Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/greatenglishmastOOstah THE INTERNATIONAL ART SERIES THE GREAT ENGLISH MASTERS THE INTERNATIONAL ART SERIES The first yearns volumes will be: L WILLIAM HOGARTH. Text by Edward Hutton IL E. M. DEGAS. Text by Georges Grappe m. THE GREAT ENGLISH MASTERS. (Berlin Exhibition of Old English Art 1908.) Text by Fritz Stahl IV. EUGENE DELACROIX. Text by CamiUe Mauclair V. FRITZ BOEHLE. Text by Rudolf Klein VL AUGUSTE RODIN. Text by Gustave Kahn The volumes of the International Art Series are published in decorated wrappers at 5/- net and in stiff linen at 6/6 net There will also be issued 100 numbered copies of each volume at 20 shillings each, with text on hand-made paper and plates on super- fine unglazed art paper, bound in real parchment. Where the artist is still living the copies will bear his autograph signature. THE GREAT ENGLISH MASTERS THE GREAT ENGLISH MASTERS BY FRITZ STAHL TWO CUTS IN FOUR COLOURS, 43 DRAWINGS ON SUPERFINE UN- GLAZED ART PAPER 5 TINTED ILLUSTRATIONS AND 2 ENGRAVINGS THE INTERNATIONAL ART PUBLISHING-COMPANY LONDON BERLIN PARIS HE COVER SHEET OF THIS WORK IS BY WILLY BELLING, THE PUBLISHERS' TRADE MARK BY HANS BASTANIER. THE FIRST HUN- DERT COPIES ARE PRINTED ON HAND- MADE PAPER; THE ILLUSTRATIONS ON SUPERFINE UNGLAZED ART PAPER. THESE COPIES ARE BOUND IN REAL PARCHMENT ❖* ALL COPYRIGHTS RESERVED o keep up with the developement of art, it would not suffice to compare works of art from all centuries, but also to wander from country to country. The different nationalities have alternated in being the standard-bearers of art. This fact may be compared to the ancient Roman runners, who never brought singly the holy fire from the altar to the distant goal, but worked in relays; as soon as the torch of one was nearly spent, a new runner lighted a fresh flambeau upon the extinguishing one of his tired comrade. However, it is true, that each epoch of history of any of the civilized nations, has seen a certain amount of art, but an art only, which was created by the art of the time — the new art, which in universal history, alone can be considered. Each nation is limited in its character and in its creative powers. As soon as everybody, living in its midst, has brought out everything in his ability, something new must take the vacated place, something, which may possess peculiarities with new possibilities, with enough saved-up force, to realize them too. Other nationalities will perhaps follow, because this novel art will satisfy their longing, or because it lies so much in the line of that general developement, which, so mysteriously ties together mankind of a certain period. This principle may be expressed also in the following manner: The demands of an era are felt irrespective of nationality, but one nation only is always predestined to fulfil these demands. The English nation was the predestined one in the eighteenth century. It was a period of universal revolutions, not simply changes, such as are demanded by each generation, but revolutions, demanding a new standard of humanity, the modern humanity and all forms of life and art, had to be revised from the beginning. The civilisation upon the Continent, presided over by France, was beautiful and rich, but sterile. A finish, such as was demanded by the future could be obtained only, fi-om England. Which qualities enabled the English nation to become the standard- bearer of art at this critical moment, and why only the English possessed 6 these qualities, should be considered, if one desires to understand the kind and value of their art. Naturally, the weakness of a prevailing art, breeds the desire for an entirely new one. Therefore, we should ask in every case of art- regeneration which faults or weakness the old one, or its propounders, possessed. The close connection, which art holds with the entire life of a people, compels us to look beyond its limits. France was an absolute monarchy, a kingdom, where existed no other might or right, but those of the king. His court was the centre of the political life of the entire nation, and therefore it had to become also the centre of its culture. The king concentrated the aristocracy from its rural haunts, creating a society, which left behind nature and the simple life of ordinary people. This society repned itself from generation to generation, and the more refined it became, the weaker it grew at the same time. This developement came to an end during the „Rococco" period. The tightlaced waist, the hair overdressed and powdered, the feet in shoes with miniature stilts for heels, in short, a treefold impediment of movement, became the fashion. The dancing-master, their most impor- tant and in many instances, their only teacher, had to concentrate his attention upon the idea, to instill into these stiff- laced people, who could move about painfully only, a lovely, doll-like grace. One only needs to look at them, to perceive and to understand the weakness of their bodies and souls, and that these people had to shun everything, which was strong, serious or natural. A passionate character? — Impossible. It would entail violent and ugly gestures. These people were covetous only, love was an intricate society-game, the most important thing, almost filling their entire lives. Matrimony? — Oh yes, a very useful institution, but it should not impede. It would be considered bad manners, if the husband should be found in the drawing-room of his wife. Children? — A necessary evil, they do not occupy any space in their lives. Family- ties are suspended. Nature? — The real article is wild and uncouth, peopled by beasts, who live in dirty hovels. They are called peasants or farmers. Thomas Gainsborough Thomas Gainsborough PORTRAIT DE SELBSTBILDNIS PORTRAIT OF MISS SPARROW LUI-MEME HIMSELF BY PERMISSION Ol- THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS, LONDON BY PERMISSION OF MESSRS. COODEN AND FOX, LONDON George Romney LORD BURGHERSII BY PRRMISSION OF LORD BURTON ULYSSES RAILLANT POLYPHEME ODYSSEUS MACHT SICII UBER POLYPHEM LUSTIG ULYSSES DERIDING POLYPHEMUS 9 If they felt the desu*e to enjoy nature, these dainty people walked within the precints of well-kept parks, or artificial gravel- walks, where pastoral mummeries do look well. These people have nothing in common with real nature, with real life, every-thing human is unknown to them. They can act some kind of life, only in the drawing-rooms, boudoirs or parks, their, artificial life however, is at all times frivolous, but graceful. All seriousness of life has been excluded down to its last vestige. The lack of tolerance in their existence, went in unison with their intolerance in matters pertaining to art, nothing serious or natural was allowed. In order to create an appropriate background for their trifling existence, the decorative artist dissolved all compactness of form into a capricious and wanton flourish, which knew no straight line, nor corner or symmetrie. Faint, light colours predominated. Soft upholstery, perched upon ingeniously constructed frames, supported the frail bodies of these people. The depicting art knew nothing else but this style, because men of that time dreamed or hoped of nothing outside of their sphere. This art appealed to them, alike through its charms and through its deficiencies, a most charming game, unique through centuries, pattering in delicate tints and expressing in tender outlines, glorious through the floating softness of the touch, but incapable to depict men or things which were not belonging to this sort of life, and incapable to grasp the truth of nature. If the „Rococco„ period is appreciated as the acme of refinement, this opinion convicts it at the same time from the standpoint of