Chapter II: Engravings (10)

Albert Dürer, who died in 1528, and Lucas van Cranach, and Holbein, who died in 1553,[38] were destined to create a race of painters, and a host of successors were soon at work. But the movement, which was impeded by troubles of a religious character, died away in the terrible convulsions of the Thirty Years’ War, and was never again renewed.

The era in which German art seemed all at once to decline was that wherein the Italian school flourished in full splendour, and exercised an unrivalled influence over every European country occupied by the Latin races. France yielded all the more readily to this foreign influence, because the Papal court at Avignon had already given an asylum to Giotto in the first place, and afterwards to Simon Memmi; both of whom, and especially the last, have left master-like traces of their presence on French soil.

As a matter of fact, although French painting, regarded in the light of a national art, cannot boast of having spontaneously produced, as a thing of home-growth, any of those essays of complete independence of which Germany and Italy are so proud; the memorials of French art at least bear witness that, during the long reign of Byzantine tradition, it never ceased to struggle with some force under the yoke; at a time, indeed, when Italy and Germany themselves seemed, on the contrary, to bear the burden with the most submissive servitude.

The tenth century, in becoming subject to the influence of a foolish but heartfelt terror (the fear of the end of the world), marked a period of fatal obstruction to every kind of effort, and progress died away; but if we look beyond this we shall perceive that, from the earliest days of the monarchy, painting was held in honour, and painters themselves afforded proofs of power, if not of genius. We shall, for instance, find that the basilica of St. Germain-des-Prés, built by Childebert I., had its walls decorated with “elegant paintings.” We shall find Gondebaud, the son of Clotaire, himself handling the pencil and “painting the walls and roofs of oratories.” In the reign of Charlemagne, we discover the texts which the bishops and priests were compelled to paint on “the whole interior surface” of their churches, in order that the charm of the colouring and of the compositions might aid the fervour of faith in the congregations. But all this is but evidence recorded in the pages of the ancient chronicles. We have other testimony derived from works still existing, on which a judgment may be practically passed. Some frescoes discovered at St. Savin, in the department of Vienne, and at Nohant-Vicq, in the department of Indre, which must be attributed to the eleventh and twelfth centuries, attest, in all their rude simplicity, the efforts of a thoughtful art, and specially bear the stamp of a true spirit of independence.

The Sainte-Chapelle, in Paris, by its painted windows and the mural paintings of its crypt, asserts the real vitality of an artistic feeling, which only waited for the signal of a bolder spirit to rise to loftier things. Moreover, if other examples are wanting, there are manuscripts, on the ornamentation of which the most skilful painters have concentrated their powers, that would suffice to point out the tendencies and artistic standard of every succeeding age. (See the article on MINIATURE-PAINTING.) However little we may consult history, we scarcely ever fail to discover traces of certain groups of artists whose names or works have survived. Thus, a series of paintings preserved in the Cathedral of Amiens, as well as the “Sacre de Louis XII.” and the “Vierge au Froment,” in the museum at Cluny, prove to us the existence, at the end of the fifteenth century, of the school of Picardy, which possessed skill in composition, combined with a feeling for colour and a certain knowledge of handling. Thus, too, the researches of the learned have traced out the laborious career of the Clouet family, sung by Ronsard and others, but whose works are almost entirely lost; thus, also, we find the names of Bourdichon, Perréal, Foucquet, who worked for Louis XI. and Charles VIII., and that of the peaceful King René of Provence, who thought it not beneath his dignity to make himself the practical chief of a school whose nameless productions are still scattered over the south of France.

With the sixteenth century commenced the age of the great Italian painters. In 1515, Francis I. persuaded Leonardo da Vinci to come to France, and to afford the example of his wonderful genius. But the illustrious creator of “La Gioconda” (the famous portrait of Mona Lisa), burthened with years and worn out with work, visited France as if only to draw his last breath (1519). Andrea del Sarto, the graceful pupil of the severe Michael Angelo, came to France in 1517; but, after having painted for his royal protector a few pictures, among which was the magnificent “Charity” in the Louvre, he again repaired to the Italian soil, to which his unhappy marriage recalled him to his doom.

In 1520 Raphael died, at the age of only thirty-seven years. Giulio Pippi (called _Giulio Romano_), Francis Penni (called _il Fattore_), and Perino del Vaga, whom he named as his heirs and charged with the completion of his unfinished works, did their best to replace the illustrious dead. For a short time it might have been thought that the inspiration of the master still remained with his pupils; but soon a separation of this group of artists, who had found their principal power in unity of thought, took place; and, fifteen or twenty years after the tomb had closed on Raphael, the tradition of his school was nothing more than a glorious ruin.

Michael Angelo, who died in 1563, was destined to have a longer career; but it was only to become a witness of the rapid decadence of the great movement he had helped to call forth. After Daniele di Volterra, the painter of the “Descent from the Cross,” which is classed among the three most beautiful works that Rome possesses; after Vasari, who possessed a double title to celebrity as a skilful painter and the historian of the Italian schools; after Rosso, whose renown subsequently suffered at the court of France; and Bronzino, who sought success in taste and delicacy; the school of the great Buonarotti produced nothing but works which seemed to wander from exaggeration to bad taste. The dwarfs who attempted to walk in the footsteps of the giant were soon exhausted, and only succeeded in rendering themselves ridiculous.

The Venetian school, the great masters of which did not become extinct before the end of the sixteenth century, had its period of decadence at a later epoch; this will not come under our consideration. The Lombard school, which, by the deaths of Correggio and Parmigianino, had been left without its chiefs before the middle of this century (1534 and 1540), seemed for a moment as if it would disappear as it had risen. But in Michael Angelo Caravaggio (Fig. 255) it met with a powerful master, who was able for some time to arrest the progress of its decadence.

