1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Painting - Wikisource, the free online library (2024)

​PAINTING, in art, the action of laying colour on a surface, or the representing of objects by the laying of colour on a surface. It is with painting in the last sense, considered as one of the fine arts, that this article deals. In the first sense, in so far as painting is a part of the builder’s and decorator’s trade it is treated above under the heading Painter-Work. The verb “to paint” is derived through Fr. peindre (peint, the past participle, was possibly the earliest part adopted, as is suggested ​in the New English Dictionary), from Lat. pingere, to paint.From the past participle pictus comes pictura, picture, and fromthe root pig, pigment. The ultimate meaning of the root isprobably to decorate, adorn, and is seen in Gr. ποικίλος, many-coloured,variegated.

In Part I. of this article, after a brief notice of the generalcharacter of the art and an account of its earliest manifestations,a sketch is given of the course of its development from theancient Egyptian period to modern times. (An account, bycountries, of recent schools of painting will be found as anappendix at the end of PartIII.) The point of view chosen isthat of the relation of painting to nature, and it is shown howthe art, beginning with the delineation of contour, passes onthrough stages when the effort is to render the truth of solid form,to the final period when, in the 17th century, the presentment ofspace, or nature in all her extent and variety, becomes the subjectof representation. Certain special forms of painting characteristicof modern times, such as portraiture, genre painting,landscape, still-life, &c., are briefly discussed.

Part II. consists in tables of names and dates intended to afforda conspectus of the different historical schools of painting fromthe 12th centuryA.D. downwards.

Part III. is devoted to a comprehensive treatment of thedifferent technical processes of painting in vogue in ancient andmodern times.

Part I.—A Sketch of the Development of the Art

§ 1. Constituents and General Character.—If we trace back tothe parent stock the various branches that support the luxuriantmodern growth of the graphic art, we see that this parent stockis in its origin twofold. Painting begins on the one side in outlinedelineation and on the other in the spreading of a coloured coatingover a surface. In both cases the motive is at first utilitarian,or, at any rate, non-artistic. In the first the primary motiveis to convey information. It has been noticed of certain savagesthat if one of them wants to convey to a companion the impressionof a particular animal or object, he will draw with his finger in theair the outline of some characteristic feature by which it may beknown, and if this do not avail he will sketch the same with apointed stick upon the ground. It is but a step from this todelineation on some portable tablet that retains what is scratchedor drawn upon it, and in this act a monument of the graphic arthas come into being.

In the other case there are various motives of a non-aesthetickind that lead to the covering of a surface with a coat of anothersubstance. The human body, the first object of interest toman, is tender and is sensitive to cold. Wood, one of the earliestbuilding materials and the one material for any sort of boat-building,is subject, especially when exposed to moisture, todecay. Again, the early vessel of clay, of neolithic date, becauseimperfectly burned, is porous. Now the properties of certainsubstances suitable for adhesive coatings on anything that neededprotection or reinforcement would soon be noticed. Unctuousand oily substances like animal fat, mixed with ashes or some suchmaterial, are smeared by some savages on their bodies to keepthem warm in cold regions and to defend them against insectbites in the tropics. Wax and resin and pitch, liquefied by theheat of the sun or by fire, would lend themselves readily for thecoating of wood with a substance impervious to moisture.Vitreous glazes, first no doubt the result of accident, fused overthe surface of the primitive clay vessel would give it the requiredimpermeability. This is no more art than the mere delineationwhich is the other source of painting, but it begins to take onitself an aesthetic character when colour plays a part in it.There are physiological reasons why the colour red exercises anexciting influence, and strong colours generally, like glitteringsurfaces, make an aesthetic appeal. In prehistoric times theflesh was sometimes stripped from the skeleton of a corpse andthe bones rubbed with red earth or ruddle, while the same easilyprocured colouring substance is used to decorate the person orthe implement of the savage. In this sensibility to colour wefind a second and distinct origin of the art of painting.

What a perspective does a glance back at the development ofpainting afford! Painting, an art that on a flat surface cansuggest to illusion the presence of solid forms with length,breadth and thickness; that on the area of a few square inchescan convey the impression of the vast spaces of the universe, andcarry the eye from receding plane to plane till the persons orobjects that people them grow too minute for the eye to discern;painting that can deck the world in Elysian brightness or veilit in the gloom of the Crucifixion, that intoxicates the senses withits revelation of beauty, or magician-like withdraws the veil fromthe mysterious complexity of nature; the art that can exhibitall this, and yet can suggest a hundredfold more than it can show,and by a line, a shade, a touch, can stir within us “thoughts thatdo often lie too deep for tears”—this Painting, the most fascinating,because most illusive in its nature, of all the arts of form,is in its first origin at one time a mere display to attract attention,as if one should cry out “See here!” and at another time aprosaic answer to a prosaic question about some natural object,“What is it like?” The coat or streak or dab of colour, theinforming outline, are not in themselves aesthetic products. Theformer becomes artistic when the element of arrangement orpattern is introduced. There is arrangement when the shape andsize of the mark or marks have a studied relation to those of thesurface on which they are displayed; there is pattern when theyare combined among themselves so that while distinct andcontrasted they yet present the appearance of a unity. Again,the delineation, serving at first a purpose of use, is not in itselfartistic, and it is a difficult question in aesthetic whether anyrepresentation of nature that aims only at resemblance really ​comes into the domain of art. It is of course acknowledged thata mere prosaically hteral likeness of a natural object is not a workof art; but when the representation is of such a kind as to bring outthe character of the object with discrimination and emphasis, togive the soul of it, as it were, and not the mere lineaments, then,logically or illogically, art claims it as its child. In the strictsense the delineation only becomes artistic when there is presentthe element of beauty in arrangement or composition. The insightand sympathy just referred to are qualities rather intellectualthan artistic, and the really artistic element would be the tastefulfitting of the representation to the space within which it is displayed,and the harmonious relations of the lines or masses ortones or colours that it presents to the eye. In other words, inartistic delineation there will be united elements drawn from boththe sources above indicated. The representation of nature willbe present, and so will also a decorative effect produced by apleasing combination of forms and lines.

§ 2. Limitations of the Meaning of the word Painting.—Ifdelineation take on itself a decorative character, so too decoration,relying at first on a pleasing arrangement of mere lines orpatches that have in themselves no significance, soon goes on toimpart to these the similitude, more or less exact, of naturalobjects. Here we arrive at a distinction which must be drawnat the outset so as duly to limit the field which this survey ofpainting has to cover. The distinction is that between ornamentalor, in a narrow sense, decorative painting on the one side,and painting proper on the other. In the first, the forms employedhave either in themselves no significance or have aresemblance to nature that is only distant or conventional.In painting proper the imitation of nature is more advanced andis of greater importance than the decorative effect to the eye.It is not only present but preponderant, while in ornamentalwork the representative element is distinctly subordinate to thedecorative effect. In Greek vase decoration the conventionalfloral forms, or the mannered animal figures that follow eachother monotonously round vases of the “Oriental” style, belongto the domain of ornament, while the human forms, say, on theearliest red-figured vases, while displayed in pleasing patternsand in studied relation to the shape and structure of the vessel,exhibit so much variety and so great an effort on the part of theartist to achieve similitude to nature, that they claim a place forthemselves in the annals of the painter’s art.

A further limitation is also necessary at the outset. Pictorialdesigns may be produced without the equipment of the painterproper; that is to say, without the use of pigments or colouredsubstances in thin films rubbed on to or attached by a bindingmaterial upon a surface. They may be executed by settingtogether coloured pieces of some hard substance in the form ofMosaic (q.v.); by interweaving dyed threads of wool, linen orsilk into a textile web to produce Tapestry (q.v.) or Embroidery(q.v.); by inlaying into each other strips of wood of differentcolours in the work called Tarsia or Marquetry (q.v.); by fusingdifferent coloured vitreous pastes into contiguous cavities, as inEnamelling (see Enamel); or by framing together variouslyshaped pieces of transparent coloured glass into the stainedglass window (see Glass, Stained).

These special methods of producing pictorial effects, in so faras the technical processes they involve are concerned, are excludedfrom view in this article and are dealt with under their ownheadings. Only at those periods when pictorial design wasexclusively or especially represented by work in these forms willthe results of these decorative processes be brought in to illustratethe general character of the painting of the time. For example,in the 5th and 6th Christian centuries the art of painting ismainly represented by the mosaics in the churches at Rome andRavenna, and these must be included from the point of view ofdesign in any review of painting, though as examples of mosaictechnique and style they are treated in an article apart. Greekvase painting, again, is a special subject (see Greek Art andCeramics), yet the designs on early Greek vases are the onlyextant monuments that illustrate for us the early stages ofthe development of classical painting as a whole. It will beunderstood therefore that in this article the word “painting”means the spreading of thin films of colouring matter oversurfaces to which they are made by different means to adhere,and it will only be taken in a wider sense in certain exceptionalcases just indicated.

§ 3. Importance in the Art of the Representation of Nature.—Ifwe regard painting as a whole, the imitation of nature may beestablished as its most distinctive characteristic and the guidingprinciple of its development. It must at the same time be understoodthat in the advanced criticism of painting, as it is formulatedin modern times, no distinction is allowed among the differentelements that go to make up a perfect production of the art. Insuch a production the idea, the form, the execution, the elementsof representation and of beauty, and the individual expressionof the artist in his handiwork, are essentially one, and none ofthem can be imagined as really existing without the others. Itis not the case of a thought, envisaged pictorially, and deliberatelyclothed in an artistic dress, but of a thought that would haveno existence save in so far as it is expressible in paint. Thisis the modern truth of the art, and the importance of the principlehere involved will be illustrated in a later section, but it must beborne in mind that the painting to which this principle appliesis a creation of comparatively modern times. As in music so inpainting, it has been reserved for recent epochs to manifest thefull capabilities of the art. Whereas the arts of architecture andsculpture, though they have found in the modern era new fieldsto conquer, yet grew to their full stature in ancient Hellas, thoseof music and painting remained almost in their infancy till theRenaissance. It was only in the 16th and 17th centuries thatpainters obtained such a mastery on the one hand over the formsof nature, and on the other over an adequate technique, that theywere able to create works in which truth and beauty are one andthe artistic speech exactly expresses the artistic idea. For thisthe painter had to command the whole resources of the scienceof perspective, linear and aerial, and all the technical capabilitiesof the many-sided processes of oil-paint. Till that stage in thedevelopment of the art was reached work was always on one sideor another tentative and imperfect, but all through these longperiods of endeavour there is one constant feature, and this is theeffort of the artist to attain to truth in the representation ofnature. No matter what was the character of his task or thematerial equipment of which he disposed, this ideal was for everbefore his eyes, and hence it is that in the relation of the painter’swork to nature we find that permanent feature which makes thedevelopment of the art from first to last a unity.

§ 4. General Scheme of the Development of the Art.—From thispoint of view, that of the relation of the work of the painter tonature, we may make a rough division of the whole history of theart into four main periods.

The first embraces the efforts of the older Oriental peoples, bestrepresented by the painting of the Egyptians; the second includesthe classical and medieval epochs up to the beginning of the15th century; the third, the 15th and 16th centuries; and thefourth the time from the beginning of the 17th century onwards.

In the first period the endeavour is after truth of contour, inthe second and third after truth of form, in the fourth aftertruth of space.

The Egyptian artist was satisfied if he could render withaccuracy, and with proper emphasis on what is characteristic,the silhouettes of things in nature regarded as little more thanflat objects cut out against a light background. The Greek andthe medieval artist realized that objects had three dimensions,and that it was possible on a flat surface to give an indicationof the thickness of anything, that is of its depth away from thespectator, as well as its length and breadth, but they cannot besaid to have fully succeeded in the difficult task they set themselves.For this there was needful an efficient knowledge ofperspective, and this the 15th century brought with it. Duringthe 15th century the painter fully succeeds in mastering therepresentation of the third dimension, and during the next heexercises the power thus acquired in perfect freedom, producingsome of the most convincing and masterly presentments of solid ​forms upon a flat surface that the art has to show. During thisperiod, however, and to a more partial extent even in the earlierclassical epoch, efforts were being made to widen the horizon ofthe art and to embrace within the scope of its representationsnot only solid objects in themselves, but such objects as a wholein space, in due relation to each other and to the universe atlarge. It was reserved, however, for the masters of the 17thcentury perfectly to realize this ideal of the art, and in their handspainting as an art of representation is widened out to its fullestpossible limits, and the whole of nature in all its aspects becomesfor the first time the subject of the picture.

§ 5. The Place of Classical Painting in the Development of theArt.—This limitation of classical painting to the representationof form may be challenged, for some hold that Greek artists notonly attempted but succeeded in the task of portraying objectsin space in due relation to each other and to the system of thingsas a whole, and that the scope of their work was as extended asthat of the Italian painter of the 16th century. The view takenin this article will presently be justified, but a word may be saidhere as to Greek painting in general and its relation to sculpture.The main arguments in favour of the more exalted view of thisphase of the art are partly based on general considerations, andpartly on the existence of some examples which seem to show theartist grappling with the problems of space. The generalargument, that because Greek sculptors achieved so much wemust assume that the painters brought their art to the same level,is of no weight, because it has been already pointed out thatpainting and music are not in their development parallel tosculpture and architecture. Nothing, moreover, is really provedby the facts that painting was held by the ancients in higherestimation than its sister art, and that the painters gained greatwealth and fame. Painting is a more attractive, more popularart than sculpture. It represents nature by a sort of trick orillusion, whereas sculpture with its three dimensions is more amatter of course. It is a puzzle how the object or scene, with itscolours as well as its forms, can be made to appear on a few squareinches of flat surface, and the artist who has the secret of theillusion is at once a man of mark. In Greece this was speciallythe case, because painting there made its appearance rather laterthan sculpture and so was from the first more conspicuous.Hence literary writers, when they refer to the arts generally, quotea painter rather than a sculptor. The people observed thepainters, and these naturally made the most of themselves andof their art. The stories of the wealth and ostentation of someof these show that there was an atmosphere of reclame about thepainters that must have affected the popular estimate, in anaesthetic sense, of their work. Then, too, popular criticism ofpainting has no standard. To the passer-by who watches thepavement artist, the result of his operations seems nature itself.“Better than I saw not who saw the truth,” writes Dante (Purg.xii.68) of incised outlines on a pavement, that cannot go veryfar in natural similitude. Vasari, though a trained artist, writesas if they “vied with nature” of certain works that, though excellentfor their day, do not approach the modern type. We thinkourselves that Raphael’s babies are like nature till we see Correggio’s,and that Venetian Venuses are “real flesh and blood” tillthat of Velazquez comes to prove them paint. The fact is thatthe expression “true to nature” is a relative one, and very littleweight should be given to a merely popular or literary judgmenton a question of the kind. Hence we must not assume thatbecause ancient painting was extravagantly praised by thosewho knew no other, it therefore covered all the field of the art.

§ 6. The Earliest Representative Art.—Naturalistic design of avery effective kind appears at a very early stage of humandevelopment, and is practised among the most primitive racesof the actual world, such as the Australians, the Bushmen ofSouth Africa and the Eskimo. Of the existence of such artdifferent explanations have been offered, some finding for therepresentations of natural objects motives of a religiousor magical kind, while others are content to see in them theexpression of a simple artistic delight in the imitation of objectsof interest. The extraordinary merit, within certain limits, ofthis early naturalistic work can be accounted for on sociologicallines. As Grosse has put it (The Beginnings of Art, p.198),“Power of observation and skill with the hand are the qualitiesdemanded for primitive naturalistic pictorial art, and thefaculty of observation and handiness of execution are at the sametime the two indispensable requisites for the primitive hunterlife. Primitive pictorial art, with its peculiar characteristics,thus appears fully comprehensible to us as an aesthetic exerciseof two faculties which the struggle for existence has developedand improved among the primitive peoples.” So far as concernsthe power of seizing and rendering the characteristics of naturalobjects, some of the earliest examples of representative art in theworld are among the best. The objects are animals, becausethese were the only ones that interested the early hunter, buttens of thousands of years ago the Palaeolithic cave-dwellers ofwestern France drew and carved the mammoth, the reindeer,the antelope, and the horse, with astonishing skill and spirit.

Fig. 6, Plate III., shows the famous sketch of a mammoth madeby a prehistoric hunter and artist of western France. The tusks,the trunk, the little eye, the forehead, and especially the shaggyfell of the long-haired elephant, are all effectively rendered.

Figs. 1, 2 and 3, Plate I., show three examples of the marvellousseries of prehistoric carvings and incised drawings, fromthe caves of southern France, published by the late EdouardPiette. We note especially the remarkable effort to portray astag turning its head, and the close observation displayed inthe representation of the action of a running buck.

Even more striking are the Palaeolithic paintings discoveredin the cave of Altamira at Santillane, near Santander in Spain.These are less ancient than the carvings and sketches mentionedabove, but they date from a time when what is now GreatBritain was not yet divided from the continent by the Channel,when the climate of southern Europe was still cold, and whenanimals now extinct—such as the European bison—were stillcommon. These paintings, boldly sketched in three colours,may be reckoned as some 50,000 years old. They display thesame power of correct observation and artistic skill as the earliercarvings. Notice in the remarkable examples given on Plate II.the black patches on the bison’s winter coat and the red colourof the hide where, with the progress of the spring, he has got ridof the long hair from the more prominent parts of his body byrubbing himself against the rocks. The impressionist characterof some of these sketches is doubtless partly due to the action oftime; but note how, in the case of the great boar, the artist hasrepresented the action of the legs in running as well as standingin much the same way as might be done in a rapid sketch by amodern painter. The mystery of these astounding paintings isincreased by the fact that they are found in a cave to which nodaylight has ever penetrated, sometimes in places almostinaccessible to sight or reach, and that they are surrounded bysymbols of which none can read the meaning (see the twolozenges in fig.3, PlateI.).

Palaeolithic art is, however, a phenomenon remote andisolated, and in the history of painting its main interest is toshow how ancient is the striving of man after the accurate andspirited representation of nature. Modern savages on about thesame plane of civilization do the same work, though not withequal artistic deftness, and Grosse reproduces (loc. cit., ch. vii.) somecharacteristic designs of Australians and Bushmen. Some ofthese are of single figures, but there are also “large associatedgroups of men and animals with the landscapes around them.”The pictures consist in outlines engraved or scratched on stoneor wood or on previously blackened surfaces of hide, generally,though not always, giving profile views, and are sometimes filledin with flat tints of colour. There is no perspective, except tothis extent, that objects intended to appear distant are sometimesmade smaller than near ones. In the extended scenes the figuresand objects are dispersed over the field, without any arrangementon planes or artistic composition, but each is delineated withspirit and in essential features with accuracy.

It is a remarkable fact, but one easily explained, that when manadvances from the hunter stage to a more settled agricultural life ​

Plate I.

Figs. 1, 2.—HEADS OF CHAMOIS, &c., ENGRAVED ON THE TINES OF AN ANTLER. (From the Cave of Gourdan, Haute-Garonne, France.)

Fig. 3.—STAGS AND SALMON. THE ORIGINALS ARE ENGRAVED ROUND AN ANTLER ABOUT AN INCH IN DIAMETER. (From the Grotto of Lortet, Hautes-Pyrenees, France.) PREHISTORIC INCISED DRAWINGS OF ANIMALS. Reproduced from Edouard Piette’s L’art pendant l’age du renne (Paris, 1907). By permission.

​

​these spontaneous naturalistic drawings no longer appear.Neolithic man shows a marked advance on the capacity of hisPalaeolithic predecessors in all the useful arts of life: his tools,his pottery, his weapons; but as an artist he was beyond comparisoninferior. His attempts to draw men and beasts resultedin no more than conventional symbols, such as an intelligentchild might scribble; of the Palaeolithic man’s taste for design,as shown in the carved work of the caves, or of his power ofreproducing nature, there is not a sign. Keenness of observationand deftness of hand are no longer developed because no longerneeded for the purposes of existence, and representative artalmost dies out, to be, however, revived at a further stage ofcivilization. At this further stage the sociological motive of artis commemoration. It is in connexion with the tomb, the templeand the palace that in early but still fully organized communitiesart finds its field of operations. Such communities we find inancient Egypt and Babylonia, while similar phenomena showedthemselves in old Oriental lands, such as India and China.

§ 7. The Painting of Contour: Egypt and Babylonia.—Inancient Egypt we find this graphic delineation of natural objects,so spontaneous and free among the hunter tribes, reduced to asystem and carried out with certain well-established conventions.The chief of these was the almost universal envisagement inprofile of the subject to be represented. Only in the case ofsubsidiary figures might a front or a back view or a three-quarterface be essayed. To bring the human figure into profile it wasconventionalized, as fig.7, PlateIII., will show. The subject isan Egyptian of high rank, accompanied by his wife and son,fowling in the marshes of the Delta. It is part of a wall-paintingfrom a tomb at Thebes dating about 1500B.C. The head, it willbe seen, is in profile, but the eye is drawn full-face. The shouldersare shown in front view, though by the outline of the breast, withits nipple, on the figure’s right, and by the position far to theright of the navel, an indication is given that the view here isthree-quarters. At the hips the figure is again in profile, and thisis the position also of the legs. It will be observed that the twofeet have the big toe on the same side, a device to escape thenecessity of drawing the four toes as seen in the outside view of afoot. As a rule the action of these figures is made as clear aspossible, and they are grouped in such a way that each is clearlyseen, so that a crowd is shown either by a number of paralleloutlines each a little in advance of the other suggesting a row seenin slight obliquity, or else by parallel rows of figures on lines oneabove the other. Animals are treated in the same way in profile,save that oxen will show the two horns, asses the two ears, as infront view, and the legs are arranged so that all are seen.

Within these narrow limits the Egyptian artist achieved extraordinarysuccess in the truthful rendering of nature as expressedin the contours of figures and objects. If the human form bealways conventionalized to the required flatness, the draughtsmanis keen to seize every chance of securing variety. He fastenson the distinctive traits of different races with the zeal of a modernethnologist, and in the case of royal personages he achievessuccess in individual portraiture. Though he could not rendervarieties of facial expression, he made the action of the limbsexpress all it could. The traditional Egyptian gravity did notexclude humour, and some good caricatures have been preserved.Egyptian drawing of animals, especially birds (see fig.7, PlateIII.),has in its way never been surpassed, and the specific pointsof beasts are as keenly noted as the racial characteristics of humanbeings. Animals, domestic or wild, are given with their particulargait or pose or expression, and the accent is always laid onthose features that give the suggestion of strength or swiftnessor lithe agility which marks the species. The precision of drawingis just as great in the case of lifeless objects, and any set ofearly, carefully-executed, hieroglyphic signs will give evidence ofan eye and hand trained to perfection in the simpler tasks of thegraphic art.

The representation of scenes, as distinct from single figures orgroups, was not wholly beyond the Egyptian artist’s horizon.His most ambitious attempts are the great battle-scenes of theperiod of the New Empire, when a Seti or a Rameses is seendriving before him a host of routed foemen. The king in hischariot with the rearing horses is firmly rendered in the severeconventional style, but the crowd of fugitives, on a comparativelyminute scale, are not arranged in the original clear fashion inparallel rows, but are tumbled about in extraordinary confusionall over the field, though always on the one flat plane. By anotherconvention objects that cannot be given in profile are sometimesshown in ground plan. Thus a tank with trees round it will bedrawn square in plan and the trees will be exhibited as if laid outflat on the ground, pointing on each side outwards from thetank.

In Babylonia and Assyria the mud-brick walls of palaceswere coated with thin stucco, and this was in the interior sometimespainted, but few fragments of the work remain. On theexterior considerable use was made of decorative bands andpanels of enamelled tiles, in which figure subjects were prominent,as we learn by the passage from Ezek.xxiii., about “menpourtrayed upon the wall, the images of the Chaldeans pourtrayedwith vermilion.” The best idea of Assyrian graphicdesign is gained from the slabs carved in very low relief, whichcontain annalistic records of the acts of the king and his peoplein war and peace. The human figure is treated here in a lessconventional scheme, but at the same time with less varietyand in a less spirited and interesting fashion than in Egypt.Of animals far fewer species are shown, but in the portrayal ofthe nobler beasts, notably the horse, the lion and the mastiff,there is an element of true grandeur that we seldom find inEgyptian design. Furthermore, the carver of the reliefs hada better idea of giving the impression of a scene than his brotherof the Nileland, and in his representations of armies marching andfighting he introduces rivers, hills, trees, groups of buildingsand the like, all of course delineated without perspective, butin far truer and more telling fashion than is the case with thescenes from the campaigns of Egyptian conquerors.

§ 8. Painting in Pre-historic Greece.—A new chapter in thehistory of ancient painting was opened by the discovery of relicsof the art in the palaces and tombs of the Mycenaean period onthe coasts and islands of the Aegean. The charming naturalisticrepresentations of marine plants and animals on the paintedvases are quite unlike anything which later Greek art has tooffer, and exhibit a decorative taste that reminds us a little ofthe Japanese. What we are concerned with, however, arerather the examples of wall-painting in plaster found at Tirynsand Mycenae and in Crete. Of the former the first to attractnotice was the well-known bull from Tiryns, represented inprofile and in action, and accompanied by a human figure; butof far greater importance, because foreshadowing an advance inthe pictorial art, are certain wall-paintings discovered morerecently by DrEvans at Cnossos in Crete. The question isnot of the single figures in the usual profile view, like the alreadycelebrated “Cup-bearer,” however important these may befrom the historical side, but of the so-called “miniature” wall-paintingsthat are now preserved in the museum at Candia, inwhich figures on a small scale are represented not singly but incrowds and in combination with buildings and landscape featuresthat seem to carry us forward to far more advanced stages of theart of painting. To borrow a few sentences from DrArthurEvans’s account of them on their first discovery (Annual ofBritish School at Athens, vi.46): “A special characteristicof these designs is the outline drawing in fine dark lines. Thisoutline drawing is at the same time combined with a kind ofartistic shorthand brought about by the simple process ofintroducing patches of reddish brown or of white on whichgroups belonging to one or other sex are thus delineated. In thisway the respective flesh-tints of a series of men or women aregiven with a single sweep of the brush, their limbs and featuresbeing subsequently outlined on the background thus obtained.”There is here, it is true, no perspective, but there is a distincteffort to give the general effect of objects in a mass, which correspondscuriously with the modern development of the art ofpainting called “impressionism.”

