Chapter D: G. ROSSETTI: Early Italian Poets (10)

[203] "The early Italian masters felt themselves so indebted to, and formed by, the master-craftsman who had mainly disciplined their fingers, whether in work on gold or marble, that they practically considered him their father, and took _his_ name rather than their own; so that most of the great Italian workmen are now known, not by their own names, but by those of their masters (or of their native towns or villages--these being recognised as masters also), the master being himself often entirely forgotten by the public, and eclipsed by his pupil; but immortal _in_ his pupil, and named in his name.... All which I beg you to take to heart and meditate on concerning Mastership and Pupilage" (_Fors Clavigera_, 1872, xxii. 3, 4). Vasari's story may be true, says Dr. Richter, "even though no contemporary record of a goldsmith called Botticello has been found. We know, however, that he had a brother, Giovanni Battista, a carpenter and frame-maker of some repute, nicknamed _Botticegli_, _i.e._ 'Little Barrel'; this nickname may have been inherited by the younger brother" (_Lectures on the National Gallery_, p. 48).

[204] See Richter's _Lectures on the National Gallery_ for the list, p. 46.

[205] Reference may be made also to Mr. Swinburne's "Notes on Designs of the Old Masters at Florence" (first published in the _Fortnightly Review_ for July 1868), in which he speaks of "the faint and almost painful grace which gives a distinct value and curious charm to all the works of Botticelli." At an auction in 1867 D. G. Rossetti picked up a Botticelli for £20. "If he had not something to do," writes his brother, "with the vogue which soon afterwards began to attach to that fascinating master, I am under a misapprehension." Pater's essay first appeared in the _Fortnightly Review_ of August 1870. Ruskin's first mention of Botticelli was in a lecture delivered at Oxford during the Lent Term, 1871. Carpaccio had been proclaimed in a lecture of the preceding year, and it became a standing joke among the profane to ask who was Ruskin's last "greatest painter." It was in answer thereto that Mr. Bourdillon wrote:

To us this star or that seems bright,
And oft some headlong meteor's flight
Holds for awhile our raptured sight.
But he discerns each noble star;
The least is only the most far,
Whose worlds, may be, the mightiest are.

[206] "The dress appears to have been originally crimson or pink. If so, it has faded to so agreeable a tone that one could hardly wish it otherwise" (Poynter).

[207] The visitor should contrast Canaletto's painting of still water with Turner's (see under 535).

[208] "Upon asking how he had been taught the art of a _cognoscento_ so very suddenly, he assured me that nothing was more easy. The whole secret consisted in a strict adherence to two rules: the one, always to observe that the picture might have been better if the painter had taken more pains; and the other to praise the works of Pietro Perugino" (_Vicar of Wakefield_, ch. xx.).

[209] The author of the catalogue of the Burlington Fine Arts Club's Exhibition of 1898 maintains that the two side panels are later in date than the central panel, and have no connection with it (p. xxxvii.).

[210] Sir Walter Armstrong attributes No. 1079 to David. "The National Gallery possesses one of the best of David's authenticated works (1045), and a comparison between it and the "Adoration of the Magi," numbered 1079, goes far to prove them to be by one hand. Compare, for instance, the figure of the beggar in the one picture with that of St. Joseph in shadow behind the Virgin, in the other. And the evidence of style is confirmed by a curious discovery that I happened to make one bright day, when the glass was off the latter picture. Low down in the left-hand corner the word OUVVATER is written in a way that precludes the notion of forgery, for it has been scratched with, perhaps, the butt end of a brush, while the paint was still wet, so that the red under-painting shows through the letters. David was born at Ouwater, or Oudewater, about 1450, and did not migrate to Bruges till 1484" (_Notes on the National Gallery_, p. 29).

[211] See Morley's _Diderot_, ii. 62. "Yet he cannot refuse to concede about one of Boucher's pictures that after all he would be glad to possess it. Every time you saw it, he says, you would find fault with it, yet you would go on looking at it. This is perhaps what the severest modern amateur, as he strolls carelessly through the French school at his leisure, would not in his heart care to deny."

[212] Ruskin speaks under the head of typical beauty (of beauty, that is, as typical of divine attributes) of the absolute necessity in pictures for some suggestion of infinity. "Escape, Hope, Infinity, by whatever conventionalism sought, the device is the same in all, the instinct constant" (_Modern Painters_, vol. ii. pt. iii. sec. i. ch. v. §§ 7, 8).

[213] Ruskin finds Leonardo's landscape unconvincing. "In realisation of detail he verges on the ornamental; in his rock outlines he has all the deficiencies and little of the feeling of the earlier men. The rocks are grotesque without being ideal, and extraordinary without being impressive." "The forms of rock in Leonardo's celebrated 'Vierge aux Rochers' are literally no better than those on a china plate" (_Modern Painters_, vol. i. pt. ii. sec. i. ch. vii. § 13; Edinburgh _Lectures on Architecture and Painting_, p. 157). A high authority on the Alpine region, Mr. Douglas Freshfield, has suggested that the originals of Leonardo's backgrounds are to be found among the mountains between Val Sassina and the Lago di Lecco: "The last spurs of the Alps are here singularly picturesque. The bold forms of the Corno di Canzo and Monte Baro break down to display the shining pools of the Laghi di Pusiano and d' Annone. Hither Leonardo may have come, and looking across the narrow lake or from beside some smaller pool or stream at the stiff upright rocks of the Grigna and the Resegone, have conceived the strange backgrounds with which we are all familiar" (_Italian Alps_, 1875, p. 126). Mr. Freshfield's suggestion is borne out by Leonardo's own topographical notes, since published. He had visited the district and specially remarks upon its fantastic rocks.