We have as yet done little more than hint at the presence of Rosso, or _Maître Roux_, at the court of France. He came in 1530, at the invitation of Francis I., to decorate the Palace of Fontainebleau. “His engraved work,” says M. Michiels, “shows him to be a feeble and pretentious man, devoid both of taste and inspiration, who exhibited laboured refinement in the place of vigour, mistaking want of proportion for grandeur, and absence of truth for originality. Being nominated by the king as Canon of the Sainte-Chapelle, he had as his assistants Leonard, a Fleming, the Frenchmen Michel Samson and Louis Dubreuil, and the Italians Lucca Penni, Bartolommeo Miniati, &c. But in 1531, Primaticcio arrived from Mantua, and a contest arose henceforth between them.... Le Rosso having ended his days by suicide, Primaticcio remained master of the field. His most talented pupil decorated under his direction the magnificent ball-room. Primaticcio painted with less exaggeration and more delicacy and elegance than Rosso; but still he formed one of that troop of awkward and affected copyists who exaggerated the errors of Caravaggio.... His empire of forty years’ duration, in the midst of a foreign population, was, however, an undisturbed one. Henry II., Francis II., Charles IX., and Catherine de Medicis, showed him no less favour than Francis I. He died in 1570, loaded with honours and riches.

“The number of French artists who allowed themselves to be influenced by the Italian method was considerable. At last a man of more vigorous character arose who would not permit false taste to rule him, and adopted all the improvements of modern art, without following in the footsteps of court favourites. His talents inaugurated a new period in the history of French painting. We are speaking of Jean Cousin, who was born at Soucy, about 1530; he adorned with his compositions both glass and canvas, and was, in addition, a skilful sculptor. His famous picture of the “Last Judgment,” in the Louvre, suggests a high opinion of him. The colouring is harsh and monotonous, but the drawing of the figures and the arrangement of the piece prove that he had the habit of thought and also of reckoning on his own powers and of seeking out novel dispositions, producing effects hitherto unknown.”

The beautiful composition we introduce here (Fig. 256) is taken from M. A. Firmin Didot’s “Notice sur Jean Cousin,” in which a large number of other subjects are reproduced; some of them may have been

engraved by the painter himself. Like Albert Dürer and Holbein, Jean Cousin did not disdain to apply his talents to the ornamentation of books.

Jean Cousin is generally looked upon as the real chief of the French school. After him, and by his side, we must place the Janets,[39] who although of Flemish origin, are actually French in their style and the character of their pictures. The most celebrated of them, François Clouet, portrayed, with a realism full of elegance and distinction, the nobles and beautiful ladies of the court of Valois.

We should here close our remarks, were it not that we might be accused of an important omission in this review of the principal schools. For nothing has been said of the Bolognese school, whose origin, though not its maturity, belongs to the epoch we have made our study. But the material circumstances we now mention must be our justification: although the school of Bologna gave signs of its existence in the thirteenth century, and under the impulse of Guido, Ventura, and Ursone, showed itself to be industrious, active, and numerous; and also in the fourteenth century, under that of Jacopo d’Avanzo and Lippodi Dalmasio; yet it died away, reviving only at the commencement of the sixteenth century, again to become extinct after the death of the poetic Raibolini, called _Francia_, without having produced any of those great individualities to whose glory alone we are compelled to devote our attention.

We must, however, confess that this school, which suddenly retrieved its position at a time when all other schools were in a state of complete decadence, found three illustrious chiefs instead of one, and acquired the singular glory of resuscitating, by a kind of potent eclecticism, the _ensemble_ of the noblest traditions. But it was not till the latter part of the sixteenth century that Bologna witnessed the opening by the Carracci of that studio whence were destined to proceed Guido, Albano, Domenichino, Guercino, Caravaggio, Pietro of Cortona and Luca Giordano--a magnificent phalanx of men who, by their own works and the force of their example, were to become the honour of an age into which it does not form a portion of our task to follow them.

ENGRAVING.

Origin of Wood-Engraving.--The St. Christopher of 1423.--“The
Virgin and Child Jesus.”--The earliest Masters of
Wood-Engraving.--Bernard Milnet.--Engraving in _Camaïeu_.--Origin
of Engraving on Metal.--The “Pax” of Maso Finiguerra.--The earliest
Engravers on Metal.--Niello Work.--_Le Maître_ of 1466.--_Le
Maître_ of 1486.--Martin Schöngauer, Israel van Mecken, Wenceslaus
of Olmutz, Albert Dürer, Marc Antonio, Lucas van Leyden.--Jean
Duret and the French School.--The Dutch School.--The Masters of
Engraving.

Almost all authors who have devoted themselves to investigate this subject have asserted, but doubtless very erroneously, that engraving on metal was naturally derived from engraving on wood. Nevertheless, any one who gives but a slight consideration to the difference existing between the two processes must be led to the belief that the two arts must result from two distinct inventions. In wood-engraving, the impression is, in fact, formed by the portions of the block which are in relief; while in engraving on metal, the incised strokes give the lines of the print. Now, no one who has any knowledge of professional matters can for a moment doubt that, in spite of the similar appearance of the productions, there is a radical difference in the starting-points and modes of execution of these two methods.

We certainly must consider it probable that the appearance of prints produced by wood-engraving may have suggested the idea of seeking to obtain a similar or better result by some other process; but that a process should be assimilated, as if by affiliation, to another diametrically opposed to it is a view we do not feel called upon to accept without reservation.

