BOOK THE SIXTH. HISTORY OF PAINTING IN PIEDMONT AND THE ADJACENT TERRITORY. EPOCH I. _Dawn and progress of the art until the sixteenth century_ 447 EPOCH II. _Painters of the seventeenth century, and first establishment of the academy_ 466 EPOCH III. _School of Beaumont, and restoration of the academy_ 483 HISTORY OF PAINTING IN UPPER ITALY. BOOK III. BOLOGNESE SCHOOL. During the progress of the present work, it has been observed that the fame of the art, in common with that of letters and of arms, has been transferred from place to place; and that wherever it fixed its seat, its influence tended to the perfection of some branch of painting, which by preceding artists had been less studied, or less understood. Towards the close of the sixteenth century, indeed, there seemed not to be left in nature, any kind of beauty, in its outward forms or aspect, that had not been admired and represented by some great master; insomuch that the artist, however ambitious, was compelled, as an imitator of nature, to become, likewise, an imitator of the best masters; while the discovery of new styles depended upon a more or less skilful combination of the old. Thus the sole career that remained open for the display of human genius was that of imitation; as it appeared impossible to design figures more masterly than those of Bonarruoti or Da Vinci, to express them with more grace than Raffaello, with more animated colours than those of Titian, with more lively motions than those of Tintoretto, or to give them a richer drapery and ornaments than Paul Veronese; to present them to the eye at every degree of distance, and in perspective, with more art, more fulness, and more enchanting power than fell to the genius of Coreggio. Accordingly the path of imitation was at that time pursued by every school, though with very little method. Each of these was almost wholly subservient to its prototype; nor was it distinguished in any other portion of the art than that by which its master had surpassed all competitors. Even in this portion, the distinction of these followers consisted only in copying the same figures, and executing them in a more hasty and capricious manner, or at all events, in adapting them out of place. Those devoted to Raffaello were sure to exaggerate the ideal in every picture: the same in regard to anatomy in those of Michelangiolo: while misplaced vivacity and foreshortening were repeated in the most judicious historic pieces of the Venetians and the Lombards.