[214] When in the Hamilton Collection, this picture was ascribed to Giorgione. Some critics strongly dispute the ascription (see, _e.g._, Richter's _Italian Art in the National Gallery_, p. 87), others accept it (see, _e.g._, an article in the _Times_, July 26, 1882). Sir Edward Poynter says: "The qualities of colour and painting in this picture so closely resemble those of the famous 'Fête Champêtre' by Giorgione in the Louvre, that it is difficult not to believe that the two pictures are by the same hand, and that, if the Louvre picture is rightly named, the original attribution to Giorgione may be correct" (_National Gallery_, i. 24). Mr. Herbert Cook is of the same opinion: "The figures, with their compactly built and rounded limbs, are such as Giorgione loved to model, the sweep of draperies and the splendid line indicate a consummate master, the idyllic landscape is just such as we see in the Louvre picture and elsewhere, the glow and splendour of the whole reveal a master of tone and colouring" (_Giorgione_, p. 94). As an illustration of the uncertainty of criticism it may be interesting to append the observations on Sir E. Poynter's remarks made by a writer in the _Daily Telegraph_ of Dec. 29, 1899: "In reality no two works belonging to more or less the same period of Venetian art could be more utterly different. The Hamilton Palace picture is a soulless and second-rate production, dating a good many years later than the Louvre idyll, wholly different from it in handling, and remarkable only for its beautiful golden tone. The Louvre 'Fête Champêtre'--a late example of the divine master--is one of the loveliest and most characteristic pieces produced in the early prime of Venetian painting. Should the 'Venus and Adonis' be set down to Giorgione, the misrepresentation in the National Gallery of a unique figure in art would be complete."

[215] By Mr. Berenson to "Amico di Sandro."

[216] "The figures are ill-proportioned and want expression and character. They are more probably by a scholar or imitator" (Layard's _Kugler_, vol. i. p. 289).

[217] Critics of the modern school assert that the picture was not executed by Botticelli, even if it was designed by him; it bears, they say, "no trace of his style" (see, _e.g._, Richter's _Lectures_ and Frizzoni's _Arte Italiana del Rinascimento_). Ruskin was on the same side: "I hope you know Botticelli well enough," he wrote to Mr. Fairfax Murray (February 14, 1873), "not to think you'll have to copy stuff like that arms-akimbo thing. By the way, what have they all got, like truncheons? They look like a lot of opera-directors." Dr. Uhlmann in his work on Botticelli ascribes the picture to Botticini; Vasari, he thinks, confused the two painters,--a theory for which there is no sort of proof. There is only one work of Botticini which has been identified with certainty. It is at Empoli, and was executed in 1490, or fifteen years at least before this picture. Vasari's account is precise, and is confirmed, as we have seen, by historical records. Very convincing internal proofs are necessary to overthrow this external evidence. Where are such proofs? The idea of the picture is entirely in accordance with what we know of Botticelli. "The wonderful energy of the angels and the boldness of the design attest his invention" (Monkhouse's _In the National Gallery_, p. 64). The case in this sense is very well put by Mr. Maurice Hewlett in the _Academy_ of January 9, 1892. He points out among other things that the picture agrees with the general spirit of Botticelli's designs for the "Paradiso."

[218] Some account of the poem is given in an appendix to vol. v. of Symonds's _Renaissance in Italy_.

[219] The traveller will find a convenient handbook to these frescoes in Mr. J. L. Bevir's _Visitor's Guide to Orvieto_.

[220] It came from the Hamilton sale (1882), and was bought for the small price of £157:10s.

[221] Owing to the similarity of initials IVO the picture was ascribed by its former owner to Isaac van Ostade, who, however, died in 1649.

[222] Materials for such comparison--which is not the least interesting of the many lines of study offered by a collection of pictures--are provided in Mrs. Jameson's books, or may be formed still better by every student for himself by a collection of photographs. A capital series of articles by Mr. Grant Allen in the _Pall Mall Magazine_ of 1895 traced, in a few of the most popular subjects, the process of "Evolution in Early Italian Art."

[223] Visitors to Venice will remember a beautiful use of this arrangement on the southern side of the Rialto, the Dove forming the keystone of the arch.

[224] A piece of paper of the last century, glued to the back of this panel, contains a memorandum in now faded ink, in the handwriting of the great-grandfather of Signor G. Molfini (from whom the picture was bought in Genoa in 1883), to the following effect:--"Antonello of Messina, a city of Sicily, a famous painter.... And this is his portrait, painted by himself, as was to be seen by an inscription below it which I, in order to reduce it (_i.e._ the picture) to a better shape, sawed away." Some traces of further writing are now illegible.

[225] Ford Madox Brown, who was not one to be impressed by any authority, has some very scathing remarks on this picture: "Bad in colour, in drawing, in grouping, and in expression, with the figure of Jesus falling on its nose, this work seems to shine solely by reason of the varnish with which it has recently been so polished up" (_Magazine of Art_, 1890, p. 135).

[226] He enumerates them in an official return of his property: "Further, I have a monkey, moreover, a raven which can talk, and which I keep by me in order that he may teach from his cage a theological jackass also to speak. Item: an owl to frighten the witches, two peacocks, two dogs, a sparrow-hawk, and other birds of prey, six fowls, eighteen chickens, two moor-fowl, and many other birds, to name all of which would only cause confusion."

[227] According to Nonius Marcellus: "By old Roman law, brides used to bring three _asses_ (pennies), and to give one, which they held in the hand, to the bridegroom, as though to purchase him; to place another, which they held in the foot, on the hearth of the family Lares; and to put the third in their pocket and rattle it at the next cross-road."

[228] See, however, for some deductions afterwards made from this estimate, _ibid._ vol. iv. pt. v. ch. iii. §§ 6, 7.

[229] Elsewhere Ruskin makes some exception in favour of Ary Scheffer: "Though one of the heads of the Mud sentiment school, he does _draw_ and _feel_ very beautifully and deeply" (_Letters on Art and Literature_, p. 37).

[230] It was placed in their chapel in the church of S. Lorenzo in that city. There it remained till 1764, when it was bought for the Duke of Marlborough, and a copy replaced the original in the chapel.