§ 9. The Painting of Form: Ancient Greece and Italy.—As ​is well known, this early civilization in the Greek world of thesecond millenium B.C. was almost completely swept away,probably by the political cataclysm of about 1000B.C. known asthe Dorian Migration. Hellenic art proper, in its historicalcontinuity, represents a new start altogether and the beginningsof it need not be sought earlier than about 800 to 700 B.C. Theart of painting had then completely lost touch with the gracefulnaturalism and with the broad generalization of the “Aegean”period, and is represented by figure designs on the so-called“geometric” or “Dipylon” vases of the most primitive kind.For a long time Greek painting is chiefly represented by work onthe vases, but that this may be regarded as in the strict sensepainting is shown by the fact that tablets or panels (pinakes)that would certainly be called pictures were being painted at thesame time by the same technical methods, and in some cases bythe same craftsman, as the vases. As Klein remarks (Euphronios,²p.252), “the most ancient material for Greek paintingis clay in the form of the vase as well as of the pinax.” Now wefind in Pliny’s account of the beginnings of Greek painting(Nat. Hist. XXXV. 15 seq.) certain stages indicated in the developmentof technique, and we are able to illustrate these stages fromvases which correspond more or less in their chronological orderwith the succession of the stages in Pliny. The correspondenceis not exact, and there are difficulties in the way of interpretingthe statements from the monuments, but the two are certainlyto be brought into connexion. According to Pliny the order ofdevelopment seems to be (1)outlines; (2)[a] outlines filled inwith flat tints, or [b]outlines with linear inner markings but nocolour. Outline drawing is obviously always the first stage inthe graphic art regarded as delineation, not decoration. The flattints without inner markings are found on “Dipylon” vases of800–700B.C., and as for the inner markings, though there is adifficulty in the exact interpretation of Pliny’s words, yet innermarkings in the form of lines scratched on these silhouettes maketheir appearance very early. Two further stages are indicatedby Pliny as the introduction of a red colour and the distinctionbetween male and female figures by a painter named Eumarus ofAthens. This would be by the use of white, which with red, anoxide of iron, appears on vases of about 600B.C. Eumarus isalso said to have “ventured to imitate all kinds of figures,” andwe cannot fail here to be reminded of the marvellous Françoisvase at Florence (fig.8, PlateIII.) of the first half of the 6thcentury, which is of large size and is decorated with a wealth offigure designs from mythological sources that are among themost remarkable productions of the graphic art in existence.Human figures and animals are there displayed in an extraordinaryvariety of poses and illustrating all kinds of scenes, andthe execution shows a firmness of hand and patience in therendering of details to which no praise can do justice. Theinner markings are rendered by lines with the most scrupulouscare and finish. Cimon of Cleonae is said to have followedEumarus with certain improvements which are of the utmostsignificance for the future of the art in Greece. He is said tohave introduced four innovations: (a) “Catagrapha,” whichPliny explains as “profile figures” but which must mean somethingmore than this, seeing that profiles had been in use fromthe first. “Foreshortenings” is a possible and an intelligiblerendering which moreover corresponds with what is furtherascribed to him; (b) the representation of “countenances indifferent positions, looking backwards or upwards or downwards.”The other improvements, in giving (c) the details ofanatomy and (d) “the wrinkles and folds of drapery,” are notof so much importance as such advance is normal and necessary.The introduction of foreshortened views is the matter of realmoment, for this is the point at which Greek painting partscompany with the older oriental traditions, and enters on a courseof its own which leads directly to all the modern developments ofthe art.

The words of Pliny explaining the term “catagrapha” canbe aptly illustrated from the vase paintings connected with thename of Epictetus. Epictetus was the leading figure among acompany of Athenian vase decorators of the last decades of the 6thcenturyB.C. and the beginning of the 5th, who usher in the periodof the most gifted and original masters of the craft. Their work ismarked by efforts to give to the human figure a vigour and expressivenessit had never before attained, and to gain their end theyessay all sorts of novel and difficult problems in drawing. In connexionwith Pliny’s words, Klein remarks (Euphronios, p.47)that on their vases “the running figures look behind them;those that are jumping, revelling or fighting look up; the liftingor bending ones look down.” Some of the best vases decoratedby this set of artists, who are the first to use the so-called “red-figured”technique instead of painting as the older masters haddone in black on red, are for qualities of strength, variety andanimation unequalled by any of their successors of the laterperiods, yet it is significant of the whole character of this ancientpainting that they are always conspicuously more successfulwith profiles and objects in an upright plane at right angles tothe line of sight than with any forms which involve foreshorteningor perspective. They are masters of contour but are stillstruggling for the full command over form, and it is noteworthythat the generation of these greatest of the vase-painters hadpassed away before these difficulties of foreshortening had beenconquered.

We have now followed on the vases the development of Greekpainting up to about the time of the Persian wars, and it must benoted that in other forms, as on terra-cotta tablets or pinakes,on the flat edges of sarcophagi in the same material, and occasionallyon marble slabs or stelae, the same technical characteristicsare to be observed. Of painting on a monumental scaleGreece proper has hitherto shown no trace, yet at this veryjuncture, in the decades immediately after the Persian wars,there suddenly makes his appearance one of the greatest representativesof monumental wall-painting known to the annalsof the art. This is Polygnotus, who, with some worthy associates,displayed on the walls of public buildings at Athens and atDelphi a series of noble compositions on a large scale that wonthe admiration of the whole Hellenic community.

To find any remains of mural painting that may seem to leadup to Polygnotus and his school we have to pass beyond thebounds of Greece proper into Italy, where, alike in the Greekand Etruscan cities and also at Rome, painting in this form waspractised from an early date. Pliny mentions paintings atArdea older than the city of Rome, and some very ancient onesat Caere. Two sets of early paintings, not actually on wallsbut on terra-cotta slabs meant for the coating of walls,have come to light in recent times at Cervetri, the ancientCaere, some of which, in the British Museum, were dated by thelate A.S. Murray at about 600B.C. (Journal of Hellenic Studies,x. 243), while others in the Louvre may be about half a centurylater. True wall-paintings, of possibly a still earlier date andcertainly of more primitive design, were found in the Campanatomb at Veil (Dennis, Etruria, ch.i.). The paintings fromCaere are executed on a white or yellowish “slip” in a fewsimple colours, and exhibit single figures in a frieze-like arrangementwith little attempt at action and none at grouping. Theflesh of the women is left the colour of the white ground, that ofthe men is painted a ruddy hue. To the 6th, and first half ofthe 5th century, belong wall-paintings in Italian tombs, which,whether in Greek cities or in Etruscan, show distinct signs ofHellenic influence. Some of these wall-paintings (AntikeDenkmäler, ii., Taf. 41–43) show considerable liveliness in colouringand in action, and a freedom and gaiety in female costumethat remind us of what we read about the painting ofPolygnotus (q.v.). The place of this great painter in the generalhistory of the graphic art is given to him for his ethical greatnessand the austere beauty of his single figures, which ancientwriters extol. All we have to do here is fix his place in thedevelopment of painting by noting the stage at which he hadarrived in the representation of nature.

The wall-paintings of Polygnotus and his school must haveexhibited a large number of figures powerfully characterizedin action and expression, not in a confused mass nor summarized

as at Cnossus, nor grouped together as in a modern composition, ​

Fig. 6.—PREHISTORIC DRAWING OF A MAMMOTH.	Photo. W. A. Mansell & Co. Fig. 7.—EGYPTIAN FOWLING IN THE DELTA.
Photo, Alinari. Fig. 10.— ZEUS AND HERA. POMPEIAN WALL PAINTING.	Photo, Alinari. Fig. 8.— FRANÇOIS VASE. Florence.
Photo. W. A. Mansell & Co. Fig. 11.— HEROD’S BIRTHDAY FEAST. WALL PAINTING IN CATHEDRAL AT BRUNSWICK.

​

By permission of Braun, Clément & Co., Dornach (Alsace) and Paris.

Fig. 12.—THE MARIES AT THE SEPULCHRE, HUBERT VAN EYCK (?). (28 × 35.)

Photo, Alinari.

Fig. 13.— HEROD’S BIRTHDAY FEAST, GIOTTO.

​

nor yet arranged in formal rows one above the other, butdistributed at different levels on the one plane of the picture, thelevels being distinguished by summary indications of a landscapesetting. Parts of some of the figures were hidden by risings ofthe ground. The general effect is probably represented by thepaintings on the vase in the Louvre shown in fig.4, one side ofwhich exhibits the destruction of the children of Niobe, and theother the Argonauts. Simplicity in design and ethical dignityin the single forms are here unmistakable.

An image should appear at this position in the text. If you are able to provide it, see Wikisource:Image guidelines and Help:Adding images for guidance.

Fig. 4.—Vase painting in the Louvre, illustrating the style of Polygnotus.

It is probable that Polygnotus had not fully mastered thedifficulties of foreshortening with which the early “red-figure”masters were struggling, but later designs both on vases and elsewheredo show that in the 4th century at any rate these had beenovercome. The drawing on the so-called Ficoronian Cista, andon the best of the Greek mirror-backs, may be instanced. Theancients recognized that in the latter part of the 5th centuryB.C. painting made a great technical advance, so that all thathad gone before seemed archaic, while for the first time “thegates of art” were opened and the perfect masters entered in.The advance is in the direction of the representation not of formonly but of space, and seems from literary notices to have implieda considerable acquaintance with perspective science. Thelocus classicus, one of great importance, is in Vitruvius. In thepreface to his seventh book he writes of Agatharcus, a painterwho flourished at Athens in the middle and third quarter of the5thcentury, that he executed a scene-painting for Aeschylus,and wrote a treatise upon it which inspired the philosophersDemocritus and Anaxagoras to take up the subject, and to showscientifically from the constitution of the eye and the directionof rays of light how it was possible in scenic paintings to givesure images of objects otherwise hard to fix correctly, so that whensuch objects were figured on an upright plane at right-angles to theline of sight some should appear to recede and others to come forwards.It would not be easy to summarize more aptly the functions ofperspective, and if philosophers of the eminence of those justmentioned worked out these rules and placed them at thedisposal of the artists, the transition from ancient to modernpainting should have been accomplished in the 5th century B.C.,instead of just two thousand years afterwards! So far howeveras the existing evidence enables us to judge, this was not actuallythe case, and in spite of Agatharcus and the philosophers,painting pursued the even tenor of its way within the comparativelynarrow limits set for it by the genius of ancient art (seeGreek Art). It may be admitted that in many artistic qualitiesit was beyond praise. In beauty, in grace of line, in composition,we can imagine works of Apelles, of Zeuxis, of Protogenes,excelling even the efforts of the Italian painters, or only matchedby the finest designs of a Raphael or a Leonardo. In the smallencaustic pictures of a Pausias there may have been all the richnessand force we admire in a Chardin or a Monticelli. We mayeven concede that the Greek artist tried at times to transcendthe natural limits of his art, and to represent various planes ofspace in perspective, as in the landscape scenes from the Odyssey,or in figure compositions such as the “Alexander and Dariusat Issus,” preserved to us in a mosaic, or the “Battle-piece”by Aristides that contained a hundred combatants. The facts,however, remain, first that the Greek pictures about which wechiefly read were of single figures, or subjects of a very limitedand compact order with little variety of planes; and second,that the existing remains of ancient painting are so full ofmistakes in perspective that the representation of distancecannot have been a matter to which the artists had really setthemselves. The monumental evidence available on the lastpoint is sufficient to override arguments to the contrary that maybe built up on literary notices. No competent artist, or eventeacher of drawing, who examineswhat is left of ancient painting,can fail to see that the problemof representing correctly the thirddimension of space, though it mayhave been attacked, had certainlynot been solved. It is of no availto urge that these remains are notfrom the hands of the greatartists but of mere decorators.In modern times the mere decorator,if he had passed through aschool of art, would be as farabove such childish blunders asa Royal Academician. We haveonly to consider dispassionatelythe photographic reproductionsfrom ancient paintings (Herrmann,Denkmäler der MalereiedsAltertums, Munich, 1906, &c.) to see that the perspectiveresearches of the philosophers had not resulted in a generalcomprehension among the artists of the science of recedingplanes. For example, in the famous wall-painting of “Zeus andHera on Mount Ida” in the House of the Tragic Poet at Pompeii,the feet of the standing figure of the goddess are nearer to thespectator than the seat of her lord, but the upper part of her formis away on the farther side of him (see fig.5, PlateIV.). No onewho could draw at all would be capable now of such a mistake.In interiors the perspective of the rafters of a roof, of a table,a stool, a throne, is in most cases faulty; and the scale of thefigures seems often to be determined rather by their relativeimportance in the scene than by their position on the planes ofthe picture. In the Pompeian landscape-piece of “Paris onMount Ida” (Herrmann, No.8) there is no sense of therelative proportions of objects, and a cow in the foregroundis much smaller than Paris, who is a long way back in thecomposition.

It is an additional confirmation of this view to find earlyChristian and early medieval painting confined to the representationof the few near objects, which the older Oriental artists hadall along envisaged. If classical painters had really revolutionizeddesign, as it was actually revolutionized in the 15thcentury of our era, and had followed out to their logical consequencethe innovations of Agatharcus, we may be sure that the ​influence of these innovations would not have been wholly losteven in the general decline of the arts at the break-up of theRoman Empire of the West. In any case, the influence wouldhave survived in Byzantine art, where there was no suchcataclysm. Yet we fail to see in the numerous pictorial miniaturesfrom the 5th century onwards, or in the mosaics or thewall-paintings of the same epoch, any more effective grasp ofthe facts of the third dimension of space than was possessed bythe pre-classical Egyptian.

All through the middle ages, therefore, the facts concerningpainting with which we are here concerned remain the same,and the art appears almost exclusively concerned with the fewselected objects and the single plane. The representation isat most of form and not of space.

§ 10. Early Christian and Early Medieval Painting.—Theextant remains of early Christian painting may be consideredunder three heads: (1)the wall-paintings in the catacombs; (2)thepictorial decorations in books; (3)the mosaic pictures onthe walls of the churches, (1)The first are in themselves oflittle importance, but are of historical interest as a link of connexionbetween the wall-painting of classical times and the moredistinctively Christian forms of the art. They are slightlyexecuted and on a small scale, the earliest, as being more near toclassical models, are artistically the best. (2)That form ofpainting devoted to the decoration and illustration of booksbelongs more to the art of ornament than to painting proper(see Illuminated MSS. and Illustration). (3)Early Christianmosaics are noble monuments of the graphic art, andare its best representatives during the centuries from the 5thto the 8th. A dignified simplicity in design suits their largescale and architectural setting, and the aim of the artist is topresent in forms of epic grandeur the personages of the sacrednarratives. They are shown as in repose or engaged in sometypical but simple action; the backgrounds being as a rule plainblue or gold and the accessories of the simplest possible description.The finest Christian mosaic is also the earliest. It is inthe apse of S. Pudentiana, Rome, and displays Christ enthronedas teacher with the Apostles seated on each side of Him. It maydate from the 4th century. Next to this the best examples areat Ravenna, in the tomb of Galla Placidia, the Baptistery,S.Apollinare Nuovo and S.Vitale, dating from the 5th and 6thcenturies. The picture in the baptistery of the " Baptism ofChrist " is the most artistic piece of composition and pictorialeffect, and next to this comes the “Good Shepherd” of the tombof Galla Placidia. The finest single figures are those of the white-robedsaints between the windows of the nave of S. ApollinareNuovo, and the most popular representations are the twoprocessions of male and female saints lower down on the samewalls. The famous mosaics in S. Vitale depicting Justinian andTheodora with courtiers in attendance, though historicallyinteresting, are designed in a wooden fashion, and later mosaicsat Palermo, Venice, Rome and other places are as a rule ratherdecorative than pictorial. Where the costly material of glassmosaic was not available, the churches of this period wouldshow mural paintings on plaster of much the same design andartistic character, though comparatively ineffective.

In monumental painting the interval between the earlyChristian mosaics and mural pictures and the revival of the 13thcentury is filled by a series of wall and ceiling paintings ofCarolingian, Romanesque and early Gothic date, in Italy,Germany and England. The earliest of which account needbe taken are those in the recently excavated church of S. MariaAntiqua by the Forum at Rome (Rushworth, in Papers of theBritish School at Rome, vol.i., London, 1902), where there is acomplete and, on the whole, well-preserved series consistingfor the most part in single figures and simply composed scenes.Most of the work can be dated to the time of Pope JohnVII. atthe beginning of the 8th century. Its style shows a mixture ofByzantine motives with elements that are native to Rome.It must be remembered that at the time Rome was stronglyunder Byzantine influence. Passing over some more fragmentaryspecimens, we may refer next to several series of muralpaintings in and near the island of Reichenau at the western endof the lake of Constance, where a school of painting flourishedin the latter part of the 10th century. The work here is quiteas good as anything Italy has to show, and represents a nativeGerman style, based on early Christian tradition, with very littledependence on Byzantine models. The most interesting pieceis the “Last Judgment” in the church of StGeorge at Oberzellon Reichenau, where, in a very simple but dignified and effectiveform, we find the earliest existing representation of this standardtheme of later medieval monumental art (F.X. Kraus, Wandgemäldeder StGeorgskirche zu Oberzell auf der Insel Reichenau,Freiburg-i.-Br., 1884).

About a hundred years later, in the latter part of the nthcentury, a mural painting of the same theme was executedin the church of S.Angelo in Formis near Capua in southernItaly, the style of which shows a mixture of Latin and Byzantineelements (F.X. Kraus, Die Wandgemälde von S.Angelo in Formis,Berlin, 1893).

To the middle of the 12th century belongs one of the mostcomplete and interesting cycles of medieval wall-decoration,the display of a series of figures and scenes illustrating theeleventh chapter of Hebrews, in the chapter-house of the nowsecularized monastery of Brauweiler, near Cologne, in theRhineland. Here the pictorial effect is simple, but the decorativetreatment in regard to the filling of the spaces and the linesof composition is excellent. The design is Romanesque in itsseverity (E. Aus’m Weerth, Wandmalereien des Mittelalters in denRheinlanden, Leipzig 1879). Romanesque also, but exhibitingan increase in animation and expressiveness, is the paintingof the flat ceiling of the nave of the fine church of St Michael atHildesheim. In the general decorative effect, the distributionof the subjects in the spaces, the blending of figures and ornament,the work, the main subject of which is the Tree of Jesse, isa masterpiece. Two nude figures of Adam and Eve are for theperiod remarkable productions. The date is the close of the 12thcentury.

Succeeding examples show unmistakable signs of the approachof the Gothic period. In the wall-paintings of the nuns' choirof the church of Gurk in Carinthia, a certain grace and tendernessbegin to make themselves felt, and the same impression we gainfrom the extensive cycle in the choir of the cathedral of Brunswick,from the first decades of the 13thcentury. The pictureof Herod's birthday feast is typical of the style of Germanpainting of the time; there is nothing about it in the least rudeor tentative. It is neither childish nor barbarous, but veryaccomplished in a conventional style that is exactly suited fromthe decorative point of view to a mural painting. The story istold effectively but in quaint fashion, and several incidents of itare shown in the same composition. There is no attempt torepresent the third dimension of space, nor to give the perspectivesetting of the scene, but the drawing is easy and true andexpressive. The studied grace in the bend of certain figuresand the lively expressions of the faces are traits which prefigureGothic art (see fig.11, PlateIII.).

Distinctively Gothic in their feeling were the wall-paintingsin the chapel at Ramersdorf, opposite Bonn, dating from thebeginning of the 14th century. They are only preserved incopies, but these enable us to see with what grace and feelingthe slender figures were designed, how near to Angelico's camethe tender angels making music where the virgin is receiving hercelestial crown (E. Aus’m Weerth, loc. cit.). From the end ofthe 14thcentury. Castle Runkelstein, near Botzen in Tirol, haspreserved an extensive cycle of secular wall-paintings, muchrepainted, but of unique interest as giving an idea how a medievalresidence of the kind might be adorned. The style is of nativegrowth and no influence from south of the Alps is to be discerned(Janitschek, Geschichte der deutschen Malerei, Berlin, 1890, 198seq.). Technically speaking, all these mural paintings consistin little more than outlines filled in with flat tints, neithermodelling of the forms nor perspective effect in the setting isattempted, but the work so far as it goes is wholly satisfactory.

There is no coarseness of execution nor anything in the forms. ​

Photo, Alinari.

Fig. 14.—PEACE, LORENZETTI. Siena.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 16.BATTLE OF S. EGIDIO, UCCELLO. (72 × 125.) National Gallery, London.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 17— martyrdom OF S. SEBASTIAN,POLLAIUOLO. (114 × 7912)National Gallery, London.

Photo, Alinari.

Fig. 18.— THE DREAM OF CONSTANTINE,PIERO DELLA FRANCESCA. Arezzo.

Photo, Alinari

Fig. 15.—THE EXPULSION FROM EDEN, MASACCIO.

Photo, Alinari.

Fig. 19.—BURIAL OF S. FINA, GHIRLANDAJO. S. Gemignano. ​

By permission of Braun, Clement & Co. Dornach (Alsace) and Paris.

Fig. 20.—DANCE OF THE MUSES, MANTEGNA. (64×77.) Louvre.

Photo, Anderson

Fig. 21.— ALTARPIECE AT MURANO, BELLINI. Figures almost Life-size. ​gestures or expressions that offends the eye. The colours arebright and pure, the decorative effect often charming.

In the matter of panel paintings on wood, we have the interestingnotice in Bede that Abbot Benedict of Wearmouth at theend of the 7th century brought from Italy portable pictures onwooden panels for the decoration of his church, part of whichstill remains. The style of the painting on these, it has recentlybeen noticed, would resemble the existing wall-paintings of thebeginning of the 8th century in S. Maria Antiqua in Rome,already referred to. Movable panel pictures in the form ofrepresentations of the Madonna and Child were produced inimmense numbers at Byzantium and were imported largelyinto Italy, where they became of importance in connexion withthe revival of painting in the 13th century. As a rule, however,paintings on panel were not movable but were attached to ascreen, a door, or similar structure of wood consisting in framingand panels. This form of decoration is of special importanceas it is really the origin of the modern picture. The paintedpanel, which at first forms an integral part of an architecturallydesigned structure of wood, gradually comes to attract to itselfmore and more importance, tiU it finally issues from its originalsetting and, emancipated from all relations to its surroundings,claims attention to itself as an independent work of art.

Painted panels in an architectural setting were used for thedecoration of altar-fronts or antependia, of altar-backs or, asthey are commonly called, altar-pieces, choir-screens, doors ofpresses and the like; or again for ceilings. There was paintingalso on the large wooden crucifixes displayed in churches, wherea picture of Christ on the Cross might take the place of the morelife-like carved image. In Italy painted panels were used asdecoration of furniture, notably of the large carved chests orcassoni so common at the epoch of the Renaissance.

Examples of early medieval date do not appear to havesurvived. In Germany, where, as has been noticed, the arts inthe nth and 12th centuries stood at a higher level than in Italyor elsewhere in the west, certain antependia or altar-fronts fromSoest in Westphalia of the 12th century are said to be the earliestknown examples of German panel painting. One is preserved inthe museum at Berlin. A little later the number of such panelsintroduced as part of the decoration of altar-backs, generallywith folding doors, becomes very great. Painted panels as partof the decoration of screens are preserved in the choir at Colognefrom the middle of the 14th century. In Italy the paintedcrucifix shared popular favour with the imported or imitatedByzantine Madonna-panels. A good example of the earlypainted altar-screen is preserved in Westminster Abbey.

Later, in the isth century, the painted panel, generally witha single figure of a saint, becomes a common part of the carved,painted and gilded chancel screen in English churches, and manyspecimens are still to be seen, especially in East Anglia.

§ II. Beginnings of the Picture: German and Early FlemishPanel Painting. — From the decorative panels introduced intowooden screen-work was developed in Germany and Flanders thepicture proper, the mural painting passing out of use owing tothe prevalence in the north of Gothic architecture, which doesnot admit of wall spaces for the display of pictures, but substitutesas a form of painting the stained-glass window. In Italy,where Gothic was treated as a plaything, the wall spaces werenever sacrificed, and in the development of the art the muralpicture took the lead, the painted panel remaining on the wholeof secondary importance.

Priority in this development of the picture is claimed inGermany for the school of Prague, where a gild of painters wasfounded in 1348, but the first northern school of painting thatinfluenced other schools and plays a part in the history of paintingas a whole is the so-called school of Cologne, where painterssuch as Meister Wilhelm and Hermann Wynrich achievedreputation in the 14th century, and produced as their successorin the 15th Stephan Lochner, author of the so-called " Dombild "in the cathedral, and of the " Virgin of the Priests' Seminary."A little later than the earliest Cologne masters appears Hubertvan Eyck, born near Maestricht at no great distance from the

Rhineland capital, who with his younger brother, Jan, heads theEarly Flemish school of painting. Hubert is one of the greatnames in the history of the art, and is chiefly responsible for thealtar-piece of the " Adoration of the Lamb " at Ghent, the mostimportant masterpiece of the northern schools before the 17thcentury, and the earliest monument of the then newly developedart of oil painting. Table No. I. in Part II. of this article givesthe names of the chief successors of the Van Eycks, and the schoolends with the life and work of Quintin Matsys of Antwerp, inthe first quarter of the i6th century. The spirit of the earlyCologne school, and in the main of that of Flanders, is idyllicand devotional, but the artists of the latter school achieveextraordinary force and precision in their representation of thefacts of nature. They are, moreover, the first painters of landscape,for in their hands the gold background of the medievalpanels yields place to a rendering of natural scenery and ofeffects of distance, minute in details and fresh and delightful infeeling. The famous picture ascribed by some to Hubert vanEyck in the coUection of Sir Francis Cook at Richmond is agood example. The subject is the " Three Maries at theSepulchre, " and the background is a wonderful view of a cityintended for Jerusalem (see fig. 12, Plate IV.).

