• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

Asked if he has ever had a conversation with the said Onorio Longhi and Orazio Gentileschi concerning the said painting The Resurrection.

Answered:

I’ve never spoken to Onorio Longhi about the said painting of the Resurrection by Baglione, and it’s been more than three years since I’ve spoken to Gentileschi.

Asked if he knows the painter Lodovico Bresciano and Mario, also a painter.

Answered:

I know a Lodovico Bresciano and a Mario, both painters. This Mario once stayed with me and it’s been three years since he left and I haven’t spoken to him since. As for Lodovico I’ve never spoken to him.

Asked if he knows someone called Bartolomeo, who was once a servant of his, and his whereabouts.

Answered:

I know Bartolomeo. He was once my servant who went two months ago to the Castello del Soderino.

Asked if he knows someone called Giovanni Battista, a young man who lives behind the Banchi.

Answered:

I don’t know any young man called Giovanni Battista or any young man who lives behind the Banchi.

Asked if he knows how to write verse in the vulgar tongue.

Answered:

Your Excellency, no. I don’t dabble in verse either in the vulgar tongue, or in Latin.

Asked if he has ever heard of a poem or composition written in the vulgar tongue in which the said Giovanni Baglione was mentioned.

Answered:

I have never heard it in verse or in prose, in the vulgar tongue, or in Latin.

Asked if he has ever heard of a poem or composition written in the vulgar tongue in which the said Giovanni Baglione was mentioned.

Answered:

I have never heard in verse or in prose, in the vulgar tongue or in Latin, or in any other form, anything where mention of the said Giovanni Baglione was made.

And to his Excellency who said that according to the Bar he was aware that mention had been made of this Giovanni Baglione, and also of the said Mao, in some verses in the vulgar tongue.

Answered:

Never have I received information that mention has been made of Giovanni Baglione or of the said Mao in verse in the vulgar tongue.

Caravaggio’s definition of a good painter as ‘one who knows how to paint well and imitate natural objects well’ is almost comically prosaic. Perhaps he meant it as a deliberately provocative, no-nonsense assertion of his own notoriously direct naturalistic approach. But it is equally likely that he was just playing dumb. Caravaggio knew very well that there was more to painting than the mere reproduction of appearances. But it was not in his interests to appear before the court as an intellectual. After all, intellectuals were the kind of people who might write poetry in their spare time.

Caravaggio’s eventual list of valent’huomini was influenced by calculation. Most of those chosen were conservative and academically minded painters. None were his friends, least of all Annibale Carracci, with whom he had crossed paintbrushes in the Cerasi Chapel. He included Federico Zuccaro, who had insulted Caravaggio’s Contarelli Chapel canvases in the presence of Giovanni Baglione. Zuccaro was president of the Academy, so no wonder Caravaggio wanted the court to think he thought well of him. This was not merely false magnanimity: it was a shrewd attempted alignment with respectability.

Shortly after Caravaggio gave his evidence, Baglione decided to concentrate his attack on Gentileschi. He came back to the court that afternoon with another exhibit for the prosecution. It was an angry letter to Baglione from Gentileschi, written earlier that summer. Baglione had been on a pilgrimage to the shrine at Loreto and Gentileschi had asked him to bring him back some silver figurines of the Madonna. Baglione had given him two figures, but they were in lead, which Gentileschi had taken as a slight. Having explained the background to the court, Baglione then produced the letter:

To Giovanni the painter,

I am not returning your Madonna figurines as you deserve but will keep them for the devotion they represent. However, I consider you a man with just about enough courage to buy them in lead. Your