[231] This picture and Van Dyck's "Charles the First" (1172) were bought in 1884 from the Duke of Marlborough for £87,500. Sir F. Burton, the Director of the National Gallery, had valued them at £115,500 and £31,500 severally. I remember once hearing Mr. Gladstone refer to this matter. His economic conscience seemed to give him some qualms on the score of the unprecedented price. But he took comfort in the fact that, large as was the price actually paid, the price asked by the owner, as also the valuation of the Director, was very much larger. "At any rate," he said with a smile, "I saved the taxpayers £45,000 on this Raphael, by not listening to the advice of the Director of the Gallery." The purchase had been pressed upon the Government by all sorts and conditions of men. The Royal Academy memorialised Mr. Gladstone, and pleaded especially for the Raphael--"a work produced in that happy period in which the reverent purity and the serene grace of the master's earliest work are already mellowing into the fuller dignity of his middle style." The Trustees of the National Gallery declared that the purchase would at once raise the Collection to a rank second to none, and superior to most, of the great Continental Galleries; whilst a memorial from members of Parliament of all parties, after referring to the Raphael as the finest in point of colouring that ever came from his hand, assured Mr. Gladstone that "their constituents and the whole nation will approve and applaud" a departure from "the hard line of severe economy." It appears from _The Life and Correspondence of Mr. Childers_ (ii. 163), who was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time, that the purchase was first suggested by Queen Victoria.

[232] Sir Edward Poynter. The luminous quality of the picture conquered Mr. Ruskin. After one of his last visits to the National Gallery, he said to me: "The new Raphael is certainly lovely--quite the loveliest Raphael in the world. The 'San Sisto' is dark and brown beside it."

[233] In this matter of the open sky also the "Ansidei Madonna" is curiously transitional. "Raphael," says Ruskin (_ibid._ § 10), "in his fall, betrayed the faith he had received from his father and his master, and substituted for the radiant sky of the Madonna del Cardellino, the chamber-wall of the Madonna della Sediola, and the brown wainscot of the Baldacchino." Here we have both--the Baldacchino and the open sky behind.

[234] Mr. Monkhouse suggests alternative explanations. Who is the figure on the throne? "Is he meant for some intellectual Dives, learning too late that happiness exists not in luxury or knowledge? Is he the poet, musing in sadness and mental solitude on the mysteries of life, who cannot taste of its fruit or listen to its music, unconscious of the brute forces symbolised by the panther, and the vanity of human pride imaged by the peacock on the dead branch; or is he a philosopher imparting wisdom to the young? What matter, the picture charms like nature, because we cannot fathom it" (_In the National Gallery_, p. 234). In the case of Giorgione's frescoes at Venice, Vasari frankly "gave it up": "I, for my part, have never been able to understand what they mean, nor, with all the inquiries that I have made, could I ever find any one who did understand, or could explain them to me." But the theory that the subject in Renaissance pictures meant nothing--that details were treated from a purely pictorial point of view--is, as Dr. Richter has well observed, more convenient than correct. The clue to many of these unknown subjects is to be found in classical or Italian literature. Bellini's allegorical compositions have recently been thus interpreted. Titian's so-called "Sacred and Profane Love" has been identified by Herr Franz Wickhoff as an illustration of the story of Medea as told in the seventh book of the _Argonautica_ of Valerius Flaccus, and the same author has also found the key to several works ascribed to Giorgione.

[235] Dr. Richter, who found these pictures in a Veronese palace, points out that the architecture in the background represents the old tower of the castle of Mantua (_Art Journal_, Feb. 1895). It has, however, been urged amongst other objections that the eagle on the banners belongs to neither of the two houses. Perhaps, therefore, the subject of the pictures is purely imaginary or borrowed from some romance of the time.

[236] See note on No. 591.

[237] One portrait, however, was found by Mr. Petrie, not fixed over the face of the mummy, but framed and glazed for hanging on the wall of a tomb. The frame, now in the British Museum, is very like what is called an "Oxford frame."

[238] Two other members of the family are known as painters--Ambrosius, brother of the younger Hans; and Sigmund, brother of the elder. A portrait ascribed to the latter is in our Gallery, No. 722.

[239] The picture is painted on ten boards joined vertically; and it is interesting to speculate how far the composition may have been directed by the necessity of avoiding any joint in the faces.

[240] _Cf._ what Ruskin says of "the glorious severity" of Holbein's portraits (_Modern Painters_, vol. ii. pt. iii. sec. 1. ch. xiv. § 19).

[241] The contrast between the picture as it was before being cleaned and as it is now is very great. The accessories have come out in astonishing clearness, and the crucifix in the left-hand corner has been unveiled. The dingy green of the curtain background has given place to a rich damask, and the gown of the younger man--which Wornum described as "brownish green"--is now seen to be not green at all. Mr. Dyer, to whose art this successful restoration was due, removed the obscuring dirt and varnish entirely by manual friction.

[242] Several pages would be required to give a _résumé_ of all the theories propounded, and of all the _pros_ and _cons_ in each case. An account of the principal theories was given in the fourth edition of this Handbook, and the story forms an entertaining chapter in the curiosities of criticism. The most elaborately sustained of the theories is that which identifies the "ambassadors" with the Counts Palatine Otto Henry and his brother Philip (see the monograph on the picture by W. F. Dickes).

[243] The following is the text of the document:--

Remarques sur le suject d'un tableau excellent des Srs.
d'Inteville Polizy, et de George de Selve.[244]

En ce tableau est representé au naturel Messire Jean de D
Intevile chevalier sieur de Polizy près de Bar-sur-seyne Bailly
de Troyes, qui fut Ambassadeur en Angleterre pour le Roy
François premier ez années 1532 & 1533 & de puis Gouverneur
de Monsieur Charles de France second filz diceluy Roy, le
quel Charles mourut a forest monstier en l'an 1545, & le dict
sr. de D Intevile en l'an 1555, sepulturé en l'eglise du dict
Polizy. Est aussi representé audict tableau Messire George de
Selve Evesque de Lavaur personnage de grandes lettres & fort
vertueux, & qui fut Ambassadeur pres de L Empereur Charles
cinquiesme, le diet Evesque Filz de Messire Jean de Selve
premier president au parlement de Paris, iceluy sr. Evesque
decedé en l'an 1541 ayant des la susdicte année 1532 ou 1533
passé en Angleterre par permission du Roy pour visiter le
susdict sieur de D Intevile son intime amy & de toute sa
famile, & eux deux ayantz rencontrez en Angleterre un excellent
peinctre holandois, l'employèrent pour faire iceluy tableau qui
a esté soigneusement conservé au mesme lieu de Polizy iusques
en l'an 1653.

[244] Evesque de Lavour (_sic_) contenant leurs emplois, et tems de leur deceds.