In Germany, on the other hand, the tendency of the 15thcentury was towards a rather crude realism in details, to whichthe higher artistic qualities of beauty and devotional sentimentwere often sacrificed. This is a new phenomenon in the historyof the art. In the older Oriental, the classical and the medievalphases of painting, though there is a constant effort to portraythe truth of nature, yet the decorative instinct in the artist, hisfeeling for pattern, was a controlling element in the work, 'andthe representation was conventionalized into a form that satisfiedthe ideal of beauty current at the time. Jan van Eyck wasmatter-of-fact in his realism, but avoided ugliness, whereasin Germany in the 15th and i6th centuries we find action andexpression exaggerated to contortion and grimace, and allartistic qualities sacrificed to a mistaken idea of force. Germanart was, however, saved by the appearance of some artists ofgreat genius who more than made up for the national insensibilityto beauty by their earnestness and truth. Martin Schongauer ofColmar learnt his art from the painters of the Flemish Netherlands,and imbibed something of the feeling for beauty whichthe successors of Hubert van Eyck had never wholly lost.After Schongauer German art culminates at Nuremberg in theperson of Albrecht Dürer, and a little later in that of HansHolbein the younger. Contemporary with Dürer, MathiasGrunewald of Colmar exhibits a dramatic power in his creationsthat compensates for their exaggerated realism, and BartholomausBruyn, of Cologne, prefigures the future success of thenorthern schools in portraiture. In Germany, however, thewars of religion in the i6th century checked the further growthof a national art. Holbein's migration to England is a significantsign of this, and German art in this phase of it may be said tocome to an end in the person of Adam Elsheimer of Frankfort,who introduced German painting at Rome about the year 1600.

In the Netherlands the early religious school ends, as we haveseen, with Quintin Matsys, and the next generation of Flemishpainters for the most part practise their art in Italy, and importItalian fashions into the painting of their own country. Fromthe ranks of these so-called Italianizcrs in the Flanders of the16th century proceeds a little later the commanding personalityof Rubens.

§ 12. The Rise of Schools of Painting. — The expression"school of painting" has more than once been used; what isthe meaning of it? The history of painting has hitherto beentreated in the article as a development that proceeded accordingto a natural law of evolution in independence of individuals.In painting, however, as in all the higher operations of the arts,the initiative of the individual counts for much, and the actionand reaction on each other of individuals, and those groups ofindividuals whom common aims and practice draw togetherinto schools, make up for us a good part of the interest of thehistorical study of painting. At certain periods this particular ​interest has been lacking. In ancient Egypt, for example,and among the older Oriental peoples generally, schools of paintingin the modern sense did not exist, for the arts were carriedon on traditional lines and owed little, so far as records tell, toindividual initiative. In ancient Greece, on the contrary, wefind ourselves at once in an atmosphere of names and achievementswhich give all the glamour of personal and biographicalinterest to the story of art. In the early Christian and earlymedieval periods, we return again to a time when the arts werepractised in the same impersonal fashion as in the oldest days,but with the later medieval epoch we emerge once more into anera where the artist of genius, with his experiments and triumphs,his rivals and followers, is in the forefront of interest; whenhistory is enlivened with anecdote, and takes light and shadefrom the changing fortunes of individuals.

There is a danger lest the human interest of such a periodmay lead us to forget the larger movements, impersonal andalmost cosmic, which are all the time carrying these individualsand groups forward on their destined course. The history ofpainting cannot be understood if it be reduced to a notice,however full, of separate " schools" or to a series of biographies,fascinating as these may be made, of individual artists. Hencein what follows it is still the main course of the development ofthe art in its relation to nature that will be kept in view, while theinformation about names and dates and mutual relations ofartists and schools, which is in its own way equally important,will be furnished in the tables constituting Part II. of this article.

What has just been said will prepare the reader for the factthat the first schools of painting here mentioned are thoseof Germany and Flanders, not those of Italy, though thelatter are more important as well as actually prior in pointof time.

§ 13. The Gothic Movement and the Proto-Renaissance, intheir Influence an Painting north and south of the Alps. — Therevival of the arts of sculpture and painting in the Italy of thelast part of the 13th century was an event of capital importance,not only for that country but for the west at large. Its importancehas, however, been exaggerated, when it has been saidto imply the rediscovery of the arts after a period in which theyhad suffered an entire eclipse. So far as Italy is concerned, bothsculpture and painting had in the previous period sunk to alevel so low that they could hardly be said to exist, but at thesame epoch in lands north of the Alps they were producingworks of considerable merit. Romanesque wall-painting ofthe 12th century, as represented in some Rhineland churchesand cloisters, is immeasurably better than anything of the sameperiod south of the Alps. In the arts of construction andornament the lead remained for a long time with the northernpeoples, and in every branch of decorative work with the exceptionof mosaic the craftsmanship of Germany and Francesurpassed anything that native Italian workmen could produce.By the middle of the 12th century the intellectual and socialactivity of the French people was accompanied by an artisticmovement that created the most complex and beautiful architecturalmonuments that the world has seen. The adornmentof the great French Gothic cathedral was as artistically perfectas its fabric was noble. For one, at any rate, of the effects atwhich the painter aims, that of glowing and sumptuous colour,nothing can surpass the stained-glass windows of the Gothicchurches, while the exteriors of the same buildings were enrichedwith hundreds of statues of monumental dignity endowed with agrace and expressiveness that reflect the spirit of the age.

The Gothic age in France was characterized by humanity,tenderness and the love of nature, and there are few epochs inhuman history the spirit of which is to us more congenial. The1 2th century, which witnessed the growth of the various elementsof culture that combined to give the age its ultimate character,saw also a movement of revival in another sphere. The referenceis to what has been aptly termed a " Proto-Renaissance, " thecharacteristic of which was a fresh interest in surviving remainsof classical antiquity. In more than one region of the west,where these remains were specially in evidence, this interest

manifested itself, and the earliest sign of it was in Provence,the highly Romanized part of southern Gaul known par excellenceas the " Provincia." To this is due the remarkable developmentof decorative sculpture in the first decades of the 12th century,which gave to that region the storied portals of St Gilles, and ofSt Trophime at Aries. Somewhat later, in the early part of the13th, those portions of southern Italy under the direct rule ofthe emperor Frederick II. presented a similar phenomenon thathas been fully discussed by M. Bertaux in his L' Art dans I'llaliemeridional (Paris, 1904). There were other centres of this samemovement, and a recent writer enumerates no fewer than seven.The Gothic movement proper depended in no degree on the studyof the antique, and in art the ornamental forms which expressits spirit are naturalistic, not classical, while the fine figuresculpture above referred to is quite independent of ancientmodels, which hardly existed in the central regions of Francewhere the Gothic movement had its being. Still the proto-Renaissancecan be associated with it as another phase of thesame awakening of intellectual life that marked the 12th century.Provence took the lead in the literary revival of the time, andthe artistic movement that followed on this was influenced by thefact of the existence in those regions of abundant remains ofclassical art.

The Gothic movement was essentially northern in its origin,and its influence radiated from the lie de France. What hasbeen described as the idyllic grace, the tenderness, that mark theworks of the early Cologne school, and to some extent those ofthe early Flemings, were Gothic in their origin, while the feelingfor nature in landscape that characterizes van Eyck, and thegeneral tendency towards a realistic apprehension of the factsof things, may also be put down to the quickening of both thoughtand sympathy due to the Gothic movement. Hence it is thatthe northern schools of painting are noticed before the Italianbecause they were nearer to the source of the common inspiration.All the lands of the West, however, exhibit, each in its ownspecial forms, the same stir of a new intellectual, religious andartistic life. In Italy we meet with the same phenomena as inFrance, a proto-Renaissance, first in southern Italy and then,as we shall presently see, at Rome and at Pisa, and a religiousand intellectual movement on Gothic lines that was embodiedin the attractive personality of St Francis of Assisi. Francis wasas perfect an embodiment of the Gothic temper as St Louishimself, and in his romantic enthusiasm, his tenderness, hishumanity is in spirit more French than Italian.

§ 14. The Rise of the Italian Schools of Painting. — The revivalof the arts in Italy in the latter part of the 13th century was theoutcome of the two movements just noticed. The art of NiccolaPisano is now recognized as a phase of the proto-Renaissanceof southern Italy, whence his family was derived. It representsa distinct advance on the revived classical sculpture of Provenceor Campania because Niccola's artistic personality was a strongone, and he gives to his work the impress of the individual ofgenius. Throughout its history Italian art depends for itsexcellence on this personal element, and Niccola's achievementis epoch-making because of his personal vigour, not because hereinvented a lost art. Towards the end of the 13th century,painting began to show the results of the same renewed studyof antique models, and here again the revival is connected withthe names of gifted individuals. Among these the most noteworthyare the Roman Pietro Cavallini and Duccio di Buoninsegnaof Siena. The condition of painting in Italy in latemedieval days has already been indicated. Cavallini andDuccio now produce, in two standard forms of the art, the muralpainting of the " Last Judgment " and the enthroned Madonnawith angels — works characterized by good taste, by largenessand suavity of treatment, and by an execution which, if stillsomewhat primitive and laboured, at any rate aims at beauty ofform and colour. The recently uncovered fresco of the LastJudgment by Cavallini, executed about 1 293 on the western waDof S. Cecilia in Trastevere at Rome, is classical in feeling andrepresents an immense advance on the older rendering of thesame subject in S. Angelo in Formis (see § 10). The vast ​enthroned Madonna in the Rucellai chapel of S. Maria Novellaat Florence, ascribed by Vasari to Cimabue, is now assignedby many to Duccio of Siena, and presents similar attractivequalities. Cimabue, a Florentine contemporary of Cavalliniand Duccio, is famed in story as the chief representative of thepainting of this period, but we possess no certain works from hishand except his mosaic at Pisa. His style would probablycorrespond to that of the painters just mentioned. His chiefimportance for our purpose resides in the fact that he was theteacher of the Florentine Giotto.

If the artists just referred to represent a revived classicismrather than a fresh and independent study of nature, Giotto isessentially a creation of the Gothic movement and his closeassociation with the Franciscan cycle of ideas brings this factinto clearer rehef. Giotto is in no way dependent on the studyof the antique, but rehes on his own steady and penetrating outlookupon man and upon nature. He is Gothic in his humanity,his sympathy, his love of truth, and he incorporates in hisown person many of the most pleasing quahties of Gothic art asit had already manifested itself in France, while by the force ofhis own individual genius he raises these qualities to a higherlevel of artistic expression.

In the work of Giotto painting begins to enter on its modernera. The demonstrative element permanently takes the preeminenceover the more decorative element we have calledpattern-making. Though the pattern is always present, theelements of it become of increasing value in themselves asrepresentations of nature, and the tendency henceforward fora couple of centuries is to exaggerate their importance so thatthe general decorative effect becomes subordinate. Giotto'sgreatness depends on the gift he possessed for holding the balanceeven among opposed artistic qualities. If he was interestingand convincing as a narrator, he had a fine eye at the same timefor composition and balanced his masses with unerring tact.Neither he nor any of the Florentine frescoists had much senseof colour, and at this stage of the development of paintingcompositions of light and shade were not thought of, but in lineand mass he pleases the eye as much as he satisfies the mind byhis clear statement of the meaning and intention of his figuresand groups.

In putting these together he is careful above all things tomake them tell their story, and primitive as he is in techniquehe is as accomplished in this art as Raphael himself. Moreover,he holds the balance between the tendency, always so strongamong his countrymen as among the Germans, to over-emphasisof action and expression, and the grace and self-restraint whichare among the most precious of artistic qualities. He neversacrifices beauty to force, nor on the other hand does he allowhis sense of grace of line to weaken the telling effect of action orgrouping. A good example of his style, and one interesting alsofrom the comparative standpoint, is his fresco of " Herod'sBirthday Feast " in S. Croce at Florence (fig. 13, Plate IV.). Wecontrast it with the earlier wall-painting of the same subject inthe cathedral at Brunswick (fig. 1 1, Plate III.). Giotto has reducedthe number of actors to the minimum necessary for an effectivepresentation of the scene, but has charged each figure withmeaning and presented the ensemble with a due regard forspace as well as merely for form. The flatness of the older workhas already been exchanged for an efl'ective, if not yet fullycorrect, rendering of planes. The justice of the actions andexpressions will at once strike the observer.

The Florentine school as a whole looks to Giotto as its head,because he embodies all the characteristics that made it great;but at the same time the artists that came after him in mostcases faOed by over-emphasis of the demonstrative element,and sacrificed beauty and sentiment to vigour and realism.The school as a whole is markedly intellectual, and as a resultis at times prosaic, from which fault Giotto himself was savedby his Gothic tenderness and romance. His personality wasso outstanding that it dominated the school for nearly a century.The " Giotteschi " is a name given to a number of Florentinepainters whose labours cover the rest of the 14th century

among whom only one, Andrea di Cione, called Orcagna, hftedhimself to any real eminence.

At Siena the Gothic movement made itself felt in the nextartistic generation after that of Duccio. Its chief representativewas Simone Martini. With him Sienese art takes upon itselfa character contrasting markedly with the Florentine. It ison the demonstrative side less intellectual, less vigorous, lesssecular; and a dreamy melancholy, a tenderness that is a littlesentimental, take the place of the alertness and force withwhich the personages in Florentine frescoes are endued. On theother hand, in decorative feeling, especially in regard to colour,Sienese painting surpasses that of the Florentines. Simone wasfollowed by a number of artists who answered to the Florentine" Giotteschi " and carry on the style through the century, butas Florence produces an Orcagna, so at Siena about the middleof the 14th century there appear in the brothers Lorenzetti twoartists of exceptional vigour, who carry art into new fields.Ambrogio Lorenzetti, the younger of the brothers, is speciallyrepresented by some frescoes in the Public Palace at Siena of asymbolical and didactic kind, representing Good and BadGovernment, from which is selected a figure representing Peace(fig. 14, Plate v.). Sienese sentiment is here very apparent.Simone Martini's masterpiece had been a great religious frescoof an edifying kind on the wall of the chapel, and now in therooms devoted to the secular business of the city Lorenzetticovers the waUs with four large compositions on the subjectnamed.

The painters of the Sienese school were on the whole faithfulto the style indicated, and later on in the century they extendthe boundaries of their school by spreading its influence into thehill country of Umbria. In the cities of this region Taddeo diBartoli, one of the best of the followers of Simone, worked aboutthe end of the century, and early Umbrian art in consequenceexhibits the same devotional character, the same dreaminess, thesame grace and decorative charm, that are at home in Siena.

Elsewhere in Italy the art of the 14th century represents ageneral advance beyond the old medieval standard, but no outstandingpersonalty made its appearance and there was nothingthat can be strictly termed a revival. At Rome, where on thefoundation of the noble design of Cavallini there might have beenreared a promising artistic structure, the removal early in the14th century of the papal court to Avignon in France led to acessation of all effort.

§ 15. The Fifteenth Century, and its Influence on the Developmentof Painting at Florence. — We come now to what wasindicated in § 4 as the third of the main periods into which thehistory of painting may be divided. It is that in which, by theaid of the new agency of perspective, truth of form was for thefirst time perfectly mastered, and an advance was made in therendering of the truth of space.

The opening of the 15th century in Italy is the most importantepoch in the whole history of painting, for it was the real beginningof the modern era. Here Florence, the first home of Renaissanceculture, unmistakably assumes the lead, and the new era isagain opened by the agency of an individual of genius. Thefather of modern painting is the Florentine Masaccio. He notonly advanced the art in those qualities in which Giotto hadalready made it great, but pointed the way towards the representationof the third dimension of objects and of space as a wholewhich had for so long been almost ignored. His short life course,for he died before he was thirty, only allowed him to execute onework of the first importance, the frescoes in the Brancacci chapelof the Carmine at Florence. There in the " Tribute Money "he told the story with all Giotto's force and directness, but withan added power in the creation of exalted types of humancharacter, and in the presentation of sohd shapes that seem tolive before us. In the " Expulsion from Eden " he rose to greaterheights. In the whole range of demonstrative art no moreconvincing, more moving, figures have ever been created thanthose of our first parents, Adam veiling his face in his hands,Eve throwing back her head and wailing aloud in agony, whilein the foreshortened form of the angel that hovers above we ​discern the whole future development of the art for a century tocome (see fig. 15, Plate V.). Above all qualities in IVIasaccio'swork we are impressed with the simplicity and the ease of thework. The youthful artist possessed a reserve of power that,had he hved, would have carried him at one bound to heightsthat it took his actual successors in the school well nigh acentury to cUmb.

The 15th century at Florence presents to us the picture of aprogressive advance on the technical side of art, in the courseof which various problems were attacked and one by one vanquished,till the form of painting in the style recognized in theschool was finally perfected, and was then handed on to the greatmasters of expression, such as Raphael and Michelangelo, whoused it as the obedient instrument of their wills. The efiortsof the artists were inspired by a new intellectual and socialmovement of which this century was the scene. If the Gothicmovement in the 14th century had inspired Giotto and SimoneMartini, now it was the revived study of the antique, the trueRenaissance, that was behind all the technical struggles of theartists. Painting was not, however, directly and immediatelyaffected by the study of antique models. This was only onesymptom of a general stir of intellectual life that is caUed by theapt term " humanism." In the early Gothic epoch the movementhad been also in the direction of humanity, that is to say,of softness in manners and of the amenities and graces of Ufe,but it was also a strictly rehgious movement. Now, in the 15thcentury, the inspiration of thought was rather pagan thanChristian, and men were going back to the ideas and institutionsof the antique world as a substitute for those which the Churchhad provided for thirty generations. The direct influence ofthese studies on art was chiefly felt in the case of architecture,which they practically transformed. Sculpture was influencedto a lesser degree, and painting least of all. It was not till thecentury was pretty far advanced that classical subjects of amythological kind were adopted by artists like Botticelli andPiero di Cosimo, the first figures borrowed from the antiqueworld being those of republican worthies displayed for purposesof public edification.

The elements which the humanistic movement contributedto Florentine art are the following: (i) The scientific study ofperspective in all its branches, hnear and aerial, including thescience of shadows. (2) Anatomy, the study of the nude formboth at rest and in action. (3) Truth of fact in details inanimate and inanimate subjects. (4) The technique of oilpainting. It must be observed that in this work the Florentineswere joined by certain painters of Umbria, who were not satisfiedwith the Umbro-Sienese tradition already spoken of, but alUedthemselves with the leaders of the advance who were fightingunder the banner of Masaccio.

Of the studies mentioned above by far the most importantwas that of perspective. Anatomy and reahsm in details onlyrepresented an advance along the lines painting had beenalready following. The new technique of oil painting, thoughof immense importance in connexion with the art as a whole,affected the Florentines comparatively Uttle. Their favouriteform of painting was the mural picture, not the self-containedpanel or canvas for which the oil medium was specially designed,and for mural work fresco remained always supreme (see Part III.,§ 35). In this mural work the introduction of scientific perspectiveeffected something like a transformation. The essence ofthe work from the decorative point of view had been its flatness.It was primarily pattern-making, and nature had been representedby contours which stood for objects without giving them their fulldimensions. When the artist began to introduce varying planesof distance and to gain relief by light and shade, there was atonce a change in the relation of the picture to the wall. It nolonger agreed in its flatness with the facts of the surface of whichit formed the enrichment, but opposed these by its suggestionof depth and distance. Hence while painting as a wholeadvanced enormously through this effort after the truth of space,yet decorative quality in this particular form of the art proportionatelysuffered. .: . . .

The study of perspective owed much to the architect andscholar Brunellesco, one of the oldest as well as ablest of the menin whom the new movement of the 15th century was embodied.Brunellesco taught all he knew to Masaccio, for whose geniushe felt strong admiration; but the artist in whom the result ofthe new study is most obvious is Paolo Uccello, a painter ofmuch power, who was born as early as 1397. Uccello, asextant works testify, sometimes composed pictures mainlywith a view to the perspective effects for which they furnishedthe opportunity. See fig. 16, Plate V., where in a fresco of acavalry skirmish he has drawn in foreshortened view the figureof a warrior prone on the ground, as well as various weaponsand other objects under the feet of the horses. A fresco of " TheFlood " at Florence is even more naive in its parade of thepainter's newly won skill in perspective science. The intarsists,or workers in inlaid woods, who were very numerous in Florence,also adopted perspective motives for their designs, and thesetestify to the fascination of the study during all the last part ofthe century and the beginning of the next.

The advance in anatomical studies may be illustrated inthe person of Antonio PoUaiuolo. Masaccio had been as greatin this department of the painter's craft as in any other; and inthe Adam and Eve of the " Expulsion, " and the famous nudesshown in the fresco of " Peter Baptizing, " he had given thetruth of action and expression as few have been able to render it;but in the matter of scientific accuracy in detail more anatomicalstudy was needful, and to this men like Pollaiuolo now devotedthemselves. Pollaiuolo's " Martyrdom of St Sebastian, " inthe London National Gallery, is a very notable Olustration ofthe efforts which a conscientious and able Florentine of theperiod would make to master these problems of the scientificside of art. (See fig. 17, Plate V.)

On the whole, however, of the men of this group it was not aFlorentine but the Umbrian Piero de' Franceschi that representsthe greatest achievement on the formal side of art. His theoreticalstudies were profound. He wrote a treatise on perspective,representing an advance on the previous treatment of thescience by Alberti; and to this study of linear perspective Pierounited those of aerial perspective and the science of shadows. Afresco of his at Arezzo entitled the " Dream of Constantine "is epoch-making in presenting a night effect into the midst ofwhich a bolt of celestial radiance is hurled, the incidence of whichon the objects of the various planes of the picture has been carefullyobserved and accurately reproduced. (See fig. iS, Plate V.)

Piero handed on his scientific accomphshments to a pupil,also an Umbrian of Florentine sympathies, Luca SignorelU ofCortona. He achieved still greater success than Pollaiuolo inthe rendering of the nude form in action, but more conspicuouslythan any others of this group he sacrificed beauty to truth, andthe nudes in his great series of frescoes on the Last Things atOrvieto are anatomized like ecorches, and are in colour andtexture positively repellent. Luca's work is, however, of historicalimportance as leading on to that of Michelangelo.

A great power in the Florentine school of the 15th centurywas Andrea del Castagno, an artist with much of the vigour, thefeeling for the monumental, of Masaccio, but without Masaccio'ssaving gift of suavity of treatment. He is best represented bysome single figures representing Florentine worthies, whom hehas painted as if they were statues in niches. They formedpart of the decoration of a villa, and are noteworthy as whollysecular in subject. There is a massiveness about the formswhich shows how thoroughly the 15th century Florentines weremastering the representation of solid objects in all their threedimensions. Other painters attracted attention at the time fortheir reaUstic treatment of details. Vasari singles out AlessioBaldovinetti.

The importance for art of the Florentine school of the isthcentury resides in these efforts for the perfecting of paintingon the formal side, which its representatives were themselvesmaking and were inspiring in others. The general historianof the art will dweU rather on this aspect of the work of the

school than on the numerous attractive featufes it offers 19 the ​

Photo, Neurdein.

Fig. 22.—THE CONCERT, GORGIONE (?). Louvre. (44 × 55)

Photo, Anderson.

Fig. 23.—THE PRESENTATION IN THE TEMPLE, TITIAN. (138 × 310.) Academy, Venice. ​

Photo, Hanfstaengl

Fig. 24.—FÊTE CHAMPÊTRE, WATTEAU. (22 × 18.)Edinburgh.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 25.— HON. MRS GRAHAM, GAINSBOROUGH.(93 × 60.) Edinburgh.

Photo, Anderson.

Fig. 26.— CHARLES V., TITIAN. (133 × 110.) Madrid.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 27.— GEORGE GYSIS, HOLBEIN. (3812 × 33.) Berlin. ​superficial observer. The Fra Angelicos, the Filippo Lippis,the Benozzo Gozzolis, the Botticellis, the Filippino Lippis ofthe century express pleasantly in their work various phases offeeUng, devotional, idyllic or pensive, and enjoy a proportionatepopularity among the lovers of pictures. Exigencies of spacepreclude anything more than a mention of their names, but asentence or two must be given to a painter of the last half of thecentury who represents better than any other the perfectionof the monumental style in fresco painting. This painter isGhirlandajo, to whom is ascribed a characteristic saying. Whendisturbed in hours of work about some domestic affair heexclaimed: “Trouble me not about these household matters;now that I begin to comprehend the method of this art I wouldfain they gave me to paint the whole circuit of the walls ofFlorence with stories.” Ghirlandajo was entering into theheritage of technical knowledge and skill that had been laboriouslyacquired by his countrymen and their Umbrian comradessince the beginning of the century, and he spread himself uponthe plastered walls of Tuscan churches with easy copiousness,in works which give us a better idea than any others of the timeof how much can be accomplished in a form of art of the kindby sound tradition and a businesslike system of operation.

The mural painting of Ghirlandajo represents in its perfectionone important phase of the art. It was still decorative in thesense that lime colour-washes were the natural finish of the limeplaster on the wall, and that these washes were arranged in acolour-pattern pleasing to the eye. The demonstrative element,that is, the significance of these patches of colour as representationsof nature, was however in the eyes of both painterand public the matter of primary importance, and similitudewas now carried as far as knowledge of anatomy and linearperspective rendered possible. Objects were rendered in theirthree dimensions and were properly set on their planes andsurrounded with suitable accessories, while aerial perspectivewas only drawn on to give a general sense of space without theeye being attracted too far into the distance. As a specimen ofthe monumental style nothing can be better than Ghirlandajo’sfresco of the “Burial of S.Fina” at S.Gimignano in Tuscany(see fig.19, PlateV.). We note with what architectural feelingthe composition is balanced, how simple and monumental is theeffect.

