Michelino was an artist who also retained the ancient style, and continued to the last the practice of making his figures large and his buildings small, a practice blamed by Lomazzo even in the oldest painters. He assigns to him a rank, however, among the best of his age on account of his designs of animals of every kind, which he painted, says Lomazzo, wonderfully well, and of the human figure, which he executed with effect, rather in burlesque than in serious subjects; and in this style was esteemed the model of his school. He would appear likewise to have been esteemed by foreigners, as we find in the Notizia Morelli, that in the house of the Vendramini at Venice there was preserved "a small book in 4to. bound in kid-skin, with figures of animals coloured" by this artist. At a little interval, according to Pagave, we are to place the period of Agostino di Bramantino, an artist unknown to Bottari, as well as to more recent investigators of pictorial history. I apprehend that an error committed by Vasari gave rise to an additional one in the mind of Pagave, a very accurate writer. Vasari, remarking that in a chamber of the Vatican, which was subsequently painted by Raffaello, the previous labours of Pier della Francesca, of Bramantino, of Signorelli, and of the Ab. di S. Clemente, were destroyed to accommodate the former, supposes that the two first of the artists, thus sacrificed, conducted them contemporaneously under Nicholas V. about 1450. Induced by the esteem he had for the same Bramantino, he collected notices also of his other works, and discovered him to be the author of the Dead Christ foreshortened, of the Family which deceived the horse at Milan, and of several perspectives; the whole of which account is founded in error, when attributed to a Bramantino, who flourished about 1450, yet the whole is true when we suppose them to have been the work of one Bramantino, pupil to Bramante, who lived in the year 1529. I cannot perceive, however, in what way the Consiglier Pagave could have detected Vasari's mistake in the Milanese works; whilst in those of the Vatican, which, according to Vasari himself, all belong to the same individual, he has taken occasion to repeat it. He had better have asserted that the historian had erred in point of chronology, in supposing that Bramantino painted under the pontificate of Nicholas V. than have ventured on the hypothesis of the existence of an ancient Bramantino, called Agostino, by whom a very beautiful work was to be seen in the papal palace, and no other specimen at Rome, at Milan, or elsewhere. I disclaim all belief then in this old artist until more authentic proofs are brought forward of his existence, and I shall be enabled to throw new light upon the subject before I conclude the present epoch.