[245] The words in the choir-book are thus identified by Mr. Eastlake (see a very interesting letter to the _Times_, 17th August 1891).

On the left-hand page:--

Kom Heiliger Geyst herzegott erfüll mit deiner gnaden und (?)
deiner gleubge hertz mut un sin dein brustig lib entzüd in ihn.

O herz durch deines lichtes glast (?) züdem glaube versamlet
hast das volck aller welt zunge ...(?) dir herzu lob gesungen
... gesungen ...

On the right-hand page:--

Mensch wiltu (?) leben seliguch und bei Gott blibene
Solch (?) halten die zehen gebot die uns gebeut unser Gott ...
unser ...

"It seems to have been assumed," adds Mr. Eastlake, "that the choir-book is a Protestant one, and therefore inconsistent with the presence of the silver crucifix recently revealed in the left-hand upper corner of the picture. But it is evident that the hymn or anthem above mentioned is merely a paraphrase of the well-known 'Veni Sancte Spiritus,' which for ages past has appeared in the Roman Catholic breviary for use on Whit Sunday or the Feast of Pentecost, and still survives in the Anglican Ordination Service." The music in the book has been identified by Mr. W. B. Squire, of the British Museum, as the counterpoint sung by the tenor in Johann Walther's setting for the Wittenberg hymn-book of 1524. Mr. Squire adds his opinion that Holbein chose those compositions for copying in the picture, "on account of the bearing which the words had upon either the individuals portrayed, or some incident connected with them, and intended to be commemorated" (Letter to the _Times_, 14th November 1891). Miss Hervey finds an explanation in the fact that the Bishop of Lavaur was devoted to the cause of religious re-union between the Roman Catholic and the Reformed Churches. The doctrine expressed by the two hymns was common to all the churches.

[246] For further particulars the reader is referred to _Holbein's 'Ambassadors': the Picture and the Men_, by Mary F. S. Hervey (1900). Miss Hervey gives an interesting account of her identification of the sitters, and many curious speculations as to the details of the picture.

[247] It has been suggested by some high authorities that the lower portion of the picture was probably left to some pupil to finish; for the Admiral's legs are very flabbily drawn. They look as if there were no bone or muscle in them, but only sawdust or padding. Señor de Bereute, in spite of the very definite history of the picture given by Palomino, attributes the whole work not to Velazquez but to his pupil and son-in-law, J. B. del Mazo (1308). If this be correct, Mazo was another Velazquez. There is nothing in Mazo's known works to justify such an estimate of his powers. "Mazo, still in his early youth, had in 1634 married a daughter of Velazquez, and had only recently got a subordinate place in Philip's court. It is hard to believe that he could have painted this superb picture when only about 25 years of age, or that Philip would have entrusted him with the portrait of a favourite when he had beside him his trusty Court painter, Velazquez" (_Quarterly Review_, April 1899, p. 521).

[248] "Congratulate me (he wrote to his old friend and colleague, Sir H. A. Layard) on a real _trouvaille_. The picture I bought at G. Bentinck's sale has come out splendidly, and is in first-rate condition. Burton is greatly struck with it. It is a wonderful bit of luck to have picked up so fine a picture from among so many of the cognoscenti." No wonder that Sir William Gregory, who bought his pictures so cheap, was aghast at the large and even fancy price which the nation sometimes has to pay. "The cost of them," he writes of the Longford pictures (Nos. 1314-1316) "makes me blush when I think of it."

[249] The composition, however, has been blamed on the ground that the square picture on the wall interferes with the girl's head in a very awkward manner. The Cupid represented in that picture is also very clumsy. A correspondent replying to these criticisms writes: "The composition depends not upon the rhythm of the lines, but upon the arrangement of patches of colour, somewhat in the manner of the Japanese. Dutch painters often represented inferior pictures upon the walls of their interiors, perhaps as a kind of humorous contrast to their own masterpieces. See, for instance, the daub in De Hooch's picture in the National Gallery (No. 834)."

[250] By Mr. Berenson ascribed to "Amico di Sandro."

[251] "Hung on each side of the great Vandyck, on the east wall of the principal Dutch and Flemish room, they have given the completing touch to that collection of _chefs d'oeuvre_, and made it now beyond question the finest wall of masterpieces of those schools in Europe" (Sir Edward Poynter's speech at the Royal Academy Banquet, 1899).

[252] The purchase for the nation was at one time in jeopardy. Early in 1899 the two pictures were offered by Lord de Saumarez to the National Gallery for the sum of £12,500. A special grant was obtained from Her Majesty's Treasury for this sum on the condition that the Trustees should forego the annual grant for 1899-1900, estimated at £5000. Lord de Saumarez found, however, that he had no power to sell the pictures without an order from the Court of Chancery, and having been subsequently offered the sum of £15,000 for these two pictures, the Court decided they could only be sold to the National Gallery for an advance on the sum offered. The Trustees, therefore, offered the sum of £15,050, for which the Court awarded them to the Trustees. Towards the balance of the purchase money, amounting to £2550, two of the Trustees, Mr. Alfred de Rothschild and Mr. Heseltine, liberally contributed £500 each, and the remainder, amounting to £1550, was paid out of the grant for the year 1898-99.

[253] Mr. Roger Fry (in _The Pilot_, Jan. 5, 1901) attributes our picture, which he calls "a distressing production," to "some journeyman painter who treated Fra Bartolommeo's design in the spirit of the earlier furniture painters, but without their charm and _naïveté_."

[254] "His early pictures have only a hint of personal expression. Some of his Madonnas are still almost Byzantine in their hieratic solemnity. It is possible to follow Giovanni Bellini's career almost from year to year by the increase of personal expression in his figures and landscapes" (Mary Logan: _Guide to the Italian Pictures at Hampton Court_, p. 9).

[255] See Bernhard Berenson's _Lorenzo Lotto_, 1895, pp. 21-120.

[256] See Mr. Herbert Cook's _Giorgione_, pp. 68-74.

[257] That fine picture came from the Manfrini Palace at Venice; and though by some called a "bad and late copy" (Mündler, _Beiträge zu B.'s Cicerone_, 1870, p. 61) is by others highly praised. Thus Waagen, in his _Treasures of Art in Great Britain_ (vol. iii. 1854, p. 19), in describing the Cobham Hall pictures, says of the picture now in the National Gallery that it "agrees essentially with the fine portrait in the Manfrini collection at Venice. But the tone of the flesh is heavier here, and the grey colour of the dress unites too much with the grey ground, while in the Manfrini picture, the brown tones of the dress stand out decidedly from it."