§ 16. The Fifteenth Century in the other Italian Schools.—It hasbeen already noticed that the painting of the 14th century inthe Umbrian cities was inspired by that of Siena. Throughthe isth century the Umbrian school developed on the samelines. Its artists were as a whole content to express the placidreligious sentiment with which the Sienese had inspired them,and advanced in technical matters almost unconsciously, or atany rate without making the pronounced efforts of the Florentines.While Piero de' Franceschi and Luca Signorelli vied withthe most ardent spirits among the Florentines in grapphngwith the formal problems of the art, their countrymen generallypreserved the old flatness of effect, the quiet poses, the devoutexpressions of the older school. This Umbro-Sienese art producedin the latter part of the century the typical Umbrianpainter Perugino, whose chief importance in the history of hisart is the fact that he was the teacher of Raphael.

An Umbrian who united the suavity of style and feelingfor beauty of the Peruginesques with a daring and scientificmastery that were Florentine was Piero de’ Franceschi’s pupil,Melozzo daForlì. His historical importance largely residesin the fact that he was the first master of the so-called Romanschool. As was noticed before in connexion with the earlyRoman master, Pietro Cavallini, the development of a nativeRoman school was checked by the departure of the papal courtto France for the best part of a century. After the return, whenaffairs had been set in order, the popes began to gather roundthem artists to carry out various extensive commissions, suchas the decoration of the walls of the newly-erected palacechapel of the Vatican, called from its founder the Sistine. Theseartists were not native Romans but Florentines and Umbrians,and among them was Melozzo daForlì, who by taking up hisresidence permanently at Rome became the founder of theRoman school, that was afterwards adorned by names likethose of Raphael and Michelangelo.

In the story of the development of Italian painting Melozzooccupies an important place. He carried further the notionof a perspective treatment of the figure that was started byMasaccio’s angel of the “Expulsion,” and preceded Correggioin the device of representing a celestial event as it would appearto a spectator who was looking up at it from below.

On the whole, the three Umbrians, Piero de’ Franceschi,with his two pupils Luca Signorelli and Melozzo, are the mostimportant figures in the central Italian art of the formativeperiod. There is one other artist in another part of Italy whosepersonalty bulks more largely than even theirs, and who, likethem a disciple of the Florentines, excelled the Florentines inscience and power, and this is the Paduan Mantegna.

We are introduced now to the painters of north Italy. Theirgeneral character differs from that of the Umbro-Sienese schoolin that their work is somewhat hard and sombre, and wantingin the naivete and tenderness of the masters who originallydrew their inspiration from Simone Martini. Giotto had spentsome time and accomplished some of his best work at Padua inthe earliest years of the 14th century, but his influence had notlasted. Florentine art, in the more advanced form it wore inthe first half of the 15th century, was again brought to it byDonatello and Paolo Uccello, who were at work there shortlybefore 1450. At that time Andrea Mantegna was receiving hisfirst education from a painter, or rather impresario, namedFrancesco Squarcione, who directed his attention to antiquemodels. Mantegna learnt from Donatello a statuesque feelingfor form, and from Uccello a scientific interest in perspective,while, acting on the stimulus of his first teacher, he devoted himselfto personal study of the remains of antique sculpture whichwere common in the Roman cities of north Italy. Mantegnabuilt up his art on a scientific basis, but he knew how to inspirethe form with a soul. His own personalty was one of thestrongest that we meet with in the annals of Italian art, and hestamped this on all he accomplished. No figures stand more firmlythan Mantegna’s, none have a more plastic fullness, in none aredetails of accoutrement or folds of drapery more clearly seenand rendered. The study of antique remains supphed him witha store of classical details that he uses with extraordinaryaccuracy and effectiveness in his representations of a Romantriumph, at Hampton Court. Ancient art invested, too, with acertain austere beauty his forms of women or children, and inclassical nudes there is a firmness of modelling, a suppleness inmovement, that we look for in vain among the Florentines.Fig.20, PlateVI., which shows a dance of the Muses with Venusand Vulcan, is typical. Mantegna was not only a great personality,but he exercised a powerful and wide-reaching influenceupon all the art of north Italy, including that of Venice. Hisperspective studies led him in the same direction as Melozzo daForli, and in some decorative paintings in the Camera degh Sposiat Mantua he pointed out the way that was afterwards to befollowed by Correggio.

Mantegna’s relations with the school of Venice introduce usto the most important and interesting of all the Italian schoolssave that of Florence. Venetian painting occupies a positionby itself that corresponds with the place and history of the citythat gave it birth. The connexions of Venice were not with therest of Italy, but rather with the East and with Germany.Commercially speaking, she was the emporium of trade withboth. Into her markets streamed the wealth of the Orient,and from her markets this was transferred across the Alps tocities like Nuremberg. From Germany had come a certainGothic element into Venetian architecture in the 14th century,and a little later an influence of the same kind began to affectVenetian painting. Up to that time Venice had dependedfor her painters on the East, and had imported ByzantineMadonna pictures, and called in Byzantine mosaic-workersto adorn the walls and roof of her metropolitan church. Thefirst sign of native activity is to be found at Murano, where, ​in the first half of the 15th century, a German, Justus ofAllemagna, worked in partnership with a Muranese family. Alittle later a stranger from another quarter executes importantcommissions in the city of the lagoons. This was an Umbrian,Gentile da Fabriano, who possessed the suavity and tendernessof his school.

The natural tendency of Venetian taste, nourished for centurieson opulent Oriental stuffs, on gold and gems, ran in thedirection of what was soft and pleasing to the sense. Thenorthern Gothic and the Umbrian influences corresponded withthis and flattered the natural tendency of the people. For theproper development of Venetian painting some element ofFlorentine strength and science was absolutely necessary, andthis was imparted to the Venetian school by Mantegna throughthe medium of the Bellini.

The Bellini were a Venetian family of painters, of whom thefather was originally an assistant to Gentile da Fabriano, butlived for a while at Padua, where his daughter Nicolosia becamethe wife of Mantegna. With the two Bellini sons. Gentile andGiovanni, Mantegna became very intimate, and a mutualinfluence was exercised that was greatly to the benefit of all.Mantegna softened a little what has been termed his “iron style,”through the assimilation of some of the suavity and feeling forbeauty and colour that were engrained in the Venetians, whileon the other hand Mantegna imparted some of his own sternnessand his Florentine science to his brothers-in-law, of whomthe younger, Giovanni, was the formative master of the laterVenetian school.

§ 17. The Painting of the Sixteenth Century: the Mastery ofForm.—If we examine a drawing of the human figure by Raphael,Michelangelo, or Correggio, and compare it with the finestexamples of Greek figure design on the vases, we note at oncethat to the ancient artist the form presented itself as a silhouette,and he had to put constraint on himself to realize itsdepth; whereas the moderns, so to say, think in the third dimensionof space and every touch of their pencil presupposes it.The lovely “Aphrodite riding on a Swan,” on the large Greekkylix in the British Museum, is posed in an impossible positionbetween the wing of the creature and its body, where therewould be no space for her to sit. The lines of her figure areexquisite, but she is pure contour, not form. In a Raphaelnude the strokes of the chalk come forward from the back,bringing with them into relief the rounded limb which growsinto plastic fullness before our eyes. Whether the parts recedeor approach, or sway from side to side, the impression on theeye is equally clear and convincing. The lines do not merelylimit a surface but caress the shape and model it by their verydirection and comparative force into relief. In other words,these 16th-century masters for the first time perfectly realizethe aim which was before the eyes of the Greeks; and Raphael,who in grace and truth and composition may have been onlythe peer of Apelles, probably surpassed his great predecessor inthis easy and instinctive rendering of objects in their solidity.

In so far as the work of these masters of the culminatingperiod, in its relation to nature, is of this character it needsno further analysis, and attention should rather be directed tothose elements in Italian design of the 16th-century which havea special interest for the after development of the art.

Not only was form mastered as a matter of drawing, butrelief was indicated by a subtle treatment of light and shade.Foreshortening as a matter of drawing requires to be accompaniedby correct modulation of tone and colour, for as the formin question recedes from the eye, changes of the most delicatekind in the illumination and hue of the parts present themselvesfor record and reproduction. The artist who first achievedmastery in these refinements of chiaroscuro was Leonardo daVinci, while Correggio as a colourist added to Leonardesquemodelling an equally delicate rendering of the modulation oflocal colour in relation to the incidence of light, and the greateror less distance of each part from the eye. This representeda great advance in the rendering of natural truth, and preparedthe way for the masters of the 17th century. It is not only by

linear perspective, or the progressive diminution in size ofobjects as they recede, that the effect of space and distance canbe compassed. This depends more on what artists know as“tone” or “values,” that is, on the gradual degradation of theintensity of light and shadow, and the diminishing saturationof colours, or, as we may express it in a word that is not howeverquite adequate, aerial perspective. That which Leonardo andCorreggio had accomplished in the modelling, lighting andtinting of the single form in space had to be applied by succeedingartists to space as a whole, and this was the work not of the 16thbut of the 17th century, and not of Italians but of the masters ofthe Netherlands and of Spain.

§ 18. The Contribution of Venice.—Before we enter upon thisfourth period of the development of the art, something must besaid of an all-important contribution that painting owes to themasters of Venice.

The reference is not only to Venetian colouring. This waspartly, as we have seen, the result of the temperament andcirc*mstances of the people, and we may ascribe also to thepeculiar position of the city another Venetian characteristic.There is at Venice a sense of openness and space, and the artistsseem anxious on their canvases to convey the same impressionof a large entourage. The landscape background, which wehave already found on early Flemish panels, becomes a featureof the pictures of the Venetians, but these avoid the meticulousdetail of the Flemings and treat their spaces in a broader andsimpler fashion. An indispensable condition however for therich and varied effects of colour shown on Venetian canvases wasthe possession by the painters of an adequate technique. Inthe third part of this article an account is given of the changein technical methods due, not so much to the introduction of theoil medium by the Van Eycks, as to the exploitation at Venice ofthe unsuspected resources which that medium could be madeto afford. Giovanni Bellini, not Hubert van Eyck, is really theprimal painter in oils, because he was the first to manipulateit with freedom, and to play off against each other, the variouseffects of opaque and transparent pigment. His noble pictureat Murano, representing the Doge Barbarigo adoring theMadonna, represents his art at its best (see fig.21, PlateVI.).

Bellini rendered possible the painters of the culminatingperiod of Venetian art, Giorgione, Titian, Tintoretto, with othershardly less great. Giorgione was the first who made the art,as an art of paint not merely of design, speak to the soul. Hismelting outlines and the crisp clean touches that wake the pieceto life; his glowing hues and the pearly neutrals that give themrepose and quality; the intimate appeal of his dreamy faces,his refined but voluptuous forms, and the large freedom of hisspaces of sky and distance, all combine to impress us with asense of the poetry and mystery of creation that we derive fromthe works of no other extant painter. The “Concert” of theLouvre, fig.22, PlateVII. is typically Giorgionesque.

Tintoretto, more intellectually profound, more passionate,writes for us his message in his stormy brush-strokes, nowshaking us with terror, now lifting our souls on the wings of hisimagination; but with him as with the younger master it isalways the painter who speaks, and always in the terms ofcolour and texture and handling. Lastly, between the two,unapproachable in his majestic calm, stands Titian. Combiningthe poetry of Giorgione with much of Tintoretto's depth andpassion, he is the first, and still perhaps the greatest, of thesupreme masters of the painter's art. His masterpiece is thegreat “Presentation” of the Venice Academy, fig.23, PlateVII.Painting, it is true, has to advance in its developmentbeyond the ideals of Titian’s century, but it loses on the ethicalside more than on the technical side it wins, and without theVenetians the world would have never known the full possibilitiesof the art that began so simply and at so early a stage ofhuman civilization.

§ 19. The Fourth Period: the Realization of the Truth of Space.Changed Relation of Painting to Nature.—By the 17th centurythe development of painting had passed through all its stages,and the picture was no longer a mere silhouette or a transcript ​of objects against a flat background, but rather an enchantedmirror of the world, in which might be reflected space beyondspace in infinite recession. With this transformation of thepicture there was connected a complete change in the relationof the artist to nature. Throughout all the earlier epochs ofthe art that painter had concerned himself not with nature asa whole, but with certain selected aspects of nature that furnishedhim with his recognized subjects. These subjects were selectedon account of their intrinsic beauty or importance, and asrepresenting intrinsic worth they claimed to be delineatedin the clearest and most substantial fashion. In the 17thcentury, not only was the world as a whole brought withinthe artist’s view, but it presented itself as worthy in everypart of his most reverent attention. In other words the artof the 17th century, and of the modern epoch in general, isdemocratic, and refuses to acknowledge that diff'erence in artisticvalue among the aspects of nature which was at the basis of theessentially aristocratic art of the Greeks and Italians. It doesnot follow that selection is of any less importance in modernpainting than it was of old; the change is that the basis of selectionis not now a fixed intrinsic gradation amongst objects, butrather a variable difference dependent not on the object itselfbut on certain accidents of its position and lighting. Theartist still demands that nature shall inspire him with herbeauty, but he has learned that this beauty is so widely diffusedthat he may find it anywhere. It was a profound saying ofJohn Constable that there is nothing ugly in nature, for, as heexplained it, let the actual form and character of an object bewhat it would, the angle at which it might be viewed, and theeffect upon it of light and colour, could always make it beautiful.It is when objects and groups of objects have taken on themselvesthis pictorial beauty, which only the artistically trained eyecan discern, that the modern painter finds himself in the presenceof his “subject,” and he knows that this magical play of beautymay appear in the most casual and unlikely places, in meanand squalid corners, and upon the most ordinary objects ofdaily life. Sometimes it will be a heap of litter, sometimes amaiden’s face, that will be touched with this pictorial charm.Things to the common eye most beautiful may be barren of it,while it may touch and glorify a clod.

The artist who was the first to demonstrate convincinglythis principle of modern painting was Rembrandt. WithRembrandt the actual intrinsic character of the object beforehim was of small concern. Beauty was with him a matter ofsurface effect that depended on the combined influence of theactual local colour and superficial modelling of objects, withthe passing condition of their lighting, and the greater orless clearness of the air through which they were seen. Behindthe effect produced in this fortuitous fashion the object in itselfvanished, so to say, from view. It was appearance that wasimportant, not reality. Rembrandt’s art was related essentiallynot to things as they were but as they seemed. The artistsof the 15th century, whose careful delineation of objects givesthem the title of the earliest realists, portrayed these objectsin precise analytical fashion each for itself. More advancedpainters regarded them not only in themselves but in theirartistic relations as combining beauties of form and colour thattogether made up a pictorial effect. Rembrandt in his later workattended to the pictorial effect alone and practically annulledthe objects, by reducing them to pure tone and colour. Thingsare not there at all, but only the semblance or effect or “impression”of things. Breadth is in this way combined with themost delicate variety, and a new form of painting, now called“impressionism,” has come into being.

To give back nature just as she is seen, in a purely pictorialaspect, is the final achievement of the painter’s craft, but as thedifferences of tone and colour on which pictorial beauty dependsare extremely subtle, so it is only by a skill of touch that seemslike the most accomplished sleight of hand that the requiredillusion can be produced, and in this way the actual handlingof the brush assumes in modern painting an importance whichin the old days it never possessed. The effect is produced not bydefinite statements of form and colour, but by what Sir CharlesEastlake termed “the judicious unfinish of a consummateworkman,” through which “the flat surface is transformed intospace.” Frans Hals of Haarlem, who was born in 1580, wasperhaps the first to reveal the artistic possibilities of a freesuggestive handling in oil paint, and Van Dyck is said to havemarvelled how Hals was able to sketch in a portrait “withsingle strokes of the brush, each in the right place, withoutaltering them and without fusing them together.” In thewonderful late Velazquez at Vienna, the portrait of the InfantPhilipp Prosper as a child of two years old, the white drapery,the minute fingers, the delicate baby face from which look outgreat eyes of darkest blue, are all indicated with touches soloosely thrown upon the canvas that seen near by they are allconfusion—yet the life and truth are in them, and at the properfocal distance nature herself is before us. The touches combineto give the forms, the local colours, the depth, the solidity ofnature, while at the same time the chief impression they conveyis that of the opalescent play of changing tones and hues which,eluding the limitations of definite contours, make up to thepainter’s eye the chief beauty of the external world. Moreoverit will be understood that this realization of the truth of space,which is the distinguishing quality of modern painting, doesnot mean that the artist is always to be rendering large views ofsky and plain. The gift of setting objects in space, so that theatmosphere plays about them, and their relations of tone to theirsurroundings are absolutely correct and convincing, is shownjust as well in a group of things close at hand as in a wide landscape.The backgrounds in the pictures by Velazquez of “TheSurrender of Breda” and “Don Balthazar Carlos” at Madridare magnificent in their limitless suggestion of the free spacesof earth and sky, but the artist’s power in this respect is just aseffectively shown in the creation of space in the interiors of“The Maids of Honour” and the “Spinners,” and the skill withwhich he brings away the hand of the sitter from his white robe,in the “InnocentX.” of the Doria Palace at Rome. The factis that the scale on which the modern painter works, and thenature of his subjects, make no difference in the essential characterof the result. A very few square feet of canvas weresufficient for Ruysdael to convey in his “Haarlem from theDunes” the most sublime impression of infinity; and a Dutchinterior by De Hooch gives us just as much feeling of air anddistance as one of the vast panoramic landscapes of De Koningkor Rubens.

§ 20. Impressionism.—The term “impressionism,” much heardin artistic discussions of to-day, is said to date from a certainexhibition in Paris in 1871, in the catalogue of which the wordwas often used; a picture being called Impression de mon pot-à-feu,or Impression d’un chat qui se promène, &c. Aninfluential critic summed up these impressions, and dubbedthe exhibition “Salon des Impressionistes” (Muther, ModernPainting, 1896, ii. 718). It is a mistake however to supposethat the style of painting denoted by this term is an inventionof the day, for, in so far as it is practised seriously and withadequate artistic powers, it is essentially the same style as thatof some of the greatest 17th-century masters, such as Rembrandtand Velazquez. Modern investigation into the reasons of thingshas provided the system with a scientific basis and justification,and we can see that it really corresponds with the experimentallydetermined facts of human vision. The act of “seeing” maymean one or two different things. We may (1)allow our glanceto travel leisurely over the field of vision, viewing the objects oneby one, and forming a clear picture to ourselves of each in turn;or (2)we may try to take in the whole field of vision at a glance,ignoring the special objects and trying to frame before ourselvesa sort of summary representation of the whole; or again, (3)wemay choose a single point in the field of vision, and focus onthat our attention, allowing the surrounding objects to groupthemselves in an indistinct general mass. We can look at naturein any one of these three ways; each is as legitimate as the others;but since in most ordinary cases we look at things in order togain information about them, our vision is usually of the first or ​analytical kind, in which we fix the objects successively, notingeach by each their individual characteristics. As the objectof painting is to reproduce what is seen as we see it, so in themajority of cases painting corresponds to this, our usual way,of viewing nature. That is to say, all painters of the earlyschools, and the majority of painters at all times, represent naturein a way that answers to this analytical vision. The treatmentof groups of objects in the mass, though, as we have seen,occasionally essayed even In ancient times (see §§8, 9), does notbecome the painter’s ideal till the 17th century. We find then,and we find here and there through all the later periods of theart, efforts on the part of the artist to reproduce the effect ofvision of the other two kinds, to show how objects look whenregarded all together and not one by one, or how they look whenwe focus our attention on one of them but notice at the sametime how all the others that are in the field of vision group themselvesround in a penumbra, in which they are seen and yet notseen. The special developments of impressionistic art in recenttimes in France and England are dealt with in the article onImpressionism (see also the appendix to this article on RecentSchools of Painting), but it is mentioned here as a style of paintingthat is the logical outcome of the evolution of the art whichhas been traced from the earliest times to the 17th century. Forthe particular pictorial beauty, on which the modern paintertrains his eye, is largely a beauty of relation, and depends onthe mutual effect on each other of the elements in a group.Unless these are looked at in the mass their pictorial quality willbe entirely missed. This word on impressionism, as correspondingto certain ways of looking at nature, is accordingly anecessary adjunct to the critique of modern painting sincethe 17thcentury.

§ 21. Painting in the Modern Schools.—The history of the arthas been presented here as an evolution, the ultimate outcomeof which was the impressionist painting of 17th-centurymasters such as Rembrandt and Velazquez. In this form ofpainting the artist is only concerned with those aspects of naturewhich give him the sense of pictorial beauty in tone and colour,and these aspects he reproduces on his canvas, not as a meremirror would, but touched, pervaded, transfigured by his ownartistic personality. It does not follow however that theseparticular ideals of the art have inspired modern painters as abody. No one who visits the picture exhibitions of the day, oreven our galleries of older art, will fail to note that a good dealof modern painting since the 17th century has been academicand conventional, or prosaically natural, or merely popular inits appeal. With work of this kind we are not concerned, andaccordingly, in the table (VIII.) which follows in Part II. of thearticle, the names with few exceptions are those of artistswho embody the maturer pictorial aims that have been underdiscussion.

Of the schools of the 17th century that of Spain, owingmuch to the so-called Italian “naturalists,” produced theincomparable Velazquez with one or two notable contemporaries,and later on in the 18th century the interesting figureof Goya; while the influence of Velazquez on Whistler and otherpainters of to-day is a more important fact connected with theschool than the recent appearance in it of brilliant technicalexecutants such as Fortuny.

The schools of Flanders and of France are closely connected,and both owe much to Italian influence. The land of Italy,rather than any works of Italian painters, has been the inspirationof the so-called classical landscapists, among whom theLorrainer Claude and the French Poussin take the rank ofcaptains of a goodly band of followers. In figure painting theVenetians inspire Rubens, and Raphael stands at the headof the academic draughtsmen and composers of “historical”pieces who have been especially numerous in France. Rubensand Raphael together formed LeBrun in the days of LouisXIV.,David and Delaroche in the two succeeding centuries, and themodern decorative figure painters, such as Baudry, whose worksadorn the public buildings of France. Flemish influence is alsostrong in the French painting in a gallant vein of the 18th centuryfrom the serious and beautiful art of Watteau (fig.24, PlateVIII.)to the slighter productions of a Fragonard. VanDyck, anotherFleming of genius, is largely responsible for the British portraitureof the 18th century, which is affiliated to him through Knellerand SirPeter Lely. There is something of the courtly eleganceof VanDyck in the beautiful Gainsborough at Edinburghrepresenting the Hon. Mrs Graham (fig.25, PlateVIII.). On thewhole, though the representative masters of these two schoolsare original, or at any rate personal, in technique, they are intheir attitude towards nature largely dependent on the traditionsestablished in the great Italian schools of figure-painting of the16th century. The contrast when we turn from France andFlanders to Holland is extraordinary. This country producedat the close of the 16th century and in the first half of the 17tha body of painters who owed no direct debt at all to Italy, and,so far as appears, would have been what they were had Titian andRaphael and Michelangelo never existed. They took advantage,it is true, of the mastery over nature and over the materialapparatus of painting which had been won for the world bythe Italians of the 15th and 16th centuries, but there theirdebt to the peninsula ended, and in their outlook upon naturethey were entirely original.

The Dutch school is indeed an epitome of the art in its modernphase, and all that has been said of this applies with specialforce to the painting of Holland. Democratic in choice ofsubject, subtle in observation of tone and atmosphere, refined incolour, free and yet precise in execution, sensitive to every charmof texture and handling, the Dutch painter of the first half ofthe 17th century represents the most varied and the mostfinished accomplishment in paint that any school can show.Such work as he perfected could not fail to exercise a powerfuleffect on later art, and accordingly we find a current of influenceflowing from Holland through the whole course of modernpainting, side by side with the more copious tide that had itsfountain-head in Italy. Hogarth and Chardin and Morlandin the 18th century, the Norwich painters and Constable in the19th, with the French Barbizon landscapists who look to thelast as their head, all owe an incalculable debt to the sincereand simple but masterly art of the countrymen of Rembrandt.

§ 22. The Different Kinds of Painting represented in the ModernSchools.—The fact that the Dutch painters have left us masterpiecesin so many different walks of painting, makes it convenientthat we should add here some brief notes on characteristicmodern phases of the art on which they stamped the impressof their genius. The normal subject for the artist, as we haveseen, up to the 17th century, was the figure-subject, generallyin some connexion with religion. The Egyptian portrayed themen and women of his time, but the pictures, through theirconnexion with the sepulchre, had a quasi-religious significance.The Assyrian chronicled the acts of semi-divine kings. Greekartists, whether sculptors or painters, were in the majority ofcases occupied with the doings of gods and heroes. Christianart, up to the 16th century, was almost exclusively devoted toreligious themes. In all this art, as well as in the more secularfigure-painting of the modern schools, the personages represented,with their doings and surroundings, were of intrinsic importance,and the portrayal of them was in a measure an act of serviceand of honour. Portraiture is differentiated from this kind ofsubject-picture through stages which it would be interestingto trace, but the portrait, though secular, is always treated insuch a way as to exalt or dignify the sitter. Another kind offigure-piece, also differentiated by degrees from the subject pictureof the loftier kind, is the so-called Genre Painting, inwhich the human actors and their goings-on are in themselvesindifferent, trivial, or mean and even repellent; and in which,accordingly, intrinsic interest of subject has disappeared to bereplaced by an artistic interest of a different kind. Landscape,in modern times so important a branch of painting, is also anoutcome of the traditional figure-piece, for at first it is nothing buta background to a scene in which human figures are prominent.Marine Painting is a branch of landscape art differentiated fromthis, but supplied at first in the same way with figure-interest. ​The origin of Animal Painting is to be sought partly infigure-pieces, where, as in Egypt and Assyria, animals playa part in scenes of human life, and partly in landscapes, inwhich cattle, &c., are introduced to enliven the foreground. TheHunting Picture, combining a treatment of figures and animalsin action with landscape of a picturesque character, gives anartist like Rubens a welcome opportunity, and the picture ofDead Game may be regarded as its offshoot. This brings us tothe important class of Still-Life Painting, the relation of whichto the figure-piece can be traced through the genre picture andthe portrait. As a natural scene in the background, so on thenearer planes, a judiciously chosen group of accessory objectsadds life and interest to the representation of a personage orscene from human life. Later on these objects, when regardedwith the eyes of an artist fully opened to the beauty of theworld, become in themselves fit for artistic, aye, even ideal,treatment; and a Vollon will by the magic of his art make theinterior of a huge and polished copper caldron look as grand as ifit were the very vault of heaven itself.