history. The acme of refinement means: further developement, in other words — the end. — The artificial shoots it produced, were of novel, unique beauty, but they were sterile and unable to produce seed for a new creation. Besides they had lost during their all-filling joy for their times, all sense for the art of the past, an art entirely different from theirs and there was no room for it any more, either within their souls or within their abodes. This lack of feeling excluded a regeneration by reaching back to a stronger and more productive art. 10 All other courts of Europe imitated the French example, they lived the same live, professed the same art, but in some instances only in a clumsy manner and nowhere with the same talent and grace. Among the people, even in France, there grew a constantly increasing hate towards these doings, a hate, which finally demanded their abolishment. The new generation aspired with fervour toward new times, liberty, nature and strong humanity. But, alas, these impotent burghers could only dream, hope and prepare in spirit, what was bound to come sooner or later. There existed only one nation, where the common man could attain power and influence, where he could create and in fact created. Toward the shores of that country the longings of all those nations concentrated, where advice was at a premium, it could be found only there. This country was England, and it was able to satisfy all desires. Being situated at the periphery of Europe and isolated upon an island, it had had its own developement and at the same time had preserved its own peculiarities. It was proof against all foreign influences and it opened itself only to so much of foreign art and manners, as it could assimilate. Thus French flippancy, governing the entire civilized world, since the seventeenth century, had not been able to penetrate to this island kingdom. It seemed for one moment, however, as if the barriers would fall. The French consort of Charles I., a daughter of Mary Medici, and a sister of Louis XIV., perhaps, besides introducing political ideas, doubtless brought French fashion and taste to the court of St. James from Versailles. These influences, however, were quickly nipped in the bud, quickly and terribly by the revolution. There never could be any more authocracy. The gentry, the siipport of Cromwell, could never any more loose its influence. There have since been many sovereigns, and the aristocracy has played an important role at all times; but to the middle classes belonged the governing power. These classes do not exist in any other country, there even does not exist an equivalent term in any other language to express concisely what they are. It is therefore impossible to term them „burghers„ in the meaning, that words implies with other nations, although they occupied the same John Opie MANSELL It Co., LONDON PORTRAIT MRS. GODWIN Sir Joshua Reynolds BY PERMISSION OF IIFNRY J. PFUNGST, LONDON RICHARD BURKE Sir Joshua Reynolds MANSEl.L Sr Co., LONDON MRS. ROBINSON 15 place and position. Their most important privilege consisted in the fact, that they had the right to appear at Court. They either held a public ofifice or occupied a commercial position and wherever their residence was, either at home or abroad, they belonged heart and soul to England. This fact made a developement impossible, such as went on in France, in spite of the fact, that many externals of Rococco filtered through. The standard-bearers of English culture were men of freedom and could never become puppets of the boudoir. They were unable to adapt a costume, which could impede their vigorous and natural motion. They never lost their connection with nature, they appreciated its gifts and lived according to their moods. This class of men did not always mingle with its own kind, but loved to live among people of other classes or other professions than theirs. Their life centred around the family and the children. Thus it shows plainly, that the English people were beings of untrammeled senses and of simple human proclivities, full of reverence for ancient art, a feeling entire unknown to the puppets of Rococco. The higher men of this class had already formerly searched for real art and had collected its treasures, but now there appeared a real impetus and the entire gentry tried to follow their leaders. The increasing wealth of the country permitted extensive travels and considerable purchases. They only had learned to understand, what was strong and natural. When they came to Italy, they were won over to ancient art and revelled in Roman and Hellenic specimens, they added to the „Holbeins„ and „Van Dycks,, which were hanging upon their walls of their ancestry-halls and bought most beautiful works of the Dutch, German, Italian and Flamish artists. What these people desired of their individual taste, could not any more be supplied by foreign masters. Up to this time, there scarcely had been any English painters. The ancient Romans, whose sole energy was spent in political work, had to attract foreign artists and the same may be said of the English. The nation now should and could produce artists of their own flesh and blood. They would be predestined to produce work, such as was desired by all, hut which had been so far unattainable. 16 That shows, why the Britons were the predestined people during this worldshaking revolution, why they possessed the required properties, which were lacking in the French of the Rococco period, although these had been the leaders up to now. However, if we modern people step into halls, where we can see paintings of Gainsborough, Reynolds, Romney, Raeburn or Constable, we may feel those connections, which linked these artists to the previous period. But, if one imagines for one moment a gallery of French paintings of the 18th century, one feels immediately, how very much closer the Britons are to us. In France, we see dolls with lustful eyes, forever flirting in stuffy and closed halls or in gardens without life and light, oppressing and boring healthy-minded people extremely, while across the channel we find men of flesh and blood, men with individualities, men of courage, warmhearted women, dreaming girls, children with harmless eyes, whispering trees, moving air, glittering light The terms of older art are inadequate to expound those problems, which a new time puts to its exponents. Happy is that generation, which is able to continue established traditions, allowing novel features to mingle with the old ones imperceptibly, until they are assimilated. To the English painters of the 18th century this was denied. French art, even if it had been known to them, could not inspire them, on account of its antithesis to their worldly feeling, while the domestic epigones after Van Dyck, only had been of fleeting fame. Two instances may be mentioned, A Dutchman, who had taken the name of Sir Peter Lely while he was sojourning in England, imitated the style of Van Dyck with little talent; a German by the name of Gottfried Kneller, who fancied the dry style of the frenchified scholars of Rembrandt, was the other one. Miniature painting, a fresher and more complete art, came nearer to the ideal, at least in feeling, but what could that help from a technical point of view, when large canvasses had to be considered? They were compelled, therefore, to look for help and advice to older art. Of what this older art consisted, has been set forth in the foregoing lines. For their most Thomas Gainsljoroiigli BRAUN & Co., DORNACII PROMENADE MATINALE MORGENSPAZIERGANG THE MORNING WALK George Romiicy MANSKLL & Co., LONDON LADY CRAVEN 19 important work, van Dyck was the most prominent type, he had painted the aristocracy of their country a century ago and