Be this as it may, certain authors look upon wood-engraving as having been invented in Germany at the commencement of the fifteenth century. Others have derived it from China, where it was in use in the year 1000 of our era. Others, again, propound the opinion that the art of printing stuffs by means of engraved blocks was employed in different parts of Asia, to which it had been imported from ancient Egypt, at a period long before it was first thought of in Europe. These hypotheses being admitted, the whole question reduces itself into an inquiry as to the way in which the art made its entrance into Western Europe in the first half of the fifteenth century; this being the earliest date at which we find engravings made in Germany, France, and the Low Countries.

The most ancient _dated_ impression known of a cut engraved on wood is a St. Christopher, without either mark or name of its author, bearing a Latin inscription and the date of 1423. This specimen is so roughly engraved, and in drawing is so faulty, that it is only natural to assume it must be one of the earliest attempts at wood-engraving. There is, however, an engraving in the Imperial Library, Paris, representing the Virgin holding the Child Jesus seated in her arms (Fig. 258), which may perhaps be considered an earlier specimen than the St. Christopher. The back of the niche is a kind of mosaic, formed of diamond-shaped quadrilaterals; the _aureolæ_ and ornaments of the niche are coloured a yellowish brown. There is, however, one singularity in this engraving which testifies to its great antiquity; it is printed on paper made of cotton, and is unsized, and the impression sinks so deeply into it that it may be seen nearly as well on the back of the print as on the front. We must not omit to mention another engraving, preserved in the Royal Library, Brussels; this is also a “Virgin with the Child Jesus,” surrounded by four saints (Fig. 259). It is a composition of a somewhat grand style, and does not agree very well with the date, MCCCCXVIII., which is seen at the foot of the print.

We must, doubtless, attribute to nearly the same time some specimens of playing-cards,--these we have already mentioned when dealing specially with this subject; and also a series of figures of the Twelve Apostles with Latin legends, underneath which are the same number of phrases in French, or rather in the ancient dialect of Picardy, reproducing the whole text of the Decalogue; one of these xylographic plates may be seen in the chapter on “PRINTING.” In these engravings each figure is standing up, clothed in a long tunic, and covered with a wide mantle; the ink, so to speak, is bistre, and the mantles are coloured, red and green alternately. The Apostles all bear the symbolical sign which distinguishes them, and are surrounded with a long fillet, whereon is traced in Latin the sentence of the Creed attributed to each, and one of the ten Commandments. St. Peter, for instance, has for his motto this French sentence, “Gardeis Dieu le roy moult sain;” St. Andrew, “Ne jurets point son nome en vain;” St. John, “Père et Mère tosjours honoras;” St. James the Greater, “Les fiestes et dymeng, garderas,” &c.

There are other engravings belonging to the middle of the fifteenth century which make known the fact that the art of engraving was practised by several artists in France; and that without doing any injustice

to Germany we can attribute several anonymous works to French masters. But we must in any case claim the very characteristic works of an engraver named Bernard Milnet. In the engravings of this master there are neither lines nor cross-hatching; the ground of the print is black; the lights are

formed by an infinite number of white dots varying in size according to the requirement and taste of the artist. This engraver does not appear to have had any imitators; and, to tell the truth, his mode of operation must have presented many difficulties in execution. There are only six known specimens of his work--a “Virgin with the Child Jesus,” “St. Catherine Kneeling” (Fig. 260), the “Scourging of Christ,” a group of “St. John, St. Paul, and St. Veronica,” a “St. George,” and a “St. Bernard.”

Although engravings of this time are now extremely rare, it does not necessarily follow that they were equally scarce at the dates when they were executed. M. Michiels, in his “Histoire de la Peinture en Flandre,” says that, “according to ancient custom, on feast-days the Lazarists, and others belonging to religious orders who were accustomed to nurse the sick, carried in the streets a large wax candle ornamented with mouldings and glass-trinkets, and distributed to the children wood-engravings illuminated with brilliant colours, and representing sacred subjects. There must, therefore, have been a considerable number of these engravings.”

In the sixteenth century wood-engraving, improved by the pupils of Albert Dürer, and especially by John Burgkmair (Fig. 261), was very extensively developed; and the art was then practised with a superiority of style which left far behind the timid attempts of the preceding century.

The works of most of the wood-engravers of this period are anonymous; nevertheless, the names of a few of these artists have survived. But it is only by an error that, in the nomenclature of the latter, certain painters and designers, such as Albert Dürer, Lucas van Leyden, and Lucas van Cranach, have long been made to figure. There are wood-engravings which do actually bear the signatures or monograms of these masters; but the fact is, that the latter were often in the habit of drawing their designs on the wood, as is frequently the practice with artists in our own day; and the engraver (or rather the _formschneider_, form-cutter, to employ the usual expression), in reproducing the composition drawn with a pencil or pen, has copied also the signature which the designer of the subject added. An error often committed by writers may be thus easily set right.

We must not quit the subject of wood-engraving without mentioning engraving in _camaïeu_; a process of Italian origin, in which three or four blocks, applying in succession to the print uniform tints of more or less intense tones, ultimately produced engravings of a very remarkable effect, imitating drawings with the stump or the pencil. At the commencement of the sixteenth century several artists distinguished themselves in this

mode of engraving, especially Ugo di Carpi, who worked at Modena about the year 1518; Antonio Fantuzzi, a pupil of Francis Parmigianino, who accompanied and assisted Primaticcio at Fontainebleau; Gualtier, and Andrew Andreani; and lastly, Bartholomew Coriolano, of Bologna, who would have been the last engraver in this style, were it not for Antonio M. Zanetti, a celebrated Venetian amateur, who was still nearer to us in point of date. Two or three Germans, John Ulrich in the sixteenth, and Louis Buring[40] in the seventeenth, century, also made some engravings in _camaïeu_, but only with two blocks: one giving the design of the subject with the outline and cross-hatching, the other introducing a colour, usually bistre, on which all the lights were taken out, so as to leave the ground of the paper white. These specimens imitated a pen-and-ink drawing on coloured paper, and finished with the brush or pencil.