[258] See the _Second Annual Report of the National Art Collections Fund_, 1906, pp. 35, 36. Until the matter was cleared up by the researches of Señor de Beruete, summarised in that Report, it was supposed that our picture was one of five mythologies painted by Velazquez for the Gallery of Mirrors in the Alcazar of Madrid, two of which perished in the great fire of 1734. Knowledge of this fire was doubtless the origin of a suggestion that our picture also had been damaged and repainted. There was correspondence on this subject, and on others connected with the picture, in the _Times_ of November and December 1905 and the early part of 1906.

[259] The intermediate processes by which the price of the picture rose from £30,500 to £45,000 have not been disclosed. Towards the latter sum, the largest contributions were--"An Englishman" £10,000; Lord Michelham, £8000; and Messrs. Agnew, £5250.

[260] See pp. 75-78 of _The Barbizon School_, by D. C. Thomson, from whose translation I borrow a few sentences.

[261] According to William Morris, most visitors to the Gallery are apt to pass by some of its principal treasures. "If ordinary people go to our National Gallery, the thing which they want to see is the Blenheim Raphael, which, though well done, is a very dull picture to any one not an artist. While, when Holbein shows them the Danish princess of the sixteenth century yet living on the canvas ...; when Van Eyck opens a window for them into Bruges of the fourteenth century; when Botticelli shows them Heaven as it lived in the hearts of men before theology was dead, these things produce no impression on them, not so much even as to stimulate their curiosity and make them ask what 'tis all about; because these things were done to be looked at, and to make the eyes tell the mind tales of the past, the present, and the future" (Mackail's _Life of William Morris_, ii. 273).

[262] The precise nature of the transaction was this:--Lady Carlisle received in cash £40,000 and the Treasury paid the death-duties (£2776). Of these sums, the National Gallery funds contributed £15,000; the National Art-Collections' Fund, £10,000; and the Treasury £17,776 (see House of Commons Debate, February 28, 1912).

PICTURES ON LOAN

THE HOLY FAMILY.

_B. Fungai_ (Sienese: about 1460-1516). _See 1331._

This picture, not yet numbered, is lent by the Victoria and Albert (South Kensington) Museum. It is generally characteristic of Fungai, but the figure of the Infant Christ is not pleasing.

_Lent by Mr. Pierpont Morgan._

THE MADONNA DI SANTI ANTONIO.

_Raphael_ (Urbino: 1483-1520). _See 1171._

"In the same city (says Vasari)--[the city of Perugia, for which also the Ansidei Madonna was painted]--Raphael was commissioned to paint a picture of Our Lady by the nuns of Sant' Antonio of Padua; the Infant Christ is in the lap of the Virgin and is fully clothed, as it pleased those simple and pious ladies that he should be; on each side of Our Lady are figures of saints, San Pietro, namely, with San Paolo, Santa Cecilia, and Santa Catarina. To these two holy virgins the master has given the most lovely features and the most graceful attitudes; he has also adorned them with the most fanciful and varied head-dresses that could be imagined--a very unusual thing at that time. In a lunette above this picture he painted a figure of the Almighty Father, which is extremely fine, and on the predella are three scenes from the history of Christ, in very small figures.... The whole work is without doubt very admirable; it is full of devout feeling, and is held in the utmost veneration by the nuns for whom it was painted. It is very highly commended by all painters likewise."

The small scenes which formed the predella have been dispersed;[263] for the rest, the picture thus described by Vasari is before us. Vasari dates the work 1505, but it is now commonly ascribed to the years 1507-8, after Raphael had experienced the influence of Fra Bartolommeo; it would thus be a little later than the Ansidei Madonna.

The history of the picture is long and eventful. In 1677 the nuns obtained permission to sell it, "to pay their debts and because the surface was in some parts flaking away." The central panel and the lunette (forming the picture as it now is) were bought by Antonio Bigazzini, a nobleman of Perugia, for a sum of about £500. Shortly afterwards, the picture passed into the hands of the great Colonna family at Rome, and it is often called "The Colonna Raphael." The fortunes of the picture now became part of those of modern Italian history. In the last century, the picture had been bought by Francis II., King of Naples. It was a great favourite of his, and was always kept in his bedroom in the Royal Palace. When the revolution of 1860 came, and the king was driven out of Naples, the Raphael accompanied him on his wanderings, and the king succeeded in conveying it in safety to the fortress of Gaeta. When Gaeta fell in 1861, and the king went into exile, he again took the picture with him, and it was safely transported to Spain. The king was accompanied in his flight by the financier and factotum, formerly Spanish Minister at Naples, upon whom he had conferred the title of Duke of Ripalda. To him the king in some way pledged the picture, and for a time it became known as the Ripalda Raphael. Its history next becomes connected with the secular jealousies of England and France. In 1867 Sir J. C. Robinson saw the picture at Madrid, and received a hint that it might possibly be for sale. Sir William Boxall, the Director of our Gallery, went to inspect the picture, which was then in fine condition; and Disraeli authorised the trustees to buy it. Negotiations were commenced on the basis of £20,000; but the Duke of Ripalda was a friend of the Empress Eugénie, and the knowledge that England was in the market inspired a counter-bid of £40,000 from France. The outbreak of the Prussian War caused a hitch in the negotiations; and the picture, which had been sent to Paris, underwent rigorous "restoration." The Colonna Raphael, wrote Sir William Gregory (May 1870), "was, a few months ago, one of the most perfect and important pictures of that master. In an evil moment it had been submitted to the cleaner, and a piteous spectacle it now is in the eyes of gods and men. It is said that on the old frame being removed, the picture fell to the ground in three pieces. This is confirmed by the extraordinary winking appearance of the eye of one of the female saints, through which unfortunately one of the cracks runs, and which therefore had to be repainted by a modern hand." Ruskin, perhaps unaware of these repaintings or believing that they could be removed, strongly urged the acquisition of the picture for the nation (_Works_, xxii. 140, xxxiv. 512). But the authorities would not entertain the idea, and the picture, refused both by the Louvre and by the National Gallery, returned, unpurchased and unhonoured, into the hands of the Duke. In 1886 it was lent to the South Kensington Museum and there it remained for several years, until Mr. Martin Colnaghi bought it from the representatives of the late King of Naples. The Parisian repaintings were removed, and the picture was restored to much of its pristine beauty. Ultimately it passed into the possession of Mr. Pierpont Morgan (at the price, it is said, of £100,000), and by him it is for the present lent to the National Gallery.

