3 £> ?r ~~ & // * 252 a -' / Univ.of 111 . 53 /365 V;V -3-4 C (?&■ ■> t*.t« : Library /t 3 V i it %xt i&S, 7 LIGHTS IN ART A REVIEW OF ANCIENT AND MODERN PICTURES. WITH CRITICAL REMARKS ON THE PRESENT STATE, TREATMENT, AND PRESERVATION OF OIL PAINTINGS. BY GEORGE WILLIAM NOVICE, ARTIST. SECOND EDITION , WITH IMPROVEMENTS. EDINBURGH : PRINTED BY THOMAS AND ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE, PRINTERS TO THE QUEEN AND TO THE UNIVERSITY. SOLD BY S. S. ANDERSON, 30 NORTH BRUNTSFIELD PLACE 1874. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates https://archive.org/details/lightsinartseconOOnovi JL-u PREFACE. | N several of the best works hitherto H published upon the Art of Painting, the absence of careful selection, distinctness, and brevity, is, in many respects, apparent The main object of the present undertaking is to obviate, in some measure, the want of these qualities. A concise and plain classification of the various schools has been attempted ; and each school is presented, as far as possible, in a separate form. The title implies the character of the work, which is simply a selection of the most eminent masters, or luminaries in Art. Most of us have beheld the glorious firmament decked with single stars and constellations ; some of these are effulgent in the highest degree, some appear less brilliant, while others are obscured, and many besides are entirely unknown to the human eye. We cannot discern any beyond the range of our vision. And so in the long course of Art, we chiefly know the names and a 2 703829 VI PREFACE . the works of those men whose gifts of genius have become manifest to the world. The light of those great men shone in proportion to the magnitude of their several endowments. Very few displayed the lustre of the highest genius ; many possessed light, or talent, in different degrees, while a multitude of others were so obscure as not to transmit any benefit to posterity. This work is compiled with a view to instruct ; and, as we cannot receive instruction through a dark medium, the light of the genius of former days only can be made available as a safe guide for the student, and also for the general reader. For that reason, only real masters of the art, from the time of Apelles to the second half of the nineteenth century, have been selected. The names of the several masters are introduced with sufficient regard to chronological order, and all the dates, historical references, et cetera , are derived from the best authorities. CONTENTS. PART THE FIRST. CHAPTER I. Introduction — Egyptian Pictures — Apelles and the Arts of Ancient Greece, ........ CHAPTER II. Painting in Ancient Rome — Early Italian Art — Leonardo da Vinci ; his Contemporaries and Successors, CHAPTER III. Decline of Italian Painting — Art before and after the Reforma- tion — Pictures in Churches, CHAPTER IV. Italian Painters of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries, CHAPTER V. PAGE I 13 43 53 Painting in France — The First Native Artist — The Followers of Vouet and Greuze, ....... 83 CONTENTS. CHAPTER VI. German and early Flemish Art— Albert Durer— Matsys— Decline of Painting in Germany, ..... CHAPTER VII. The Flemish School — Rubens — Snyders — Wildens — Vander Meulen, .......... CHAPTER VIII. Holland — Native and Flemish Art — Rembrandt — Teniers — Vandervelde — Paul Potter — Jan Steen — Imitators and Unknown Masters — Art Declension — New Productions, CHAPTER IX. Spanish Art — Zurbaran — Velasquez — Murillo ; his Character and Style — Supremacy of the Great Masters in Spain, — ♦ — PART THE SECOND. CHAPTER I. Britain — Introduction of Art by the Romans — Holbein — The first Native Artist — Cornelius Jansen and other Foreigners in England, ......... CHAPTER II. Vandyck ; his munificent Patron and Friend ; his luxurious way of living — Alchymy instead of Painting — Premature Death and Professional Character, . . . PAGE 108 126 142 2 1 1 240 CONTENTS . IX CHAPTER III. PAGE Native and Foreign Art in Britain from the time of Vandyck to the Birth of Sir Joshua Reynolds, .... 247 CHAPTER IV. Sir Joshua Reynolds ; his Education— The Royal Academy — Gainsborough — The British School, .... 264 CHAPTER V. Wilson — Morland — Raeburn, Lawrence, etc., . . 280 CHAPTER VI. Historical and Every-day Subjects — Sir David Wilkie— Con- tinental Influence — Watson-Gordon, .... 297 CHAPTER VII. British Landscape Painting — Patrick Nasmyth — Turner — John Wilson — Stark, ........ 309 CHAPTER VIII. Immortality of Genius — Pernicious Influences — Art blighted by Commerce — Conclusion, 332 APPENDIX. The Present State, Treatment, and Preservation of Old and New Paintings, ........ 343 |Jart \\)t Jfirsl. PART THE FIRST. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION — EGYPTIAN PICTURES — APELLES AND THE ARTS OF ANCIENT GREECE. RTIFICIAL form is of high antiquity. The qualities and preparation of colours were also known at a period equally remote ; and one of the first uses to which they were applied was that of painting the human body, to serve as a covering against heat and cold, and likewise against the attacks of insects. Hunting being one of the chief occupations of man in his primeval state, a close cover- ing was necessary in order that his agility in the chase might not be impeded. As time advanced, ornament and gay colouring were adopted to increase the attractions of the person. From sacred history, we learn that Jezebel ‘ painted her face ’ when she desired to render herself agreeable to the eyes of Jehu. The combination of form and A LIGHTS IN ART. 2 colour must always have been attractive ; and the human breast, no doubt, early imbibed an ardent desire to praise and to imitate the sublime works of the Creator. Yet we have no authentic records to in- form us when drawing and painting were first practised. The prophet Isaiah alluded to ‘ pleasant pictures,’ but we are not informed of what kind they were ; and at a subsequent period, Jeremiah referred to certain deco- rations i painted with vermilion.’ Even in those early times, colours were probably manufactured in a variety of ways for illustrative and decorative purposes. There can be little doubt that moist colours were used, as well as small pieces of smooth stone, of dif- ferent hues, for mosaic work. Although the subjects represented are not known to us, we may easily believe that they were produced upon the grand fundamental principle in art, — the union of form and colour. The art of Mosaic is supposed to have been invented by the ancient people of the East, who might also have discovered the use of pigments. The doubtful information respecting the origin of painting which we possess, ought not to be taken as an argument against the possibility of the art being known in very remote ages ; because painting executed in fresco, tempera, or oil is perishable, and the very few remaining ex- amples of early art produced by those means are only a few centuries old. The decadency of every mode of painting will strengthen the belief, that the art must LIGHTS IN ART. 3 have been exercised at periods antecedent to the Christian era. According to the best authorities, the ancient in- habitants of Egypt lived under a monarchy of an irregular character, until the time of Joseph, who, in consideration of his extraordinary wisdom, was nomi- nated by the king governor of the whole land. His admirable management of public affairs greatly aug- mented the power and grandeur of the sovereign. Agriculture appears to have been the chief pursuit of the Egyptians prior to the administration of the Hebrew governor, who collected the people into cities , 1 where they acquired a love for architectural magni- ficence in conjunction with the other arts. That patriarchal ruler founded a system upon which the welfare of mankind has been reared, and upon which our prosperity and social order still depend. The polite arts can only flourish where the highest civilisa- tion has been attained and vigilantly guarded. Pos- sibly some of the useful arts introduced into Egypt were derived from the antediluvian world through Noah and his descendants. Correct representations of natural objects, displayed in brilliant colouring, are known to have been executed long before the birth of Moses. The ruins of the ancient city of Thebes have astonished all learned travellers in modern times. 1 Nineveh, where the arts evidently flourished, is supposed to be the first great city of antiquity. Vide Layard’s Nineveh and its Remains. 4 LIGHTS IN ART. Among those ruins have been discovered wonderful specimens of architectural and pictorial skill. Lord Lindsay, in his Letters on Egypt , Edom , etc., after viewing the pictures in the ruined palaces of Thebes, says : ‘ The information we can gather from these paintings as to the religious opinions of the Egyptians is interesting. The doctrines of a future state, of judgment after death, and of rewards and punish- ments, are invariably subjects of representation.’ The colours used in their pictures, or hieroglyphics, are remarkably bright, and so hard as to appear like part of the stone upon which they are fixed. Considering the exposure to which many of these surprising relics of antiquity have been subjected, their preservation would seem almost miraculous, were we not to bear in mind that the ancients chiefly worked in mosaic, or that they adopted a peculiar method of manipulat- ing moist colours entirely unknown to the moderns. If their representations were produced by painting and not by mosaic, we must conclude that the art of using moist colours to stand the test of many centuries is lost to us. Cecrops planted a colony of Egyptians in Greece about the year 1556 B.C. At that period the in- habitants of Athens are said to have been sunk in ignorance and barbarity. The institution of marriage was unknown, and they lived more like brutes than human beings. Cecrops taught them the primary LIGHTS IN ART . 5 arts of civilisation ; and the instructions afforded by his successors were so well received, that the people readily discontinued their savage mode of life, and gradually became polite. The improvement was carried into the other Grecian States. In the time of Amphictyon the separate States of Greece were united into a republic ; and in the council annually held at Thermopylae, all matters relating to the welfare of the people were wisely discussed. Their principal commercial dealings were with the Persians, from whom they also derived some knowledge of the fine arts. There can be no doubt that the Greeks had arrived at considerable eminence in the mecha- nical arts twelve centuries at least before the birth of Christ. According to Homer, shipbuilding was a great employment ; and their vessels were remark- able for strength, velocity, and beauty of proportion. Much of their magnificence may probably be ascribed to the use of gold, intermixed with the most brilliant pigments. It will be necessary to believe that human nature must be understood ere we can arrive at the causes which have led to the full development of art. Draco, by his severe virtue, effectually taught the people to admire and value the wisdom of Solon. Many degrees of rank and importance, instituted according to the wealth and intelligence of indi- viduals, were bestowed by the greatest lawgiver 6 LIGHTS IN ART . among the Greeks. Order was firmly established, society became refined, and all kinds of art and polite learning were carefully cherished. Public con- fusion and individual excitement are alike at enmity with the desire for quiet study, and art can only flourish in times of peace and prosperity. The Athenians enjoyed a large measure of peace and happiness, all derived from good government ; and the other Grecian republics, excepting Sparta, be- came prosperous from the same cause. Tranquillity being favourable to the steady pur- suit of painting and sculpture, Apelles, Zeuxis, and Protogenes appeared in the former art ; while Phidias and Lysippus shone in the latter. Those great artists were followed and imitated by many others more or less famous. Numerous ancient and modern authors have freely descanted on the beauty of early Grecian productions in these arts. Some of their descrip- tions, however, being overwrought, cannot safely be relied upon. Alberti, an Italian author, asserted that ‘ a knowledge of the divine remains of antiquity is almost sufficient to produce adoration, and that the pictures of Apelles and other great painters of that age will be eternally admired, although their works are perished/ They can only be admired through the medium of imperfect description. Yet we are sufficiently informed to know that the ancient Greek artists studied nature in all her perfections, LIGHTS IN ART 7 and that their imitations in marble and colours were wonderfully correct. They astonished mankind by a simple adherence to truth. Dryden says, ‘ The way to please being to imitate nature, both the poets and painters of ancient times, and in the best ages, have studied her.' Education and common sense have always guided, and will still guide, artists in the selection of their subjects, and will also direct them to portray unpleasing objects in the most agreeable manner. Apelles is said to have painted a portrait of Antigonus in profile, because he had lost one of his eyes. Recently a photographer, who probably never heard of Apelles, executed the likeness of a clergyman in profile, because he also had lost an eye. There is a tendency in our nature to shun all deformity, mental and physical ; by opposing which we destroy the course of our best inclinations. This proper tendency, indeed, constitutes the sweetening influence that binds society in harmony together. The remains of ancient Greek sculpture are suffi- cient to prove that the productions in that noble art were of the highest order. Figures conceived by the loftiest imagination possess every charm for delighting the eye, while the inanimate coldness of their beautiful forms alone declare them the work of human hands. Time and accident have hitherto spared the Medicean Venus, ‘ The statue that enchants the world ; ’ 8 LIGHTS IN ART . and several other wonderful productions of that most remarkable period are still preserved. While Alex- ander the Great and his generals were mighty in war, Praxiteles, Phidias, and Lysippus were famous in art. The excellency of ancient Greek sculpture being known and universally admitted, we may easily suppose that Apelles and others, being co-existent with the great sculptors, were equally eminent in the sister art of painting. But as all the paintings of that age have perished, we can never arrive at any definite conclusion respecting them. Our entire knowledge of the genius of Apelles, Protogenes, and other painters, is altogether drawn from the accounts of several authors who have lived at different periods since the days of Alexander the Great. After their ideas of symmetry were conceived, the statuaries and painters of Greece are said not to have confined themselves to any particular model. Before executing a design, they selected several living models, and copied from each those propor- tions which their judgment pronounced perfect. The selections were afterwards united in one ideal body, formed in marble, or painted upon the material then in use for pictures. In portraiture, when a correct likeness was of course required, they scrupu- lously avoided deformity, as we know in the instance of Apelles and Antigonus. The desire for the pos- session of excellence is in perfect harmony with the LIGHTS IN ART. 9 advance of civilisation ; and the intelligent artist will study the beauties of nature with the same assiduity as he will forbear to imitate those defects which are not intended to form any part of the divine plan. ‘ Rejoice for ever in that which I create/ was a holy injunction. The Greeks, being acquainted with the earliest method of producing pictures, soon discovered a more expeditious, though less enduring manner of working. Painting in tempera was a discovery subsequent to the invention of mosaic art. Water- colours, finely ground, and rendered slightly gluti- nous, were the chief ingredients used in tempera. The paintings executed by means of colours so prepared were remarkably pure ; and we are informed that astonishing brilliancy was produced, after the colours had become sufficiently hard, by varnishing. Pictures done in tempera are dull and arid, until the natural transparency of some of the colours is assisted by good varnish, which is a clear, shining liquid. The Greeks may also have used varnish for the pur- pose of protecting their work from certain atmospheric influences ; yet they could scarcely have entertained any serious thoughts about durability, because tempera painting is fragile and insecure. Oil painting is supposed by many to be a modern invention ; yet it was mentioned by Pliny as an ancient discovery, and several writers since his time believe 10 LIGHTS IN ART. it to have been practised more than two thousand years before the days of Van Eyck, who is commonly spoken of as the founder of the art, Haydon, in one of his interesting lectures, related that Dr. Aske, who wrote upon art towards the close of the last century, believed oil painting to have been known and practised at a very remote period. It may have been imparted to the Greeks by the Egyptians. We are informed by many of the best writers that the works of the Grecian painters were incomparably fine. If those artists had not been acquainted with a very superior process, their performances could scarcely have re- ceived the praises of all beholders. Fresco painting was usually executed upon the walls of public buildings. The method employed in this art is to spread the colours over a layer of plaster while in a damp condition. When perfectly dry, the pigments and the plaster form one body, and a hard surface is presented, capable of resisting, in certain climates, almost every kind of moisture. Had this process been known to the Greeks, and adopted by them in the execution of their paintings, palpable ex- amples of their pictorial genius might have been dis- played in many succeeding ages, extending probably to our own day. The hardness of the material in which ancient statues, basso-relievos, columns, and obelisks were wrought, sufficiently accounts for the preservation of these valuable relics. LIGHTS IN ART . 1 1 The primary causes of the decay and total annihi- lation of ancient paintings can never be satisfactorily explained. A bad substance, resembling the quality of chalk, mixed with a glutinous liquid, may have been the ground upon which the artists generally worked. Such an ephemeral preparation would naturally be subject to atmospheric influences. The colours em- ployed, with the addition of varnish, would not be stringent enough to prevent the preparation from peeling and dropping away by degrees. This remark may be considered to apply to tempera painting only. Pictures painted in oil, however, if based upon chalky grounds, cannot be durable. Damp will destroy them ; heat will produce the same result, and scarcely any temperature can insure their permanent safety. The colours used by Apelles are said to have been so in- tensely brilliant, as to compel him to lower their dazzling effect by darkly tinted varnish. Extra- ordinary skill must therefore have been attained in the manufacture of pigments ; and we may feel surprised that any deficiency of knowledge should have been manifested in the important work of laying a founda- tion or ground upon which artistic labour had to pro- duce the most delightful representations by means of those well-prepared colours. The Greek painters of that age may have been entirely ignorant of the perishable nature of the substances of which the grounds for their pictures were composed ; and the 12 LIGHTS IN ART. drudgery of preparing those grounds was probably left in the hands of inferior workmen. War and intes- tine commotions were insufficient to destroy every vestige of a cherished art in that extensive and power- ful empire. Many marvellous specimens, chiefly in marble, were plundered by invaders, and long pre- served ; but regarding pictures, as the internal causes of decay could never be remedied, destruction was inevitable. The ancient Greek painters appear to have been regardless of posterity, and only desirous of gain- ing the admiration of their contemporaries. Grecian art declined and became nearly extinct after the death of Alexander the Great, when the empire was divided into four parts by his ambitious generals. The Greeks lost their profound learning, their excellency in art, and their valued indepen- dence together ; and finally became subject to the Roman republic, originally a kingdom established by Romulus, who, in his early career, may perhaps have been little better than a daring leader of banditti. All the nations composing the once mighty empire of the Greeks were subdued by the Romans about the year 146 B.C. CHAPTER II. PAINTING IN ANCIENT ROME — EARLY ITALIAN ART — LEONARDO DA VINCI— HIS CONTEMPORARIES AND SUCCESSORS. URING the extension of the Roman power over many countries, the arts and sciences appear to have been almost unknown, or little cultivated. The entire energies of the people, indeed, were devoted to military affairs and inordinate conquests. In the first ages of the republic, periods remarkable for the most successful warfare and the sternest integrity, they appear to have entertained an utter contempt for polite learning, and even for many of the graces proper in the civilized nature of man. At the taking of the city of Corinth, nearly among the last of their great exploits in Greece , 1 1 Athens was not thoroughly conquered until the year 86 B.c., when its valuable library was transferred to Rome. Fortunately the victorious legions were not always destructive. The preservation of writings and works of art can throw the only light discernible by us upon dark and distant ages. About the middle of the nineteenth century, the Imperial Summer Palace at Pekin, containing valuable relics and records of the ancient Chinese empire, was destroyed by LIGHTS IN ART. the victors displayed the most barbarous ignorance by their indiscriminate destruction of classic art ; and the people generally, while the commonwealth con- tinued, evinced little desire for mental improvement. The refining influence of the arts may be said to have slumbered until the time of Julius Caesar. In the reign of Augustus, a long and universal peace prevailed in every country belonging to the empire. The people were happy under the mild ad- ministration of the monarch, favourable opportunities of acquiring knowledge were presented, the immortal genius of Cicero had appeared, and several Roman artists are supposed to have flourished. While the Saviour of mankind sojourned upon earth, teaching peace, humility, and love, the utmost grandeur of the Roman empire was attained. The arts of painting and sculpture may have been practised during the reigns of succeeding emperors, and were probably not neglected until the irruption of the northern nations, when the Romans were obliged to abandon ease, luxury, and any taste they might have imbibed for art, in the dire necessity of repelling the incursions of the Goths, Vandals, and other roving tribes of barbarians. In modern times, however, very little has really European invaders, — an event which plainly shows that little difference only exists between Christian soldiers of the present age and those of the old Pagan world. Mummius, indeed, is said to have disapproved of the barbarity of his soldiers at the taking of Corinth. LIGHTS IN ART. i5 been known respecting the talents of ancient Roman painters ; and as their productions failed to attract any particular notice in their own time, we may well conclude that they were vastly inferior to their famous Greek prototypes. Had any of the artists of ancient Rome possessed extraordinary power, like the genius of Apelles, their names, at least, would have been handed down to our own day. In all probability, intestine strife and frequent political changes were found to be adverse to the steady pursuit of art ; and though many noble specimens of painting were doubtless preserved, and safely deposited in Rome, by the several conquerors of Greece, the admiration they elicited was certainly greater than all the oppor- tunities afforded to imitate them. Most of us are thoroughly convinced of the unrivalled excellency of the ancient Greek sculptors and architects ; and a recent writer has inferred that the paintings produced during the best periods of the Roman empire were as inferior to the works of Apelles, as the orations of Cicero were to those of Demosthenes, or the poetry of Virgil to that of Homer. After the Romans became involved in war with the uncivilized nations, the empire was divided by Constantine the Great, who removed the imperial seat of government to Constantinople, previously called Byzantium. In the year 410 of the Christian era, the city of Rome was sacked by the Goths. ‘ This 1 6 LIGHTS IN ART dreadful devastation/ says a late author, ‘ continued for three days, and unspeakable were the precious monuments, both of art and learning, that sunk under the fury of the conquerors .’ 1 Before the time of Constantine the Great, the art of painting at Byzantium was chiefly practised in the Oriental or Persian style ; and even after the Romans were located in that city, the peculiarities of the eastern style were not abandoned ; on the contrary, they were continued in a most remarkable and servile manner. Pictures in mosaic had also been produced there, the same as in other places ; but -classic art seems to have been entirely disregarded in all the countries of the East. If any tolerable painters accompanied Constantine from the shores of the Mediterranean to those of the Euxine, it is surprising that they did not introduce something more natural than Byzantine crudities. But the enervating luxury in which the Romans latterly indulged had impaired their entire energies, and they appear to have retained no remembrance of the chaste beauty of Grecian art, nor of any endeavours that might have been made by their predecessors to imitate those specimens of true genius which the fortune of war had thrown in their way. The indolence of oriental life was congenial to their acquired notions of ease, and no attempts were made to emerge from their degrading condition of 1 Adams’ Roman History. LIGHTS IN ART. 17 apathy and indifference. Indeed, the respect formerly awarded to the name of a Roman became no longer due. During the reign of the Emperor Justinian, who was an architect, a poet, and a theologian, Byzantine art was probably introduced into several parts of Italy, and also into the adjacent countries ; and, at a sub- sequent period, it certainly became known in Russia and other northern nations. The eastern method appears to have been blended with the early German art, a union totally inconsistent with the smallest desire for improvement. One of the best specimens of Byzantine art combined with the German, still extant, is the work of Theodore of Prague, who is supposed to have flourished in the twelfth century. The subject represents the ‘Wise Men’s Offering/ and is extremely brilliant, being painted in tempera upon a ground of gold leaf. 1 In Greece and Russia, the original Byzantine method was long preserved and imitated without the least modification ; and even modern Russian paintings bear a close resemblance to the stiff, formal, and gilded productions of a remote period. The Byzantine empire terminated in the year 1453, when Constantinople was taken by the Turks. About the same time art began to revive in Rome, under 1 This curious relic is in the possession of Captain James Stirling, R.N. , of Glentyan, Renfrewshire, who obtained it in Rome. B LIGHTS IN ART. new and favourable auspices. An improvement in painting had become manifest in various parts of Italy during the thirteenth century. Ancient Greek sculpture had been sought and carefully studied by several artists, who avoided many of the faults into which previous painters had fallen by their familiarity with oriental productions, and who may be considered the originators of a more correct style. Cimabue, who was living in 1 300, but whose works have nearly all perished, is supposed to have followed the ancient Greek standard ; and his celebrated pupil, Giotto, is believed to be the first painter of the mediaeval period who studied from nature. Christian art, how- ever, appears to have struggled for a considerable time ere it became entirely free from the peculiarities of pagan influence. Though a monk of the order of the Dominicans, and a rigid devotee, Angelico da Fiesole, who flourished about the year 1439, could never divest himself of that unnatural influence ; and the same remark will apply to others who succeeded him, especially to Filippo Lippi, Carlo Crevelli, and Matteo da Siena. Sandro Botticelli, scholar of Filippo Lippi, was the first who altogether abandoned oriental imitation. His pictures contain numerous small figures, carefully drawn from nature, and exquisitely finished ; yet, like many of the early Italian masters, his knowledge of perspective was very deficient. Botticelli and other intelligent artists of that period LIGHTS IN ART . 19 were fortunate in having access to the few remain- ing 1 sculptures of ancient Greece, whereby they were encouraged to resort to nature alone for that excellence upon which the famous Greek sculptors entirely depended. The art of painting visibly improved in the fifteenth century under the genius of Masaccio, who threw off all conventional and prescribed rule, and boldly ventured to imitate nature in her endless variety of form and expression. He was so successful that the greatest masters of Italy afterwards studied his works. Andrea Mantegna, born in the north of Italy, 1431, was invited to Rome by Pope Innocent VIII. He adhered strictly to the study of antique models ; con- sequently his designs, though classical, were some- what formal and severe. In the Louvre may still be 1 In the summer of 1859, the following announcement from Rome appeared in portions of the British press : ‘ The magnificent statue of the Marine Venus, which was discovered a few weeks ago in some excavations made in the gardens of Julius Caesar, not far from the Portese Gate, has been purchased for the Imperial Museum of St. Petersburgh, for a sum of about 50,000 francs.’ Had the statue referred to been made by an artist of ancient Greece, or by a Roman statuary before the fall of the empire, the Papal Government would hardly have con- sented to part with it. Supposing it to be an original modern pro- duction, the name and date of the sculptor would, in all probability, have been preserved, and the statue itself would not have been found buried beneath the ruins of antiquity. Were it a Grecian or a Roman relic of ancient time, its discovery would doubtless have been made long before the middle of the nineteenth century. As the ‘ Marine V enus ’ has been safely brought to light, the cognoscenti, learned in matters of art, should endeavour by all means to discover its origin. 20 LIGHTS IN ART . seen his masterpiece, an instructive specimen of high art in the fifteenth century. The novel and indepen- dent style of Masaccio failed to impress the mind of Mantegna, who, not attracted by nature, became an idolater of the renowned statues of Greece. Suc- ceeding artists, while they derived benefit from the classic representations of Mantegna, were careful not to forget the excellent qualities of Masaccio. The styles of the two masters were judiciously combined, or rather conjointly imitated ; and thus a beginning was effected for an admirable system, upon which, in the course of a few years, the finest practice in Italian art was firmly established. LEONARDO DA VINCI, Born near Florence in the year 1452, became eminent in the arts and sciences, and also in literature. He is allowed to be the father of painting at Milan, where he executed his great picture, well known by the title of 'The Last Supper.’ This grand performance, though painted in oil, is now nearly obliterated by injudicious treatment. When James Barry, the Royal Academician, visited Milan towards the end of the last century, he found that the celebrated picture was undergoing the process of renovation. The restorer was at work, but instead of simply repairing damaged parts only, Barry observed that he also painted over those portions which were free from injury and perfectly LIGHTS IN ART. 21 sound. Since the days of Barry, the Last Supper has been operated upon by many other hands, so that very little of the original work can now remain. Fortunately, some excellent copies by Leonardo’s disciples, including Luini, are still extant in Italy, and we have fine engravings of the same work. Why the learned ecclesiastics under whose charge this noble performance has been constantly kept, should have allowed it to be so defaced, is a question difficult to solve. Other productions of minor importance by the same master have been preserved, although they have evidently been in the possession of less distinguished individuals. A grand picture of the Last Supper, though treated in a different manner, by Camillo Procaccini, has been preserved in the cathedral of Genoa. Titian also executed a large painting of the same subject. A few years since a picture, on a very thick panel, representing the Holy Family, attributed to Leonardo, was brought to this country from Italy . 1 It was almost in a perfect state, and the very few damages it had sustained were occasioned by the insecure or chalky ground upon which it was painted. Had the ground or preparation been composed of solid white 1 The picture referred to was considered genuine by the author’s friend, Mr. James Dennistoun, who, after a residence of many years in Italy, died at Edinburgh in 1855. He was an accomplished critic, and the author of several works on the fine arts, comprising the life of Sir Robert Strange. 22 LIGHTS IN ART. lead and linseed oil, the picture would have been in an excellent state of preservation. It had fortunately escaped unskilful cleaning and the rough practice of repainting. As the artists of ancient Greece probably painted upon grounds similar to that adopted by Da Vinci, we cannot be surprised at the complete annihila- tion of their works. This great man died, during a long visit to France, in 1519, about a year before the demise of Raphael. His genius was versatile and commanding ; in literary attainments he ranked high ; and as an engineer he has rarely been equalled. ' As a painter,’ observes Michael Bryan, 'Leonardo may be regarded as the first who attempted to reconcile minute and elaborate finish with grandeur of idea and dignity of form. He particularly attached himself to the expression of character and the just delineation of the affections of the mind. If in this sublime depart- ment of the art he was afterwards excelled by Raphael, he had at least the glory of having surpassed in it every painter who had preceded him, and of having opened a path unknown before, which was afterwards so successfully trod by Raphael himself.’ He may be designated one of the great shining lights in Italian art. Several portraits of Leonardo da Vinci, done by himself, have been preserved ; and his treatise on painting, first printed at Paris in 1651, is well known as a valuable book of reference. LIGHTS IN ART. 23 BERNARDINO LUINI Belonged to the Lombard school, and is usually con- sidered the nearest follower of Leonardo da Vinci, to whom his pictures are frequently ascribed. He was born about 1460, but the time of his death is unknown. Representations of the Holy Family and similar sub- jects by him are very beautiful, especially when seen in a pure state. Jacopo Pontormo 1 also imitated Leonardo da Vinci, but at a subsequent period he seems to have preferred the manner of Albert Durer. Another disciple, Bartolomeo, excelled in expression, colouring, and graceful attire. He invented the lay figure, generally employed by artists since his time, though now partly superseded by the invention of photography. The partiality of Bartolomeo to the nude form was blamed by his austere friend and spiritual guide, Savonarola, who died a martyr for the sake of con- science. Two other painters called Bartolomeo flour- ished at subsequent periods. 1 A portrait of the wife of Andrea del Sarto attributed to Pontormo, was obtained at Florence for the Corehouse collection, Lanarkshire, by the late Mr. Andrew Wilson, a pleasing landscape painter, and an excellent judge of old pictures. He resided long in Italy. To his son, Mr. C. H. Wilson, who also improved his taste in Italy, the compiler is indebted for much valuable information. 24 LIGHTS IN ART. MICHAEL ANGELO BUONAROTTI, Born in the district of Arezzo, Tuscany, in the year 1474, was the pupil of Domenico Ghirlandajo, who had some reputation, though his manner was dry and purely mechanical. 1 Like Leonardo da Vinci, with whom he sometimes competed, Michael Angelo was a man of high attainments ; and, during a long and eventful career, executed many wonderful works. Until the age of twenty-six years he was chiefly known as a sculptor. In 1512 he painted in fresco the ceil- ing of the Sistine Chapel, where, several years after- wards, he also accomplished his celebrated cartoons for the ‘Last Judgment/ But his great excellence appeared in architecture, wherein he was not surpassed by the ancient Greeks. His principal works can only be seen at Rome and Florence. On some very rare occasions he is supposed to have painted in oil ; but if he really executed any pictures in that manner, they are not known to be extant. His picture of the Holy Family in the gallery at Florence, according to Lanzi, is painted in distemper. 2 The small oil painting called ‘ Michael Angelo’s Dream,’ in our National Gallery, is generally acknowledged to be a copy from an old print, probably engraved from one of his numerous designs. 1 Ghirlandajo painted the portrait of Americus, after whom the con- tinent of America is named. 2 Distemper and tempera , both indiscriminately used, are synonymous terms. LIGHTS IN ART . 25 In Sebastian del Piombo’s grand work of the ‘ Resurrection of Lazarus/ executed in oil, the figure of the restored man is supposed to be entirely painted by Michael Angelo, who, indeed, designed the whole picture. Michael Angelo retained all his greatness until the close of life, at the patriarchal age of ninety . 1 His excellent abilities in painting, sculpture, and architec- ture were the gifts of Heaven ; and the noble monu- ments of his genius were reared by incessant labour and cheerful perseverance. Piety, moderation, and humility accompanied his profession of Christianity. Ardent and indefatigable in every pursuit, his gigantic undertakings were invariably crowned with success, 1 The following paragraph appeared in the newspaper press of Feb- ruary i860 : — 1 The house of Michael Angelo at Florence, which is filled with works of art, has become the property of that city by the bequest of Signor Buonarotti, one of the great sculptor’s descendants. As some opposi- tion was made by Signor Buonarotti’s heirs, the Tuscan government settled the matter by paying them 4000 scudi. ’ In connexion with the above, it may be mentioned that Captain Stir- ling called upon the compiler in the month of August 1859. He had just returned from Florence, where he had been present at the recent revolution. A hope having been expressed that he had not been incom- moded, and that the valuable treasures of art there had not been inter- fered with, or in any way damaged by the event, he replied, smiling, ‘ The whole affair was extremely pleasant ; everybody seemed happy ; and the revolution passed off merely by the exchange of one set of offi- cials for another.’ The gallant captain’s collection of pictures at Glentyan is extremely choice, containing exquisite specimens of Italian art from the twelfth to the sixteenth century, chiefly selected in Italy by himself. 26 LIGHTS IN ART , . awarded to him by one Almighty Being, on whose strength he ever relied. A greater luminary than Michael Angelo never appeared to shed lustre upon fallen humanity, and his memory will be held in per- petual reverence by all the better portions of our race. Among the number of his pupils was Georgio Vasari, afterwards a historian, and the able biographer of Italian painters. The life of Buonarotti was written by Vasari, and also by Condiva, another disciple of the illustrious artist. Michael Angelo himself was a writer of the first class. A splendid monument, in marble statuary, representing Painting, Sculpture, and Architecture, was erected to his memory at Florence. RAPHAEL SANZIO 1 Was born at Urbino, and died, prematurely, during the lifetime of Buonarotti. At the age of little more than ten years he was placed, in consequence of the death of his father, under the care of Pietro Perugino, one of the best painters of the Umbrian school. When he had attained the age of seventeen he went to Flor- ence for improvement ; and four years afterwards he visited Rome, where he was employed by Pope Julius the Second to paint in the Vatican. In sculpture and architecture he became very eminent ; and his oil paintings are admirable, especially those representing 1 The family name was Santi or Santo, and has been changed to Sanzio, in compliment to the great painter. LIGHTS IN ART . 27 the Holy Family ; but his greatest works are in fresco. His principal and last performance is the ‘ Transfigura- tion/ a sublime subject, executed by order of the car- dinals for the cathedral of Narbonne. In opposition to this grand picture, Sebastian del Piombo painted the ‘ Resurrection of Lazarus’ for the same cathedral, under the immediate direction of Michael Angelo. Raphael was undoubtedly the greatest of all modern painters, and equal to the ancients, whose ideas in the choice of models he is supposed to have followed. Concerning ideal beauty, he thus expressed himself : ‘ To paint a fair one, it is necessary for me to see many fair ones ; but because there is so great a scarcity of lovely women, I am constrained to make use of one certain idea, which I have formed to myself in my own fancy.’ The attitudes of his figures are always grace- ful, their countenances are beautiful, and the arrange- ment of every piece of drapery is classical and varied. But in his representations of the nude figure he was inferior to Michael Angelo, his knowledge of anatomy being defective. His manner of painting has not the massive body and roundness peculiar to the style of Correggio, who worked with a fuller pencil ; and he is surpassed by Titian in richness of colouring, and in the natural effects of light and shade. In composition, agreeable contour, and exquisite expression, his pic- tures are truly marvellous, and have not been equalled by any subsequent masters. 28 LIGHTS IN ART . The title of the Prince of Painters has been bestowed upon him by general consent ; yet in private life the love of pleasure may have curtailed the number of his days. His mortal frame surrendered the divine spirit in 1520, at the age of thirty-seven years. The following description of the person of Raphael, by Quatremere de Quincy, is interesting : ‘ He was finely proportioned, his person pleasing and elegant ; his features were regular, his hair brown, his eyes of the same hue, and of a sweet and modest expression ; his complexion olive, his general air full of grace and sensibility. He had a long neck, a small head, a tall light figure, with an appearance of delicacy. Captivat- ing in manner, engaging in address, of distinguished presence, his bearing was that of a finished courtly gentleman.’ 1 Numerous copies from Raphael’s works were made by artists belonging to the school of Bologna ; and although these have become dark and unpleasing, they 1 A very curious portrait of the great painter when a boy, was for- merly in the possession of Mr. James Dennistoun, who contributed an account of it to the A rt Journal in 1841. Mr. Dennistoun purchased it about three years before, while travelling in Italy, at a village near Urbino. It was painted in distemper by Giovanni Santi, the father of Raphael, on a thin panel, measuring sixteen inches by eleven. Making allowance for the juvenile time of life at which the portrait was executed, it bears a close analogy to the description of Raphael in mature man- hood. It consisted of a profile head and shoulders, quaintly repre- sented, and appeared to be a genuine production of the fifteenth cen- tury. This remarkable relic was sold with Mr. Dennistoun’s collection of pictures at Christie and Manson’s in the winter of 1855. LIGHTS IN ART. 29 nevertheless display much of the graceful drawing and the fine expression of the original designer. Engrav- ings and copies in oil have been continually multiplied since his death, so that there is scarcely a collection of old paintings in which Raphael is not represented. Many wealthy collectors, with very little historical or practical knowledge, still purchase copies, frequently of a recent date, and endeavour to persuade themselves and others that their acquisitions are the veritable pro- ductions of the great artist. The subjoined remarks by an elegant theological writer in one of the monthly periodicals of 1862, 1 may enable the reader to form a correct opinion of the lofty genius of Raphael : ‘ In that last and greatest of the works of Raphael, the Transfiguration, preserved in the innermost cabinet of the Vatican, as the choicest of its treasures of art, — in painting which, ere he could give it the last finishing touches, the pencil dropped for ever from the master’s hand, — there is a seeming incongruity between the upper and lower compartments of the picture which at first strikes the beholder with a sense of discord. Above on the mountain summit, in serene and radiant ether, the figure of the glorified Saviour with its two saintly attendants floats in golden mist ; below, on the plain is seen a human form, con- vulsed with agony, a youth writhing and shrieking in a, paroxysm of demoniac possession amid a group 1 The Family Treasury for September. 30 - LIGHTS IN ART. of terror-stricken spectators. The antithesis seems too violent, till the subtle meaning of the painter’s sub- lime conception slowly dawns upon the mind, — the ineffable peace and brightness of heaven as contrasted with the sorrow and suffering, the conflict and the anguish of earth, — yet both combined in the human experience, and mysteriously linked together in the sympathy of the Man of sorrows.’ JULIO ROMANO Was the greatest of all Raphael’s disciples ; and, in conjunction with Francesco Penni, a fellow-student, completed the frescoes in the Vatican, left unfinished by the untimely death of his master. His style, how- ever, bears no resemblance to that of Raphael, being somewhat harsh, and frequently ungraceful. Romano was a great imitator of the ancients. Had he studied the ease and simplicity of nature, and had he success- fully combined that study with his thorough knowledge of the arcana of art, he would have been more eminent. His genius became shrouded by excessive admiration for the works of antiquity, and he endeavoured to restore the conventional notions and obsolete rules of a past era. The beauties of surrounding nature were not objects for imitation to a mind wholly absorbed by the wonders of pagan art. He died at the age of fifty-four, twenty-six years after the death of Raphael, and one year before Sebastian del Piombo, the scholar LIGHTS IN ART 3i of Giorgione, and the favourite of Michael Angelo. In consequence of an irregular course of life, Andrea del Sarto, the best imitator of the designs of Michael Angelo, died prematurely at Florence in 1 530, sixteen years prior to the death of Julio Romano. GIORGIONE. In 15 1 1, Giorgione fella victim to the plague, at the age of thirty-three years. His first instructor was Giovanni Bellini, of the Venetian school, and he was the contemporary and rival of Titian. According to Bryan and others, the works chiefly consulted by him were those of Leonardo da Vinci. The steadfast resolution of Giorgione always to work from living figures in preference to any other models, however academically correct, is highly commendable, and ought to be entertained and closely followed by all young artists who really desire to become eminent in their difficult profession. Entire or even partial dependence upon any classical forms of beauty will assuredly lead the painter into a stiff, conventional manner, from which, in his mature years, when all his habits are settled and confirmed, he will not be easily emancipated, although thoroughly convinced, it may be, of the fatal error into which he has insensibly fallen. The study of antique excellence is only bene- ficial in leading the young mind to a knowledge of the beautiful ; and when such knowledge has been acquired, 32 LIGHTS IN ART. nature alone can furnish those objects of beauty which are worthy of future study and constant imitation. The ancients derived all their celebrity from the con- templation of nature ; their models were carefully selected, and they did not confine themselves by any servile consideration of the performances of those artists who flourished before their own time. The practice of Giorgione, therefore, should be remembered and adopted, while the pedantic infatuation of Julio Romano ought ever to be eschewed as an evil. In the pictures of Romano, the freedom of nature is not discernible ; in Giorgione’s art, nature appears almost to live. The works by which Giorgione is now mostly known are portraits ; those in fresco are nearly obli- terated by time. His most admired historical work is the 'Finding of Moses,’ at Milan. TITIAN, Who was also a pupil of Bellini, wisely followed the path pursued by Giorgione. His first manner was dry and formal, like that of his master ; and he may be considered altogether indebted to Giorgione for directing him in a more natural and pleasing course. It has been justly observed that he would never have attained any high degree of excellence had he not been on terms of close fellowship with Giorgione, whose liberal ideas he was enabled during a long life to carry into effect by his own practice. LIGHTS IN ART 33 He resided some years in Spain, and the pictures he painted in that country are ranked among his finest productions. Ten years of Titian’s life were laboriously devoted to the study of natural objects, and he imbibed in the course of that period a very accurate knowledge of colour, agreeable form, and the varying effects of light and shade. He has not been equalled by any painter since his time in the splendour of his colouring, the vigour of his execution, and the truth of his multiform delineations. The paintings from his hand represent historical subjects, portraits, and landscapes , 1 and are very numerous, including several likenesses of the Emperor Charles the Fifth, who con- ferred upon him the honour of knighthood, accom- panied by a handsome pension, which placed the artist in easier circumstances than he had previously known. While Michael Angelo was struck by the extraordinary brilliancy of Titian’s colouring, he re- gretted that design and composition were not suffici- ently understood by the great Venetian painter ; and also that his drawing, though perfectly natural and agreeable, was not in strict accordance with academic rule. Virtually, he became the popular founder of a new and gorgeous style, which, in the practice of his followers, and even in the latter part of his own career, 1 A landscape by Titian, painted for the Emperor Charles v., is in the National Gallery at Edinburgh. C 34 LIGHTS IN ART . was doomed to degenerate into laxity and excessive freedom, — a degeneracy fatal to the permanence of high art, and, if art is really of any value to mankind, fatal also to the advance of moral goodness. Titian and Giorgione were born in the same year, 1477, an d both died of the plague, — Titian having reached the age of nearly a hundred years. His most successful scholars were Paul Veronese, Tin- toretto, Bonifazio, and Andrea Schiavone. The elder Bassano also studied his works. Paul Veronese is entitled to the first rank in the school of Titian. His representations, especially those of women, are full of grace and beauty. His compositions are not classi- cally correct ; yet this fault, perhaps, is overbalanced by good drawing, well-disposed drapery, and fine colouring. Tintoretto was remarkably rapid in exe- cution, and endeavoured to imitate the noble designs of Michael Angelo. The productions of his pencil are almost incredible in number, and many of them are little inferior to the pictures of Titian ; the majority, however, present a rude, unfinished appear- ance. The works of Bonifazio are superior to those of Tintoretto and Bassano, and are highly esteemed by the best connoisseurs. CORREGGIO, Who sometimes signed himself Antonio Lieto da Correggio, belonged to the Lombard school, and was, LIGHTS IN ART. 35 according to Sandrart, of a noble family ; but Vasari relates that he was the son of a labourer, and lived in poverty. The name of his instructor is unknown. He was born in 1494, at Correggio in the duchy of Modena, and lived forty years. Bryan says : ‘ This illustrious painter may be regarded as one of these rare examples of innate and daring genius, which without a precursor, and deprived by circumstances of the advantages of technical education, ventures to supply those deficiencies from the resources of the mind.’ The ‘ Assumption of the Virgin’ in the cathedral at Parma, his principal work, was finished about four years before his death. He chiefly excelled in the representation of saints and young children ; and he possessed the art of distributing light and shade in a very extraordinary and peculiar manner. This peculiarity consisted in the introduction of a focus, or collection of brilliant lights into one great mass, which was gradually extended, imperceptibly, from the centre, diminished in force according to distance, and finally lost in shadow. The effect produced by this method was almost magical, and has never been observed to so much advantage in the works of any other painter, although many good artists of the same school, after his death, strenuously endeavoured to follow his example. Mechanical imitation can never successfully compete with the spontaneous and natural emanations of genius ; and any attempt to copy 36 LIGHTS IN ART original thought, with a desire to display it as a new idea, must end in comparative or total failure. The tyro in painting may admire and study the genius of Correggio, and the other great luminaries who have appeared at various times in art ; he may even adore their excellencies, and strive to emulate their perfor- mances ; yet he must not confine himself to mere imitation, nor rest satisfied with any style he may acquire from them. He must do as they did — go to nature, and strike out a path for himself. To copy, or to imitate perpetually, the admired style of another, is little better than slavery ; and he who devotes him- self to such servile practice can never become great The mind cannot soar in a state of enthralment : 4 True freedom is where no restraint is known .’ 1 The finishing of Correggio was most elaborate ; yet he seems to have worked with wonderful facility, and never to have lost an hour of his short existence. It has been remarked (so apparently easy was his method of execution) that almost every small picture from his easel appears to have been painted within the compass of one day ; and yet his pictures present more of the impasto , 2 and many of them are richer in colour, than the best works of Titian. He never visited Rome, and only occasionally travelled short distances on foot from the little town where he was born. His last 1 Cowper. 