We must now go back to the year 1452, which is generally fixed upon as the date of the invention of engraving on metal (Fig. 262).[41] When discussing the subject of “Goldsmith’s Work,” we mentioned, among the pupils of the illustrious Ghiberti, Maso Finiguerra, and stated that this artist had engraved on silver a “Pax” intended for the treasury of the Church of St. John. Certain writers having recognised in a print now in the Imperial Library of Paris, and also in another print in the Library of the Arsenal, an exact impression of this engraving, were led to attribute to the celebrated Florentine goldsmith the honour of an invention in which he might perhaps have had no share at all. Possibly this process of printing off an impression, which was a very natural thing to do, had been actually practised by goldsmiths long before Finiguerra; they wished, doubtless, to preserve a pattern of their _niello-work_, or to see how it progressed in its various stages. The proofs, thus taken off by hand, having been lost, Finiguerra may have been considered the originator of a method which he only applied as a matter of course to his goldsmith’s work. The two circumstances--that the plate is made of silver and not of any common metal, and that it may be classed among the numerous _nielli_, engraved plates of decorative goldsmith’s work, which have been handed down to us and are of even earlier dates--will alone suffice, in our opinion, to dispose of the

idea that this work was expressly executed in order to furnish impressions on paper. It was nothing but chance that in this case introduced the name of Finiguerra, which would not have become known in this connection, if it had not been for the preservation of two ancient impressions of his _niello-work_; while those taken from other and perhaps older plates had been destroyed. Thus the date, or the asserted date, of the invention of engraving on metal was fixed by the ascertained date of the piece of goldsmith’s work.

Be this as it may, the print of the “Pax,” or rather of the “Assumption,” engraved by Finiguerra, does not fail, in the opinion of all writers and amateurs, to bear the title of the earliest print from metal; a title to which it has a perfect right, and in thus regarding it we are induced to give a brief description of the subject represented in the engraving. Jesus Christ, seated on a lofty throne and wearing a cap similar to that of the Doges, places, with both his hands, a crown on the head of the Virgin, who, with her hands crossed upon her breast, is seated upon the same throne; St. Augustine and St. Ambrose are kneeling; in the centre, below, and on the right, several saints are standing, among whom we can distinguish St. Catherine and St. Agnes; on the left, in the rear of St. Augustine, we see St. John the Baptist and other saints; lastly, on both sides of the throne a number of angels are blowing trumpets; and, above, are others holding a streamer, on which we read: “ASSVMPTA. EST. MARIA. IN. CELVM. AVE. EXERCITVS. ANGELORVM;” “Mary is taken up into Heaven. Hail, army of angels!”

The first of the impressions of this _niello_ found its way into the Royal Library with the Marolles Collection, bought by Louis XIV. in 1667: the other was discovered only in 1841, by M. Robert Dumesnil, who, in the Library of the Arsenal, was turning over the leaves of a volume containing engravings by Callot and Sebastian Le Clerc. This latter impression, though taken on inferior paper, is nevertheless in a much better state of preservation than the other; but the ink is of a greyer hue, and one might readily fancy that, as M. Duchesne, the learned writer, asserts, it was printed before the final completion of the plate.

In support of the opinion which we before indirectly expressed, that the practice of taking impressions from engraved plates of metal might well be a kind of fortuitous result of a mere professional tradition incidental to the goldsmith’s art, we may remark that most of the engravings which have been handed down to us as belonging to the era fixed upon for the invention of engraving, are the work of Italian goldsmith-engravers. More than four hundred specimens of this date have been preserved; among the artists we must mention Amerighi, Michael Angelo Bandinelli, and Philippo Brunelleschi, of Florence; Forzoni Spinelli, of Arezzo; Furnio, Gesso, Rossi, and Raibolini, of Bologna; Teucreo, of Siena; Caradosso and Arcioni, of Milan; Nicholas Rosex, of Modena, of whose work we have three _nielli_ and more than sixty engravings; Antonio Pollajuolo, who engraved a print called the “Fight with Cutlasses,” representing ten naked men fighting; lastly, the most skilful of the metal-chasing goldsmiths after Finiguerra, Peregrino of Cesena, who has left his name and his mark on sixty-six _nielli_.

More special mention must be made of Bartholomew Baldini, better known under the name of Baccio, to whom we owe, in addition to some large engravings both of a sacred and of a mythological character, twenty vignettes designed for the folio edition (1481) of Dante’s “Inferno;” of Andrea Mantegna, a renowned painter, who himself engraved many of his own compositions; and of John van der Straet, called _Stradan_ (Fig. 263), who executed at Florence many remarkable plates.

We find in Germany an engraver who dates several of his works in the year 1466, but on none of them has he left more than his initials, E. S. This has not failed to tax the ingenuity of those who would establish his individuality in some authentic way. Some have agreed to call him Edward Schön or Stern, on account of the stars he frequently introduces into the borders of the vestments of his figures; one asserts that he was born in Bavaria, because in a specimen of his works is the figure of a woman holding a shield emblazoned with the arms of that country; another believes him to have been a Swiss, because he twice engraved the “Pilgrimage of St. Mary of Einsiedeln,” the most celebrated in the country. But those amateurs who, upon the whole, think more of the work than the workman, are content to designate him as _the Master of 1466_.

This engraver has left behind him three hundred examples, most of them of small dimensions, among which, independently of sundry very curious compositions, we must notice two important series, namely, an _Alphabet_ composed of grotesque figures (Fig. 264), and a pack of _Numeral Cards_, the greater part of which are in the Imperial Library.