§ 23. Portraiture. — Attention has already been called in § 7to the skill of the Egyptian artist in marking differences ofspecies and race in animals and men. In the case of personagesof special distinction, notably kings, individual lineamentswere portrayed with the same freshness, the same accent oftruth. There is less of this power among the artists of Assyria.The naturalism of Cretan and Mycenaean art is so striking thatwe should expect to find portraiture represented among itsremains, and this term may be fairly applied to the gold masksthat covered the faces of bodies in the tombs opened by DrSchliemann. In early (historical) Greek art some archaic vasesshow representations of named personages of the day, such asKing Arkesilas of Cyrene, that may fall under the same heading,and portraiture was no doubt attempted in the early paintedtombstones. The ideal character of Greek art however keptportraiture in the background tiU the later period after Alexanderthe Great, whose effigy limned by Apelles was one of themost famous pictures in antiquity. Our collections of worksof classical art have been recently enriched by a series of actualpainted portraits of men and women of the late classical period,executed on mummy cases in Egypt, and discovered in Graeco-Egyptiancemeteries. An attempt has been made by comparisonwith coins to identify some of the personages represented withmembers of the Ptolemaic house, including the famous Cleopatra,but it is safer to regard them, with Flinders Petrie, as portraitsof ordinary men and vvomen of the earhest centuries a.d. Technicallythey are of the highest interest, as will be noticed in § 42.From the artistic point of view one notes their variety, their lifelikecharacter, and the pleasing impression of the human personalitywhich some of them afford. There are specimens in theLondon National Gallery and British Museum.

During the early Christian and early m.edieval periods portraitsalways existed. The effigies of rulers appeared, forexample, on their coins, and there are some creditableattempts at portraiture on Anglo-Saxon pieces of money. Inpainting we find the most continuous series in the illuminatedMSS. where they occur in the so-called dedicatory pictures,in MSS. intended for royal or distinguished persons, wherethe patron is shown seated in state and perhaps receiving thevolume. The object here, as Woltmann says, " always appearsto be to give a true portrait of the exalted personage himself "{Hist, of Paintiiig, Eng. trans., i. 212). Julia Anicia, granddaughterof Valentinus III., in the 6th century; the Carolingianemperor, Lothair, in the 9th; the Byzantine emperors, Basil II.in the 10th, and Nikephoros Botaniates in the nth, &c.,appear in this fashion. Some famous mosaic pictures inS. Vitale, Ravenna, contain effigies of Justinian, Theodora, andthe Ravennese bishop, Maximian. In very many medievalworks of art a small portrait of the donor or the artist makes itsappearance as an accessory.

With the rise of schools of painting in the 14th and isthcenturies, especially in the north, the portrait begins to assumegreater prominence. The living personage of the day not only

figures as donor, but takes his place in the picture itself as oneof the actors in the sacred or historical scene which is portrayed.A good deal of misplaced ingenuity has been expended in olderand more modern days in identifying by guess-work historicalfigures in old pictures, but there is no doubt that such were oftenintroduced. Dante and some of his famous contemporariesmake their appearance in a fresco ascribed to Giotto in the chapelof the Bargello at Florence. One is wilUng to see the face andform of the great Masaccio in the St Thomas with the red cloak,on the right of the group, in the fresco of the Tribute Monty(see § 15). Dürer certainly paints himself as one of the Magi inhis picture in the Uffizi. In Italy Ghirlandajo (see § 15) carriedto an extreme this fashion, and thereby unduly secularized hisbibhcal representations. The portrait proper, as an independentartistic creation, comes into vogue in the course of the 15thcentury both north and south of the Alps, and Jan van Eyck,!Iemlinc, and Dürer are in this department in advance of theFlorentines, for whereas the latter almost confine themselvesto flat profiles. Van Eyck introduces the three-quarter face view,which represents an improvement in the rendering of form.Mantegna and Antonello da Messina portray with great firmness,and to Uccello is ascribed an interesting series of heads of hiscontemporaries. It is Gentile and Giovanni Bellini howeverwho may be regarded as the fathers of modern portrait painting.Venetian art was always more secular in spirit than that of therest of Italy, and Venetian portraits were abundant. Those byGentile Bellini of the Sultan Mahomet II., and by Giovanniof the Doge Loredano are specially famous. Vasari in hisnotice of the Bellini says that the Venetian palaces were full offamily portraits going back sometimes to the fourth generation.Some of the finest portraits in the world are the work of thegreat Venetians of the i6th century, for they combine pictorialquality with an air of easy greatness which later painters findit hard to impart to their creations. Though greatly damaged,Titian's equestrian portrait of Charles V. at Madrid (fig. 26,Plate VIII.) is one of the very finest of existing works of the kind.It is somewhat remarkable that of the other Italian painterswho executed portraits the most successful was the idealistRaphael, whose papal portraits of Julius II. and Leo X. aremasterpieces of firm and accurate delineation. Leonardo's" Monna Lisa " is a study rather than a portrait proper.

The realistic vein, which, as we have seen, runs throughnorthern painting, explains to some extent the extraordinarymerit in portraiture of Holbein, who represents the culminationof the efforts in this direction of masters Like Jan van Eyckand Durer. Holbein is one of the greatest delineators that everlived, and in many of his portraits he not only presents hissitter in life-like fashion, but he surrounds him with accessoryobjects, painted in an analytical spirit, but with a truthfulnessthat has seldom been equalled. The portrait of Georg Gysis atBerlin represents this s'de of Holbein's art at its best (fig. 27,Plate VIII.) . Some fine portraits by Italianizing Flemings such asAntonio Moro (see Table I.) bring us to the notable masters inportraiture of the 17th century. All the schools of the periodwere great in this phase of the art, but it flourished more especiallyin Holland, where political events had developed in thepeople self-reliance and a strong sense of individuality. As aconsequence the Dutch men and women of the period from about1575 to 1675 were incessantly having their portraits painted,either singly or in groups. The so-called " corporation picture "was a feature of the times. This had for its subject some groupof individuals associated as members of a company or board ormilitary mess. Such works are almost incredibly numerousin Holland, and their artistic evolution is interesting to trace.The earlier ones of the i6th century are merely collections ofsingle portraits each treated for itself, the link of connexionbetween the various members of the group being quite arbitrary.Later on efforts, that were ultimately successful, were made togroup the portraits into a single composition so that the picturebecame an artistic whole. Frans Hals of Haarlem, one of themost brilliant painters of the impressionist school that he didmuch to found, achieved remarkable success in the artistic ​grouping of a number of portraits, so that each should have thedesired prominence while yet the effect of the whole was thatof a unity. His masterpieces in this department in the townhallat Haarlem have never been equalled.

As portraitists the other great 17th-century masters fall intotwo sets, Rembrandt and Velazquez contrasting with Rubensand his pupil Van Dyck. The portraits of the two former areindividualized studies in which the sitter has been envisaged inan artistic aspect, retaining his personality though sublimatedto a harmonious display of tone and colour. The Flemings aremore conventional, and representing rather the type than theindividual, are disposed to sacrifice the individuality of the sitterto their predetermined scheme of beauty. Both Velazquez andRubens have left portraits of Isabel de Bourbon, first wife ofPhilip IV. of Spain, but whereas the Spaniard's version gives usan uncomely face but one full of character, that of the Flemingshows us merely the big-eyed buxom wench we are accustomedto meet on all his canvases. Rembrandt was much less carefulthan Velazquez or Holbein or Hals to preserve the individualityof the sitter. He did not however, like the Flemings, conventionalizeto a type, but worked each piece into an artistic study oftone, colour and texture, in the course of which he might dealsomewhat cavalierly with the actual facts of the piece of naturebefore him. The result, though incomparable in its artisticstrength, may sometimes, in comparison with a Velazquez, seemlaboured, but there is one Rembrandt portrait, that of Jan Sixat Amsterdam, that is painted as directly as a Hals, and withthe subtUty of a Velazquez, while it possesses a richness ofpictorial quality in which Rembrandt surpasses all his ancientor modern compeers (see fig. 28, Plate IX.).

In the i8th century, though France produced some goodlimners and Spain Goya, yet on the whole England was thehome of the best portraiture. Van Dyck had been in theservice of Charles I., and foreign representatives of his stylecarried on afterwards the tradition of his essentially courtlyart, but there existed at the same time a line of native Britishportraitists of whom the latest and best was Hogarth. Onespecial form of portraiture, the miniature iq-v.), has beencharacteristically English throughout. The greater Englishand Scottish portraitists of the latter part of the i8th century,headed by Reynolds, owed much to V'an Dyck, and their workwas of a pronounced pictorial character. Every portrait,that is to say, was before everything beautiful as a work of art.Detail, either of features or dress, was not insisted on; and theeffort was rather to generalize than to accentuate characteristicpoints. In a word, while the artist recognized the claims of thefacts before him to adequate portrayal, he endeavoured to fuseall the elements of the piece into one lovely artistic unity, and inso doing he secured in his work the predominant quality ofbreadth. This style, handed on to painters of less power, diedout in the first half of the 19th century in attenuated productions,in which harmony became emptiness. To this has succeededin Britain, still the home of the best European portraiture,a more modern style, the dominant notes of which have beentruth and force. While the older school was seen at its bestwhen dealing with the softer forms of the female sex and ofyouth, these moderns excelled in the delineation of characterin strongly-marked male heads, and some of them could hardlysucceed wth a woman's portrait. The fine appreciation ofcharacter in portraiture shown by Sir John Watson Gordonabout the middle of the 19th century marked the beginning ofthis forcible style of the later Victorian period, a style suitedto an age of keen intellectual activity, of science and of matterof-fact.More recently still, with the rapid development incertain circles of a taste for the life of fashion and pleasure,the portrait of the showily-dressed lady has come again intovogue, and if any special influence is here to be discerned itmay be traced to Paris.

§ 24. Genre Painting. The term " genre " is elliptical — itstands for genre has, and means the " low style, " or the stylein which there is no grandeur of subject or scale. A genrepiece is a picture of a scene of ordinary human life without

any religious or historical significance, and though it makesits appearance earher, it was in the Netherland schools of thefirst half of the 17th century that it was established as a canonicalform of the art. In Egypt we have seen that the subjects fromhuman life have almost always a quasi-religious character,and the earliest examples of genre may be certain designs onearly black-figured vases of the 6th century B.C. in Greece.Genre painting proper was introduced at a later period in Greece,and attracted special attention because of its contrast to thegeneral spirit of classical art. It had a special name aboutwhich there is some difficulty but which seems to denote thesame as genre has. In early Christian and early medieval paintinggenre can hardly be recognized, but it makes its appearance insome of the later illuminated MSS. and becomes more common,especially north of the Alps, in the 15th century. It reallybegins in the treatment in a secular spirit of scenes from thesacred story. These scenes, in Italy, but still more among theprosaic artists of the north, were made more life-like and interestingwhen they were furnished with personages and accessoriesdrawn from the present world. Real people of the day were aswe have just seen introduced as actors in the scriptural events,and in the same way all the objects and accessories in thepicture were portrayed from existing models. It was easysometimes for the spectator to forget that he was looking atbiblical characters and at saints and to take the scene fromthe standpoint of actuality. Rembrandt, one of whose chieftitles to fame is derived from his religious pictures, often treatsa Holy Family as if it were a mere domestic group of his ownday. It was a change sure to come when the religious significancewas abandoned, and the persons and objects reducedto the terms of ordinary life. This of course represented abreak with a very long established tradition, and it was onlyby degrees, and in Germany and Flanders rather than in Italy,that the change was brought about. Thus for example, StEloi, the patron of goldsmiths, might be portrayed as saint,but also as artificer with the impedimenta of the craft abouthim. The next stage, represented by a charming picture byQuintin Matsys at Paris, shows us a goldsmith, no longer asaint, but busy with the same picturesque accessories (fig. 29,Plate IX.). He has however his wife by his side and she is readinga missal which preserves to the piece a faint religious odour.Afterwards all religious suggestion is dropped, and we have thefamiliar goldsmith or money changer in his everyday surroundings,of which northern painting has furnished us with so manyexamples.

Genre painting, however, is something a little more specialthan is here implied. The term must not be made to coverall figure-pieces from ordinary life. There are pictures bythe late Italian " naturalists " of this kind; Caravaggio's" Card Players " at Dresden is a famUiar example. Theseare too large in scale to come under this heading, and the sameapplies to the bodcgones or pictures of kitchens and shopsfull of pots and pans and eatables, which, largely influencedby the Italian pictures just noticed, were common in Spain inthe early days of Velazquez. Nor again are the large and showysubject pictures, which constitute the popular items in thecatalogues of Burlington House and the Salon, to be classedas " genre." The genre picture, as represented by its acknowledgedmasters, is small in scale, as suits the nature of itssubject, but is studied in every part and finished with the mostfastidious care. The particular incident or phase of life portrayedis as a rule of little intrinsic importance, and only servesto bring figures together with some variety of pose and expressionand to motive their surroundings. It is rarely that the mastersof genre charge their pictures with satiric or didactic purpose.Jan Steen in Holland and Hogarth in England are the exceptionsthat prove the rule. The interest is in the main anartistic one, and depends on the nice observance of relations oftone and colour, and a free and yet at the same time precisetouch. All these qualities combine to lend to the typical genrepicture an intimite, a sympathetic charm, that gives the masters

of the style a firm hold on our affections. Probably the most ​

Photo, Bruckmann.

Fig. 28, — JAN SIX, REMBRANDT. Six Collection.Amsterdam.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 30.—A SINGING PARTY, BROUWER. (16 × 21.) Munich.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 31.— HAARLEM, FROM THE DUNES, RUYSDAEL.(20 × 24.) Hague.

By permission of Braun, Clement & Co.Dornach (Alsace) and Paris.

Fig. 29.— LE BANQUIER ET SA FEMME, QUINTINMATSYS. (2812 × 27.) Louvre.

Photo, Hanfstaengl.

Fig. 32.—CROSSING THE BROOK, TURNER. (76 × 65.)

National Gallery, London. ​

By permission of Braun, Clement & Co., Dornach (Alsace) and Paris.

Fig. 33.—STILL LIFE, CHARDIN. (74×50.) Louvre.

Photo, Anderson.

Fig. 36.—THE THREE GRACES, BOTTICELLI.Florence.

Photo, Anderson.

Fig. 34.— FIGURE OF ADAM, MICHELANGELO. Rome. ​excellent painters of genre are Terborch, Metsu and Brouwer,the two first painters of the life of the upper classes, the last ofpeasant existence in some of its most unlovely aspects. Thepictures of Brouwer are among the most instructive documentsof modern painting. They are all small pictures and nearlyall exhibit nothing but two or three boors drinking, fighting,or otherwise characteristically employed, but the artist's feelingfor colour and tone, and above all his inimitable touch, hasraised each to the rank of a masterpiece. He is best representedin the Munich Pinacotek, from which has been selected fig. 30,Plate IX. Hardly less admirable are Tenicrs in Flanders; DeHooch, Ver Meer of Delft, Jan Steen, A. van Ostade, in Holland,while in more modern times Hogarth, Chardin, Sir David Wilkie,Meissonier, and a host of others carry the tradition of the workdown to our own day (see Table VIII.). Greuze may have thedoubtful honour of having invented the sentimental figure piecefrom ordinary life that delights the non-artistic spectatorin our modern exhibitions.

§ 25. Landscape and Marine Painting. This is one of themost important and interesting of the forms of painting thatbelong especially to modern times. It is true that there issufficient landscape in ancient art to furnish matter for a substantialbook (Woermann, Die Landschaft in der Kunsi der altcnVdlker, Munich, 1876), and the extant remains of Pompeian andRoman wall-painting contain a very fair proportion of worksthat may be brought under this heading. By far the mostimportant examples are the half-dozen or so of pictures forminga series of illustrations of the Odyssey, that were found on theEsquihne at Rome in 1848, and are now in the Vatican hbrary.As we shall see it to be the case with the landscapes of the latemedieval period, these have all figure subjects on the nearerplanes to which the landscape proper forms a background,but the latter is far more important than the figures. Insome of these Odyssey landscapes there is a feeling after spaceand atmospheric effect, and in a few cases an almost moderntreatment of light and shade, which give the works a prominentplace among ancient productions which seem to prefigure thelater developments of the art. In the rendering of landscapedetail, especially in the matter of trees, nothing in antique artequals the pictures of a garden painted on the four walls of aroom in the villa of Livia at Prima Porta near Rome. Theyare reproduced in Antike Denkmdler (Berlin, 1887, &c.). Thesemay be the actual work of a painter of the Augustan age namedLudius or Studius, who is praised by Phny {Hist. Nat. xxxv.116) for having introduced a style of wall decoration in which" villas, harbours, landscape, gardens, sacred groves, woods,hills, fish-ponds, straits, streams and shores, any scene in shortthat took his fancy " were depicted in lively and facile fashion.Pompeian wall paintings exhibit many pieces of the kind, andwe find the same style illustrated in the low rehefs in modelledstucco, of which the specimens found near the Villa Farnesina,and now in the Terme Museum at Rome, are the best known.

In medieval painting landscape was practically reduced toa few typical objects, buildings, rocks, trees, clouds, &c., whichstood for natural scenery. OccasionaUy however in the MSS.these objects are grouped in pictorial fashion, as in a ByzantinePsalter of the 10th century in the National Library at Paris.The beginning of the 15th century may be reckoned as the timewhen the modern development of landscape art had its origin,and Masaccio here, as in other walks of painting, takes thelead. Throughout the century the landscape background,always in strict subordination to the figure interest, is a commonfeature of Flemish and Italian pictures, but, in the latterespecially, the forms of natural objects are very conventional,and the impression produced on the city-loving Tuscan orPaduan of the time by mountain scenery is shown by the factthat rocks are commonly shown not only as perpendicular butoverhanging. Titian is the first painter who, as mountain-bred,depicts the soaring peaks with real knowledge and affection(see the distance in fig. 22, Plate VII.), and the Venetians arethe first to paint landscape with some breadth and sense ofspaciousness, while, as we have seen, the Flemings, from Hubert

van Eyck downwards, distinguish themselves by their minuterendering of details, in which they were followed later on byDürer, who was fond of landscape, and by Altdorfer. OfDurer indeed it has been said that some of his landscape sketchesin water-colour are the first examples in which a natural sceneis painted for its own sake alone. Some of the northern artistsof the " Italianizing " school of the i6th century, such asPatinir, whom Dürer, about 1520, calls "Joachim the goodlandscape painter, " Paul Bril later in the century, and AdamElsheimer, who worked at Rome about 1600, with several oftheir contemporaries, must not be omitted in any sketch ofthe history of the art. South of the Alps, the late ItalianSalvator Rosa treats the wilder aspects of nature with someimaginative power, and his work, as well as the scenery of hisnative land, had an influence in the rapid development of landscapeart in the 17th century, which was in part worked outin the peninsula. What is known as " classical landscape "was perfected in the 17th century, and its most notable masterswere the Lorrainer Claude Gelee and the French Poussin andDughet, while the Italianizing Dutch painters Both and Berchemmodify the style in accordance with the greater naturalism oftheir countrymen.

The landscapes of Claude are characteristic productions ofthe 17th century, because they convey as their primaryimpression that of space and atmosphere. The compositions, inwhich a few motives such as rounded masses of foliage areconstantly repeated, are conventional; and there is little effortafter naturalism or variety in detail; but the pictures are fullof art, and reproduce in telling fashion some of the larger andgrander aspects of the material creation. There are generallyfigures in the foreground, and these are often taken fromclassical fables or from scripture, but instead of the landscape,as in older Italian art, being a background to the figures, theselast come in merely to enliven and give interest to the scenery.The style, in spite of a certain conventionality which offendssome modern writers on art, has lived on, and was representedin our own country by Richard Wilson, the contemporaryof Reynolds; and in some of his work, notably in the LiberStudiorum, by Turner. Even Corot, though so individual apainter, owes something to the tradition of classical landscape.

The prevailing tendency of modern landscape art, especiallyin more recent times, has been in the direction of naturalism.Here the masters of the Dutch school have produced thecanonical works that exercise a perennial influence, and theywere preceded by certain northern masters such as the elderBreughel, whose " Autumn " at Vienna has true poetry;Savary, Roghman, and Hercules Seghers. Several of the Dutchmasters, even before the time of Rembrandt, excelled in thetruthful rendering of the scenes and objects of their ownsimple but eminently pain table country; but it was Rembrandt,with his pupil de Koningk and his rival in this departmentJacob Ruysdael, who were the first to show how a perfectlynatural and unconventional rendering of a stretch of countryunder a broad expanse of sky might be raised by poetry andideal feeling to the rank of one of the world's masterpieces ofpainting. Great as was Rembrandt in what Bode has called" the landscape of feeling, " the " Haarlem from the Dunes "of Ruysdael (fig. 31, Plate IX.) with some others of this artist'sacknowledged successes, surpass even his achievement.

Nearer our own time Constable caught the spirit of the bestDutch landscapists, and in robust naturalism, controlled byart and elevated to the ideal region by greatness of spirit, hebecame a worthy successor of the masters just named, whileon the other side he furnished inspiration to the French paintersof the so-called Barbizon school, and through them to many ofthe present-day painters in Holland and in Scotland.

To fix the place of J. M. W. Turner in landscape art is noteasy, for the range of his powers was so vast that he coveredthe whole field of nature and united in his own person theclassical and naturalistic schools. The special merits of eachof these phases of the art are united in this artist's " Crossing;the Brook " in the National Gallery, that is probably the most ​perfect landscape in the world (fig. 32, Plate IX.). In a gooddeal of Turner’s later work there was a certain theatrical strain,and at times even a garishness in colour, while his intenseidealism led him to strive after effects beyond the reach of humanart. We may however put out of view everything in Turner’sœuvre to which reasonable exception may on these grounds betaken, and there will still remain a body of work which forextent, variety, truth and artistic taste is like the British fleetamong the navies of the world.

Among Turner’s chief titles to honour is the fact that heportrayed the sea in all its moods with a knowledge andsympathy that give him a place alone among painters ofmarine. Marine painting began among the Greeks, who werefond of the sea, and the “Odyssey” and other classical landscapesare stronger on this side than the landscapes of theTuscans or Umbrians, who cared as little for the ocean as forthe mountains. The Venetians did less for the sea in theirpaintings than might have been expected, and in northernart not much was accomplished till the latter part of the 16thcentury, when the long line of the marine painters of Hollandis opened by Hendrick Cornelius Vroom, who found a worthytheme for his art in the defeat of the Spanish Armada. Simonde Vlieger of Rotterdam, who was born about the beginning ofthe 17th century, was the master of W. Vandevelde the younger(1633–1707), who has never been equalled for his truthful representationof calm seas and shipping. He painted innumerablepictures of the sea-fights of the time between the English andthe Dutch, those representing the victories of the Dutch beingin Holland, while at Hampton Court the English are triumphant.There are exquisite artistic qualities in the painting of Vandevelde,who is reckoned the canonical master in this branch ofart; but the few sea-pieces by Ruysdael, especially the “Dykes”of the Louvre, and the “Stormy Sea” at Berhn, exhibit theelement under far more imaginative aspects. Besides Turnerthere are many British artists of modern days who have wonfame in this branch of art that is naturally attractive toislanders.

§ 26. Animal Painting.—In all early schools of representativeart from the time of the cave-dwellers downwards, the artisthas done better with animals than with the human figure,and there is no epoch of the art at which the portrayal ofanimals has not flourished. (On Egyptian and Assyrian animalssee §7.) In Greece the representations of animals on coinsare so varied and so excellent that we may be sure that thepraise given to the pictures of the same creatures by contemporaryartists is not overdrawn. In northern art animals havealways played an important part, and the motives of medievaldecoration are largely drawn from this source, while beastsymbolism brings them into vogue in connexion with religiousthemes. In Italian and early Flemish and German art animalsare as a rule only accessories, though some artists in all theseschools take special delight in them; and when, early in the 17thcentury, they begin to take the chief place, the motive is oftenfound in Paradise, where Adam and Eve lord it over the animalcreation. If De Vlieger and Ruysdael are the first to show thesea in agitation, Rubens may have the same credit for revealingthe passion and power of the animal nature in the violentactions of the combat or the chase. In this his contemporaryFrans Snyders (1579–1657), and after Snyders Jan Fyt,specialized, and the first named is generally placed at the headof animal painters proper.

In Holland, in the 17th century, the animal nature presenteditself under the more contemplative aspect of the ruminants inthe lush water-meadows. True to their principle of doing everythingthey attempt in the best possible way, the Dutch painthorses (Cuyp, Wouwerman) and cattle (Cuyp, Adrian Vandevelde,Paul Potter) with canonical perfection, while Hondekoeterdelineates live co*cks and hens, and Weenix dead hares andmoor-fowl, in a way that makes us feel that the last word onsuch themes has been spoken. There is a large white turkey byHondekoeter in which the truth of mass and of texture in thefull soft plumage is combined with a dehcacy in the detail of

the airy filaments, that is the despair of the most accomplishedmodern executant.