THE ADORATION OF THE MAGI.

_Unknown_ (Spanish: end of 15th century).

Signed "Lo Fil de Mestre Rodrigo." Lent by the Victoria and Albert Museum.

FOOTNOTES:

[263] In addition to the "three scenes" mentioned by Vasari there were two single figures, of St. Francis and St. Anthony of Padua respectively: these are in the Dulwich Gallery.

COPIES FROM THE OLD MASTERS

I.--_VELAZQUEZ_

One collection is of fifty-nine copies in oil-colour, on a reduced scale, of pictures by Velazquez in the Prado Gallery, at Madrid, presented by Lord Savile. They were painted by Mr. Chidley Molony, an English gentleman who first went to Spain as an officer in the army of General Evans, and subsequently settled at Madrid, where he was a great favourite and well known, especially to the English Colony. The following are the subjects of these copies:--

1. The Adoration of the Magi.
2. The Crucifixion.
3. The Coronation of the Virgin.
4. St. Anthony visiting St. Pablo.
5. A Group of Rustics drinking (the picture known as "Los
Borrachos").
6. The Forge of Vulcan.
7. The Surrender of Breda (the picture known as "Las Lanzas").
8. The Tapestry Fabric of St. Isabel at Madrid (the picture known
as "Las Hilanderas").
9. Velazquez in his painting room, with various members of the
Royal Family and their Attendants (the picture known as
"Las Meninas").
10. "Mercury and Argus."
11. Equestrian Portrait of King Philip III.
12. Equestrian Portrait of Queen Margarita de Austria (wife of
Philip III.).
13. Equestrian Portrait of King Philip IV.
14. Equestrian Portrait of Queen Isabel de Borbon (first wife of
Philip IV.).
15. Equestrian Portrait of Prince Baltasar Carlos, as a child.
16. Equestrian Portrait of the Duke of Olivares.
17. Portrait of Philip IV. as a young man, in court dress.
18. Portrait of the Infanta of Spain, Doña Maria, Queen of Hungary
(sister of Philip IV.).
19. Portrait of the Infante, Don Carlos, second son of Philip III., in
court dress.
20. Portrait of King Philip IV. in hunting dress.
21. Portrait of the Infante, Don Fernando de Austria (brother of
Philip IV.), in hunting dress.
22. Portrait of Prince Baltasar Carlos, at the age of six, in
hunting dress.
23. Portrait of King Philip IV., at the age of fifty (?), clad in half
armour.
24. Portrait of Doña Mariana de Austria (second wife of Philip IV.).
25. King Philip IV. kneeling at prayer.
26. Queen Mariana de Austria, second wife of Philip IV., kneeling at
prayer.
27. Portrait of Prince Baltasar Carlos, son of Philip IV., at the age of
fourteen, in court dress.
28. Portrait of the Infanta, Maria Teresa de Austria, daughter of
Philip IV. and afterwards Queen of France.
29. Portrait (bust length) of the Cordovan poet, Don Louis de Góngora
y Argote.
30. Portrait of Doña Juana Pacheco, wife of the author (bust length;
in profile).
31. Portrait of a Girl (daughter of Velazquez?).
32. Portrait of a Girl (another daughter of Velazquez?).
33. Portrait of a middle-aged Lady (half length).
34. Portrait of Don Antonio Alonso Pimentel, ninth Count of Benavente,
Groom of the Bedchamber to King Philip IV.
35. Portrait of the Sculptor, Martinez Montanes (half length).
36. Portrait of Pablillos de Valladolid, a Jester of King Philip IV.
37. Portrait of Pernia, a Jester of King Philip IV. (commonly known
as the Portrait of "Barbarroja").
38. Portrait of a Jester of King Philip IV., nicknamed Don Juan de
Austria.
39. Portrait of a Dwarf of King Philip IV., called "El Primo."
40. Portrait of a Dwarf of King Philip IV. (Sebastian de Morra?)
41. Portrait of Don Antonio, an English (?) Dwarf of King Philip IV.
(with a mastiff).
42. The Boy of Vallecas.
43. The Idiot of Coria.
44. Æsop.
45. Menippus.
46. The God Mars.
47. Portrait of a Man (bust length).
48. Portrait of a Man (bust length).
49. Portrait of Alonso Martinez de Espinar, Groom of the Bedchamber
to Prince Baltasar Carlos (bust length).
50. View in the Garden of the Villa Medici, Rome.
51. View in the Garden of the Villa Medici, Rome.
52. View of the "Calle de la Reina" in Aranjuez, with a Royal
Cavalcade on the road.
53. Study of an old Man's head, in profile.
54. Study of an old Man's head (a smaller copy).
55. Portrait of Philip IV., in court dress.
56. Portrait of Prince Baltasar Carlos, as a child, in court dress.
57. A Group of Figures, presumably painted by Velazquez, in the
foreground of a "View of Zaragoza", by Juan Bautista Martinez
del Mazo.
58. Another group of Figures in the same picture.
59. Portrait of Doña Mariana de Austria, second wife of Philip IV.,
dressed in mourning (now attributed to Juan B. M. del Mazo).

II.--_REMBRANDT_

A second collection (also presented by Lord Savile) consists of forty copies, painted in oil-colour, on a reduced scale by Herr Paul Roemer, from pictures by Rembrandt in the Imperial Gallery of the Hermitage, St. Petersburg. The subjects are as follows:--

Enclosed in one Frame--

1. The Denial of St. Peter.
2. Portrait of Rembrandt's Mother; half length; seated, holding
a book on her knees.
3. Portrait of Rembrandt's Mother; half length; seated.
4. Portrait of a young Warrior in armour.
5. Portrait of an aged Jew; half length; seated.
6. Portrait of a Man; half length; standing.
7. Portrait of a Woman; half length; seated.
8. Portrait of the Rabbi Manasseh ben Israel; seated.
9. A young female Servant, with a broom.
10. "Le Benedicite." (A Peasant family saying grace.)

