Abstract
Malvasia's antagonism to seventeenth-century Florentine writers on art has little to do with mere campanilismo or personal animosities, nor is it centered on Vasari: it stems, rather, from essential methodological and theoretical disagreements. Malvasia certainly read and used his Vasari a lot, as his preparatory notes for the Felsina pittrice prove; but he was also aware of the latest trends in historiography outside the narrow field of art history, namely in the works of Mabillon and the Bollandists. In adopting and adapting the gist of their lesson to the narration of art history in Bologna, he supported the evolution of a genre “invented” by Vasari — the biographies of artists — into art history as we now know it. The Florentines (especially Baldinucci and Dati) and their Roman friend Bellori were following different paths: although they did not ignore the evolution of historiography at home and abroad, they tried to work within the classical biographical frame, giving special emphasis to facts (Baldi...
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