At almost the same epoch Holland also presents us with an anonymous engraver, who might be called _the Master of 1486_, from the date on one only of his engravings. The works of this artist, whose manner exhibits a powerful and original style, are very rare in any collections not belonging to the country in which he worked. The Cabinet of Engravings at Amsterdam possesses seventy-six of them, while that of Vienna has but two, that of Berlin one only, and that of Paris six, among which we may remark “Samson sleeping on the knees of Delilah,” and “St. George,” on foot, piercing with his sword the throat of the dragon which menaced the life of the Queen of Lydia.

We have still three comparatively celebrated engravers to mention before reaching the epoch at which Marc Antonio Raimondi in Italy, Albert Dürer in Germany, and Lucas van Leyden in Holland, all simultaneously flourished.

Martin Schöngauer, for some time designated by the name of Martin Schön, who died at Colmar in 1488, was a good painter as well as a skilful engraver. More than one hundred and twenty specimens of his work are known, the most important of which are--“Christ bearing his Cross,” “The Battle of the Christians” (waged against the infidels by the apostle St. James), both very rare compositions of large size; the “Passion of Jesus Christ,” the “Death of the Virgin,” and “St. Anthony tormented by Demons,” one proof of which, it is said, was coloured by Michael Angelo. We must add (and this circumstance shows again the kind of direct relation which we have already noted as existing between engraving and goldsmith’s work), that Martin Schöngauer also engraved a pastoral staff and a censer, both of very beautiful workmanship.

Israel van Mecken (or Meckenem), supposed to be a pupil of Francis van Bocholt, as he worked at Bocholt previous to the year 1500, is, of all German engravers of this epoch, the one whose works are most extensively known. The Cabinet of Engravings in the Imperial Library, Paris, possesses three volumes of his engravings, containing two hundred and twenty-eight superb examples; among these we must especially notice a composition engraved on two plates of the same height; “St. Gregory perceiving the Man of Sorrows at the Moment of the Mass.” We must confine ourselves to the mention, in addition, of his “St. Luke painting the Portrait of the Virgin;” “St. Odile releasing from Purgatory, by his prayers, the Soul of his Father, Duke Etichon;” “Herodias” (Fig. 265); and “Lucretia killing herself in the presence of Collatinus and others,” which last is the only subject this artist has taken from profane history.

We mention Wenceslaus of Olmutz, who was engaged in engraving from the year 1481 to 1497, with the especial object of describing an allegorical print due to his _burin_; it may serve to give a notion of the fantastic tendency impressed on the ideas of the day by the religious dissensions which arose at this epoch between several princes of Germany and the court of Rome. This print, or rather this graphic satire, most of the allusions in which are now lost to us, represents the monstrous figure of a woman entirely naked, seen in profile and turning to the left, her body covered with scales, with the head and mane of an ass; her right leg terminates in a cloven foot, and the left in a bird’s claw; her right arm is terminated by the paw of a lion, and the left by a woman’s hand. The back of this fantastic being is covered with a hairy mask, and in the place of a tail she has the neck of a chimera, with a deformed head from which darts a serpent’s tongue. Above the engraving is written, “_Roma Caput Mundi_” (“Rome the head of the world”). On the left hand is a three-storied tower, upon which a flag adorned with the keys of St. Peter is floating. On the château is written, “_Castelagno_” (Castle of St. Angelo); in the foreground is a river, upon whose waves is traced the word “_Tevere_” (the Tiber); lower still is the word “_Ianrarii_” (January), below the date 1496: on the right, in the background, is a square tower, upon which is written, “_Tore Di Nona_” (Tower of the Nones); on the same side, in front, is a vase with two handles, and in the centre of the lower part the letter W, the monogrammatic signature of the engraver. Our interest in this plate is increased by the date it bears; for, being engraved by means of

_aquafortis_, it proves that Albert Dürer is wrongfully regarded as the inventor of this mode of engraving, more expeditious than with the _burin_, as the oldest _aquafortis_ work of Albert Dürer is dated 1515, that is to say, nineteen years later than that of Wenceslaus of Olmutz.

We now come to three great artists who, at a period in which the art of engraving had made the most remarkable progress, availed themselves of it for producing works which eminently characterise each master respectively.

Albert Dürer, born at Nuremberg in 1471, was a vigorous painter, and was not less remarkable for the productions of his _burin_ and etching-needle. We do not intend to describe all his works, though all are worthy of notice, but must content ourselves with mentioning “Adam and Eve standing by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil,” a small plate of delicate workmanship and admirable perfectness of design; the “Passion of Jesus Christ,” in a series of sixteen plates; “Christ praying in the Garden of Gethsemane,” the first work executed by this master by means of _aquafortis_, then a new method, which, being less soft than the _burin_, gave rise to an idea not dispelled for some time, that this print and several others were engraved on iron or tin; several figures of the “Virgin with the Infant Jesus,” which are all remarkable for expression and simplicity, and have received odd _sobriquets_ on account of some accessory object which accompanies them (for instance, the “Virgin with the pear, butterfly, ape,” &c.); the “Prodigal Son keeping Swine,” a composition in which the painter himself is represented; “St. Hubert praying before the Cross borne by a Stag” (Fig. 266), a very rare and beautiful plate; the “Chevalier and his Lady;” lastly, the “Chevalier of Death,” a _chef-d’œuvre_, dated 1515, and representing Francis of Sickingen, who was destined to be the firmest supporter of Luther’s Reformation.[42]

Marc Antonio Raimondi, born at Bologna about the year 1475, was first a pupil of Francis Raibolini, and afterwards of Raphael,[43] whose style he often

followed, and in his compositions did his utmost to imitate his pure and noble manner. Everything in his designs is ideally true, and all is harmonious in the _ensemble_ of his works. Most of his engravings still existing are very much sought after, and as any description we could give would only convey but an imperfect idea of the excellence of these works, the strongest testimony in favour of their merit will be to mention the high prices given for certain prints by this master at the public sale which took place in 1844. For example:--“Adam and Eve,” a print after Raphael, 1,010 francs (£40); “God commanding Noah to build the Ark,” from the same master, 700 francs (£28); the “Massacre of the Innocents,” 1,200 francs (£48); “St. Paul preaching at Athens,” 2,500 francs (£100); the “Lord’s Supper,” 2,900 francs (£116); the “Judgment of Paris,” which is regarded as the _chef-d’œuvre_ of Marc Antonio, 3,350 francs (£134); three pendentives of the “Farnesina,” 1,620 francs (£64 10s.), &c. Subsequently, these enormous prices have been even exceeded.