Enclosed in one Frame--

11. Abraham at Table with the Angels.
12. Jacob's elder Sons showing him Joseph's garment.
13. Potiphar's Wife accusing Joseph.
14. The Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard.
15. The Incredulity of St. Thomas.
16. Portrait of Rembrandt's Mother; half length; seated.
17. Portrait of a young Jewess, crowned with flowers.
18. Portrait of a Turk; half length.
19. Portrait of a Man.
20. Portrait of a young Man, with long fair hair.
21. Portrait of a young Man, dressed in black.
22. Portrait of an old Man.

Enclosed in one Frame--

23. The Sacrifice of Abraham.
24. The Holy Family.
25. The Return of the Prodigal Son.
26. Danaë.
27. Portrait of an old Officer.
28. A Young Girl at her Toilet.
29. Portrait of a Man.
30. Portrait of a Woman.
31. A Landscape; with figures representing the journey to Emmaus.
32. View on the Rhine.
33. The Toilet of a young Jewish Girl.

Enclosed in one Frame--

34. The Disgrace of Haman.
35. The Descent from the Cross.
36. Portrait of Lieven Willemszon van Copenol, the Calligrapher.
37. The Mother of Rembrandt; half length; seated.
38. Portrait of an aged Jew.
39. Portrait of an old Man.
40. A Nun teaching a Child to read.

III.--_MURILLO, ETC._

A third collection (presented by Dr. E. J. Longton, of Southport) consists of forty-five small water-colour copies, by W. West, from pictures by old masters, principally in the Prado Gallery at Madrid. The following are the subjects:--

After Murillo--

1. The Adoration of the Shepherds. Prado, Madrid.
2. St. Elizabeth of Hungary tending the Sick. Academy of St.
Fernando, Madrid.
3. The Dream of the Roman Senator and his Wife. _Ibid._
4. The Roman Senator and his Wife telling their Dream to Pope
Liberius. _Ibid._
5. St. Thomas of Villanueva giving alms. Museum, Seville.
6. Christ on the Cross, supported by St. Francis. _Ibid._
7. SS. Justa and Rufina. _Ibid._
8. St. Anthony with the Infant Saviour. Museum, Seville.
9. St. Felix restoring the Infant Christ to the Virgin. _Ibid._
10. La Vergen de la Servilleta. _Ibid._
11. Moses striking the Rock in Horeb. La Caridad, Seville.
12. St. John the Baptist as a Child, with the Lamb. _Ibid._
13. The Charity of St. Juan de Dios. _Ibid._

After Zurbaran (?)

14. A Legendary Subject.

After Velazquez--

15. Los Borrachos (The Tipplers). Prado, Madrid.
16. Portrait of Philip IV. (with a Dog). _Ibid._
17. Prince Balthazar as a Boy on his Pony. _Ibid._
18. Portrait of the Infanta Doña Margarita. _Ibid._
19. Portrait of a Male Dwarf, with a Dog. _Ibid._
20. Las Meninas (The Maids of Honour); Velazquez in his Studio
painting the Infanta Margarita Maria. _Ibid._
21. Equestrian Portrait of Philip IV. _Ibid._
22. Portrait of the Earl of Nottingham. _Ibid._

After Titian--

23. Portrait of Philip II. as a Young Man. _Ibid._
24. Equestrian Portrait of Charles. _Ibid._
25. The Bacchanal. _Ibid._
26. Portrait of Charles V., with a Dog. _Ibid._
27. Portrait of an Officer.

After Rubens--

28. The Three Graces. _Ibid._
29. The Garden of Love. _Ibid._

After Van Dyck--

30. The Betrayal of Christ. _Ibid._
31. Portrait of Henry, Count de Berg. _Ibid._
32. Portrait of a Cavalier. _Ibid._

After Ribera--

33. Jacob receiving Isaac's Blessing. _Ibid._
34. Jacob's Dream. _Ibid._

After Jordaens--

35. Family Group in a Garden. _Ibid._

After Raphael--

36. The Holy Family (La Perla). Prado, Madrid.
37. The Holy Family (La Rosa). _Ibid._
38. The Holy Family (Del Lagarto). _Ibid._
39. Christ bearing the Cross (Lo Spasimo). _Ibid._

After Correggio--

40. Noli me tangere. _Ibid._

After Claude--

41. Landscape, with St. Mary Magdalen kneeling. _Ibid._

After Giorgione--

42. The Virgin and Child, with St. Bridget. _Ibid._

After Rembrandt--

43. Queen Artemisia. _Ibid._

After Sir A. More--

44. Queen Mary of England. _Ibid._

After Parmigiano--

45. Portrait of a Lady with three Children (probably Riccarda
Malaspina, Wife of Lorenzo Cibo). _Ibid._

IV.--_THE ARUNDEL SOCIETY'S COLLECTION_

The Arundel Society was formed in 1849 in order to meet "a revived interest in art by suitable instruction." In the case of early Italian art, "the materials for such instruction were abundant, but scattered, little accessible, and, in some instances, passing away." The Society set itself to secure engravings and other records of works of art which came within the description just given. A large collection of water-copies from the Old Masters was thus accumulated, and the Collection was in 1897 deposited in the National Gallery on loan. Two years later, the Society was wound up, and the collection was given to the nation. It is of great interest and value to all students of mediæval art. Many of the Arundel copies are familiar from reproductions in chromo-lithography. "The latter," as a well-known critic has remarked, "although they undoubtedly did good service in their time by calling attention to the less known and less easily available masterpieces of the earlier Italian art, were often enough lamentable caricatures of the things which they professed to represent. The drawings themselves are, however, in many cases, of an exquisite accuracy, of which the reproductions give little or no idea. Of course, when the attempt is made to copy in this medium the great achievements of Giovanni Bellini, Giorgione, Titian, Palma Vecchio, Paolo Veronese,--or even of such earlier colourists as the Van Eycks and Memlinc,--failure, more or less complete, must inevitably be the result. It would be difficult, on the other hand, to overestimate the value of such copies as those of the famous frescoes of Mantegna in the Church of the Eremitani at Padua, those of Benozzo Gozzoli at San Gimignano and Montefalco, of Piero della Francesca at Arezzo, or of the great galaxy of Quattrocento painters--Perugino, Pinturicchio, Botticelli, Ghirlandajo, Signorelli, Cosimo Rosselli, and Piero di Cosimo--who worked in the Sixtine Chapel before Michelangelo came to dwarf and efface them with his stupendous ceiling, and, thirty years later on, with his 'Last Judgment.' For the purposes of study and comparison these copies, lent by the Arundel Society, fulfil much the same role as does a good museum of casts from antique masterpieces. They do not enable the student of art to form a complete idea of the originals, any more than the copies of the Pheidian and Praxitelean sculptures do; but they enlarge his view of the scope and significance of Italian and Netherlandish art in their greatest phases, and happily they fill up gaps which must occur even in the most various and representative collection, such as is the National Gallery."[264]