his work could be found in many castles and homes of the better class. When children hold opposite views to their parents, they may find congenial ideas at their grandparents, — that is about the way, — the artists of that time overlooked their immediate ancestors, who had been touched a little by the French Rococco epoch. The new generation felt the desire to become more English or to show more national individuality. It did not admire anything of the former period, the dress even became similar again to that of their grandfathers time. Women, youths and children at least, wore antiquated designs and colours. The painters of the time, therefore, had their path indicated, it was made clear to them where they should begin. For the male portrait, which did not find favour in Van Dyck's style, Rubens or Rembrandt could act as a type. The models of these two artists wore clothing, which had some faint resemblance to the uniforms, coats and material of their present fashion. In looking for a standard for landscapes, it was easily found in the Dutch masters, whose works were fashioned from natural scenes in the Netherlands similar to their own. Such assertions as the foregoing, however, seem to justify the opinion of those critics, who charge the English masters with electicism, not considering them as the first generation of modern, but the last one of ancient art. However, that is by no means the general opinion. These painters felt for men and nature stricktly from the standpoint of their own period and their own country. Whenever they needed types to express themselves, they only underwent the same experience as artist of later generations too, even those, who have been critizised by our generation as revolutionists. They were entirely innocent, because uninterrupted tradition in Rococco had ceased, thus becoming useless to serve for any new inspirations. All of them, even Crevicault and Delacroix, the masters of Barbizon, — the Manet — all have had to learn upon former masters of painting, even all those, who have in spite of these facts, 20 been elevated to ancestors of the new art. Flamlanders, Dutchmen and Spaniards had been utilized by these Frenchmen as teachers or types. (Many of them, as will be set forth later, upon being inspired by English art.) The English have shown a much prmer instinct. Van Dyck, the painter of their ideal, may almost be considered an English artist, his later work has been decidedly influenced by men and scenes of that country. And the other masters, who come under consideration, have been the nearest neighbours or at least, citizens of related nations; while later artists of other nationalities, ignored all differences between nations, cultures and landscapes, surely to the detriment of their art, at least of ideal art. The foremost painters of this English art were Thomas Gainsborough and Joshua Reynolds. These names are mostly coupled together, but it is very often the case, that things or persons are mentioned in one breath through habit of language and it is necessary therefore, in considering these two artists, not alone to sever them for a time, but even to show at least one outspoken contrast between them. A very strong contrast too — as strong as two features of the same period of culture are able to show. They met and painted the same society, in some cases even the same persons, but they painted them with different temperaments and saw them with different eyes. (Another proof how strong the personal element was predominating in the art of these eclectics.) Gainsborough was of strong nature, but of a refined sensuality, a man of instinct. He enjoyed everything good in life, the landscape most perhaps, music, and handsome women. Method, calculation or problems, were far from his mind. He was unable to finish an apprenticeship and returned home from London after staying two years where he had gone, when 15 years of age. He endeavored to support himself In later years, when he visited the landed proprietors near Bath, he could memorize a painting by Van Dyck, assimilating all coloristic secrets of the master and being able to overcome all tech- nical difficulties. But, he was never able to analize this splendid gift. John Constable MOULIN DE FLATFORD SUR LA STOUR FLATFORD-MUHLE AN DER STOUR FLATFORD MILL, ON THE RIVER STOUR John Constable CATHEDRALE DE SALISBURY KATHEDRALE ZU SALISBURY By permission of W. A. Mansell & Co., London SALISBURY CATHEDRAL 23 Nature had given him a great sensibility for colour. He could find the right tone, transitions, or possessed the ability to harmonize given tints, — the borrowing of musical terms is intentionally, — everything was as easy as play to him. Any appearance coming before his vision, assumed the shape of a picture before his minds eye and a wide back- ground of landscape was utilized by him, to form a contrast to the colours of the head and of the draperies. He loved blue, a difpcult colour, especially in lighter tints. Reynolds, the hypercritic of art, knew this difficulty and considered it insurmountable. Gainsborough was perhaps the only artist, who overcame it. His most famous work upon this field is "The blue Boy" a young gentleman in a blue-silk Van Dyck costume. How did he do it? He put him into an evening — landscape. Only a streak of light is left near the horizon, everything else a warm brown twilight. Yellowish -brown shadows lurk in the folds of the shimmering light-blue fabric, which is emphasized only upon the lighted places. In this manner the dangerous large blue area is avoided, it is astonishing how little of this colour was used, but in spite of it, the character of the fabric is well seen. The solution is most ingenious, but could have been produced alone by instinct. The fame of the picture is justified, but it has been an impediment perhaps to the appreciation of other work. Especially during a period, where the eyes, used to pronounced and conspicuous effects, have forgotten to focus themselves in a delicate manner. Gainsborough had many possibilities in this matter. Upon many paintings, where blue-gowned ladies stand upon the green lawn of a park in the brightest light, the solution is even finer. If several such paintings are seen successively, it will appear, as if a certain formula had been applied and repeated, the way light and shade are dividing the area of the painting and give life to it at the same time. Furthermore, one sees evidences of this fact, in the masterful way, in which the whitish- or grayish-tints of the landscape commingle with the blue colour. Seeing several of these paintings simultaneously, it becomes evident, that each one shows a different solution and that scarcely the same tints are repeated. 