Lucas van Leyden, born in 1494, and, like Albert Dürer, a clever painter as well as skilful engraver, has left about eighty plates, the most remarkable of which are “David playing the Harp before Saul;” the “Adoration of the Magi;” a large “Ecce Homo,” engraved by the artist at the age of sixteen; a “Peasant and Peasant-woman with a Cow;” the “Monk Sergius killed by Mahomet;” the “Seven Virtues;” a plate called the “Little Milkmaid,” very rare; lastly, a “Poor Family travelling,” of which only five proofs are known; they were bought for sixteen louis d’or by the Abbot of Marolles, when he formed his cabinet of prints, which became one of the richest additions to the Imperial Library.

In a befitting rank below these famous artists we may class a French engraver, Jean Duret, born at Langres in 1488, who was goldsmith to Henri II., and executed several beautiful allegorical plates on the intrigues of the king and Diana of Poitiers, as well as twenty-four compositions taken from the Apocalypse; also Pierre Woeiriot (or Voeiriot), an engraver and goldsmith of Lorraine, born in 1531, who produced numerous fine works down to the end of the century; the most famous of them, designated by the name of the “Bull of Phalaris” (Fig. 267), represents the tyrant of Agrigentum shutting up human victims destined to be burnt alive in a brazen bull.

There were at work in Italy at the same epoch Augustine of Musi

(Agustino de Musis, called the Venetian), Giacomo Caraglio, the Ghisis,[44] Eneas Vico; in Germany, Altdorfer (Fig. 268), George Pencz,[45] Aldegrever, Jacque Binck, Bartel and Hans Sebald Beham (Fig. 269), who are designated under the collective name of the “Little Masters;” in Holland, Thierry (Dirk) van Staren.

In the course of the sixteenth century engraving reached its culminating point, and at that time Italy and Germany no longer took the lead in this branch of art, for the most skilful and renowned masters then belonged to Holland and France.

Those of Holland were Henry Goltzius (or Goltz), born in 1558, and his pupils Matham and the Mullers, whose vigorous gravers might remind one of brilliant effects of colour without any loss of purity of design; the two brothers, Boetius and Scheltius Bolswaert, so called from their native town Bolswaert, born in 1580 and 1586 respectively; Paul Pontius and Lucas Vorsterman, both born in 1590, whose engravings so well represent the _chiaroscuro_ and colour of Van Dyck and Jordaens.

In France was Jacques Callot, born in 1594, whose works were both numerous and original, and enjoyed a somewhat popular celebrity; among them the most worthy of remark are the “Temptation of St. Anthony,” the “Fair of the Madonna d’Imprunette,” “The Garden” and the “Parterre,” both scenes in Nancy; as well as several series, such as the “Miseries of War,” &c. There were also Michael Lasne, born in 1596, who engraved a number of historical portraits; and Etienne (Stephen) Baudet, who reproduced eight large landscapes after Poussin.

A separate notice is reserved for Jonas Suyderoef, born at Leyden in 1600, who, by combining the graver, the etching-needle, and aquafortis, gave an exceptional character to his works. Among the two hundred engravings by this master the most admired are the “Treaty of Munster,” after Terburg; and the “Burgomasters of Amsterdam receiving the News of the Arrival of Queen Mary of Medicis,” after De Keyser.

We are now touching closely upon, even if we have not already exceeded, the limits to which we are prescribed by the scope of our notices; but as the history of engraving does not present, like that of so many other arts, the spectacle of a grievous decadence after a period of brilliancy, we cannot without regret come to a conclusion, when mention might still be made of many distinguished names among the engravers of every country.

We should also scarcely be able to pass on to another subject without having alluded to those men whose works belong, indeed, to the following epoch, but the date of whose birth connects them with that we are considering. We could not, in fact, assume to have treated of engraving had we passed over in silence Van Dyck, Claude Lorraine, and Rembrandt (Fig. 270), those greatest of masters who were equally celebrated for painting and engraving. In truth, perhaps, we could not say anything of them which would not be superfluous.

Who is not acquainted with at least some few works by Van Dyck? This celebrated pupil of Rubens has left in painting as many masterpieces as canvases; and in engraving he knew how to give to his etching-needle so much _verve_ and spirit, that his prints are perfect models to follow, and have never been surpassed. Who is there that does not admire the landscapes of Claude Lorraine, which are equally remarkable for the light diffused over them, and the misty atmosphere that tempers its brilliancy? We all know this master produced, as if for recreation, certain engravings which for truth and melancholy (_mélancolic_) are hardly surpassed by his marvellous paintings. And how can we speak of Rembrandt without seeming to be commonplace? For his fertile and varied talent no difficulty ever seemed to exist; a theme, the most simple and common in appearance, becomes in his hands the basis of a masterly conception; nature, to which he seemed to lend a new life, while seizing upon its most striking realities, was for him an inexhaustible source of powerful compositions.