It is hoped that the following catalogue may serve to bring before the notice of visitors the importance of a collection which deserves much greater attention than it has hitherto received. The artists represented are arranged alphabetically, with references to such of them as are also represented by original work in the National Gallery. After the title of each work, information is given as to the nature of the original from which the copy is made, and the place where the original is. The numerals after each picture refer to the numbers at present on the frames.

ALBERTINELLI (see under 645).

The Visitation (11): picture, Uffizi, Florence.

ANDREA DEL CASTAGNO (see under 1138).

The Last Supper (120): fresco, Convent S. Apollonia, Florence.

ANGELICO, FRA (see under 663).

Christ and Magdalen (51): fresco, Convent of S. Marco, Florence.
Christ at Emmaus (76): " " " "
The Transfiguration (49): " " " "
The Crucifixion (91): " " " "
The Entombment (50): " " " "
The Marys at the Sepulchre (53): " " "
Madonna and Child, etc. (65): " " "
The Presentation (54): " " " "
The Annunciation: " " " "
Coronation of the Virgin: " " " "
Christ as a Pilgrim (70): " " " "
Ordination of St. Stephen (55): fresco, Vatican, Rome.
Adoration of the Magi (166): " " "
Lives of SS. Stephen and Lawrence (128, 131, 134, 193, 194,
etc.): frescoes, Chapel of St. Lawrence, Vatican.

["The remote little chapel containing Fra Angelico's
masterpieces." Without seeing it, no one can have any
conception of "the strength and freedom of the artist." "These
frescoes are the highest expression of that which the friar for
many years had been striving after. They are an anthology of
his artistic virtues" (_Fra Angelico_, by Langton Douglas: see
pp. 141-158 for a full discussion of them).]

AVANZO, JACOPO D' (Veronese: painted 1377).

St. Lucy and her Judges (36): fresco, S. Antonio, Padua.
Martyrdom of St. George (183): fresco, S. Giorgio, Padua.

BARTOLOMMEO, FRA (_see_ under 1694).

Christ at Emmaus (72): fresco, S. Marco, Florence.
Vision of St. Dominic (45): " " "
Virgin and Child (24): " " "
"Noli me tangere": " " "

BELLINI, GIOVANNI (see under 189).

Virgin and Child (62): picture, Frari, Venice.

["The art of Bellini is centrally represented by two pictures
at Venice: one the Madonna in the sacristy of the Frari with
two saints beside her, and ten angels at her feet; the second,
the "Madonna with four Saints" over the second altar of San
Zaccaria. In the first of these the figures are under life
size, and it represents the most perfect kind of picture for
rooms; in which, since it is intended to be seen close to the
spectator, every right kind of finish possible to the hand may
be wisely lavished; yet which is not a miniature, nor in any
wise petty or ignoble, etc." (Ruskin: _Relation between Michael
Angelo and Tintoret_, p. 14).]

BOCCACCIO BOCCACCINO (see under 806).

Christ among the Doctors (57): fresco, Cathedral, Cremona.

BOTTICELLI (see under 1034).

Spring (86): picture, Belle Arti, Florence.

[The most probable explanation of the allegory is this:--The
picture represents a masque or joust of Spring given by
Giuliano de' Medici in honour of his mistress, "La Simonetta
Vespucei," who is here represented as Spring, Giuliano himself
figuring as Mercury. In the centre is Venus with Cupid above
her head, pointing an arrow at Giuliano. Shortly after the
joust, Giuliano was murdered, and La Simonetta died. The
death-like figure to the extreme left, breathing upon Spring,
represents the premonition of these coming disasters. Simonetta
was a favourite model of Botticelli's, the same slender and
long-throated lady appearing in many of his works, though
sometimes spiritualised almost past recognition (cf. _Ariadne
Florentina_, Appendix iv.; and a sonnet by D. G. Rossetti
describing this picture).]

Destruction of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (180): fresco, Sistine Chapel.
Moses at the Well (185): fresco, Sistine Chapel.
The Temptation (110): " " "
Venus rising from the Sea (87): picture, Uffizi, Florence.

[For an interesting description and interpretation of
this picture, see Pater's _Studies in the History of the
Renaissance_: "The light is cold--mere Sunless dawn; but a
later painter would have cloyed you with sunshine; and you
can see the better for that quietness in the morning air each
long promontory as it slopes down to the water's edge. Men go
forth to their labours until the evening; but she is awake
before them, and you might think that the sorrow in her face
was at the thought of the whole long day of love yet to come.
An emblematical figure of the wind blows hard across the grey
water, moving forward the dainty-tipped shell on which she
sails, the sea 'showing his teeth' as it moves in their lines
of foam, and sucking in one by one the falling roses.... What
is unmistakable is the sadness with which Botticelli has
conceived the Goddess of Pleasure as the depositary of a great
power over the lives of men."]

Giovanna Tornabuoni and the Graces.
Lorenzo Tornabuoni and the Liberal Arts.

[Copies from the frescoes formerly in the Villa Lemmi, near
Florence, now in the Louvre: for a description of them, see
Ruskin's _Art of England_, § 69.]

BUFFALMACCO (Florentine: 1262-1351).

Raising of Lazarus (216): fresco, Assisi.

CARPACCIO (see under 750).