But animals have been treated more nobly than when shownin Flemish agitation or in Dutch phlegmatic calm. Leonardoda Vinci was specially famed for his horses, which he may havetreated with something of the majesty of Pheidias. Durer hasa magnificent horse in the “Knight and Death,” but this isstudied from the Colleoni monument. Nearer our own timethe painter of Napoleonic France, Gericault, gave a fine reading,of the equine nature. Rembrandt’s drawings of hons arenotable features in his work, and in our own day in France andEngland the lion and other great beasts have been treated withtrue imaginative power.

§ 27. Still-Life Painting.—Like portraiture and landscape,the painting of objects on near planes, or as it is called still-lifepainting, is gradually differentiated from the figure-piece whichwas supreme in the early, and has been the staple product in all,the schools. Just as is the case with the other subsidiarybranches of painting, it appears, though only as a by-product,in the history of ancient classical painting, passes practicallyout of existence in medieval times, begins to come to a knowledgeof itself in the 15th and i6th centuries, and attains canonicityin the Dutch school of the first half of the 17th century. Stilllifemay be called the characteristic form of painting of themodern world, because the intrinsic worth of the objectsrepresented is a matter of complete indifference when comparedwith their artistic treatment in tone, colour and texture. Byvirtue of this treatment it has been noted (§§ 19, 20) that a studyot a group of ordinary objects, when seen and depicted by aRembrandt, may have all the essential qualities of the highestmanifestations of the art. There is no finer Rembrandt forpictorial quality than the picture in the Louvre representingthe carcase of a flayed ox in a flesher’s booth. As illustratingthe principle of modern painting this form of the graphic arthas a value and importance which in itself it could hardlyclaim. It is needless to repeat in this connexion what hasbeen said on modern painting in general, and it will sufficehere to indicate briefly the history of this particular phase ofthe art.

The way was prepared for it as has been noticed by theminute and forcible rendering of accessory objects in the figure piecesand portraits of the early Flemish masters, of Dürer, andabove all of Holbein. The painting of flower and fruit pieceswithout figure interest by Jan Breughel the younger, who wasborn in 1601, represents a stage onward, and contemporarywith him were several other Dutch and Flemish speciahsts inthis department, among whom Jan David de Heem, born 1603,and the rather older WiUem Klaasz Heda may be mentioned.Their subjects sometimes took the form of a luncheon tablewith vessels, plate, fruit and other eatables; at other times ofgroups of costly vessels of gold, silver and glass, or of articles usedin art or science, such as musical instruments and the like; andit is especially to be noted that the handling stops alwaysshort of any illusive reproduction of the actual textures ofthe objects, while at the same time the differing surfaces ofstuffs and metal and glass, of smooth-rinded apples and gnarledlemons, are all most justly rendered. In some of these pieceswe realize the beauty of what Sir Charles Eastlake has calledthe “combination of solidity of execution with vivacity andgrace of handling, the elasticity of surface which depends onthe due balance of sharpness and softness, the vigorous touchand the delicate marking—all subservient to the truth of modelling.”In this form of painting the French 18th-century artistChardin, whose impasto was fuller, whose colouring more juicythan those of the Dutch, has achieved imperishable fame (seefig.33, PlateX.); and the modern French, who understandbetter than others the technical business of painting, havecarried on the fine tradition which has culminated in the workof Vollon. The Germans have also painted still-life to goodresult, but the comparative weakness in technique of Britishpainters has kept them in this department rather in the background.

​Part II., § 28. — Sch(X)ls of Painting

In the following Tables are included the main facts in the history of Painting since about a . d. iooo, with the artists of the first, second andthird ranlc in their schools and periods. The relative importance of the artists is shown by the size of the capitals in which theirnames are printed. Facts and names of minor importance have in the interest of clearness been'excluded. The names are given ascommonly used, and where they differ from the headings of the separate biographical articles identification can be made by the Index.Words indicating localities are in italics.)

A table should appear at this position in the text. See Help:Table for formatting instructions.

1200

1150

10

woo

I.

MEDIEVAL PAINTING & ITS OFFSHOOTS NORTH OF THE ALPS.

From the Caroiingian period till the Xlltti century Germany is the chief European centre uf artistic production. From about 1150 to1300 France takes the leati. Italy is in the background till about 1250.J

} Romanesque Wall and Panel Painting, Reichenau, Brauweiler, Brunswick, Hildesheim, Soesl, &c.r Romanesque Sculpture, Hildesheim, Brunswick, Wechselburg, Freiberg i. S., &c.

(THE GOTHIC MOVEMENT IN CENTRAL FRANCE FROM 1150. 1

} Gothic decorative Sculpture, Stained Glass, Ivories, MS. Illuminations, &c. l to

I Qualities in the work: — Refinement, Tenderness of Feeling, Love of Nature, j 1300

ITALY.

(For Comijarison.)

5. A n^elo in Formis,Willi paintings of c. 1100.

Byzantine panels imported.

Proto-Renaissance,

c. 12001300.

GOTHIC INFLUENCE ON NORTHERN PAINTING.Wall and Panel Paintings at Ramersdorf, Cologne, Westminster, &c.THE EARLIEST NORTHERN SCHOOLS.

GERMANY. FLANDERS.

Early Religious Schools (Gothic).

Prague, from c. 1348. HOLLAND.

Cologne. MEISTER WILHELM, fl. c. 1360. HUBERT & J.N

Gothic characteristics inGIOTTO,1267-1337.

EYCK. n. c. 1380-1440.

HERMANN WYNRICH, fl. c. 1400.STEPHANLOCHNER (Dombild, c. 1440)

German Realism begins.

MARTIN SCHONGAUER {Colmar), c. 145014SS. Influenced by Van der Wcyden.

EARTH. ZEITBLOM (Ulm), C. 145O-C. 152O.HANS HOLBEIN THE ELDER (Augsburg), d. 1524

doration of the Lamb, Ghent. 1432.ROGER VAN DER WEYDEN, :39g-1464 {in Italy.1449).

DIERICK BOCTS (.Ilaarlem), 1400(?)-1475. (Perhaps author of the" Lieversberg Passion. )PETRUS CRISTUS, c. I4IO-1472.

HANS MEMLINC, c. 1430-1494.HUGO VAN DER GOES, c. 1435-1482.r.ERARD DAVID (Oudewater), c. 1450-1523.

MASACCIO, 1402-1429.Age of humanism begins.

ALBRECHT DURER

{Nuremberg'), 1471-152S.LUCAS CRANACH, i4-2-i5S3HANSBURGKMAIR, 1473-153IM.THIAS GRUNEWALD, c. i47S-c. 1530-BARTH.BRUYN, c. 1493-I:. 1555-. Painter ofPortraits.

HANS HOLBEIN, 1497-1543. England

his headquarters, 1526-1543.

ADAM ELSHEIMER, 1578-1620. Influential at

Rome c. 1600.

LUCAS VAN LEYDEN{Leiden). 1494-1533JAN SCHOREEL, 1495-1562

{.ilkmaar).MARTEN VAN HEEMSKERK

{Rdarlem), 149S-1574.

QUINTIN M.TSVS {Antwerp), c. 1466-1530.JOACHIM DE PATINIR, d. c. 1524. ^ Landscape

BREUGHEL THE ELDER, C. 1525-1570. V and

The BREUGHEL Family.) Genre.

MABUSE IJAN GOSSART), C.1472-C.1533

FRANS FLORIS(DE VRIE.NDT) c. 1520- [• Figures

1570.

NTONIO MORO, c. isi2-c. 1575. Portraits.PAUL ERIL, 1554-1626. Landscape.

RAPHAEL, d. IS20.The High Renaissance.

TITIAN, d.is-6.

TINTORETTO,

1518-1594-

German painting proper almost dies outin the XVIIth and early XVIIIthcenturies.

For the Dutch School ofthe XVIIth century,see Table VII.

PETER PAUL RUBENS, b. 1577.For the Flemish School as headed byRubens, see Table VIII.

For later Italian Painting,see Table VI.

1200

II.

THE PROTO-RENAISSANCE AND THE REVIVAL OF ART IN 7r.4Z, r.

CONDmON OF THE ART OF P.AINTING IN ITALY BEFORE THE REVIVAL.

Wall Paintings of poor style, with hard black outlines, devoid of any feeling for beauty or truth to nature.

Panel Paintings, chiefly in the form of Enthroned Madonnas of Byzantine type, heavy but dignified;and painted Crucifixes, repulsive in

aspect, with exaggeration of physical suffering, black outlines, green shadows, hatched lights.

Best Italian Sculpture, e.g. by .tellanii at Farma, c. 1 200, greatly inferior to contemporary work in France. J

1250

REVIVAL FIRST SEEN IN SCtTLPTURE.NICCOL. PIS.^NO inspired by the Proto-Renaissance of Southern Italy; his pulpit at Pisa, 1260.

REVIVAL OF PAINTING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE PROTO-RENAISS.NCE.

At ROME, piETRO CAVALLINI "Last Judgment" at S. Cecilia, Rome, c. 1293; at SIENA. DUCCIO DI BUONINSEGNA, c. 12SS-C.1315,(probably) Ruccellai Madonna at Florence, and Madonna at Siena; at FLORENCE, CIMABUE, teacher of Giotto. ​III.

GOTHIC INFLUENCE ON THE ITALIAN REVIVAL.

A table should appear at this position in the text. See Help:Table for formatting instructions.

Gothic Naturalism, Expressiveness, and Feeling in the Sculpture of Giovanni Pisano and Andrea Pisano.]

FLORE>:CE.

GIOTTO. 1 267-1337, great in composition and in natural and dramatic treatmentof sacred themes.

Painting carried on on traditional lines by the Giottcsques to theend of the century. At Florence painters' company founded 1349.

TADDEO GADDI, STEFANO, MASO DI BANCO, BERNARDO DADDI,

ANDREA ORCAGNA, agnolo caddi, spinello aretino,

GIOVANNI da UlLANO, ANDREA DI FIRZNZE, STARNINA, &C.

SIENA.

SIMONE M.RTINI, c. 1 283-1344. exhibits the pensive sweetness that marksSienese painting. At Siena painters' company founded 1355.Sienese school preserves throughout its tender and devout feeling,and decorative charm.

LIPPO MESOn, BARTOLO DI FREDI. ANDREA VANNI.

TADDEO BARTOLi influences art in Umbria.

THE LORENZETTI, d. c. 1348. Painters of dramatic power.

CONTEMPORARY PAINTING /.V OTBER PARTS OF ITALY.

Revival hardly begins in XlVth century. Best work done by allegretto di nuzio of Fabriano and altichiero of Verona.FRA ANGELICO DA FIESOLE, 13S7-14SS, sums up the purely religious art of the Gothic period.

IV.

IT.ALIAN SCHOOLS OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE RENAISSANCE.

Painting advances at Florence, declines at Siena. Other Italian schools begin to developFLORENCE. SIENA. UMBRIA. NORTH ITALY.

MASOLINO DA PANICALE. 1383-^- 144°

Teacher of

MASACCIO, 1402-1420. Great as Giotto, withadded knowledge and unique sense of themonumental in painting.

FiLippo LIPPI, 1406-1469. Idyllic charm.SA.NDRO BOTTICELLI. 1444-1510-. Sentimentand beauty. Treats classical subjects.

FlLlPPINO LIPPI, 1460-1505. Grace, classical

details.BENOzzo GozzoLi, 1424-1498. Copious in detail.

COSIUO ROSSELLI, PIERO DI COSIUO.

PAOLO UCCELLO, ^^^. devotee of Perspective"

AND. DEL CASTAGNO, c. 13QO-14S7. Vigour.DOM. VENEZiANO. c. 1400-(?} 1461, ttics oil-paint?

ALESSIO BAUDOVINEITI, 1427-149O, realist.

ANT. POLLAIUOLO i5i2. Anatomy, nude, oil.

149»

ANDREA DEL VERROCCHIO, 1435-1488.

Great in sculpture. Teacher of Leonardo.DOM. DEL GHIRLANDAJO, 1449-1494Master of monumental style in fresco.

a =

2~

FRA BARTOLOMMEO,

AND. DEL SARTO,

14S7

147'; 'I1517' 1.

Perfection of art on theformal side.

SIENA.

TADDEO BARTOLI

1363-142^-DOM. DI BARTOLO

SANO DI PIETRO

MAT. DI GIOVANNI

FRAN. DI GIORGIO,&C.. &C.

carry art throughthe century on thesame lines as inthe XlVth cent.

Decline ofSienese Art.

All these fore-runners of the greatmasters.

UMBRIA.

GENTILE DA FABRIANO,

c. 1370-C. 1450. VisitsVenice and Florence.

NICCOLO ALLTNNO.

BENEDETTO BONFIGLI.

FIORENZO DI LORENZO.

B. CAPORALI,

&C., &C.

Exhibit Umbrian suavity onSienese lines. No progressPIERO DE' FRANCESCHIc. 1416-1492, teacher of

MELOZZO da FORLI, Hi^1494and of

LUCA SIGNORELLI. i^^1524Realists of Florentine type.Progressive.

GIOVANNI SANZIO. d. 1494.

Father of Raphael.

PIETRO PERUGINO.

1446-1524. Raphael's master

VERONA.

VITTORE PISANO, d. 1456.

Finest Italian medalist.

PADUA,Native art begins with the

school of FRANCESCOSQUARCIONE, 1394-1474.

Classical remains studied.

DONATELLO tc UCCELLO

Work at PADUA, c. 1445]From all these proceeds

AND. MANTEGNA,

14311506

Studies Tuscan Art andinfluences Venetian.

VICENZA.montagna, 1475-1523.

FERRARA.

cosiMO tura, d. c. 1496.

LORENZO COSTA, 1460-1535BOLOGyA.

FRANC. FRANCIA,

1450-1517-

VENICE.

{ GENTILE da FABRIANO

Works at Venice^ c. 1422.]

School of MURANO,

influenced from Germany,

and

THE vrvARiNi flourish,

c. 1440-c. 1500.

CARLO CRIVELLI,

d, C, 1493.

ANTONELLO da MESSINA,

c. 1430-1479In Venice, 1475-6.

Oil painting introduced,

c. 1473-

CniA DA CONEGUANO,

d. c, 1508.

VmORE CARPACaO,

d. c. 1522.

THE BELLINI,

Associated with MantegnaJACOPO d. c. 1470.

GENTILE, ^^J^^,1507

GIOVAN^^, Eii4|o

1516

THE GREAT ITALIAN MASTERS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.

FLORENCE.

LEONARDO DA VINCI, ffffAt Milan 1482-1499. " Last Supper" finishedc. 1497.

MICHELANGELO BLONARROTI

1475-1564-

Sistine Chapel ceiling painted 1508-1512." Last Judgment, " c. 1540.Dome of St. Peter's, c. 1560.

SEBASTIANO DEL PIOUBO, I4S5-1547.

GIORGIO VASARI, 1511-1574.

Wrote lives of the artists.

The Michelangelesque affects Italian

design in general.

UMBRIA.

PERUGINO, SANZIO.

NORTH ITALY.

VILAS.

BERNARDINO LUINI,

c. 1465

c. 1540

R.FFAEL SANZIO,

1483-1520.

Umbrian period to 1504.

Florentine period, 1 504-1508.

Roman period, ,1508-1520.

GIOVANNI DA UDINE.

Age of the mannerist's.

GIULIO ROMANO, 1492-1546.

PERINO DEL VAGA.

&C., &C.

Followers of Rapliael.

Influenced by Leonardo,

PAR.MA,

CORREGGICt^PARMIGIANO, 1504-1540.

BRE.KIA.MORETTO, C. 1498-1554.

BEROAiaO.MORONI, C. 1510-1578.

VENICE.GIOVANNI BELLINI.

GIORGIONE, ^j^

LORENZO LOTTO, C. 1480-C. I5S6.

PALMA VECCHIO, c. 1480-1528.TITIAN,

died 1576, born 1476 (?) or some years later (?).

First dated work, 1507.Tribute Money, " c. 1508 (Dürerat Venice, 1506)Peter Martyr, " 1530, influenced by Michelangelo."Presentation in Temple, " 1540.

PAUL VERONESE, 1S2S-15SS.TINTORETTO. 15:8-1594."Paradise" begun, 1588.

155Q ​

A table should appear at this position in the text. See Help:Table for formatting instructions.

VI.THE LATER PHASES OF ITALIAN PAINTING.

Eclectics. BOLOGNA SCHOOL.THE CAR.^CCI, ^7-^, LUDOvico, agostino, annibale.

Naturalists.

CARAVAGGIO, 1560-1609.

VENICE (amiinued).

PARIS BORDONE, SCHIAVONE,

THE BASSANI.THK DOXIFAZI, &C.. &C.,

all die before the end of XVIth century.

PADOVANINO, 1500-1650.

GUIDO REM, 1575-1642; DOMENICHINO, IsSl-1641.EARBIERI (GUERCINO), lS9l-1666; SASSOFERRATO, 1605-1685.

RlBERA (Spani.ird), 15S8-1653. Strong lighl

and shade.SALVATOK ROSA, 1615-1673. Landscape.

G. B. TIEPOLO, 1692-1769. Docomtive styleCANALETTO, 1697-1768, Views of Venire.LONGHl, 1702-1762; CUARDl, 17x2-1793,

VII.

1700

THE DUTCH SCHOOL OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.

Artists of native type. Italianizers.

Portraitists and Painters of Corporation Pictures. g. honthorst, 1590-1656.

MIEREVELT, 1567-1641; RAVESTEYN, C. 1572-1657; DE KEYSER, 1596-1667. PIETER LAST.MAN, 1583-1633.

—REMBRANDT, 1606FRANS HALS,

1 60b

1069; VAN DER HELST, 1613-1670.

GERARD DOU, JAN VICTOR, GERBRANDT VAN DEN EECKHOUT, CAREL FABRITItJS, AART DE GELDER, f'ERD. IIOL, COVERT FUNCK, ^, "

(Poetic.)

fP. DE KONINGK.

DE HOOCH; VER MEER OF DELFT.

(Rustic.)A. VAN OSTADE.

1650.

(Aristocratic.)G. TEKBORCH.G. METSU.

(Satiric.)JAN STEEN.

I, VAN OSTADE.

(Cavalier.)P. WOUVVERMAN.(-DE heem; heda, (Slill life.)ejij M, DE hondekoeter. (Poultry.)S j1 JAN WEENIX. (Dead game.)

IjAN VAN tlUVSUM. (Flowers.)

o oj (Early landscapists, born before 1600.)?

3 ■S'l ESAJAS VAN DE VELDE, J. VAN GOYEN.)

? "! AERT VAN DER NFER. (Night Scenes, moonlight.)

rUYSDAEL, hoebema, wvnants.

(Cattle and Landscape.)A. CUYP; A. van de velde; PAUL POTTER,

(Marine painters,)SIMON DE vlieger; W. V.N DE VELDE;

L. EACKHUYSEN.

(Architecture.)

JAN VAN DER HEYDEN.

JAN BOTHNICOLAES BERCHEM

K. DU JARDIN.

ll

(Painters of the Decline.)

VAN MIERIS, C. NETSCHER,ADRIAN VAN DER WERFF.

HOLLAND.

1580, H.LS, 1666.

VIII.CONSPECTUS OF THE MODERN SCHOOLS SINCE 1600.

ITALY.

FLA NDERS.

RUBENS, '-jp-1640

The Venetians.

Naturalists,

Landscapists.

The Florentines.

RAPHAEL.Figure Painters,

SPAIN.

REMBRANDT, '-^1609

Dutch School ofPortrait, Landscape, Genre,

See TABLE 'II above.

VAN DYCK, ip.

1 64 1

TENIERS,SNYDERS;BROUVVER,

POUSSIN, 1^24.I i66s

CLAUDE, i^.

I 1652DUGHET, 1613-1675,(CASPAR POUSSIN).

FR.INCE.

r-"

Age of

LOUIS XIV.

LE BRUN,

1 619-1690.

VELAZQUEZ,

1599-1060,

1617, MURILLO, 1682,

GERMAN '.I

CHODOWIECKI, 1726-1801.

RAPHAEL MENGS,

726-180

Js Hi?

17S4, CORNELIUS, 1867,1789, OVERBECK, 1869,1805, KAULBACH, 1874,

fRETHEL, 1816-1859

Rom-anticists! EOCKLIN,

BRITAIN.

HOGARTH, iS22, knellf.r1764

Hli REYNOLDS, G.INSUOROUGH, i2I21792 I I 1788

ROMNEY, RAEBURN.

1785, WILKIE, 1S4I.

i(..S4, WATTEAU, 1721.

BOUCHER.I'.TER, FRAGONARD.

CHARDIN,

1699-1779.

GREUZE. 1725-1805.

-I

1746

Norwich School. 1714, wilson, 1782,

1770, CONST.BLE, 1S37. TURNER. mSI 1S51

Water Colour School.

Pre-Raphaelites.

W.ATTS.

I CORUT,

1796

|'S7S

I 1

Modern Dutch, maris, &c.; Glasgow School.

3l4, MILLET, 1875,1

Barbizon School.

DIAZ. I

MONTICELLI, I

I I

174S, DAID, 182^,I

INGRES,I

DELAROCHE,

LAURENS, &C.

17981863

DEL.CROIxl^„°^"

r

Sentimental Genre. Impressionists. WHISl'LER.

XX. 16 ​

Part III. — The Technique of Painting

§ 29. The Materials of Painting. — Painting begins, as wehave seen, on the one side in outline delineation, on the otherin the spreading of a coating of colour on a surface. For boththese the material apparatus is ready at hand. Drawing mayhave begun merely with lines in the air, but lasting designswere soon produced either by indenting or marking any softsubstance by a hard point, or by rubbing away a comparativelysoft substance, such as a pointed piece of burnt wood, on arough surface of harder grain. Almost all the materials in usefor drawing are of primitive origin. Charcoal, coloured earthsand soft stones are natural or easily procured. Our plumbago wasknown to Pliny (xxxiv. iS) and to Cennino (ch. 34), but it wasnot in common use till modern times. The black-lead pencilis first described as a novelty in 1565 (QueUenschriften editionof Cennino, p. 143). A metal point of ordinary lead or tinwas used in medieval MSS. for drawing lines on parchment,or on a wooden surface previously whitened with chalk (Theophilus,II. ch. xvii.). Silver-point drawing is only a refinementon this. The metal point is dragged over a surface of wood orparchment that has been grounded with finely powdered bonedust,or, as in modern times, with a wash of Chinese white(Cennino, ch. 6 seq.; Church, 292), and through the actualabrasion of the metal leaves a dark line in its track. Plinyknows the technique (xxxiii. 98). When a coloured fluid wasat hand a pointed stick might be used to draw lines with it,but a primitive pen would soon be made from a split reed orthe wing-feather of a bird.

The coating of one substance by another of which the colouris regarded from the aesthetic standpoint is the second sourceof the art of painting. To manipulate the coating substanceso that it will lie evenly; to spread it by suitable mechanicalmeans; and to secure its continued adherence when duly laid,are by no means difficult. Nature provides coloured juicesof vegetable or of animal origin, and it has been suggested thatthe blood of the slain quarry or foeman smeared by the victorover his person was the first pigment. To imitate these bymixing powdered earths or other tinted substances in water is avery simple process. Certain reeds, the fibres of which spreadout in water, were used as paint-brushes in ancient Egypt.A natural hare's-foot is still employed in theatrical circles tolay on a certain kind of pigment, and no great ingenuity wouldbe required on the part of the hunter for the manufacture ofa brush from the hair or bristles of the slain beast. In thematter of securing the adhesion of the coating thus spread,nature would again be the guide. Many animal and vegetableproducts are sticky and ultimately dry hard, while heat ormoisture thins them to convenient fluidity. Great heat makesmineral substances liquid that harden when cold. Hencebinding materials offer themselves in considerable abundance,and they are of so great importance in the painter's art thatthey form the basis of current classifications of the differentkinds of painting.

§ 30. The Surfaces covered by the Painter. — Many importantquestions connected with the technique of painting depend onthe nature of surfaces; for the covering coat — though from thepresent point of view only of interest aesthetically — may, aswe have seen, originally serve a utilitarian purpose. Thesurface in question may be classed as follows: the humanbody; implements, vessels, weapons, articles of dress; objectsof furniture, including books; boats and ships; walls and otherparts of buildings; panels and other surfaces prepared especiallyor entirely to be painted on.

The differences among these from the present point of vieware obvious. The body could not suitably be covered with asubstance impervious to air and moisture; the coatings of aclay vessel and of a boat should on the other hand make themwaterproof. The materials used in building often requireprotection from the weather. The painting on the preparedpanel needs to resist time and any special influence due tolocation or climate. All such considerations are prior to thequestions of colour, design, or aesthetic effect generally, in these

coatings; and on them depend the binding materials, or media,with which the colouring substances are apphed. The case ofone particular surface much employed for pictorial displayis exceptional. This is the wall-plaster so abundantly usedfor clothing an unsightly, rough, or perishable building material,Uke rubble or crude brick. This function it performs perfectlywhen left of its natural white or greyish hue, but its plainunbroken surface has seemed to demand some relief throughcolouring or a pattern, and the recognition of this led to oneof the most important branches of the art, mural painting.Now lime-plaster, if painted on while it is still wet, retainsupon its surface after it has dried the pigments used, althoughthese have not been mixed with any binding material. On allother surfaces the pigments are mixed with some bindingmaterial, and on the character of this the kind of painting depends.There is thus a primary distinction between the process justreferred to and all others. In the former, pigments, mixedonly with water, are laid on while the plaster is wet, and fromthis " freshness " of the ground the process is called by an Itahanterm, painting " a fresco " or " on the fresh, " though in ordinaryparlance the word " fresco " has come to be used as a noun, aswhen we speak of the " frescoes " of Giotto. Furthermore,as " fresco " is the wall-painter's process par excellence the wordis unfortunately often employed inaccurately for any muralpicture, though this may have been executed by quite a differentprocess. In contradistinction to painting " a fresco " all otherprocesses are properly described by the Italian term " a tempera," meaning " with a mixture." The word is used as anoun in the sense of a substance mixed with another; but itis to be regarded as the imperative of the verb temper are,which both in Latin and Italian means " to divide or proportionduly, " " to qualify by mixing, " and generally " to regulate."Tempera means strictly " mix, " just as " recipe, " also employedas a substantive, is an imperative meaning " take." In ordinaryparlance, however, the word tempera is confined to a certainclass of binding materials to the exclusion of others, so that themore general term " media " is the best to employ in the presentconnexion. We go on, therefore, to consider these variousmedia in relation to dift'erent surfaces and conditions.