The mention of these artists on the threshold of an epoch into which we

are precluded from following them, must suffice to convey some idea of the height that art had attained during this century. We will, however, enumerate after them a few names among foreign engravers. The Flemish artists, Nicolas Berghem and Paul Potter, both great animal-painters, have left some prints in aquafortis for the possession of which amateurs contend; Wenceslaus Hollar, the Englishman,[46] engraved “The Queen of Sheba,” after Veronese; to Cornelius Visscher, a Dutchman, we owe the famous “Seller of Ratsbane;” and to Stefano della Bella, of Florence, the “View from the Pont-Neuf, Paris.” Rupert, the Prince-Palatine (nephew of Charles I. of England), was the inventor of the mezzo-tinto, or black style of engraving; and William Faithorne, an Englishman, engraved several portraits after Van Dyck. France also presents to our notice some justly celebrated names. The views of towns by Israel Silvestre, of Nancy, are very beautiful; François de Poilly, of Abbeville, reproduced several pictures by Raphael; Jean Pesne, of Rouen, himself a painter, engraved especially after Poussin; Antoine Masson, of Orleans, has left a print of the “Pilgrims of Emmaus,” after the picture by Titian, which is regarded as a _chef-d’œuvre_. Lastly, Robert Nanteuil, of Rheims, the famous portrait-painter, engraved Péréfixe, Archbishop of Paris, four times; the Archbishop of Rheims five times; Colbert six times; Michel Le Tellier, Chancellor of France, ten times; Louis XIV. eleven times, and Cardinal Mazarin fourteen times.

SCULPTURE.

Origin of Christian Sculpture.--Statues in Gold and
Silver.--Traditions of Antique Art.--Sculpture in
Ivory.--Iconoclasts.--Diptychs.--The highest Style of Sculpture
follows the Phases of Architecture.--Cathedrals and Monasteries
from the Year 1000.--Schools of Burgundy, Champagne, Normandy,
Lorraine, &c.--German, English, Spanish, and Italian
Schools.--Nicholas of Pisa and his Successors.--Position of French
Sculpture in the Thirteenth Century.--Florentine Sculpture and
Ghiberti.--French Sculptors from the Fifteenth to the Sixteenth
Century.

It is an indisputable fact that the epoch in which the Emperor Constantine, by receiving baptism, effected the triumph of Christianity, developed a kind of revival in the movement of the decorative arts, the ideas of which were then exclusively directed to the exaltation of the new faith. To construct numerous basilicas, to adorn them magnificently, and by means of the chisel to embody in a material form the spiritualism of the Gospel, were the objects of this pious monarch. Gold and silver were the less spared, as marble was considered too common a substance in which to represent the sacred personages of the divine hierarchy. At Constantinople, in the basilica constructed by Constantine, there was represented, on one side of the apse, a seated figure of our Saviour surrounded by His twelve disciples; on the other side, Christ was represented also sitting on a throne and accompanied by four angels, who had precious stones of Alabanda, inlaid, to represent their eyes. All these figures were life-size, and made of silver _repoussé_; each one weighing from ninety to a hundred and ten pounds. In the same church, a canopy representing the Apostles and cherubim in relief, of polished silver, weighed more than two thousand pounds. But these splendours were even eclipsed by those of the font of porphyry in which Constantine received baptism from the hands of Bishop Sylvester. The part whence the water flowed away was adorned with massive silver over an extent of five feet, and for the purpose three thousand pounds of this precious metal were employed. In the centre, columns of gold supported a lamp of the same metal weighing fifty-two pounds, in which, during the feast of Easter, two hundred pounds of perfumed oil were burnt. The water was poured into the font through the image of a lamb of solid gold, weighing thirty pounds. On the right was a life-size representation of our Saviour, weighing a hundred and seventy pounds; on the left was a statue of John the Baptist of the same size; while seven hinds of silver placed around the font, and pouring water into the basin, harmonised in their dimensions and materials with the other figures.

We would not assert that these works, pompously enumerated by Anastasius, the Librarian, corresponded in purity and elevation of style with the richness of the materials employed; for we know, on the contrary, that in order to comply with the wishes of the powerful emperor, artists were found who, by simple substitution of heads, attributes, or inscriptions, converted without any scruple a Jupiter into God the Father, or a Venus into a Virgin. The large cities were not as yet depopulated of the innumerable crowd of statues which adorned them; and it was only in provinces far from the metropolis that the images of the false gods were buried under the fragments of their overthrown temples (Figs. 272 and 273).

In fact, before the art had adopted, or rather created, the system of Christian symbolism, it was absolutely necessary to borrow the elements of its existence from the glorious materials of the past, and even to imitate the works of Pagan art.

In Greece more than elsewhere--and by Greece we include Constantinople--statuary preserved, under Constantino and his earliest successors, a certain degree of power which we might call original. The design still adhered to beautiful forms, and, in the arrangement of subjects, the principles of the ancients were for a long time applied, as if instinctively. Although artists no longer studied nature, they were, at all events, surrounded by excellent models, which guided them with somewhat imperious rule.

We have already seen that, among the barbaric chiefs who invaded the empire of the Cæsars and seated themselves on the Imperial throne of Rome, were some who, at a certain period, professed to be, if not the protectors of the Fine Arts, which had then sunk into torpor, at least the preservers of the Greek and Roman monuments belonging to the noblest epoch of Art. The statues were no longer broken down; the inscriptions and bas-reliefs ceased to be mutilated; the triumphal arches (Fig. 274), the palaces, and the theatres, were respected, or, rather, were left standing. But a kind of deadness had come over the artistic world, and a few sympathetic manifestations of this kind were not sufficient to reanimate its enervated spirit; it was necessary that the period of repose should be fully accomplished--a period which, in the views of Providence, was perhaps a phase of profound contemplation or preparatory development.