2 Full body of paint. LIGHTS IN ART. 37 walk was performed in very hot weather, between Parma and his own home. The great man, whose affection was strong, hastened, with a small sum of money which he had that day received for his labour, to supply the pressing wants of his beloved wife and children, — that wife and those dear, beautiful children who had been the chief models for his inimitable pictures. The weight of the money, all in copper coins, and his anxiety to reach his family, exhausted his strength ; fever ensued, and terminated in death. Correggio, though in adverse circumstances, was truly ‘ one of the princes * among painters, and a veritable prince of the earth, — a good man. The rays emitted from his august genius shone brightly after he had parted with mortality, and still shine refulgently as ever. FRANCESCO MAZZUOLI, CALLED PARMIGIANO, Was born at Parma, ten years after the birth of Cor- reggio, and died at the age of thirty-six. In the early part of his life he imitated N the natural and pure style of Correggio ; he subsequently visited Rome, where he studied the works of Michael Angelo and Raphael, and also the models of antiquity. He therefore pos- sessed many scholastic advantages which were entirely unknown to Correggio, whom he excelled in design and classical composition, and nearly equalled in free- dom of touch and delicacy of colouring. The extreme 38 LIGHTS IN ART. indolence of his disposition brought him into many difficulties, which are supposed to have shortened his existence. When he felt inclined to work, however, his equanimity was extraordinary. During his resi- dence at Rome, while engaged on his large picture of the ‘Vision of St. Jerome / 1 now the property of the British nation, the city was sacked by order of the Emperor Charles the Fifth. Several soldiers fiercely entered the painting-room of the artist, and were so much struck by his composure, and the startling effect of his performance, that they immediately withdrew in the most peaceful manner. This anecdote clearly shows that the talent for painting, even if only exer- cised at intervals, literally absorbs nearly all the facul- ties of the mind ; and that the effect of the art, when successfully performed, is manifested in the most powerful manner upon the rudest beholders, whose savage intentions, as by magic, may be instantaneously changed, perhaps permanently, to the harmless nature of the lamb. The agency of high art, therefore, may be used as a medium for the advancement of Chris- tian civilisation. Only the very highest aspirations of genius in any art or system of theology are capable of promoting the moral and spiritual welfare of man- kind. The power displayed must be sufficient, as in the case of the Emperor’s soldiery, to exchange the 1 This magnificent picture was purchased by the Directors of the British Institution for three thousand and fifty guineas. LIGHTS IN ART. 39 most brutal and sanguinary feelings for those of clemency, forbearance, and love. The name of Parmigiano completes the roll of the illustrious painters of Italy, whose productions have not been equalled by the succeeding artists of that or any other country. They were the great luminaries of the celebrated Schools founded in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries ; and although their radiance was partially borrowed by many followers reared in those famous seminaries, the light so obtained became less and less brilliant, and finally disappeared. Correggio and Parmigiano belonged to the Lombard school, which, like the Tuscan, Roman, and Venetian schools, virtually became extinct before the close of the six- teenth century. The existence of the great Italian schools in the following century was merely fanciful. Several years after the death of Parmigiano, the Caracci family established the inferior or second Lombard school, which is now usually distinguished by the name of the school of Bologna. CARAVAGGIO. But before making any further allusion to the fifth Italian school, Caravaggio ought to be mentioned. Though classed among the Roman painters, he really belonged to no particular school, being too indepen- dent to receive regular instruction, and so repulsive in his disposition and style of painting as to gain no 40 LIGHTS IN ART followers, with the exception of Ribera, a Spanish artist who studied in Italy. Caravaggio flourished about the end of the sixteenth century. He was originally a common day labourer, chiefly employed by masons. In that capacity he was occasionally required to pre- pare the walls of ecclesiastical and other buildings for fresco painting. This menial employment, however, became the means of directing his attention to the study of art. He possessed original ideas, and in the course of a short time became an expert painter ; but an ungovernable mind rendered him incapable of bearing any control, retarded his artistic career, and destroyed him in the prime of life, being only forty years old at the period of his death, 1609. In his works we observe a strict adherence to nature, but without the least discrimination in the choice of his subjects, which were always unpleasing. He intro- duced strong lights and intensely dark shadows, especially when he painted the human figure, and never attempted to modify or reduce their asperity. A savage kind of independence pervades his man- ner, and an utter contempt of all prescribed rule is observed throughout his performances. Such are the principal characteristics of the painting of Cara- vaggio — a startling genius, yet withal an unpleasing character in the sight of God and man. He became an outlaw, having fled from Rome, where he had destroyed the life of a fellow-creature. LIGHTS IN ART \ 4i The three chief painters of the Caracci family, Ludovico, Annibal, and Agostino, founded their styles upon those of Raphael, Titian, and Correggio. Ludo- vico imitated the works of Correggio at Parma, and designed his compositions with considerable know- ledge. Annibal excelled his principal instructor, Ludovico, and afterwards formed a very agreeable and correct style by a careful examination of the great works produced in the Roman, Venetian, and Lom- bard schools. He became celebrated at Rome, where he was much employed. Agostino, though a good painter, was more eminent as an engraver. He had a natural son, Antonio, who, had he lived longer, might probably have surpassed as an artist all the other members of his family. Ludovico, thirty years before his death, which took place in 1619, at the age of sixty-four, with the assistance of his talented relations, opened the well-known school wherein Guido, Dome- nichino, Albani, and others were educated in the best principles of the art GUIDO, Born near Bologna in 1574, lived sixty-eight years. He received his early instructions from Denis Calvert, a Flemish artist, and the rival of Ludovico Caracci in the school of Bologna. Though Guido preferred the style of the Caracci, he could never entirely divest himself of Calvert’s manner. After leaving that school 42 LIGHTS IN ART. he imitated the compositions of Albert Barer, whose original ideas he endeavoured to appropriate, and so far succeeded as to induce a very general belief while he lived, and even down to the present time, that the beautiful productions of his pencil entirely emanated from his own conceptions of nature. Although not possessed of originality, he obtained more money and reputation than any of his contemporaries. Dome- nichino was a skilful painter, but without any great natural endowments ; and Albani must be regarded merely as a pleasing artist. According to Fresnoy, an accomplished critic of the seventeenth century. Sisto Badolocchi, who died young, was more accurate in design than all the other disciples of the Caracci. Lanfranco and Viola were the last painters of emi- nence in the school of Bologna. CHAPTER III. DECLINE OF ITALIAN PAINTING— ART BEFORE AND AFTER THE REFORMATION — PICTURES IN CHURCHES. HE declension of high art in the sixteenth century may be attributed to those eccle- ! siastical differences which were com- menced by Martin Luther in Germany, and which resulted in the establishment of a new sect, in direct opposition to the hitherto unrivalled authority and splendour of the Church of Rome. The liberal patron- age bestowed upon the professors of painting could never be revived after the Reformation. Honourable distinction and the highest rewards awaited the exer- tions of the great artists in the auspicious times of Julius the Second, Leo the Tenth, and other sovereign pontiffs, whose costly magnificence could never be emulated by any of their successors. The artists themselves were men of so much power and enthusiasm that their productions appeared little less than the offspring of inspiration. Devotional feelings directed their labours, and they possessed the most perfect 44 LIGHTS IN ART, knowledge of the divine nature and human sufferings of our blessed Lord. Their unaffected piety, combined with sacred historical erudition, enabled them to por- tray all the touching incidents in the earthly life of the Saviour. The benign expression of His matchless countenance, the wonderful miracles He performed, His patience and heavenly meekness, the agony of His feelings in the garden of Gethsemane, the bitter- ness of death on the cross, His appearance to Mary Magdalene after His resurrection, His affecting con- verse with the two disciples on their way to the village of Emmaus, and His departure and ascension into the realms of eternal glory, are some of the holy themes chosen and illustrated by the greatest painters. The subjects contained in the inspired volume are, indeed, of the most sublime and pathetic character, unequalled by the finest epic descriptions of the ancient Greek and Roman poets. Michael Angelo, the highest authority in art, is said to have strongly recommended on his deathbed the attentive study of the Holy Scriptures ; and we find that many of the old masters who received the best intellectual culture, were the most eminent ; while others, whose early training had been neglected, passed the years of their existence in an unsettled state, and were never qualified for the instruction of their fellow-creatures. We must always remember that the art of painting is only valuable when calculated to improve the mind ; if LIGHTS IN ART. 45 exercised only to amuse, it cannot be considered as a branch of education. The best men will certainly say that religion is good, and that art is intended to be a help, not a hindrance, in the way to holiness. Yet, after the Reformation, the wonders of art were only viewed by vast multitudes of people as abominable objects, set up by a crafty priesthood to ensnare them into the commission of idolatrous practices. In Saxony, an infuriated populace, instigated by the zeal of Luther’s followers, demolished many valuable works of art in Catholic churches. Luther himself, however, disapproved of all outrage, and did all in his power to preserve order and discipline among those who had be- come fanatical by his doctrine. Indeed, from the fact of his being the intimate friend of Albert Durer and other eminent artists, we may believe that he felt no aversion to the fine arts, and we may even assume that he was really not averse to the introduction of pictures and statuary into Protestant places of worship. The very best men possess no resemblance to the perfection of God, and have never performed any perfect work. The grandest performances of the great painters are therefore imperfect, and when introduced into edifices dedicated to the Most High, cannot reasonably be regarded as worthy objects of adoration. We cannot worship the works of men’s hands without disobeying the divine command, ‘ Thou shalt have no other gods before me.’ We are distinctly commanded to have no 46 LIGHTS IN ART. gods in the presence of the true God ; and as God is everywhere present, we cannot lawfully have any gods or idols in any place whatever. But works of art may be introduced everywhere as specimens of man’s intelligence and skill. Cathedrals, and other ecclesias- tical structures, are usually magnificent in archi- tectural display ; and the admission of the noblest examples of the two sister arts, painting and sculpture, cannot be regarded as inconsistent or unpleasing in the sight of God. The happy union of painting, sculpture, and architecture, forms one harmonious piece of varied and stupendous workmanship for the admiration of all beholders, among whom many dull and senseless devotees will at all times be found to dishonour, by their idolatry, the talent, the industry, and the piety of more intelligent beings. Blocks of beautiful marble, sculptured with the view to per- petuate the memory of those who have been eminent in the world, have been, and still are, occasionally admitted into our Episcopal churches. Too great a dis- play of monumental statuary would, however, encum- ber our cathedrals, and present a confused medley of figures, busts, and pedestals. Consequently, the indis- criminate admission of sculpture would be improper. But the same objection cannot apply to pictures, which are admirably suited to occupy vacant spaces upon extensive walls. They offer no obstruction, are not unwieldy, and can easily be placed or removed with- 47 LIGHTS ny ART. out damage to the edifice. The walls of many Protes- tant temples are comparatively bare, and often weary the eye by a want of variety ; and where architectural aid has been employed, the ornaments are frequently meaningless and grotesque, or altogether void of intelligent design. In Presbyterian places of worship, the architects seem literally bound to invent the very plainest interiors. The inside appearance of almost every Presbyterian church is tame, unsightly, and destitute of any relief, with the exception of that pro- duced by the sombre-looking pulpit, which is generally reared close to a large, bare, and extremely light wall, positively offensive to all visual susceptibility. The pulpit bears a little resemblance to some dark, ominous spot upon an uninviting, dreary plain. The wander- ing eye is rarely gladdened by the appearance even of a common stained-glass window ; and where this trifling relief is observed, it may be regarded as the highest ornamental aid conceded by Presbyterian rigidity. The mere idea of the admission of a fine scriptural painting, were it possible for such a fancy to invade the mind of any follower of Calvin or Knox, would be instan- taneously expelled and banished for ever in abhor- rence as an instigation of Satan, who is supposed to hold despotic sway in the Church of Rome. The affectation of plainness arises from the fear of resem- bling, in the remotest degree, the alleged idolatry of that Church. Fear is a phantom of the imagination, 4 8 LIGHTS IN ART. and, when long cherished, exercises the influence of an idol, at whose shrine the possessor is ever ready to sacrifice the highest faculties of his nature. Other forms of idolatry, too numerous to mention here, are embraced by those who profess to worship only one, true, and living God. There can really be no sin in the adornment of Christian places of worship by scriptural works of art, Jehovah being honoured by the employment of those talents which He has intrusted to the beings of His own creation. All the fine arts are equally good ; and if the introduction of architectural beauty and melodious music be lawful, every other art may be lawfully admitted. The simplicity of the primitive Christian churches cannot be taken as a pattern for modern places of worship, because the early converts were poor and persecuted, and possessed no means of rearing costly buildings for the services of the new religion. Christianity is now fostered by the power and wealth of nations, and all affluent Christians are expected to be liberal, in every sense of the term, when they resolve to build a house for the presence of the Almighty. A Protestant clergyman , 1 in the course of some remarks on public places of worship, says we should ‘ not run into the absurd extreme of supposing that it matters not what kind of building we set apart for God’s service. There is no Popery in making a 1 The Rev. J. C. Ryle. LIGHTS IN ART . 49 church handsome.’ A handsome church includes all that is ornamental and beautiful. God is as well pleased to dwell in a splendid structure devoted to His service, as He is to be present in the most humble building frequented by the poorest worshippers. He is still better pleased to dwell in the heart, where devotion cannot be pharisaical, and where He is worshipped in spirit and in truth. Man can do but little for the honour and glory of his Maker, yet he should ever strive to do his best ; and he certainly can do so by employing all those means bountifully intrusted to him for high purposes. To expect the Spirit of God to reside in the grandest structure, without humble, earnest prayer, would be irreverent, and the expectation could never be realized. King Solomon, at the dedication of the magnificent temple at Jerusalem, anxiously inquired, 'But will God in very deed dwell with men on the earth ? Behold, heaven and the heaven of heavens cannot contain Thee ; how much less this house which I have built !’ Solomon employed his entire kingly power in the erection of that temple, which was adorned by every art known in the world. The temple was still gorgeous, and the wonder of all beholders in the time of our Saviour , 1 yet He condescended to teach and expound 1 Solomon’s temple was destroyed by the Chaldeans in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. The second edifice, in which our Lord taught, was built on the same site, according to a decree of Cyrus, King of Persia. D LIGHTS IN ART . So the Holy Scriptures within its walls. The building itself was harmless ; only the dissembling worshippers were odious in the sight of God./'- When ignorant, superstitious multitudes bow down in reverence before painted and carved representations, the senseless act cannot be conscientiously sanctioned by a learned priesthood, although that priesthood may not always warn and reprove the idolaters. But the best instruction will fail to produce a right and lasting impression upon every mind, because all persons are not endowed with the same degree of intelligence. Anxious pastors may point in the proper direction, and yet vast numbers may go astray, on account of the spiritual darkness which is so difficult to dispel. The finest works of art were introduced into Roman Catholic churches as the worthy illustrations of sacred subjects, and as the agreeable means of aiding the mind in the meditation of heavenly reality. They were never intended by those who gave them admission to be viewed as objects for divine worship. If the Catholic clergy and their intelligent hearers really consider the arts of painting and sculpture emblema- tical and allusive only, they cannot justly be accused of violating the commandment in the decalogue. While the highest admiration is due to the successful efforts of the great masters in art, properly educated persons The Jewish temple was finally burnt by the Romans, contrary, how- ever, to the desire of their general, about the year A. D. 70. LIGHTS IN ART . Si cannot extend such admiration beyond a prescribed limit without incurring the serious charge of undue reverence, — a charge which mere common sense will teach them to avoid. Illiterate worshippers in Catholic temples have, no doubt, been guilty of idolatry while contemplating the masterpieces of genius. Acts of mistaken devotion, however, might have been, and always may be, prevented by wholesome teaching. The mind, naturally inclined to error, ought at a very early period of life, to be strongly impressed with the fact that paintings and statues in churches can only assist in the exercise of devotion, and that they ought never to be regarded as heavenly things. Intelligently viewed, pictures and images can never tend to idolatry ; and their admission into places set apart for religious purposes is therefore perfectly sinless. Dr. Johnson, the friend of Sir Joshua Reynolds, defined the pictorial art as illustrative ; and certainly it possesses the power of indelibly impressing the mind with the most important events in sacred and other history. Although it cannot impart oral instruction, it has the power of affecting certain minds more strongly than the most eloquent language used by any pulpit orator, and the impressions made are likely to be more lasting than those produced by the subtlety of the finest sermon, the well-chosen words of which may often fall upon the ear without penetrating the heart. Supplicating prayer, pious discourse, solemn LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS 52 LIGHTS IN ART . music, suitable sculpture, and scriptural painting, all combined within an edifice of architectural beauty, can scarcely fail to leave some good impression upon the hearts of all individuals composing a congregation. Preaching itself is an art — a powerful one, and might everywhere become more powerful still by a judicious union with all the other high arts. There are silent homilies in scriptural pictures. CHAPTER IV. ITALIAN PAINTERS OF THE SEVENTEENTH AND EIGHTEENTH CENTURIES. HE art of painting was probably more extensively practised in Italy during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries than at any previous time, yet the works produced never rivalled the masterpieces of the sixteenth century. Schools were established, and the art was more gene- rally pursued as a profession than it had ever been before. This chapter is intended to refer to the very few painters who really soared above mediocrity. Having no great genius, the majority of artists satisfied themselves by imitating, or endeavouring to imitate, the wonderful productions of a former age. Many of them so far degenerated as to become mere copyists, whose days were consumed by the laborious occupation of painting what are now termed duplicates of fine original pictures. Thousands of these perform- ances have been dispersed over many countries, and are frequently viewed as the genuine works of those 54 LIGHTS IN ART . masters whose names are ignorantly given to them. This fact will sufficiently account for the incredible number of inferior old pictures ascribed to the greatest painters. Caesar D’Arpino, a Neapolitan, died in 1640 at the age of eighty. He chiefly painted battles and histori- cal designs in a manner somewhat resembling the style of Rubens and Baroccio. The colouring of Arpino is extremely beautiful, but his outlines are rather charged, or overstrained. Ribera, usually called Spagnoletto, 1 was a native of Spain, though he is always classed with the painters of the Neapolitan school. He received his first in- structions in Valencia, and subsequently became a student of the works of Raphael and the Caracci. But on seeing the productions of Caravaggio he altered his style, which is distinguished by powerful contrasts of light and shade, and a strict adherence to nature. Although not endowed with the highest faculties, he arrived at eminence by dint of incessant labour and a determination to excel. He drew with considerable accuracy, and his best pictures are finished with great care. Ribera died in 1656, at the age of sixty-eight. We have no authentic information respecting Guer- cino’s acquirement of the rudiments of painting, yet we may conclude that he produced some meritorious pictures at a very early period of life. His family 1 The Little Spaniard. LIGHTS IN ART 55 name was Barbieri, and he acquired the designation of Guercino in consequence of a defect in his right eye. When about forty, he became a great admirer and imitator of the works of Agostino Caracci ; and towards the latter part of his career, Guido was the master whose style he endeavoured to follow. His representations of the Magdalene, the Madonna, vari- ous saints, and young children, have not the softness of Guido ; the outlines of his figures are frequently hard, and his carnations occasionally appear heavy. As a portrait painter he was very successful, and in that capacity had the honour of being employed by Queen Christina of Sweden. Her Majesty presented her own portrait, probably by him, to the Protector of England, her celebrated ally. Guercino established a school, and had many imitators, whose productions are often attributed to him. He died in 1666, aged seventy-six. ANDREA S ACC HI, Born near Rome, within two years of the close of the memorable sixteenth century, was a pupil of Albani, and subsequently studied the works of Raphael, of whose sublime genius he became an ardent admirer. Many of his carefully finished pictures are highly esteemed on the Continent, especially at Rome, where he died at the age of sixty-three. The colouring of this master is not so powerful as that of his contem- 56 LIGHTS IN ART. porary, Pietro Cortona, a rapid and pleasing painter of the Tuscan school ; it is, however, very fascinating from its extreme delicacy. He devoted a consider- able portion of his life to the practice of portrait paint- ing, examples of which are sometimes seen in this country. 1 SASSOFERRATO. The works of Sassoferrato, or Salvi, lead to the supposition that he studied under Domenichino, to whose method of designing they bear much resem- blance, and are executed with marvellous power. There is great beauty of expression in many of the heads painted by Sassoferrato. His subjects are chiefly scriptural, and he occasionally produced literal copies from the works of the great masters. In the collection of the Earl of Warwick, there is a fine copy by him after Guido, representing the Virgin and Child. Although this painter scarcely possessed any origin- ality, and freely borrowed from the designs of his pre- decessors and contemporaries, his pictures are remark- ably pleasing, and have found their way into the best collections. He died at Rome in 1685, at the age of eighty. VI VI AN I. Two Italian artists named Viviani, who painted 1 In the Gallery at Dulwich a female portrait is attributed to Andrea Sacchi. LIGHTS IN ART. 57 architectural subjects, are mentioned by Pilkington, Bryan, Lanzi, Hobbs, and other compilers ; but their accounts are so confused and contradictory, that very little reliance can be placed upon them. The collection of Mr. Wardlaw Ramsay of Whitehall, near Edinburgh, contains a large picture, attributed to Ottavio Viviani, who was born at Brescia in 1599, and died in 1674. It represents a magnificent architectural view of the Piazza del Popolo in Rome, the principal object being an ancient obelisk brought from Egypt, and erected upon a pedestal in that city by order of Pope Sixtus the Fifth. The figures in this picture have been ascribed to Jan Miel, who visited Rome, though they are evidently by the same hand that painted the buildings. Another large architectural picture, said to be the work of this artist, is in the collection at Hampton Court Palace. Cadagora Viviani, often strangely confounded with Ottavio, is supposed to have flourished at Rome about the year 1650. His subjects are similar to those represented by Viviani of Brescia. It is singular that the pictures of both masters have often been ascribed to Canaletto. AGOSTINO TASSI. The principal works of Agostino Tassi, the scholar of Paul Brill and the first master of Claude, are at Genoa and Leghorn. He is said to have been born at 58 LIGHTS IN ART. Bologna, towards the close of the sixteenth century, and to have been employed in early life in the decora- tion of the outsides of houses. He painted landscapes with ruins and figures, and storms at sea ; and dis- played much truth in colouring, perspective, and the distribution of light and shade. Some of his land- scapes contain the ruins of splendid architectural work in variously coloured marble, and are most elabor- ately finished. Unfortunately, he occasionally painted upon the insecure ground of chalk and size ; conse- quently, many of his pictures have perished. The works of this comparatively little known master are frequently mistaken for those of Pietro Lucatelli and Pannini, who both lived, however, at a much later period . 1 For the sake of connexion, a remark or two may be here offered respecting the styles of those two artists. The manner of Lucatelli is distinguished by great freedom of touch and natural colouring ; yet he never finished with that minuteness observable in the best works of Agostino Tassi. Pannini was inferior to both, his colour being for the most part opaque and heavy, and his distances not sufficiently atmospheric. In design he was fanciful and redundant, and there is a want of repose in nearly all his compositions. The ruins introduced into his landscapes are chiefly ideal, yet always picturesque ; and his figures, especially in 1 Lucatelli was born at Rome in 1660, and his disciple Pannini at Piacenza in 1691. LIGHTS IN ART . 59 the interior of churches, are painted in a very full and spirited manner. During a lifetime which embraced nearly seventy-three years, he executed an immense number of pictures. His works are very numerous in Britain. CAMPIDOGLIO. This artist was born at Rome in 1610. He painted fruit, flowers, and other objects in a free, strong, and very natural style. Agreeable colouring and much force particularly mark his productions. He died in his sixtieth year. SALVATOR ROSA, Born near Naples in 1615, possessed a lofty genius, and was endued with a correct knowledge of several arts. Painting, engraving, music, and poetry alike engaged his earnest attention. He was no mean politician, and appeared peculiarly fitted for military employment. The activity of his mind, however, brought him into many serious difficulties. Being unfortunately a participant in the insurrection of Mas- saniello at Naples, he was obliged to take refuge in Rome, where he remained with little intermission until his death, at the age of fifty-eight. He had a manly, independent spirit ; and his satirical ten- dency, expressed by numerous poetical effusions, nurtured the bitter enmity of his less gifted associ- ates. Satire is never well received by those for whom 6o LIGHTS IN ART. it is intended, and indeed is rarely pleasing to the world at large. We are all naturally so averse to candour, that when our vices and follies are exposed, especially in severe language, we involuntarily recoil, and at once endeavour to repel the satirist, however honest and just he may be. Our imperfections are so palpable in the clear light of truth that we instinc- tively abhor them, and hate the friend by whom they are displayed. The ingenuous man who desires a quiet life, must close his eyes to the peccancy of his nearest kindred and most intimate acquaintances, otherwise they will speedily become his enemies. Yet satire is often adopted by good men for the benefit of society : it was employed by Salvator Rosa, who probably con- sidered that abstaining from the exercise of his talent would be a dereliction of duty, which was to expose the flagrant vices of his time. He was like a brave soldier, who never shuns the danger of battle in the hope of victory. In painting, the subjects of Salvator corresponded with the vivid originality of his mind. They were chosen from wild and rugged scenery, where the ravages of many tempests were visible, and where numerous banditti, far away from the repose of civil- ized life, selected their solitary haunts. Those fierce marauders, partly clad in picturesque armour, were variously represented ; sometimes at rest with their weapons near at hand, watching for unwary travellers, LIGHTS IN ART. 61 and frequently assembled in lawless council, to deliberate on future acts of violence and plunder. The painter delighted to portray nature in savage liberty ; the fury of the elements and the deeds of desperate men were the usual selections for his pencil. A fine, free, dashing style of execution, bold effects of light and shade, and natural colouring, distinguish the landscapes of Salvator Rosa. His pictures are nume- rous, yet he did not live long enough to paint all that are ascribed to him. 1 Many artists of the period in which he lived endeavoured to follow his peculiar method ; and it is nearly impossible to look over col- lections of old pictures, public or private, without find- ing some work ostensibly painted by his own hand. In the Manchester Exhibition of 1857, eleven paint- ings attributed to Salvator were exhibited, and many more were offered for the same purpose, but declined. Most of the eleven referred to were genuine produc- tions, and fortunately in good preservation. GIOVANNI CASTIGLIONE, Born at Genoa in 1616, was the scholar of Andrea de Ferrari. When Vandyck visited Genoa, he is said to have imparted much valuable information to Cas- tiglione, who, however, chiefly excelled in landscape and animal painting. As he evidently possessed some 1 The battle-pieces of Borgognone, who lived about the same time, are often attributed to Salvator Rosa. 62 LIGHTS IN ART. genius for this line of art, especially in the delineation of animals, Vandyck may have been indebted to him for some useful information in return for the lessons he received. We know that the quadrupeds occa- sionally introduced by Vandyck into his own pictures are remarkable for accuracy and other artistic excel- lencies. Castiglione employed a portion of his time in etching, and died at the age of fifty-four. CARLO DOLCI, Also born in 1616, belonged to the Tuscan school, and seldom executed works of large dimensions. He is principally known by his pictures of the Madonna and various saints, most elaborately wrought, exquisitely transparent in colour, and scrupulous in detail. By constantly aiming at extraordinary high finish, he sacrificed every appearance of easy execution and all freedom of style. He rarely introduced into any work more than a single figure. Although he lived sixteen years longer than Castiglione, his existence was too short, and his method of working too minute and tedious, to enable him to produce many pictures. His laborious manner was partially imitated during his life, and also after his death, by a few other artists, whose productions are commonly .ascribed to him. No less than seven pictures in the Manchester Exhibition were given to the name of Carlo Dolci. The genuine works of this master are very rare, and extremely valuable. LIGHTS IN ART . 63 ONORIO MARIANI . 1 One of the best artists of the Carlo Dolci period was Mariani, whose productions are held in high esti- mation at Florence, where he was born. An excel- lent picture by this master, who is little known in Britain, was lately purchased at an auction in Edin- burgh. It represents the Holy Family and St. John in a landscape. The figures are of the size of life, correctly drawn and well grouped, and the carnations are true to nature. Becoming dignity marks the attitude of the Virgin, the expression of whose face is indescribably chaste and lovely. The incarnate Son presents a perfect model of infantile beauty, while the face and bearing of the reputed father clearly indicate his royal descent. Many other painters have imparted to Joseph a mean and plebeian appearance, totally at variance with the fact of his kingly origin. Though a disciple of Carlo Dolci, Mariani seems to have studied the works of Raphael and Titian. He never finished in the elaborate manner of his instructor ; yet his pencilling is sufficiently soft and agreeable. All the accessories appear in due subjection to his principal figures, which are presented to the eye of the spectator in prominent relief. In design, and in the power of producing fine works on a great scale, he was doubt- less superior to Carlo Dolci. He died in 1715, aged 88 . 1 Sometimes called Marinari. 6 4 LIGHTS IN ART . FILIPPO LAURI, A Roman artist, born in 1623, usually painted poeti- cal subjects and landscapes on a small scale, yet in a correct and delicate manner. He frequently executed designs from the Metamorphoses of Ovid; in" those and similar compositions the inventive faculties of Lauri are remarkable. As he attained the age of seventy-one, his works are numerous and eagerly desired by connoisseurs. They bring high prices. CARLO MARATTI Was a painter of little eminence, although many of his works are well known and admired in the world of art. He was very industrious during a whole lifetime, extending, like that of Mariani, to eighty-eight years, thirteen of which were passed in the eighteenth cen- tury. A precious stone can emit no brilliancy with- out care and polish. If Carlo Maratti really possessed any bright genius, it was allowed to remain dormant, deeply buried beneath the heavy task of endeavouring to imitate the great performances of preceding masters. He seems never to have aimed at originality, or if he did, the effort was extremely feeble. The desire of appropriating the ideas of those eminent painters who flourished before his time absorbed his strength ; and, in his impotency, he was constrained to glean from their various works, and to call the selections the LIGHTS IN ART. 65 spring of his own genius. He was a mere borrower of the excellencies of other men, especially of Raphael. Sometimes his talent was employed in closely copying the works of the great masters. These copies are numerous and very excellent, and are frequently mis- taken for the productions of the original designers. To the practice of borrowing for his own works, and mak- ing exact copies, he added the drudgery of restoring old and decayed pictures. At one period of his life he was employed to clean and repair some of the works of Raphael in the Vatican. Being certainly endowed with peculiar mechanical power, we may conclude that he felt himself well qualified for the performance of those difficult and very nice opera- tions. Yet the tedious task of restoration, although honourable enough when carefully executed, can never assist an artist in the way to fame. By frequently following that occupation much valuable time is con- sumed, the mind becomes partially inactive, and the hand loses much of the elasticity imparted to it by entire freedom. The only advantage is a pecuniary one ; there is no higher reward. Had Carlo Maratti in his early days fully acquired all the rudiments of art, and had he afterwards determined to imitate nature alone, he might possibly have attained the highest reputation in original painting. Though his career was unusually long, he invariably endeavoured, so insatiable was his love of gain, to embrace too many 66 LIGHTS IN ART. objects, and thus rendered himself incapable of grasp- ing even one object with sufficient firmness to make it altogether his own. He that desires superlative ex- cellence in any art or science, should warily select one branch only, and should strive to master it by all the powers in his possession. The deliberate choice of a particular pursuit ought to absorb every energy of the mind. ‘This selection/ says a great orator, ‘this singleness of entire absorption, is absolutely necessary to avoid the dispersion of the faculties caused by intemperate devotion to several subjects, whereof the certain tendency is to produce mediocrity in all/ 1 Among Maratti’s original works are the Visitation of the Virgin, the Flight into Egypt, and the Baptism of Christ LUCA GIORDANO Was a rapid worker, and, like Carlo Maratti, produced an immense number of pictures. At the commence- ment of his career he studied under Spagnoletto, and subsequently became the assistant of Pietro da Cor- tona. He successfully imitated the works of Paul Veronese and other great masters, and was much employed at Florence. In 1692 he visited Spain, where he remained about ten years, and died soon after his return to Florence, in the seventy-third year 1 Vide Lord Brougham’s Address to the Members and Students of the University of Edinburgh on the 18th of May i860. LIGHTS IN ART. 67 of his age. Giordano was a good colourist, and painted his pictures in a free and skilful manner. In composition, however, he was sometimes extravagant, and his drawing often appears slovenly and defective. The collection of the Earl of Derby contains a repre- sentation of the Nativity by this master, who also painted the Crucifixion and many other sacred sub- jects. 1 He belonged to the Neapolitan school, and left numerous followers and imitators, the most dis- tinguished of whom, perhaps, was GIUSEPPE SI MO NELLI. According to Lanzi, this painter was originally a servant to Giordano, whose manner of colouring he successfully imitated. But in design he was not very eminent. His chief excellence consisted in the man- agement of rich and agreeable colours, judiciously blended, and dispersed so as to produce the most pleasing effect of harmony. In 1862, a large altar- piece by this artist formed part of a collection of old paintings in the possession of William Edwards Wood, Esq. It represented the Holy Family in a landscape 1 Colonel M ‘Niven, who resided at Edinburgh in 1848, possessed an excellent painting of the Crucifixion by Giordano. The Colonel was a clever amateur artist, and the intimate friend of David Roberts, the Royal Academician. His water-colour sketches of scenes in the Holy Land, where he sojourned for some time, display considerable ability. From several of these interesting sketches he afterwards executed finished drawings, which he contributed to the public exhibi- tions. 68 LIGHTS IN ART. of singular beauty. But the figures were literal tran- scripts of nature, without any indication of classical treatment. Nothing of divinity appeared in the mysterious Son, perceptibly drawn from one of the commonest of infants ; while the mother of God per- sonated a well-sustained and respectable nursery-maid of modern time. As to the reputed father of the heavenly child, he was a mere representation of a hard-working mechanic, whose pedigree had never been known, or was entirely forgotten. The painter had evidently been incapable of penetrating into the divine mystery of the subject, which he essayed to produce upon canvas under the guidance of ordinary human perceptibilities alone. Not being endued with the power of spiritual discernment, his ideas for sacred designs were extremely limited, and he therefore largely drew from those objects by which he was constantly surrounded. The work referred to was probably one of Simonelli’s best productions. It had the advantage of bearing his signature, undoubtedly affixed by his own hand. CARLO CIGNANI. Fervid and original thought may be traced in many of the designs of Carlo Cignani, who was born at Bologna in 1628, and lived nearly twenty years into the following century. His long existence enabled him to produce numerous works of importance, which LIGHTS IN ART, 69 have occasionally been mistaken for those of his celebrated contemporary, Nicolas Poussin. Scriptural subjects occupied a considerable portion of his time, and were usually executed in a most pleasing manner. A valuable picture of the Magdalene by Carlo Cignani is preserved at the Dulwich Gallery ; and at Hampton Court Palace are several excellent cartoons, executed by him in chiaroscuro. These cartoons are said to have been designed for the frescoes in the ducal palace at Parma. Many of the mythological pictures, especially those representing bacchanalian scenes, which we fre- quently find ascribed to N. Poussin and other masters, are in all probability the productions of Cignani, whose genius was sufficiently versatile and prolific for the complete illustration of fabulous history. FRANCESCO TREVISANI, The son of a talented architect of Triest, died in 1746, at a patriarchal age. He is classed in the Roman School, and possessed the power of imitating, with rapidity, the works of the great masters. Though a considerable number of his productions are literal copies, chiefly on a small scale, his manner of painting is remarkably free, yet delicate and clear. Being deficient in lofty design, he rarely ventured to intro- duce into his original pictures, comprising landscapes and architectural views, more than single figures, generally representing saints, and ordinary portraits. 70 LIGHTS IN ART. An excellent painting of St. Francis by this master belongs to the collection of Lord Hatherton, and was exhibited at Manchester in 1857. Trevisani was an accomplished man, and married a noble Venetian lady. He afterwards resided permanently at Rome in the enjoyment of the highest favour, being knighted for his admirable copies after Paul Veronese, Correggio, and other famous masters. Death came suddenly upon him, and his remains were solemnly interred at Rome with all the ceremony and honour usually awarded to patrician rank. Gorgeous display had always afforded him infinite pleasure. FRANCESCO SOLIMENA, Born near Naples in 1657, painted portraits, land- scapes, and historical subjects in a style formed upon the study of the best works of Luca Giordano and Carlo Maratti. He entertained, in early life, a laud- able desire to profit by the contemplation of ancient art, and subsequently painted all his own designs, occasionally in fresco, from the finest living models. Though he was chiefly employed to adorn the churches and convents of Italy, he was patronized and greatly esteemed by the most distinguished personages. The king of Naples honoured him by desiring to have his own portrait and the likeness of Solimena painted in one picture, in order that the particular friendship of the sovereign for the artist LIGHTS IN ART. 7 1 might be known to posterity. Solimena executed the work in his best manner. During the later portion of his long life, ninety years, his eyesight partially failed ; and then he devoted the remainder of his days to the instruction of youth. He'earnestly recom- mended a thorough acquaintance with the greatest masters before commencing to paint from nature, and duly impressed upon the young mind the absolute necessity of selecting, after proper classical study, the most beautiful living forms for historical composition. In landscape painting he advised a constant and strict adherence to nature in preference to the fancy of the most elevated imagination. These and similar pre- cepts given by men of the highest intelligence ought ever to be the safeguards of all young artists, whose inexperience naturally inclines them to indulge unten- able novelties, which, in process of time, irresistibly draw the mind into a vague, unsatisfactory state, from • which complete emancipation is impossible. The man who desires to become a great, instructive artist, or in any way useful to his species, must in his early years be rightly educated. Every aged, cultivated artist should become, like Solimena, the welcome instructor of his youthful brethren. BORGOGNONE. Though Cortesi, called Borgognone, had the advan- tage of being instructed by several masters, he did not 72 LIGHTS IN ART follow the manner of any, but discovered a path for himself, wherein he became more celebrated than any other professed battle-painter of his time. His bril- liant ideas were conceived while he passed a portion of his life in a military capacity, and he afterwards embodied them in a style so bold and free as to astonish all his instructors in art, including Guido and Albani. Borgognone is said never to have painted from any sketch or drawn design, nor to have used dead colouring ; he evidently finished each part of his work at once, and never retouched, by glazing or otherwise, any of the completed parts, and yet he pre- served entire unity in the whole. He died in his fifty-fifth year, 1676. JOSEPH PARROCEL, Born in 1648, placed himself under the tuition of Borgognone, whose style he closely followed with con- siderable success. He was remarkably careful in the preparation of his materials, and consulted nature for every design. The battle-pieces by this artist are deservedly prized, and frequently mistaken for those of his master. His son Charles and his nephew Ignatus pursued the same course with nearly the same result, so that even good judges often confound the works of the three relatives, who appear to have been guided through life by little more than one idea. The battles LIGHTS IN ART. 73 of the elder Parrocel, however, though really infe- rior to those of Borgognone, are more vigorous than the same kind of subjects painted by Charles and Ignatus. GIOVANNI TIEPOLO, Another historical painter of some merit, but whose name is not often mentioned, was born at Venice in the second half of the seventeenth century, and lived to the age of seventy-three. Some of his pictures are of a very pleasing character, and have frequently been attributed to other artists whose names are better known. CANALETTO. The reader is now directed to the works of Cana- letto, whose genius is almost universally known, at least in every land where the fine arts have been disseminated. He was the son of a scene-painter at Venice, Bernardo Canal, and in 1719, being then twenty-two years of age, visited Rome, where he devoted the principal part of his time to the study of antiquities, and the best modern architecture. The works of the great painters also engaged his particular attention, and were carefully studied, with- out any servile attempt at literal imitation. Impressed with sound ideas by the frequent contemplation of those classic productions, he was afterwards enabled to delineate, with wonderful celerity, multitudes of 74 LIGHTS IN ART. well-chosen and elegant figures, though on a small scale, which impart an appearance of lively animation to his numerous pictures. On the termination of his sojourn at Rome he returned to his native city, with a mind abundantly stored, and a facile hand, where he found himself perfectly qualified to paint those incomparable views which form the solid basis of his fame. The singular beauty of Venice was agreeable to his genius, and he seems to have been created for the express purpose of transferring to canvas the happy union of nature and art, for which that city, 4 Throned on her hundred isles, ’ 1 is so remarkable. There can be no doubt that the numerous views of Venice by Canaletto are his best pictures, being truthful, fresh, and vigorous ; and they are not even surpassed in detail by the popular science of photo- graphy at the present day. His perspective in these productions is truly admirable ; but for this parti- cular excellence, he is said to have been indebted to the use of the camera obscura , — a perfectly legitimate medium, however, when rendered, as it always was, in the hands of Canaletto, entirely subservient to the purposes of art. In his Venetian pictures, real atmos- pheric influence seems to pervade the azure sky, the magnificent and picturesque buildings, the dark blue 1 Childe Harolds Pilgrimage . LIGHTS IN ART. 75 glittering appearance of the canals, the swift gondola, with fair and gallant occupants, propelled and safely guided by well-trained and brawny gondoliers, the stately barge or galley of some patrician inhabitant of the marine city, and a countless variety of other pleasing objects depicted by the ready pencil of the gifted painter. Indeed, everything he touched in his native place presents the look of reality. A subdued red ground appears to have been the preparation upon which he commonly worked. He seems to have painted the architectural portions of his pictures in a careful, firm, and very broad manner, and, before they were allowed to dry, to have used a hard, small-pointed instrument, probably a black lead pencil, made to run straight by a ruler, for the purpose of drawing long and correct lines to form columns, cornices, balconies, and other parts requiring extreme accuracy. The hard instrument, by permanently removing the tinctured white paint, left clean and unbroken lines, which could not have been produced by any fine hair pencil guided by the most steady hand. Canaletto evidently adopted the simple means here described ; and intending purchasers of pictures attributed to him, would do well by taking the pains to ascertain whether the method referred to has really been employed or not. If no traces of its use can be discovered, especially in Venetian views, they may rest assured that Canaletto had no hand in the ;6 LIGHTS IN ART work ascribed to his genius. The bright or high lights of this master were laid on with a full pencil in a smart and decisive manner, and their original sharpness was never lost by extra touching or second painting. There is consequently no confusion and no feebleness in his mode of execution ; it is always free, clear, and distinct, every touch having an im- portant meaning, like the almost magical touches of a first-rate player on the violin. The shaded portions of his work are thinly painted, because the trans- parency of all shadows cannot be produced by heavy bodies of opaque matter. He seems never to have resorted to mere glazing, at least to any great extent, being doubtless aware that such a pernicious method would have destroyed the clean and fresh appearance of his labour. The educated eye, accustomed to dwell upon genu- ine painting, is almost pained by a single glance at the various attempts to imitate, or to copy literally, the works of eminent artists. No painter has been more imitated and copied than Canaletto, often very faintly, and only in some few instances with a degree of moderate success. Hundreds of poor copies are extant, and even prized by their credulous owners, who generally have paid very low prices for them, probably at auctions. The most successful copies are bought and sold on the belief, or pretended belief, of their being genuine productions ; and in such cases LIGHTS IN ART. 77 high prices are commonly realized. Many of the copies referred to are old ; others are new, and have the required look of age imparted to them by lining, artificial cracking, dirt, and excessive varnishing. Canaletto visited England in 1746. He remained between two and three years, and executed several pictures, including some views in London, chiefly taken from the Thames. The extensive collection of the Duke of Buccleuch contains some of the best of his English productions ; and the Duke of Richmond possesses a splendid ‘View of Whitehall/ But we can scarcely avoid thinking that his genius was con- siderably depressed under the influence of our heavy atmosphere, and that the genial climate of Italy was more consonant to the buoyancy of his feelings. Canaletto returned to the beautiful city of his birth, where his spirit departed in the seventy-first year of his age. During his sojourn in England, he engaged the services of William James, a clever landscape painter, 1 who imitated the style of his employer with remarkable success. FRANCESCO GUARDI. Canaletto’s best pupil and follower was Francesco Guardi, who, however, cannot be termed a mere imitator, being really an artist of considerable ori- 1 Several original pictures by James are preserved at Hampton Court Palace. 78 LIGHTS IN ART. ginality. Usually, a degree of heaviness pervades his pictures, many of which, especially those of a small size, present an unfinished appearance, and almost indicate that they were only intended as sketches for more elaborate productions. On the whole, his works are so distinctive, that no well- informed observer can reasonably mistake them for those of any other painter ; yet some of his most carefully finished pictures, executed at the com- mencement of his practice, have been attributed to Canaletto. He had two styles ; the first being a near approximation to that of his great instructor, and the second a perfectly free and independent manner of his own. The works produced in this latter style are held in high and deserved estimation. No resem- blance to the very distinguishing peculiarity, to which an endeavour has already been made to direct atten- tion, — namely, the singular skill of Canaletto in drawing long, unbroken architectural lines, — can any^, where be found in the paintings of Guardi, although he frequently attempted to imitate his master, in the most servile manner. The careful observer will easily ascertain that the touch of Guardi, even in his most highly finished productions, is less clean and distinct than that of Canaletto. At Dalkeith Palace, a splendid apartment is adorned exclusively with some of the finest Italian and English productions of Canaletto, and the walls of a similar apartment are LIGHTS IN ART. 79 entirely devoted to a valuable collection of the works of Guardi, painted in the early and subsequent periods of his life. Thus the master and the pupil are nearly in juxtaposition, and present a favourable contrast for the satisfaction of the connoisseur. The collections in both apartments were chiefly obtained in Venice by the ancestors of the present noble Duke. A View on the Grand Canal by Canaletto is seen at Whitehill, not far from the ducal residence, where a duplicate of the same subject, with a few trifling alterations, is displayed among the works of Guardi. There are also at Preston Hall, near Dalkeith, sixteen small views in Venice by Guardi, in his free and easy manner. In 1849, William Burn Callander, Esquire, informed the author that he had purchased the whole series referred to, in Venice, from Guardi’s son, to whom he had been recommended by his friend Canova, the celebrated sculptor. 1 FRANCESCO ZUCCARELLI. The demise of the most agreeable landscape painter of modern Italy, Francesco Zuccarelli, oc- curred at Venice in 1788. He was a native of Florence, and his long life, eighty-six years, enabled him to produce a vast number of pictures in a light, easy, and fascinating style. Being chiefly of a very 1 Mr. Callander often spoke with evident delight of the pleasant evenings he had passed at Venice in the society of Canova. So LIGHTS IN ART . portable and convenient size, many of them have been widely dispersed in several countries, and are now highly valued by every collector. They are numerous in England ; and one public collection, Dulwich Gallery, contains no less than five speci- mens, representing the master in various degrees of excellence. But the most important collection of the works of this master is contained in a splendid private apartment at Windsor Castle, named, in honour of the painter, the Zuccarelli Room. The principal charac- teristics of Zuccarelli as an accomplished artist, are the selection of picturesque views, appropriate figures, a strict adherence to nature in her most benign aspects, and a subservient hand to embody upon canvas all the rare beauties gathered by the mind. In the foregrounds of some of his best landscapes appear a few sheep, fleecy, and well tended by male and female rustics, often elegantly formed, and cap- tivating in their pastoral attire. Zuccarelli used his pencil with great softness and effect. An appear- ance of the utmost freedom pervades nearly all his productions, and is very agreeable to those connois- seurs who appreciate and admire correct execution combined with rapidity. The component parts of every design constitute a happy union of form and colour, leaving no unsatisfactory void to mar the efficiency of complete harmony. LIGHTS IN ART. 81 BON ARIA Appears to have been a contemporary of Zuccarelli, and painted landscapes in an excellent style, en- livened by figures somewhat resembling, in drawing and touch, those of Canaletto in his most careful manner. Bonaria finished his pictures more ela- borately than Zuccarelli, whose sweet and tender mode of colouring, however, he seems to have imi- tated. The works of this painter are usually signed, very distinctly, ‘ C. Bonaria,’ but he seldom affixed dates. FRANCESCO CASANOVA, Though not born in Italy, has always been reckoned among the Italian artists. He painted numerous pictures during a long life, and died at Vienna in 1805. Good specimens of his ability as an original painter are preserved at Dulwich and Hampton Court. The eighteenth century closed without producing any other very remarkable men in the Italian schools of painting. The art, however, did not lack profes- sors, whose names were little known in their own day, and have long since been buried in oblivion. Many of their pictures are preserved and used as articles of commerce to deceive the ignorant and unwary, who F 82 LIGHTS IN ART. purchase them at auctions and elsewhere, usually for small sums, under the borrowed names of the most celebrated masters. Several forgotten painters de- voted the best years of their lives to the lucrative practice of making copies from fine original works, and these counterfeit productions continue to swell the vast number of questionable pictures which are now constantly seen exposed for sale in almost every great city. CHAPTER V. PAINTING IN FRANCE — THE FIRST NATIVE ARTIST — THE FOLLOWERS OF VOUET AND GREUZE. HE people of France cannot properly claim the distinction — prior, at least, to the present century — of having originated and fostered any regular school of painting, or of having well classified the several excellent painters who have at different times appeared among them. Yet we are perfectly familiar with the designation of the French School ; a favourite term, and used to denote an imagined equality in art with their Italian neigh- bours. France has certainly produced many great artists, very few of whom, however, are known to have secured a sufficient number of followers to establish a right system for the successful forma- tion of a school, as that phrase is understood in the fine arts . 1 A great painter occasionally appeared to 1 William Enfield, A.M., in his valuable Encyclopedia , thus clearly defines the term in question : 4 A school, in the fine arts, denominates a class of artists who have learned their art from a certain master, either 8 4 LIGHTS IN ART. astonish and delight his countrymen ; but he was alone, and passed away with his own individual ex- cellence, without disciples able to follow or improve upon his style. In some cases where imitators seemed desirous to pursue a noble example, their efforts were attended by entire failure, and they finally sank to a degree below mediocrity. The luminaries of art arose singly and at intervals, with- out the instruction of eminent masters, or any other apparent aid, and departed in solitary grandeur, leaving nothing but their fame, like the orb of night, to enlighten the pictorial void that succeeded their terrene existence. To imbibe high principles, to emulate approved practice, and to aim steadily and consistently for the perpetuation of a noble style, were attainments too lofty for the volatile students of any great professor in French art. Impatience under control, and a premature desire to attain an independent position, or to be speedily elevated upon their own merits, were the chief causes of that humiliating incapacity. History leads to the belief that painting was known by receiving his instructions or by studying his works, and who of consequence discover more or less of his manner, from the desire of imitation, or from the habit of adopting his principles.’ — Vol. viii. p. 39. This definition, though rigidly correct, is restricted. The term may be allowed to contain a more comprehensive meaning. Wornum says the word school ‘ has various significations with writers on art ; in its general and widest sense it denotes all the painters of a given country, without special reference to time or manner. ’ LIGHTS IN ART . 85 at a very early period in France. All the arts of civilisation were introduced after the Romans, under Julius Caesar, had effected an entire conquest of that country. The Gauls, as the subjugated inhabitants were called by their sanguinary conquerors, quietly submitted to the new domination ; and instead of attempting to recover their lost liberty, earnestly cultivated all the arts of peace without much inter- ruption, until the Roman power was overthrown by the Franks, whose leader, Pharamond, is generally supposed to have founded the French monarchy about the year A.D. 417. The Franks being a bar- barous people, every polite art was abandoned, and the pursuits of conquest and plunder were the chief employments of that hardy race during many suc- cessive reigns. Clovis, the first Christian king, con- siderably extended his dominions, and fixed the capital of his empire at Paris, about the beginning of the fifth century. After the death of Clovis, a long period, embracing more than two hundred years, was miserably disturbed by intestine warfare and the frightful invasions of the Saracens, who were finally defeated by Charles Martel. His son, Pepin, excluded the reigning family of Clovis, and by general consent assumed the title of king. He was remarkably brave and just, and is supposed to have been a promoter of learning and art. As Pope Stephen the Third was much indebted to this 86 LIGHTS IN ART . monarch, we may reasonably infer that Roman re- finement and a desire to excel in art were not unknown in France during and after the reign of Pepin. Byzantine artists were probably employed in that country about the seventh century to execute pictures in mosaic and enamel. At the close of the tenth century, some ’Greek or Italian artists settled at Limoges, in the south of France, and produced excellent enamel work, specimens of which are still to be seen in a few antique collections. The most authentic early examples of that art, however, were executed in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Miniature painting was also practised at an early period, and painting on glass is equally remote. These two arts are supposed to have been purely French inventions. Francis the First, anxious to found a school for the cultivation of high art, invited to France an Italian painter, Francesco Primaticcio, who had been an assistant to Julio Romano. He executed several of his principal works at Fontainebleau, where his pupil, Nicolo Bolognese, was likewise employed. Primaticcio died at Paris in the year 1570, aged eighty years. JEAN COUSIN — BLANCHARD. According to the best accounts, Jean Cousin was the first native artist of any reputation. His works LIGHTS IN ART. 8 / consisted of portraits, historical subjects, and paint- ings on glass. Cousin died in 1589, and was suc- ceeded by Blanchard, who, having studied the fine productions of the great Venetian painters, especially Titian, acquired considerable eminence in the reign of Louis the Thirteenth, but he left no followers to perpetuate his style. NICOLAS POUSSIN Flourished in the same reign, and has been called by his countrymen the Raphael of France ; an ap- pellation not readily acknowledged, especially by their neighbours on the other side of the Alps ; for, although he carefully studied at Rome the works of Raphael, his own original productions bear little or no resemblance to the ‘ divine’ creations of that in- comparable master. His best subjects were founded upon the ancient fables, and were painted in a pure and correct manner. Towards the close of his career, and after he had examined and duly considered the gorgeous works of Titian, he alto- gether abandoned his first style, and painted with greater softness, richness, and freedom. Yet his early pictures, many of which are hard and dry, have been more highly esteemed than those painted after the period of middle life. A perfect know- ledge of ancient literature qualified him to select the best allegorical subjects, and he has never been 88 LIGHTS IN ART. surpassed in that line of art. Had he in some way united his two styles, so as to make them appear one, he would certainly have been a greater master. The valuable talents he possessed, and displayed at different periods of life, would have been stronger in union than in separation. Raphael’s proficiency in design and Titian’s mastery in colouring, might perhaps have been combined, or represented at least, in the same work. In 1641, Nicolas Poussin was appointed first painter-in-ordinary to the king. He afterwards returned to Rome, where he died in 1665, at the age of seventy-one. A curious picture by this master was exhibited at the British Institution in the year 1855. The noble proprietor (the Earl of Derby) entitled it, 'The Arts inquiring of Rome why they do not flourish in Modern Times.’ Among his numerous works, his landscapes are not the least pleasing : some of them are ascribed to Domenichino, whose style he is supposed at one period of his life to have imitated. GASPAR DUGHET, Though born at Rome in 1613, is usually classed among the French artists. He assumed the name of Poussin in consequence of having married the sister of that eminent master, from whom he also received instructions in painting. The subjects of his finest pictures were selected from scenes in Italy, LIGHTS IN ART ; 89 where he almost constantly resided, and where he is believed by some writers to have derived much benefit from seeing the works of Claude de Lorraine. The style he adopted may perhaps be described as something like a medium between the quiet beauty of Claude and the bold, almost savage manner of Salva- tor Rosa ; yet, as he hardly appears to have imitated either of those masters, he ought to be pronounced, with little hesitation, an original painter of the first rank. Had he never seen the productions of Claude and Salvator, his capabilities in art would probably have been equally striking. The path he followed was evidently one of his own making. Other ways had been pointed out to him ; yet, although they might have been attractive, he preferred pursuing a, new, untrodden course to fame. He differed from all other landscape painters who lived before and during his own time, and has not been surpassed, in design and composition, by the most eminent artists of suc- ceeding ages. The French people may well feel proud of calling him their own ; but as he was really a native of another land, where he acquired his sub- sistence and his reputation, their claim may be con- sidered open to some controversy. His parents are said to have been French, and he married a French- woman ; still he had very little to do with France. Caspar Poussin survived his famous brother-in-law about ten years. 90 LIGHTS IN ART. LOUIS LENAIN Flourished during the lifetime of the two Poussins. He was a portrait-painter of considerable note, and a clever designer of subjects from rural life. Many of his pictures are highly prized on account of their originality and the truth they represent. At the sale of Sir Simon Clarke’s collection in 1840, by Christie and Manson, a very curious and extremely interesting work by Lenain, entitled ‘ The Passions,’ was sold for one hundred and ten guineas. He died in 1648 ; but as we find no authentic record of his birth, the term of his existence is not known. CLAUDE DE LORRAINE, Whose paternal name was Claude Gelee, born in the year 1600, of poor parents, probably of German descent, and said to have been apprenticed in early boyhood to a baker, arrived by natural gifts, culti- vated by unceasing labour, to a higher degree of perfection in landscape painting than any other man in the history of modern art. His genius may be compared to the force of a mighty river, scarcely discernible at the beginning, slow, yet constant and sure in its course, removing every obstacle, gradually becoming deeper, wider, longer, and still flowing on, always acquiring magnitude and strength, enriching and refreshing the country through which it runs, LIGHTS IN ART. 9 1 demanding the gratitude and admiration of man, and then, in the height of mature grandeur, falling into the vast, eternal ocean. Although the works of all the great painters of ancient Greece have perished, their fame still lives ; and the name of Claude will not be forgotten when his brilliant productions no longer remain to strike the admiring eye. The eclat of genius belongs to heaven, and is part of the ever- living soul. This wonderful painter went to Rome when very young, with the barest means of subsist- ence, and engaged himself as a servant to Agostino Tassi, an artist whose name has already been brought before the reader. While in that menial capacity he added to the rudiments of drawing, which he had previously acquired from Godfrey Wals, an obscure painter, some knowledge of his master’s practice in the use of colours. His rudimental training was after- wards completed by Sandrart, who first instructed him to paint from nature. The subjects of his pic- tures are usually of a rural yet classical character, and display singular accuracy in the representation of the different times of day. Early morning, noon, and evening are faithfully delineated by his pencil. In landscape he attained the acme of art ; but human excellence, however lofty, is never perfect. The greatest admirers of Claude will candidly acknow- ledge that his trees are somewhat formal and laboured, and that the drawing of his cattle and figures is often 92 LIGHTS IN ART . incorrect, and not in due proportion to the size of relative objects. Such imperfections, however, are characteristic of the master, and we can scarcely, perhaps never, meet with a genuine work from his hand without them. The nefarious practice of imitating his works for pecuniary gain prevailed in his own lifetime, whereby he was very sorely troubled ; and with the view of checking the fraudulent traffic, he made drawings of all his subsequent pictures, wrote the names of the individuals to whom they were sold, made references to the places where they were deposited, and care- fully preserved the collection, which, after his death, was published under the title of Liber Veritatis. The engravings in this publication are correct imitations of the master’s drawings ; and many copyists, unable to procure access to the original paintings, have been, and are still, glad to work from these engravings. A countless number of spurious pictures are therefore always in the market, and sold to credulous buyers as the productions of Claude. Thus he virtually, though not consciously, made easy and perpetuated the system of which he complained. Claude has invariably been claimed by the French as belonging to their school. Being, however, a native of the duchy of Lorraine, which did not be- come part of France until more than a hundred years had elapsed from the time of his birth, he cannot LIGHTS IN ART. 93 properly be claimed by the French nation. 1 More- over, he almost constantly resided at Rome, where he acquired all his reputation and reward, and where, in 1682, his laborious existence was brought to a close. His remains were interred in the church of the Trinita del Monte, a fine painting of which had been executed by himself. Although he is here, in defer- ence to custom, classed among the French painters, he may rightly be said to belong to the Roman school. Patel, another pupil of Agostino Tassi, though an inferior landscape painter, is frequently called the French Claude , a designation which surely implies that Claude himself was a foreigner. His principal works are at Rome, and in several public and private collections throughout Europe, while a vast number of misnomers are dispersed in many directions. No less than ten pictures, all attributed to him, were displayed at the Manchester Exhibition in 1857. A curious fact came under the writer’s own observation in 1837. A well-known auctioneer in Edinburgh at that time, sold for fifty- six guineas a large and very attractive landscape, ascribed to Claude, which had been the property of one of the professors in the university of that city. The purchaser believed he had acquired a genuine work, although it was indubitably copied from a print, No. 55 in the Liber Veritatis f about twenty years 1 Lorraine was ceded to France by treaty in the year 1739. 94 LIGHTS IN ART before. Mistakes like this are very common, and they all arise from ignorance or want of thought. We have our national galleries, containing many choice examples of the old masters, we have numerous books devoted to the subject of painting, the nation is said to be rapidly advancing in knowledge of every kind ; and yet many of our learned, intellectual, and wealthy collectors of pictures seem to be entirely uneducated in the matter of fine, old, genuine art. Swaneveldt, a Fleming, when very young, placed himself under the directions of Claude in Italy. In consequence of his studious and retired way of living, sometimes in the recesses of rocks, or under the shelter of old trees, he was styled the Hermit of Italy, a designation still attached to his name. His pictures are tender and natural, like those of his in- structor, but rather deficient in colour and effect. In landscape he approached the excellence of Claude nearer than any other artist, and far surpassed his master in figure painting. He died at Rome, aged seventy, in 1690, having survived Claude Lorraine about eight years. The works of Swaneveldt have always brought high prices. EUSTACHE LE SUEUR Was a distinguished pupil of Simon Vouet, a man of great ability, and the leader of many followers. Le Sueur afterwards studied the productions of the LIGHTS IN ART. 95 Roman school, and has been compared with Raphael, although his approach towards perfection was far below the exalted degree attained by that matchless painter. Had he lived longer, he might have achieved, perhaps, by unremitting study, a much more elevated position in art. The premature death of this artist deprived France and the world of that excellence which would no doubt have appeared had his life been of longer duration. When Raphael prematurely ceased to exist, his work was complete, he had arrived very near to the height of perfection ; but no mortal can ever be permitted to grasp the summit, which belongs to the Deity alone. Le Sueur died in the middle of his career, without fully executing the lofty designs of his genius. As pure classical compositions, the works of this master are entitled to the highest praise. His pictures display less of theatrical or meretricious effect than is ob- servable in the productions of many French artists of his own time and of subsequent periods. Had his practice been more extended, and had he carefully trained a few able and vigilant followers, he might possibly have been the illustrious founder of a school, sufficiently eminent even to vie with that of Rome. Death terminated the course of this painter in 1655 ; his brief existence being one year longer than the lifetime of Raphael, whose transcendent fame he had been ambitious to emulate or surpass. The prin- cipal works of this master are at Paris. 96 LIGHTS IN ART. CHARLES LE BRUN, The great contemporary and survivor of Le Sueur, had also been instructed by Vouet. In 1643, the age of twenty-four, Le Brun visited Italy, having for his companion Nicolas Poussin ; and although he studied the best productions of the Roman school with uncommon assiduity, and sought in every way to acquire classical knowledge, his manner of designing was always inferior to that of Raphael. In colouring he never arrived at the excellence attained by the great masters of the Venetian school. He had, how- ever, a vigorous imagination, and possessed many of the qualities which constitute a great artist, especially good drawing and accurate expression. Yet he was deficient in that creative power which seemed to render his unrivalled prototype nearly divine. With- out the endowment of any extraordinary gift of nature, he displayed wonderful facility in mechanical operation, and produced vast compositions, eminently attractive to almost every beholder. But simplicity was frequently sacrificed for mere theatrical effect, — an error which his followers easily imbibed, yet failed to acquire any inclination to imitate his better qualities. Being the fashionable court painter, even his worst faults were copied and magnified, and the impure school reared by him was doomed speedily to dwindle away in gaudy extravagance and paltry LIGHTS IN ART. 97 delusion. In the words of Mr. Ruskin, disciples ‘are their masters’ shadows, and distort their faults in a flattened mimicry.’ Unfortunately for his fame, he lived in a corrupt age, under the auspices of a grand and luxurious monarch, Louis the Fourteenth, at whose splendid court, where high favours were heaped upon him, he could scarcely be expected to remain invulnerable against the insidious attacks of flattery, and the showy grandeur of his patrons. Vain-glory, state corruptions, misguiding literature, and a thousand other evils, all inimical to high art, marked the giddy period, and continued in strength until they gave way and finally succumbed under the crushing influence of the revolution of 1789. Le Brun died at the age of seventy-one years. HYACINTH RIGAUD, Born in 1663, attained the age of eighty, and during that long existence acquired wonderful freedom of hand by the constant habit of imitating the portraits of Vandyck. Le Brun dissuaded him from visiting Italy ; he therefore passed all his days in France with honour and high reward, being knighted and pen- sioned by Louis the Fifteenth. Though he is ranked among the best French masters, his manner is rather flippant or deficient in repose, particularly in the drapery of his most dignified portraits. G 9 3 LIGHTS IN ART . VALENTINO Was another distinguished pupil of Simon Vouet ; but as he left France when very young, and spent the remainder of his life in Italy, where he imitated the bold style of Caravaggio, he more properly belongs to the Roman school. His pictures are re- markable for strong light and shade, originality, and powerful colouring ; but as he died at the age of only thirty-two, they are not numerous. Mignard also studied under Vouet, and afterwards improved his style by a residence of twenty-two years at Rome. Several painters of note succeeded the immediate followers of Vouet. Among them appear the names of Watteau, Paterre, Lancret, and Lajoue. WATTEAU. The works of Watteau and Lancret are well known. Watteau’s sprightly genius well suited the age in which he lived. He used his pencil in a light, free manner, and perfectly understood the harmony of colours. In early life he was employed to decorate the opera-house at Paris, — an occupation by no means unfavourable to the acquirement of great freedom. During the reign of George the First he visited England, where he only made a short stay. In 1721 he died near Paris, in the thirty-seventh year of his LIGHTS IN ART . 99 age. Notwithstanding the shortness of his life, his quick method of painting enabled him to produce many fine pictures, both in oil and water colours, which are now dispersed in several collections. The Whitehill collection, near Edinburgh, contains an admirable life-size portrait of a jester, or theatrical clown, in which many of the best qualities of this admired artist are combined. A host of inferior artists endeavoured to follow his fascinating manner, and servile copyists produced, and still produce, verbatim transcripts of his subjects, the singular gaiety of which has also tempted mere decorative painters to daub them upon the walls of sundry noble mansions. It is hardly necessary to say, that numerous pictures attributed to Watteau are either imitations of his general method, or literal copies from his particular designs. Those who collect indis- criminately, seldom admit that any of their purchases are untrue, and seem to forget that Watteau’s life only extended to little more than half the average length of ordinary human existence. Though he certainly painted with wonderful rapidity, his power of execution must have been superhuman to have enabled him to perform all the work said to be done by his hand. PATERRE— LANCRET, ETC. Paterre was a pupil and soon afterwards became IOO LIGHTS IN ART . a clever imitator of Watteau : his pictures are ob- served in several Continental and British collections. Lancret, however, was the most successful follower of Watteau, though his pictures are somewhat defi- cient in freedom of touch and atmospheric beauty. As he combined with his imitations a considerable degree of originality, his works are held in much estimation, and are more numerous than those of Watteau. The four small paintings in our London National Gallery, representing infancy, youth, man- hood, and old age, are good and interesting speci- mens of this master. He died twenty-four years after the premature death of Watteau, aged fifty-five. NOLLEKENS, Born in 1706, became a close imitator of Watteau, and was much employed in England, where he con- stantly resided. Some of his best works are now not unfrequently mistaken for those of his famous proto- type. He died at the age of forty-two. LAJOUE, A painter of church interiors, flourished about the year 1736. His works are remarkable for neatness of execution, united with a correct display of drawing and perspective. The colouring of his best pictures is agreeable, light, airy, and harmonious ; while his figures, always on a small scale, are grouped with LIGHTS IN ART. IOI great skill. Lajoue’s careful and very pleasing pro- ductions ought to rank higher in the estimation of the lovers of fine art. JOSEPH VERNET, Whose works are almost everywhere well known, was born at Avignon in 1712. He lived seventy- seven years, having survived Zuccarelli and Richard Wilson, to whose manner of painting his own style in many instances bears a striking resemblance, though he does not appear to have imitated either. Indeed, he may properly be termed an original genius, yet far from the highest order. The poetical feeling of Gaspar Poussin, and the almost heavenly tenderness of Claude, were beyond his loftiest con- ceptions, which seem to have been confined to a literal representation of corporeal nature or tangible objects. While his efforts to grasp abundant detail were successful, he failed to impress the mind with the reality of hidden or mysterious beauty, which, to a certain extent, is sometimes desirable in the art of painting. His delineations, being hard and extremely palpable, satisfy and weary the eye at once, leaving nothing for the imagination to dwell upon or to explore. In ideal excellence he was surpassed by Zuccarelli and Wilson, while he equalled them in material display and the power of imitating what he saw. Zuccarelli portrayed 102 LIGHTS IN ART . more of the freshness and delicacy of nature, and the works of Wilson are free from that partial heavi- ness which usually pervades the painting of Vernet. The principal subjects of his pencil are landscapes, beach scenes, and open marine views, pleasingly interspersed with vessels, figures, and other objects, which are always painted in a careful, yet free manner. He lived many years in Italy, and, about 1753, finally settled in France, where he was patron- ized by Louis the Fifteenth, and became a member of the French Academy. Vernet was a good man and fond of his art, which he pursued to the last moment of his life. His works are generally prized. 1 JEAN BAPTISTE GREUZE. The eighteenth century closed in the lifetime of Jean Baptiste Greuze, perhaps one of the most suc- cessful portrait painters of any age. He was born at Tournus in 1726, and lived seventy-nine years. Besides portraits, this fascinating artist painted numerous subjects from familiar life, often in groups, which never fail to charm all who have opportuni- ties of seeing them. He worked with more impasto , or with a fuller body of substantial colours, than any other painter of his country ; and has not been surpassed in the purity of his carnations, nor in the 1 Sir Simon Clarke’s ‘Vernet,’ a storm with vessels stranded, was sold by Christie and Manson, in 1840, for ^157, 10s. LIGHTS IN ART. 103 light, airy effect of his designs. The French nobility of that period, with hearts effectually steeled by luxurious pleasure and a cold system of philosophy against the privations of the common people, rivalled each other in eulogy and in the acquirement of this painter’s productions, for which the most extrava- gant prices were frequently paid. Bernardin de Saint Pierre, while satirizing the follies of the time in which he lived, says: ‘We are taught to be well acquainted with books, with pictures, with algebra, with heraldry, and not with men. Connoisseurs are rapt in admiration at the sight of a Savoyard’s head painted by Greuze ; but the Savoyard himself is at the corner of the street, speaking, walking, almost frozen to death, and no one heeds him. That mother, with her children around her, forms a charm- ing group ; the picture is invaluable ; but the origi- nals are in a neighbouring garret without a farthing upon which to subsist .’ 1 The Louvre and many other celebrated Continental galleries contain choice examples of Greuze. In some English collections, also, a few of his best pictures may be found. The Marquis of Hertford is the possessor of a work of rare beauty and repose, ‘A Young Girl with a Dove, formerly the property of Mr. Wilkinson ; and Mr. R. S. Holford, some years ago, acquired a similar sub- ject of equal merit. These two pictures are specially 1 Studies of Nature, vol. ii. p. 426. 104 LIGHTS IN ART \ mentioned by Dr. Waagen in his Treasures of Art in Great Britain f and particular reference to the Hert- ford picture appears in Smith’s Catalogue Raisonne ’. But all collectors desirous of possessing the works of Greuze have not been equally fortunate. Copies are observed in many collections, where some manifesta- tion of truth and knowledge might reasonably be expected instead of palpable falsehood and inexcus- able ignorance. The poorest imitations of his pic- tures are, however, pleasing and always marketable, — results altogether arising from the extraordinary fascination of his subjects. Many of his admirers are sufficiently acquainted with his ideas, while they know nothing of the actual labour of his hand. We are not required to examine the penmanship of a poet to enable us to judge of his excellence ; on the contrary, we are imperatively called upon to make ourselves thoroughly conversant, by close inspection, with the mechanical power of an artist, or with his method of using the brush, before we can form altogether correct notions of the extent of his ability. Much of the reputation of a painter depends upon the skill he may acquire in executing his various designs; and those individuals who are really anxious to pos- sess original pictures, ought perfectly to understand every method of execution adopted by the experi- enced artist. Without such knowledge, collectors of 1 Vol. ii. pp. 157 and 199. LIGHTS IN ART . 105 pictures are constantly liable to imposition by the sale of counterfeit productions. As Greuze lived long and painted much, his pictures are numerous ; yet time and rude attempts at cleaning will event- ually deface or destroy them. The copies from his works are equally numerous, and are still increasing; but they are of no value, pretty as they often appear, beyond perpetuating the bare ideas of the master. Certainly, the pleasing subjects of Greuze, whether executed by his own hand or by any mean copyist, possess the remarkable power of captivating alike the prince and the peasant. About the beginning of the present century, a pure taste, derived from ancient models and the great masters of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, began to prevail in France. Greuze left many able followers, who, being patronized by the Count de Caylus, and other persons of rank and influence, displayed un- usual energy in their endeavours to introduce, by correct practice, those principles which sufficed to annihilate the false and extravagant tendencies of the preceding era. There can be no doubt that the domination of Napoleon the Great over Italy, Germany, Holland, Spain, and other countries in Europe, conduced, in a most eminent degree, to the favourable cultivation of high art in the French nation. For some time Paris was the envied reposi- tory of the grandest productions belonging to the io 6 LIGHTS IN ART great Italian schools. They were ultimately restored to the various countries from whence they had been brought, though not before the rising artists of the period had imbibed much of their excellence, nor before an influential portion of the community had been convinced of the superiority of simple grandeur over frivolous display, or vain attempts at mere dramatic effect. Patrons were soon found to en- courage those artists who were able to gratify the growing desire after refinement, and we may now confidently affirm that native talent in the art of painting is no longer deficient in that powerful empire. PAUL DELAROCHE — HORACE VERNET, ETC. Since the death of Greuze in 1805, many cele- brated painters have appeared ; and among them the names of Paul Delaroche, Horace Vernet, and De Marne are very conspicuous. The first mentioned is particularly well known in this country, from the fact of his having paid us the compliment of selecting for the subjects of his pencil some of the most striking events in our history. His picture of the two unhappy princes, Edward the Fifth and his brother, in the Tower of London, and his representation of a touching incident in the life of Cromwell, are works of superlative excellence. The emotions of deep sorrow in the countenance of the LIGHTS IN ART. 107 youthful king, and the expression of anxiety mingled with hope in the boyish face of his watchful relative, are depicted with the utmost truth and the finest feeling. In the other picture referred to, the in- vincible Commonwealth leader is represented in a meditative mood, with his eyes intently fixed upon the decapitated body of his unfortunate sovereign. Horace Vernet, grandson of Joseph Vernet, died in the beginning of 1863, and is well known as a skilful delineator of military subjects ; and Louis De Marne is admired for the very exquisite finish of his easel pictures, which faithfully represent landscape views and persons in humble life. He died in 1816, in his ninetieth year. Should French art continue to be progressive, in proportion to the advance made during the last fifty years, there can be no doubt that an important school, the foundation of which has long been securely laid, will be substantially reared, and that it will ulti- mately attain an elevation not inferior perhaps to the lofty eminence by which the greatest of the Italian schools have been distinguished. CHAPTER VI. GERMAN AND EARLY FLEMISH ART — ALBERT DURER — MATSYS — DECLINE OF PAINTING IN GERMANY. YZ AN TINE art, with all its puerility and crude detail, was practised by the Germans and Flemings at a very early period, and appears to have been conventionally preserved, with little improvement or modification, until the first half of the fifteenth century, when a more natural taste originated with two Flemish painters, Hubert and John Van Eyck, brothers, who also revived or im- proved the process of painting in oil . 1 Those skilful painters established an important seminary, whence a knowledge of the supposed new process was trans- mitted, by very able scholars, to Italy and other countries where the arts were diligently followed and liberally patronized. But the Germans of that period were entirely ignorant of ancient Greek art, and 1 The best tempera pictures executed anterior to the fifteenth century, with colours mixed in water and size, possess great beauty and fresh- ness, and are more transparent than the generality of oil paintings. LIGHTS IN ART. tog copied nature without discrimination. Consequently their works display a stiff, uncouth manner, altogether devoid of ideal beauty. ROGER VANDER WEYDEN, Born about the year 1400, was placed when very young, in the Van Eyck School at Bruges, where he studied with great assiduity, and with little interrup- tion, during a space of more than forty years. At the age of fifty his Gothic tendency became neutralized by a visit to Italy ; and during the remainder of his life, a period of fourteen years, he produced several pictures, which are not wholly deficient in classical design. His best scholar was Hans Hemling or Memling, the date of whose birth is not particularly known. In 1857, Captain Stirling acquired in Germany a most elaborate specimen of Hemling’s ability. It represented, on a very small scale, an incident in the life of our Saviour. Numerous figures, judiciously grouped, appeared in an oriental landscape of much beauty, and the whole subject was well conceived and exquisitely painted. Hemling died in 1489. VANDER WEYDEN THE YOUNGER, Dean of the religious corporation of St. Luke' evidently improved his original stiff manner by studying the designs of the Italians. Some of the 1 10 LIGHTS IN ART best specimens of his art are in England, and once belonged to the lamented Prince Albert, whose laud- able aim to preserve the rare and curious productions of the early masters is well known. We are not acquainted with the time of the younger Weyden’s birth, nor with the duration of his existence. His death, however, has been recently stated to have taken place in 1529, though there is some reason to believe that he painted five or six years after that date. A few unimportant works appear to have been executed by him about the year 1535. MICHAEL WOHLGEMUTH, Of the Nuremberg school, painted many subjects in a stiff, quaint manner, chiefly from the New Testa- ment, and devoted much of his time to carving in wood. Several of his pictures were acquired for the Liverpool Royal Institution, where they have attracted the special attention of visitors desirous of becoming acquainted with the genuine works of old Gothic art. He lived eighty-five years, having been the careful instructor of many pupils. ALBERT DURER, The first great light in German art, was the most eminent scholar in the academy of Michael Wohlge- muth. The conventionalities of that school, however, were speedily disregarded by the aspiring young LIGHTS IN ART. in artist, who, directed by his genius alone, sought in nature what his preceptor had failed to impart. With- out having studied the beautiful simplicity of antique models, he soon emerged from the barbaric style of the age in which he lived, and aimed at the reform of the art of his country by unaffected and truthful representations. Yet, having no conceptions of ideal beauty, he copied nature with little discrimination, and was not entirely free from that stiffness which predominated in all the works of his German prede- cessors and contemporaries. A visit to Italy in 1506, and a subsequent friendly intercourse with Raphael, considerably improved his taste ; and he ultimately became enabled to effect a decided reformation among his countrymen. Though his pictures are numerous, they are finished with the greatest care. He drew well, yet not always elegantly, and the contour of his figures is occasionally hard. In grandeur of thought, expression, and aerial perspective, he is considered deficient ; and the drapery of his historical figures, though in good taste, displays no regard to any knowledge he might have possessed pertaining to ancient costume. There is also a want of softness, and almost an entire absence of gradation in his method of colouring, which preclude the possibility of perfect harmony. Doubtless he had other faults, yet he stood pre-eminently high as a man of versatile ability, and his name will endure while art continues I 12 LIGHTS IN ART . to exist. Among his favourite subjects were the ‘ Madonna and Child with Saints/ the ‘ Birth of the Virgin/ and the ‘ Holy Family/ He sometimes painted portraits, and the collection of the Duke of Northumberland contains a very interesting one of his father, who was a goldsmith, and intended his son for the same calling. This curious relic is in- scribed by Albert Durer, and bears the date of 1497. To the art of painting he added that of engraving, and became celebrated for his skill on copper and wood. These engravings, indeed, are nearly as valuable as his paintings. He was also distinguished in literature, and wrote several works on the fine arts, geometrical science, and fortification. A journal of his visit to the Netherlands in 1520 is said to be still extant. He died at Nuremberg, his native place, in the year 1528, at the age of fifty-seven, and due honour has been paid, and is still awarded to his memory. The house in which he was born is quite entire, and has been properly converted into a picture gallery for the reception of works contributed by eminent artists. The character of Albert Durer was sprightly, ardent, enterprising, and always inclined to the most strict integrity. He considered purity of mind essential to the advance of all improvement, and felt convinced that true religion was inseparably con- nected with the happiness of mankind. The attain- ment of high art, or the faithful representation of the LIGHTS IN ART 1 13 most exalted subjects, he believed to be impossible without devotional feeling, and a thorough convic- tion of the vital importance of holy themes. With the utmost sincerity he espoused the cause of Martin Luther against the Church of Rome, and became a firm adherent to the principles of the Reformation. He seemed to have no idea, however, that an adher- ence to the new doctrine could in any way tend to destroy the power of the Holy See, and only desired the abolition of certain corrupt practices for restoring the Church to her primitive state of purity. Perhaps Luther himself, could he have foreknown all the con- sequences which resulted from his well-meant opposi- tion, might have yielded implicit obedience to the unwise edicts and stern commands of his magnificent master, Leo the Tenth. He might probably not have advanced a single step towards reformation could he have been aware of the uncertainty, the length, and the miseries of the way. But the strongest intellect is too weak to fathom the depths of time, — to know the results of present thought and action. The con- sequences of the art-reforming energy of Albert Durer have at least been harmless, free from opposi- tion, and unsullied by the sanguinary deeds which have occasionally marked the course of Church reformation, — a reformation commenced from the purest motives by his learned Christian friend, Martin Luther. H LIGHTS IN ART . 1 14 Lucas Sunder, Gregoria Pentz, and Hans Scheuf- felin were among the pupils, imitators, and contem- poraries of Albert Durer, CRANACH. The career of Lucas Sunder, usually called Cra- nach, from the place of his birth, was very remark- able. He was a skilful painter and engraver, and his woodcuts are highly esteemed by connoisseurs. In early life he enjoyed the honourable post of painter-in-ordinary to the electoral court of Saxony, and had the advantage of travelling in the suite of Prince Frederick to the Holy Land. He stood so high in the favour of that prince, that on his return the dignity of a noble was conferred upon him. The Elector of Saxony having avowed himself the pro- tector of Luther against the Pope, Cranach embraced the doctrine of the unflinching reformer, and after- wards endured a long imprisonment on the charge of heresy. When the Protestant party became strong he was released, and settled at Weimar, where he filled the office of burgomaster during more than forty years. He died in 1553, in the eighty-first year of his age. Prosperity, honour, adversity, and degra- dation were all distinctly represented in the life of Cranach. LIGHTS IN ART. US QUINTIN MATSYS, Born at Antwerp about the year 1460, was originally a blacksmith. A romantic story has been frequently related in connexion with his name as an artist. While a humble disciple of Vulcan, he is said to have become deeply enamoured with a beautiful girl, the favourite daughter of an obscure painter, who, how- ever, was so enthusiastic in his attachment to art as to determine that he would only give the maiden to one of his own calling. Although the affection of the youthful pair was mutual, the daughter displayed her feelings of duty by resolving to act in strict accordance with the determination of her father. Quintin there- fore resolved to become an artist, and promptly exchanged the anvil for the easel. He travelled with all possible expedition to Rome, for the purpose of receiving the best instruction. At the seat of art he studied with uncommon assiduity, but under what particular master is not known. Having patiently passed through a necessary course of study he returned in haste to his native city, and shortly afterwards married the object of his choice, with the full consent of her father. The style of Quintin Matsys is peculiar and ex- tremely elaborate. It seems to combine the styles of three other masters, the elder Van Eyck, Albert Durer, and Titian, with whose works he was probably LIGHTS IN ART . 1 1 6 well acquainted. We find an agreeable union of high finish and rich colouring in his best pictures, which is rarely observable in the paintings of preced- ing artists ; and his method of effecting that union may be considered unquestionably novel in the usual practice of art then in vogue. His name is justly enumerated with those of the great original painters of the sixteenth century, and his remaining produc- tions, which are few in number, command the highest valuation at the present day. Antwerp contains some of the finest works of Matsys ; and his inimi- table painting of ‘ The Misers ’ has long been pre- served at Windsor Castle. Mr. Hazlitt has remarked that the design of this celebrated picture is not correct. The reader will bear in mind that two figures are represented. Hr. Hazlitt assumed that avarice is a solitary vice, and that the real miser will only count his gold when no human eye is permitted to observe the action. Probably the criticism is reasonable enough ; yet a kind of sympathy may be expected to exist between two misers, sufficiently strong to prevent one from wronging the other. A miser may possibly believe that full confidence can safely be placed in a brother miser, but not in any member of the human family free of the sin of mak- ing a god of money. The miser may adore another miser nearly with the same feeling as he adores his own useless hoard of gold. Matsys seems to have LIGHTS IN ART. ii 7 taken this view of the subject. A fine mezzotinto engraving of ‘The Misers' has been executed by Earlom. Near the cathedral of Notre Dame at Antwerp was formerly shown the iron railings of a well with ornamental foliages, the workmanship of Quintin Matsys before he became a painter. He died in 1530, and his bust is placed at the entrance of the cathedral with a suitable inscription. John Matsys was the son of Quintin, and painted the same kind of subjects. LUCAS VAN LEYDEN, Born in 1494, was a distinguished pupil of Cornelius Engelbrechtsen, a contemporary of Albert Durer. Though a native of Holland, his conceptions were essentially German or early Flemish : some writers, however, have erroneously designated him the patriarch of the Dutch School. His ability seems to have been precocious ; for we are informed, by more than one biographer, that he painted the pic- ture of St. Hubert when only twelve years of age, and that he was scarcely fourteen when he executed his singular work of ‘ Mahomet Drunk.’ Dr. Waagen mentions a picture by him in the collection of the Earl of Pembroke, 1 and his own portrait is preserved in the Liverpool Royal Institution. His greatest performance, however, is a painting of ‘The Last 1 Vide Treasures of Art in Great Britain , vol. iii. p. 152. 1 18 LIGHTS IN ART. Judgment,’ at Leyden, the place of his birth. Hav- ing died at the early age of forty, his paintings are few and rarely met with. In this country he is chiefly known as an eminent engraver. DE VOS. Three Flemish painters surnamed De Vos lived between the years 1520 and 1665. Martin became the pupil of Francis Floris, and afterwards travelled to Italy, where he resided many years. He was a landscape, portrait, and historical painter of eminence, and died in his native city, Antwerp, at the age of nearly eighty-four years. Simon and Paul produced excellent pictures of battles and hunting parties, and also a few historical works. A beautiful example of Simon de Vos, St. John Preaching in the Wilderness, was acquired a few years ago by William Pollock, Esq., of Edinburgh. These three masters were distinct from each other in style, and not united by kindred. ARY DE VOYS Sometimes imitated Poelemberg, and his delinea- tion of the nude figure is particularly fine. But, hav- ing married a very rich lady, he became indolent ; consequently his works are few and rarely seen. The year of his birth was 1641, but how long he lived is not known. LIGHTS IN ART. 1 19 JAN GOSSAERT, COMMONLY CALLED MABUSE, From his birthplace, became in early life the intimate acquaintance of Lucas van Leyden. From the effects of dissipation he died at the age of thirty-six, in the year 1532. He painted several pictures in the primi- tive German manner, which are, however, greatly esteemed. The wings of an altar-piece at Holyrood Palace are supposed to be painted by him. They represent James the Fourth, King of Scotland, his brother, Queen Margaret attended by St. George, and the patron saint of the country, St. Andrew. These interesting portraits, which were removed from Hamp- ton Court about 1857, have unfortunately suffered much from fire. That they are by Mabuse is not at all improbable. He is known to have visited Eng- land in the reign of Henry the Seventh, and may also have paid a visit to Scotland about the same time. Some of the best works of this master have his name distinctly inscribed upon them. One of these, the ‘ Adoration of the Kings/ is in the valuable collection of the Earl of Carlisle. HANS VON KULMBACH Died in 1 540, at what age is unknown ; his works, however, indicate that he painted in 1509, and that he continued the exercise of his art during the re- mainder of his life. In some respects his manner 120 LIGHTS IN ART. resembles that of Albert Durer. His Royal Highness the late Prince Consort was the possessor of a very curious small portrait by Kulmbach. JOHN ROTTENHAMER Was born at Munich in 1564, and greatly modified his original stiff German method by studying the productions of Tintoretto at Venice. He became very eminent in design and colouring, and finished his pictures in a correct and most elaborate style. Though his originality was somewhat impaired by too close a resemblance to the Venetian school, his compositions are good and agreeably diversified. Occasionally he painted in conjunction with Velvet Breughel ; and specimens of their united abilities are displayed in four remarkable works, entitled ‘ Earth, Air, Fire, and Water,’ at present (1863) in the collec- tion of Sir Humphrey de Trafiford, Bart. Rotten- hamer died at Augsburg in the fortieth year of his age. ADAM ELZHEIMER, Born at Frankfort in 1574, also visited Italy, and studied the works of the great masters. His pictures are usually small, and frequently on copper. One of his best paintings, ‘ St. Peter delivered from Prison,’ belonged to the late Earl of Elgin, and is deservedly prized. He died at the age of forty-six. In early LIGHTS IN ART. 121 life he probably studied the works of Paul Brill, who was his senior by nearly twenty years. PAUL BRILL Was originally an ornamental painter in his native city, Antwerp. At an early period, however, he visited Rome, where he was instructed by his brother Matthew, who had gained considerable reputation in that city. The talents and assiduity of Paul were speedily rewarded by Pope Gregory the Thirteenth, for whom he executed his greatest work, — a magni- ficent landscape in fresco, nearly seventy feet in length. He afterwards painted many pictures in oil, of large and small dimensions, which are remarkable for rich colouring, beautiful scenery, and excellent figures. The works of his brother, though dissimilar, are frequently attributed to him, insomuch that the very name of Matthew Brill is now scarcely known. Some of his own productions on a small scale have been mistaken for those of Elzheimer. Paul Brill died at Rome in 1626. His most eminent contempo- rary, JOHN BREUGHEL, Was a native of Brussels. This painter improved his talents in Italy ; and on his return to Flanders was much employed by Rubens and other distin- guished artists to paint the landscape and other minor LIGHTS IN ART. 1 22 portions of their pictures. In many of the historical works of Hendric van Balen the landscapes were finely executed by Breughel. The original pictures painted entirely by his own hand are carefully finished, and many of them are upon copper. But he seldom attempted to introduce figures on a large scale, and the painters who engaged so much of his time to paint their landscapes probably assisted him very materially in this important branch of art. The small figures painted by his own hand are, however, exquisitely finished and accurately drawn. Sir George Houston Boswall, Bart., is the owner of two small historical pictures on copper , 1 wherein the two branches, landscape and figure painting, are most artistically combined. By some of his friends and contemporaries this celebrated painter was called Velvet Breughel, an appellation supposed to have been given to him in consequence of some peculiarity in the appearance of his work, which was thought to resemble the softness or texture of velvet. But as he lived in an age when fashionable male attire was elegant and costly, a feel- ing of vanity, not uncommon in some artists, may have induced him to adorn his person with that ex- pensive material. The term therefore may have been applied to him in derision. He died about one year previous to the demise of Paul Brill, at the age of i The subjects of these pictures are — ‘Christ Healing the Sick,’ and & St Paul Preaching at Athens.’ LIGHTS IN ART . 123 fifty-seven. Pilkington mentions three other painters of the name of Breughel, but their productions are of an inferior order. ABRAHAM JANSEN Attained an elevated position in art, and deservedly enjoyed the reputation of being one of the best Flemish painters of his time. His celebrity con- tinued with undiminished lustre until eclipsed by the resplendent genius of Rubens, who speedily arrived at the pinnacle of fame, and deprived Jansen of his supremacy. A dethroned monarch with some vestiges of power will scarcely refrain from making war upon the adversary who has displaced him. Defeat is naturally repulsive to the human heart, even when effected by a just and honourable foe. The seeds of bitterness and discontent can hardly be eradicated ; and the grace by which we are enabled to love all mankind can only be obtained from God. King Saul hated his young rival David, and exercised all his power to crush the future sovereign of his dominions ; yet the generous youth felt no animosity. An evil spirit, like Saul’s, pervaded the soul of Jansen, who conceived the most bitter rancour against his countryman and junior, the noble-minded Rubens. That great painter, the greatest of modern times, modestly declined painting a picture in competition with Jansen, who vainly imagined that his supposed 124 LIGHTS IN ART. enemy would be vanquished in the attempt. Un- conquerable envy produced a desire to inflict injury ; and as no opportunity occurred to gratify that desire, he became the victim of disappointed revenge, and died a miserable man. Poor Jansen ! He supposed himself strong enough to overcome his great rival, while he had no strength to subdue the envious feelings of his own nature. Nearly the whole of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries passed in Germany without producing any artists of remarkable genius, or sufficiently charac- teristic and important to guide the national taste. Mengs, 1 Lingelbach, Dietrich, and other esteemed painters, being chiefly educated in Italy, contributed in a very low degree towards the formation of a dis- tinct school in their own country. Their incapacity to follow the correct principles and practice of Albert Durer is now generally known and admitted. In the present century, several eminent German artists have made strenuous efforts for the establishment of a permanent school, to which they have aimed to im- part something of the early national character, modi- fied by the refinement of the best Italian schools, and 1 At All Souls’ College, Oxford, is a picture of our Saviour after his resurrection, and Mary Magdalene, by Mengs, called ‘Noli me tangere,’ remarkably good in colouring and expression. It was painted at Rome, and bought by the College for three hundred guineas. LIGHTS IN ART. 125 the attractions of the great Flemish masters. Among the painters referred to, Henry de Hess, who died at Munich in 1863, aged sixty-five, was an eminent delineator of battles, and his works have been highly and justly extolled by the numerous critics of his own country and other parts of Europe. But anything like a premature judgment upon recent productions must only be considered as a task of supererogation. The ensuing years of the nineteenth century must pass away, progress must enter another long course of time, and the people of a new era will decide whether Germany has worthily accomplished her mission in this age for the advancement and dura- bility of elevated art, or whether she has failed in the attempt. While painting declined in Germany, Rubens and other great masters, whose works shall be noticed in the next chapter, appeared in Flanders with extra- ordinary lustre, and founded various academies for the instruction of young men remarkable for their docility and perseverance, whose honourable labours have greatly contributed to the renown of their native land. CHAPTER VII. THE FLEMISH SCHOOL — RUBENS — SNYDERS — WILDENS — VANDER MEULEN. ETER PAUL RUBENS was born at Col- ogne in 1 577, eight years after the birth of Abraham Jansen. He learned the first rudiments of art from* Adam van Oort, and received further instructions under Octavius van Veen, other- wise called Otho Venius, who painted historical subjects, and died in 1634. At the age of twenty- three, Rubens went to Italy, where he studied with great assiduity and success. He afterwards visited Spain, and returned to his own country in 1608, with a mind well cultivated by familiar intercourse with men of high rank and intelligence. At Antwerp he was much employed by the Archduke Albert ; and in 1620, Marie de Medicis invited him to Paris, where he executed twenty-one paintings, illustrative of the greatest events in her own life. After he had com- pleted those important works, he again visited Spain, where his capacity for state business was observed by LIGHTS IN ART. 127 Philip the Fourth, who sent him in the quality of ambassador to the English Court. With the excep- tion of Michael Angelo Buonarotti, who was ap- pointed ambassador to Rome by the government of the Florentine Republic, the biography of Rubens affords the only instance on record of an artist being selected to represent the grandeur and authority of sovereign power. But the relations existing between the Spanish monarch and our unfortunate Charles the First were too unfriendly and perplexing for the diplomacy of Rubens to adjust ; and though he was received with every mark of deference, his arrival produced no remarkable change in the affairs of the two countries. Indeed, at that time and afterwards, there was no manifestation of mutual good feeling, with the exception of a transient, though seemingly satisfactory, treaty of peace effected by Don Carlos de Colomas, another ambassador, in 1629. At home and abroad, nearly the entire reign of Charles was marked by difficulty and disaster. The high preten- sions and excessive domination of the Spaniards continued to obscure the fair prospects of Britain, until they were effectually and finally curbed by our dauntless Cromwell and his invincible heroes. These historical facts are merely introduced with the view of directing attention to the embarrassments which enveloped the embassy of Rubens, whose career as a statesman will be found narrated elsewhere. Apart 128 LIGHTS IN ART. from his diplomatic mission, his presence afforded the highest satisfaction to Charles. The great painter received commissions to execute several important works, including those at Whitehall ; and his refined patron, probably animated by the example of Philip, conferred upon him the honour of knighthood. The two kings, though politically at variance, were cer- tainly of one mind when actuated by the desire of heaping benefits and honours upon their illustrious favourite. 1 After a sojourn of considerable length in England, the increasing troubles of Charles, and the impending civil war, induced Rubens to return to Antwerp, where he died in 1640, eight years before his royal entertainer and friend, the King of England, was brought to the scaffold by the stern originators of our national freedom. Rubens equally excelled in his- torical, portrait, landscape, animal, and flower paint- ing ; and in these distinct branches of art he executed an immense number of pictures. The Manchester Ex- hibition of 1857 contained thirty-four subjects by his hand, chiefly contributed by the Queen, the nobility, and other distinguished proprietors. Almost every collector of old pictures in Britain can display, or believes he can display, something by this wonderful master, the greatest part of whose productions, how- 1 Charles the First loved, and it is said even practised, the art of painting. It has also been said that Rubens corrected some of His Majesty’s drawings. LIGHTS IN ART . 129 ever, are still to be seen in Belgium, Holland, France, and Genoa . 1 When we remember that his life did not much exceed threescore years, and that he was a man of rank and fashion, a courtier and a traveller, we are surprised at the extent and importance of his labours ; but if we bear in mind the wonderful facility of his pencil, and the ready power of his invention, our astonishment will naturally cease. In his peculiar and high position, constant application was impos- sible ; yet whenever he resumed the palette, with a determination to work in earnest, every touch was effective, and never required the least alteration. He lost no time in considering what he should do. Original ideas rushed upon his mind without cessa- tion, and he had only to embody them in his own happy manner upon the ready canvas before him. It has been somewhere remarked that he painted from ‘ a simple act of the will.’ The characteristics of his style are, grandeur of design, correct com- position, magnificent colouring, vivacity, and easy execution. Perhaps no painter in any age knew 1 Some of the works of Rubens now on the Continent once be- longed to the collection of Charles the First. At the sale of the King’s pictures, Cromwell bought several, including a few by Rubens, which, fortunately, were retained in this country. One of the state apartments at Windsor is called the Rubens Room, where the repre- sentatives of foreign courts occasionally meet in communication with the British sovereign — an arrangement very suitable in memory of the great painter and diplomatist. I 130 LIGHTS IN ART, better than he did how to balance and bring into harmony all the component parts of a picture ; and probably no painter, with the exception of Titian, ever succeeded so well in arresting and fixing the attention of the spectator. His grand manner was formed after studying the works of Michael Angelo and Titian, and almost appears to be a combi- nation of the excellencies of those masters. But he never quite equalled the lofty conceptions of the noble Florentine, nor the gorgeous colouring of the great Venetian painter. The statuary of ancient Greece, no doubt, furnished him with a desire to imitate beautiful forms ; yet his own drawing is strangely deficient in accurate proportion and classical refinement. Indeed, no trace of ideal beauty can be discovered in his delineation's of the human figure. He literally painted from living models, not always elegant, nor entirely free from vulgarity. The truth of this observation will be apparent by contrasting his ‘ Three Graces ’ with the Venus de Medicis, and his finest representation of 4 The Crucifixion ’ with the group of Laocoon. The Grecian statue of the goddess is altogether beauti- ful, elegant, and refined. It has delighted every eye, and offended none. The same panegyric cannot be applied to any nude figure painted by Rubens. In representing the sufferings of Laocoon, the sculptor has succeeded in depicting the finest pro- LIGHTS IN ART. i3i portions of the human form in agony, without violating the sensibilities of the beholder. The tortured figure is a noble personification of ideal beauty, though not entirely drawn from the ima- gination. It is a unity of perfections derived from the severe study of many excellent models. Our admiration is intense, and our deepest sympathies are moved by this incomparable triumph in art. Rubens aimed to portray the last sufferings of our Saviour by painting an ordinary man, in whose plebeian veins no royal blood could flow, and on whose countenance appeared no expression indi- cative of a divine nature. Being actuated by no high influence, and embracing no classical beauty, although within his grasp, he drew a mere common- place mortal, strong and fleshy, to personate the glorious Immanuel on the cross at Calvary. The great Italian masters had loftier conceptions of the divinity of Christ. A singular accordance of style pervades the immense number of his productions. Sir Joshua Reynolds has well said, that ‘ Rubens is a remarkable instance of the same mind being seen in all the various parts of the art. The whole is so much of a piece, that one can scarce be brought to believe that if any one of them had been more correct and perfect, his works would not be so complete as they appear.’ The most celebrated painters of ancient Greece are supposed to have 132 LIGHTS IN ART . worked upon a white ground, which greatly assisted their efforts to produce pictures of extraordinary power and brilliancy. Many of the greatest Italian masters, after the time of Raphael, evidently adopted dark grey, and, sometimes, deep red grounds, which have imparted a degree of heaviness to a great number of their finest productions. Rubens, judging from the majority of his works, seems to have avoided all coloured grounds, and to have preferred a simple preparation, composed of white lead and drying oil. Whether the adoption of this ground arose from a desire to imitate the ancient Greek method in preference to the custom which prevailed in several of the Italian schools, or from the reasoning of his own mind, is a problem difficult to solve. We can easily imagine, however, that on his first visit to Italy he may have felt some disappointment while contemplating the grandest works of the Lombard, Bolognese, and Neapolitan schools. Those productions, painted upon dark grounds, would naturally appear too sombre for his sanguine expectations and vivacious temperament, and might have induced him to adopt a more cheer- ful style in his own paintings. By choosing the white ground, he seems to have acted upon the principle that light can only proceed from light, or that darkness can yield no light to any mortal effort. Life and light can only be derived from chaotic LIGHTS IN ART \ 133 darkness by the divine hand. On a careful investi- gation of those pictures by Rubens which have for- tunately escaped ill treatment, harsh cleaning, and repainting, the white ground may be discovered through all the transparent or glazing colours. His deep shades and richly-coloured draperies were laid on without any opaque mixture sufficiently strong to obscure the light beneath ; and however often he might be required to work over the same parts, he carefully preserved the preponderance of the valu- able white ground. Solid or opaque colours were only used in his high lights and half tints, and these imparted additional clearness to his shadows and the brilliant drapery of his principal figures. The white ground was the guiding light upon which his eye dwelt in the entire progress of his labours, and was not altogether lost sight of when the work was completed. If Rubens really desired to equal the ancients, and to rival or surpass the finest productions of the moderns, we may safely believe that his lofty desires were not far from accomplishment. His view of the positive excel- lencies of ancient painting, afforded by description only, was of course imaginary, and he may there- fore have exalted the genius of Apelles to an unrea- sonable height ; yet the extravagance of his fancy might have assisted his determination to excel. While meditating upon the masterpieces of Buona- 134 LIGHTS IN ART. rotti and the other great painters of Italy, his imagi- nation was confined within due bounds, and he had only to study and admire those real wonders of art. To his mind, the greatest painters appeared as rare luminaries, whose brightness aided and magnified his own splendour to a superlative degree. He was, indeed, the great luminary or sun of all modern art, and effectually obscured or absorbed every inferior light. To our vision, the sun is the most glorious object in creation, and, like all created nature, re- quires the continual care and support of Providence. May not comets, to us the most inexplicable wan- derers in the firmament, be attracted, and finally absorbed, by the vast influence and irresistible power of the superior luminary ? The supposition that comets are always wandering, and that they are periodically seen by the inhabitants of our earth, may be altogether erroneous. A comet is an erratic light, but how is the light produced ? Rubens painted in conjunction with several of his most eminent contemporaries, and trained many pupils. His imitators have been very numerous, and their paintings are not unfrequently attributed to him. Paulus Pontius was an eminent engraver of his works about the year 1632. LIGHTS IN ART, 135 FRANCIS SNYDERS, A distinguished contemporary and friend of Rubens, was born at Antwerp in 1579. He was the pupil of Henric van Balen, and became famous for his faith- ful representations of the incidents and dangers of the chase, though he frequently painted other sub- jects of a less exciting character. Those pictures which he executed conjointly with Rubens are speci- ally prized on the Continent, and also in British collections. The gallery of the Earl of Derby con- tains a fine specimen of the united excellencies of the two masters. Snyders was much employed by Philip the Third of Spain, and many of his best productions are still seen in that country. Cromwell, in the height of his sovereign splendour, was desirous of a visit from Snyders to the English court ; but the desire was frustrated by the death of the favourite painter in 1657. His works are well known. No man ever succeeded so well in depicting a boar hunt. The ferocity of the wild animal in subjection to the fangs of infuriated dogs, the bravery of huntsmen, and the terror of their steeds, are all portrayed with so much vigour and precision as almost to alarm the spectator. Such exciting conflicts are usually repre- sented in the midst of the most romantic scenery. The productions of a few other painters, parti- cularly Adrian van Utrecht, who died in 1651 at the 136 LIGHTS IN ART . age of fifty-two, bear some resemblance to those of Snyders, and are commonly ascribed to him. To connoisseurs, however, his manner of design and execution are sufficiently peculiar and distinct to avoid misconception. Verheyen imitated Snyders and Hondekoeter, and died in the beginning of the last century. JACOB JORDAENS, Born at Antwerp in 1593, was often employed by Rubens in the capacity of a valuable assistant. The pictures of Jordaens are, indeed, little inferior in execution and colour to those of his illustrious friend and patron. He attained the age of eighty-five years. JOHN WILDENS, The most celebrated Flemish landscape painter of the seventeenth century, acquired the friendship of Rubens, who frequently enriched his landscapes by the introduction of admirable figures. A magnifi- cent gallery picture painted by Wildens and Rubens formerly belonged to the late Lord Eldin, one of the judges in the Scottish law courts, and is now the property of Alexander Allan, Esq. of Hillside. JACOB VAN ARTOIS. The most distinguished scholar of Wildens was Jacob van Artois, who afterwards adopted a style LIGHTS IN ART 137 peculiarly his own. He studied colouring and the various effects of nature with considerable success, and finished his landscapes with extreme care. The ready pencils of the younger Teniers and Gonzales Coques supplied his best productions with appro- priate figures. He was a native of Brussels, and died in 1665 in the fifty-second year of his age. GONZALES COQUES, The intimate friend of Artois, became a great ad- mirer and imitator of the works of Vandyck ; but he afterwards painted, very elaborately, familiar life subjects, and received more commissions than he was ever able to execute, although he lived above sixty- six years. In 1857, a joint work by Coques and Artois was exhibited at Manchester by John Walter, Esq., under the title of ‘ A Pic-nic/ ERASMUS QUELLINUS, Although early devoted to a literary life, became the pupil of Rubens, and afterwards a distinguished painter. He continued the practice of art until his death, which occurred at the age of seventy-one. A picture by him, representing ‘ The Return from Egypt,’ is mentioned by Dr. Waagen. 1 His works, which are finished with a considerable amount of labour, are little known in this country. When seen 1 Treasures of Art in Great Britain , vol. iii. p. 221. 138 LIGHTS IN ART. they are attributed, unless they happen to be signed, to other masters whose names are more familiar. The same observation may be applied to many other excellent original painters, whose talents have never been fully appreciated, and whose biography is either unwritten or a mere scanty record of their lives and exertions. VANDER MEULEN. Not the least interesting reality connected with Brussels, is the fact of that city having been the birthplace of many famous painters. In addition to those already enumerated, that very eminent military painter, Vander Meulen, who accompanied Louis the Fourteenth in nearly all his campaigns, was born there. His principal instructor in the art was Peter Snayers, a battle-painter of considerable ability. Colbert, Minister of State to the French king, invited him to Paris, where he became a court favourite, and was constantly employed. By fre- quent attendance in the camp of his royal patron, he became acquainted with martial operations, and the complete method of arranging men in the field of battle ; and his facility in the use of the pencil enabled him to delineate all matters of importance with the greatest expedition. In this arduous way he collected the most useful and valuable materials for his pictures, which he always painted in a care- LIGHTS IN ART. 139 ful and splendid manner. Although truthfulness and precision constitute their chief excellence, the natural and agreeable colouring, and the easy style of execution, in other words, the free mode of handling the brush, are certainly admirable. But while commending the merits of this artist, it must be admitted that his compositions are generally formal, and that a degree of sameness, not observ- able in battle-pieces before his time, pervades a great number of his productions. We ought to remember, however, that considerable changes had taken place in military costume and weapons of war during the reign of Louis the Fourteenth. Very ornamental and even tawdry attire, the prevailing fashion of the period, had found its way into the armies of the Grande Monarque. Feathered hats, lace frills, and richly embroidered coats were adopted by the French officers, and worn instead of the iron-pot, the casquetel, the helmet with triple or single bars, the gorget, and the plain buff jerkin. The bayortet was invented, and first used in the campaigns of that king. Many stringent regulations were neces- sary to render the use of the new weapon effective. Ranks had to be more rigidly formed than hereto- fore ; men were put into stiff postures, and their united action was required, like the movements of infantry regiments in our own day, to be unvaried and strictly according to rule. Parade and mono- 140 LIGHTS IN ART tonous particularity never suit the free genius of a great artist. The superior faculties of Vander Meulen were scarcely exercised, and are, consequently, rarely seen in his works. We are therefore not acquainted with the entire scope of his abilities. Falconi, Stoffe, and Snayers practised their art when warfare was more picturesque, though by no means less terrible. Those painters drew together hosts of fierce warriors, whose accoutrements were truly multiform, engaged in mortal conflict, and wildly striving for victory by the expert use of their pikes, swords, and arquebuses. Bleeding chargers, wounded and dismounted riders staggering in their last agonies, mutilated corpses of men and horses in heaps, and the fatal battle-field itself, rudely broken and moistened by the gore of iron-clad combatants, are a few of the incidents frequently depicted by limners before the time of Louis the Fourteenth, whose stiff battalions, pompous military display, and mathematical slaughter were reserved for the ready pencil of Vander Meulen. The collection of the Duke of Newcastle contains a battle-piece by this master, in which William the Third is represented engaged in the fight. He died at the age of fifty six, in the year 1690. John van Hugtenburgh, a native of Haarlem, visited Paris and painted excel- lent representations of battles in the manner of Vander Meulen, with whom he was very intimate. LIGHTS IN ART . 141 His subsequent fame in Holland was the result of his sojourn at the French capital. George Philip Re- gendas was born about thirty years after the birth of Vander Meulen, and died in 1742. This artist painted military subjects in a stiff, formal manner ; his pictures are not so well finished nor agreeably composed as those of Hugtenburgh. Flanders cannot be said to have received much lustre from painting in the last century ; indeed, even from the days of Rubens and his immediate followers to the present time, no very remarkable genius has appeared in that country. Brussels, now t Belgium’s Capital,’ although the birthplace and residence of many popular artists, has ceased to merit the honourable distinction of being a nursery for the highest art. CHAPTER VIII. HOLLAND — NATIVE AND FLEMISH ART — REMBRANDT — TENIERS — VANDERVELDE — PAUL POTTER — JAN STEEN — IMITATORS AND UNKNOWN MASTERS— ART DECLENSION — NEW PRODUCTIONS. N many respects, Holland may be considered the most remarkable country of modern times. Our great historian, Lord Mac- aulay, thus briefly, yet graphically, describes the origin and prosperity of the Dutch nation : — ‘ Before the grandeur of Venice had declined, another commonwealth, still less favoured, if possible, by nature, had rapidly risen to a power and opulence which the whole civilized world contemplated with envy and admiration. On a desolate marsh, where there was neither wood nor stone, neither firm earth nor drinkable water, a marsh from which the ocean on one side, and the Rhine on the other, were with difficulty kept out by art, was to be found the most prosperous community in Europe/ The Hollanders were not only eminent in overcoming natural ob- stacles, in adventurous enterprises, the acquirement LIGHTS IN ART . 143 of wealth, and the love of national independence : they were soon distinguished in the fine arts, which they exercised with a truthfulness to nature, and a reliance on their own resources, little inferior to the correct performances and the strong display of inde- pendent feeling manifested by the ancient Greeks. In imitation they were admirable, and, as they ad- vanced in practice, seemed to entertain no desire to become acquainted with classical delineation. The objects by which they were daily surrounded furnished them with their best and only models. While the Greeks imitated with precision all the beauties they had selected, they were careful to avoid the introduction into their works of the less refined portions of nature. Hence, the component parts were consistent, harmonious, and perfectly agreeable. No commonplace form, no vulgar attitude or expression, nor the slightest deformity could mar the union of beauties in a severely studied and finished perform- ance. Learned in all the arcana of their art, they rigidly adhered to rules which were essential in their progress to perfection. Vice and deformity were alike shunned, while virtue and beauty were imitated. The Greek artist copied nature only in her loveliness ; the Dutch painter always drew her exactly as he found her : sometimes agreeable and winning, and more frequently ugly and repulsive. Rembrandt, whose works shall be noticed in due order, has given the 144 LIGHTS IN ART. whole truth, in a rough and plain way, without knowing how to withhold, or desiring to omit, any un- dignified object or low expression. His representa- tions are true, like those of Apelles, and in this respect he is equal with the ancient Greek. But he is inferior to Apelles and Zeuxis in the nobler art of portraying only the graces and the refinements of humanity. An old Italian author pompously said, that those and other Greek painters drew only ‘ the miracles of nature and we may soberly say, that the Dutch artists invariably painted nature in her most ordinary aspects, and in almost every circumstance, however mean, in which she might be placed. The maid-servant of an inn, or any country wench — coarse, vulgar, and altogether unattractive — was studied and drawn by the most celebrated painters in Holland, with as much care and accuracy, as any classic artist of Italy could display in the contemplation and drawing of the Venus de Medicis — the incomparable union of all perfections in the female form; and the repulsive hostler, or rude peasant, became as frequent a model for imitation as ever the famous statue of the Apollo Belvidere has been for academical study. A close and literal adherence to everything they saw, constituted the great characteristic of the best Dutch painters. If they ever neglected familiar objects and sought to be imaginative, their productions immedi- ately bordered upon the burlesque. The ancient LIGHTS IN ART 145 Greeks were superlatively eminent, because they represented the beautiful parts of nature ; the Hol- landers of the seventeenth century were eminent, because they painted nature as she is — partly refined and partly obscene. Both methods of representation were equally true; but as man cannot be raised towards perfection by contemplating mean and debasing objects, and as he can only be elevated by refinement, or by a knowledge of the beautiful, the labours of the ancient Greeks must always be con- sidered pre-eminent, and therefore worthy of our highest admiration. If we really desire to be ranked above the lower animals, our training, education, and pursuits ought to be of the best kind ; and, to be truly valuable, the art of painting ought to be so followed as to form an important branch of polite learning. Dutch paintings were scarcely known to foreigners prior to the beginning of the seventeenth century. Vandyck’s estimation of those works pro- bably first directed the attention of other nations to the practice of art in Holland. FRANCIS FLORIS, Born in 1520, was honoured by the appellation of the Raphael of Flanders, and died in middle life in consequence of dissipated habits. By studying the works of the great masters of Italy, he had acquired the ability to execute historical designs in a very IC 146 LIGHTS IN ART. noble manner ; but he was too fond of displaying his anatomical knowledge, and of rendering his out- lines, which, however, were always correct, with too much asperity. The picture of the Fall of Lucifer, at Antwerp, is considered his greatest performance. Francis Floris was a rapid painter, and frequently finished a life-sized figure in less time than an hour. To commemorate the entrance of Charles the Fifth into Antwerp, he is said to have painted seven large figures in the course of one day. FRANCKS. Francks, called Old Francks, and his son, styled Young Francks, usually painted subjects taken from the Old and New Testaments, and also from Roman history, in a very elaborate manner. Young Francks excelled his father, who died in his seventy-second year, 1616. The best work by the hand of the son has been preserved in the church of Notre Dame at Antwerp. Young Francks lived to the age of sixty- two. GASPAR DE CRAYER, Also of Antwerp, was the intimate friend of Vandyck, who painted his portrait. Crayer became an excel- lent historical painter, and was honoured by the approbation of Rubens, who visited Antwerp for the express purpose of seeing one of his performances — LIGHTS IN ART H 7 the centurion alighting from his charger to throw himself at the feet of our Saviour. This picture is acknowledged to be the finest work of Crayer, who died in 1669, at the age of eighty-four. FRANK HALS. This painter, who was born in 1584, notwithstand- ing some eccentricity in his disposition, arrived at great eminence in portraiture, and was so fortunate as to have his ability generously acknowledged by his great rival, Vandyck — a noble instance of proper feeling not often extended to brother artists. He also occasionally painted familiar life-subjects, which, however, are little more than portraits grouped together, or four or five figures introduced into one picture ; but even that number was rarely attempted. Probably Hals was not deficient in the art of com- position, or proper arrangement of objects : the paucity of his designs may have been necessitated by the size of his figures, which was usually that of life ; and he may have judiciously avoided the display of ludicrous character in large groups, from the conviction that they would certainly appear more glaringly offensive than on a small scale. Among the least objectionable of the vulgar sub- jects ascribed to Frank Hals, is a fine picture representing a group of young boys in the presence of an older individual, who, while complacently 148 LIGHTS IN ART smoking a long clay pipe, is silently regarding his puerile companions in their first attempts to master a habit in which he has been long proficient. The urchins are all provided with short pipes and tobacco, and, with only one exception, appear to enjoy the indulgence amazingly. The youngest boy is com- pletely overpowered by the narcotic plant : his pale face indicates extreme sickness, his head and shoulders recline upon a table, and he seems utterly incapable of producing another whiff. Expressions of merriment and triumph mark the countenances of the more successful juveniles, while habitual uncon- cern is depicted in the heavy features of their instruc- tor. This fine picture was brought from Holland in 1830, and is now (1863) the property of Mr. Ward- law Ramsay. Frank Hals loved his pipe, his bottle, and his friends ; yet the conviviality of his temper does not appear to have been inimical to longevity, as, at the time of his decease, he had attained the age of eighty-two years. Some of his pictures are very carefully finished ; but many of those painted in the latter part of his life have a coarse and slovenly appearance. GERARD HONTHORST Received instructions from Abraham Bloemaert, a painter of considerable reputation. He afterwards visited Rome, where his abilities were much admired ; LIGHTS IN ART . 149 though his sojourn in that city did not impart a very high degree of classical beauty to his performances. Groups of figures, sometimes of an historical character, displayed by the effect of fire-light, principally engaged his attention. The subjects of many of his pictures are taken from the New Testament, and are treated in a very original and masterly manner. His ‘ Christ’s Agony in the Garden,’ formerly in the possession of Mr. Smith Barry, is extremely forcible and well de- signed. Honthorst visited England in the reign of James the First, and was appointed chief painter to the King’s daughter, the Princess Elizabeth, after- wards Queen of Bohemia, — from whom the present royal family of Great Britain is descended. He ultimately settled at The Hague, where he was highly patronized by the Prince of Orange, and died in 1660, at the age of sixty-eight. SANDRART, The well-known writer on art, accompanied Honthorst to England, where he copied some of the finest pic- tures in the royal collection, including several por- traits by Holbein. He afterwards visited Italy and Spain, and died in 1683, full of years, riches, and honour. JOHN WYNANTS, Whose birth is supposed to have taken place about LIGHTS IN ART. 150 the year 1600, may be considered the most pleasing landscape painter of the Dutch school. The general effect of the pictures in his best style is remarkably luminous and natural, presenting the appearance of that peculiar warm glow produced by sunshine, while his subjects always partake of pastoral simplicity and picturesque beauty. His colouring is soft and harmonious, particularly in his delineation of skies and distances. Careful finishing, without any con- straint of manner, is invariably observed in his work, all the component parts of which form a perfect union of design. Like many other eminent land- scape painters, he was not adequate to the task of drawing good figures, which were frequently painted for him by his celebrated pupils, Philip Wouvermans and Adrian Vandervelde. In the same way, he was occasionally assisted by his German friend Lingelbach, the well-known landscape and figure painter, who died at Amsterdam in 1687. Wynants lived to the age of seventy-seven, and executed many capital works, which having always been held in high estimation, are consequently much desired. Good imitations of them are numerous. Even poor copies are constantly offered for sale to satisfy the craving of some wealthy individuals, who believe their money will easily, and at any time, procure the finest original pictures by the most celebrated masters. Wynants being a special favourite, the LIGHTS IN ART . 151 demand for his paintings is greater than the genuine supply. The deficiency is attempted to be remedied by disguised copies, or by the productions of inferior masters, whose style seems to bear some resemblance to his own. Deceptions, however, cannot be prac- tised upon collectors thoroughly conversant with old art. Mere disingenuous labour can only pass current with the uninformed, and is of value only to the vendor. ALBERT CUYP, Though the son of an artist, Jacob Cuyp, is said to have been brought up to the trade of a brewer. He was born at Dort in 1605. The time of his death is not accurately known. We may infer, however, from the dates found upon some of his works, that he was living about the year 1683. From the best accounts we have of him, we learn that he received instruc- tions in painting from his father ; who, nevertheless, might have felt apprehensive about the precarious pursuit of art, unassisted by any other pecuniary aim, for the supply of those necessities in life which his own experience had taught him might occasion trouble to his son. The trade of brewing was no doubt chosen as the proper auxiliary for the young man against the embarrassments of the world, into which the uncertain profession of painting might reasonably be expected to plunge him. How long he 152 LIGHTS IN ART was occupied in that trade is not precisely known. Whether long or short, however, it does not appear to have been injurious to his artistic development, as nearly all his pictures bear indubitable evidence of entire freedom in the use of the pencil. Indeed a very inferior picture by Albert Cuyp would be a singular anomaly. He must, therefore, have exer- cised his art with considerable adroitness while en- gaged in the business of brewing, which he probably did not altogether abandon until he had acquired some reputation as a good painter, or until purchasers were found for his works. In all likelihood, he was a master brewer, and had sufficient leisure for the cultivation of those high talents which were be- stowed upon him by nature. Had he been a common labourer in a brewhouse, almost incessant manual toil would have rendered him incapable of handling the pencil with that delicacy and precision which are invariably observed in all his productions. We may reasonably infer that he pursued his art with diligence and with little interruption from the time of his early instruction in the bare rudiments by his father ; and that the occupation of making liquors was merely followed as a pecuniary advan- tage, for a limited period only, to ease him in his flight to that pictorial sphere, in which his superior faculties shone with unvaried lustre. Like all the great painters, Cuyp confined himself to one infallible LIGHTS IN ART. 153 model, and that model was nature. His position in life prevented him from forming a style upon the con- templation of ancient and modern art ; consequently, he was not led to the imitation of any master what- ever. From nature alone he judiciously selected the excellencies which he conceived necessary for the study of a painter, and the faithful representation of those excellencies mainly constitutes the great charm in his pictures. The selections for his pencil con- sisted of the tranquil and rural scenes by which he was always surrounded. Quiet canal views, occasion- ally enlivened by passage or ferry boats ; luxuriant grassy banks with cattle and sheep ; rich meadows, agreeable peasantry, and picturesque trees, are all comprised in his most favourite subjects. In the deli- neation of well-nurtured cows, grazing in the evening of a long sultry summer day, attended by a sleepy hind, or by a neatly attired damsel with her milk- pail, Cuyp was truly felicitous and unrivalled. He was sometimes employed to paint pictures of polished society or high life, such as a party of ladies and gentlemen engaged in hawking, the portrait of a Dutch merchant attended by servants on the banks of a river with shipping, the Prince of Orange starting on a coursing expedition, and other subjects of a similar kind. He is supposed to have worked occa- sionally in conjunction with Vander Neer, the cele- brated painter of moonlight views. With the excep- 154 LIGHTS IN ART. tion of Rembrandt, he employed a greater body of paint than any other Dutch master, and always worked with a soft, full pencil. Great Britain con- tains many of his finest works, several of which have, from time to time, been exhibited at the British Institution, Pall Mall ; and no less than ten were displayed for the benefit of the public at Manchester in 1857. VANDER NEER. Arnold Vander Neer was born about 1613, and lived nearly seventy years. He invariably painted villages, or the picturesque dwellings of fishermen on the banks of rivers and canals by moonlight, with boats, nets, and well-designed figures, and finished every object in a neat and accurate manner. A peculiar genius guided his ready hand. The broad light of day seldom warmed his imagination beyond enabling him to delineate the pensive solitude of a previous moonlight night, when he had meditated alone on the banks of a quiet river near his abode in a little hamlet not far from the busy place of his nativity — Amsterdam. His delineations of such peaceful scenes were superior to all prior efforts of the same kind, and have never been equalled by the pencils of succeeding artists in any country. Nature in her tranquil mood seems to have been the unfailing model on which his soul, like the spirit of Albert LIGHTS IN ART . 155 Cuyp, loved to dwell ; and his creations lack almost nothing save the faculty of locomotion. He was the father of Eglon Vander Neer, who painted historical subjects, portraits, and landscapes in a very agreeable manner. The conversational pieces of Eglon are in the manner of Terburg, and display great purity of colour. In the foregrounds of his landscapes he introduced several kinds of plants, invariably copied from nature in a very elaborate style. Among his historical compositions, one picture in particular is known to possess remarkable beauty. It represents Hagar in the Wilderness. This single production established his reputation in the highest branch of his profession. Eglon Vander Neer paid great attention to colours, and constantly endeavoured to procure the most beautiful and lasting pigments for his palette. He always preferred those which he knew had been long in use, and studiously avoided those which had not been tested by frequent application and time. His example, respecting the choice of colours at least, ought surely to be followed by all artists who regard lustre and durability. Eglon Vander Neer died in 1703, aged sixty. PAUL REMBRANDT. We now come to the most renowned painter of the Dutch School, Paul Rembrandt, called Van Rhyn, from the circumstance of his having been born, in 156 LIGHTS IN ART. 1608, on the banks of the Rhine, near Leyden. He received instructions from Swanenburg, Lastman, and Pinas, masters of no great eminence, to whom he was not so much indebted as to the strength of his own genius. Close application to the study of nature may be said to have been his principal tutorage. Being the son of a miller in a rural locality, his eye was early accustomed to dwell on natural and picturesque objects, which an excellent memory enabled him to retain, and from which he made selections for many of his most pleasing pictures. He never trusted, however, to mere recollection : the scenes which had captivated his fancy were again visited before he ventured to complete the embodi- ment of a design. In this way he produced numerous landscapes, remarkable for truth, vigorous effect, and masterly execution. The picture known as ‘ Rem- brandt's Mill ’ is a fine example of his ability in land- scape painting. But the great force of his genius was concentrated upon figure-painting, comprising por- traiture, and a variety of other subjects, in which he found scope for the versatility of his mind. The portraits painted by him are admirable transcripts of life ; while his representations of historical or sacred subjects are too literal, too much like ordinary humanity, to afford entire satisfaction to any eye accustomed to refined art or classical beauty. Being unacquainted with the purity, elegance, and simplicity LIGHTS IN ART. IS 7 of antique models, he altogether depended upon his own imagination, which, incapable of any lofty flight, revelled in commonplace materialism. The necessity of choosing according to the rules of art was never felt ; he painted almost every object as it was presented to his view, and even occasional grossness hardly escaped his love of imitation. In some of his delinea- tions, coarse vulgarity is decidedly prominent. Yet he is justly commended for truthfulness, originality of design, and a perfect knowledge of chiaroscuro . Indeed, notwithstanding all his deficiencies — and they are many — he has been ranked, by the best judges, among the greatest painters of any age. Fuseli, though often extravagant in his criticisms, very properly says of Rembrandt : ‘ Disdaining to acknow- ledge the usual laws of admission to the Temple of Fame, he boldly forged his own keys, and entered and took possession of a most conspicuous place by his own power. He was undoubtedly a genius of the first class in whatever is not immediately related to form or taste/ Rembrandt illustrated many of the graphical narratives contained in the Holy Scriptures, including ‘ Jacob's Dream/ ‘ Daniel before Nebuchadnezzar / 1 and ‘ Belshazzar’s Feast.’ But his Dutch conceptions were never sufficiently elevated for the due treatment of sublime and mysterious 1 This picture, the property of Lord Scarsdale, is erroneously attri- buted by Dr. Waagen to Solomon de Koning. 158 LIGHTS IN ART. subjects. The lack of erudition was in a great measure compensated in his case by an ardent temperament and the keenest desire to excel. Had he received in early life a greater supply of mental excellencies, his genius would have shone with tran- scendent lustre. Without the advantages of high academical assistance, and by the sheer dint of perseverance, he achieved wonders in painting ; and while we cannot fail sometimes to observe the appear- ance of grotesque forms and uncouth attire, we are captivated by dignified expression, a charming con- sonance of light and shade, and astonishing richness and depth of colouring. His portraits are probably facsimiles of the persons from whom they were taken, and are unquestionably his greatest performances. In that particular branch he painted literally from life, imitating every beauty with precision, detailing forms and hues even when they appeared as defects, imparting the truest expression, whether agreeable or otherwise, and rendering every transcript of nature a perfect model of unaffected art. The number of minute particulars which engaged his attention pro- duced no confusion ; every line was properly sub- servient to the main design, every tint was happily blended in the right place, and entire unity resulted from his combined and apparently artless though cer- tainly laborious exertions. His male portraits may be considered perfect examples of his art ; but the same LIGHTS IN ART . 159 panegyric cannot well be applied to his representa- tions of high feminine character. Ideal beauty, or any conceptions of elegance beyond the reality of ordinary and individual form, never occupied his mind. Any glowing description of the prodigies of Grecian art must have been vastly above his com- prehension, because he evidently had no faith in the necessity of endeavouring to improve nature. He appears to have fancied that perfection was observ- able in all forms, and that every feature, remarkable either for beauty or ugliness, was equally worthy of imitation. With an implicit belief in the excellency of nature, in every guise and circumstance, he would never allow himself to depart from what he considered the legitimate business of an artist — the faithful delineation of every object as it might be presented to his vision. We may easily account therefore for the little attraction to be found in his portraits of women, whose vanity, or excusable desire to be made beautiful by the limners art, he could never conde- scend to gratify. No one ought to infer that female loveliness did not exist in Holland during the career of Rembrandt. It is probable that there were many beautiful ladies in that country who never sat to Rem- brandt nor to his contemporaries for their portraits. Had he been so fortunate as to paint from the finest models, he would no doubt have captivated us by the most charming pictures of female beauty. Perhaps i6o LIGHTS IN ART, one of the most agreeable works by this great master is a portrait belonging to the Duke of Buccleuch, at Dalkeith Palace, entitled ‘The Jewish Bride/ The countenance is by no means unpleasing, the habili- ments are gorgeously painted, and the whole perfor- mance may be viewed as a fine artistic example of perfect harmony. His paintings are very numerous ; yet so great is the demand for them, and so difficult are they to obtain, that the works of his best pupils, especially Eeckhout, are frequently substi- tuted in their stead. 1 The number of paintings ascribed to Rembrandt in the Manchester Exhibi- tion of 1857 was no less than thirty. Many were originals of the highest quality from the most cele- brated collections in Britain. His own portrait at the age of thirty-six, formerly the property of the Baring family, and of immense value, was con- tributed by the Queen from Buckingham Palace. Towards the close of his life, Rembrandt indulged an unfortunate craving for the acquirement of curio- 1 In 1859, Captain Stirling informed the compiler that he had seen at Florence a fine original portrait of Oliver Cromwell, ascribed to Rembrandt, in the possession of a dealer. But as the Protector was never on the Continent, and as Rembrandt is not known to have visited England, the account is rather questionable. The portrait alluded to may have been a copy by Rembrandt, or by one of his numerous scholars and imitators, after a picture actually done from Cromwell ; or it may have been taken from an engraving. Rembrandt had no doubt heard of the imperious English ruler, whose portrait he might have painted from some authentic description — oral, written, or pictorial. LIGHTS IN ART . 161 sides, and affected the importance of a virtuoso. In this unwise manner he wasted his substance, and died in penury at the age of sixty-three. Ferdinand Bol was an excellent imitator of Rem- brandt, and died in 1681. A fine portrait of a lady by him is in the Glentyan collection. ADRIAN BROUWER, The eccentric and dissolute pupil of Frank Hals, was born at Haarlem in 1608, and terminated a life of wild excess at the age of thirty-two. His subjects were of the lowest kind, yet they are highly esteemed for their truthfulness and originality. A capital picture by him, ‘ Two Boors Quarrelling/ is in the collection of the Earl of Carlisle. Notwithstanding his dissipated habits and erratic practice, a few excellent scholars, including the younger Teniers, were glad of his instructions, and subsequently painted the same kind of subjects. Indeed, he may be considered the forerunner of a new style, or the first delineator of the degrading manners and low propensities of the Dutch peasantry, whose drunken revels and brutish amours were congenial with his own feelings. The pursuit of art in a wrong direction is hurtful to the moral welfare of mankind, and can only be admired for the skill and dexterity of the man who chooses to run in that way. Poor Brouwer sacrificed his life to one beloved idol — pleasure. LIGHTS IN ART . 162 VAN CRAASBECK, Born at Brussels in 1608, was a close follower of Brouwer, whose subjects he exactly imitated. He was an original genius, however, and though he painted from low life, his invention was lively and re- markably humorous. All his characters are drawn from nature, and his general colouring is more like Teniers than Brouwer. He reached the age of sixty. DAVID TENIERS, The Younger, was born at Antwerp, two years after the birth of Brouwer, and lived, in temperance and honour, eighty-four years. Though he received early instructions from his father, a Flemish artist, of great ability, and also from Rubens, he may properly be ranked in the Dutch school, because he chiefly founded his style upon that of Brouwer, whose vicious irregularities, however, he sedulously avoided. Under Rubens, a worthy pattern in all respects for imitation, he completed those studies upon which he raised a reputation so enduring, that the mere sound of his name has become a house- hold word in all civilized society. His first great friend and patron was the Archduke Leopold, who nominated him painter to the court, and director of the principal fine-art gallery. Among his many ' patrons was the King of Spain, who became the LIGHTS IN ART . 163 owner of an immense number of his most admired performances. His Majesty estimated them so highly as to build a gallery expressly for their reception. After the acquirement of his well-earned celebrity, when he found himself the possessor of considerable wealth, he erected a handsome and picturesque chateau, at a small village near Antwerp, where he entertained many of the most illustrious individuals of his time. That pleasant country-seat appears to have afforded him ample satisfaction and delight. Several of his most pleasing pictures are views of the house and the adjacent grounds, en- livened by elegant and appropriate figures. The collection of Sir George Warrender formerly con- tained an interesting picture by Teniers, entitled, ‘ His own Chateau, with portraits of Himself and his Three Children.' We may assume that domestic happiness was the crown of his prosperity. He painted a vast variety of subjects with perfect com- prehension and astonishing freedom. With mar- vellous celerity, he turned from the ‘ Triumph of Neptune' to a game at nine-pins, and from a sacred subject to boors drinking at the door of an inn. He was also remarkable for his imitations of the different styles of other masters ] l but his most admired pro- 1 Any picture not exactly a copy, yet an accurate imitation of style, is technically termed a pasticcio . Teniers and other painters of this class of pictures are never ranked among ordinary or literal copyists. 164 LIGHTS IN ART. ductions are his own original pictures, painted from ordinary or familiar life. The usual style of this very eminent artist is light, simple, and unconstrained ; it combines perfect breadth with every attention to detail, while the execution, or manner of touching, is sharp and spirited, yet always exact and extremely delicate. A yellow ground, upon which he usually worked, displays all his cool tints to much advantage, and imparts a peculiar warmth to his colouring, which otherwise might appear too cold. A sweet neutral hue pervades each entire work, the several parts of which are unobtrusive, harmonious, and true. His general colouring has something of the agreeable appearance of silver ; and Sir Joshua Reynolds, alluding to Teniers, says that his pictures ‘ are valued by connoisseurs in proportion as they possess this excellence of a silver tint.’ The works of this master are very numerous, and good specimens may be seen in almost every collection of real importance. But copies and imitations are much more numerous, and serve to furnish the walls of those who cannot obtain original examples. The fancies of pseudo-collectors are sometimes very amusing. Men, seemingly intelli- gent in all matters, except in the matter of art, really believe, or appear to believe, that flagrant copies are the true emanations of the most renowned masters. Nearly all the copies after Teniers present a thick, heavy, and loaded appearance, and are easily detected LIGHTS IN ART. 165 by persons familiar with the excellencies of origin- ality. Adrian van Ostade, Minderhout Hobbima, Jan Both, and William Vandervelde the Elder, were all born, as Teniers was, in the year 1610. ADRIAN VAN OSTADE Became a fellow-student with Brouwer, under Frank Hals. He seems to have been fascinated by the genius of his master, upon whose style he may be said to have formed an improved one of his own. The pictures painted by him, especially those repre- senting interiors with figures, are highly finished, rich in colour, resembling the deep hues of a beautiful tortoise-shell, and remarkably clear. He also painted exteriors, with rustic musicians, skittle-players, and merry-making peasants in a most exquisite manner. Yet, like other Dutch painters of his class, he occa- sionally marred his compositions by the introduction of some vulgarism, bordering upon obscenity, which can only be excused on the score of a strict adher- ence to the manners of the times, and the extra- ordinary artistic skill with which such subjects were treated. We know of no immorality in the life of this eminent painter. Indeed, a long existence — for he attained the age of seventy-five years — may be considered the certain reward of steadiness and of habitual temperance. i66 LIGHTS IN ART. ISAAC OSTADE, Born in 1617, the brother and pupil of Adrian,, painted landscapes and figures somewhat in the manner of his instructor. He delineated the effects and peculiarities of the winter season in Holland with considerable care and accuracy ; but as he died in the prime of life, his productions are compara- tively few. The dissipated Cornelius Bega was also a pupil of the elder Ostade, and painted landscapes, cattle, and figures in a delicate and very pleasing manner. He lived forty-four years. CORNELIUS DUSART Painted all kinds of peasant life in Holland with minute observance and characteristic truth ; yet, though he delighted to represent taverns, vulgar dances, and brutalizing carousals, he was naturally disposed to quietness, and a lover of solitude. He had only one intimate friend, Adam Dingemans ; and that friend, on his last visit to the lonely dwelling of Dusart, found the occupant whom he had, less than an hour before, left in apparent health, silent for ever. Dingemans, a man of feeling, became so affected at the sight as to die on the same day, and the remains of the two friends were buried together in the same place. Dusart had been a follower of Adrian Ostade, and lived thirty-nine years. His pictures, though all LIGHTS IN ART. 1 67 taken from low life, abound in artistic ability, while the expression and various attitudes of his figures are more refined than the delineations of his eminent instructor. A pure specimen of this master, signed, is in the Belmont collection. SIMON VANDER DOES Learned painting from his father, who flourished when Karl Du Jardyn enjoyed the height of his prosperity. Simon visited England, but shortly returned to Holland, where he painted cattle with much truth, ease, and delicacy. That Holland should have produced so many famous cattle-painters is certainly a matter of sur- prise. An observation or two relative to the cause of that particular excellence may prove of some value now and hereafter. The great Dutch animal-painters were accustomed, during their whole lives, to observe, in their own country especially, bulls, cows with variegated hides, and flocks of sheep grazing in the verdant pastures and along the banks of quiet rivers and canals with almost perfect freedom and full enjoyment. The pencil was ever ready to delineate those peaceful scenes adapted to the genius of Paul Potter, Berchem, Adrian Vandervelde, and other contemplative artists of kindred pursuits. Fresh air, exercise, and natural aliment sustained the useful quadrupeds for the support and study of man. Hoi- LIGHTS IN ART. 1 68 land, however, like other highly civilized countries, has undergone an immense change during the present century. But mutation is not always good. In Great Britain we have no ‘ cattle upon a thousand hills our mountain sides, valleys, and level lands no longer display pastoral herds tended by brawny hinds. Literally, our country cannot be termed a ‘land that floweth with milk and honey.’ Our milch-cows in divers places have been deprived of exercise, proper atmosphere, and the pure water of the streams ; they have been, and still are, immured in sheds, frequently cold and damp, for the express purpose of constant confinement, and if at any time they are allowed the use of their legs in the open air, they invariably totter, and often stumble, like intoxi- cated people. Their natural wants have been neglected, they have been forced to take artificial food and the roughest usage, and murrain has accord- ingly followed. We are now, 1866, punished by the ‘ cattle plague.’ These days, even in Holland, would hardly have suited Potter, Berchem, and all the other fine cattle-painters of past time. Simon Vander Does was remarkably industrious, yet the extravagance of his wife embarrassed his circumstances to such a degree as to produce the greatest depression upon his mind. Amid all his domestic sorrows he applied himself to work until the close of his days in 1717, at the age of sixty-four. LIGHTS IN ART . 169 Some of the cattle-pieces of this master have been sold for large sums in Britain, though his figures are deficient in elegance and his colouring inclines rather too much to a yellow tint. Michael Carre and Adrian van Diest, contempo- raries of Vander Does, were also good cattle-painters. They both resided long in England, but received little encouragement. At length Carre was invited to Prussia, where he obtained high prices for his pro- ductions. But Van Diest, his genius depressed by neglect, lost his health and died in extreme poverty. He was the brother-in-law of Adrian Coloni, who likewise painted cattle. HOBBIMA. No authentic information respecting the career of Hobbima has been handed down to posterity. We are merely acquainted with the year of his birth, and also with the fact that he was the contemporary and friend of Jacob Ruysdael, to whose style his own pictures bear considerable affinity. The collection of the Marquis of Hertford contains a fine landscape by Hobbima, signed and dated 1665. Probably, the painter only lived a short time after that date. The best rural landscapes of this master are fresh, vigorous, and pleasing ; they are executed in a strong manner with a great body of colour, which, in his trees especially, presents a very remarkable, LIGHTS IN ART. 170 blunt, and jaggy appearance. The large, heavy touches applied to produce the imitation of foliage, rough barks of gnarled trees, old cottages, and pic- turesque water-mills, are uneven, notched, rude, and altogether different from the handling of almost any other painter. In his most elaborate work, the touches, or rather distinct lumps of solid paint, rise considerably above the surface of the material upon which he laboured, and are really countless pro- tuberances of every form and hue. Yet all this laborious and apparently overdone execution has produced the most surprising, simple, and natural effect, with no indication of the least desire to outdo what he merely intended to imitate. He possessed no idea of going beyond the modesty of nature, and happily imitated her according to his own pure conceptions. As a colourist and just distributor of light and shade, he has never been surpassed by any other landscape painter ; but his knowledge of the human form was not sufficient to enable him to represent figures, which were usually painted in his pictures by Berchem, Adrian Vandervelde, Wouver- mans, and Lingelbach . 1 1 About the year 1828, Signor Galli imported a splendid landscape by Hobbima, valued at a thousand guineas, which was afterwards acquired by the late Sir Robert Peel. A few words respecting the importer may be interesting. He was a native of Milan, and in very early life served in the army under Napoleon the First. After a short time of active service, he found his way to England, and ap- LIGHTS IN ART. 171 An obscure painter upon glass, surnamed Both, was the father of two distinguished artists, who, after being under the tuition of Abraham Bloemaert, painted in conjunction. The two brothers, JAN AND ANDRIES BOTH, Enlarged their knowledge by visiting France and Italy. They long sojourned at Rome, where they produced many excellent pictures. The Italian evening scenes of Jan Both are remarkable for warmth of colour, delicacy of touch, and perfect harmony. Indeed, all the pictures known to have been painted by his hand, without the assistance of his brother, are extremely beautiful. They are not numerous, as he only attained the age of forty-six years. DE HEUSCH— DE VRIES. De Heusch was a pupil, and afterwards a close imitator of Jan Both. De Vries, who lived about the prenticed himself to a jeweller and lapidary. He soon became a master, and finally settled in Edinburgh as a picture-dealer. The pictures he imported from Holland and other countries were of the highest class. He died in 1859, after a residence of about forty years in Scotland. His portrait was finely painted by Sir John Watson Gordon, and is now (1863) the property of William Pollock, Esq., Edinburgh. Galli had the honour of being acquainted with Sir Henry Raeburn, Sir William Allan, the Rev. John Thomson of Dudding- stone, Francis Grant, R.A., etc. The compiler of this work was introduced to him by Henry Morland, brother of the celebrated George Morland. 172 LIGHTS IN ART same time, painted landscapes and figures in a pleasing style, and is fairly represented at Belmont, near Edinburgh. WILLIAM VANDERVELDE, The Elder, who was born at Leyden, spent the early part of his life at sea. The States-General, relying on the painter’s nautical skill, placed a handsome yacht entirely at his command, in which he fearlessly entered into the hottest battles, without receiving any harm from the contending foes, under whose joint protection he felt himself so secure as to pursue calmly his varied studies of naval warfare. England was then at war with Holland, and the intrepid artist, who, probably, concerned himself very little about the causes of national hostilities, was equally re- spected and patronized by the admirals of the oppos- ing fleets. He witnessed many great conflicts, which are faithfully delineated in his pictures. King Charles the Second invited him to England, where he long exercised his art with much success. He died in London, 1693. The works of this master are justly valued, though they are vastly inferior to those of his son, WILLIAM VANDERVELDE, Commonly called the Younger, who was born at Am- sterdam when his father was twenty-three years of age. LIGHTS IN ART. 1 73 Early parental care, judicious training, and a mind formed to retain instruction, produced the most beneficial results. Young Vandervelde, aided by De Vlieger, soon arrived at the height of his profession, and totally eclipsed all who had gone before him in the same line of art. Though he painted subjects similar to those of his father, they are executed in a much finer manner ; and his name deservedly ranks first on the list of all marine painters, not only before but also since his own time. The great charm of his pictures consists in the prevalence of the silver tint which he diffused, by many wonderful gradations, throughout his entire work. A correct knowledge of the neutral and harmonizing effects of the atmos- phere never permitted him to colour in a gaudy, positive manner, as his father, who seemed uncon- scious of the gentle influence of a soft airy medium, almost invariably did. The sea-pieces of the younger Vandervelde, especially his representations in calm weather, are perfectly true to nature in every par- ticular, and never fail to elicit the highest commenda- tion from every beholder. His genius delighted in repose, in the serenity of still waters, when the gentlest zephyr ceased to fan the sail of the sleepy fisherman’s barque, and when the sandy beach be- came the favourite afternoon resort of listless people, attired in the comely and picturesque costume of the period. Yet he shrank not from the frowning 174 LIGHTS IN ART heavens, the raging wind, and the troubled sea. In emulation of Backhuysen, he described the angry elements buffeting some noble ship, and distressing lighter craft, with accuracy and true poetic feeling. A fine painting by him, representing ‘ A Ship in a Storm, 1 is in the collection of the Earl of Warwick. Sea-fights, which were frequent at that time, engaged much of his attention ; and the interest he excited by painting those subjects induced Charles the Second to invite him to London, where he continued the exercise of his art to the entire satisfaction of his patrons. His English pictures of naval engagements, however, are considerably inferior to the smaller paintings which he executed in Holland during his earlier days, when Admiral Blake, and other heroes of the English Commonwealth, were masters of the sea, and inspired the Dutch nation with respect, emulation, and valour. The restored king was no true lover of art, and certainly no hero. He was as little respected by foreigners as by his own subjects, and Vandervelde may probably have regretted his acceptance of the royal invitation. After the death of Charles, he was occasionally employed at Court during the very brief reign, less than two years, of James the Second. The accession of William and Mary naturally terminated the wars with Holland, and Vandervelde was engaged to paint the English and Dutch fleets in conjunction against the French LIGHTS IN ART . 175 navy. He died in the reign of Queen Anne, in the seventy-fourth year of his age. JAN VAN DE KAPELLE Is supposed to have studied the works of the two Vanderveldes. We have no authentic dates of his birth and death, and merely know that he painted about the year 1650. A beautiful picture of a calm by this master is in the collection of Earl Spencer, BLANKHOF Lived about the same time, and painted sea-pieces, especially storms and shipwrecks, in a style some- what resembling that of Jacob Ruysdael, though with much less finish. His works are not much known ; and, when seen, are commonly mistaken for the productions of other masters. By his country- men at Rome, this painter was named Jan Maat He died in middle life. P. V. VELDEN, Whose marine views greatly resemble those of Beer- straaten, also painted about the middle of the seven- teenth century. Although he usually signed his pictures, which are remarkably good, his name is but little known, and was not even found by the Rev. Matthew Pilkington during all his diligent researches after names and dates. 176 LIGHTS IN ART GERARD DOW, Born at Leyden in 1613, was originally a painter upon glass. He had only reached the age of fifteen, however, when he became the pupil of Rembrandt, under whom he acquired great proficiency. Al- though he lived sixty-seven years, his pictures, in consequence of the time he expended in producing exquisite finish, are not numerous. One of the best specimens of his talent—' ‘ A Young Woman cleaning a Saucepan 9 — is in the Royal Collection at Bucking- ham Palace, and has been more than once allowed for public inspection at the British Institution. GABRIEL METZU Studied the works of the preceding artist, and after- wards of Gerard Terburg, an excellent painter of interiors with figures, small portraits, etc. Metzu painted similar subjects in a very superior manner, and died of the stone at Amsterdam in 1658, aged forty-three. His works are few in number, and extremely valuable. One of his most capital pictures, mentioned by Houbraken, is a lady washing her hands in a silver basin. THOMAS WYCK Was born at Haarlem in 1616, and lived seventy years. He probably visited Italy, as he frequently LIGHTS IN ART. 1 77 painted some of the principal ports in the Medi- terranean. He resided in England after the restora- tion of Charles the Second, and was much employed. His son, John, a painter of military subjects, in the style of Philip Wouvermans, also lived in England, where he died about 1702, in the sixty-second year of his age. As the elder Wyck painted with a full pencil, his touch is broad and easy, and most of his works display considerable accuracy in drawing. But his colouring is occasionally cold and opaque. DE KONING. The two De Konings, Solomon and Philip, studied the works of Rembrandt. They were born at Amsterdam ; Solomon in 1609, an d Philip ten years afterwards. The time of Solomon’s death is unknown ; yet he is supposed to have been living in 1663. Philip, who was a distinguished landscape painter, died in 1689. PHILIP WOUVERMANS, Born at Haarlem in 1620, became the pupil of Wynants, in whose landscapes he occasionally painted figures. During his life, which only ex- tended to about forty-eight years, he was very in- defatigable, and produced many beautiful pictures representing military and other subjects suitable for the introduction of horses, his favourite animals, M 178 LIGHTS IN ART. which he always delineated in a truthful, masterly manner. Indeed, he is justly considered one of the finest animal painters of the Dutch school. Horse fairs, mounted cavaliers at inn doors, skir- mishes of cavalry, stable interiors, travellers and hostlers, landscape and peasantry, are the subjects of some of his most capital pictures. He also represented other familiar scenes and equestrian groups — especially hawking parties — in a most pleasing manner. His picture of ‘ Men and Wo- men on Horseback,’ formerly the property of the Duchess de Berri, is an exquisite specimen, and will be found enumerated in Waggen’s Treasures of Ail in Great Britain} The collection of his Grace the Duke of Buccleuch, at Dalkeith Palace, contains a fair example of this admirable master. Barent Gaal was a disciple and good imitator of Philip Wouvermans. ALDERT VAN EVERDINGEN AND ADAM ✓ PYN ACKER Were born in the same year, 1621, and their terms of life were about equal : the former having died in 1675, and the latter two years before that date. Everdingen studied under Roland Savery, and afterwards painted some interesting views in Nor- way, which have frequently been mistaken as the 1 V ol. ii. p. 202. LIGHTS IN ART . 