§ 31. Binding Materials or Media. — The, fundamental distinctionamong media is their solubility or non-solubility inwater, though, as will be seen presently, some possess boththese qualities. The non-soluble media are (i) of mineral, (2)of vegetable origin, (i) Of the former kind are all vitreouspastes or pottery glazes, with which imperishable colouredsurfaces or designs are produced on glazed tiles used in thedecoration of buildings, on ceramic products, and in all processesof enamelling. Silicate of potash, employed to fix pigments onto mural surfaces of plaster in the so-called " stereo chrome "or " water-glass " processes of wall painting (see § 37), isanother mineral medium, so too is paraffin wax. In theprocess called (unscientificaUy) " fresco secco, " in which thepainting is on dry plaster, Hme is used as a binding materialfor the colours. Its action here is a chemical one (see § 36).(2) Non-soluble vegetable media are drying oils, resins, waxes(including paraffin wax, which is really mineral). In ancienttimes wax, and to some small extent also resins, were used asa protection against moisture, as in shipbuilding and some formsof wall-painting. Resins have always remained, but waxgradually went out of use in the earlier Christian centuries,and was replaced by the new medium, not used in classicaltimes, of drying oil. In northern lands the desire to protectpainted surfaces from the moisture of the air led to a moreextensive use of oils and resins than in Italy; and it was in theNetherlands that in the 15th century oil media were for thefirst time adopted in the regular practice of painting, whichthey have dominated ever since.

The soluble media are of animal and vegetable origin. Egg,yolk or white, or both combined, is the chief of the former.Next in importance are size, gained by boiling down shreds ofparchment, and fish glue. Egg is the chief medium in whatis specially known as " tempera " painting, while for the painting ​commonly called distemper or " gouache, " of which scene paintingis typical, size is used. Milk, ox-gall, casein and othersubstances are also employed. Of soluble vegetable mediathe most used are gums of various kinds. These are common" temperas " or tempera media, and, with glycerin or honey,form the usual binding material in what is called " watercolour" painting. Wine, vinegar, the milk of fig-shoots, &c.,also occur in old recipes.

Attention must be drawn to the fact that substances can beprepared for use in painting that unite soluble and insolublemedia, but can be diluted with water. These substances areknown as " emulsions." A wax emulsion, which is also called" saponified wax, " can be made by boiling wax in a solutionof potash [in the proportions 100 bleached wax, 10 potash,250 distilled water (Berger, Bcitrage. i. 100)] till the wax ismelted. When the solution has cooled it can be diluted withcold water. An admixture of oil is also possible. This, accordingto Berger, is what Pliny and Vitruvius (vii. 9, 3) call " Punicwax, " a material of importance in ancient painting.

An oil emulsion can be made by mixing drying oil with waterthrough the intermediary of gum or yolk of egg. An intimatemechanical compound, not a chemical one, is thus effected,and the mixture can be diluted with water. If gum arablebe used the result is a " lean " emulsion of a milky-white colour,if yolk of egg a " fat " emulsion of a yellowish tint. Whenthese wax or oil emulsions are dry they have the waterproofcharacter of their non-soluble constituents.

Lastly, it must be noticed that certain substances used inthe graphic arts — some of which possess in themselves a certainunctuousness — can be, as it were, rubbed into a suitably roughened,and at the same time yielding, ground, to which they willadhere, though loosely, without binding material. This is the casewith charcoal, chalks and pencil. The same property is impartedby a little gum or starch to soft coloured chalks, with whichis executed the kind of work called " pastel." These are nowalso made up with an oleaginous medium and are known as " oilpastels." Pictures can be carried out in ordinary or in oilpastels, and the work should rank as a kind of painting. Thecoloured films, rubbed off from the sticks of soft chalk on asuitably rough and sometimes tinted paper, are artistic intheir texture and capable of producing very beautiful effects ofcolour. Professor Church notes also that the colours laid onin this fashion seem peculiarly durable (Chemistry, p. 293).

§ 32. The Processes of Painting: Preliminary Note. — Thesewill be discussed from the point of view of the media employed,but certain departures from strict logical arrangement will beconvenient. Thus, different processes of monumental paintingon walls may be brought together though distinct media areemployed. Tempera and early oil practice cannot be separated.

Painting by the use of vitreous glazes fused by heat may benoticed first, as the process comes within the scope of the article,though it has generally been applied in a purely decorativespirit, so as to be a branch of the art of ornament rather thanstrictly speaking of painting (see § 2).

In painting processes proper fresco takes the lead. It isin its theory the simplest of all, and at the same time it hasproduced some of the most splendid results recorded in the annalsof the art. With the fresco process may be grouped for thesake of convenience other methods of wall-painting, which sharewith it at any rate some of its characteristics.

One of these subsidiary methods of wall-painting is that knownas the wax process or " en caustic, " used in ancient times andrevived in our own. Painting in wax, not specially on walls,was an important technique among the ancient Greeks, and theconsideration of it introduces some difficult archaeologicalquestions, at which space will not allow more than a glance.The wax used in the process, softened or melted by heat or drivenby fire into the painting ground — whence the name " en caustic "ox " burning in " — is really a tempera or binding material,and we are brought here to the important subject of temperapainting in general. It will have to be noticed in this connexionwhat were the chief binding materials used in the so-named

technique in different lands at the various stages of the art, andwhat conditions were imposed on the artist by the nature ofhis materials. Lastly, there is the all-important process in whichthe binding materials are oils and varnishes, a process to whichattaches so much historical and artistic interest, while a formof tempera painting that has been specially developed in moderntimes, that known as water-colour, may claim a concludingword.

§ a. Historical Use of the Various Processes of Painting.-Theextent and nature of the employment of these processesat different periods may have here a brief notice.

Tempera painting has had a far longer history and moreextended use than any other. The Spaniard Pacheco, thefather-in-law and teacher of Velazquez, remarks on the venerationdue to tempera because it had its birthday with art itself,and was the process in which the famous ancient artists accomplishedsuch marvels. In the matter of antiquity, paintingwith vitreous glazes is its only rival: glazed tiles formed, infact, the chief polychrome decoration for the exteriors of thepalaces of Mesopotamia, and were used also in Egypt; but allthe wall-paintings in ancient Egypt and Babylonia and MycenaeanGreece, all the mummy cases and papyrus rolls inthe first-named country are executed in tempera, and thesame is true of the wall-paintings in Italian tombs. In GreeceProper paintings on terra-cotta fixed by fire were very commonin the period before the Persian wars. When monumentalwall-painting came to the front just after that event it wasalmost certainly in tempera rather than in fresco that Polygnotusand his companions executed their masterpieces. It has beendoubted whether these artists painted directly on plaster oron wooden panels fixed to the wall, but the discovery in Greeceof genuine mural paintings of the Mycenaean period has setthese doubts at rest. In Italy tomb-paintings actually onplaster exist from the 6th century B.C. The earlier panelpainters of the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. also used temperaprocesses, though their exact media are not recorded. Aboutthe time of Ale.xander there seems to have been felt a demandfor a style of painting in which could be obtained greater depthand brilliancy of colouring, with corresponding force in relief,than was possible in the traditional tempera; and this led topainting in a wax medium with which abundance of " body "could be secured. There are many puzzling questions connectedwith this ancient en caustic, but the discovery in recentyears of actual specimens of the work, in the form of portraitson the late Egyptian mummy cases of the first centuries a.d.have assisted the study. Meanwhile a new technique to havebeen in process of evolution for use on walls, for the fresco process,in a complete or modified form, was certainly in use among theRomans.

The history of the fresco process, as will presently be seen,is somewhat puzzling. Vitruvius and Pliny knew it, and it ismentioned in the Mount Athos Handbook, vihAch incorporatesthe technical traditions of the art of the Eastern Empire; itappears also to have been in use in the Christian catacombs,but was not practised by the wall painters who adorned theearly medieval churches south and north of the Alps. Thedifficulties of the process, and another reason to be noticeddirectly, may have led to its partial disuse in the West, but wefind it again coming into vogue in Italy in the 13th and14th centuries. In the early Christian centuries its placewas taken in the monumental decoration of walls by marbleinlays, and especially by glass mosaic, which is in itself animportant form of wall-painting and may have put paintingon plaster, and with it the fresco process, into the shade; noticewill however presently be taken of a theory that seeks to establisha close technical connexion between mosaic work and the frescopainting, which, on the decline in the later medieval period ofmosaic, came forward again into prominence.

The tempera processes were accordingly in vogue in earlymedieval times for wall-paintings (except to some extentin the East), for portable panels, and on parchment forthe decoration and illustration of manuscripts. Meanwhile the ​use of drying oils as painting media was coming to be known,and both on plaster and on wood these were to some extentemployed through the later medieval period, though withoutseriously challenging the supremacy of tempera. From thebeginning of the 15th century, however, oil painting rose rapidlyin estimation, and from the end of that century to our owntime it has practically dominated the art. Wall-painting infresco continued to be practised till the last part of the i8thcentury, and has been revived and supplemented by variousother monumental processes in the 19th, but even for muralwork the oO medium has proved itself a convenient substitute.Water-colour painting in its present form is essentially an artof the last hundred years. The old tempera processes have beenpartly revived in our own time for picture-painting, but thechief modern use of tempera is in scene-painting, where it ismore commonly called " distemper."

§ 34. Paintuig with Coloured Vitreous Pastes. — There is nosingle work that deals with the whole subject of this materialand its different uses in transparent or opaque form in the arts,but details will be found in the special articles where theseuses are described. (See Ceramics; Mosaic; Enamel; Glass,STAINED.) On the subject of the substances and processesemployed in the colouring of the various vitreous pastes informationwill be found in H. H. Cunynghame's Art Enamelling onMetals (2nd ed., London, 1906, ch. vi.), but the subject is a largeand highly technical one.

Coloured vitreous pastes are among the most valuable materialsat the command of the decorative artists, and are employedin numerous techniques, as for example for the glazes of ceramicproducts including wall or iloor tiles; for painted glass windows;for glass mosaic, and for all kinds of work in enamels. Thevitreous paste is tinged in the mass with various metallic oxides,one of the finest colours being a ruby red obtained from gold.Silver gives yellow, copper a blue green, cobalt blue, chromiumgreen, nickel brown, manganese violet, and so on. Tin in anyform has the curious property of making the vitreous pasteopaque. It should be understood that though the vitreoussubstance and the metalHc o.xides are essentially the same inall these processes, yet the preparation of the coloured pasteshas to be speciaUy conditioned in accordance with the particulartechnique in view. There are generally various ways of producingreds and blues and greens, &c., from oxides of differentmetals. The material is generally lustrous, and it admits ofa great variety in colours, some of which are highly saturatedand beautiful. It is on the lustre and colour of the substance,rather than on the pictorial designs that can be produced byits aid, that its artistic value depends; but though this imphesthat it comes under the heading " Ornament " rather than" Painting, " yet in certain forms and at particular periods ithas been the chief medium for the production of pictorial results,and must accordingly have here a brief notice.

The difference between opaque and transparent colouredglass is the basis of a division among the arts that employ thematerial. If it be kept transparent the finest possible effectis obtained in the stained-glass window, where the colours areseen by transmitted light. The stained-glass window cameinto general use in the early Gothic period, and was a substitutefor the wall-paintings which had been common in the Romanesquechurches of the nth and 12th centuries. Hence it is aform, and a very sumptuous and beautiful form, of the art ofmural painting, representing that art in the later medievalbuildings north of the Alps. In Italy, where the practice ofwall-painting continued without a break from early medievalto Renaissance times, the stained-glass window was not a nationalform of art.

The most effective use of opaque coloured vitreous pastes isin ceramics (pottery) and in glass mosaic. The terra-cottaplaque, or tile-painted with designs in glazes of the kind was,as we have seen (§ 7), one of the chief forms of exterior muraldecoration in ancient Mesopotamia. The best existing exampleswere found not long ago on the site of the ancient Susa ( Shushanthe palace " of Scripture) and are now in the Louvre. Human

figures, animals, and ornaments, are represented not only inlively colours but also in relief; that is to say, each separateglaze brick had its surface, measuring about 12 in. by 9 in.,modelled as well as painted for the exact place it had to occupyin the design. On these bricks there are formed small ridgesin relief intended to keep the different liquid glazes apart beforethey were fixed by vitrifaction in the kiln. Chemical analysishas shown that the yellow colour is an antimoniat of lead, thewhite is oxide of tin, similar to the well-known opaque whiteglaze used by the Delia Robbia in Italy, the blues and greens areprobably oxides of copper, the red a sub-oxide of copper (Semper,Der Stil, i. 332). This same region of the world has remainedthrough all time a great centre for the production of colouredglazed tiles, but the use of " Persian, " " Moresque, " and otherdecorated plaques has been more ornamental than pictorial.

Glazed pottery only comes occasionally within the surveyof the historian of painting. It does so in ancient Greece,because the earlier stages of the development of Greek paintingcan only be followed in this material; it does so, too, in a sense,in Italian faience and in some Oriental products, but these hardlyfall within our view. The Greek vase was covered with a blackglaze of extreme thinness and hardness, the composition ofwhich is not known. Figure designs were painted in this onthe natural clay of the vessel (see fig. 3, Plate IV.), or it wasused for a background, the design being left the colour of theclay. Other colours, especially a red (oxide of iron) and white,were also employed to diversify the design and emphasize details,and these were also fixed by firing. A special kind of Greekvase was the so-called " polychrome lekuthos, " a small uprightvessel, the clay of which was covered with a white " slip " onwhich figure designs were painted in lively tints. The techniqueis not quite understood, but the colours were certainly fired.There is an article on " The Technical History of White Lecythi "in the American Journal of Archaeology for 1907; the processesare not, however, analysed.

In glass mosaic thin sohd slabs of coloured vitreous pastesare broken up into little cubes of | in. to 5 in. in size and set insome suitable cement. The artist works from a coloured drawingand selects his cubes accordingly. Any number of shades ofall hues can be obtained, and the modern mosaic workers ofItaly boast that they dispose of some 25,000 different tints.As it is of the essence of the work to be simple and monumentalin effect, a limited palette is all that is needed; and the mosaicsrecently executed in St Paul's in London are done in aboutthirty colours. The worker should have at hand appliances tocut to shape any particular cube wanted for a special detail.

The ancients used the art, and the finest existing ancientpicture is in a mosaic, not indeed of glass pastes, but of colouredmarbles. This is the famous " Battle of Issus " found atPompeii. Glass mosaic came in under the early Roman Empire,but its chief use was in early Christian times, when it was thechief material for mural decoration of a pictorial kind. Ravennais the place where this form of painting is most instructivelyrepresented, and the 5th and 6th centuries a.d. are the timesof its greatest glory. At Rome and Constantinople there isfine early work, while that at Venice and Palermo is later. Inthe earliest and best examples the design is very simple, and afew monumental forms of epic dignity, against a flat backgroundcommonly of dark blue, represents the persons and scenes ofthe sacred narratives. The effect of colour is always sumptuous.Gold, especially for the backgrounds, is in later work freelyemployed.

The subject of enamel work forms the theme of a separatearticle. Here it need only be said that pictures can be producedby painting on a ground, generaOy of metal, with colouredvitreous pastes that are afterwards fixed by fusing. Limogesin France has been the great centre of the art, but enamellingloses in artistic value when a too exclusively pictorial result isaimed at.

§ 35. Fresco Painting. — Vitru'ius (De Architectura, bk. vii.chs. 2, 3; age of Augustus), Mount Athos Handbook (Hermeneia,chs. 54 seq.; date uncertain but based on early tradition); Cennino ​Cennini (Trattato della pittura, chs. 67 seq., ed. Milanesi, 1859;Eng. trans, by Christiana J. Herringham, Lond., 1899); LeonBattista Alberti (De re aedificatoria, bk. vi. ch. g; early and middle15th century); Vasari (Operc, ed. Milanesi, i. 181; middle of16th century)—all refer in general terms to the fresco process, asone generally understood in their times. Armenini (Dei veriprecetti della pittura; Ravenna, 1587), and Palomino (El Museopictorico; Madrid, 1715-1724), give more detailed accounts ofthe actual technical procedure, of which they had preservedthe tradition. Much information of the highest value andinterest was collected at the time when, in the forties of the19th century, the project for the decoration in fresco of the newEnglish Houses of Parliament was under discussion. This iscontained in various communications by Sir Charles Eastlake,Mr Charles Heath Wilson, and others, printed with the successiveReports of the Commissioners on the Fine Arts from1842 onwards. The experience obtained in the revived modernwork in fresco by Cornelius, Hess, and other German artistsencouraged by King LudwigI. of Bavaria, which began at Romein the second decade of the 19th century, was also drawn uponfor the purpose of these Reports. A useful compendium wasissued at the time by W.B. Sarsfield Taylor, A Manual of Frescoand Encaustic Painting (Lond., 1843). F.G. Cremer’s VollständigeAnleitung zur Fresco-Malerei (Düsseldorf, 1891), may also bementioned as a recent manual. The chemistry of the processis well explained by Professor Church in his Chemistry of Paintsand Paintings.

The fresco process is generally regarded as a method for theproduction of a picture. It is better to look upon it in the firstplace as a colour-finish to plaster-work. What it producesis a coloured surface of a certain quality of texture and a highdegree of permanence, and it is a secondary matter that thiscoloured surface may be so diversified as to result in a patternor a picture.

We do not know among what people the discovery was firstmade that a wash of liquid pigment over a freshly laid surfaceof lime plaster remained permanently incorporated with it whenall was dry, and added to it great beauty of colour and texture.The Egyptians, the Assyrians, the Phoenicians, the Mycenaeanand later Greeks, the ancient Italians—all made extensive useof plaster as a coating to brickwork or masonry, but when theycoloured it this was done after it was dry and with the use ofsome binding material or tempera.

The earliest notice of the fresco technique that we have inextant literature is contained in the third chapter of the seventhbook of Vitruvius, and it is there treated as a familiar, well understoodprocedure, the last stage in the construction andfinish of a wall. Pliny also in several passages of his NaturalHistory treats the technique as a matter of common knowledge.In Vitruvius the processes of plastering albaria opera are firstdescribed (vii. 2, 3), and it is provided that after the roughcast, trullissatio, there are to follow three coats of plaster madeof lime and sand, each one laid on when the one below is beginningto dry, and then three of plaster in which the place of thesand is taken by marble dust, at first coarse, then finer, and inthe uppermost coat of all in finest powder. It might now be(1)finished with a plain face, but one brought up to such anexquisite surface that it would shine like a mirror (chs. 3, 9); or(2)with stamped ornaments in relief or figure designs modelledup by hand; or (3)it might be completed with a coat of colour,and this would be applied by the fresco process, for which Plinyuses the formula udo illinere, “to paint upon the wet.” Thereason why the pigments mixed with water only, withoutany gum or binding material, adhere when dry to the plasteris a chemical one. It was first clearly formulated by OttoDonner von Richter in connexion with researches he made onthe Pompeian wall-paintings and published in 1868 as an appendixto Helbig’s Campanische Wandgemälde. He demonstrated thatwhen limestone is burnt into lime all the carbonic acid is drivenout of it. When this lime is “slaked” by being drenched withwater it drinks this in greedily and the resultant paste becomessaturated with an aqueous solution of hydrate of lime. Whenthis paste is mixed with sand or marble dust and laid on to thewall in the form of plaster this hydrate of lime in solution risesto the surface, and when the wet pigment is applied to this theliquid hydrate of lime or lime water, to use Professor Church’sphrasing, “diffuses into the paint, soaks it through and through,and gradually takes up carbonic acid from the air, thus producingcarbonate of lime, which acts as the binding material” (Church,p.278). It is a mistake to speak of the pigment “sinking intothe wet plaster.” It remains as a fact upon the surface, butit is fixed there in a sort of crystalline skin of carbonate of lime—theelement originally banished when the lime was burned—thathas now re-formed on the surface of the plaster. Thiscrystalline skin gives a certain metallic lustre to the surface of afresco painting, and is sufficient to protect the colours from theaction of external moisture, though on the other hand thereare many causes chemical and physical that may contributeto their decay. If, however, proper care has been taken throughout,and conditions remain favourable, the fresco painting isquite permanent, and as Vitruvius says (vii. 3, 7), “the colours,when they have been carefully laid upon the wet plaster, donot lose their lustre but remain as they are in perpetuity ... sothat a plaster surface that has been properly finished does notbecome rough through time, nor can the colours be rubbed off,that is unless they have been carelessly applied or on a surfacethat has lost its moisture.”

In the passage from which these words are taken Vitruviusgives useful hints as to the aesthetics of the fresco technique.Italian writers on the subject, such as Vasari, are generallyso taken up with the pictorial design represented on the wallthat the more essential characteristics of the process in itselfare lost sight of. To Vitruvius the work is coloured plaster,not a picture on plaster, and he shows how important it is thatthe plaster should be finished with a fine surface of gleaningwhite so as to light up the transparent film of colour that clothesit. It is the result of such care in classical times that a surfaceof Pompeian plastering, self-tinted “a fresco,” is beautifulwithout there being any question of pattern or design.

This beauty and polish of Pompeian, and generally of ancientRoman plaster, has recently been made the ground for callingin question the view accepted for a generation past that it wasmerely lime plaster painted on “a fresco,” and for substitutinga totally different technical hypothesis. The reference is tothe treatment of ancient wall-painting generally in the firstpart of Berger’s Beiträge (2nded., 1904, pp. 58 seq.). This writerdenies that the well-known classical wall-paintings in questionare frescoes, and evolves with great ingenuity a wholly newtheory of this branch of ancient technique. It is his view thatthe plaster was prepared by a special process in which waxlargely figured and which corresponds to, and indeed survivesin, the so-called “stucco-lustro” of the modern Italians.

The process in question is described by L. B. Alberti (De reaedificatoria, vi. 9), who says that when the plaster wall surfacehas been carefully smoothed it must be anointed with a mixtureof wax, resin and oil, which is to be driven in by heat, and thenpolished till the surface shines like a mirror. This is a classicalprocess referred to by Vitruvius under the name “ganosis,”as applied to the nude parts of marble statues, possibly to tonedown the cold whiteness of the material. Now Vitruvius,and Pliny, who probably follows him, do as a fact prescribe thissame process for use on plaster, but only in the one specialcase of a wall painted “a fresco” with vermilion, which wasnot supposed to resist the action of the light unless “locked up.”in this way with a coating of this “Punic” or saponified wax.Neither writer gives any hint that the process was applied toplaster surfaces generally, or that the lustre of these was dependenton a wax polish, and Vitruvius's description is so clear thatif wax had been in use he would certainly have said so.

Vitruvius prescribes so many successive coats of plaster, eachone put on before the last was dry, and on the wet uppermostcoat the colouring is laid. How can we with any reason substitutefor this a method in which the plaster has to be madequite dry and then treated with quite a different material and ​process? Furthermore, Berger holds the astonishing theorythat on the self-coloured surfaces of Pompeian and Romanplastered walls the colour was not apphcd, as in the fresco process,to the surface of the final coat, but was mixed up with the actualmaterial of the intonaco so that this was a coat of colouredplaster. This is of course a matter susceptible of ocular proof,but the actual fragments of ancient coloured stucco referredto by Berger afford a very slender support to the hypothesis,whereas everyone who, like the present writer, possesses suchfragments can satisfy himself that in almost every case thecolour coat is confined to the surface. The writer has a fragmentof such stucco from Rome, coloured with vermilion, andhere there is clear evidence that some substance has soaked intothe plaster to the depth of an eighth of an inch, as would be thecase in the " ganosis " of Vitruvius. The part thus affected isyellowish and harder than the rest of the plaster. A carefulchemical analysis, kindly made for the purpose of this articleby Principal Laurie of Edinburgh shows that, although the smallquantity of the material available makes it impossible to attaincertainty, yet the substance may possibly be wax with theslight admixture of some greasy substance. On the other handall the writer's other specimens show the colour laid on to allappearance " a fresco." The evidence of the coloured plasterin the house of about the 2nd century B.C. on Delos is whollyagainst Berger's view. The writer has many specimens of this,and they are all without exception coloured only on the surface.It is true that there are certain difficulties connected withPompeian fresco practice, but the description of the processas a wet process in Vitruvius and Pliny is so absolutely unmistakablethat Berger's theory must without hesitation berejected.

The history of the fresco technique remains at the sametime obscure. Here again Berger offers an interesting suggestionwhich cannot be passed over in silence. If the Pompeiantechnique, as he beUeves, be a wax process on dry plaster,followed by some form of tempera, how did the fresco technique,which is known both in East and West in the later medievalperiod, take its rise? The early medieval age was not a timewhen a difficult and monumental technique of the kind is likelyto have been evolved, but Berger most ingeniously connects itwith that of mosaic work. In mosaic the wall surface is atfirst rough plastered and a second and comparatively thin coatof cement is laid over it to receive and retain the cubes ofcoloured glass, only so much cement being laid each morningas the worker will cover with his tesserae before night. It wasthe practice sometimes to sketch in water-colours on the freshlylaid patch of cement the design which was to be reproduced inmosaic, and Berger points to the incontestable fact if this sketchwere allowed to remam without being covered with the cubesit would really be a painting in fresco. This is the way hethinks that the frescoe practice actually began, and the periodwould be that of the decline of mosaic work in the West asthe middle ages advanced.