Nevertheless, although the art which gives life to marble and bronze--a high style of sculpture--was in a stationary or retrograde state, the lower kind, which we may call domestic, preserved some degree of activity. For instance, it was then the custom for great personages to send as presents diptychs of ivory, on the outer face of which were carved bas-reliefs recalling some memorable event. Monarchs, on their accession, were in the habit of conferring diptychs of this kind on the governors of provinces and bishops; and the latter, in order to testify to the good understanding existing between the civil and religious authorities, placed the diptych on the altar. A marriage, a baptism, or any success, gave occasion for the presentation of diptychs. For two centuries artists lived on nothing but this kind of work. It needed events of some very extraordinary character to cause the production of any monument of real sculpture.

In the sixth century the cathedrals of Rome, Trèves, Metz, Lyons, Rhodez, Arles, Bourges, and the abbeys of St. Médard at Soissons, St. Ouen at Rouen, and St. Martin at Tours, are mentioned as remarkable; and yet the walls of these edifices were nothing but bare stone, without either ornament or sculpture. “To become living stones,” says M. J. Duseigneur, “they had to wait for another age. The whole of the ornamentation was exclusively applied to the altar and the baptismal font. The tombs even of great personages present the most primitive simplicity.” (Fig. 275.)

Ancient Gaul, in spite of its disasters, still retained, in certain parts of its territory, men, or rather groups of men, in whose hearts the cultivation of Art still remained a living principle. This was the case in Provence, round the archbishops of Arles; in Austrasia (Metz), near the throne of Brunehaut; in Burgundy, at the court of King Gontran. Most of the works and even the names of these artists are now lost; but history has recorded the movement, which was, as it were, a happy link destined to abbreviate the solution of continuity in artistic tradition.

At the time when Greek art, in its degenerate state, had sunk down into a department of mere goldsmith’s work, casting over Europe only a pale and feeble light; when artists, in representing sacred or profane subjects, contented themselves with simple medallions of bronze, gold, or silver, which were generally inserted in a shrine, or suspended on the walls; across the seas Byzantine art was springing into life; an art which blended Hellenic reminiscences with Christian sentiment.

In the eighth century, the epoch of the uprising of the Iconoclasts against images of all kinds, Byzantine sculpture had acquired certain well-marked characteristics: rigidness of outline, meagreness of form, elongation of the proportions, combined with great profuseness of costume; all was the expression of saddened resignation and costly grandeur. The monumental statuary of this age has, however, almost entirely disappeared, and we should be nearly destitute of any accurate record as to the state of Art for a period of several centuries, were it not for numerous diptychs which, to some extent, supply this want. Many of these sacred diptychs were exquisitely wrought. Gori, in his “Trésor des Diptyques,” written in Latin and published at Florence in 1759, divides these monuments into four classes: diptychs intended to receive the names of the newly baptised; those wherein were written the names of the benefactors of the church, sovereigns, and popes; and those destined to preserve the memory of the faithful who had died in the bosom of the church (Fig. 276). Their outward surface generally represented some scene taken from the Evangelists, in which Christ was especially depicted as young and beardless, his head glorified with a nimbus without a cross. The more these representations were condemned, the more they who paid respect to them endeavoured to perpetuate their use. The Greek artists, being unable to find a livelihood in their own country, made their way into Italy in such numbers that the popes Paul I., Adrian I., and Pascal I., erected monasteries to receive them. Owing to the influence of this immigration, Art, which in the West was germinating in an undecided state between a weak style of originality and an awkward mode of imitation, was compelled to assume a character of its own, and this necessarily was the Byzantine character; that is, a manner which was firm, clear, and, in general, impressed with a certain imposing nobility of style. This style attained all the more success by its being illustrated by very eminent artists, whom Charlemagne patronised as fully adequate to the magnificence of his ideas; and also because the richness of ornament which this style combined with its work was likely to render it pleasing to the populace.

The royal palaces of Aix-la-Chapelle, Goddinga, Attiniacum, and Theodonis Villa, and the monasteries of St. Arnulph, Trèves, St. Gall, Salzbourg, and Prüm felt the salutary influence which Charlemagne exercised on all kinds of Art. Prior to 1793, in these various localities precious remains were still to be seen, reaching back to the eighth century; they testified to the fact that, apart from Byzantine influence, and bearing the impress of a simple Christian sentiment, sculpture still clung, owing to Lombard ascendancy, to some of the grand traditions of antiquity.

This union of principles gave rise to a number of works bearing a remarkable character. The foundation of the abbeys of St. Mihiel (Lorraine), Isle-Barbe (near Lyons), of Ambernay and Romans; the erection of several of the great monasteries in Alsace, Soissonnais, Brittany, Normandy, Provence, Languedoc, and Aquitaine; the construction of the

The first compartment represents St. Remy, Bishop of Rheims,
healing a paralytic; the second, St. Remy healing a sick man by the
invocation of the sacrament on the altar; the third, St. Remy,
assisted by a holy bishop, baptising King Clovis in the presence of
Queen Clotilda, and receiving from the Holy Spirit the sacred
_ampulla_.
]

important churches of Metz, Toul, Verdun, Rheims, Autun, &c.; the restorations which took place at the abbeys of Bèze, St. Gall, St. Benignus of Dijon, Remiremont, St. Arnulphe-lès-Metz, and Luxeuil, were of sufficient importance to occupy an immense number of artists, architects, and sculptors, who, like the monk Gundelandus, abbot of Lauresheim, handled the compasses and the mallet with as much authority as the crucifix. Nothing could equal the splendour of some of the monasteries, which were perfect centres of genius and skill, in which all the Fine Arts united were a mutual assistance to one another; directed, perhaps, by a master who was himself inspired by a feeling for elevated production (Fig. 277).