179 productions of Jacob Ruysdael. In painting cas- cades, torrents, and picturesque watermills, Ever- dingen has not been surpassed ; while the peculiar freshness and natural effect of his romantic scenes have rarely been equalled. We are not acquainted with the master of Pynacker, who went to Rome at an early age, and painted views of the environs of that city, in what is called the decorative style. A ‘View on the Tiber’ by him was acquired by Lord Overstone. The landscapes of Pynacker, for the most part, display a stiff, formal method of handling ; and his colouring, being usually strong and heavy,, is much at variance with the delicacy of nature. His chief merit consists in originality of style. SIMON DE VLIEGER, A painter of sea and river views, flourished at Amsterdam about the year 1640, and is admired for the neatness of his execution, which is not greatly inferior to that of his disciple, the younger Vandervelde. Two fine specimens of this master form part of the Whitehall collection. BEERSTRATEN, Whose style resembles the most carefully finished productions of De Vlieger, died about 1689. He often painted sea-ports and coast scenes. A signed picture of a storm by this master forms part of the 1 8o\ LIGHTS IN ART. V valuable collection of William Pollock, Esq. ; and another fine specimen, a calm, is preserved at Meadowbank House. NICHOLAS BERCHEM, A celebrated landscape, cattle, and figure painter, was born in 1624, and attained the age of fifty-nine. He became the scholar of Van Goyen, and subse- quently received instructions under Jan Baptist Weeninx, from whom he evidently learned little more than the mere mechanical part of his profession. His own genius afterwards directed him to embrace an original manner, which materially differed from the styles of his early preceptors. Preferring nature for his infallible guide, he required no other monitor. The subjects of his pictures were chosen with the greatest discrimination from the most varied and beautiful scenery, agreeably enlivened by groups of peasantry in charge of cows, mules, and other animals. Warm, bright colouring, a due distribution of light and shade, and careful execution are among the chief characteristics of his style. His works and imitations of them are numerous, and usually bear his name in full. Dr. Waagen mentions 1 a 'Group of Peasants’ with the true signature of Berchem, and the date of 1655 ; and Mr. Wardlaw Ramsay of Whitehall is the possessor of a small cattle-piece 1 See Treasures of Art , vol. ii. p. 16. LIGHTS IN ART. aZi which is also genuinely signed. Many other veritable performances might be mentioned if space allowed. It may be well to observe that imitations of his style and signature are often so skilfully executed as even to deceive, at first sight, some of the most eminent collectors and knowing connoisseurs. A deliberate scrutiny, therefore, in a very strong light, is particu- larly recommended to all liberal buyers and lovers of the subjects of this master, and also of all those masters whose productions occasionally appear, or are supposed to appear in the picture-market. Van- der Bent, though the disciple of Adrian Vandervelde, painted cattle-pieces much in the style of Berchem. But Jacques Van Hugtenburgh, though carefully instructed by Berchem himself, produced beautiful pictures, views, and animals in the vicinity of Rome, in a style entirely his own. He was the elder brother of the battle painter, John Van Hugtenburgh, but died prematurely in Italy. PAUL POTTER, •Another cattle painter of extraordinary eminence, was born at Enhuysen in 1625, and died of consump- tion at Amsterdam in the twenty-ninth year of his age. He was taught the rudiments of drawing and painting by his father, Peter Potter, an artist of no great celebrity. Although the landscapes of Paul Potter are beautifully finished and true to nature, he 1 82 LIGHTS IN ART. appears to have bestowed no care in the selection of his views, which are of the most ordinary description. Generally, a clear sky, a portion of flat country ter- minating in a low horizon, a green bank in the fore- ground, and the stump of an old tree seemed to afford him perfect satisfaction. He painted each particular part, from the lofty, azure firmament, down to the lowest blade of grass, in the most elaborate manner, and probably conceived the idea that more varied scenery would draw attention from those more im- portant objects, hinds and cattle, which he desired should alone arrest the eye of the spectator. If he really worked upon that or any similar idea, we must acknowledge that his success was complete. No object can be more commanding, more palpable, nor better relieved than one of Paul Potter’s bulls bellow- ing on the summit of a grassy bank, with nothing but the open sky beyond ; and no secondary objects can be more subservient than two or three cows in repose, with a drowsy boor in attendance, lower down upon the same grassy bank. As the fierce bull is the principal animal, so the old, rude, half- decayed stump, rising from the ground without a rival to mar its importance, is the principal tree in the landscape. The cows, hind, and stump are sub- ordinate to the animal on the summit ; yet they are severally important, — the stump not the least so, its unshapen, withered condition forming a fine contrast LIGHTS IN ART. 183 with the beautiful symmetry of the noble bull. These and other simple methods of placing certain objects in opposition, constitute one of .the great triumphs of art. Paul Potter painted other subjects in an excellent manner, such as horses, dogs, etc. The ‘ Outside of a Stable, with a boy running off with Puppies/ is a small specimen, signed and dated, in the royal collection at Buckingham Palace, and formerly belonged to the Geeldemeester family. In design and composition, this painter was exceedingly unaffected. His touch is small, crisp, and full ; it slightly rises above the surface of his ground, or pre- paration for working upon, and has never been well imitated, though very numerous attempts at imitation have been made. Jan Le Due is said to have been a disciple of Paul Potter, but he did not pursue the art with much devotion. He ultimately became, however, president of the Academy at The Hague. JACOB RUYSDAEL, Born at Haarlem in 1631, was the friend of two distinguished painters, Everdingen and Berchem, from whom he is supposed to have received instruc- tion. We can easily trace much of the style of Everdingen in his landscapes; indeed, some of Everdingen’s best works, as previously stated, are ascribed to him. But he evidently possessed no- thing of the manner of Berchem. The style of 184 LIGHTS IN ART. Hobbima was more likely to incite his emulation, and he probably derived considerable benefit by studying the works of that master. In fact, to the critical eye, a remarkable similarity of manner ap- pears in the landscapes of Hobbima and Ruysdael. The connoisseur, however, can at once perceive that the similarity is only in degree ; it is not perfect. The difference is chiefly observable in the handling of the two masters. Ruysdael’s touch is finer, less loaded, and more particular than that of Hobbima. There is yet another point of difference worthy of notice. Ruysdael, in the painting of clouds, em- ployed a greater variety of grey, or neutral tints, than his predecessor, and particularly excelled in forming one large white cloud, to which all the others in the same sky are subordinate. Indeed, one of his finest productions bears the singular title of i The White Cloud/ from the circumstance of one cloud being the principal object in the entire com- position of the landscape. Perhaps no other painter in all time ever selected a mere white cloud as the chief attraction for a picture. Many of his subjects resemble those of Everdingen, and the most admired figures in his quiet landscapes were introduced by Adrian Vandervelde. Several of the finest pictures by this master belong to British collectors. The Marquis of Hertford is the owner of ‘ A Waterfall/ from the collection of Baron Denon ; and a ‘ Woody LIGHTS IN ART, 185 Landscape/ signed, belongs to Sir George Houston Boswall, Bart, of Blackadder, Berwickshire. It may be proper to observe that some of his large pictures have become dark and heavy, in consequence, pro- bably, of his having occasionally used impure oil or improper pigments. Jacob Ruysdael was a lover of solitude, and lived fifty years. He had an elder brother, Solomon, who chiefly imitated the well- known manner of Van Goyen. LUDOLPH BACKHUYSEN, A celebrated marine painter, was born, at Embden, two years before the birth of William Vandervelde the Younger, and died two years after the death of that artist. We are informed that he was originally intended for commercial pursuits, and that he actually entered upon the career of a trader, which he appears to have followed until he accidentally saw a few spirited paintings by Everdingen. The young merchant became fascinated, quickly ex- changed his mercantile views for those of art, and entered the school of the master whose works had effected the sudden transformation in his mind and prospects. He afterwards became acquainted with Hendric Dubbels, and received valuable information from that artist. Signor Galli brought over from Holland a good specimen of Dubbels, which bore a striking resemblance to some of the coast scenes LIGHTS IN ART . 1 86 painted by our own John Wilson. Speedily be- coming an expert and enthusiastic delineator of the boldest effects of nature, he frequently exposed his life to imminent danger by venturing upon the sea during the roughest weather in a small boat. This daring method of becoming thoroughly acquainted with the terrific raging of the elements, imparted to him the most correct knowledge of those subjects in which he determined to excel. All accurate observers of his style know that he did excel, and also that he surpassed all other painters in the faithful representation of tempests and ships in dis- tress. He seldom condescended to describe any effect less stirring than a fresh gale ; and his genius, we may imagine, would almost have been dormant had he attempted to delineate one of Vandervelde’s lovely calms. The comparatively few storms and shipwrecks painted by Vandervelde, though highly praised, want the strength and grandeur invariably displayed by his great contemporary. One of the finest examples of art in the collection of Mr. Ward- law Ramsay, is a sea storm by Backhuysen. This rare and most important work may be considered the happy result of a desire to gratify the poetic feeling of the painter during the latter years of his life. At first sight, to a casual visitor, perhaps, there may be nothing remarkable in the design. It is merely the picture of a subsiding storm on a bluff LIGHTS IN ART . 187 Norwegian shore, where a Dutch vessel has been totally wrecked, and near it another fine ship, irre- sistibly driven to leeward, appears doomed to similar destruction. The usual effects of an ordinary sea tempest are given without any attempt to startle the mind. All is solemn, and naturally grand. Night seems to have been wildly passed ; the waves are still in commotion, while the dark, slate-coloured vapours partially disappear before the rosy light of early morning. The solitary scene required no gaudy hues, and the artist has given none in this matchless representation of gloomy reality. Majes- tic clouds, lurid billows, fatal rocks, distressed ships, and dying mariners, are all easily painted in neutral tints, and appear, in colour and touch, something like the natural and free manner of Jacob Ruysdael. Backhuysen evidently painted this picture in the most meditative period of his existence without con- ventional restraint. i While he was painting,’ says Pilkington, Tie would not suffer even his most intimate friends to have access to him, lest his fancy might be disturbed, and the ideas he had formed in his mind be interrupted.’ He was very industrious during his entire existence, which extended to seventy-eight years. The style of this great master has been followed by a few other painters, whose works, though vastly inferior, are frequently ascribed to him. LIGHTS IN ART. 1 88 BONAVENTUR PETERS— JAN PETERS. Bonaventur Peters, and his brother, Jan Peters, lived in the time of Backhuysen, and are well known as painters of sea storms in a careful and very ela- borate manner. Bonaventur excelled his younger relative, and his style possesses the merit of ori- ginality. ANTHONY WATERLOO Is justly ranked among the best landscape painters of the Low Countries. The time of his existence is not well known ; yet, by a careful examination of his works, we may conclude he lived about the middle of the seventeenth century. Many of his landscapes contain excellent figures by the hand of the elder Weeninx. NICOLAS MAES, OR MAAS, Born at Dort in 1632, studied in the school of Rem- brandt, and afterwards became an excellent portrait and familiar life painter. A beautiful little picture by him, ‘ A Girl Sewing,’ was imported into England in 1833, and eventually became the property of the Earl of Ellesmere. It bears the signature of the artist, and the date of 1655. Maes lived to the age of sixty-one. His surname was borne by three other painters of the same period. LIGHTS IN ART . 189 FREDERICK MOUCHERON, A landscape painter, died at Amsterdam in 1686, aged fifty-three. He had studied under John Asselyn, a supposed imitator of Claude, and sub- sequently visited France, where he was induced to remain several years in the full exercise of his art. On returning to Holland, he was assisted by Adrian Vandervelde, who greatly enriched his landscapes with admirable figures. The next article comprises a few words on the talent of that most ready assistant. ADRIAN VANDERVELDE. A lifetime of only thirty-seven years was nearly consumed by Adrian Vandervelde in contributing to the excellency of works professedly from the hands of many contemporary artists, whose incapa- city in figure-painting induced them to solicit his valuable aid. Hence the productions altogether by his own hand are, unfortunately, few. When we consider how often he was engaged to assist others, we naturally wonder how he managed to find suffi- cient opportunity to work on his own account, espe- cially as he bestowed the utmost care and finish upon his original compositions. He seems to have devoted almost every hour of his mature existence to the steady practice of his delightful art. The principal subjects in which he excelled are land- LIGHTS IN ART. ' 190 scapes with cattle, ferry-boats with figures, etc. His selection of views was perfectly simple — partially re- sembling the easy choice of Paul Potter. A capital small picture by him is at Buckingham Palace, re- presenting cattle fording a stream, and bearing the date of 1659. Oddly enough, this painter sometimes introduced characters from the Holy Scriptures into his landscapes, which were always taken from Dutch scenery. He is known to have painted the Holy Family in a ferry-boat of the seventeenth century, crossing one of the canals of his own country — a glaring anachronism, yet slightly palliated by the ingenuity of the artist, who, perhaps, wished to ex- tend the first year of the Christian era to the period in which he lived. The most valuable works of Vander Heyden, a well-known mechanical 1 and very accurate delineator of town views in Holland, are those in which the figures were introduced by Adrian Vandervelde, whose death occurred in 1672. The collection of Mr. Wardlaw Ramsay contains a cabinet-size picture on panel, by a very pleasing landscape and cattle painter, Peter van Leeuw, 2 whose style somewhat resembles that of Adrian Vandervelde, though it is much less delicate in colour and touch. On the painting referred to, are 1 Had Vander Heyden lived in these times, he would probably have been a photographic artist. 2 After visiting Italy, this painter adopted the name of Leone. LIGHTS IN ART. 191 the initials and date of the master — ‘P. V. L. 1669.’ Another small specimen of the same artist is pre- served in the Bridgewater Gallery, but signed Leone, It may be proper to mention that many of his best productions, for the purposes of nefarious traffic, are attributed to Berchem and Adrian Vandervelde, FRANCIS MIERIS, Born at Delft in 1635, received instructions from Gerard Dow, and died at the age of forty-six. His pictures are small, highly-finished, and depict fami- liar incidents in refined society. He had a son, William, born at Leyden in 1662, who closely fol- lowed the style of his father. William Mieris lived to the advanced age of eighty-five. KARL DU JARDYN, An eminent painter of landscapes, cattle, and figures, visited Italy, where he assiduously studied the works of the greatest masters. Upon the basis of his Italian studies, he commenced a charming style, which, after returning to Holland, he brought to maturity, and duly received the praises and patronage of his countrymen. Yet the sunny climate of the classic land, where the seeds of his reputation had been sown, was too radiant in his memory to allow a per- manent residence in his own marshy soil. He therefore returned to Italy, and not long afterwards, 192 LIGHTS IN ART. in 1678, died at Venice, being in the forty-third year of his age. His pictures are brilliantly coloured, natural and fresh. They are classically designed, and possess a delightful air of repose ; while the execution, or manner of laying on the colours, is full and prominent without asperity, resembling the best examples of Italian painting. He was partial, in most cases, to strong contrasts ; for instance, those who are acquainted with his works have frequently seen a dark cow with two or three sheep, lying down or resting upon a grassy and deeply- shaded bank, while a fine, light-coloured cow, some- times more, knee deep in a cool, limpid stream, and a few other sheep near the brink, are displayed in the full, broad beams of a noonday sun, attended, it may be, by a shepherd and shepherdess with their dog, all drowsy, and reclining beneath the ample shades of some old, picturesque ruin, or wide-spread- ing trees in summer foliage. Gerard Hoet, who died in 1733 at the age of eighty-five, frequently painted in the fascinating style of Karl du Jardyn. GERARD LAIRESSE, Born at Liege in 1640, lived to the age of seventy- one. His pictures are chiefly historical, executed in a very rapid and effective manner, carefully designed, and extremely well finished. The Roman style, LIGHTS IN ART 193 though he is not known to have travelled beyond the bounds of his own country, was his favourite standard. His two most celebrated paintings represent Moses trampling on the crown of Pharaoh, and Cleopatra Queen of Egypt. This painter was a good musician, played skilfully on the violin, and is said never to have been able to settle himself at the easel before composing his mind by the soothing influence of melody or certain agreeable sounds. After such influ- ence, he worked so quickly as to induce the belief that his pencil was guided by inspiration. But while his sense of hearing grew strong, his visual faculty became comparatively weak, and many years before his death he was afflicted with blindness. Yet he retained his habitual cheerfulness, and beguiled the dreary time — seemingly dreary, at least, to his friends — in a most profitable way, by composing a valuable treatise on the art of painting, which, after his demise, was carefully arranged and published by a few artists who had been admirers of his character and genius. ALBERT MEYERING, An artist of Amsterdam, after much toil and penury, found his way to Rome, where he improved his taste and met with considerable encouragement. During ten years he visited and pursued his calling in nearly all the principal cities of Italy, and on returning to N 194 LIGHTS IN ART his own country received a cordial welcome and gained high esteem. Yet, notwithstanding his prolonged studies in the land of high art, his conceptions were not so classified as those of Lairesse. The works of Meyering are usually landscapes of a large size, painted expressly for large halls and other extensive apartments. His easel pictures are few, and scarcely known in Britain. This painter died in 1714, aged sixty-nine. FRANCIS POST, A native of Haarlem, after pursuing the art of land- scape painting with considerable success, died in 1680, at the age of fifty-nine. He had learned drawing from his father, John Post, and in early life went to the West Indies in the suite of Prince Maurice of Nassau. His works, which display high talent and perfect originality, are rare and valuable. They are usually signed ; and as they are not known to have been imitated or copied by any other painter, counterfeit productions of his designs are not to be met with. Consequently, when a picture declared to be painted by Post happens to be placed before an intending purchaser, he may rest assured, notwithstanding any slight restoration it may have received, that he is certainly contemplating a veritable work. Post's admirable delineations of American scenery have never been surpassed in accuracy of detail, freshness LIGHTS IN ART. 195 of colour, and aerial perspective. 1 Every object seems in accordance with geometrical rule. Build- ings, trees, high roads, pathways, rivers, and rills, with appropriate figures, are all displayed in soft colouring, modified and blended by the effects of the atmo- sphere, and offered to the eye in most agreeable harmony. All his gradations of light and shade and of colour are true to nature, while his extreme distances, melting into the pure, azure sky, are por- trayed in the finest perceptibility, and with perfect artistic skill. Perhaps the most valuable specimen in Britain of this master is to be seen in the collec- tion of Mr. Wardlaw Ramsay of Whitehill. It re- presents a beautiful panoramic view in Brazil, with a party of black figures dancing in the foreground. After returning to Holland he usually painted from sketches made during his travels. There is there- fore considerable inequality in the finishing of his pictures. MELCHIOR DE HONDEKOETER, Born at Utrecht in 1636, was the scholar of his father, Gysbert de Hondekoeter, and afterwards of Jan Baptist Weeninx. He delighted to study and portray the feathered species, particularly domestic birds, and arrived at the highest degree of eminence in this peculiarly interesting branch of art. His 1 The art of giving light to objects at various distances. 196 LIGHTS IN ART. success in imitating the newly-fledged, downy chicken, and the perfect, rich plumage of the stately barn-yard cock, surrounded by his obedient hens, was most complete and truly wonderful. Among his less familiar subjects is a fine picture, belonging to the Earl of Derby, of a lamb encircled by eagles. From boyhood to the close of his life at the age of fifty-nine, he derived the greatest pleasure from the contemplation of his winged favourites. The works of this admired master were so well imitated by Van Oolen as to puzzle all connoisseurs down to the present time. The paintings of Melchior, however, are distinguished by softness of colour and extreme delicacy of touch. JAN STEEN, Born at Leyden in 1636, received instructions in drawing from Nicholas Kunfter of Utrecht, a his- torical painter, and subsequently became the pupil of Van Goyen, from whom he imbibed a free and easy style of execution, and whose daughter he married. He afterwards, however, followed a manner of his own, and attained the highest reputation as an original designer. Nearly all his best subjects were selected from ordinary or low life ; though he was known, occasionally, to produce a few others, even from sacred history, in imitation probably of his first instructor. A painting of the * Marriage at Cana/ LIGHTS IN ART. 19 7 by Jan Steen, was exhibited at Manchester in 1857. But more familiar scenes gave him the greatest pleasure ; for instance, merry-making peasants, jovial dinner-parties, itinerant musicians, cock-fight- ing, village children at school, etc. A capital per- formance by this esteemed master, belonging to the Duke of Wellington, may be thus described : — It represents a drinking party ; the two principal figures in the piece are a man and a middle-aged female, who appear nearly intoxicated. At a little distance from them is a sleeping woman, her head leaning on a table ; a roguish boy is in the act of picking her pocket. On the top of an article of furniture placed against the wall of the apartment, is observed a mischievous monkey pulling up the weights of a clock ; and in the foreground appears a hungry dog in juxtaposition with a tempting piece of beef. This valuable picture is now entitled, ‘ The Effects of Intemperance/ It has been said that Albert Cuyp was a brewer. We certainly know that Jan Steen was established in a brewery at an early period of life, and that, in consequence of imprudence, he was speedily reduced to bankruptcy. His friends afterwards assisted him to commence the business of a tavern-keeper, in which he appears to have been engaged during the remainder of his exist- ence. Habitual dissipation and low company, how- ever, frequently brought him and his family into the 198 LIGHTS IN ART. greatest poverty and distress. The pencil was the instrument upon which he fully relied for extricating himself out of every difficulty, — a sure reliance, had he abandoned those pernicious habits, which finally plunged him into irretrievable ruin. Jan Steen died at Delft, aged fifty-three, as we are informed by all writers, with the exception of Houbraken, who states that he only attained the age of forty-two. KAREL DE MOOR, A good painter, and remarkable for the regularity of his life, attained, in 1738, the age of eighty-two years. He had studied under Gerard Dow, and subsequently received instructions from the pupil of that master, Godfried Schalken, the well-known painter of candle- light effects. De Moor visited Italy, and acquired considerable reputation by his skill in portrait paint- ing, though he frequently executed small scriptural pieces in a highly-wrought and pleasing manner. One of these subjects is a ‘ Riposo,’ signifying the Holy Family at rest while on their journey to Egypt. ABRAHAM STORCH, Supposed to have been born about 1650, painted marine subjects, especially seaports with numerous figures, in a light, easy, and well executed manner. His general colouring inclines to the agreeable silver hue. The pictures of his brother, though for the LIGHTS IN ART. 199 most part inferior, are often ascribed to him. Abra- ham died in 1708. PETER DE HOOGE Is a favourite name, but no dates have been found respecting his lifetime, with the exception of those inscribed on a few of his works, ranging from 1658 to 1670. His principal subjects were interiors with figures, displayed to great advantage by the admir- able representation of clear daylight. Sometimes he imitated with wonderful success the broad rays of sunshine, rendering every object distinct, and all the shadows beautiful, cool, and luminous. Perhaps it may be said that the art of representing natural light and shade was more perfectly understood by De Hooge than by any other master in the Low Coun- tries. Indeed, nature seems to have been his only model. In his choice of figures, the selection was not entirely made from vulgar life. There is a degree of propriety in most of his men and women, though they are certainly characters of an ordinary kind, which is at once agreeable even to the fastidious eye ; and we are almost led to the belief that De Hooge was more refined in his ideas than any of his contem- poraries in the Dutch school. One of the finest pro- ductions of this highly esteemed master represents some cavaliers paying their reckoning to the hostess of an inn, while another party of men, gallantly 200 LIGHTS IN ART. attired, may be observed through an open doorway, refreshing themselves in an adjoining room. This pic- ture is painted in a fine, broad style, and with a full body of solid colour, nearly resembling the impasto of Rembrandt Occasionally, he selected open-air subjects ; one of these, a game at nine-pins, became, a few years ago, the property of John Walter, Esq. JAN WEENINX, Born at Amsterdam in 1644, learned the art of paint- ing from his father, Jan Baptist Weeninx. He was chiefly confined to the minute delineation of birds, dead game, etc., and the extreme delicacy of his touch has very rarely been equalled. The length of his existence, seventy-five years, enabled him to pro- duce many important works, which, in addition to elaborate finish, display a most agreeable style of composition and great excellence in colouring. The Dulwich gallery contains a fair specimen of this artist —Sparrows attacked by a Hawk. He is also repre- sented at Hampton Court and in many private collections. ADRIAN VAN DER WERF, Born at a small village near Rotterdam, received instructions from Eglon Vander Neer, son of the well-known painter of moonlight subjects. His de- signs were usually taken from polished life, and LIGHTS IN ART, 201 present a graceful, pleasing effect. A small picture by him is at Dalkeith Palace. He died in 1722, aged sixty-three. Many of the historical compositions attributed to this master are by his brother, Peter, who died in 1718. Adrian was knighted by the Elector Palatine. VAN AL LST — RACHEL RUISCH — HUYSUM, ETC. The Dutch school has produced many excellent flower-painters. Among the most eminent were Van iElst (of whom we have no certain dates), Jan van Huysum (born at Amsterdam in 1682), and Rachel Ruisch. Huysum studied the works of the De Heems, and other still-life painters, with great advantage, and died at the age of sixty-seven. Van Os was five years old at the time of Huysum’s death, and attained about the same age, leaving a son, who also became a famous flower-painter. While noticing that most delightful branch of painting, we must not pass over the names of Daniel Segers, a Jesuit, who died in 1660, at the age of seventy, and Rachel Ruisch, daughter of the famous Professor Ruisch. This lady, after careful tuition by Van ALlst, became a wonder- ful delineator of flowers, plants, fruits, and insects. Her paintings appeared so replete with beauty, deli- cacy, and exquisite finish, as to be ardently desired by the most illustrious collectors in Europe, and in the early portion of her life she had no rival in her art. 202 LIGHTS IN ART . The Elector-Palatine secured the greatest number of her performances, and invariably paid for them with princely munificence. Specimens of her well-rewarded talent are rare, and only seen in a very few of the cabinets of princes or of the most wealthy connois- seurs. Rachel, in the zenith of her fame, became acquainted with Van Pool, who so captivated her by his great skill in portraiture that she married him, in preference to many other suitors who were in posses- sion of ample fortunes. In wedded life she continued to enjoy, with her husband, the patronage of the Elector, at whose decease Van Pool relinquished the practice of painting and became a merchant. Rachel Ruisch died in 1750, at the age of eighty-six, having survived her husband about five years. In extreme delicacy of touch, simple yet elegant choice, and almost perfect concord of colours, that remarkable female artist was superior to John David De Heem, William van ^Elst, Segers, John Rotius, and, indeed, to all other flower-painters of her time, with the single exception of Jan van Huysum, to whose power her own excellence may, in nearly all respects, be denomi- nated equal. The chief point of difference between Ruisch and Huysum is certainly in colour. He is known to have prepared all his tints on a principle which he never divulged ; and in consequence of that secrecy he has been charged with sordidness and an unbecoming fear of rivalry. LIGHTS IN ART . 203 Vander Hulst painted wild-flowers, frogs, toads, serpents, and lizards in a truthful manner, yet with less finish than we observe in the productions of Mignon or the De Heems. Holland affords admirable facilities for a successful pursuit in this delightful branch of art. To the in- habitants of that country, especially, horticulture is a favourite occupation, often mingled with the highest enthusiasm, and the most gorgeous flowers are con- sequently produced in great abundance and variety. Many portions of the low, flat land, or dreary marsh, described by Lord Macaulay, and other writers, have yielded in a wonderful manner to the power of culti- vation, and have truly become delightful flower- gardens. The remarkable genius of Van Huysum revelled in the parterre and in the conservatory, and with almost a magic touch he transferred their fleet- ing loveliness to his more enduring canvas. His correct and unrivalled imitations of the most beauti- ful productions of nature are still fresh and blooming, and never fail to elicit the highest admiration of every careful observer. Conrad Roepel, as a flower-painter, was his best male contemporary. CORNELIUS POELEMBERG Visited Italy, where he saw, and probably admired, the works of Raphael and Albani. He excelled in painting landscapes and the nude female figure on a 204 LIGHTS IN ART . small scale, and, by his numerous pictures of nymphs bathing, obtained many patrons, including more than one cardinal. After visiting England, at the invitation of Charles the First, he returned to the Netherlands, where, in 1666, he died, at the age of eighty. The figures of Poelemberg are elegantly drawn and most elaborately finished. His works were carefully imi- tated by two of his pupils, Vander Lis and Vertangen, whose excellent productions, when not signed, are now very commonly ascribed to him. Vertangen’s signature has been often observed, but it has been improperly removed to suit the purposes of com - merce. DANIEL MYTENS THE ELDER, HANNEMAN, AND VANDER HELST, Were admirable portrait-painters, the styles of the two latter resembling the manner of Vandyck. Mytens and Hanneman visited England, where they were much employed, before the commencement of the Civil Wars, by Charles the First and the nobility. A picture, representing part of the Royal Family, by Mytens, is in the collection of the Duke of Buccleuch, at Dalkeith Palace ; and a good portrait of Queen Henrietta Maria, painted by Hanneman, may be seen at Corehouse, Lanarkshire. Mytens, though compara- tively a feeble colourist, is supposed to have followed the manner of Rubens. LIGHTS IN ART. 205 MOLENAER, MANS, AND HEEMSKERK, Painted somewhat in the style of Adrian van Ostade. An excellent composition by the former, representing a Dutch Ball, signed and dated 1636, is in the collection of Sir G. H. Boswall, Bart. There were several artists of this name ; the signature on the picture referred to is ‘ M. Molenaer.’ Francis Mans is generally considered an imitator of John Molenaer, whose contemporary he appears to have been. But though the subjects of the two masters are nearly the same, especially in winter pieces, dissimilarity is very apparent in their modes of treatment. The difference is chiefly observed in the manner of handling ; the touch of Mans is exceedingly small, neat, .and wiry, particularly in his figures, which are usually diminutive, crowded, and too much alike. The exterior of a village inn on the banks of a river, with boats, formal trees, and multitudes of peasantry, seem to have furnished him with ample materials for making pictures. The sameness of his designs, however, is partly compensated by the ingenuity of his finishing. His works are curiosities in Dutch art, and as such are worthy of preservation. In the Liverpool Royal Institution is a winter scene by Mans, dated 1669 5 and the Whitehill collection displays a canal summer scene, bearing the date of 1682. Egbert Heemskerk, called the Younger, en- 20 6 LIGHTS IN ART. deavoured to imitate Teniers ; but most of his works are coarse in design and execution. The same re- mark will apply to F. Gael and many other painters of the bambocciate class. GERARD TERBURG— NETSCHER— HACKERT— MIREVELDT— SACHTLEVIN. Terburg, who produced the famous picture at The Hague, entitled ‘The Satin Gown/ may perhaps be considered among the original artists of his country, and Netscher may be regarded as his best imitator. Some of the landscapes of Hackert possess con- siderable interest on account of the figures having been introduced by Adrian Vandervelde and Ber- chem ; and the portraits of Mireveldt present an originality of style altogether equal to Ferdinand Bol, and scarcely inferior to Rembrandt himself. The pictures of Hermann Sachtlevin are so excel- lent as to be sometimes mistaken for the works of Philip Wouvermans, who was born when Sachtlevin had attained his eleventh year, so that Wouvermans may probably have been, in some degree, indebted to him, especially in his manner of execution, and the agreeable way in which he grouped figures and other objects. In all the preceding paragraphs, some endeavour has been made to throw additional light upon the LIGHTS IN ART . 20 7 styles and peculiarities of the most celebrated masters. There has been no attempt to parade all the painters who have belonged to the different schools, because many are scarcely known, and the talents of others were not sufficiently elevated to require special notice. There can be no doubt that numerous artists laboured in vain to transmit their names and pro- ductions conjointly to posterity, and that the fame to which some were probably entitled has been with- held for the purposes of magnifying, beyond natural limits, the industry of their renowned brethren, and of gratifying the vanity of those collectors who never buy pictures unless assured that the authors of them were the greatest masters in art. Diligent searching after real names, with the laudable view, perhaps, of bringing them into notice, is too often rendered unavailing by mercenary individuals, who find the greatest imaginable difficulty in procuring a sufficient stock of first-rate works for the object of carrying on their business. No objection can be offered against fair dealing in works of art ; but should dealers determine to act on all occasions with perfect fairness, their occupation might partially cease, because they would have few articles to vend. The genuine productions of the old masters are mostly in private and public collections, and the owners are rarely under the necessity of exposing 208 LIGHTS IN ART them for sale. Picture auctions chiefly offer the works of painters whose abilities have never been recognised, and whose names are changed to suit the convenience or fancy of the sellers. Private individuals, eager to acquire specimens of old art, should consider well' ere they resolve to buy. If they happen to possess any discrimination, and a reasonable amount of knowledge, they may, per- chance, be able to obtain, even at an auction or in the shop of a dealer, a few genuine performances by well-known masters. But the chances are rare, and the purchaser ought to moderate any desire he may feel to form his collection in haste. Let him study the art, by reading and observation, before he ven- tures to purchase a picture. Even a little know- ledge will assist any taste he may possess, and effectually guard him against fraud, and the honest derision of intelligent friends. Doubtless many artists of former times, who are not only known by the appearance of their names in the dictionaries, were in the possession of high talents ; and could we, by any means, become properly ac- quainted with the industry of their lives, a most worthy and useful object would be attained. But the dark mantle of oblivion cannot be removed, the maze of confusion cannot be penetrated, and any efforts made by us to revive the memories of forgotten yet meritorious men will, alas ! prove utterly abortive. LIGHTS IN ART 209 Art in Holland and other parts of Europe became nearly defunct at the close of the seventeenth cen- tury, or degenerated into so dormant a state as to appear lifeless. During more than a hundred and fifty years, a deleterious apathy seems to have sup- planted nearly all artistic energy, and we are now only aware of the former flourishing existence of the Dutch and other schools by the extraordinary ex- amples which have fortunately escaped the ravages of time and severe treatment In the present century, the mere practice of paint- ing has been everywhere more extensively followed than at any former periods. Artists have been, and still are, numerous in Holland, and many of them, it must be admitted, have displayed remarkable abilities, which in the seventeenth century might have shone with a higher degree of lustre. The marine views of Koekock, the cattle-pieces of Van Severdonck, and the productions of several other painters are par- ticularly good in execution or mechanical power. Even genius may have animated the minds of Koe- kock and a few others ; but the present times appear not congenial towards the development of poetic art. The charming repose of the verdant meadows, and the picturesque appearance of the canals and sea-shores, where Paul Potter, Cuyp, and Vandervelde loved to meditate, are now disturbed and spoiled by the unnatural railway-whistle, wharfs, steam-engines, 210 LIGHTS IN ART . telegraph wires, and steamers without number. Travellers refreshing themselves at the outside of an inn can only be seen very rarely in the nineteenth century. Had Teniers and Ostade lived in these days, they might have been employed to paint pic- tures of railway stations, railway guards, stokers, engine-drivers, etc. Most of us, however, have a partiality for old things and old times, and are there- fore not altogether qualified to make comparisons between present and past days. At the close of the next century, perhaps, connoisseurs in art may be able to arrive at an impartial conclusion respecting the productions of our time. CHAPTER IX. SPANISH ART — ZURBARAN — VELASQUEZ — MURILLO ; HIS CHARACTER AND STYLE — SUPREMACY OF THE GREAT MASTERS IN SPAIN. AINTING was no doubt practised in Spain, as in other countries, at a very remote period. Yet we have no authentic records of any painters of note anterior to the time of Luis de Vargas, born at Seville in 1502, who studied twenty-eight years in Italy, and imbibed much of the style of Raphael. A beautiful altar-piece, represent- ing the birth of Christ, by this master, is in the cathedral of his native city. But as most of his works were executed in fresco, very few of them have been preserved. He was a stern devotee in religion, and in the decline of life ordered his own coffin to be made and placed in his chamber, that he might constantly be reminded of death. Sixty-six years completed his term of mortality. A valuable specimen of this painter’s genius — the Virgin and Child — formerly in the Spanish Gallery of the Louvre, became, a few years ago, the property of Sir William Stirling Maxwell of Pollok and Keir. 212 LIGHTS IN ART. LUIS DE MORALES, Born at Badajoz about 1509, was invited to Madrid by King Philip the Second. He excelled in sacred subjects, and the expression of his Virgins and Ecce Homos is particularly fine. In his way of living he is said to have been vain and extravagant ; and being reduced to extreme penury in his old age, nearly fourscore, he was pensioned by the King, who, though he had formerly expressed his displeasure at the folly of the painter, entertained the highest veneration for his genius. Another artist, ALONSO SANCHEZ COELLO, Was also much favoured by the same monarch, who frequently visited his painting-room for the pleasure of conversing without the restraints of etiquette. When unable to visit Coello, the haughty successor of Charles the Fifth often condescended to write notes with his own hand, addressed to his favourite, whom he designated his ‘amado hijo ’ — beloved child ’ FRUTET— CAMPANA. About the year 1550, Frutet, a Fleming, settled in Spain, and chiefly resided at Seville. He had previously studied in Rome and Florence, and his long practice is supposed to have improved art in his adopted country. Campana, another Fleming, LIGHTS IN ART . 213 also resided in Spain, and his painting of the ‘ Descent from the Cross/ in Seville cathedral, is considered a fine performance. When Murillo first saw this picture, he stood gazing upon it so long that a friend who was near him asked what he waited for ? He replied, ‘ I only wait till those holy men shall have taken down our Lord’s body.* VINCENT JOANES, Born in 1523, is admitted to be the great leader of the Valencian school. Five pictures by him, repre- senting the martyrdom of St. Stephen, have been described as admirable works of art. His heads of the Saviour display calm dignity and heavenly expression. JUAN FERNANDEZ NAVARRETE, Born at Logrono about 1526, was a dumb artist; yet he possessed a most lively imagination, and became very celebrated. The monks of the Escurial commissioned him to paint thirty-two pictures for their church, but death overtook him before the completion of the undertaking. He only lived long enough to execute eight of the required number. These represent the Apostles and Evangelists, and are still seen in the church of the Escurial. Some connoisseurs have said that they almost equal the rich colouring of Titian. Navarrete, though incap- 214 LIGHTS IN ART able of speech, was cheerful, and is supposed to have lived fifty-three years. FRANCISCO DE RIBALTA, Born about the middle of the sixteenth century, became one of the greatest painters of the school of Valencia. He visited Italy, where he studied the works of Buonarotti and Raphael ; and after return- ing to Spain, executed the painting of the ‘Last Supper’ for Corpus Christi College at Valencia, where many of his other works are still preserved. This artist occasionally painted portraits. A picture of himself and his wife is mentioned by Mr. Stirling in the Annals of the Artists of Spain } Ribalta died near the place of his birth, in Valencia, about 1628. JUAN DE LAS ROELAS, Was born in 1560, and died at Olivares, in the sixty-fifth year of his age. His principal works were painted for the churches at Seville. PEDRO ORRENTE, Born at Montealegre, Murcia, about 1560, is sup- posed to have imitated the manner of Titian. One specimen of his ability, ' St. John and the Lamb at a Fountain,’ was contributed to the Manchester Exhibition of 1857, and has been favourably men- 1 See vol. i. p. 491. LIGHTS IN ART. 2is tioned by Mr. Stirling and Dr. Waagen. He lived to a good old age, beyond fourscore, and died at Toledo. FRANCESCO PACHECO Also lived more than eighty years from the time of his birth at Seville, in 1571. He became the scholar of Luis Fernandez, and afterwards went to Madrid for improvement. On returning to his native city he commenced a school of painting, and among his first pupils were Alonso Cano and Diego Velasquez. The propriety of his conduct and the regard he paid to religion procured for him the valuable appoint- ment of inspector of pictures to the Inquisition. His duty was to examine all paintings on sacred subjects exposed for sale in shops and other public places, and any pictures of an improper description were at once seized and conveyed to the tribunal of the Holy Office. The unguarded painter and the reckless dealer were alike subjected to punishment. Pacheco's employment for the purity of the Catholic Church, and consequently for the moral and religious welfare of the people, is deserving of special notice. An impartial treatise upon this subject might prove of some value to Protestants, and also tend to restore high and useful art in Christian countries where religion is not supreme, and where art no longer exercises an elevating influence upon the 216 LIGHTS IN ART . mind. Let no man fear being called a bigot while endeavouring to confer real benefits upon his fellow-creatures. But stringent measures to magnify the kingdom of heaven in these days are not generally desired, and a crown of martyrdom is avoided. FRANCESCO DE HERRERA, THE ELDER, Born at Seville in 1576, was also the scholar of Luis Fernandez. His manner was considerably less elaborate than the style of any of his prede- cessors, and he is said to have used the very coarsest pencils he could procure for the execution of his finest work. In his leisure hours he amused him- self by engraving on brass, — an employment which seemed to afford him infinite pleasure ; yet the harm- less occupation subjected him to a suspicion of coinir%, and he fled with great terror into the sanc- tuary of St. Hermenegild, where he painted a large picture of that royal martyr, whose head was repre- sented cloven with a hatchet. He was restored to liberty by Philip the Fourth, and lived to the age of eighty. FRANCISCO ZURBARAN, Born at Fuente de Cantos, Estremadura, in 1598, was sent for instruction to Seville, where he entered the school of Roelas. He soon became famous, LIGHTS IN ART. 217 and the candid opinion of Velasquez induced the King to summon him to Madrid, where he sub- sequently filled the appointment of court painter. Zurbaran has been termed the Caravaggio of Spain. His great picture of St. Thomas Aquinas, in the College of Santo Tomas, is considered his master- piece, and one of the grandest paintings in the world. It was brought to Paris by Napoleon the Great, where it remained some time, but was after- wards restored to Spain. The Duke of Dalmatia (Marshal Soult) was the fortunate owner of twelve fine pictures by Zurbaran, one of which, St. Cathe- rine, is now the property of Sir W. Stirling Maxwell of Pollok, and was exhibited at Manchester in 1857. Several paintings by this master, chiefly single figures of saints, were sold in London at the sale of King Louis Philippe’s Spanish Collection in 1853. He is therefore very fairly represented in Britain. Having attained the age of sixty-four, he died in the capital city of his native country, where he had enjoyed a full measure of prosperity, and where his memory is cherished, as it is all over Europe and on the continent of America, with the highest regard and most deserved veneration. Zurbaran never left Spain, and consequently was not personally acquainted with the manners and customs of any other nation. He constantly aimed at originality, and never condescended to imitate the work of 218 LIGHTS IN ART. another. The idea of imitating art, especially foreign art, seems never to have entered his mind. He required nothing besides nature, and real ob- jects were his only models. A judicious writer on Spanish art has said of Zurbaran, that ‘he was satisfied to spend days over a white mantle fixed on a model, and occupy himself on a single figure.’ 1 DIEGO VELASQUEZ DE SILVA, Descended from a Portuguese family, was born in the year 1599, and is considered the greatest painter ever produced in Spain, with the single exception of Murillo. His instructors were Herrera the Elder, and Francisco Pacheco. In 1622, he made a journey to Madrid, and was introduced to the King, Philip the Fourth, by the Duke de Olivares. After a term of seven years, diligently spent at his easel, he went to Italy for improvement, and returned to Madrid in 1631. He had previously been appointed painter to the King, and enjoyed a handsome pen- sion. Subsequently he was made chamberlain at court ; and, in 1648, again visited Italy on an em- bassy to Pope Innocent the Tenth, and to purchase works of art for his royal patron. A short time before his death, which occurred at the age of sixty- one, he accompanied the Infanta Maria Theresa to France, on the occasion of her marriage with Louis 1 Vide Standish’s Seville and its Vicinity , published in 1840. LIGHTS IN ART 2 19 the Fourteenth. But the greatest honour of all, perhaps, was his acquaintance with the famous Flemish painter, Rubens, by whose advice he had been induced to visit Italy in 1629. Standish in his account of Velasquez, says : ( He was, perhaps, the most universal genius we have known. He could paint animals, landscapes — the knowledge of which he had probably acquired from Herrera el Viejo (the Elder), his master — the sea, fancy subjects, and histori- cal pieces, with equal ease. In vigour and versatility of genius he equalled Rubens, and drew largely from him. A residence in Italy did not, however, induce him to change his style ; and the works of his later years differ little from those of an earlier period/ The same writer somewhat petulantly adds : ‘ Much of his time was unfortunately lost in attending on Philip IV/ In fact, there is really no cause of complaint respecting the industry of Velas- quez, who, like Herrera, used long coarse brushes, which enabled him to work in the most rapid man- ner, and to produce an immense number of pictures. Even in Britain his works are by no means few, as the reader will readily admit when reminded that no less than fourteen were contributed, by British noblemen and gentlemen, to the great Exhibition held at Manchester in 1859. 1 1 See Catalogue of the Art Treasures of the United Kingdom , col- lected at Manchester in 1859. 220 LIGHTS IN ART. ALONZO CANO Was a native of Grenada, and died at Madrid in 1667. He had studied in the school of Pacheco, and subsequently in that of Juan del Castillo, an artist whose works were little known in England prior to the disposal of Louis Philippe’s collection, which contained above five hundred specimens of the works of Spanish painters. Cano occupies a distinguished position in art. His finest produc- tions are pictures of the ‘ Virgin and Child,’ wherein he displayed great tenderness of expression, correct drawing, and good colouring. A picture of ‘Adam and Eve/ being one of a series of eight paintings executed for the refectory of a convent at Seville, was formerly in the Spanish Collection at the Louvre, and is now (1864) the property of Sir W. Stirling Maxwell, M.P. Cano is also represented in the collection of Dr. Archibald Smith, an eminent critic in Spanish art. The religious principles of this painter enabled him to obtain, in 1651, the appointment of minor canon in the Cathedral of Grenada. This clerical distinction seems inconsis- tent with his character, which was easily irritated, and frequently became violent. On his deathbed, he is said to have hastily put aside a crucifix, held before his eyes by the priest, because it was badly executed. Thus the love of high art, which sig- LIGHTS IN ART. 22 I nalized his whole career, was manifested in his last moments. PEDRO DE MOYA Was also born at Grenada, in 1610, and lived fifty- six years. Originally he studied with the celebrated Murillo in the Academy of Castillo, but afterwards entered the army, and served in Flanders. While in that country, he saw and admired the works of the Flemish painters, and forthwith resolved to abandon the military profession and return to his pencil. He visited England with the desire to study under Vandyck ; but unfortunately he only arrived six months before the death of that master. Having no inducement to remain, he returned to Grenada, where he quietly spent the residue of his days. The few pictures painted by this artist chiefly represent the Holy Family, and single figures of saints. JUAN CARRERO DE MIRANDA, Born at Aviles, in the Asturias, 1614, chiefly learned the art of painting from Pedro de las Cuevas. He soon became an accomplished artist, and was intro- duced by Velasquez to Philip the Fourth, who ap- pointed him one of the court painters, — an honour which was continued to him in the succeeding reign. Miranda painted the portraits of Don John of Austria, natural son of Philip the Fourth, and Charles the 222 LIGHTS IN ART. Second of Spain, with the monastic palace of the Escurial in the distance. He reached the age of seventy-one. MURILLO. We now come, in chronological order, to the most celebrated name in the Spanish school, — a name so widely circulated as to be familiar to almost every ear in all civilized societies. Bartholome Esteban Murillo, born at Seville in 1 61 8, was perhaps the only great Spanish painter known in foreign nations before the beginning of the present century, when Spain was added to the French Empire by Napoleon the Great. The valuable works acquired by the conquerors com- prised a vast number of the finest pictures by Spanish painters. Marshal Soult alone became the possessor of many splendid productions, which he retained until his decease, when they were dispersed by auction, and are now prized in several continental and British collections. Spanish art became pretty well known to English connoisseurs after the great sale in London of Louis Philippe's extensive and magnificent collection. This very important auction took place at Christie’s in 1853, and the most excit- ing competition for the acquirement of the best speci- mens was displayed on the occasion. A picture of the ‘Magdalen/ by Murillo, being knocked down at the price of eight hundred guineas, the successful LIGHTS IN ART 223 bidder was loudly and heartily cheered by the rest of the company. Since that year, our fine-art collectors who have not travelled in Spain, may reasonably be expected to know something of the characteristic styles of the greatest Spanish masters, who were essentially different and most remarkably distinct from the painters of all other schools. The genius of Murillo is now better known in England, and in other parts of Europe, than it was at the commencement of the present century ; and for this and other useful knowledge we are mainly indebted to the enterpris- ing mind and vigorous action of the first Napoleon, who may be said to have opened Spain for the benefit of surrounding nations. Voltaire was right when he affirmed that ‘ he who copies best, is the best original/ No painter ever copied nature more accurately than Murillo, and no copyist ever succeeded so well as he did in imitating the various styles of the greatest masters. His imitations of Titian, Rubens, Vandyck, Guido, Velasquez, and Zurburan, are equally felici- tous, and in the whole of them his own style is pecu- liarly manifest. The ‘ Magdalen ’ just referred to was evidently meant to be an imitation of Guido, and yet it is a consummate masterpiece, — a perfect type of nature. In many cases he seems to have reared his own lofty ideas upon the prominent conceptions of other great men. Murillo has never been surpassed in delicacy of execution, gentle and harmonious 224 LIGHTS IN ART. colouring, and aerial perspective. He constantly aimed at soft and agreeable colouring. Sir Joshua Reynolds remarked, that ‘none but great colourists can venture to paint fine white linen near flesh.’ Murillo boldly and frequently ventured to display this severe contrast, and always with complete suc- cess. His subjects were multifarious , 1 and embraced every department of art. Historical, familiar life, landscape, and sea painting, formed the chief labour of his existence. In landscape painting, however, he appears to have been less an adept than in any other branch. The sea-pieces by his hand are spirited and extremely rare. Many of his finest and most g low- ing pictures are still at Madrid : they include the ‘Patrician’s Dream,’ and the ‘Santa Isabella,’ which have been repeatedly described as beautiful speci- mens of the highest genius. One of his grandest works, ‘Moses striking the Rock,’ is in the Hospital of Charity at Seville. The reader will be able to form an idea of the extent of his labours, when reminded that the Great Manchester Exhibition contained thirteen works, all, perhaps with one ex- ception , 2 executed by him, and contributed by the nobility and gentry of Britain. This great artist 1 He sometimes painted figures in the landscapes of Ignacio Iriarte, a pupil of Herrera the Elder. 2 No. 900 in the Catalogue of that Exhibition (Old Art section) called 1 Sposalizio and ‘ considered by G. B. Cavalcaselle as the work of Tobar, a scholar and imitator of Murillo.’ LIGHTS IN ART. 225 died in consequence of a fall from a scaffold while painting a large picture of the Espousals of St. Catherine, in the Church of the Capuchin convent at Cadiz. He was in his sixty-fourth year. Murillo enjoyed the happiness of married life ; he was re- ligious without bigotry, and amiable without affecta- tion. His .manner of painting may be viewed as a beautiful emblem of his moral character. Velasco writes that Murillo never visited Italy nor travelled out of his own country, and that he was first in- structed by his uncle John del Castello, who chiefly painted fairs and market-places. Velasquez was his great and principal instructor. JOSEF ANTOLINEZ, Born at Seville in 1639, received instructions from Francisco Rezi, one of the painters to the Court of Philip the Fourth ; but as he died at the premature age of thirty-seven, his pictures, which represent his- torical subjects, portraits, landscape, and animals, are few in number, and scarcely known in this country. ANTONIO PALOMINO VELASCO, Born at Bujalance in 1653, was originally educated for the church, but a taste for the fine arts led to his being placed under the tuition of Juan de Valdes, a historical painter of some ability. Velasco, who sub- sequently studied the works of Murillo, arrived at P 226 LIGHTS IN ART . considerable eminence, and had the honour of being appointed one of the painters to Charles the Second of Spain. He was a man of great erudition, and wrote a history of the Spanish painters, entitled ‘ Muses Pictorico.’ This literary work was first pub- lished in 1724, one year previous to his death. The few pictures by Velasco which have been imported into this country are usually signed. The seventeenth century, in a high degree marked by the chivalry and unfeigned devotion of the two preceding centuries, may well be denominated a golden age of high art. All the schools of painting to which references have been made in these pages were pre-eminently great, and the pictorial fame of that memorable era has not since been equalled. Art in Spain was on a par with that of Italy ; for although the famous Spanish masters were fewer in number than those of the more classic country, the deficiency was amply compensated by the very high quality of their productions. Some connoisseurs, indeed, have declared that the best painters in Spain went far beyond the line of equality, and surpassed their con- temporaries in Italy. The Spaniards, however, chiefly depended upon the study of natural models, and were much less learned than their Roman brethren, who followed to a great extent the artificial examples of ancient Greece. Spanish art may properly be denomi- LIGHTS IN ART 227 nated the offspring of nature, fostered and brought to maturity by the gigantic ability of three representa- tives, Zurbaran, Velasquez, and Murillo, whose united fame will be as enduring as that of Apelles, Zeuxis, and Protogenes. Hart Scccrnb, PART SECOND. CHAPTER I. BRITAIN — INTRODUCTION OF ART BY THE ROMANS — HOLBEIN — THE FIRST NATIVE ARTIST — CORNELIUS JANSSENS AND OTHER FOREIGNERS IN ENGLAND. HE origin of the British School may be traced almost immediately after the decline of high Continental art. Yet long before the foundation of our school in the eighteenth century, painting was successfully practised in England by several artists of the highest reputation. Without speculating upon the real source of British art, we may assume that painting, being at all times com- prised in the arts of civilisation, was originally intro- duced by the Romans when they conquered the island, and that the inhabitants never lost sight of it afterwards. We possess no authentic record to show that the ancient Britons practised any of the arts, excepting the rudest kind of architecture in the 232 LIGHTS IN ART construction of their temples, anterior to the Roman invasion. Though the Druids were the ministers of religion and justice, and the only learned men among the natives, imthey probably parted all their know- ledge by tradition. Had they written books, or pro- duced any pictorial representations, Julius Caesar would certainly have found some vestiges, at least, of the fine arts and of letters, in the subjugated country. Fresco-painting appears to have been known at a very early period. While the cathedral church at Rochester was under repair in 1840, some workmen discovered the remains of an ancient painting in fresco, representing a symbolical subject, and very quaintly treated. The discovery created some sensation at the time, 1 and search was made in other directions for similar relics. Many interesting specimens of the same art have since been found in our oldest cities ; but care has seldom been taken to preserve even the most perfect. The dates of tempera and oil painting in Britain are doubtless very remote ; though the ex- amples handed down to us are chiefly those of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Specimens of tem- pera painting may be seen in some of our museums. The repository of the Antiquarian Society at Edin- burgh contains a small painting of Our Saviour, 1 A full account of this curious discovery may be found in The Mirror of Literature, vol. xxxv. p. 340. LIGHTS IN ART . 233 dated 1488, in nearly a perfect condition. We are not informed of the names of any expert native artists prior to the beginning of the seventeenth century, and the fine arts of the country appear to have been long in the almost exclusive possession of foreigners. Allan Cunningham, in the first volume of his Lives of British Painters , Sculptors , and Architects , has attempted to describe the char- acter and work of an English artist in the reign of Henry the Fifth. Cunningham was a pleasant writer, and drew largely from his poetical imagi- nation. The character referred to is 'John Rag, architect, sculptor, carpenter, goldsmith, armourer, jeweller, saddler, tailor, painter, and citizen of Lon- don/ The first foreigner of note, Jan Gossaert, commonly called Mabuse, visited England in the reign of Henry the Seventh ; and Lucas Cornelitz, a Dutchman, arrived in the following reign. The latter is supposed to have been originally a cook, and to have practised painting only in his leisure hours. Becoming in a short time eminent as an artist, he was appointed painter to the king, and executed many portraits, which are not unfrequently mistaken as the productions of Holbein. HANS HOLBEIN. That distinguished German being invited to Eng- land by the Earl of Arundel, brought introductory 234 LIGHTS IN ART. letters to Sir Thomas More from the celebrated Erasmus, who entertained the highest cordiality for the artist. Sir Thomas More gladly presented him to Henry the Eighth, by whom he was extensively employed and liberally rewarded. He was the chief court painter until the death of the king in 1547. His own decease was occasioned by the Plague in London, when he had scarcely attained the age of fifty-six. Among the finest of Holbein’s portraits are those of ‘ Henry the Eighth/ belonging to the Earl of Warwick ; ‘ Dr. Stokesly/ Bishop of London ; and ‘ Sir Nicholas Carew/ knight, the property of his Grace the Duke of Buccleuch. The last men- tioned is a magnificent specimen of the master, being admirable in drawing, colour, and execution. A more faithful representation of life can hardly be conceived, and as a piece of art, Titian himself never surpassed it. Holbein, however, like many other artists since his time, often failed when he attempted to portray female loveliness. Historians have de- scribed Anne Boleyn as the young, beautiful, and beloved wife of Henry, but the pencil of Holbein has not drawn her in so flattering a manner; and his large portrait of Anne of Cleves is positively disagreeable. His deficiencies in this respect have been ascribed to the stiff dresses worn by the ladies of his time ; yet any formality of costume could not possibly have altered the appearance of fascinating LIGHTS IN ART, 2 35 features, nor effectually have marred any amiable expression in the female countenance. The portraits of ladies on a small scale by Holbein are certainly pleasing. These are executed upon ivory in water- colours. His miniature of Anne of Cleves is de- scribed by Walpole as ‘exquisitely perfect.’ 1 Though the genius of Holbein occasionally prompted him to execute historical subjects he was chiefly employed in portrait painting — a branch of art easily under- stood in his own day, and in all subsequent times, especially in this country. No artist, indeed, prac- tising in Britain, ought to entertain very sanguine hopes of being profitably remunerated for his labours in any other department. Holbein was undoubtedly the first great portrait painter in England. His eminent career paved the way for those who after- wards successfully followed in the same course. CHRISTOPHER AMBERGER, Born at Nuremberg in 1550, was a distinguished disciple of Holbein, to whom his productions are frequently ascribed. He painted the history of Joseph in twelve pictures, and also a fine portrait of his great friend and patron, the Emperor Charles the Fifth. The time and place of his death are unknown. 1 This term is somewhat vague. Perhaps it is only intended to imply that the portrait referred to is perfect as an example of miniature painting, without regard to the personage represented. 236 LIGHTS IN ART . GERARD HOREBOUT Settled in England during the lifetime of Holbein, whose manner he closely imitated. He was em- ployed by Henry the Eighth, Edward the Sixth, and afterwards became principal court painter to Philip and Mary. This artist, whose works are now frequently attributed to Holbein, died in London in 1558. Guillim Stretes, of whom little is known, was also employed by Edward the Sixth. JOOST VAN CLEEF, OR CL EVE, A Fleming, appears to have lived in England some time before the death of Henry the Eighth. Hav- ing died prematurely, probably from the effects of intemperate living, his works are few and scarcely known. Two curious male portraits, however, by his hand, are preserved at Christ Church, Oxford. His general style resembled that of Quintin Matsys ; though an altar-piece in the church of Notre Dame at Antwerp, might almost be taken as a production of the Roman school. SIR ANTONIO MORE, A distinguished artist, was employed to paint the portraits of Queen Mary, daughter of Henry the Eighth, and Philip the Second of Spain. He also executed the portraits of the Earl of Essex, Sir LIGHTS IN ART 237 Francis Drake, and other personages of that period. The collection of Earl Spencer contains a good por- trait of this artist by himself. After an agreeable residence in England, where he received the honour of knighthood, he visited Spain. His death occurred in Flanders, 1588, at the age of seventy-six. FEDERIGO ZUCCHERO— GARRARD. Federigo Zucchero, an Italian, painted in England about 1574, and was the contemporary of Cornelius Ketel, who painted the portraits of Queen Elizabeth and many of the English nobility. Ketel, many years before his death, at the age of fifty-four, painted with the ends of his fingers instead of brushes, to prove, as he constantly said, that genius could “work without tools.” Mark Garrard, a native of Bruges, was ap- pointed chief limner to Queen Elizabeth, whose por- trait he probably painted more than once. He is supposed to have been the last painter to whom the Queen sat for her likeness. Garrard possessed several talents ; he was an excellent designer, and wrote a book on the art of drawing. His pictures are some- times mistaken for those of Zucchero, NICHOLAS HILLIARD. The first native painter worthy of notice was Nicholas Hilliard, born at Exeter in 1547. He was originally a goldsmith, to which calling he afterwards 238 LIGHTS IN ART . added that of a miniature painter. Stimulated by seeing the productions of Holbein, he soon became a very skilful artist, and had the honour of being ap- pointed one of the painters to Queen Elizabeth. He also received the patronage of her successor, and con- tinued to enjoy the royal favour until his death in 1619. Hilliard painted an admired portrait of the unfortunate Mary Queen of Scots. PAUL VANSOMER, A Fleming, settled in London during the reign of James the First, and executed portraits of the King, the Queen, Henry Prince of Wales, Christian the Fourth, King of Denmark, brother to the Queen ; the Duke of Richmond, and many other distinguished individuals. He died in 1621. In the same reign Lucas de Heere became celebrated, and was engaged to paint the portraits of Prince Henry and several of the nobility. CORNELIUS JANSSENS AND ARTEMISIA GENTILESCHI, Both born in 1590. The former visited England in the reigns of James the First and Charles the First. Janssens was liberally employed as a portrait painter ; but the arrival of Vandyck, and the commencement of the civil wars, induced him to leave the country. He was fond of painting black draperies, in which LIGHTS IN ART. 239 he is supposed to have used ultramarine, 1 as he certainly did in every other part of his work. The free use of that expensive pigment has imparted to his productions an extraordinary degree of lustre, not lessened by time. He painted the portraits of several members of the royal family, in a careful, simple manner, yet with very considerable effect. Gentileschi was an Italian lady, the daughter of an artist ; and one of her best productions, her own portrait painted by herself, is now in the possession of Earl Spencer. Mytens was in England at the period of her visit. JAMES KEIRINGS, A native of Utrecht, also came over in the reign of Charles the First, by whom he was engaged to paint landscapes from English scenery. His views are most carefully delineated, yet his colouring is not sufficiently powerful, and his drawing is defective. The figures in his landscapes are usually by other hands. While in Holland, his subjects were fre- quently adorned with figures by Cornelius Poelem- berg. Keirings died in 1646, at the age of fifty-six. 1 The finest blue colour, prepared by many tedious and delicate pro- cesses, from the fine stone known as the lapis lazuli. CHAPTER II. VANDYCK — HIS MUNIFICENT PATRON AND FRIEND — HIS LUXURIOUS WAY OF LIVING — ALCHYMY INSTEAD OF PAINTING— PREMATURE DEATH AND PROFESSIONAL CHARACTER. HE most prominent foreign name in the annals of British art is that of Anthony Vandyck, who, diverging from the formal and stiff manner of Holbein and his followers, adopted a graceful and easy style, which appears to have been partly suggested to his ready mind by the elegant costume of his time. William Sanderson, a writer of nearly the same period, says: ‘ Vandyck was the first painter who e’er put ladies’ dress into a careless romance.’ This refined genius was born at Antwerp in 1599. His parents, being favourable to art, and perceiving his inclination for painting, placed him at an early age under Van Balen, an artist who had studied the best works of the great masters in Italy. Having soon rivalled his first in- structor, and being desirous to receive the highest tuition, he became the pupil of Rubens, in whose LIGHTS IN ART. 241 school he speedily acquired great celebrity. In 1621 he visited Italy, and was employed at Rome to paint the portrait of Cardinal Bentivoglio, who had previously been the Pope’s Nuncio in Flanders. Even a good painter has some difficulty to con- tend with when he aims at a variety of colouring in a single portrait. Sir Joshua Reynolds says: ‘The difficulty will be in diffusing the colours of the drapery of this single figure to other distant parts of the picture, for this is what harmony re- quires; this difficulty, however, seems to be evaded in the works of Titian, Vandyck, and many others by dressing their single figures in black or white, Vandyck, in the famous portrait of Cardinal Benti- voglio, was confined in his dress to crimson velvet and white linen ; he has therefore made the curtain in the background of the same crimson colour, and the white is diffused by a letter which lies on the table, and a bunch of flowers is likewise introduced for the same purpose.’ 1 Vandyck visited Palermo, where he painted the portraits of several distin- guished individuals ; but fearing the plague which soon afterwards raged in Sicily, he left that island and proceeded to Genoa. In 1625 he returned to his native city, where he practised historical and portrait painting with remarkable success. At the 1 From notes to Mason’s translation of The Art of Painting , by Fresnoy, page 85, Dublin edition, 1783. 242 LIGHTS IN ART. end of two years he was induced to visit England ; but failing in his endeavours to be introduced to Charles the First, he departed after a very short stay. His Majesty, however, happening to hear of the cir- cumstance, directed Sir Kenelm Digby to send him a formal invitation to the English court. His second visit led to a permanent residence in England. The King commissioned him to execute portraits of all the royal family, and many of his favourite courtiers ; and on the 5th of July 1632, at St. James’s, he con- ferred upon the fortunate painter the honour of knighthood. The distinction was attended by the grant of an annuity of two hundred pounds a year for life, and at the same time he was appointed chief painter toThe King. To crown his good fortune, the munificent monarch who desired that nothing should be wanting to render him completely happy, recorm mended him as a husband to Mary, the accomplished daughter of Lord Gowrie, a Scottish nobleman ; and shortly after the wedding, Sir Anthony and his lady visited Paris. On their return to England, he found his affairs so greatly embarrassed as to induce him to apply to the King for permission to paint the walls of the banqueting-house at Whitehall. The subject he proposed to represent was the history and proces- sion of the Order of the Garter. But the application failed, in consequence, as some writers state, of the high price demanded by the artist. The real cause LIGHTS IN ART 243 of the failure, however, was, without any doubt, the commencement of the great Revolution, when the unhappy King was compelled to relinquish the arts, and to apply himself to arms. It is sad to know that the unrestrained passion for pecuniary gain rendered Vandyck truly miserable, and that the excessive love of luxury and pleasure mainly contributed to shorten his valuable life. At one period, instigated by Sir Kenelm Digby, he seriously engaged in the chimerical pursuit of discovering the philosopher’s stone, whereby he lost large sums of money, besides a great amount of inestimable time. His habitual indulgence of luxury brought on the gout and other disorders, and he died at Blackfriars on the 9th of December, in the forty-second year of his age, rather more than a twelvemonth after the death of Rubens, and about seven years before the tragical decease of his royal patron and friend. The King exerted himself to the utmost in endeavouring to prolong the existence of the famous painter, whose remains were duly honoured by interment in the old Cathedral of St. Paul’s. Notwithstanding his extravagance, he left a consider- able fortune to his wife, by whom he had one child, a daughter, espoused to a private gentleman in the south of England. His last known descendant, Sir John Stepney, died in 1748. Though Vandyck consumed much time in a course of pleasure, and died comparatively young, his works 2 44 LIGHTS IN ART. are very numerous ; yet, it must be admitted, not of equal merit and importance. Twenty-six of his pictures, comprising portraits and historical subjects, were exhibited in Manchester in 1857. Several of the portraits were valuable specimens contributed by the Queen, Earl Spencer, the Earl of Warwick, and other distinguished proprietors. Some of the contri- butions referred to were portraits of Rubens, Snyders and his wife, Charles the First, Thomas Killigrew, poet, the children of Charles the First, etc. Among the historical subjects were St. Jerome, painted by order of Philip the Fourth of Spain for the Escurial, and presented by Joseph Bonaparte to Marshal Soult; the Magdalen from the collection of the King of Holland ; a Madonna and child ; and the Descent from the Cross. Vandyck painted many portraits of Charles the First, Queen Henrietta, their royal chil- dren, Sir Kenelm Digby and his lady, the unfortunate Earl of Strafford, and other individuals belonging to the principal nobility in that memorable reign. Be- sides scriptural pieces, he executed several paintings relating to mythology in an original and fascinating style. He also copied, by command of his sovereign, a few portraits by artists of the preceding reign, in- cluding those of James the First, Prince Henry, and the Queen of Bohemia. The copy from Prince Henry’s portrait may be ranked among his best pro- ductions. At Hampton Court Palace is a picture, LIGHTS IN ART. 245 supposed to be his last work, representing Cupid and a sleeping nymph. All the works of this master are not generally known to connoisseurs, and even Lord Orford was not acquainted with the entire number. At Kinnaird Castle, near Brechin, a fine half-length portrait of Charles the First has been carefully pre- served. In 1850, the writer of these pages saw that picture; the noble owner (then Sir James Carnegie) stated that it was painted for one of his ancestors, and had never been out of the family. He declared, with laudable enthusiasm, that should he ever see his superb castle in danger by fire, Vandyck’s portrait of King Charles would be the first object he would endeavour to save. At Dalkeith Palace there is a magnificent full-length portrait, life-size, of the Earl of Strafford. The features are expressive of high intellect, intense thought, and great determination. The character of Sir Anthony Vandyck as an artist may be given in very few words. His fame holds a prominent place in the second rank of the great masters of the Flemish school, of which Rubens was the head and chief ornament, while he is justly allowed to occupy an exalted position among British painters of the first class. The extreme delicacy of his touch, the peculiar softness of his colouring, and the correct management of his lights and shades, are deservedly admired. With the exception of Titian, he may be considered the most agreeable portrait painter of 246 LIGHTS IN ART. modern times ; but in historical subjects he never displayed the invention, the artistic skill, nor the vigour of Rubens. David Beck became one of Vandyck’s most es- teemed disciples, and afterwards painter to Christina, Queen of Sweden. He was admired by Charles the First and many other princes, but died in early life about the year 1656. In softness and freedom of execution, the portraits painted by Beck nearly rival those of his master. CHAPTER III. NATIVE AND FOREIGN ART IN BRITAIN FROM THE TIME OF VANDYCK TO THE BIRTH OF SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS. ASSING over Isaac and Peter Oliver, minia- ture painters ; Jan Lievens, a Dutchman, who visited England in 1630; Jamieson, called the Scottish Vandyck, 1 and others of less note, we next come to William Dobson, who may justly be considered the first English portrait painter of very remarkable eminence. Dobson was born in Lon- don in 1610, and received instructions in painting from Sir Richard Peake, an artist who afterwards became an extensive dealer in pictures. Peake was probably the first Englishman who systematically followed that calling. He was induced to become a picture-dealer on observing the growing taste for art in England. Many of the nobility and gentry 1 A fine head-size portrait of the unfortunate Marquis of Montrose in his wedding dress, by Jamieson, the property of the Earl of Southesk, at Kinnaird Castle, is worthy of the pencil of Vandyck, and has been engraved for Mark Napier’s Life of Montrose. 248 LIGHTS IN ART. desired to emulate Charles the First, who may be said to have formed the first English collection of valuable pictures. Soon after his accession, that mon- arch made several important additions to the small number of paintings which he found belonging to the Crown. He brought into the royal collection all the pictures and statues which had been acquired by his brother, Prince Henry, and sent commissioners to Italy and France for the purchase of others. His Majesty gave ^20,000 for the Duke of Mantua’s collection, at that time considered the most valuable in Europe. Whitelocke says : ‘ The Queen was brought to bed of a second daughter, named Elizabeth. To congratu- late her Majesty’s safe delivery, the Hollanders sent hither a solemn embassy and a noble present.’ The present partly consisted of some grand paintings by Titian. The same writer adds : ‘ Some supposed that they did it to ingratiate the more with our King, in regard his fleet was so powerful at sea, and they saw him resolved to maintain his right and dominion there. From these quotations we may easily infer that Charles entertained quite a passion for the acquirement of good pictures. By the study of a few good works of the Italian and Flemish masters, Dobson acquired considerable skill, and was so fortunate as to attract the notice of Vandyck, who, with laudable generosity, introduced him at Court. After the death of Vandyck, he was appointed sergeant-painter to Charles the LIGHTS IN ART . 249 First, and groom of the privy-chamber, but he did not long enjoy his good fortune. The civil war had raged three years; and in 1645, the battle of Naseby decided the fate of the King. Dobson was soon plunged into the deepest distress. Being unable from the want of employment to pay a trifling debt, he was arrested and sent to prison, where he remained several months. He died shortly after his release, in a miser- able condition, at the age of thirty-six. Besides por- traits, Dobson painted a few historical subjects, which have been considered nearly equal to the best produc- tions of Vandyck in that branch of art. As a portrait painter he was superior to his Dutch rival, Hanneman, whose visit to London occurred soon after the arrival of Vandyck. After living in England about sixteen years, Hanneman became alarmed at the violent con- tentions between the King and the Parliament, and precipitately returned to his native country, where he long survived poor Dobson. His own portrait, pro- bably painted before he left the kingdom, is at present in the possession of Sir H. Hume Campbell, Bart. SIR PETER LELY, Born in Westphalia, was the son of a military gentle- man, and received his first instructions in art from De Grebber, a mean and very obscure painter. He arrived in England about the time of the death of Vandyck, whose agreeable style he attempted to 250 LIGHTS IN ART . imitate, and was eagerly patronized by the King and Court. The ruin of Charles the First and the com- plete discomfiture of the Royalists did not induce him to quit the kingdom. On the contrary, he continued to work quietly at his easel, and entertained no objec- tion to paint the portraits of those prominent men who had been instrumental in the downfall of his royal patron, and of monarchy itself. He painted the portrait of Oliver Cromwell, who, with his usual blunt- ness and love of truth, charged him to make a correct likeness , and not to flatter in the least. After the dis- solution of the Protectorate, he conveniently suited himself to the restored royal party, and was knighted by Charles the Second. He remained at Court after the death of that king, and died in London, of apo- plexy, while engaged upon a portrait of the Duchess of Somerset, in the sixty-second year of his age. The portraits painted by Lely are very numerous, but vastly inferior to those of the great master whose style he affected to imitate. If Hanneman had pos- sessed sufficient courage to remain in England, he would probably have been the formidable rival of Sir Peter Lely. They both expired in the same year — 1680. JEAN BAPTISTE MONNOYER, COMMONLY CALLED BAPTISTE, Was born at Lisle, in Flanders, and studied at Ant- LIGHTS IN ART. 251 werp. He afterwards visited Paris, and was employed to paint flower-pieces at Versailles, and several other royal palaces in France. His sojourn in England embraced a period of nearly twenty years ; and many of our best collections are still enriched by his admir- able paintings of flowers, fruit, etc. Probably he may have been the first painter who practised with success that department of art in England, Though deservedly esteemed, his productions are inferior to those of Van Huysum and other Dutch painters of similar subjects. He died in 1699, at the age of sixty-four, JOHN SYBRECHT, A pleasing landscape painter, is supposed to have been born about 1635. From the best accounts known we are informed that the Duke of Buckingham, re- turning through Flanders from his embassy to Paris, happened to meet with Sybrecht at Antwerp, and prevailed upon him to visit England. His Grace recommended him to several persons of high distinc- tion, including the Duke of Devonshire, by whom he was employed to paint many delightful views in the vicinity of Chatsworth. At Newstead Abbey, the patrimonial residence of Lord Byron, two excellent pictures by this scarcely known master may still be seen ; and one of his very finest works is now in the collection of Mr. Wardlaw Ramsay of Whitehill. This admirable 252 LIGHTS IN ART. painting represents a group of English peasants, with a market cart, crossing a brook, deeply shaded by large trees in midsummer foliage. Though some connoisseurs have described his manner as resem- bling a union of the styles of Rubens and Philip Wou- vermans, it presents, in a very remarkable degree, many of the striking characteristics of Hobbima and Gainsborough, and seems to form an agreeable combination of their different modes of painting. The distinct and full touching of his trees may well be compared to Hobbima, while his unaffected delineation of rustic figures is not unlike the sim- plicity of Gainsborough. He was no doubt familiar with, and may have imitated, the landscapes of the great Dutch painter ; but in the choice and group- ing of figures he appears not to have been guided by any antecedent. The genius of Sybrecht was not surpassed by that of our own favourite rural painter, Gainsborough, who was born about twenty- four years after his demise. If Sybrecht was not the prototype of Gainsborough, he was certainly endued with nearly the same power. Genius is imparted in divers proportions, at different periods, to various individuals, unrestrained by age, country, or any human circumstance whatever. It is the gift of Heaven, and is not exclusive. Being of divine origin, it ever exists, shining brightly in the distinct eras of time, and manifesting itself in many persons LIGHTS IN ART . 253 among all the nations of the earth. Some of Sybrecht’s early pictures represent views on the Rhine, executed in a careful, pleasing manner ; but nearly all his best works were produced in England, where, in 1703, he ended his days, and was buried at St. James’s, London, ROBERT WALKER, The date of whose birth is unknown, was an English artist, and painted portraits in a superior manner. He was employed by most of the remarkable men under the Commonwealth government, and shortly became very eminent. His skill as a portrait painter, indeed, was scarcely inferior to that of Vandyck. In the time of the Protectorate he filled the appoint- ment of principal painter-in-ordinary to his High- ness, by whom he was deservedly esteemed. He is known to have painted four or five admirable like- nesses of Oliver, one of which is preserved in the British Museum. This fine portrait was bequeathed in 1784 to the Museum by Sir Robert Rich, Bart., to whose great-grandfather, a colonel in the English army, it was presented by the Protector himself. 1 Another portrait belonging to that valuable series, given by Cromwell to the Grand Duke of Tuscany, 1 There are two portraits of Cromwell in the British Museum. One appears to be a copy with trifling alterations , probably painted by Walker from the other. 254 LIGHTS IN ART. is in the Gallery at Florence . 1 It is to be regretted that all Walker's portraits of the great ruler, ‘ forced, though it grieved his soul, to rule alone ,' 2 have not been preserved. One at Warwick Castle has been frightfully damaged by a picture-cleaner at Leaming- ton, whose destructive operations are perfectly irrepar- able. If noblemen and gentlemen really desire to have fine old works preserved, they should be extremely guarded against picture-cleaners and improvers, who of late years have been too much trusted and patronized. Unfortunately, most people appear very contented with this modern process of destruction, merely because it is carried on under the agreeable term of restoration . The right conservative principle, however, has not entirely disappeared ; it still lingers in a few minds. Mrs. Stowe has declared : ‘ I would no more disturb the gradual toning down and ageing of a well-used set of furniture by smart improvements, than I would have a modern dauber paint emenda- tions in a fine old picture.' The Leamington restorer actually scraped away the characteristic pimple, which he mistook for a damage, from the weather- beaten face of the stern Protector. He afterwards daubed over the serious injury he had done. In the 1 Pilkington, who was a Jacobite, has given a different account of this portrait. He says, in his Dictionary, that it ‘ was accidentally sold for five hundred pounds to the Duke of Tuscany’s resident in London. ’ 2 Crabbe. LIGHTS IN ART. 255 year 1830, Hinchinbrook House, the splendid seat, until 1627, of the Cromwell family, was discovered to be on fire. Fortunately, all the paintings, including the fine portrait of Olivers venerable mother, were preserved from injury. At Meadow- bank House, near Edinburgh, the seat of the late Alexander Maconochie Welwood, formerly one of the Judges of the Court of Session in Scotland, are several of Walker’s productions. Among them is a half-length portrait, life-size, of General Ireton, equal to any of the best paintings by the hand of Vandyck. Robert Walker is supposed to have died before the Restoration. JOHN RILEY, Another English portrait painter, was born in 1646, and lived about forty-five years. He had the ad- vantage of being well instructed ; but being the contemporary of Sir Peter Lely and Sir Godfrey Kneller, the encouragement he received by no means satisfied his expectations, and was certainly not commensurate with his ability. At length, though foreign artists were more favoured, he was employed to paint the portraits of Charles the Second, the Duke of York, and several of the aristocracy. The last and highest honour conferred upon him was his appointment to be one of the painters to William and Mary. As an artist, Riley may be considered 256 LIGHTS IN ART above mediocrity, and on a par with Lely and Kneller, his two popular and successful rivals. He survived the former eleven years, but was long out- lived by the latter. Incessant striving after fame, repeated disappointment and vexation, all bearing upon a very sensitive temperament, impaired his health, and finally deprived him of life. The cup of prosperity had never been quite full, and he could not smile at the deficiency. JOHN DE BAAN, A native of Haarlem, was invited to England by Charles the Second, and painted the portraits of the Royal Family and the principal nobility. He seems to have followed the agreeable style of Vandyck. The portrait of this artist by himself was admitted by the Grand Duke of Tuscany into the celebrated gallery of painters at Florence. He died in 1702, aged sixty-nine. SIR GODFREY KNELLER, Born at Liibeck in 1648, studied under Ferdinand Bol, the scholar and imitator of Rembrandt After a sojourn in Italy, Kneller visited England, and during thirteen years was constantly employed at Court. When those remunerative years had elapsed, Charles the Second died ; and in the succeeding short reign of James the Second the reputation LIGHTS IN ART. 257 and emoluments of Kneller were greatly increased. The vicissitudes of royalty were not injurious to the career of Kneller. On the contrary, the hostile arrival of the Prince of Orange in London, the depar- ture of the infatuated James out of the kingdom, and the momentous effects of the Revolution, all tended to advance the accommodating painter on his way to honour and fortune. By the death of Lely, he was left without any acknowledged com- petitor, his admirers never admitting the talents of poor Riley ; and he positively ridiculed the high pretensions of Jervas, who nevertheless managed to gain considerable popularity as a portrait painter. Some of the productions of Jervas are really credit- able. He painted a large picture in which Pope, whom he instructed in the art of painting, is repre- sented sitting in his library ; and Miss Martha Blount, the poet’s intimate friend, is portrayed while in the act of removing a book from one of the shelves in the apartment. The representation of Pope is valuable and pleasing. This picture was formerly the property of Mr. Watson Taylor of Erle-Stoke Park, Wiltshire, and was sold by auction in London about the year 1833. Jervas seems to have failed completely in his efforts to make an artist of Pope, who, in a letter to his friend Dean Swift, thus humo- rously describes his own productions : ‘ I have bedevilled five or six holy virgins, and made some 258 LIGHTS IN ART. angels of ugliness — such as certain Indians have fancied the devil to be— an object to fall down and worship. Moreover, I have not violated the com- mandment, having avoided that error of personi- fying the likeness of anything in heaven or on earth.’ General Monk’s inglorious restoration of despot- ism was for ever ended ; the first constitutional king, whose way had been paved by Cromwell, firmly occupied the English throne ; and a new era in learning, politics, and arts, auspiciously dawned upon the nation. Kneller was well received by William the Third and Queen Mary, appointed principal painter to their Majesties, and received the honour of knighthood. Always being a fashionable artist, his portraits of individuals in high places are very numerous, and some of them possess real marks of excellence, particularly the likenesses of Dr. Wallis, the mathematician, and Lord Crew. There are also several fine portraits by him of the Erskine family, at Alloa House, the seat of the Earl of Mar. But in representing female beauty he was greatly inferior to Sir Peter Lely . 1 During his existence, which extended to seventy-five years, he drew more crowned heads, acquired more wealth, and received more compliments and honours than any other portrait painter before or since his time. Towards 1 Kneller’s best female portraits are those of Queen Anne. LIGHTS IN ART. 259 ' the close of his life he was created a baronet — the only painter ever invested with that British dignity. The genius displayed in Sir Godfrey’s works is very considerable, notwithstanding the negligent manner in which too many of them are executed. This negligence or inexcusable haste originated in the desire of gain, a desire which, being always para- mount, proved fatal to his ambition of becoming a great master. SIR JOHN MEDINA, Born at Brussels in 1660, was of Spanish origin. At the age of twenty-six he travelled to London, and soon became a favourite portrait painter. He after- wards visited Scotland, where he was employed to paint the portraits of the principal nobility, including the Duke of Queensberry,'Lord High Commissioner, who conferred upon him the honour of knighthood, being the last dignity of the kind under the Scottish Crown. He was greatly patronized and assisted by the Earl of Leven, by whom he was introduced to the highest families in the kingdom. Calder House, the seat of Lord Torphichen, contains many of the best works of Medina, and among them is the celebrated portrait of John Knox, which is, of course, a copy from an older portrait, now unknown or destroyed. Medina died at the age of fifty-one. His own por- trait by himself is preserved in the gallery at Florence. 26 o LIGHTS IN ART . SIR JAMES THORNHILL, Born in 1676, at Melcombe Regis, Dorsetshire, be- came the most popular artist in England after the death of Sir Godfrey Kneller, whom he survived eleven years. His most important works are in fresco, including those in St. Paul’s Cathedral, the great hall of Greenwich Hospital, the noble hall at Blenheim, and one of the apartments at Hampton Court Palace, called the Queen’s bedroom, on the ceiling of which is depicted Aurora rising out of the sea. These frescoes, though now much faded, dis- play vivid conceptions and great power of design. Thornhill was knighted by George the First, and represented his native town in Parliament — an honour not known to have been conferred upon any other professional artist. The most interesting reminis- cence of Sir James, however, is the fact of his being the father-in-law of WILLIAM HOGARTH, The well-known pictorial moralist of the eighteenth century, and the greatest master of design in the English school. The genius that departed when Hogarth died has not again appeared in any other artist ; and his works stand unrivalled in the entire compass of art. When a painter is sufficiently LIGHTS IN ART. 261 gifted to instil good principles, when he virtually becomes a teacher of ethics, and when he has power to display to some extent useful or godlike capaci- ties, he may certainly be placed on a par with the greatest poet, or with the most enlightened divine. He may be ranked among the noblest benefactors of mankind. Hogarth was a great instructor, and yet he had no disciples ; and no succeeding artists have even attempted to imitate his productions. The art of painting can only form a branch of education when it is so practised as to inculcate wholesome lessons. No utility can be found where the sole object aimed at is to gratify the vulgar eye, or to please the mere erratic fancy of every beholder. Painting is most valuable when most instructive. This original artist may be considered as a writer with the pencil of a painter, and may be said to have composed comedies with as much success as Moliere. Having no model to follow, he created his art, and employed colours instead of language. Reformation in society was the constant object of his moral tendency, and he clearly discerned how the different vices of the great and the vulgar lead by various paths to the same unhappiness. 4 Sometimes/ says the judicious Lord Orford, ‘he rose to tragedy, not in the catastrophe of kings and heroes, but in mark- ing how vice conducts, insensibly and incidentally, to misery and shame. The fine lady in Marriage a-la- 262 LIGHTS IN ART. Mode, and Tom Nero in the four Stages of Cruelty, terminate their story in blood.’ In our time, we surely need an unflinching moralist resembling the genius of this great painter, and we naturally expect such a one to arise from the immense number of our divines, our poets, and our artists. According to Dean Ramsay, four millions of sermons are preached in Great Britain every year. It therefore appears that the ethical power of the pulpit is insuf- ficient to influence the hearts of the great masses of the people. William Hogarth was born in London in 1698, and died at the age of sixty-six, thirty years after the death of Sir James. PETER MONAMY, An excellent marine painter, was born at Guernsey in 1699, and is supposed to have died in 1749. Though truthful in detail and pleasing in composi- tion, his pictures are usually deficient in delicacy of touch and colour. His works stand no comparison with those of the Dutch school BALTHAZAR DENNER, A Dutchman, visited England in the reign of George the First, and attempted to revive the taste for laborious high finishing ; but the conventional ideas which led to the stiff and formal manner prevalent before and during the reign of Henry the Eighth, had LIGHTS IN ART. 263 succumbed to the liberal tendencies and a less tire- some method. Contracted principles and rigid for- mality in art had fled for ever before the freedom of Rubens, the grace of Vandyck, the softness of Lely, and the rapidity of Kneller. The attempt, therefore, of the careful Dutchman to restore the defunct particularity of the sixteenth century was morally impracticable. He might almost as well have endeavoured to restore the dust of Holbein to its proudest state of animation in the presence of the most haughty of the English kings. Though Denner lived sixty-two years, his pictures are few and chiefly valued as curiosities in art. RICHARDSON — HUDSON— HAYMAN. The first mentioned was esteemed the best English portrait painter of his time. He wrote a lucid treatise on painting, the accidental reading of which is said to have induced Sir Joshua Reynolds to follow that art as a profession. Having attained the age of eighty, he died in 1745. Thomas Hudson, who had been instructed by Richardson, opened an academy, wherein he taught several pupils, including Mortimer, Wright of Derby, and Reynolds. He died in 1779, aged seventy-eight. Hayman was the contemporary of Hudson, and both were popular yet mediocre artists. CHAPTER IV. SIR JOSHUA REYNOLDS — HIS EDUCATION — THE ROYAL ACADEMY — GAINSBOROUGH. IR JOSHUA REYNOLDS was born at Plympton, Devonshire, in 1723, the year in which Sir Godfrey Kneller died. He only remained two years and a half with Hudson, and in consequence of the poverty of his father, who was a clergyman of the Church of England, never received further academical instruction. At the age of twenty he commenced portrait painting, as the profession by which he was to gain a livelihood, in the town of Plymouth Dock, where he was patronized by several distinguished officers of the Royal Navy. At that early period of his life, however, his artistic acquire- ments were exceedingly limited, and he might never have attained a high position had he not soon after- wards made the acquaintance of William Gandy, an artist who sojourned at the time in London, but who usually painted in the provinces. Gandy painted with much effect, and his general style, which was LIGHTS IN ART, 265 entirely original, resembled the forcible manner of Rembrandt. Northcote averred that Reynolds in his early years was so deeply impressed by the talents of Gandy, as to retain the mental image during all his subsequent career. At the age of twenty-six he had saved sufficient money to visit Italy, and studied in that country nearly three years. Even there, surrounded by the great masterpieces of art, he remembered the power and originality of Gandy’s productions. On his way home he visited Paris, and arrived, with a large stock of new ideas, at his native place in 1752. Shortly afterwards he pro- ceeded to London, where he took lodgings in St. Martin's Lane, and resumed his practice by painting the portrait of his Italian servant, Marchi, whom he had persuaded to accompany him to England. When the picture was finished, he received a visit from his first and only regular instructor, Hudson, who, while viewing the performance, exclaimed, ‘ Reynolds, you do not paint so well now as you did before you went to Italy!’ Allowing for the jealousy of Hudson, there was probably much truth in the remark. While in Italy, a strict adherence to Gandy’s simplicity might have been of more im- portance to him than all the wonders of the Vatican, His simple Devonshire style, indeed, could hardly be improved by his raptures after beholding the majestic productions of Michael Angelo. Marchi’s 266 LIGHTS IN ART . portrait was succeeded by a striking likeness of Admiral Keppel. This was followed by the por- traits of several of the nobility, and the establishment of Reynolds as a fashionable artist. From his lodg- ings in St. Martin’s Lane he removed to a house in Newport Street, where he first made the acquaint- ance of Dr. Johnson, who became his frequent guest. In 1760, he again changed his residence, and occu- pied a handsome house in Leicester Square, where he lived in high style, and in the most extensive prac- tice, assisted by pupils, during the rest of his life. After sundry futile attempts to establish an annual exhibition of native talent in London, Reynolds was at length instrumental in forming the Royal Academy, which was duly instituted on the 10th of December 1768, and of which he was unanimously elected pre- sident. Among the first honorary members were Dr. Johnson, Dr. Goldsmith, and Richard Dalton, Esq., the King’s librarian. Boswell, Johnson’s biographer, was made honorary secretary for foreign correspond- ence. In 1769 he received the thanks of the academi- cians, and the honour of knighthood was conferred upon him by his Majesty. Having arrived at the utmost height of his profession, ‘he kept,’ says Far- ington, ‘what might be almost called an open table, at which were daily seen, in larger or smaller numbers, poets, historians, divines, men celebrated for their scientific knowledge, philosophers, lovers of the arts, LIGHTS IN ART. 267 and others. Dr. Johnson and Dr. Goldsmith were of those who most frequently were of this assembly of rare persons.’ The scholastic attainments of the good-natured host were radically few, and ‘ it was in such company/ continues the same writer, ‘that he gradually improved his mind, and formed his taste for literary composition and grace of expression.’ Sir Joshua read the first of his admirable discourses on the opening of the Royal Academy in January 1769, and delivered his last, the fifteenth, on the 10th of December 1790. Many attempts were made to prove that he was not the author of these and other compositions. They were ascribed to Johnson, Burke, and other great literary men, who, however, invariably denied the authorship, and stated their belief that Sir Joshua had composed them all himself without any assistance whatever. His ability for public speaking was equal to his talent for writing. From the time of his only visit to Italy until his death, embracing a period of nearly forty years, he was seldom absent from his painting-room. The very few relaxations were two hasty visits to Flanders, two or three excursions to his native county, and some hurried visits to those friends who resided near the metropolis. Indeed his industry was quite amazing. To the public exhibitions alone he contributed above two hundred and fifty pictures ; and those not exhibited amounted to a very considerable number, perhaps 268 LIGHTS IN ART. about four hundred. His few historical or rather fan- ciful works include ‘ Garrick between Tragedy and Comedy/ ‘Cymon and Iphigenia/ ‘Cupid and Psyche/ the ‘Death of Dido/ and the ‘Fortune-teller;’ while Mrs. Siddons, Sterne, Mrs. Billington, the Strawberry Girl, and a likeness of himself in spectacles, are among the best efforts in portraiture. The ‘Strawberry Girl,’ and other similar transcripts of the innocency of childhood are incomparably excellent, and may be considered perfect triumphs in art. No painter ever succeeded better in depicting the countenance of infantile beauty before it had become marred by the ungovernable passions inherent in human nature. His representations of grown-up females are rather less accurate, and somewhat partake of the puerility of his happier subjects. The palmy days of this fascinating artist were not passed wholly without alloy ; and, like all sublunary greatness, his elevated position was exposed to the machinations of many foes, and to the dangerous flattery of numerous acquaintances. He was satirized by Hone, a member of the Academy, rivalled by Gainsborough, and annoyed by Romney. Hone’s weapon of attack was a ludicrous picture, in which he introduced the knight as a plagiarist, busily engaged in making designs from old and forgotten prints. The inference desired to be drawn from the caricature was, that Sir Joshua possessed no invention of his LIGHTS IN ART. 269 own, and that he systematically and invariably bor- rowed from unknown or obscure works. This satirical performance was sent to the Royal Academy for exhibition in 1775, but was rejected by the votes of Sir Joshua’s friends in the council. It was afterwards exhibited at the expense of the artist; whose attempt, however, to injure the fame of the president proved completely abortive. Farington, in his account of this affair, well says : ‘ The public in general, equally ignorant of the merits of originality and the crime of plagiarism, had no opinion upon the subject.’ The rivalry of Gainsborough was a much more serious matter, and Sir Joshua really felt humbled by it. While the two painters lived, Gainsborough’s portraits were preferred by several persons of distinction and judgment, and the high estimation in which they were then held has continued to the present day. Posterity indeed begins to attach more value to the works of Gainsborough than to those of his popular contempo- rary. The death of Gainsborough certainly left Sir Joshua without a rival ; though Lord Chancellor Thurlow, speaking of the fine arts in his own time, declared that ‘ there were two factions contending for superiority— the Reynolds faction and the Romney faction ; I was of the Romney faction.’ His Lord- ship’s favourite was really a good artist, though by no means qualified to be placed in opposition to Reynolds. George Romney died without a competitor in 1804, 270 LIGHTS IN ART. at the age of sixty-eight, having survived Sir Joshua about twelve years. The first president of the English Royal Academy wanted one year to complete threescore and ten at the time of his dissolution in 1792. His remains were interred in St. Paul’s Cathedral, with extraordinary pomp and magnificence. Among the distinguished individuals who attended the funeral were the Arch- bishop of York, the Duke of Portland, the Earl of Carlisle, Viscount Palmerston, Edmund Burke, James Boswell, Edmund Malone, — who afterwards wrote Some Account of the Life and Writings of Sir Joshua Reynolds , — Benjamin West, Nathaniel Hone the satirist, Valentine Green, 1 and Martin Archer Shee, at that time a student of the Royal Academy. Sir Joshua Reynolds is usually considered the founder of the British School, although several native artists of eminence appeared, as we have seen, long before his time. We may here observe, that though he had many pupils, only one of them, James North- cote, became prominent, and even he scarcely attained a degree above mediocrity. The many painters who succeeded Sir Joshua cannot be said to have imitated his manner, with the exception, perhaps, of Sir Henry 1 Mr. Green was the first keeper at the British Institution. At his death he was succeeded by John Young; after whose decease the keepership was held by William Barnard, who died in 1848, aged seventy-six. They were all eminent mezzotinto engravers. LIGHTS IN ART, 271 Raeburn, the admired Scottish portrait painter, several of whose productions bear some resemblance to those of Reynolds. Instead of being the actual founder of a distinct school, Reynolds almost seems to stand alone, — a single artist of rare ability, without any devoted followers. He cannot therefore be con- sidered a great master, in the literal acceptation of that term. His inventive powers were feeble, and he was certainly deficient in drawing and design. Hav- ing no faith in genius, or natural gifts, he maintained that all excellence might be acquired by study and perseverance. This peculiar theory, combined with constant practice, carried him through a splendid career, and confirmed his belief that genius had no existence, either in himself or in any other painter. The divine conceptions of Michael Angelo and Raphael, according to his ideas, were merely the results of unwearied study and incessant application. He professed to be an ardent admirer of those masters ; but the lack of any kindred genius effec- tually prevented him from deriving any vital benefit by the contemplation of their excellent endowments. Indefatigable industry, and an unceasing desire to arrive at eminence, paved for him a new way, from which he never deviated, and in which no other artist has ever been able to tread. We may perhaps dignify his matured style by terming it original ; yet the originality contained in it is not of the highest 272 LIGHTS IN ART . order, being chiefly represented by colouring, without the necessary concomitance, or union, of all the other excellencies. In consequence of a limited capacity for invention, and a total incompetency for grandeur of design, his pictures containing more than one figure are faulty. Sacred and historical subjects, in which he occasionally felt desirous to excel, were beyond his ability ; and, whenever he attempted them, the absence of genius, and the want of regular classic tuition, became glaringly manifest. Those attempts were laboured, heavy, and unpleasing. His ‘ Holy Family/ his ‘ Death of Cardinal Beaufort/ and other works of the same class, display very little skill in elevated art. Passive or quiet subjects were those in which he perfectly excelled. Probably no future painter will be able to surpass the beautiful repose in his ‘ Cymon and Iphigenia/ — a noble work, in which he seems to have aimed at the splendour of Titian. The grace of innocence is invariably depicted in his portraiture of little children arrayed in rustic garb, or, like the ‘ Strawberry Girl/ in fanciful attire. Upon such humble subjects he delighted to dwell, because they were in perfect accordance with the simplicity of his own heart. We may well suppose him to have exclaimed — ' “ Suffer little Children to come unto me, and forbid them not i ” 1 to paint such to perfection is my favourite study !’ 1 Luke xviii. 16. LIGHTS IN ART. . 273 On the whole, the memory and works of Sir Joshua Reynolds are entitled to the praises of posterity. Notwithstanding his evident want of genius, he was endued with great steadiness of character and many good principles ; and by firm integrity, untiring diligence, and the laudable desire to become eminent, he arrived at a very high degree of excellence. His life affords a brilliant example of the reward and lasting renown which follow the course of rectitude and honourable industry. All men are not endowed with the same gifts, and no man ever displayed a gift without first having re- ceived it. To some, inspiration is given ; to some, genius ; and to others, talent. The matchless painter of Urbino is called the Divine Raphael ; Rubens was the possessor of the highest genius ; and extra- ordinary talent belonged to Reynolds. The three classes of endowments, or gifts, are each subdivided by many degrees, and every rational being is in possession of one or more of these degrees, which are also termed, to denote their importance, the powers of nature. The possession of several powers, particularly if they belong to the first or second class, constitute a great man, and he is therefore destined by the Creator to exercise a salutary in- fluence over his less gifted brethren. This wise arrangement insures the general safety, peace, and harmony of mankind. Without it, there can be 110 S 274 LIGHTS IN ART. proximity to perfection. The most intellectual of the human species properly hold in divine subordina- tion their more inferior fellow-creatures. An equal division of natural gifts to every man, or the absence of all endowments, would be appalling. Were either of these imaginary states really to exist even for one hour only, destructive anarchy would immediately arise, and man would descend to the level of the brutes. The subject of this chapter well served his time and generation, and left something of value to successive ages. Unfortunately, many of Sir Joshuas most elaborate paintings are now faded, and in a worse condition than numerous pictures painted by other artists, including even those who lived in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The cause of this decadency arises from his having too freely used thin glazings instead of solid tints. His carnations have in many instances fled, and the faces upon which they once bloomed, now present a cadaverous, sickly appear- ance. It may be proper to remark here, that the portraits executed by him before he was twenty-six years of age show no indications of decay, being simply wrought with approved tints composed of strong opaque colours. Perhaps it might be rather daring to assume that he derived no particular benefit from his visit to Italy ; yet we may venture to assert that he gathered no additional knowledge in that LIGHTS IN ART 275 country regarding the nature and endurance of pigments. It has, indeed, been admitted that the few portraits painted by him at Rome and Florence are strictly in his Devonshire style, and display no trace of his continental studies. A brief visit to Venice, however, seems to have furnished him with some novel ideas respecting the qualities and the application of colours. In that city he was deeply impressed by the gorgeously painted works of Titian, Paul Veronese, and other great men of the Vene- tian school. After returning to London, he devised a system or manner of working, by which he aspired to rival, or to surpass, those eminent masters, the remembrance of whose productions erased the simple impressions made in his native land. The new contrivance was brought to maturity, as he imagined, after long and repeated experiments with vege- table preparations. He even spoiled some old Vene- tian pictures by scraping off the colours, in order to find out what they were and how they had been laid on. The conclusion he arrived at was, that the rich glowing tints were all produced by thin glazings, or transparent mixtures, on a well-prepared dry body of pale or white paint. For some years his new style astonished all beholders. He felt proud of the discovery, and refused to impart any knowledge of it to his most favoured pupils. At length experience taught him that his fine glazings 276 LIGHTS IN ART . really possessed no more permanence than the evan- escent rosy hue on the cheeks of the loveliest maiden, or no more perpetuity than the immaculate snow- drift in a Devonshire meadow. Consequently, he abandoned his ephemeral practice for a more sub- stantial and enduring method, and his knowledge of pigments finally became on a par with that of our most experienced British painters. His experimental works in their decayed state would now be worthless, were the magic of his great name not attached to them. On that account alone they are still prized in several collections. The more solid and simply wrought pictures by this singular artist will probably last as long as any of the best productions by our most esteemed native painters, — whose general easy manner of working, however, during the last seventy years, is less studied, less firm, and of less continuance than the more elaborate and more learned method pursued by the Italians two or three centuries ago. We may as- suredly predict that Sir Joshua’s paintings will not be viewed in a sound condition after the lapse of a very long period. When, however, years have done their worst, when no touch of his pencil can be traced, the excellent engravings which have been produced from his pictures, and his valuable literary works, will certainly be seen and admired by those who shall emerge from the mysterious womb of a far dis* LIGHTS IN ART. 2 77 tant era. The enlightened beings of a remote epoch may be much better acquainted with Reynolds than we in this nineteenth century are with Apelles. All that is really good ‘ shall/ said the prophet Isaiah, * stand for ever/ THOMAS GAINSBOROUGH. Though some allusion has been made to Thomas Gainsborough, it may be necessary to add a few more observations on his professional and private character. This truly English painter passed most of his early days in the country, and his chief enjoyment was derived from his own domestic circle, his rural neigh- bours, and the picturesque scenery by which his happy dwelling at Sudbury was surrounded. The occupations and pastime of the peasantry within that quiet locality presented him with an ample variety of subjects for his pencil ; and the pictures which he produced there never fail to charm the eye by their simplicity and unaffected treatment. While in Suffolk, the fields, shepherds, milk-maids, cattle, and sheep fixed his entire attention, and he drew every object with accuracy. Before the age of twenty he pro- ceeded to London for the study of portrait-painting, in which branch of art he afterwards approached Vandyck nearer than any other contemporary artist, while in landscape he was not inferior to Rubens or Velasquez. 