24 Gainsborough, the same as the old masters, never variated in any of his works from the scale, once chosen. He took up the appearance as a unit and was enabled, therefore, to get along with those few colours, which were essential to it. The landscape received her dues, — such dues, which are obvious from a passionate lover of nature, — it never became simply a setting, but grew under his touch to a piece of the living world. The sentiment was not chosen according to the individuality of the sitter, but according to the colours, which his appearance brought either upon the palette, or which were needed to supplement them. Everything else would have been more in accordance to the aristocratic figure of the "Blue Boy" but an evening-sky. Gainsborough's artistic feeling appeared most pronounced, whenever he had to create two pictures as a set. As an exemple we may take the following: "The Man in the red Coat with yellow breeches" and the "Lady in White". It almost seems impossible to create a set of these two subjects. Gainsborough, however accomplished it and the beholder will not notice the least affectation or constraint. The red colour of the coat and the yellow of the breeches are set off by the silver-gray horse, while the silvery dress of the lady is placed next to a yellow column of carved wood, both upon a red background. This delicacy of touch for colour, which makes obvious a delicate perception for light, lets those artists, who are fortunate enough to possess these talents, become painters of landscape par excellence. It should be considered, that the real sentimental landscape was first created by the Venetians in Italy and by the Dutchmen in northern Europe, that means at those nations, which saw things in a specific manner, one may say picturesquely through the peculiarity of their atmosphere. Gainsborough, not alone was a "born" artist, but a born lover of landscape as well, who would perhaps have painted nothing else, if English society had not elevated the portrait to the standard of artistic ability. There existed a demand for portraits within this circle, which Sir Joshua Reynolds MANSELI. & Co., LONDON Sir Joshua Reynolds MANSELL & Co., LONDON MRS. CARNAC MRS. SIDDONS AS THE TRAGIC MUSE William Turner MANSELL & Co., LONDON « FIGHTING TEMERAIRE. REMORQUE POUR LA DERNIERE FOIS A SON BASSIN POUR Y ETRE DEMOLI DER >FIGHTING TEMERAIREt ZUM LETZTEN MAL ZWECKS DEMOLIERUNG INS DOCK GESCHLEPPT . . . THE "FIGHTING TEMERAIRE" TUGGED TO HER LAST BERTH TO BE BROKEN UP . . . 27 stands without parallel in history. The artist doubtless, preferred the calling of a portraitist to that of a painter of landscapes, on account of the former being more remunerative. At prst he affected the styles of Poussin and Lorrain, later the classical style, sprung from the gleaming and vivid nature of Italy, at that time the El Dorado of the better classes. He, therefore turned to portrait-painting, for which he possessed a wonderful susceptible eye. He was a man, who passionately loved the nature of his country in which, he wandered and lived with pleasure. If he is only judged by his works, it almost seems, as if he had seen the fertile and rich soil of Flanders. It is true, the works of Rubens possess a deeper and more sappy colouring than those of Gainsborough and some people judge by this fact, that the latters pictures should not be considered as coming from a master. This opinion is entirely wrong. He did not see people any different from what they were, his eye was true in every respect. Repned by culture and taste, they were formed by his hands, to speak metaphorically, as a bright spot of colour upon the background of their own soil. Their exterior was the most important part of the picture, the background was only secondary to them. The town-dweller of to-day does neither pt into rural scenes. Upon all paintings, where realistic artists place such people into rustic or pastoral scenes, there will appear a pronounced discord. Only those men, who live always in the country and close to nature at that, will appear in harmony with it. Their colour of skin and the tints of their clothing even, adapt themselves to constant rural surroundings. The painting of landscapes had been a developement for Gains- borough in many respects. It made his eye more sensible, made air and light cardinal points to him, giving to his work the wonderful ethereal and fragrant appearance. With all these accomplishements he was the first artist with whom we pnd this feature and it puts him above his great rival Reynolds. A certain inequality of his paintings is obvious therefore, a model, whose air would not sound under Gainsborough's hands, would have been a lost soul indeed. 28 It is due to the fault of coarser vision, when doubts appear to-day in regard to the truth of his portraits, especially, where the belief prevails, that he was a byzantine flatterer and his ladies portraits often show a great similarity of faces. A trained eye will detect distinctions, if proper attention is paid. There exist a number of portraits by Gainsborough, which imply the utter worthlessness of their models. An instance is the portrait of the young Prince of Wales, whose weak handsome face shows all bad instincts. In a certain sense a portrait always critizises the sitter, and some of the ladies-heads painted by Gainsborough, seem doll-like and empty. Psychological revelations, almost carricatures are few and far between among his works. Certain modern painters, who affect this style, do so by license of the cultureless society from which they obtain their models. Gainsborough was impressed differently by his sitters and therefore, did not need to depict lies. The staunch morality of society of his period, made his models keep their features under strickt control, a quality, still practised in England. Besides, Gainsborough being of sensual nature, and a "homme d femme" saw all women surrounded by a ceratin halo. He never flattered intentionally perhaps from business-reasons, because there is no difference between those portraits he painted for himself and those he painted in commission. Are his women all handsome, or so similar, that one gets the idea, that he had a ceratin ideal in his mind? No, ~ they only were ladies of a distinguished class. Many possess irregular features and insigni- ficant figures. To such passionate physiognomies as that of Mrs. Siddows, the great actress of the period, and some petulantly and irregularly depicted girls faces, a real existence can not be denied, the same may be conjectured of his classic beauties, his gem-like proves with clear complexions, rich tresses and large meditating eyes. Do not live enough of their kind, even to-day in that humid country, where sentiment and body-culture abound? The talent, to be able to feel the melody of any person — provided there is one — made it unnecessary for Gainsborough to arrange. MRS. KENNEDY OF DUNURE William Beechey UV PF.RMISSION' . >I HIS CRACH THE DUKE OF WELLINGTON Sir Joshua Reynolds BY PERMISSION OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS. LONnON ARTHUR, 1st DUKE OF WELLINGTON STR WILLIAM CHAMBERS 31 search or drape. He would have been unable to do so too. His strength, however, at times was his weakness, it was dependent upon his sen- suality. To be able, to correspond with the contour, to invent groups, such was not in his power. However, to correspond with colours, was instinct with him. Reynolds was different, as we will see. As in every portraitist, there existed in Gainsborough a certain family resemblance between his creations and himself He had a fine face, very quiet, chiseled features, the mouth prmly closed, the eye clear and musical, the complexion pure, but pale. If this would not be an authentic fact, he would have been imagined that way. If we compare to his picture a portrait of Joshua Reynolds by himself, the contrast of these two natures will become obvious. Reynolds had coarse features, vivid complexion, curly brown hair, a full mouth and sparkling eyes. One feels the restless desire of this individuality to obtain knowledge, its prudence, its great self-assertion. There is no doubt, that this general picture of the feature was accentuated by deafness. He always is in pose or in a certain make-up, or his portraits show a certain adjunct, which makes it model different from other people and stamps it as an artist. A certain likeness to Rembrandt is emphasized. In this manner he stood against the musical dreamer Gainsborough as a prudent, an astute man of the world. Many things are missing in him, which the other possesses and vice versa. Nature had denied him one important thing, just the one, which was Gainsboroughs most pronounced gift, namely: instinct. If his pictures had not come down to