generally 2–2.5 meters high by 1.75–2 Caracciolo’s Assumption of the Virgin, 300 ducats in 1638 meters wide) and their usual number of figures (gen- for Stanzione’s Pietà (Fig. 6, technically an overdoor erally the equivalent of between four to six figures and placed in the nave, although this wouldn’t have affected only rarely exceeding eight). Unlike the more varied the price), 400 ducats for Ribera’s painting of the same nature of fresco production, they are thus more com- 7 Jusepe de Ribera, Pietà, 1637. Oil on canvas, 264 ¥ 170 cm. Certosa di S. Martino, Naples.

14 7 Pietro da Cortona and , Apollo Pointing out Hercules to the Prince, 1644–47 and 1659–61. Fresco. Room of Apollo, , .

Buonarroti the Younger, probably to enjoy greater the master’s cartoons.191 As customary, the Medici freedom.188 There is no evidence that, despite the latter’s ambassador paid a visit to Ferri in order to invite him complaints in mid-1641 that putting Cortona up was to Florence. In correspondence of 1659, there is refer- inconvenient, the artist moved elsewhere.189 Having ence to just one room and to the possibility that been absent during 1643, he left Florence again in 1647 Cortona would return to Florence to put the final to work in S. Maria della Vallicella and the Palazzo touches on the work.192 Another letter, of August 1659, Pamphilj in Rome. Meanwhile he maintained good seems to confirm that the marriage of the future 8 Ciro Ferri, Prince Crowned by Fame and Eternity. 1663–65. Fresco. Room of Saturn, Palazzo relations with the Medici, yet he never returned to Cosimo III provided the motivation for a “final agree- Pitti, Florence. Florence to complete the Planetary Rooms and get his ment.” In it, the grand ducal secretary invited the final payment. Medici ambassador in Rome, Carlo Rinuccini, to expe- By 1659, when the negotiations for the marriage of dite “those drawings by Pietro da Cortona, so that his precincts of the palace itself, where lodging and refresh- he would be paid 1,500 scudi for said work.”195 Ferri Prince Cosimo III were already well under way, the young pupil [Ferri] can come here as soon as possible ments were prepared for him.”194 Unlike Colonna and had worked 15 months and was therefore earning a decoration of the Planetary Rooms in the Palazzo Pitti and finish the work in one of the grand duke’s Mitelli and his master Cortona, Ferri always took monthly salary of 100 scudi; his board came to 45 scudi could no longer remain incomplete.190 It has not been antechambers because, given that we cannot wait 100 advantage of the court’s hospitality. For him, too, the a month and he had an assistant.196 Ferri earned about recognized that this was the reason behind a decisive years to hold a marriage in this most serene house, it fee for his work seems to have been defined verbally a third less than Colonna, but his board merited three turn of events in a saga that had dragged on for too would be incongruous for the most noble apartment of and only at the end, as underscored by a letter from times as much (considering that prices at the time were many years. Because of Cortona’s age and precarious this palace to be a room full of scaffolding on such an Andrea Arrighetti of February 1661, when the painter relatively stable, that might help explain Colonna’s health, it was decided by mutual agreement between occasion.”193 had just finished the ceiling of the Room of Apollo grievances in 1639). When Ferri returned to Florence the various parties that the decoration would be com- Ferri, who had arrived in Florence at the start of (Fig. 7): “The same was expressed to him [Ferri] by me in June 1663 to paint the Room of Saturn (Fig. 8), he pleted by his closest collaborator, Ciro Ferri, based on November 1659, “was invited to dismount within the personally. I have remained in agreement with him that lived “as usual” next to the Palazzo Pitti larder; this time

20 21 11 Palma Giovane, Multiplication of the Loaves and Fishes, 1613. Oil on canvas, 300 ¥ 860 cm. S. Maria dei Carmini, Venice.

12 Marco Vicentino, Gathering of the Manna, 1613. Oil on canvas, 300 ¥ 860 cm. S. Maria dei Carmini, Venice.

10 97 118 Pietro Ricchi, Lot and his Daughters. Oil on canvas, ¥ cm. Museo del Settecento Veneziano, Ca’ Rezzonico, Venice. received 400 ducats and Vicentino only 140. The price of the chamber,” and did Bruni follow the terms of his of celebrity was about threefold.212 contract? Aliense answered the first by arguing that Artistic value and hence economic value are often Bruni not only followed the initial instructions but did inspire a rare literary genre—the book in praise of those of price by size (where size helps stabilize other taken to be subjective, much as Pino did in his com- exceeded them by including details not found in the a single painting (Giovanni Giorgio Nicolini, Le ombre variables), could be even greater when celebrated plaint, but the judicial system held another view. When submitted sketch and by applying his knowledge of per- del pennello glorioso del molt’illustre signore Pietro Bellotti, painters are compared with struggling stringers. Exam- disagreements arose between painter and patron regard- spective to adjust scale and sightlines appropriate to the eccellentissimo pittore, Venice, 1659)—but it also cost him ples exist where different painters producing compara- ing price after a contract was signed and the painting site: considerable time to produce. Having to paint more ble work (in size and complexity) for the same patron was completed, the matter could then be referred to a I find that the works are more correct than the sketch slowly, he could produce fewer works than the com- at the same time were paid differently. In 1613 the judicial review.213 Usually two painters were assigned to . . . first of all because the groups of flowers would paratively speedy and sketchy Ricchi, who often abbre- fathers of S. Maria dei Carmini commissioned two large evaluate the disputed work and to determine a fair have been too large and out of proportion if they had viated with shadows and thinly painted surfaces (Fig. lateral paintings for their presbytery, a Multiplication of price.214 Besides the Venetian examples that I have cited been made according to the sketch because they are 10). As a result, his paintings were rarer commodities. the Loaves and Fishes (Fig. 11) by Palma Giovane and a in the Introduction, only one more will be mentioned at a height much closer to our field of vision. Limited supply might have increased demand; it cer- Gathering of the Manna (Fig. 12) by the unsuccessful and here: the testimony in 1618 by Antonio Aliense to the tainly raised prices. virtually unknown Marco Vicentino. Both paintings Provveditori al Sal regarding paintings by Domenico He went on to note that the architecture is more com- This is not to say that reputation did not influence were the same size (25.8 square meters) and with com- Bruni for the Palazzo Ducale (now lost).215 There were plicated, more sophisticated in perspective, and adjusted price. The differences noted in Tables 16 and 17, at least parable numbers of figures (about 28), and yet Palma two parts to his mandate: were the paintings “worthy to suit the site and viewing conditions. Aliense con-

34 35