278 LIGHTS IN ART , His incessant love of labour was remarkable. Rey- nolds, in one of his discourses, says that Gainsborough painted by candle-light, and that ‘ he could not amuse himself in the evenings by any other means so agreeable to himself/ He imitated no preceding master in art ; nature was his only guide, precisely as she had been to the great original painters of the con- tinental schools. The style of Gainsborough is free, yet elegant ; less redundant in execution than the manner of Sir Joshua, and more refined than the style of Morland. He was a correct draughtsman, and scarcely had occasion to alter a line or a touch in the course of making out his design. His practice combined two of the most difficult branches of paint- ing — portraiture and landscape. The ‘Milk Girl’ and the ‘Blue Boy' are delightful specimens of por- trait painting. The latter, at present the property of the Marquis of Westminster, is said to have been painted in opposition to Sir Joshua Reynolds, who had asserted that a pervading blue tint in any picture could not produce an agreeable effect. All connois- seurs know how well Gainsborough succeeded in his experiment to refute this opinion. For landscape art, we have only to step into the Vernon Gallery, or to visit some private galleries, to admire examples of his genius in that department. He died in 1788, aged sixty-one. Our admiration for his performances is increased LIGHTS IN ART. 279 when we consider that he was one of the kindest and most amiable of men. He always acknowledged the true claims of poverty, and afforded instant relief to the deserving, and was beloved alike by the poorest cottager and the greatest lord. CHAPTER V. WILSON — MORLAND— RAEBURN — LAWRENCE, ETC. ICHARD WILSON, a member of the Royal Academy, where his own portrait by himself is still preserved, died in Lon- don 1 in 1782, at the age of sixty-eight, ten years prior to the death of the first president. Since that event, his genius has become fully known and properly appreciated, though his merits were almost entirely overlooked during his lifetime. While he depended upon landscape painting for a livelihood, he could only obtain a bare subsistence. Originally he practised portrait painting — that lucrative branch of art enabling him to live in tolerable comfort, and even to visit Italy in 1749. The scenery of that classic land, and the beautiful emanations of Claude Lorraine, seem to have altered his course of thinking so completely, as to induce him to begin the career of a professional land- 1 His remains were interred in the picturesque churchyard of Mold, Flintshire. LIGHTS IN ART. 281 scape painter. This change of pursuit, recommended by Vernet and Zuccarelli, though it seldom led to re- munerative results during his existence, was the founda- tion of that deserved fame awarded to his memory by posterity. When in Italy he painted many charm- ing pictures, including a fine view of Rome, now be- longing to the Earl of Dartmouth ; Cicero’s Villa, and the ruins of the Villa of Maecenas near Tivoli. These and similar productions are equal in colour, though not in finish, with the finest paintings by Claude. In simple poetic beauty, spontaneously pro- duced, they even surpass the happiest effusions of the artist of Lorraine. The style of Richard Wilson is delightfully free, more facile even than the manner of Zuccarelli, to whose mode of colouring, however, Wilson may have been somewhat indebted. After a sojourn of six years in Italy, he returned to England, and worked indefatigably at his easel ; yet his mar- vellous industry never released him from indigence. His acquaintance with some of the most celebrated artists of his time, and the honour of being elected a Royal Academician, were merely nominal advantages ; and he was allowed by friends and wealthy connois- seurs to subsist chiefly upon bread, cheese, and beer, in a miserable garret near Tottenham Court Road. About 1 776, he solicited and obtained the place of librarian in the Academy with a salary too insignifi- cant for the acceptance of his more fortunate brethren. 282 LIGHTS IN ART It is difficult to account for the neglect he experienced. Probably his Welsh temperament might have been so irascible as to produce occasional bursts of petulance in speech and manner, which would be generally offensive, especially to those who believed that genius and suavity of demeanour are absolutely inseparable. Uniform sweetness of temper was as remarkable in Sir Joshua Reynolds, as habitual peevishness was in poor Wilson, who, unlike the fortunate Devonshire painter, was an entire stranger to the smiles of man- kind, at least when he attempted to win his daily bread by the pencil alone. At length the compassion of the infinite Giver of that genius which could not, apart from meretricious aid, be discerned by man, was mercifully extended to the laborious artist, who was rescued from the pangs of corroding want by the bestowal of another gift, — the possession of worldly prosperity. In the decline of life he succeeded, by the death of a brother, to a small patrimony in Wales, where he passed many of his remaining days in the quiet pursuit of a delightful art, which had been his only solace in long years of penury and cruel neglect. He retired to Wales in 1780, and never contributed to the Royal Academy after that year. Richard Wilson may be considered our first and greatest painter of landscapes. In the selection of subjects, and the manner of treating them, he displayed more classical refinement, and a higher degree of poetic LIGHTS IN ART. 283 feeling, than his celebrated contemporary Gains- borough, whose chief excellence consisted in a faith- ful delineation of humble life and rural English scenery. Many artists visit Italy without deriving great improve- ment. Wilson was a brilliant exception. His genius had lain dormant before he went to that enticing clime, where it soon became warmed into activity. It increased in strength, and continually glowed with- in him, until its mortal tenement was dissolved in the course of nature. That excellent genius is now in elysian regions, under heavenly control, ready to be imparted to a new terrestrial being. We wait for another painter with the endowments of Richard Wilson. The works left by him are very numerous ; and as he frequently painted duplicates, we often see more than one picture of a favourite subject. He executed no less than five pictures of Niobe and her Children. The original first exhibited in 1760, was purchased by the Duke of Cumberland, the hero of Culloden. One of the five, nearly the size of the original, was fortunately acquired, in 1865, by William Pollock, Esq., of Edinburgh. The picture in the National Gallery was painted for Sir George Beau- mont, Bart. The most admired landscapes by this extraordinary genius are peaceful in design, beauti- fully neutral in colour, and, to use an expressive tech- nical term, fat in the touch. He has been more copied than any other British landscape painter, — 284 LIGHTS IN ART . an infallible proof of his superiority. Among his con- temporaries, and the painters who lived nearly in his time, were Jonathan Richardson, George Barret, Allan Ramsay, William Hodges, Marlow, Wheatley, High- more, and Samuel Drummond. The last named was an associate of the Royal Academy, and imitated the style of Wilson very closely. GEORGE MORLAND, Who was born in 1764, possessed an original genius, which was unhappily marred by very eccentric and dissolute habits. The great abilities bestowed upon him by the Author of nature were recklessly un- heeded ; and he seemed quite incapable of check- ing, in the smallest degree, the erratic tendency of his mind. Like the Dutch painter Brouwer, he exhausted a valuable life by thoughtless merriment and low dissipation, and paid the penalty of his folly by a premature death, being only forty years old, in the midst of distressing poverty. Notwith- standing his short and irregular practice, he pro- duced many admirable works, which still continue unrivalled in English art. His favourite subjects were cottage scenes, gipsy encampments, farm- yards, winter pieces, etc. With the exception of this artist, perhaps no man ever succeeded in de- picting, with any semblance of beauty, the most grovelling and filthy of all animals, a sow, with her LIGHTS IN ART 285 brood of pigs basking on a layer of straw, or wallowing in a sty. He imitated most completely every appearance peculiar to those very unpre- possessing quadrupeds, and even imparted to their bristly hides and ungainly proportions so much softness and delicacy as to render them almost fascinating. With equal success he delineated the shaggy cur, the sorry mare, the blithe stable boy, and the ruddy ploughman in his peerless white smock-frock and tightly laced hobnail boots. Another of his favourite subjects was the outside of a country ale-house ; the jolly landlord in person standing complacently at the doorway, and serving a few thirsty wayfarers with his incomparable stingo or potent spirit from the juniper berry. Like Gainsborough and Wilson, Morland was excellent in figures, having in early life, under his father, gone through some of the drudgery of ordinary portrait painting. He possessed the power, therefore, of introducing into his pleasing compositions, with astonishing facility, a variety of characters suitable to the picturesque scenes which he either imagined or drew from reality. Childhood and maturity in rural life came within the wide range of his pencil. He portrayed with equal accuracy the artless urchin, the rosy milk-maid, and the careful housewife. Neither was he deficient when he attempted to delineate more refined society. Summer excursions, 286 LIGHTS IN ART . pic-nic parties, composed of ladies in gipsy hats and easy attire, and gentlemen in the comely costume of the period, attended by servants, near the skirts of a wood, or on the grassy banks of a delightful stream, occasionally formed the subjects of very charming pictures. His manner of painting is full, free, and truthful in colour ; and he never violated the modesty of nature by straining to produce artificial effects. The touching of his trees is admirable, especially when he imitated the leafing of an old oak in the sear and yellow tints of autumn. This most in- genious painter may not unfitly be styled the rural Raphael of England. Like the great Italian, he derived all his excellence from a close imitation of nature, and never condescended to borrow even a single idea from any master in the art he loved. Unhappily, that portion of his love not devoted to art was ignominiously expended upon the low frequenters of tap-roorps, and other degrading haunts ; and he effectually withheld from posterity the satisfaction of admiring any degree of morality in connection with his genius. He seemed to entertain a positive aversion towards persons of rank, and all well ordered society ; and some of his biographers assert that he contemptuously refused to claim a baronetage which had dignified his ancestors. The honour of having his name prefixed by the title of ‘ Sir 5 was regarded by him with unaffected LIGHTS IN ART. 287 derision. Morland’s works were frequently copied and imitated while he lived, and hundreds of copies have been manufactured since his death, chiefly from coloured engravings. The excellent pro- ductions of James Ward and Ibbetson, his contem- poraries, present a near approximation to his manner, although they cannot properly be called imitations. Ward and Ibbetson, indeed, may be said to have possessed endowments peculiar to themselves. ~ BARRY — FUSELI. The works of Barry and Fuseli display the highest originality, and much poetic feeling; yet the com- positions of those artists are, for the most part, extravagant, and often unintelligible. Barry was a native of Ireland, and died in 1806. The produc- tions of Fuseli present little of a mundane character. In attempting to embody the metaphysical ideas of Milton, he endeavoured to penetrate the wildest regions of fancy, without considering the inability of others to follow in the track which he alone could traverse. Fuseli has unwittingly proved that the science of ontology is vastly too abstruse for the pencil. BENJAMIN WEST, President of the Royal Academy, was a native of Philadelphia. He became a worthy British subject, 288 LIGHTS IN ART and stood high in the favour of George the Third. West was a good designer, and really great in the compositions of historical and scriptural subjects. Correct drawing is conspicuous in all his works ; but he appears to have been very deficient in colouring, and also in the management of the chiaroscuro . He died in 1820, at the venerable age of eighty-two. RICHARD COSWAY Was known in the beginning of the present century as a good artist. He married a very beautiful lady, who was also an artist, and most highly accom- plished. She became the favourite model for many of his very fascinating pictures, which frequently illustrated the ancient mythology. In his picture of Venus dissuading Adonis from hunting, the charms of the goddess were drawn from his universally admired partner. Every man should consider his wife the finest woman in existence. Cosway beheld a Venus in his spouse, and she, vice versa y saw an Adonis in him. Mr. and Mrs. Cosway really pre- sented a rare example of blissful wedded life ; con- sequently, they were often ridiculed by a host of envious acquaintances, whose matrimonial joys were less exuberant. Cosway, whom no satire, however bitter, could seriously irritate, lived, in the full enjoy- ment of his art, his religion, and his artist-wife, to a good old age, and died in the happy assurance of a LIGHTS IN ART. 289 glorious resurrection. His bereaved lady entered a religious house, and became an abbess. A painting of Venus and Cupid by him is preserved at the Royal Academy. SIR WILLIAM BEECHEY, Born in 1753 at Burford, Oxfordshire, was one of the favourites of George the Third. By constant study, he became a good artist, and, in 1793, an associate of the Royal Academy. About the same time he was appointed portrait painter to Queen Charlotte. Five years afterwards he was elected a member of the Academy, and shortly after received the honour of knighthood, the first distinction of the kind after the death of Reynolds. In the council- room of the Academy may be seen his presentation picture — a portrait of the Prince of Wales. He lived to the age of eighty-six. THOMAS STOTHARD, The pictorial expositor of British poetry, was born in London, 1755. During a period of fifty years, he produced admirable illustrations of the belles lettres of our country from the time of Chaucer to the days of Rogers, and invariably displayed a perfectly ori- ginal genius. The best productions by this truly English artist are from Bunyan’s Pilgrim's Progress , The Flitch of Bacon , and The Pilgrimage to Canter - T 290 LIGHTS IN ART. bury. His designs are supposed to amount to more than four thousand, and above half that number have been devoted to books and other works. The greatest production in painting by Stothard is the picture of ‘ Intemperance ’ executed by order of the Marquis of Exeter for his seat in Northamptonshire. This per- formance, a sketch of which belongs to the Vernon collection, though allegorical in design, represents a point of time in the intercourse of Mark Antony and Cleopatra, thus rendering the composition a union of allegory and history. The picture, however, would have been more correct, and consequently more use- ful, had it been entirely allegorical or entirely his- torical. Combinations of this kind have a tendency to produce confusion in the youthful mind. Stothard was a married man, and passed the greatest portion of his life happily in Newman Street, the favourite locality of eminent artists, where he serenely closed his career in 1834, at the age of seventy-nine years. He was a Royal Academician, and the father of the author of Monumental Effigies of Great Britain. Regarding the artistic ability of Stothard, it may be said that his drawing, especially of the female form, is peculiarly graceful, that his composition and colouring are agreeable, and that his execution is easy ; while his powers of invention, throughout his whole practice, appear in the highest degree of excel- LIGHTS IN ART. 291 lence. Specimens of this master, who may truly be termed a clear light in British art, are preserved in the gallery of the nation. SIR HENRY RAEBURN, A very distinguished Scottish artist, had attained his sixty-seventh year at the period of his decease, in 1823, about a year after the memorable visit of George the Fourth to Scotland. Raeburn, as pre- viously observed, appeared to be the only follower of Sir Joshua Reynolds. The observation, however, must be restricted to his manner of colouring. In other respects, especially in his method of handling, which is remarkably free and decisive, his style is perfectly original. He was a most expeditious por- trait painter, and it is almost im possible to enter any great mansion in Scotland without seeing one or more of his works. The male portraits by his ready hand are certainly his finest productions ; yet there is considerable softness and beauty in some of his pictures of the fair sex. The portrait of Mrs. Maco- nochie Welwood, at Meadowbank House, near Mid- Calder, would have been extremely creditable to the pencil of Sir Joshua. Raeburn’s works still hold the first rank in Scottish portraiture. THOMSON OF DUDDINGSTON. The landscapes of Thomson of Duddingston, the 292 LIGHTS IN ART. son of a minister in Ayrshire, and the contemporary of Sir Henry Raeburn, are generally acknowledged to be the finest ever produced north of the Tweed. Thomson, who became, in 1805, the minister of the parish of Duddingston, a delightful suburb of' the ‘ Modern Athens/ acquired, from the celebrated Dr. Chalmers, the appropriate designation of the ‘ artist- minister/ Considered apart from his clerical calling, he may fitly be termed the Scottish Wilson. Almost every gentleman in Scotland desires to possess a specimen or two of the Reverend John Thomson; and he is now beginning to be appreciated even in England. One of his romantic landscapes, Loch-an- Eilan, near Inverness, was bequeathed to the Lon- don National Gallery in 1864 by his sister-in-law, Mrs. Anne Thomson. He resided in the manse, close by Duddingston Loch ; and Signor Galli, the Italian picture-dealer, on the occasion of calling there one fine morning, and finding him hard at work in the painting-room, exclaimed, ‘ Now, Mr. Thomson, throw your Bible into the loch ! ’ The reply was, ‘No, Signor; I will keep the book — it brings much profit.’ The artist-minister is supposed to have made about eight hundred pounds yearly by his pencil. He was the father of Dr. Thomson, an eminent physician at Leamington, and the father-in-law of Robert Scott Lauder, painter of a popular engraved picture — ‘Christ Teaching Humility’ — belonging to LIGHTS IN ART . 293 the Royal Scottish Academy. Thomson of Dud- dingston died in 1840, aged sixty-two. His portrait had been painted by Raeburn, and has been engraved in mezzotinto by Alexander Hay. His most successful followers were Robert Gibb, who, besides, displayed some originality of his own, especially in cattle and figures, J. B. Kidd, and Mac- kenzie. Their ordinary subjects were, with the excep- tion of Gibb’s, precisely the same as those selected by Thomson, to whom the pictures of his disciples are frequently ascribed. Among the best works of the master and his pupils are views in the Isle of Skye, Eyemouth, Dunbar, the Bass Rock, and other ro- mantic scenes. A grand view in the Isle of Skye, by Thomson, is in the Whitehill collection. Nearly all their pictures, however, not excepting Thomson’s, are now, unfortunately, in a very insecure and cracked condition — the common and fatal result of early varnishing. The landscapes by Thomson have been, and still are, extensively copied by inferior hands. SIR THOMAS LAWRENCE, The great contemporary and rival of Raeburn, was born at Bristol in 1769, and lived sixty-one years. He excelled Raeburn, Hoppner, Shee, Opie, and indeed all his other contemporaries, in female por- traiture. In delineating youth, his carnations were 294 LIGHTS IN ART, always pure and blooming. He drew the female form in elegant and unaffected simplicity, and was eminently successful in imparting the most agreeable expression to every variety of countenance. Among the other characteristics of his style may be enu- merated grace and ease in the disposal of the costume, and a charming neutrality of colouring throughout his entire productions. His male por- traits, though admirable, display less of masculine vigour than those of Raeburn and Hoppner, and serve to show that his genius was chiefly directed to por- tray the softer sex. The innocency of childhood engaged much of his attention, and afforded many .delightful opportunities for the exercise of his pencil. Sir Thomas, indeed, by ‘The art that baffles Time’s tyrannic claim ,’ 1 faithfully handed down to a grateful posterity the lineaments of many a beloved one, whose charming forms are either changed by the weight of years or mouldering in the dust. He possessed deep feeling. The untimely death of the Princess Charlotte, whose portrait he had painted at Claremont a very short time before the sad event, called forth the tenderest sympathies of his heart. In a letter written to a friend he thus expressed himself : ‘ I never think of her, speak of her, write of her without tears, and have often, when alone, addressed her in her bliss, as 1 Cowper. LIGHTS IN ART. 295 though she now saw me, heard me ; and it is because I respect her for her singleness of worth, and am grateful for her past and meditated kindness/ In another place he wrote : ‘ I was stunned by her death / 1 The person of Sir Thomas Lawrence was of the middle height, manly, and prepossessing. His countenance towards the close of life usually ap- peared pale, probably an indication of the heart disease which suddenly carried him off on the very last day of his dining with Sir Robert Peel at Whitehall. The unfinished portrait which he painted of himself a short time before his decease is an ex- cellent likeness ; though the compiler of these pages, having frequently seen him at the Royal Academy in his presidential capacity, believes that he failed to do ample justice to the very benign expression of his intellectual features. Only a few months had elapsed after his lamented death, when the noble-minded directors of the British Institution collected, by strenuous exertions, the finest portion of his works, which they exhibited, partly for the gratification of the public, and partly for the benefit of the deceased president’s relations, on the walls of their well-known gallery in Pall Mall. The interesting collection comprised the beautiful portraits of the Marchion- ess of Londonderry, Lady Peel, and Miss Croker, 1 The Life and Correspondence of Sir Thomas Lawrence , Knight , P.R.A., etc . etc . Published in 1831. 29 6 LIGHTS IN ART. daughter of the Right Honourable J. W. Croker. Among the numerous male portraits of illustrious individuals appeared that of Pope Pius the Seventh, chaste in colouring, natural in light and shade, and carefully finished. In this capital performance, his Holiness, a most venerable-looking man, is represented easily seated on a splendid chair, while his serene countenance betokens entire resignation to the will of Heaven. The painter has judici- ously introduced, as part of the background of this picture, the Laocoon and the Apollo Belvedere. The fascinating abilities of Lawrence were repre- sented at the Manchester Exhibition of 1857 by eight of his best works, including the Countess of Derby, Lady Leicester, Sir Sidney Smith, and the ‘ Gipsy Girl/ Phillips, Pickersgill, and Jackson were eminent artists in the time of Sir Thomas. The collection of the Duke of Northumberland contains a fine por- trait of the Emperor Napoleon the First, painted in 1802 by Phillips, who also executed the best portrait extant of Lord Byron. CHAPTER VI. HISTORICAL AND EVERY-DAY SUBJECTS— SIR D. WILKIE- CONTINENTAL INFLUENCE — WATSON GORDON. ERY few of our artists have attempted to paint subjects from the sacred writings, or even from ordinary history. Lofty themes, especially those drawn from the Holy Scriptures, appear to have produced a mere paucity of concep- tion, totally incompatible with the ambitious desire of mastering those subjects. The singular representa- tions of Martin are multitudinous and affectedly grand. His poetical idea of Belshazzar’s Feast is highly ex- travagant ; it is altogether notional, and not an illus- tration of the mysterious event described by the prophet Daniel. And yet it may be considered his most successful performance. Danby, if he did not imitate Martin, approached his style very closely. Etty’s designs were sometimes theatrical, and conse- quently many of his works display very little of that solemn dignity which is indispensable in scriptural delineation. As a colourist, he was gaudy, or rather 298 LIGHTS IN ART, offensive in showiness, at least to the connoisseurs in Venetian art, while his drawing, especially in produc- tions of a gigantic size, frequently indicate consider- able negligence, or an imperfect acquaintance with classical models. Haydon, who became a student of the Royal Academy in 1804, was equally unfit to portray religious subjects, though his conceptions were clear and lofty. Indeed he would have done better had he never attempted to embody any of his ideas by means of the pencil. Yet his first exhibited picture, the death of Dentatus, indicated a promise of high pictorial excellence, but a trivial circumstance induced him to quarrel with his friends in the Aca- demy at that time, and thus he unfortunately retarded all further steady progress in art. His principal talent, it must be admitted, was essentially fitted for another instrument, the pen ; and we cannot help lamenting the existence of that powerful feeling within his breast which prompted him, in defiance of all opposition, to sacrifice the best portion of his valuable life in fruitless endeavours to become a great painter. He was an excellent writer, and a useful and popular lecturer on the subject of art. As a critic, he was impartial and inflexibly just ; yet withal caustic and severe. His remarks upon the productions of other men were sometimes inexcusably bitter, occasioned by the obvious and repeated indifference manifested by the public towards his own painted and often LIGHTS IN ART . 299 uninviting canvas. The want of fortitude to sustain him against the effects of chilling neglect proved the harbinger of destruction. His over-wrought feelings ultimately overpowered his reason, and he terminated an uneasy existence by the hand that had assisted him to court the vain admiration of a giddy world. Poor Haydon had nearly attained his sixtieth year in 1846, when he committed the rash act His notes and journals were published in 1853. BIRD OF BRISTOL. Edward Bird, the son of a journeyman carpenter in Staffordshire, was born in 1762, and commenced to get his living as a japanner. But the employment not agreeing with his disposition, he thought proper to abandon it for the pursuit of a nobler art. In 1807 he exhibited several pictures at Bath, and about the same time received the appointment of draw- ing-master to the Princess Charlotte. Before visiting London he painted subjects from ordinary life, such as Raffling for a Watch, the interior of a Blacksmith’s Shop, a Country Auction, etc., and these pictures may be considered his most successful performances. At Stafford House are two paintings by Bird in his second or more ambitious style — ‘ Chevy Chase/ and the ‘ Death of Eli.’ For these two works the artist received eleven hundred guineas. He died at Bristol in 1819, and his remains were interred in the cathedral 300 LIGHTS IN ART . of that city. In his time appeared many of the genre productions of Leslie, Witherington, and Rippingille. HENRY HOWARD, Born in London, 1769, learned the rudiments of painting from Phillip Reinagle, and afterwards com- pleted his studies in the Royal Academy. In 1791 he visited Italy, where he remained about three years, spending his time nearly in accordance with the advice of Sir Joshua Reynolds, from whom he had received a letter of introduction to the British Minister at Florence. He finally became a distinguished portrait and historical painter, and, in 1833, was elected Pro- fessor of Painting to the Academy, where he exhibited two hundred and fifty-seven works from 1794 to the year of his death, 1 847. William Hilton, who died in 1839, possessed fine poetical feeling, and equalled, in many respects, the refined taste of Howard. Hilton painted difficult subjects with considerable success from the Old Testament, Spenser’s 4 Faerie Queene/ the works of Shakespeare, etc. SIR DAVID WILKIE. Our familiar life painters have been very numerous. The name of Wilkie, who was born in 1785, occupies a conspicuous place on the roll. He was the son of a Scottish Presbyterian minister in the county of Fife, LIGHTS IN ART 301 and received his artistic education at the Trustees’ Academy, Edinburgh, 1 where he greatly distinguished himself in drawing — the solid foundation of his future excellence. Having produced his painting of Pitlessie Fair, probably his best work, he resolved, like many of his gifted countrymen before and since his time, to push his fortune in the south. Accordingly, in 1805 he proceeded to London, where, in the following year, he exhibited his famous picture of the Village Politi- cians. This novel performance established his repu- tation. Works of a similar character, and not less excellent, annually appeared in the public exhibitions of the metropolis during a period of several years, in which his celebrity reached the culminating point. Within that brilliant period he produced the Blind Fiddler, the Rent Day, the Penny Wedding, the Chelsea Pensioners, and many others, in remarkable unity of style, considering that nearly twenty years were devoted to their production. Academical degrees, riches, esteem, and the honour of knighthood, were liberally bestowed upon him between the years 1809 and 1836 ; and yet all those distinctions and rewards proved totally insufficient to satisfy his desires. Sir David Wilkie grew tired of delineating the simplicity of humble every-day life, and aspired to rival the great masters in portrait and historical painting. 1 Sir William Allan and William Simson were Wilkie’s fellow- students in the same academy. 302 LIGHTS IN ART. The powerful effects of Rembrandt, and the dashing execution of Velasquez, imparted to his mind new ideas, and for ever chased away those original concep- tions to which he had been solely indebted for all his renown. This unfortunate dereliction commenced in 1825, when he first visited the Continent. His at- tempts at portraiture in the style of Rembrandt were lamentable failures. In truth, all his travels and studies in Spain and other countries, where high art had formerly reigned, only enabled him to represent, in a somewhat coarse, unfinished manner, extraneous subjects with which he was not thoroughly conversant. Wilkie's pencil ought never to have been employed in painting romantic Spanish donnas, sinister-looking friars, nor indolent monks ; and would have been far better engaged in depicting, with the artist’s early care and assiduity, the homely characters of his native land. The blue-eyed lasses of Caledonia, their sturdy Highland blades, old wives, venerable sires, and blus- tering bailiffs, all painted from life at home, would have been more readily appreciated by British people. Toil and wandering in strange lands hastened his dis- solution. He became unwell in Egypt, and died at sea on his way from that country to England, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. The illness by which he was attacked in Egypt being caused by the plague, the perishable remains of Sir David were speedily committed to the deep. LIGHTS IN ART. 303 Of Wilkie’s two styles, the first only is worthy of special regard. This he steadily pursued before he travelled out of Britain ; and one cannot help regret- ting that Continental influences, instead of improv- ing, entirely banished it from his practice. The works in his first style are highly estimable in every point of view. Abounding with truth and originality of thought, they never fail to leave a deep impres- sion on every mind, not easily effaced. They are intelligible pictures of simple and unsophisticated life, with which we all love to be familiar. Few of us grow weary by contemplating the various groups of humble individuals, either in sadness or in mirth, as we *find them depicted by Wilkie. He never made truth appear unseemly by any burlesque ex- pression or attitude. Every figure is faithfully re- presented ; while all the feelings and emotions of the heart, seen in the countenance, are studied with the skill of a physiognomist. Merriment is so truly portrayed as not to incite undue laughter in the spectator. He finished with the most perfect nicety, yet not in the elaborate manner of Ostade and other Dutch masters. Generally, he bestowed as much care upon all the subordinate parts of his work as he did upon the figures. Even a pin-cushion, that insignificant though useful article, which no tidy woman chooses to be without, occupied more attention than Etty or Haydon ever gave to their 304 LIGHTS IN ART . gigantic heroes. It may be proper to observe, that the pictures produced in the latter years of his first style possess more richness of colouring, and are more freely handled, than the works executed during the early days of his career. The difference, how- ever, does not amount to a distinct manner. The compositions of Wilkie, though perfectly artistic, have all the appearance of accidental grouping. On looking at them, the idea is suggested that a number of individuals promiscuously placed themselves as they pleased, and without any feeling of constraint. The painter who is able to generate this idea is truly great in his art, which he studiously conceals by im- parting a natural air to the most laborious and arti- ficial work. Even comical subjects cannot well be described without serious thought and systematic treatment. Brouwer, with all his habitual drollery, had moments of calm reflection. There is perhaps less concealment of art in Wilkie’s Village Festival than in all the other compositions belonging to his first manner. In this well-known production there are several distinct groups, all very excellent, but too widely separated for the preservation of that unity which is absolutely indispensable in a perfect com- position. Besides, the painter has composed each group too much in accordance with Academic rules to suit the natural hilarity of an out-door festive gathering in rural life. He ought to have remem- LIGHTS IN ART 305 bered that elegance and propriety are at variance with the process of inebriation. Teniers and Ostade were completely successful when they represented the boorish revelry of Flanders and Holland, be- cause they truly depicted the inartificial medley of peasants who were all actuated by one desire only — - the eager wish for boisterous merriment . 1 English villagers, when assembled in large numbers for the sole purpose of wild enjoyment, were probably no more refined in the time of Wilkie than the drunken Flemish and Dutch boors of the seventeenth century. His second or foreign style presents little to recom- mend it. The pictures belonging to this category are unpleasantly brown in colour, while the execution is loose and altogether unsatisfactory. The excellent genius of Wilkie appeared to have fled, leaving him to grope in a walk of art entirely unknown to him, in which he continually lost his way, and never arrived at the goal of his wishes. Many of Sir David’s contemporaries produced pictures similar to those in his first style, though without any attempts at imitation. Besides Bird, Henry Liverseege, John Burnet, William Collins, Thomas Clater , 2 Parker of Newcastle, H. Pidding, T. S. Good, Farrier, and the father of the compiler of 1 Rubens also painted a village festival, and faithfully represented the rude hilarity natural at rustic merry-makings. 2 Son of Francis Clater, author of Every Man his own Farrier . U LIGHTS IN ART. 30 6 this work, were among the best painters of ordinary life. But the most formidable rival of Wilkie was WILLIAM MULREADY, A native of Ireland, who found his way to London about 1800. He was Wilkie's junior by one year only. At the age of twenty-three he produced a capital work, 'Fair Time,' and subsequently appeared his 'Choosing the Wedding Gown,' the 'Wolf and the Lamb/ and the ‘Whistonian Controversy,' all works of the highest class in his line of art. His application was truly indefatigable ; he is said to have used the pencil until a day or two of his death, which took place in his seventy-seventh year, 1863. Unlike many other artists, who frequently contribute six or eight pictures to one exhibition, Mulready was satisfied with one a year, believing that a painter's reputation depended upon the quality of his labour more than upon the quantity of work produced. He never visited the Continent, and never evinced any desire to change the kind of subjects which he chose for careful delineation at the beginning of his career. During all his long life he constantly aimed to ren- der the natural style of his adoption perfect. The remains of this single-minded artist repose at Kensal Green. LIGHTS IN ART. 307 SIR JOHN WATSON GORDON, Born in 1790, the year in which Sir Joshua Reynolds concluded his admirable discourses at the Royal Academy, was the son of a captain in the Royal Navy, and maternally descended from Falconer, the author of The Shipwreck. He studied with Wilkie and Allan in the Trustees’ Academy, Edinburgh, and at a very early period of life became an eminent portrait painter. In 1850 he succeeded Sir William Allan as President of the Royal Scottish Academy, and about the same time received the honour of knighthood. His portraits, which are true to nature, comprise those of Dr. Chalmers, Principal Lee, Sir Walter Scott, the Marquis of Tweeddale, Professor Wilson, Sir David Brewster, and many other emi- nent personages. In London, and also on the Con- tinent, his talents were well known and duly appre- ciated. Two portraits by him were exhibited at Paris in 1855, and highly commended by Theophile Gautier, the eminent critic. Sir John died at his residence, Catherine Bank House, near Edinburgh, in the seventy-fourth year of his age, and his mortal re- mains were interred in the family burying-ground, Canongate Churchyard. He never visited the Con- tinent, and desired no better models than those supplied by nature ; yet he was familiar with ancient art, without, however, professing the least connois- 3o8 LIGHTS IN ART. seurship. His style was always exceedingly simple, both in execution and colour, and he never aimed at any meretricious effect of light and shade. The vehicle, or liquid for working his colours, was pure, being composed of poppy oil and spirits of turpentine only. He entertained an utter abhorrence of varnish and all glutinous mediums, believing that the use of them could not produce sound, permanent work. This belief became gradually strengthened by his repeated observations of Wilkie’s latter practice, which we know has resulted in change of colour, cracking, and other evils, some of which are not even yet fully developed. Sir John never allowed his pic- tures to be varnished ; but the operation was some- times unfortunately effected without his knowledge by carvers and gilders, to whom his portraits were occasionally sent to be framed. CHAPTER VII. BRITISH LANDSCAPE PAINTING — PATRICK NASMYTH — TURNER— JOHN WILSON— STARK. N British landscape and marine painting, the productions of John Berney Crome of Norwich, Richard Bonington, Patrick Nasmyth, Turner, John Wilson, Stark, and Constable, are well known. Crome’s pleasing transcripts of nature are justly esteemed. Bonington, whose exist- ence terminated soon after he had arrived at muturity, imparted a charming appearance of reality to his pictures, which usually represent coast and other interesting views. He was an accomplished young man, and his early death produced feelings of the deepest regret in the hearts of a wide circle of friends and admirers. ^^PATRICK NASMYTH, A name which acquires increasing celebrity as time rolls on, was the son of Alexander Nasmyth, an eminent landscape painter, who spent the principal 3io LIGHTS IN ART part of a long and well-regulated life at Edinburgh, where Patrick 1 first drew breath about the year 1785. He was initiated in the art by his father, who earnestly impressed upon him the necessity of studying nature, as the only way by which he could acquire excellence and retain originality. The impressions received in early life were real, valuable, and lasting, and they safely guided him through the entire length ol his artistic career. The romantic scenery of Scot- land afforded him the best opportunities for the cultivation of landscape painting. He patiently studied the accidental formation of clouds, and the shadows thrown by them on the earth, and was thus enabled to delineate with accuracy the numerous and varied effects of the atmosphere. Mountain scenery, however, appears not to have been so attractive to his mind as the gently rising hills and extensive wolds in some of our English counties ; and, there- fore, his genius was not fully developed until he became a permanent resident in London. From the metropolis he made frequent journeys into the most picturesque parts of the country, where he produced a vast number of graphical sketches, from which his elaborately finished pictures were after- wards painted. The fine rural landscapes executed towards the close of his life approximate nearer 1 His baptismal name was Peter ; why it was changed to Patrick is not known. LIGHTS IN ART. 3ii to the works of Hobbima than the productions of any other British artist, and yet they are dis- tinctly national, and entirely separate from any foreign appearance. He never imitated any of the Continental masters, preferring to copy nature as he found her in many fertile and beautiful portions of our own island. In delineating the splendid varieties of the sky, the soft azure of the extreme distance bounded by an undulating horizon, the in- tervening open country, the leafing and barks of trees, and diversified foregrounds, where dock-leaves luxuriantly grow, he was truly unrivalled. He drew all his designs upon a white ground, with Italian black chalk ; he then introduced the shading, by means of bitumen mixed with turpentine. Allow- ing that preparation to dry, colours were employed, and the work was finished in portions, each at one painting, and so accurately as to require no sub- sequent retouching. The sky and the extreme dis- tance were first painted upon the clean white ground of the canvas, and always finished in one day, however large the picture might be. His blue was the purest ultramarine, and the grey tints in clouds and distant parts of the landscape were composed of the same precious colour, burnt cork, and light red. The gradations of green were mostly pro- duced by ultramarine, terra verte, and brown pink cooled, where necessary, by a mixture of burnt 312 LIGHTS IN ART. cork and flake white. The vehicle used to render his tints soft and facile for working, was mastic varnish mixed with poppy oil for the sky and dis- tance, and boiled linseed oil, also mixed with the same kind of varnish, for all the other parts of the landscape. The serious cracking which is now observable in many of Nasmyth’s pictures, has by several persons been attributed to the mixtures above mentioned ; but those who entertain that belief are in error : the real cause of the cracking referred to is altogether occasioned by premature varnishing, applied after the paintings had been disposed of by the artist. Nasmyth, and all his brethren in art, cannot be blamed for the injudicious meddling of unskilful hands. Like many other landscape painters of the British and Dutch schools, Nasmyth was deficient in drawing the human form. He seldom, therefore, introduced figures. The beautiful painting of Lee Wood, near Bristol, formerly the property of the late Lord North wick, originally appeared without figures of any kind ; and the gentleman who bought it from the artist employed Alexander Fraser, Wilkie’s assist- ant, to introduce a gipsy party. This introduction was privately effected without Nasmyth’s knowledge, and, though admirably executed, somewhat mars the solitude of the scene. Prominent figures, indeed, were unsuitable for the quiet character of the artist’s LIGHTS IN ART. 313 well-studied designs.^ tJnfortunately, Nasmyth be- came, in the prime of life, rather too fond of convivial pleasures ; yet he never associated, as Morland did, with low and degrading company. Dissipation, how- ever, in all ranks of society, is equally detrimental to health and fortune. Though a bachelor, he never saved money, and his affairs were in continual embar- rassment. During the last ten years of his life he lodged at Lambeth, and chiefly exercised the pencil when his landlady grew clamorous for payment. In those declining, gloomy years, his hand, originally vigorous, became unsteady and nerveless ; and when, in sadness, he sat at his easel, he required to imbibe frequently the deceitful spirit which had, by excessive use, deprived him of his natural power and stability. About the end of July 1831 he made an excursion to Norwood, accompanied by two friends, for the pur- pose of sketching. Heavy rain had fallen on the previous day, and the air was still chilly. Nasmyth commenced his drawing, and remained stationary for nearly two hours, when, the sketch being finished, he rejoined the friends whom he had left at an inn. He complained of being unusually cold; yet, after par- taking of some refreshment, he felt revived, and the party spent the remainder of the day pleasantly. On the following morning, however, he laboured under the effects of a violent disease, which, in the course of a few days, and in spite of all medical treatment, was 3H LIGHTS IN ART. succeeded by fever. He gradually sank, and on the 1 8th of August breathed his last, in the forty- sixth year of his age. He died in much poverty, and was buried at the expense of John Wilson, the marine painter, and other friends, in St. Mary’s Churchyard, Lambeth. The works of Patrick Nasmyth are highly prized, and are now of great value in a commercial point of view ; but numerous copies have been produced, and these, many of them being painted in his lifetime by clever young artists, are often sold as originals. All copies and imitations are, however, easily detected by those who are thoroughly conversant with his peculiar style. In 1830 he sold his valuable collection of original drawings and sketches for thirty pounds to Mr. George Pennell, who also purchased several of his most highly finished pictures. The landscapes of one of his sisters, Anne Nasmyth, are nearly equal to his own productions. TURNER. After the time of Richard Wilson, the most eminent classical landscape painter in England was Joseph Mallord William Turner, Professor of Perspective in the Royal Academy. His early productions are chaste, natural, and carefully executed ; but after visiting Rome in 1819, where he practised the art with diligence, the energy of his original style became LIGHTS IN ART . 3i5 considerably modified. The serene climate of Italy, and a desire to rival the softness of Claude Lorraine, seem to have retarded the progress of his powerful genius. On returning to England he painted several pictures, which were decided imitations of the great foreign master whose works he was so desirous to emulate. His first manner of painting, which was forcible and full of truth, gradually disappeared, to make way for a new style, less vigorous and natural. Reference may here be made to a single work in his best time, now the property of the Earl of Yarborough. It portrays a storm at sea, and the wreck of the 'Minotaur/ The elements are in awful commotion, dark, frowning, and majestic ; while the straining vessel, dignified with a name denoting the skill of man combined with the strength of the bull, is doomed to succumb to the grand, mysterious powers of nature, and is truly a type of human impotence in comparison with the tempest. This picture strikes the thoughtful beholder at once with the littleness of man, and at the same time with the greatness, to our perception, of the delineator. Turners subsequent style, particularly the latter portion of it, which may be called his third manner, dwindled down to the extremity of vague affectation, which, if understood by himself, was hardly comprehended by any one else, being almost a literal delineation of mists and vapours, or rather a kind of chaos out of which distinct form 3 16 LIGHTS IN ART. and detail had to be created in the brain of the spec- tator. We are reconciled to the thick mist often ob- served in nature, by the conviction that it will speedily be dissipated in the rays of the glowing sun. But an artist has no power to disperse painted fogginess, and consequently can never render incipient objects attrac- tive or properly visible. Though the imagination may do something to fill up a void, no painter is authorized in leaving too much to be supplied by fancy. A story is related of an old master who painted a picture of Pharaoh and his host drowned in the Red Sea while in pursuit of the Israelites ; but it only displayed sky and water. When the artist was requested to point out the Egyptians, he said, ‘ They are all drowned/ He was then asked, ‘ Where are the Israelites?' The reply was, ‘They have all passed over.' Turner might have been asked to point out the objects he professed to delineate, and he might have said, ‘ They are all shrouded by the atmosphere, which I have closely imitated, and which constitutes the grand mystery of my design.' His new manner certainly presented the recommendation of novelty ; and as the public (designated by Dr. Chalmers ‘a great baby ’) ever runs after the newest fashion, how- ever absurd, the fortunate painter found many ad- mirers, became rich, vain, and arrogant, and finally declined to sell, at any price, his extraordinary per- formances, which were allowed to accumulate till his LIGHTS IN ART. 3i7 death, almost unseen, at his gloomy residence, in Queen Anne Street. He never married, and realized during a long life, seventy-six years, about half a million of money, yet in his latter days affected -to live in poverty, under an assumed name, and died in a miserable lodging at Chelsea in December 1851. The character and works of Turner may be summed up in a very few words. Neglecting his genius, and forsaking the proper path in which he early trod, he wandered in a labyrinth of error, irre- coverably lost his way, became singularly eccentric in his manners, and a mere empiric in the art which nature had intended him to pursue in truth and sim- plicity. His second style is a vacuity, an empyreal conceit, something out of the order of nature ; and consequently his fame as an artist altogether rests upon those performances executed during his first manner, when he was contented to admire, and calmly to study, the perfect works of his Creator. In 1828 Turner contributed four important subjects to the Royal Academy : ' Dido directing the Equipment of the African Fleet/ ' Boccaccio relating the Tale of the Bird-Cage/ and two views of 'East Cowes Castle.’ Two years afterwards he sent no less than seven pictures to the same academy. That number con- tained his 'Fish Market on the Sands, with the Sun rising through Vapour,’ and the 'Funeral of Sir Thomas Lawrence, a Sketch painted from Memory.’ 318 LIGHTS IN ART. The six pictures referred to, though poetical in design, were feeble in execution, and sadly deficient in detail. Without the aid of titles, no person would have been able to ascertain what they were intended to represent. Nearly all the paintings, about one hundred, in the Turner Collection are encumbered by a superabundance of titles and mottos, many of which are from the ‘ Fallacies of Hope’ — a poeti- cal composition by the painter himself in imitation of Milton. Yet no painter can be justified who employs language to describe the delineations which his palette alone ought to render manifest to the eye of every intelligent beholder. The pen is an instru- ment for the poet, but not for the painter, who is bound to explain all his meaning upon canvas by the employment of the pencil. He is only warranted to give the plainest titles to his pictures. All extra or descriptive words are inadmissible in an art which, by the great masters, has been made to appear suf- ficiently comprehensive by means of lines and colours. The artist who is compelled to have recourse to lan- guage of any kind, in order to make his painting - intelligible, cannot be considered fully competent to exercise the art. A good picture can safely be left to tell its own story. The painter may possess a poetical imagination, but he has only colours and a variety of tints to express thought. His thoughts are never distinctly imparted by the pencil, and we can LIGHTS IN ART . 3i9 only infer from his hand the intent of his mind. The only vehicle he can use for the conveyance of know- ledge is simply a combination of lines and tints, and nothing more. Language is composed of a countless number of words, every one of which can almost tell a tale. Painting has not the same advantage ; even a series of pictures cannot very clearly describe a story. The greatest, painter is limited to particular incidents, singly given, to some particular posture or expression, to some passing effects of nature, and he cannot advance a single step beyond the prescribed bounds of his captivating art. Ambitious endeavours to render the art a language can never achieve a favourable result. Some recent critics, by ingenious theories, have conceived strange ideas regarding the definition of painting. The author of Modern Painters says the art of producing pictures is ‘a noble and expressive language but the assertion is a false theorem, inasmuch as any work of the pencil is only fitted to describe one moment of time. One book may contain a continuation of many events, but one picture can only offer a single incident. Painting is really art, work of skill, and not literature. A soli- tary picture can never present an epic character, and in the most complete series of pictures we can never discover motion, sound, motive, nor anything approxi- mating to change. The noble art is a fixed delinea- tion of all objects and fleeting appearances, and 320 LIGHTS IN ART . cannot offer to the mind anything in the shape of narrative ; consequently it is not a language. All lovers of true art must regret that Turner, with his splendid genius, and endued with classical knowledge, should have become, in his latter days, a mere vision- ary. Eighty-three drawings by this very remarkable man were exhibited at Manchester in 1857. Several years before his first visit to Italy, he seems to have been dissatisfied with his own original gifts, and to have aimed at surpassing the artist of Lorraine. In consequence of this predilection, he commenced to publish, in 1807, a book of sketches in imitation of the Liber Veritatis . The desire of emulating Claude continued to his last day. He bequeathed to the National Gallery two of his best paintings on condition that they should be placed in juxtaposition with two noble works by Claude. The condition was complied with — certainly to the dis- advantage of the donor. JOHN WILSON, A Scotchman, was born in 1774. He commenced and consistently followed until his death — which occurred at the age of eighty-one — a most pleasing branch of art, that of marine painting. His favourite subjects were selected with infinite taste from the English, French, and Dutch coasts, and were always delineated with truth and originality. Fishermen on LIGHTS IN ART 321 the beach, a few small vessels on different tacks, and perhaps a large ship indistinctly seen in the offing, chiefly constituted a most delightful picture. No artist ever painted sky and water in a more natural manner. The effect of light and shade upon clouds and sea, in various states of the weather, was studi- ously observed, and graphically described upon his canvas. All forms, natural and artificial, display picturesque beauty ; and no uncouth or hard outline anywhere appears to mar the suavity of his composi- tion. His colouring is equally sweet, and always agreeable. Like the younger Vandervelde, he adopted one peculiar tint, which pervaded his entire work. But instead of imitating the silver tint of the famous Dutchman, he selected one which had never been employed in a general way by any other painter. He well denominated the favourite hue which characterizes all his colouring, the pearly tint ; and it is chiefly the ascendency of this tint that gives a charming neutrality to all his posi- tive colours. The pearly influence has imparted a delicious coolness to his designs ; it is pleasing to every eye, and conveys a useful lesson to those young artists whose vision too often directs them to colour in a gaudy and unnatural manner. John Wilson frequently recommended the use of the pearly tint to the students of the British Institution ; and the same tint is observed, though sometimes 322 LIGHTS IN ART . insufficiently, in the paintings of his celebrated pupil, > Clarkson Stanfield. He had several other pupils, including David Roberts and his own son. Ex- cepting the productions of Stanfield and Roberts, the works of the industrious veteran far surpass those of his scholars and imitators. Roberts, of course, cannot be ranked among the number of imi- tators, because he adopted a style entirely different from that of his instructor. The quiet, clear coast scenes painted by John Wilson are scarcely inferior to the calm representations of Vandervelde ; and his breezy atmospheric effects are as true to nature as those of Backhuysen. Had he finished his produc- tions with more care and precision, he might have rivalled in every respect the greatest marine painters of the Dutch school. Wilson was one of the original members of the Society of British Artists, and passed the best portion of his life in London, at his favourite residence, No. 6 Union Place, Lambeth, near the grounds of the Archbishop’s palace, and within a short walk of the banks of the Thames. His contemporary, Callcott, painted coast scenes in a delicate and serene manner, and sometimes landscapes with cattle. Works of this class, produced in his first style only, entitle him to the appellation of the English Cuyp. Wilson, having never departed from his own proper subjects, was a more steady genius. Callcott’s second and last manner was historical. LIGHTS IN ART . 