us, showing their strong effects, one could almost doubt, his artistic talent in following up his course of studies. When a boy, ten years of age — it is almost too horrible to mention it — he endeavored to master the intricacies of perspective. When Gainsborough was of this age, he very likely roamed in the forest, singing, whistling and dreaming. After Reynolds had finished his apprenticeship, he was enticed to worship Rembrandt through the imitator Gaudy. Rembrandt was his ideal at one time, the same 32 as Van Dyck was worshipped by Gainsborough, from whom he learned, much to his liking, to express animated features through an atmosphere of light and darkness. But he soon discarded that. The trend of his English contempo- raries, the Italy-lovers, awakened his desire to see this country, and to bask in the glories of its classic art. This desire had been bred through literature. The same as Goethe of a later century, he loved Rafael and the Bolognese Akademicians among painters. But Reynolds artistic eye discovered Michel Angelo and the Venetians and if he did not take their part entirely, he used them as types to a certain extent. All artists of later periods, at least the more famous colorists have done the same. Reynolds copied everywhere old masters, or made notes about them for later use. He strengthened his love for handsome colours upon the Venetian canvasses and his sense for lovely contours and groups upon the classical and academical masters. Thus he developed through hard work a good taste, the only quality, he did not receive from nature. Is it possible to become a great artist in this manner? Theoretically no, experience says yes, however, but only in one instance and this instance was Reynolds. He had brought into play, wonderfully to relate, all these different and divergent influences, through his personality and energy, he forced these powers into his service and concordance. It was of disadvantage to him in a certain respect, that he was able to treat art theoretically, through his being an able orator and author. Like all artists he was subjective and tried to recommend his curriculum of studies as the sole and only one, which would lead to success. Many who judged him, did so by his work and not by his deeds. In consequence he appears a fanatic eclectic, who knew no difference between tendency and value. In reality he took with great assurance those things, which he needed to supplement his natural gifts. In spite of this fact, he stands upon a high pedestal of distinction and inde- pendency. 33 Indeed, his art is artful, but great nevertheless. There are in fact, many more kinds of art, but those, which are dreamed by theorists. Reynolds had much more blood and temperament, than Gains- borough. It is not accidental, that his favorite colour was a strong, sometimes uninterrupted; vivid crimson. The ethics of his time and his taste, acquired in Italy, held him in check, otherwise — one is apt to think — he would have slapped down his colours like Franz Hals, who did that upon the impression of the moment. One thing is obvious, — the quiet existence and the equilibrious state of his models never sufficed for him. He loved to show them in motion, either singly or in groups, where that was impossible, they do show some disturbance of mind, either by a curved up lip, or by sparkling eyes Gainsborough's lines are all descending, Reynold's ascending. The men of the former artist look tired, those of the latter enter- prising. He grasps deeper in a psychological sense, possesses more knowledge of men and conveys his impressions. In his gallery of famous and unfamous contemporaries are shown nearly all possibilities of the male character. Superiority of will, penetrating intelligence, latent strength, sparkling humour. Here he shows his originality, because these men he depicted before. Is perhaps anybody able, to tell where he "learned" to analyze in such a thorough manner these sentimental or ironical characters? No, that was inborn intellect, an intellect, which was stricktly up to date, according to his period. Even women of esprit or of caprice and verve, found their strongest interpreter in him. Fascinating ugliness, for which women themselves or their male admirers, have no sense whatever, he expressed in an astonishingly convincing manner. Where mental qualities were lacking, for instance in handsome women or children, whose feature mostly are of little spiritual interest, he created an atmosphere, which brought life into the picture. Women gossip or read together, mothers play with their babies, enjoying their pranks, pressing them to their hearts, or grouping the little ones around themselves, while all faces are enlivened by the smile of love and joy. 34 Just that one point, which Gainsborough lacked, namely: the true line of the moving body, its contour, in short, linear composition and the symmetrical joinder of the level through figures anf groups, — Reynolds possessed as a natural talent. The picture of the "Duchess of Devonshire" may be cited as an instance. The way she holds the infant upon her left arm, while making a playful gesture with her right hand, how the baby throws her tiny arms joyfully upward, surely will attract the beholder. It is a real motive from the nursery. (A typical English scene, in antithesis to childless French ones.) Do not the contours of this animated group show like an ancient relief? This work proves, that classical art, which Reynolds sometimes imitated, as far as the settings were concerned, had impressed him deeply. The classical feature in this case, has been added, like a precious spice to a simple dish. It gives an agreeable taste, without being too prominent, an ingenuous person would not even find it. Another example! How grand, but natural, presents itself the Hamilton group ! The lady on horseback, the Lord leading her steed and supporting his consort. How beautiful is her pose within that frame! The artist had the desire to create people of interest, to be sure, but at times, he went too far in this respect. The tendency of his period for the classical, coupled with his individual proclivities, sometimes drove him into allegory or masquerade! Where Gainsborough would have chosen the Van Dyck costume, which still had been worn by his grandfather, Reynolds selected the antique, a drapery from a strange country and an obsolete time, elevating women into demigoddesses. One of his ladies is depicted, sacrificing to the Graces, three sisters are seen, sacrifizing to Hymen. Mrs. Siddows, painted so lovely by Gainsborough in the costume of the period, is shown by Reynolds as a tragic Muse, accompanied by guardian-angels, sitting upon a throne in the clouds, showing the profound assiduity and large contour of a Sibyl of Michel Angelo. Even children, for whose sweet naivete the artist generally had a fine perception, were disguised and depicted in awkward poses. One of his great features was the worm, deep and handsome colour, which even George Romney M\NS1:LL & Co., LONDON LADY HAMILTON 37 to-day shines in unabated splendour. His deep and live characteristic, the rich and sure touch, should also be fully appreciated. Gainsborough knew the works of Van Dyck by heart, Reynolds, affected the colouring of Tizian. That characterizes the nature of each. Gainsborough was an artist, Reynolds a master-artisan in the better sense of the term. He penetrated deeply into the secret of treating colours and he singly reached a goal, which was craved in vain by entire generations of artists during the nineteenth century. He knew too, how the different shades behave in regard to effect, or how cold or warm shaded tints, should be applied in the proper manner, in order to obtain harmony and proportion. It seems, that he revelled in these difficulties, both in colouring and drawing. To harmonize red with black, or even with white, presented no difficulties to him. His expert artistic -sense, a science, which to-day is underestimated by many, always found the solution. He made good use of his independency from reality, especially regarding the costume, a trait, which creates inventive ability. His art enabled him to arrange, entirely absent in Gainsborough. Upon the portrait of and her children, a boy, dressed in red velvet, nestles close to the white-gowned mother. It would have been possible to chose other colours, as the two mentioned, ore antagonistic to each other. But Reynolds did nothing of that kind. He took up a problem, where he could show his art. From the lighter tint of the creased velvet, he created the colour of a cloak, which drapes the lady. In reality that did not exist. In the folds of the cloak he created several shades within the principal colour and through this scale from shining red, graduating down into pure white, the painting possesses a special attractive charm. The entire richness, which we admire in his works, has been attained through the surmounting of such difficulties. His paintings differ from those of Gainsborough, like an artificial musical composition from a simple air of folks-lore. He was, during his life-time, the more appreciated artist, no doubt. His position can 38 be compared only to that of Rafael in Rom, or of Rubens in Antwerp. He kept a large house and had the tastes of a prince. He was an equal to any of his customers, as far as income, education or worldly manners are concerned. It will appear, therefore, that his fuUblooded manners were more in keeping of the time, than those of bashful Gainsborough, During this period of transition, he was a little more modern, in spite of being a little older. That fact, however, signifies little, for Hogarth, considerably older than he, was more modern, by a good deal. His broad views and the reality of his impressions went so far, that society of the period did not like him as a portraitist. He had been able to work freely only, according to his views. But was not that more modern? Was he not ahead of his time in questions of art? He represented a piece of the "Merry old England" of the 17*^ century, which still had several representatives in literature. He may be considered the bridge between two related periods, connecting them, a strange, usurping art wedged between. Hogarth possessed no influence, as the entire generation around the middle of the eighteenth century had been dependent upon Reynolds and Gainsborough. Hogarth was not a personality of imposing fame, but he was one of the imposing entity, standing, as it were upon a high pedestal. One man of them was conspicuous, we are bound to believe, and he will be more and more appreciated as time progresses. His name was George Romney. Perhaps, his fame can, not be compared to that of Reynolds and Gainsborough, but as a painter he possessed more significance. A leaning towards a certain type is not any more perceivable in him, his tone was created from the way, his eyes saw this world. It was a lighter tone for the first time, the same, which was took up by secessionistic painters a century later, who abolished the style of old dark tinted paintings. It was a tone, in which we can recognize our own ideas of light. Within this luminous art, single forms or — colours become insignificant in comparison to the general impression of the THOMAS FANE John Constable LE MOULIN DE STRATFORD STRATFORD-MUHLE BY PERMISSION OF LORD SWAYTHLING Riscligitz phot. STRATFORD MILL Sir Joshua Reynolds MANSELL & Co.. LONDO.V Allan Ramsay WOODBURY, LONDON ANNE, COUNTESS OF ALBEMARLE PORTRAIT DE FEMME FRAUENBILDNIS .... PORTRAIT OF A LADY 41 fundamental tone (undertone). The shapes appear plastic within this air. Through this ability, Romney had developed a special kind of painting, full of tone, but more than slack. He goes much farther than Gainsborough, but in spite of this fact, shows form, even if it appears to be in a latent state, just as sure as Reynolds. It is a pleasure indeed to follow his dancing brush, the way, for instance, he paints the powdered tresses of a belle, or the shaggy coat of a dog. One imagines sometimes, to gaze at Manets works. If a history of painting as a trade should be written, i. e. of the palette and colour technics, Romney would occupy one of the foremost places therein. As an artistic personality, he is limited to a smaller circle, than his two great collegians. (Perhaps his work is not yet known enough.) a a a In the first epoch of English art, portrait-painters predominate, while the second one, shows the painters of landscape in a brighter light. Raeburn and Gloppner, disciples of the great leaders, also Lawrence, a disciple "twice removed" show work, which is not of the class of their teachers, but there is good reason for this fact, as talent, the most important requisite, was not present among them. But the people of that epoch were not very picturesque. The fashion of the nineteenth century lacked a good many artistic qualities. The so-called "Werther" dress, i. e. swallowtailcoat and high boots, the antique cut of ladies gowns neither of them can be compared to the graceful costume of the former period, either where beauty or the material is concerned. The trend of the times vacillates between dryness and sweetishness, which was liable to influence portraitists. Reynolds preference, to paint women in an idealized classical masquerade, impressed these painters considerably and in consequence their ladies, depicted as Mebe or some other deity, appear ridiculous. The growing realism demanded more nature, more perhaps, than colours can give, so that reality substituted inadequate art to a certain extent. This fact did not exclude some beautiful creations. The splendid matrons of Raeburn, good and vigorous wives of the rustic aristocracy, 42 show more human kindness than their mothers. The art of portraiture of their and the subsequent epochs, hardly have equals, as far as characteristics or colours are concerned. Here, a Scot enters the field, showing colours, all his own and an individual atmosphere, typical Scotch, which created a unique kind of landscape-painting in the course of that century. A dense silver-gray veil modifies lights and colours, which appear therefore, with a certain sweetness and vibration. A comparison to music may give this im- pression best: their tone reminds one of a corded violin. These tones are first noticed in Raeburns paintings, landscapes and portraits possess it both, in the former especially perceivable in the green and brown of the trees and the clouded sky. Raeburn did not trifle in painting his landscapes, like former painters, who used them as a good back- ground for their models. His landscapes were adjusted according to the peculiarities of his sitters. Gloppner's portraits of children are often lovely too, at times intentionally more childish, than we like. But -- as time proceeds, charming paintings become more rare. The material beauty of the colours decreases, the dark pictures become chocolade-coloured, the light ones look soapy. A forced smoothness is substituted for artistic broadness. The more wonderful therefore, if such a charming master-piece appears, as "Miss Farren" by Lawrence. This lovely young lady glides over a flowery lawn, dressed in a white satin flowing robe, past a blue-green sky, the clouds above her: gray with silver-lining. A vision, created by an artist, who lived with and adored nature. Such lovers of nature were raised by the great English landscape- artists, which influenced even the next generation, to which belonged such