323 JOHN FREDERICK HERRING, A self-taught animal painter, was born in England of Dutch parents about the year 1794. He appears to have been always well acquainted with horses. At an early period of life he was the driver of the York and London stage coach, called the ‘ Highflyer.’ Doncaster, Epsom, and other racing localities fur- nished him with subjects befitting his genius, and he produced many admirable pictures which were chiefly exhibited at the Royal Academy and the British Institution. He had the honour of being appointed animal painter to the Duchess of Kent, and many portraits of celebrated horses by his hand are pre- served in the royal and other collections. Herring was a plain, humble man, and though an artist by nature, he was by no means scientific. To- wards the middle of the present century a great re- volution had commenced to pass over the old way of travelling, but the artist-coachman could never bring his steady mind to aid in any degree the new system. To his eye, four splendid horses harnessed to an elegant stage-conveyance, containing, outside and in, eighteen travellers, comprised a much finer sight than a locomotive dragging, it might be, with the speed of the wind, on monotonous iron rails, a train of carriages crammed with hundreds of living creatures, bipeds and quadrupeds, all liable at any moment to be 324 LIGHTS IN ART. crushed to atoms by collision, or hurled over some tremendous precipice to certain destruction. To him, a picturesque roadside inn was more pleasant than a railway station, the smiling countenance of the inn- keeper more inviting than the visage of any stiff, formal station-master, and the crack of his own whip more musical than the railway whistle. The old mode of transition presented charms which he could never discover in the new system. He believed that the motion of man was never intended to vie with the swiftness of a bird ; and he equally disliked steam- engines and balloons because they were unnatural. As he could never exchange the open road for the circumscribed rail, and as he was compelled by pecuniary circumstances to labour, he preferred, when obliged to relinquish the bridle, to grasp the pencil, of which he was only deprived by death in his seventy-first year. Herring painted in the most simple manner ; yet his pictures will probably endure longer than the works of many other artists who were guided by academical rules. No man ever surpassed him in hard, practical knowledge. He may be said to have lived all his life among the animals he delighted to portray, and to have been equally at home on the road, the race-course, and the hunting-ground. The symmetry, action, and habits of horses formed in his breast the basis, and the only one, of all excellente. LIGHTS IN ART. 325 GEORGE LANCE, A still-life painter, was born in Essex, 1802, and lived sixty-two years. He had received instructions from Haydon, and also in the British Institution, but be- lieving himself unqualified for the regular pursuit of historical painting, he abandoned that line of art, and adopted the lowest branch of all, to which, in the course of time, he imparted considerable dignity. He appears to be the first English artist who attained eminence in the delineation of fruit and flowers, and consequently his works have elicited much admira- tion, especially in that class of individuals who only patronize new art. But to those who are duly con- versant with the productions of Van Huysum, Mig- non, Baptiste, and many other flower-painters of old time, the pictures of Lance do not reach a superlative degree of excellence. Sometimes, when the remem- brance of Haydon perhaps crossed his mind, he at- tempted historical and genre subjects with partial suc- cess; but these are few in number. As a still-life and fruit painter, he is represented in our National Gallery. DAVID ROBERTS — THOMAS SEDDON. We must now offer a few more remarks respecting David Roberts. Though in early life a house and scene painter, he became a very distinguished member of the Royal Academy in London, and also an hono- rary member of the Academy in Edinburgh, his native 326 LIGHTS IN ART. city ; to the corporation of which, a few years since, he presented one of his largest works, a view of Rome, now in the Scottish National Gallery. On that occa- sion he received the freedom of the city. The works of this popular artist are varied in their character. His early productions, including the ‘Bridge o’ Doon’ and ‘Alloway Kirk,’ are painted in a careful and very simple manner. After settling in London, about 1822, his original manner became changed for one of greater freedom and more artistic skill. The first exhibited work by Roberts, Rouen Cathedral, appeared at the Royal Academy in 1826. About the year 1839, he commenced a tour in the East, where he made numer- ous sketches, afterwards published under the title of ‘ The Holy Land.’ One of his best finished pictures, executed altogether in London from a sketch, is a view of Jerusalem with the Mount of Olives. A similar subject was painted by Thomas Seddon, whose visit to the East was prior to that of Roberts. Seddon’s picture, completed in 1834, possesses the important advantage of having been entirely painted on a spot in the vicinity of Jerusalem. Some people appear to believe that Roberts was the first delineator of eastern life and scenery. It may, therefore, not be out of place to mention here that he was also preceded by another artist, Nicholas Ryckx, who was born at Bruges in 1637, and who devoted many years to the occupation of sketching nearly all the memorable LIGHTS IN ART. 327 places in the Holy Land. The finished oil pictures, afterwards painted by Ryckx, of Jerusalem and the neighbouring country, are most careful in execution and true in colour. His works are highly esteemed, but they seldom meet the public eye. It is probable that Seddon 1 and Roberts never beheld a picture by Nicholas Ryckx. The fact of an old master being ac- tuated by the very motives which guided subsequent painters to Palestine is greatly in favour of the assertion of the King of Jerusalem, who wrote for all time, that ‘there is no new thing under the sun/ Roberts left an immense number of pictures, in oil and water colours, many of which are interesting and beautiful views in other lands. Street scenes, and interiors of Continental cathedrals, with numerous figures, are among his most successful efforts. The painting of his figures and his general colouring seem to partake a little of the Spanish school ; but he often displays a want of due finish, while his colouring is sometimes heavy, present- ing in too high a degree the prevalence of a brown tint. His method of execution is frequently loaded ; yet he was a perfect master of light and shade, and well knew how to produce the most striking effects. Should his pictures escape varnish , they will no doubt be transmitted to an admiring posterity. He realized a considerable fortune, and died suddenly in the autumn of 1864, ' m the sixty-eighth year of his age. 1 Thos. Seddon died at Cairo, 1856, in the thirty-fifth year of his age. 328 LIGHTS IN ART. JAMES STARK, Born in 1794, was the best pupil of Crome. His landscapes are truly English in their character, and approximate nearer to the delightful style of Patrick Nasmyth than the works of any other British painter. He did not, however, imitate Nasmyth ; his manner is altogether original, founded upon the close study of nature. Some of his most carefully finished land- scapes have been ascribed to the distinguished master, whose manner resembled his own ; yet no judge of the two styles can mistake one for the other. Stark painted figures more accurately than Nasmyth, — a superiority partly acquired in the rustic academy at Chelsea, of which he became a member about the year 1832. The number of members was below twenty, and included Thomas Clater, C. R. Stanley, J. C. Brown (a Scottish artist), Davis, Novis, and Priest. The time for study was in the evening of two days every week, and the models — draped figures and animals — were judiciously selected within the locality of Chelsea. The members who professed landscape painting derived considerable benefit from that rural school. During several years, Stark annually exhibited pictures at the Royal Academy and the British Insti- tution. English pastoral scenery was also painted with the utmost truth and effect by John Constable, but his method of execution, though original, was LIGHTS IN ART. 329 rather mannered. Stark produced natural effects ; he equalled Constable in colour, and surpassed him in accuracy of touch. There is an appearance of fritter or spottiness in the handling of the senior artist which we never perceive in the pictures of Stark. Both artists closely copied nature, and yet we discover no similarity in their productions. This kind of separate and distinct originality is of the highest importance in art. Stark died in 1859, twenty-two years after the demise of Constable. SIR CHARLES EASTLAKE, Fifth President of the Royal Academy, was born at Plymouth, and educated at Plympton, where the first president had been instructed. Eastlake became a pupil of Haydon, also a native of Plymouth, and in early life visited France, Italy, Greece, and Sicily. He spent fourteen years in Italy, and painted an interesting series of pictures representing the banditti of the country. Though not subjects of ordinary life, they were true to nature, and carefully delineated. These pictures were exhibited at the British Institution during the keepership of William Barnard, and are probably his best artistic productions. He succeeded Sir Martin Archer Shee as president of the Royal Academy in 1850, and from that period his practice in painting may be said to have nearly ceased. As a literary man, Sir Charles ranked high, having 330 LIGHTS IN ART left several excellent volumes on the history and methods of various Continental schools. In 1853 he received the degree of D.C.L. from the University of Oxford, and was subsequently invested with the order of the Legion of Honour by the Emperor Napoleon the Third. Perhaps the most important of his official duties consisted in the purchase of rare old foreign pictures for this nation. These were selected with infinite taste and the utmost care. Sir Charles died at Pisa in the winter of 1865, at the age of seventy- three. Though Eastlake cannot fairly be considered a great artist in practice, his many other abilities and extensive knowledge connected with the profession of his choice have imparted to the world a remarkable lustre, which fully entitles him to a position among the bright luminaries in art. In his literary pursuits he met with a kindred spirit in his accomplished lady, the amiable daughter of the erudite Dr. Rigby. JOHN GRAHAM GILBERT, A native of Glasgow, displayed an early love for art, and when quite a youth proceeded to London for the purposes of study. In 1821, he obtained the gold medal of the Royal Academy for a picture of the children of Charles the First after Vandyck. He afterwards visited the Continent, and on his return to Britain commenced practice as a portrait painter in LIGHTS IN ART. 33i Edinburgh, where he certainly might have remained had not his professional calling procured him an introduction to a lady of large fortune, Miss Gilbert of Yorkhill, whom he married, and whose name he assumed. Yorkhill is a fine estate, beautifully situated on the banks of the Clyde, where he delighted to study, and where many of his best pictures are pre- served. Though possessed of little imagination, he had a good eye for colour, and worked with extreme care. He was chiefly eminent in the single figures of young females, and these charming productions, in numerous instances, are not inferior to Sir Joshua’s attempts in imitating the famous Venetian School. Graham Gilbert died in the spring of 1866, at Glas- gow, in the seventy-second year of his age. His most important work is the portrait, life-size, of Sir John Watson Gordon in a court dress ; yet the most pleasing, perhaps, of all his productions is the large half-length portrait of the first wife of Captain James Stirling, R.N., of Glentyan. It resembles in feminine beauty many of the fascinating delineations of Lawrence, or even of Vandyck. The lady herself was young, beautiful, and amiable, and the studious painter appears to have been enamoured with his subject. The compiler had the pleasure of seeing this picture in the summer of 1847. CHAPTER VIII. IMMORTALITY OF GENIUS — PERNICIOUS INFLUENCES — ART BLIGHTED BY COMMERCE — CONCLUSION. HESE pages are chiefly intended to con- tain strictures upon the varied labours of deceased painters, whose genius and attain- ments raised them to the highest distinction in the history of art. Those eminent men conferred certain benefits upon the human race during and after their own days. Earth has received their mortal frames ; yet their spirits, or the heavenly influences by which they were actuated, have returned to the Giver of all good, and will endure for ever. Genius is a spirit, and cannot die. At the fall of the human tenement, the divine spirit is preserved for holy purposes, known only to One, whose essence it is. It animated the minds of men in the early ages of the creation, and still exists. The spirit that inspired and directed the intellect of Apelles, Michael Angelo, and Raphael is in continuity, to be again imparted by Omnipotence LIGHTS IN ART. 333 at any time. All men have not received the gift of genius ; and the few upon whom the spirit has been bestowed have only received it in degrees, or in cer- tain portions, which cannot be enlarged except by the illimitable Father himself. Full possession of the heavenly influence would render the performances of man perfect, so that they might even rival the works of the Author of nature. Rivalry of this kind cannot be permitted ; for although God created man in His own image, He wisely ordained the creature to remain for ever in a state of subordination to His own undivided power. In the whole course of time, only one instance is known of the plenitude of the Divine Spirit being lodged in one man, and that man was no less than the perfect Son of God, specially sent to dignify all mankind. We know that Michael Angelo possessed a large share of the heavenly spirit; consequently, his works nearly approached perfection. Many other chosen individuals have excelled in pro- portion to the magnitude of the celestial gift. But another influence, an evil genius, exists and exercises an authority according to the strength of the position gained. This deleterious spirit is frequently in open hostility to the holy influence, and, when successful, the conquered soul becomes added to the appalling host under Satanic dominion. The spirit of evil in- stigated Caravaggio to commit murder, and prompted Brouwer and Morland to become the votaries of 334 LIGHTS IN ART Bacchus. Wilkie and Turner neglected their proper gifts when they were induced to aim at the acquire- ment of supernatural ability ; and others have become the mere worshippers of mammon. A few brief observations on the practice of living artists may here be offered to the reader, without animadversion upon any particular individual. The laudable desire of instructing our contemporaries can best be entertained by a retrospection of the past, — an hypothesis which seems to render the study of history more valuable than the most laboured specu- lations ever written upon living persons. Departed men cannot complain ; while souls still dwelling in the flesh are too sensitive to relish the truth, however candidly advanced. As the human eye recoils from the unclouded sun in meridian splendour, so the strongest mind shrinks from the glaring display of unmasked reality. Sensitiveness is one of the weak characteristics of our nature, and we usually succumb to its influence. Criticism upon the living, there- fore, should be extremely temperate, otherwise it can hardly produce the desired effect. The mildest language is alone suitable for the feebleness of our human capacity. If intended to be pleasing, truth can only be displayed under a veil ; no mortal can endure it in a pure, denuded state. The art of painting, especially in these islands, has no doubt degenerated during the last fifty years. LIGHTS IN ART, 335 Art-unions, and other mercantile speculations, have contributed their influences towards producing this unfortunate result. In the year 1834, the first art- union, or association for the promotion of the fine arts, was formed. Shortly afterwards, similar asso- ciations were established under royal auspices. The system established by associated individuals, and annually supported by subscribers, has, in little more than a quarter of a century, crowded the walls of many splendid modern mansions, to the exclu- sion of every specimen of fine old art. Public taste has been in a great measure perverted ; and too many young persons, with no befitting genius, have been induced to embrace the profession of painting. In nearly all the great cities of our empire, the annual exhibitions are also crowded to excess with questionable new productions. Private residences are, of course, furnished from these yearly exhibi- tions. The great Continental masters found no difficulty in meeting with admirers without the assistance of art unions, and the ostentatious display of their works upon the walls of immense galleries. Artists and the public at large required no associations of pseudo-connoisseurs for the promotion of art. Genius encountered no hindrances when needing to be seen and appreciated. In these days, it has been urged that art-unions have improved the minds of the 336 LIGHTS IN AR T. middle and lower classes of society ; but the argu- ment is illogical, inasmuch as no unnatural and gaudy representations can possibly improve the intellect, which ought only to be cultivated by care- ful and classical tuition. If painted representations really produce any effect upon the mind, the con- templation of high art is absolutely required. Our modern pictures are mostly theatrical in design, extravagant in colour, and very attractive to the vulgar eye by the addition of superbly ornamented gilt frames. The commercial advantages presented by annual exhibitions, art-unions, and fashionable picture-deal- ing, induce too many persons to speculate in art. Even established artists of eminence are allured by the same popular causes. But undue praise is fre- quently awarded to incipient productions, painted by very young men, who in consequence imagine themselves great artists, become vain and arrogant, live expensively, and finally sink into obscurity. Those belonging to that inferior class may perhaps, when no longer deluded by ambitious notions, obtain a precarious livelihood by painting commonplace portraits, repairing damaged pictures, and dealing in a small way ; or they may relinquish the brush altogether and turn to photography. Artists of great ingenuity, attracted by the smil- ing prospects of a quick and abundant return for LIGHTS IN ART. 337 their labours, become extremely impatient, and blindly adore mammon, — a more deceitful deity than all the false gods of the ancient pagan world. Genius of celestial origin is neglected, grieved, and lies dormant in the soul of every mortal who bends in adoration to the glittering dust of the earth. Such deadening influences upon the minds of many of our leading artists have the effect of producing vast numbers of flimsily executed works, and of diffusing improper ideas of art throughout all ranks of society. The progress of high art can receive no beneficial impetus from the schemes of commercial speculators ; and those artists who are anxious to become rich virtually wander from the safe and quiet course which might have led them to fame and fortune. Inordinate love of gain, pleasure, and luxurious living destroy the calm meditative powers of the mind, which becomes unstable and disquali- fied for any studious pursuit. The artist who desires to attain indubitable excellence, should never forget that he is, in the strict sense of the term, a working man, whose labours, like those of any other handi- craft calling, must be constant, uniform, and un- wearied. Most of our fashionable painters, especi- ally those who enjoy high favour, might feel offended were they informed that their labours belong to the manual category. Should they avowedly dislike the class referred to, we ought to conclude that they 33 § LIGHTS IN ART. have no strong inclination for labour, or that when they employ the pencil, it is used without the neces- sary power. Genius is scared away by luxury and indolence, or is permitted, by want of exercise, to lie dormant within the breast. Duty is forgotten, because conscience is asleep. Fine pictures cannot be produced by dreams and fancies, nor by a mere partial employment of the pencil. Those who profess the difficult art of painting must be up and doing. A great oracle may here be quoted : ‘ Awake, as in the ancient days, in the generations of old .’ 1 A singular awakening was manifested not long ago by several distinguished artists, who affected to discern the perfection of beauty in the crude pro- ductions of the mediaeval ages, and of the dull period immediately preceding the brilliant career of Raphael. The novelty of imitating those unnatural performances, and the favour bestowed upon the imitators by the public, lasted much longer than could have been reasonably anticipated. Some commendation is unquestionably due to the works of the artists who lived in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, from the fact that those painters worked without any examples of high art for their guidance. They are supposed to have been entirely ignorant of the noble works produced by the ancient Greek and Roman artists. What ^sa. li. 9. LIGHTS IN ART. 339 they achieved may be considered superior to the incipient efforts of the Byzantine epoch, and ought therefore to be preserved as evidences of improve- ment in the progress of art ; but they certainly ought not to be selected as objects for imitation. Our artists were not required to go so far back as the middle ages in search of proper guides. They might surely have found something better in the works of the great masters of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Yet under the influence of the pre-Raphaelite mania, their eyes appeared to be closed to the excellencies of the well-known Italian and Flemish schools. The illustrious names of Raphael, Titian, and Rubens appear to have passed altogether from their minds. Happily, the novelty of imitating the faded relics of a dark period gradually subsided, and is now nearly abandoned, to make way, however, for a modified style, some- what resembling the hard and elaborate manner of Albert Durer and other German painters. Many popular British artists now represent every object with photographic exactness, or scientific particu- larity, which is positively at variance with the per- fect freedom, delightful blending, and harmony of the glorious creation. The nineteenth century has not yet produced geniuses in our land, capable of astonishing the world by their conceptions, or by the master-strokes of their pencils. Even our best 340 LIGHTS IN ART. professors of the noble art should abandon the high- ways recently traversed, and diligently seek the proper course, which can alone lead to lasting renown. Mere fancies, and the bad taste of numerous patrons, can never insure the fame of an artist, who, should he really entertain the desire to become eminent, must study the works of the great masters, and afterwards confine himself to a close imitation of nature. ^ppjenbt*. 41 / APPENDIX. HE productions of the old masters, con- sidered in the aggregate, are not in a satisfactory condition. In all pictures known to be extant, however, the decay incident to the lapse of centuries is not equally apparent. While some are fresher and more brilliant than most of the works executed at the present day, others, not so well preserved, appear gloomy and often repulsive. The remarkable freshness which we occasionally observe in some old paintings may be accounted for on the assumption that the materials employed to produce them were of a very enduring kind, and that the most scrupulous care was constantly taken to protect them from injury. Dry and pure atmosphere, and strict prohibitions against the pretended skill of all em- pirics in the dangerous practice of improving or restoring, have unquestionably resulted in the entire preservation of many valuable works. An incredible number of other ancient productions, many of which, doubtless, were originally very estimable, have, from 344 LIGHTS IN ART. a variety of causes, lost their pristine beauty. Dark grounds were often adopted ; evanescent colours, perhaps, were not unfrequently employed ; and, in the ordinary course of time, an unpleasing mutation became the inevitable consequence. These causes of decay have been followed by others of a more detrimental character. Situations penetrated by the intense rays of the sun, or liable to the effects of damp ; the ignorance of domestics, and other indi- viduals in charge of public and private buildings ; the devastations of war, when valuable pictures were partially and sometimes wholly destroyed ; and the attempts at renovation by incompetent persons ; — are a few of the chief causes which have rendered a vast number of old paintings unattractive, and to ordi- nary observers utterly valueless. To a connoisseur, however, these mutilated and obscure specimens of former art are objects of very deep interest. He is glad to acquire them, and constantly displays a keen desire to find, beneath accumulations of re- paint, varnish, and dirt, all their original beauty. But even some connoisseurs are not always on the right path to arrive at truth. Instead of thoroughly relieving their art treasures of the impurities by which they are usually shrouded, on the plea of not desiring to alter ‘the tone / 1 a term often most im- 1 In painting, this favourite term implies the harmonious blending of the colours by time. LIGHTS IN ART. 345 properly used, they allow mercenary restorers to operate in a wrong way. The consequence is, that numerous old pictures become more obscured than ever by daubing, under the name of restoration, and bad varnishing, several times repeated. The owners of such works seem to believe that abundance of var- nish must necessarily bring to light many beauties, the positive appearance of which, however, is actually delayed by the very means employed to render them visible. Proprietors of old paintings ought to be struck by the remark of the late Professor Aytoun in a lecture delivered in the University of Edinburgh : ‘If you wish to see an object distinctly, the less the eye is attracted by the medium through which it is seen, the better.' But the ‘ medium ’ is not always even partially transparent. It is, indeed, usually so opaque that the keenest eye can hardly penetrate it ; consequently the original work of the master is nearly obscured. Thoroughly opaque bodies, or layers of repaint, are often applied by daubers, thoughtlessly employed to restore some of the most estimable productions of ancient art. All sorts of expedients have been resorted to for the purpose of concealing heavy repaint, or partial retouching. The most common is the application of excessive varnishing, combined with ‘toning,’ 1 as it is called, to impart the appearance of age to the 1 Toning — a cant term. 34 ^ LIGHTS IN ART new work. In numerous old landscapes, the original skies are altogether daubed over ; the extremities of the leafing nearest the clouds are fringed with false touches, to suit the fancy of the daring operator ; and the broad masses of clear shade in the fore- ground, or other parts, are rendered dark and un- pleasant by glazings of brown pink, Vandyck brown, etc. The draperies in many of the fine Italian pictures are painted or glazed over so completely as to hide the original colouring; while the pure and beautiful carnations of the figures are violated in a similar way. But no adequate description can be given of the immense havoc committed by that centipede in art — the reckless picture -restorer. Another craftsman extensively employed is the pic- ture-liner, whose operations are sometimes equally destructive. Old pictures painted upon canvas have at different periods required lining, or backing with new canvas, to prevent them from falling to pieces. The operation is often attended with imminent risk and even positive danger, in consequence of the injudicious means resorted to. Severe pressure, adopted for the purpose of levelling rising cracks, has invariably resulted in flattening those sharp and prominent touches which distinctly characterized the works of many of the best masters. Where violent heat has been combined with pressing, the effects produced have been deleterious in the extreme. LIGHTS IN ART . 347 The indiscriminate use of hot irons has frequently discoloured and even scorched sundry portions of the finest paintings ; and the damage thus sustained is irreparable, because the colours, in addition to the loss of their original brilliancy, have been weakened and deprived of their compact quality, and have in fact been reduced to a state resembling a sandy substance. This fragile condition is merely held together by the usual glutinous mixture employed in lining, and by an extraordinary application of varnish. Many kinds of varnishes are in use. Copal and other oily compounds are the most pernicious, being almost impossible to remove, after becoming dry and hard, with perfect safety. All resinous mixtures, though easily removed, produce a dull, clammy appearance over the surfaces of oil paint- ings, and ought therefore to be avoided. The least objectionable of all the inferior liquids is turpentine inspissated with Canada balsam. This compound being pure, causes no discoloration, and is removed with perfect ease in cases of necessity. But only one and perfectly safe varnish for old pictures is known. The pure and valuable mixture alluded to is composed of gum-mastic dissolved in spirits of turpentine by the hot rays of the sun in summer, or by means of heated sand during the winter months. Mastic varnish made in the cold season, however, is slightly inferior to that produced by 348 LIGHTS IN ART. natural heat. Being very expensive, mastic in a pure state is not generally used, even when the finest old works of art demand the nourishment it affords ; the use of it, of course, is most unwisely withheld. From what has been stated in reference to re- painting, destructive lining, and bad varnishing, possessors and collectors of old pictures may pos- sibly feel some alarm regarding their various ac- quisitions. It will be proper, therefore, to relieve such individuals of any doubts and fears they may entertain, by the assurance that all the productions of former art now remaining have not suffered in the same degree. Occasionally, indeed, a fine work may be seen in as perfect a state as when it was obtained from the master’s easel ; and, in addition, the mellowing of time may have rendered it even more beautiful than it originally appeared. A few cheering examples of almost entire preservation may yet be found, and numerous splendid pro- ductions have only partially suffered from mal- treatment. Vast numbers have certainly received the very worst usage ; and yet many of these are not beyond redemption. They may still be relieved of false and extraneous coverings ; they may be stripped close to the surface of the original work ; the condition to which they have actually been reduced may be satisfactorily ascertained, and judicious means LIGHTS IN ART. 349 may yet be applied to make them again agreeable and worthy of our regard. Stripping or thorough cleaning, requires the utmost caution, so as not to remove or injure the smallest particle of the genuine work. The operation should therefore only be per- formed by an artist who has devoted a considerable portion of his life to the study and management of old paintings. No person, unless practically ac- quainted with art, can know what a picture will bear under the critical operation of complete cleaning. Any technical description of the various methods em- ployed for the removal of decayed varnish, repaint- ing, and dirt would perplex the reader ; and no essential benefit would be derived by any individual, because almost every picture requires a mode of treatment adapted to the particular state in which it may be found. Scarcely two old pictures are ever seen exactly in the same condition, and a successful process upon one may prove the ruin of another. Hence arises the insurmountable difficulty of pre- scribing rules for the guidance of those who under- take the onerous task of restoring the works of the old masters to a state of purity. Success can only be expected to follow the laudable exertions of well- trained operators. Mere pretenders, however feasible their arguments may appear, ought never to be trusted. Noblemen and other proprietors of paint- ings are recommended not to leave the selection 350 LIGHTS IN ART. of cleaners to their agents or men of business, how- ever competent they may declare themselves to be. When art treasures require to be put in order, the arrangement for that purpose ought to be made be- tween the real owner and the actual operator. Intel- ligence, conscientiousness, and artistic skill should be among the component parts of the character selected. An honest man will not be scrupulous about allowing the progress of his work to be inspected by his em- ployer, who will thus acquire much of that useful knowledge respecting the state of pictures, which is at present chiefly confined to dealers. The value of old works mainly consists in their purity. When they have been singed by lining, rendered thin by over-cleaning, considerably repainted, and covered by a cataclysm of varnish to conceal damages, their prime value may truly be said to be lost for ever. The most expert hand can never restore annihilated excellencies ; and the man who is bold enough to aver that he can bring before our view beauties known to have been annulled, may justly be stigmatized as a shameless impostor. A destroyed picture may be compared to a deceased person, whose body cannot be restored to life by any treatment of the physician. Careless lining and over-cleaning produce the most fatal results, and of course defy the greatest skill of the best operator. All extraneous matter, such as that caused by repainting and excessive varnishing, LIGHTS IN ART. 3Si may, perhaps, be safely removed with due caution ; and if pictures have not previously suffered from the effects of severe rubbing, the operation will prove highly satisfactory to all parties concerned. Should any holes or rents appear after careful stripping, the proprietor will not be greatly surprised, if he should happen to remember that his picture has passed through the dangers and vicissitudes of centuries. The unavoidable accidents of time, unless very severe, do not virtually mar the value of a fine painting, and may be prevented from appearing as eyesores by the very simple process of filling up and repairing; After cleaning, which for safety should be rather under than overdone, and the necessary renovation of damaged parts, the work may be laid aside, where it can receive the benefit of daylight without exposure to the intense heat of the sun, in order that it may become thoroughly hardened and fit for the reception of pure mastic varnish, which ought not to be applied sooner than a month or six weeks after the repairing is completed. The first coat of varnish may, if necessary, be followed by another after an interval of two months, care being taken to remove all dust and damp from the surface before the application of the second coat. Should the varnish appear to have sunk into the canvas, the picture will bear the addition of a third coat, which will in most cases obviate the dryness, and 35 2 LIGHTS IN ART. produce a clear, smooth surface. It invariably happens, that soon after a painting has been fully varnished, even with the purest mastic, a disagree- able-looking kind of fog, or chilly appearance, is observed to pervade the superficies, or outside of the shining substance. This partial obscurity, occasioned by atmospheric influence, is easily removed by smartly rubbing the whole surface with a soft, clean silk handkerchief So simple and so easy is this remedy, and withal so harmless, that it may be applied with pleasure by any lady or gentleman in a drawing-room, and does not require the pictures to be removed from the walls. Housemaids, foot- men, and all uninstructed persons should be posi- tively enjoined never to touch, in any way, the works of art belonging to their masters or mistresses. A person duly qualified should be appointed to inspect occasionally all pictures deposited in private mansions and public buildings, with the view of applying reme- dies wherever they may be required. Nearly all the finest paintings produced in the British school during the present century, and also numerous Continental productions of a recent date, have been brought into a dangerous condition by premature varnishing. Possessors of modern pic- tures, when they observe cracking and other un- favourable appearances, conceive the erroneous idea that the painters were unacquainted with the proper LIGHTS IN ART. 353 use of colours, and that they employed some dele- terious mixture which tended to render their work perishable in a comparatively short space of time. The blame, however, rests with the possessors, and not in any degree with the artists, whose perfor- mances, if allowed to remain as they were taken from the easel, would present a satisfactory appear- ance at the end of half a century at least. It will be necessary to explain the destructive process which invariably takes place after early varnishing. The vehicle employed to render the various pigments flexile and easy for the pencil is chiefly composed of oil ; and this vehicle, or medium, as it is sometimes called, is abundantly used throughout the entire manipulation of a picture. A very small portion of the oil is absorbed into the canvas, or panel, upon which the picture is painted. The oil is naturally attracted to the surface, that part being most exposed to the air, and gradually disappears by the imperceptible process of evaporation. This invisible process continues until all the moisture is exhausted, but is not of the same duration in every case. All pictures have not an equal body of paint, and consequently have not received an equal quan- tity of the oily matter. Accordingly, the length of time requisite for complete evaporation, in all cases, must considerably vary ; and it is perhaps impossible in any case to ascertain precisely the 354 LIGHTS IN ART. termination of the process. That a long period ought to expire before varnish is applied, must be sufficiently obvious ; and there will be no stretching beyond the mark in asserting, that not less than ten years ought to elapse before the most thinly painted oil picture can safely undergo the operation. In many instances, twenty and even thirty years may be necessary before the application of varnish. After varnishing, the surface becomes sealed and of a glassy hardness ; the escape of the fumes or vapours engendered by the oily moisture is impeded ; opposi- tion ensues between the two heterogeneal substances ; and the vapours rend and tear in their confinement until a visible hiatus, or perfect opening, in the glassy covering is effected. The breach appears in the form of a cleft, or ugly crack, and is rapidly suc- ceeded by countless others of a similar description. No cessation can take place until evaporation has forced a free passage to the air, the natural element for the total absorption of all exhalations. The mischief is not only apparent in the coating of varnish ; it actually extends to the painting, the surface of which is indelibly marked by unsightly cracks and odious fissures. Destroyed coats of mastic varnish can safely be removed by friction ; but cracks in the painting itself can never be really obliterated, — they can only be filled up and repaired. Another flagrant evil proceeds from early varnish- LIGHTS IN ART. 355 ing. The surface of the picture, not being in posi- tive contact with the atmosphere, is prevented from acquiring that mellowness, or agreeable tone, which can only be imparted by time and the effect of pure, unobstructed light. Mellowness produced by var- nishing is unnatural ; it gradually assumes a most offensive hue, either inclining to brown or green, according to the ingredients of which the varnish is composed. After the most careful cleaning, there- fore, ‘ the contrast/ observes the writer of an article in a recent publication, ‘ will generally be so great, upon the immediate exhibition of the picture to the owner’s eyes, that the colours will look raw, and the picture will appear crude .’ 1 The want of patience on the part of owners, and their indiscretion in the employment of ignorant persons, are the prime causes of the evils hitherto complained of. New paintings cannot be too cautiously preserved, and all meddling with their purity is positive violation. Artificial mellowness and a shining surface are at variance with their safety, and finally destroy all their original beauty. Years will effectually modify their primitive brilliancy, and even rawness itself will become softened and agreeable by age, without any assistance whatever. Perfect softness will cer- tainly be produced in due time ; and should the painting then appear, in consequence of the entire 1 Cassells’ Works of Eminent Masters. 1854. 3S<5 LIGHTS IN ART. evaporation of the oils, thirsty and arid, mastic varnish may be applied with the greatest advantage. Of course, a little gentle cleaning before the applica- tion of the liquid may in some cases be necessary. Copal, and every kind of oil varnish, should be scrupulously avoided, being totally unfit either for old or new paintings. Oily substances, however, can be removed, though not without the greatest care and immense risk, from strongly painted old pictures, especially those of the Italian and Spanish schools ; but when they appear upon the smooth and delicate surfaces of Dutch or Flemish works, every attempt to raise them is attended with posi- tive danger, and in many cases removal without destructive consequences is impossible. The evils arising from the use of oil varnish upon modern pictures, or, more properly speaking, upon pictures which have been painted during the last fifty years, are of the very worst description, and defy all the skill of the most able operator. Upon paintings so treated, no means can be devised of separating the oil contained in the varnish from the oils mixed with the several pigments. They have become so indissolubly united, so thoroughly incorporated, that the whole art of man, assisted by all the wonderful powers of chemistry, can never effect even the slightest appearance of disjunction. As food becomes part of the living body, and cannot be separated by human LIGHTS IN ART. 357 agency, so oil varnish becomes part of a new painting. Should any fearless operator determine, at all hazards, to take off the oily covering, not being aware of its connexion with the oils beneath, he must penetrate to the very priming of the canvas or panel, and the entire painting will be destroyed for ever. Fortun- ately, the fatal practice of spreading these deleterious mixtures over the surfaces of valuable paintings has never been very general, and is now, perhaps, nearly discontinued. It was formally condemned in 1853, when the dangerous condition of the national pictures was investigated by a select committee of the House of Commons. These inestimable works had received successive coatings of oil varnish, and are still, espe- cially the modern pictures, in a very unsatisfactory state. 1 The old works in that collection, however, may yet be restored, by prudent management, to something like their pristine beauty. The production of oil paintings involves a large amount of pecuniary cost, quiet study, and constant manual labour. Artists are literally working men ; and, since the first practice of the art down to the present day, enormous sums of money have been expended in the acquirement of their works. In all civilized countries paintings adorn the walls of the finest mansions, and skilful architects are employed to design the most expensive public galleries for their 1 See the Art Journal for July 1854. 358 LIGHTS IN ART. reception. Noble and wealthy proprietors appear satisfied with the means they have adopted for the custody and preservation of valuable works. Liberal salaries are paid to superintendents, curators, and keepers of galleries, where their services are supposed to be necessary ; yet the pictures themselves, acquired at such a vast expenditure, seem in reality to be little cared for. The bad condition in which numerous fine paintings are often found, cannot, however, be attributed to entire carelessness in the minds of the proprietors, who naturally feel disposed to protect their property from injury ; yet the same proprietors may at times be somewhat remiss, and therefore not sufficiently guarded in the selection of those persons who profess to cure every misfortune incidental to all works of art. The employment of empirics upon fine pictures is the occasion of lasting regret in the minds of the owners, to whom a line from one of our modern poets may be fitly applied — ‘Enjoyment stops where indolence begins.’ In conclusion, a single hint to the Government may not be deemed altogether irrelevant. The safe keep- ing of our national works of art might be secured by the appointment of inspectors of galleries, judiciously chosen, and carefully instructed in the onerous duties to be performed. Of course the chief duty would be to inspect, from time to time, the condition of all LIGHTS IN ART . 359 paintings in our national collections, and to prohibit any interference which they might consider likely to mar the preservation and permanent safety of those valuable productions. Inspectors should be men of the highest integrity, thoroughly conversant with all matters of art, ancient and modern, and inflexible in the discharge of their functions. Such a system, established by legislative authority, would be upheld and imitated by private individuals in possession of similar treasures, and thus a broad way would be opened for the certain attainment of a most desirable end — the conservation of the labours of departed genius. The works of nature are maintained in per- fect order by the hand that made them. Man, created after the divine image, cannot accomplish the grand object of his being by neglecting the work of his own skill. He was told to ‘ replenish the earth ’ by his labour, to fill every place under his dominion by the exercise of the genius imparted to him. 1 Be fruitful and multiply 9 was the divine command ; but man cannot multiply his labours by any weariness in their preservation. He is bound to conserve the valuable productions of his diligence not solely for his own gratification, but also for the benefit of his fellow- creatures, and of all succeeding generations. The perishable nature of our most enduring performances can supply no excuse for indifference, which is offen- sive to the great Giver of every talent we possess. at tty (EtJtnlmrgf) SM&ersttg $ress« BY T. AND A, CONSTABLE, PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY. LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. The Right Rev. the Bishop of Edinburgh, I Atholl Place, The Right Hon. the Lord Provost, . The Very Rev. the Dean of Edinburgh, 17 Atholl Crescent, Alexander Brothers, Renfield Street, Glasgow, W. H. Davenport Adams, .... W. Davenport Adams, .... George Aikman, Esq., A. L.W.C. S., 51 York Place, Rev. John Alison, Newington, Edinburgh, . Mrs. John Anderson, 6 Royal Terrace, Thomas Annan, Esq., 77 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow, Rev. Dr. Arnot, 6 Archibald Place, . Misses Aytoun, 28 Inverleith Row, . Bainbridge, Esq., North St. Andrew Street, . James Ballantine, Esq., Warrender Lodge, . William Ballingall, Esq., 12 Teviot Place, . W. Bankhead, Esq., 14 Eton Terrace, Mrs. Barclay, 14 Coates Crescent, . J. M. Barclay, Esq., R. S.A., 11 Forres Street, Dr. Bedford, Heriot’s Hospital, Mrs. Beith, 15 Grosvenor Crescent, . R. P. Bell, Esq., 10 North St. Andrew Street, Charles Bell, Esq., Crail, Fifeshire, . Mrs. Bentinck, Indio, Bovey Tracey, . George Bertram, Esq., Sciennes, Miss Beveridge, 9 Belgrave Crescent, Mrs. John Binny, Leopold Place, 2 A 362 LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. Professor John S. Blackie, 24 Hill Street, Rev. Professor Blaikie, D. D. , 9 Palmerston Road, Grange, Miss Blaikie, Meadow House, Fettes College, Sam Bough, Esq., A.R.S.A., 2 Hill Street, Rev. C. E. Bowden, 2 Ramsay Gardens, David Brewster, Esq., Logie Green, Edinburgh, William Brodie, Esq., 9 Cambridge Street, . John Brown, Esq., M.D., 23 Rutland Street, - David Bryce, Esq., Architect, 131 George Street, . Mungo Burton, Esq., A.R.S.A., 19 Leopold Place, Duncan Cameron, Esq., Stirling, .... Hugh Cameron, Esq., R.S.A., 16 Picardy Place, Lady Campbell, Garscube, ..... Miss C. E. Campbell, 2 Albyn Place, Miss Campbell of Glendaroch, Largie Castle, Cantyre, Mrs. Campbell, sen. , of Kilberry, 9 Rosebery Crescent, James Carnegie, Esq., 16 Windsor Street, . Miss Cathcart, 5 Heriot Row, .... The Very Rev. Provost Cazenove, The College, The Cumbraes, G. P. Chalmers, Esq., R. S.A., 51 York Place, Thomas Chapman, Esq. , 1 1 Hanover Street, William Christie, Esq., 16 George Street, Misses Cockburn, 6 Coates Place, .... Thomas Constable, Esq., 11 Thistle Street, . Rev. Joseph M. Cotterill, St. Mark’s, Portobello, . James Cowan, Esq., M.P. , ..... Alexander O. Cowan, Esq., 38 West Register Street, J ohn Cowan, Esq. of Beeslack, .... W. M. Crichton, Esq., 31 Princes Street, . Mrs. Crudelius, 14 Inverleith Terrace, Miss Cullen, 19 Melville Terrace, Stirling, . Rev. G. D. Cullen, ...... William Cumming, Esq., M.D., 18 Ainslie Place, . Mrs. Augustus Cunynghame, 10 Gloucester Place, . William Cushnie, Esq., St. Catherine Place, LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. 363 Mrs. Dalrymple, 21 Grosvenor Crescent, Matthew Denholm, Esq., Dean Park, John Donald, Esq., 3 Lauder Road, James Donaldson, Esq., LL.D., 20 Great King Street, W. Fettes Douglas, Esq., R. S.A., 21 Coates Crescent, Rev. William Douglas, 18 Dublin Street, J. C. R. Dudingston, Esq., .... Mrs. Dunbar, 52 George Square, Andrew Elliot, Esq., 17 Princes Street, Joseph Farquharson, Esq., 5 Eton Terrace, . James Ferguson, Esq., Meadow Lodge, George Straton Ferrier, Esq., 12 Queen Street, J. R. Findlay, Esq., 8 Rutland Square, Mrs. Forbes of Medwyn, 17 Ainslie Place, . William Ford, Esq., 17 St. John Street, John Fraser, Esq., I Buccleuch Street, P. Gardner, Esq., Links Place, Leith, Professor Geikie, Boroughfield, Rev. Thomas Gentles, Grange Cottage, Causewayside, Robert Gibb, Esq., 22 Scotland Street, Thomas Gibson, Esq., 93 Princes Street, Alexander Gibson, Esq., 10 Belgrave Crescent, Robert Gibson, Esq., Malta Green Villa, Colonel Gordon, Glasgow, .... Mrs. James Go wans, 16 Randolph Crescent, Alexander Gowans, Esq. , 25 George Street, . . . I Sir Alex. Grant, Bart., Principal of the University of Edinburgh, I Patrick Guthrie, Esq., 16 Nicolson Street, . . . I Donald Haggart, Esq., 26 George Street, . . . 1 James Haldane, Esq., 15 Atholl Crescent, . . . 1 Rev. Alexander Haldane-Chinnery, Greenhill House, . 1 John Harrison, Esq., 36 North Bridge, . . . I Sir George Harvey, P.R.S.A., 21 Regent Terrace, . . 1 Mrs. Harvey, 32 George Square, . . . . 1 George Hay, Esq., A.R.S.A., 16 Picardy Place, . . I 364 LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. James Hay, Esq., Links Place, Leith, William Hay, Esq., Architect, 17 Hill Street, Simon Henderson, Esq., 2 St. Peter’s Place, Robert Herdman, Esq., R. S.A., 9 St. Bernard’s Crescent, Mrs. Herdman, Coltbridge House, . Mrs. D. O. Hill, Newington Lodge, W. B. Hole, Esq., 51 York Place, . James Hope, Esq., Belmont, Mrs. Hoyes, 7 Ainslie Place, .... M. N. Macdonald Hume, Esq., 15 Abercromby Place, The Right Hon. John Inglis, Lord Justice- General, . Mrs. W. S. Mitchell Innes, Parsonsgreen, . Rev. Gildart Jackson, Parsonage, Leith, Edward James Jackson, Esq., 6 Coates Crescent, Charles Jenner, Esq., Easter Duddingstone Lodge, . T. B. Johnston, Esq., 4 St. Andrew Square, Professor Kelland, 20 Clarendon Crescent, . Professor Lister, 9 Charlotte Square, A Lady, per the Superior of St. Andrew’s Home, . A Lady, per the Superior of St. Andrew’s Home, David Laing, Esq., Signet Library, . Rev. Neville Laurence, All Saints’ Church, . * . Otto Leyde, Esq., A.R.S.A., 6 Osborne Terrace, . W. E. Lockhart, Esq., A.R. S.A., 62 Queen Street, R. F. Logan, Esq., 4 Picardy Place, Mrs. Lorimer, 1 Bruntsfield Crescent, Rev. J. M‘Cann, D.D., Woodlands Road, Glasgow, Alexander J. Macarthur, Esq., M.D., Anstruther, . J. B. M‘Donald, Esq., A.R.S.A., 6 Great Stuart Street, John M‘Ewan, Esq., 36 Lauder Road, Mrs. MacGibbon, Edgehill House, .... Rev. James M‘Gregor, D.D., 11 Cumin Place, . . 1 Alexander S. Mackay, Esq., 13 Cornwall Street, . . 1 John Mackay, E^q., 1 19 George Street, . . . 1 William D. M‘Kay, Esq., 16 Picardy Place, . . 1 LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. 365 C. G. Mackenzie, Esq., 33 Melville Street, . . . 1 James Mackintosh, Esq., 18 North Bridge, 1 Duncan M‘Laren, Esq., M.P., Newington House, . . 1 Kenneth Macleay, Esq., R. S.A., 3 Malta Terrace, . . 1 Rev. J. M‘Murtrie, 14 Inverleith Row, . . . 1 Daniel Macnee, Esq., R. S.A., 14 Montague Place, Glasgow, 1 Rev. J. Calder Macphail, Pilrig Manse, . . . 1 William M ‘Taggart, Esq., R.S.A., 13 Hope Street, . 1 J. MacWhirter, Esq., A.R. S.A., Titchfield Road, London, 1 Rev. Thomas Main, 7 Bellevue Crescent, . . . I Mrs. Marjoribanks, Warriston House, Inverleith Row, . 1 J. D. Marshall, Esq., 5 Newington Terrace, . < . I Mrs. Masson, 10 Regent Terrace, . . . . 1 Mrs. Alice Stanley May, 25 Pitt Street, 1 G. R. Merry, Esq., I Inverleith Row, 1 W. Mitchell, Esq., 11 S. Charlotte Street, . . . 1 Mrs. Moffat, 34 Greenhill Gardens, . . . . 1 John Moffat, Esq., 125 Princes Street, 1 John Mossman, Esq., 83 North Frederick Street, Glasgow, . 1 William Muir, Esq., Leith, ..... I Mrs. Muirhead, Viewpark, ..... 1 Rev. A. D. Murdoch, All Saints’ Church, . . . 1 William C. Murray, Esq., 3 Clarendon Crescent, . . 1 Messrs. Thomas Nelson and Sons, Hope Park, . . 1 Mrs. Nelson, Salisbury Green, . . . . 1 John Nesbitt, Esq., 24 George Street, . . . 1 Mrs. Nichol, Huntly Lodge, .... 2 Alexander Nicol, Esq., 70 Lauriston Place, . . . 1 Pollok S. Nisbet, Esq., 15 George Street, . . . 1 Rev. R. S. Oldham, St. Mary’s, Glasgow, . . . 1 Thomas Oliphant, Esq., 33 Charlotte Square, . . 1 George Ogilvie, Esq., Watson’s College, . . . 1 J. H. Oswald, Esq., 28 London Street, . . . 1 Thomas Owen, Esq., R.N., Holyhead, ... 2 Dr. Paterson, 15 North Merchiston Place, . . . 1 366 LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. R. Roy Paterson, Esq., 27 George Street, William Paterson, Esq., 67 Princes Street, . . W. G. Patterson, Esq., 34 Frederick Street, Chalmers I. Paton, Esq., 1 15 Princes Street, Sir Noel Paton, 33 George Square, .... Waller H. Paton, Esq., R.S.A., 14 George Square, Dr. Peddie, 15 Rutland Street, .... J. Dick Peddie, Esq., R. S.A., 3 South Charlotte Street, Mrs. Pendreigh, . * Rev. Dr. Penney, Stuartville House, Partick, Glasgow, John Pettie, Esq., R.A., 21 St. John’s Wood Road, London, A. W. Potts, Esq., Fettes College, .... Mrs. Raimes, Bonnington Park, Edinburgh, Rev. Principal Rainy, D.D., 8 Rosebery Crescent, . Samuel Raleigh, Esq., Park House, Edinburgh, Peter Ralston, Esq., 73 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow, John Rattray, Esq., 32 Castle Terrace, John T. Reid, Esq., 8 London Street, William Reid, Esq., 93 George Street, Rev. J. Watson Reid, 2 Seton Terrace, Dennistoun, Glasgow, Miss S. J. Richardson, 40 Bootham, York, . Alexander Ritchie, Esq., 19 St. David Street, James Robb, Esq., Gorgie, ..... George Robertson, Esq., W.S., 17 Royal Circus, . Warde Robertson, Esq., 30 St. Andrew Square,. James Robertson, Esq., 6 Blacket Place, James Ross, Esq., 114 George Street, Mrs. Russell, 9 Shandwick Place, .... John Rutherford, Esq., 65 Sauchiehall Street, Glasgow, Henry Sandbach, Esq., ..... Mrs. Sandbach, Hafodunos, Abergele, N. Wales, Rev. Daniel F. Sandford, 19 Rutland Street, Rev. Archibald Scott, 18 Regent Terrace, . J. Douglas Scott, Esq. , Bridge of Allan, The Hon. Lord Shand, New Hailes House, LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. 367 Professor Simpson, 52 Queen Street, . . . 1 George Skene, Esq., 3 North Manor Place, . . . 1 William Skinner, Esq., W.S., 31 Great King Street,. . 1 Thomas Sloan, Esq., 49 Broughton Street, . . . 1 John Smart, Esq., A.R. S.A., 4 Picardy Place, . . 1 Alexander Smith, Esq., Willowbrae House, . . 1 Mrs. Thomas Smith, Heriot Hill House, . . . 1 J. Somerville, Esq., 23 South Blacket Place, . . 1 T. Spowart, Esq.* 7 Coates Crescent, . . . 1 Thomas B. Sprague, Esq., 26 Buckingham Terrace, . 1 Clark Stanton, Esq., A.R.S.A., 1 Ramsay Lane, . . I John Steell, Esq., R.S.A/, 9 Randolph Place, . . 1 James Steuart, Esq., 8 Doune Terrace, . . . 1 D. W. Stevenson, Esq., 2 Castle Terrace, . . . I E. W. Stevenson, Esq., 17 Montague Street, . . 1 John R. Stewart, Esq., 17 Myrtle Street, . . . 1 Mrs. Stuart, Newmills, ..... 1 P. Stuart, Esq., 8 Thomas Street, . . . . 1 Sheriff Tait, 13 Great Stuart Street, . . . . 1 Mrs. Professor Tait, 38 George Square, . . . 1 Mrs. Thompson, 12 Queen’s Crescent, . . . 1 Charles Thomson, Esq., I Inverleith Terrace, . . I Dr. David Thomson, Staff Surgeon, R.N., Edinburgh, . 1 John Thomson, Esq., 9 Leven Terrace, Edinburgh, . 1 George Thomson, Esq., 9 Leven Terrace, Edinburgh, . 1 William Thomas Thomson, Esq., 3 George Street, . . 1 Alexander Thomson, Esq., 5 George Square, . . 1 Robert Thorburn, Esq., Viewfield, Lasswade, . . I Mrs. Trayner, 10 St. Colme Street, . . . . 1 Mrs. Tweedie, Calcutta, ..... 1 Captain and Mrs. Vibart, 1 1 Hailes Street, . . . 1 John Wallace, Esq., 11 Melbourne Place, . . 1 Rev. Professor Wallace, D.D., 20 Northumberland Street, . 1 John Watson’s Institution, ..... 1 Miss Helen Wearne, 15 Carlton Terrace, . . . 1 3 68 LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS. George Webster, Esq., 21 Lauriston Street, . R. M. Weir, Esq., 17 Royal Terrace, Alexander Whytock, Esq. , 1 1 George Street, Miss Wilson, 20 Leopold Place, .... Alexander Woodcock, Esq., Staff Surgeon, R.N., Anstruther, Robert P. Wright, Esq., 135 George Street, James Wright, Esq., 19 Buckingham Terrace, Robert'S. Wyld, Esq., 19 Inverleith Row, . Major Wyld, 16 Inverleith Row, .... R. H. Wyndham, Esq., 24 Forth Street, John Yelland, Esq., 24 George Street, Edward Yerbury, Esq., 3 Hanover Street, . W. Graham Yooll, Esq., Prior’s Gate, Pittenweem, Mrs. Young, Blackford, Grange, . . . . 4 ♦ 4