men as John Constable and William Turner. Constable continues Gainsborough, without showing any of his mannerisms. He did not need any more the round about way over the classic Poussin and Lorrain, who had disappeared behind the horizon of his period. He commenced like the Dutchmen and surpassed even these, a true child of his time, a time of self assertion. George Romney MRS. ROBINSON (PERDITA George Romney LA FILLE DU PASTEUR DES PASTORS TOCHTER THE PARSON'S DAUGHTER By permission of W. A. Mansell & Co., London 45 However, it must be conceded, that he painted his works, so to speak, as a substitute of Dutch painting for English customers, similar to Gainsborough and Reynolds early days, the painted counterparts to Van Dycks, Rubens or Rembrandts. Constable, in progressing, came nearer and nearer to his types, although his work shows a personal note, as his eyes were very susceptible to air and light. The sketches, which he constantly made in great numbers, show plainly his very own talent in an unadulterated manner. Dutch landscapes, in spite of the fact, that they express nature in a lovely manner, show at all times a marked declination from reality. Their undertone is nearly always idealized by a silver- or golden- tint, enhancing, what they try to depict. Constable was looking for greater truth, he took light- gray or brown for the undertone and dissolved in this manner the smooth solid surface. In this manner, light becomes emphasized, the contours show plainly, while colours appear modified. He was the prst artist, who ventured to reproduce the green colour of vegetation. This green had been shunned by all painters since the sixteenth century, although it is surmised generally, that this abhorrence of grassgreen started during the Rococco period. The artists of that epoch, it is true, actually feared to show the verdant tint. Even the alleged realistic Dutchmen had avoided it. It may be said, that while trying to circumscribe this most prominent colour of nature, they were compelled to circumscribe the others as well. They had to choose a colour-scale therefore, which would make it possible to impress the eye as green, without using any green pigments. The new generation of artists had different views. It is no wonder, that real green first shows in an English picture, the British landscape possesses in reality such richly coloured meadows and trees. Constable painted the most simple scenes: forest and field, rivers, farms, and mills, bridges, ferries or horse-ponds, showing a firm con- sistency of character in this respect. His real talent did not lie in the direction of depicting things, but in showing the effects of the atmos- phere upon them. In this manner, there appeared gradually a deve- lopement, in which light and air assumed a more important role, until 46 everything of solid character was dissolved in them. This developement, with its different phases, filled out an entire century. One of Conflables contemporaries, commenced at the last phase of this developement, at the point, where others were considered to have arrived at the zenith of their perfection, namely: Turner. He was a monomaniac. His interest in nature was aroused only then, when things disappeared in fog, or between light and twilight, as soon as they had lost their contours. Such upheavals of nature become more vivid and phantastic, where the sky is opalescent and the sunbeams brighter, that is the reason Turner went south. Through all countries he wandered and searched for such scenes. Sometimes he found them in London, at other times in Venice. He came nearest to that ideal of real art, which Whistler set up. Nobody was able to give a better play of colours with less realistic motives. a o D How different English art was from that of the previous Rococco period, has been set forth. The foregoing article has shown many instances, where the work of the English artists has been kept up ever since, even up to the present time. If one desires to elucidate upon their historical importance, the question will come up, whether the contemporanious or later ortists upon the continent, borrowed from them, or whether they found their perfection unaided. Since a short time, we are able to answer this question truly. The Germans are more able to answer it, because they have at all times cared more for foreign art, than other nations. Since the middle of the 19*^ century, they had received decisive incitation from France. For a long time, they were contented to follow up the tracks of modern art, going backward, down to the masters of Barbizon, or even down to Delacroix and Gericault. That has become different now. Modern art has made them susceptible to certain qualities and therefore, the realistic German art of the first half of the 19*^ century was discovered, which as a standard had existed already, but had been forgotten entirely a little later. Its commencement goes back into the 18*^ century. As soon MARY GRANVILLE 49 as its origin was looked for, all ways lead north, to Hamburg, Denmark and from there along the coast to England. By this route, attention was called to the fact, that the French inciters of German art had been influenced by England. The Fontainebleau circle, as far down as Delacroix and Gericault, can not be imagined without Constable as a type. The painters of the Revolution are known to have had English ideals, as a matter of foct. That is not marvellous, as we known since all times, that England was leading in all other matters of culture and from the 18^ century on, had given a valuable stimulus to the entire world. Its free citizens were conscious of their privileged position, they played their part in politics and their constitution was the ideal of Europe. The English family and its home-life, together with the love of nature of its members, had influenced Rousseaus ideas. English fashion decreed the dress of international society. The English Park, with its temples, ruins and huts, was substituted for the smooth garden. Osseanic enthusiasm for nature, gave seed to the German literature, Shakespeare and the civic drama helped to free the German stage. The English novel became the model of the Epos. All these effects were continued in French romance. In all these things, pure Germanic spirit is revealed. It operated first in the Netherlands and Germany, later, when a terrible war had destroyed German culture, it took up its abode in Holland during the 17*^ century at the time, when the flood of romantic styles had reached there, finally it went to England. As soon as humanity needed it again, it came from there and went all over the world. FRIEDERICH STAHL. 50 Biographic Notes. Thomas Gainsborough was born in Sudbury, Suffolk in the year 1727. His talent and his joy for drawing soon became evident . . He, therefore was sent to London, when 15 years of age, where he learnt a little of copper- engraving from the gracious Frenchman Gravelot, while his teacher for oil-painting, became the vigorous Englishman Haymain. He soon opened his own studio, which, however, did not pay expenses, and after three years of absence Gainsborough returned home, where he commenced to study deeply around well-known scenes. A marriage with a girl of fortune, allowed him to remove with his bride to Ipswich, where he practised his beloved art of landscape- painting. By degrees he received orders for portraits, and one of his protectors induced him, to remove to the fashionable coast-resort Bath in the year of 1760. He soon made acqaintances amongst the fashionable society there, and became its acknowledged portraitist. During the years of quiet reclusion in Ipswich, he was well prepared to grasp the beauty of old ancestral paintings, chiefly of Van Dyck, which abounded in the castles of his clients, and he adopted the last touch of his pne work, from the pictures of this Dutchman, who had inspired him. His material and artistic success, soon became a matter of fact, allowing him an income large enough, to enjoy life in the true sense of the term, musical and histrionic friends, gathering at his hospital board. When the Royal academy was founded under Reynolds during the year 1768, Gainsborough became a member. He removed to London 1774, where he lived the last 14 years of his life, as an acknowledged star on the side of Reynolds, keeping a large house. He died on August 2'^^ 1788. Joshua Reynolds was born on July 16*^ 1723 in Plympton-Earl, Devonshire. His early love for art became manifest first, when he studied books about painting, perspective and technics. He never became an artisan, but went, nineteen years old, to the portraitist Hudson, and became an apprentice, in order to study art Sir Joshua Reynolds Mit Eriaubnis Stiner HochfUrstlichen Durcli- laucht des FUrsten zu Schaumburg - IJppe John Constable LA FERME DE LA VALLliE DAS GEHOFT IM TAL MANSELL & Co., LONDON THE VALLEY FARM John Hoppner MANSET.I. & Co., LONDON LADY LOUISA MANNERS o o r o r H w o w 50 5C in O > > 55 jrom the start. Instead of the four years, which he had promised, Reynolds only remained remained two years, in order to establish at his home a keen studio for portraiture . . During the following years, his manner became provincial and fickle, as could not be expected otherwise. The influence of Rembrandt alone, whose works were made accessible to him, by the painter Gandy, put Reynolds upon a little higher plane. It became his fortune, to be taken away from this life. An aristocratic officer induced him, to accompany him to Africa, and on his return, Reynolds had an opportunity to visit Rome during the year 1749. In seeing the works of the old masters, his idea of art, underwent a change, and his latent energy was called to new life, with a far off goal. Reynolds remained in Rome for three years, where he began his subtile study of the old masters, as far as technics and colours were concerned. The portraits of his fellow-countrymen, which he finished in the Italian capital, show the effect of these studies. When he returned to England, only 29 years old, he was a master of his art. His great success did not procrastinate. He worked seven years very hard, and then moved into a great mansion, which he furnished with taste regardless of costs, where he entertained his friends and lived like a grand seigneur. During the year 1768 he became the president of the newly founded Royal Academy, and the King elevated him to the rang of a Peer. Reynolds died on the 23^^ of February of 1792. He maintained his position until the last, his funeral took place in St. Paul's Cathedral and became a national event. George Romney (born on the 15*^ of December 1734, in Lancashire, died on the 15*'^ of November 1802 in Kendal) conquered London, so to speak, from one day to the next, after having passed a hard youth, after having reached thirty years. He had come from the provinces, and had no friends in London, nevertheless he was suddenly considered a full-fledged rival of Reynolds and Gainsborough. In his later years, it was Lady Hamilton, who inspired him again and again to new portraits and allegories, Her Ladyship being his model. 56 His fame lasted thirty years. Then he went back home as a sick man, obtained the pardon of his once deserted wife, but became insane and died 68 years old. John Hoppner (born on April 4*^ 1758 in London, Whitechapel, who died on January 23^^ 1810), was a scholar of the London Academy and a successor to Reynolds. Henry Raeburn. was born on March 4*^ 1756 in Stockbridge, near Edinburgh, Scotland. He commenced his career of art, by becoming a goldsmith, went over later to the fashionable miniature-painting, and painted large oil-painting subsequently. By having contracted a marriage, which left him independent financially, he went 22 years old, to London to finish his technical knowledge, and then went to Italy, upon the advice of Sir Joshua Reynolds. After having been there two years, he returned to his Scotch home, and developed there, under the influence of the romantic surroundings, his specialty. He was the first painter of Edinburgh without doubt. He received all honours, which are possible to bestow upon a man, and he became a Peer, like his English rivals in 1822. He died on July 8*^ 1823. Thomas Lawrence was born on May 4*^ 1769. From a very small beginning, he soon earned a great fame, and when only 22 years old, he became the successor of the court -painter Reynolds. He was made a Peer and died as the President of the Royal Academy on January 7*^ 1830. John Constable was born on June 11*^ 1776 in East Bergholt, Suffolk. He only succeeded to receive the consent of his parents, to become an artist, when 23 years of age, and he received his artistic instruction at the Academy in London. His most important work was done after he had settled in Hampstead in 1820, where he studied nature constantly, the landscape there, with its special charms, found a good interpreter m him. He died on March 30*^^ 1837. William Turner was born on April 23 1775 in London, as the son of a barber. He was educated as a painter of architecture and topo- graph, and while travelling through his native country, discovered the PORTRAIT DE LA FEMME ET DE LA SCEUR DE L' ARTISTE PORTRAT DER GEMAHLIN UND DER SCHWESTER DES KUNSTLERS PORTRAIT OF THE WIFE AND SISTER OF THE ARTIST Thomas Gainsborough MANSEIX & Co., LONDON MRS. SIIERID.\N AND MRS. TICKELL William Beechey MRS. SIDDONS MANSELL & Co., LONDON ENFANT A LA POUPliE KIND MIT DER PUPPE CHILD WITH THE DOLL 59 charm of its atmosphere. He was taken with it, so much that he made landscape the only subject of his art. Afler having travelled extensively, he lived the life of a recluse, only filled by his work, in London, and all honours were bestowed upon him. He left 100 pictures and 19000 water-colour sketches to the National Gallery, only to make sure, that some of his works would hang next to those of Lorrain. He died on December 19*^ 1851. INDEX OF PICTURES William Beechey Arthur, Duke of Wellington Page 30 Mrs. Siddons » -JO John Constable Ine nay- Wain Flatford-Mill on the River Stour „ 22 Salisbury Cathedral .... 22 Stradford Mill „ 40 The Walley Farm „ 52 John Crome The Windmill 21 Thomas Gainsborough Portrait of himself 7 Miss Sparrow „ 7 Harvest cart 12 The morning walk 17 T/Jtt11 „ 30 Mrs. Beaufoy 35 Colonel St. Leger 54 Mrs. Graham „ 54 Mrs. Sheridan and Mrs. Tickell „ 58 John Hoppner Lady Louisa Manners . .. 53 John Opie Portrait Mrs. Godwin ... „ 11 Mary Granville 48 William Owen Portrait of the Wife and Sister of the Artist 57 Sir Henry Raeburn Mrs. Scott Moncrieff .... „ 14 Sir Walter Scott 14 Mrs. Kennedy of Dunure . . . „ 29 Mrs. Campbell of Balliemore 35 Allan Ramsay Portrait of a Lady Page 40 Sir Josua Reynolds Georgina, Duchess ofDevonshire and her child „ 7 Richard Burke „ 12 Mrs. Robinson „ 12 Miss Bowles » 13 Mrs. Carnac ,25 Mrs. Siddons » 25 Sir William Chambers „ 30 The graces decorating a ter- minal pgure of Hymen . . „ 36 Anne, Countess of Albemarle . „ 40 Lord Hathfield „ 44 Mrs. Braddyl „ 44 The Strawberry Girl .... „ 47 Child with the Doll „ 58 Georges Romney Portrait Lord Burghersch „ 8 Lady Craven .,18 Lady Poulett „ 26 Lady Hamilton „ 36 Thomas Fane » 39 Mrs, Robinson (Perdita) ... „ 43 The Parson's Daughter ... „ 44 William Turner Ulysses deriding Polyphemus . „ 8 The "Fighting Temeraire" tugged to her last berth to the broken up „ 25 Rain, Steam and Speed, the Great Western Railway „ 51 Wilham, Graf zu Schaumburg- Lippe „ 51 GETTY RESEARCH INSTITUTE 3 3125 01360 2467