In spite of the attractiveness of these suggestions, we mustreaffirm the view of this article that the testimony of Vitruviusis conclusive for the knowledge by the Romans of the earlyempire of the fresco technique. Why we do not find evidenceof it far earlier cannot be determined, but it is worth notingthat the success of the process depends on the plaster holdingthe moisture for a sufficient time, and this it can only do ifit be pretty thick. In ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, forexample, the plaster used as painting ground was very thin,and especially in those hot climates would never have lent itselfto fresco treatment. On the other side, the dechne, and perhapstemporary extinction, of the technique in the early middleages may be reasonably explained by the general condition ofthe arts after the break-up of the Roman Empire of the West.

To return now to the technical questions from which this historicaldigression took its rise, it will be easily seen that the processof painting in fresco must be a rapid one, for it must be completedbefore the plaster has had time to dry. Hence only a certainportion of the work in hand is undertaken at a time, and only

so much of the final coat of plaster, called by the Italians intonacois laid by the plasterer as will correspond to the amount theartist has laid out for himself in the time allowed him by thecondition of the plaster. At the end of this time the plasternot painted on is cut away round the outline of the work alreadyfinished, and when operations are recommenced a fresh patchis laid on and joined up as neatly as possible to the old. In themaking of these joints the ancient plasterer seems to have beenmore expert than the Italians of the Renaissance, and the seamsare often pretty apparent in frescoes of the 15th and 16th centuries,so that they can be discerned in a good photograph. Whenthey can be followed, they furnish information which it is ofteninteresting to possess as to the amount that has been executedin a single day's work. Judging by this test, Mr Heath Wilson,in his Life of Michelangelo, computed that on the vault of theSistine Michelangelo could paint a nude figure considerablyabove life size in two working days, the workmanship beingperfect in every part. The colossal nude figures of young menon the cornice of the vault at most occupied four days each.The " Adam " (fig 34, Plate X.). was painted in four or perhapsin three. A day was generally occupied by the head of suchfigures, which were about 10 ft. high. Raphael, or ratherhis pupils, it is thus calculated, painted the Incendio delBorgo, containing about 350 sq. ft., in about forty days, thegroup of the young man carrying his father occupying three.The group of the Three Graces in the Villa Farnesina took fivedays at most. Luini, a most accomplished executant, couldpaint " more than an entire figure, the size of life, in one day "(Second Report, p. 37). It has been noticed as one of the difficultiesabout the Pompeian frescoes, that joints hardly occur, orat any rate that larger surfaces of plaster were covered by thepainter at a single time than was the case among Renaissanceartists, and a conjectural explanation has been offered basedon the fact that the ancient plaster ground, laid on in manysuccessive coats while in each case the previous one was stillhumid, was thicker and would hold more moisture than themore modern intonaco, and would accordingly allow the artistlonger time in which to carry out his work. Alberti, Armenini,and Palomino only contemplate one or two thin coats over theoriginal rough cast, while Cornelius and his associates, whor*vived the process early in the 19th century, speak of anintonaco over the rough cast only about a quarter of an inchthick. A piece of plaster ground from Raphael's Loggie inthe Vatican was found to be quite thin, and Donner calculatedthat the ancient grounds were on an average 3 in. thick, themodern only a little over 1 in. On such grounds work hadnecessarily to be finished within the day, and Cennino expresslysays (ch. 67): " Consider how much you can paint in a day;for whatever you cover with plaster you must finish the sameday." Hence almost invariably in ItaUan fresco practiceevery join means a new day's work. At Pompeii the plaster,it is thought, might have remained damp over night. In theMount Athos Handbook tow was to be mixed with the plaster,undoubtedly to retard its drying.

This necessarily rapid execution gives to well-handled frescoesa simplicity and look of directness in technique that are of theessence of the aesthetic effect of this form of the art. HenceVasari is right when he extols the process in the words, " of allthe ways in which painters work, waU-painting is the finestand most masterly, since it consists in doing upon a singleday that which in other methods may be accomphshed inseveral by going over again what has been done. . . . thereare many of our craft who do well enough in other kinds of work,as for example in oil or tempera, but fail in this, for this is intruth the most manly, the safest, and most solid of all waysof painting. Therefore let those who seek to work upon thewall, paint with a manly touch upon the fresh plaster, and avoidreturning to it when it is dry " (Opere, ed. Milanesi, i. 181).

The process gives the artist another advantage in that hispainting, being executed in the very material of the surfaceitself, seems essentially a part of the wall. It is lime paintingon a hme ground, and fabric and enrichment are one. This ​can be noted in the Sola del Constantino in the Vaticanat Rome, one of the stanze or suite of rooms decorated byRaphael and Jus associates. There are two figures here paintedon the walls in oil, and though there is a certain depth and richnessof effect secured in this medium, they are too obviouslysomething added as an afterthought, while the figures in frescoseem an integral part of the wall.

Work of this kind, finished in each part at a sitting, is whatthe Italians call buon fresco or " true fresco, " and it has alwaysbeen, as it was with V'itruvius, the ideal of the art, but at manyperiods the painters have had to rely largely on retouches andreinforcements after the plaster was dry. Cennino devotesthe 67th chapter of his Trattato to a description of the process,and expressly tells us that the method he recommends is theone traditional in the school of Giotto, of which he himself wasa direct scion. He is fully alive to the importance of doing asmuch as possible while the ground is wet, for " to paint on thefresh — that is, a fixed portion on each day — is the best and mostpermanent way of laying on the colour, and the pleasantestmethod of painting "; but an ordinary artist of the early partof the 15th century had not sufficient skill to do all that wasrequired at the one moment. Observations made on the worksexecuted by various Italian masters from the 14th to the i6thcentury show great varieties in this matter of retouching, butthe subject need not be dwelt on as it involves no principle.Every painter of worthy ambition, who had entered into thespirit of his craft, would desire to do all he could " on thefresh, " and would be satisfied with, and indeed glory in, theconditions and limitations of the noble technique. Masaccio,even at the beginning of the 15th century, is remarkable for theamount of fine pictorial effect he secured without reliance onretouching. It was second-rate artists, like Pinturicchio, whodelighted to furbish up their mural pictures with stucco reliefsand gilding and to add touches of more brilliant pigments thancould be used in the wet process. Giotto, Masaccio, Ghirlandajo,Michelangelo, Luini, are among the frescanti proper, whor*present the true ideals of the craft.

The following notes upon the methods of the work are derivedpartly from observation of extant works and partly from the oldertreatises, but reference has also been made to modern practice inGermany and Italy, as information derived from this last sourcemay be found useful by those who are disposed to-day to makeessays in the process.

To avoid loss of time it is essential that the necessary drawingshould all be accomplished beforehand. Pozzo, a painter andwriter of the end of the 17th century says, " everyone knows thatbefore beginning to paint it is necessary to prepare a drawing andwell-studied coloured sketch, both of which are to be kept at handin painting the fresco, so as not to have any other thought than thatof the execution " (First Report, p. 35). In Cennino's time it seemsto have been the practice to square out the work full size from thesketch on to the surface of the rough cast before the intonaco waslaid. This at any rate enabled the artist to see how his work asa whole would come in relation to the space provided for it, but theactual intonaco had to be laid piece by piece over this generalsketch and the drawing of each portion repeated on the new surface.In the palmy days of Italian painting, however, as well as in moderntimes, the design has been drawn out on a full-sized cartoon, andthis cartoon, or a tracing from it, has been transferred piece bypiece to the freshly laid intonaco on which the painting is aboutto be executed. The drawing may be nailed against the wall, andthe outlines passed over with a blunt-pointed stylus of some hardmaterial, that by dinting the paper impresses on the yieldingplaster a line sufficient to guide the painter in his work; or theoutlines of the cartoon may be pricked and "pounced " with alittle bag of red or black powder that will leave a dotted outlineon the wall.

The preparation of the intonaco itself is however a matter formuch care. The lime should be prepared from a stone that is asfar as possible pure carbonate of lime — the t raver tine of Tivoli,recommended by Vasari, is perfect for the purpose — and after itis burnt should be slaked with water and thoroughly macerated sothat the lumps are all completely broken up. The slaked lime,of the consistency of a stiff paste, or as it is termed "putty, " mustbe kept covered in from the air for a considerable period that variesaccording to different authorities from eight to twelve months toas many years. All experts, from Vitruvius downwards, areagreed on the necessity for this, but the exact scientific reasontherefor does not seem to be quite clear. One advantage of thekeepmg is that the lime hydrate may take up a certain amount

of carbonic acid, though not too much, from the air. Churchsays that, " not more than one-third or at most two-fifths of thelime should be converted into the carbonate " (p. ig); but Faraday(Fifth Report, p. 25) was of opinion that through lapse of timethere was brought about a molecular change that divided the particlesmore thoroughly and gave the lime a finer texture so as tomix lietter with the pigments. At any rate, when Cornelius and hisassociates started the modern fresco revival at Rome, in 1815, anold workman who had been employed under Raphael Mengs directedtheir attention to this tradition, and they used lime that had beenkept in a slaked condition, but still caustic — that is, still deprivedof most of its carbonic acid, for twelve years! For mixing theplaster the proportions of lime to sand or marble dust vary; Cenninogives two of sand to one of " rich " or caustic lime, but the Germansused three of sand to one of lime. Whatever its exact constitution,the intonaco has to be carefully laid each morning over that partof the rough cast, previously well wetted, that corresponds to theamount laid out for the day's work. Contrary to the prescriptionof Vitruvius and Pompeian practice, which favours a polishedsurface, the moderns prefer a slight roughness or "tooth ' on theintonaco. Painting should not begin, so Cornelius advised (FirstReport, p. 24), till " the surface is in such a state that it will barelyreceive the impression of the finger, but not so wet as to be in dangerof being stirred up by the brush."

The pigments are ready mixed in little pots, on a tin palettewith a rim round the edge, or on a table, and in old Italian practiceeach colour was compounded in three shades — dark, middle andlight. The water should be boiled or distilled, or should be rainwater;for spring-water often contains carbonate of lime that wouldderange the chemistry of the process. Again, on account of thechemical action that takes place during the process, the pigmentshave to be carefully selected. The palette of the fresco painter isindeed a very restricted one, and this is another reason of the broadand simple effect of the work. Practically speaking only the earthcolours, such as the ochres raw or burned, can be used with safety;even the white has to be pure white lime (in Italian, bianco San-Giovanni),since lead white used in oil painting (Italian, biacca) isinadmissible. Vegetable and animal pigments are as a rule excluded," very few colours of organic origin withstanding the decomposingaction of lime " (Church, p. 280). The brushes are ofhog-bristles or otter-hair or sable, and have to be rather long inthe hair. Round ones are recommended. According to earlyItalian practice, the painter would first outline the figures orobjects, already drawn on the plaster, with a long-haired brushdipped in red ochre, and would then, e.g. in the case of the faces,lay in broadly with terre verte the shadows under the brows,below the nostrils, and round the chin, and bring down and fuseinto these shadows the darkest of the three flesh-tints, with a dexterousblending of the wet pigments upon a surface that preservestheir dampness. On the other side these half-tones are now modelledup into the lighter hues of the flesh. White may then be used indecided touches for the high lights, and the details of the eyes,mouth and other features put in without too much searchingafter accidents of local colour. Modern frescoists have found that" the tints first applied sink in and look faint, so that it is necessarysometimes to go over the surface repeatedly with the same colourbefore the full effect is gained " (First Report, p. 24), but it is wellto allow in each case some minutes to elapse before touching anyspot a second time. For the hair the Italians would make threetints suffice, the high lights again following with white. Thedraperies are broadly treated. After the whole has been laid in,in monochrome, with the green pigment, the folds would be markedout with the deepest of the three tints for shadow, and these shadowsunited by the middle tint. Lastly the lighter parts are painted upand finally reinforced with white. The work needs to be deftlytouched, for too much handling of one spot may destroy the freshnessof the tints and even rub up the ground. It is not necessary(as moderns have sometimes supposed) to put touch beside touch,never going twice over the same ground. So long as the pigmentsand the surface are wet the tints may be laid one over the otheror fused at will, and may be " loaded " in some parts and in othersthinly spread, the one essential being that a fresh and crisp effectshall not be lost. The wetness of the ground will always securea certain softness in all touches, even those that give the stronghigh-lights, and so important is it that the plaster should not beginto dry, that it should be sprinkled if necessary with fresh water.The characteristic softness of the touches laid on " a fresco " isthe more apparent when they are compared with those strokes ofreinforcement which may be put on " a tempera " after the workis dry. Armenini says that the shadows may be finished and deepenedby hatching, as in a drawing, with black and lake laid onwith a soft brush with a medium of gum, size, or white and yolkof egg diluted with vinegar. Such retouches are always hard and" wiry, " and are as much as possible to be avoided.

As examples of execution in fresco no works are better thanthose of Luini. He painted rapidly and thinly, securing therebya transparency of effect that did not however preclude richness.Heath Wilson indeed says of his painting that " it may be ​compared to that of Rubens; it is juicy, transparent, and clear;his execution is light and graceful." No sounder modelcould be taken for modern work. The high-water mark ofachievement in fresco painting was however reached by a greaterthan Luini — by Michelangelo in his painting of the Sistine Chapelroof. Considering that since his boyhood he had had no practicalexperience of the fresco process, and refused the commission aslong as he could because he was not a painter but a sculptor,Buonarroti's technical success in the manipulation of the difficultprocess is still more astounding than the aesthetic result of thework as a creation of imaginative genius. He had to paint forthe most part lying on his back in a sort of cradle, and workingwith his arms above his head, and had no skilled assistants;yet there is no quality in the work that strikes us more than itsfreshness and air of easy mastery, as if the artist were playingwith his task. The fusion of the lights and shadows throughthe most delicate half-tones is accomphshed in that meltingfashion for which the Italians used the term sfumato or" misty, " while at the same time the touches are crisp and firm,the accent here and there decided; and the artist's incomparablemastery of form gives a massive solidity to the whole (see fig.34, Plate X.)

In our own times and in English-speaking circles the frescoprocess has been discredited owing to the comparative failureof the experiments connected with the Houses of Parliament.On the condition of the frescoes there, as well as on that of thepictures in various other media, a series of Memoranda weremade by Professor Church, and a select committee of the Houseof Lords took evidence on the subject as late as December 1906.Most of the frescoes executed in the forties and fifties of theigth century had got into a deplorable state; but Church's beliefwas that the main cause of the decay was the sulphurous acidwith which, owing to the consumption of coal and gas, the airof London is so highly charged. The action of this acid — amillion tons of which are said to be belched out into the Londonatmosphere in every year — turns the carbonate of lime whichforms the surface of the fresco into a sulphate, and it ceases toretain its binding power over the pigments. " The chemicalchange, " he reports, " is accompanied by a mechanical expansionwhich causes a disruption of the ground and is the main causeof the destruction of the painting." It is a remarkable fact,however, that one of the frescoes in question. Sir John Tenniel's" St Cecilia, " completed in 1S50, painted very thinly and on asmooth surface, lasted well, and opposed " a considerablemeasure of successful resistance for nearly half a century on thepart of a pure fresco to the hostile influence of the Londonatmosphere " (Church, Memorandum, iv. 1896).

Abroad, experience was more favourable. The earliestfrescoes of the modern revival — those by Cornelius and hisassociates from the Casa Bartholdy at Rome — are in a fairlygood state in the National Gallery at Berlin. Such too is thecondition of Cornelius's large fresco in the Ludwigskirche atMunich. The best modern frescoes, from the artistic point ofview, in all Europe are those of about 1850 by Alfred Rethel inthe town-hall at Aix-la-Chapelle, and they are well preserved.The exterior frescoes on the Pinacotek at Munich have on theother hand mostly perished; but the climate of that city issevere in winter, and nothing else was really to be expected.We must not expect carbonate of lime to resist atmosphericinfluences which affect to a greater or less degree all mineralsubstances.

§ 36. Frcsco-Secco. — (See Charles Heath Wilson, in appendixto Second Report of the Commissioners on the Fine Arts, London,1843, p. 40; Church, Chemistry of Paints and Painting, 1901, p.278).

The process called " fresco-secco " is a method of lime paintingon a plaster surface that has been allowed to dry. It is describedby Theophilus in the Schedida of about a.d. 1 100; and Mr CharlesHeath Wilson in 1843 wrote of it as " extensively used in Italyat present and with great success." It is of course obvious thatpaintings must often be executed on walls the plastering of whichis already dry, and on which the true fresco process is impracticable.Some kind of painting in tempera is thus needful, and" fresco-secco " uses for this the lime that is the very constituentof the plaster. The process is thoroughly to drench the drysurface of the plaster the night before with water with which alittle lime or baryta water has been mixed, and to renew thewetting the next morning. The artist then fixes up his cartoon,pounces the outlines, and sets to work to paint with the samepigments as used in buon fresco mixed with lime or baryta wateror with a little slaked lime. If the wall become too dry a syringeis used to wet it. The directions given by Theophilus (i. 15)correspond with this modern practice. " When figures orrepresentations of other things, " he says, " are to be delineatedon a dry wall, it must be forthwith moistened with water tiUit is thoroughly wet. On this wet ground all the colours mustbe laid that are required, and they must be all mixed with hme,and will dry with the wall so that they adhere to it." Mr C. H.Wilson praises the work for its convenience, economy, and easeof execution, and notes that " for ornament it is a better methodthan real fresco, as in the latter art it is quite impossible to makethe joinings at outlines owing to the complicated forms of ornaments," but says that " it is in every important respect an inferiorart to real fresco. Paintings executed in this mode are ever heavyand opaque, whereas fresco is light and transparent." Hedeclares also for its durability, but Professor Church states whatseems obvious, that " the fixation of the pigments ... is lesscomplete " than in real fresco though depending on the samechemical conditions(Second Report, 1843, p. ^o; Chemistry, p. 279).

§ 37. Stcreochromy or Water-Glass Painting. — (See ChemischtechnischeBibliothek, Band Ixxviii., Die Mineral-Malerei, vonA. Keim, Wien, &c., 1881; Rev. J. A. Rivington in Journal of theSociety of Arts, No. 1630, Feb. 15, 1884; Mrs Lea Merritt andProfessor Roberts Austin in Journal of the Society of Arts, No.2246, Dec. 6, 1895; F. G. Cremer, Beitrdge zur Technik derM monumental-M alverfahren, Düsseldorf, 1S95).

Akin to " fresco-secco, " in that a mineral agent is used tosecure the adhesion of the colouring matter to the plaster, isthe process known as stcreochromy or water-glass painting. Itis not a traditional process, but an outcome of comparativelymodern chemical research, and is not yet a century old. It isbased on the properties of the substance called water-glass, asilicate of potassium or of soda, perfected by the Germanchemist Von Fuchs about 1825. A process of painting called" stcreochromy " was soon after evolved, in which pigments ofthe same kind as those used in fresco, mixed only with distilledwater and laid on a prepared plaster ground, were afterwardsfi-xed and securely locked up by being drenched with this substance,which is equivalent to a soluble glass. Some of the muralpaintings in the Houses of Parliament, notably those by Maclise,were executed in this process. Improvements were more recentlyeffected in the process with which the names of Keim and Recknagelof Munich are connected, and in this form it has been useda good deal in Germany in the last quarter of the 19th centuryboth in interiors and in the open air. For example, in 1881Professor Schraudolph of Munich painted in this process thefront of the Hotel Bellevue in that city. This improved water glasspainting was introduced to notice in England in a paperread before the Society of Arts by the Rev. J. A. Rivington onthe 13th of February 1S84, and printed in the Journal of thesociety, No. 1630. A more recent description is contained inF. G. Cremer's Beitrdge.

The recipe for the preparation of the actual medium is as follows:15 parts pounded quartz sand, 10 parts refined potash, i partpowdered charcoal are mixed together and fused for 6 to 8 hoursin a glass furnace. The resultant mass when cold is reduced topowder and boiled for 3 or 4 hours in an iron vessel with distilledwater till it dissolves and yields a heav^' syrupy liquor of stronglyalkaline reaction. This can be diluted with water, and in the processis applied hot.

The ground is very carefully prepared, and over a thoroughlysound and dry backing a thin coat of plaster is laid, composed ofonly I part lime to 5 or 8 parts selected sand and pounded marblewith a slight admixture of infusorial earth. The object is to obtaina hom*ogeneous porous ground that can be thoroughly permeatedwith the solution, and to help to secure this the intonaco when dry ​is sprayed with hydrofluo-silicic acid to dissolve away the crystallineskin of carbonate of lime formed on the surface and to "open thepores " of the plaster. The surface of the painting ground, whichis left with a decided " tooth " upon it, is then well soaked withthe solution, and when dry will be found " hard but perfectlyabsorbent and ready for painting."

The pigments consist in the usual ochres and earths; chromereds, greens, and yellows; Naples yellow (antimoniate of lead);cobalt blue and green; and artificial ultramarine; terre verte, &c.,with zinc white or baryta white.

It is important however to note, that the pigments (which canbe supplied by Messrs Schirmer, late Faulstich, of Munich, andmany other firms) are mixed with various substances so as to renderuniform the action upon them of the fixing solution and neutralizethe action of its alkalies. The operations of painting, in whichonly distilled water is used with the colours, are easy and admit ofconsiderable freedom. " Every variety of treatment is possible,and the method adapts itself to any individual style of painting."The work can be left and resumed at will. After the painting isdry there comes the all-important final process of fixing with thewater-glass solution. This is sprayed on in a hot state by meansof a special apparatus, and the process is repeated till the wallcan absorb no more, the idea being that the substance will penetrateright through to the wall, and when set will bind pigments,intonaco, roi'gh plastering and wall into one hard mass of silicatethat will be impervious to moisture or any injurious agencies.The last paragraph of the official account of the Keim processissued in 1883 for the guidance of those contemplating mural workruns as follows: "The fixing of the picture is accomplished bymeans of a hot solution of potash water-glass, thrown against thesurface by means of a spray-producing machine in the form of avery fine spray. This fixing done, by several repetitions of theprocess, a solution of carbonate of ammonia is finally applied tothe surface. The carbonate of potash, which is thus quickly formed,is removed by repeated washings with distilled water. Then thepicture is dried by a moderate artificial heat. Finally a solutionof paraffin in benzene may be used to enrich the colours and furtherpreserve the painting from adverse influences."

§ 38. Spirit Fresco or the " Gambicr Parry " Process, withmodifications by Professor Church. — (See Spirit Fresco Painting:an Account of the Process, by T. Gambier Parry, London, 1S83;Church, Chemistry of Paints and Painting, 288 seq.).

This process is also one of quite modern origin, but in GreatBritain, at any rate, it is now very popular. Mr Gambier Parry,who invented and first put it into practice, claims for it that it" is not the mere addition of one or more medium to the manyalready known, but a system, complete from the first preparationof a wall to the last touch of the artist, " and that the advantagesit offers are " (i) durability (the principal materials being all butimperishable); (2) power to resist external damp and changes oftemperature; (3) luminous effect; (4) a dead surface; (5) freedomfrom all chemical action on colours."

The theory of the process is much the same as that of stereochromy,the drenching of the ground with a solution that formsat the same time the medium of the pigments, so that the wholeforms when dry a hom*ogeneous mass. The solution or mediumis however not a mineral one, but a combination of oils, varnishesand wax, the use of which makes the process nearly akin to thatof oil painting. The objection to the use of oil painting properon walls is the shininess of effect characteristic of that system,which is in mural work especially to be avoided, and " spiritfresco " aims at the elimination of the oleaginous element andthe substitution of wax which gives the "matt " surfacedesired.

Mr Gambier Parry directs a carefully laid intonaco of ordinaryplaster suitable for fresco on a dry backing, " the one primarynecessity " being that the intonaco " should be left with its naturalsurface, its porous quality being absolutely essential. All smoothingprocess or ' floating ' with plaster of Paris destroys this quality.All cements must be avoided." When dry the surface of the wallmust be well saturated with the medium, for which the followingis the recipe: pure white wax 4'oz. by weight; elemi resin 2 oz.by weight dissolved in 2 oz. of rectified turpentine; oil of spikelavender 8 oz. by measure; copal varnish about 20 oz. by measure.These ingredients are melted and boiled together by a processdescribed in his paper, and when used for the wall the medium isdiluted in one and a half its bulk of good turpentine. With thisdiluted solution the wall is well soaked, and the directions continue," after a few days left for evaporation, mix equal quantities of purewhite lead in powder and of gilder's whitening in the mediumslightly diluted with about a third of turpentine, and paint thesurface thickly, and when sufficiently evaporated to bear a secondcoat, add it as thickly as a brush can lay it. This when dry, for

which two or three weeks may be required, produces a perfectsurface " both white and absorbent.

The pigments, which are practically the same as those used inoil painting, must be ground in dry powder in the undiluted medium,and when prepared can be kept in tubes like oil colours. Solidpainting with a good deal of body is recommended and pure oil ofspike is freely used as painting medium. Pure spike oil may alsobe washed over the ground before painting " to melt the surface(hence the name Spirit Fresco) and prepare it to incorporate thecolours painted into it." The spike oil is " the one common solventof all the materials; . . . the moment the painter's brush touchesthe surface (already softened, if necessary, for the day's work) itopens to receive the colours, and on the rapid evaporation of thespike oil it closes them in, and thus the work is done." The oil ofspike lavender, it may be noticed, is an essential oil prepared fromLavandula spica.

Professor Church has suggested improvement in the compositionof the medium by eliminating the " doubtful constituents " elemiresin and bees'-wax and substituting paraffin wax, one of the safestof materials, dissolved in non-resinifiable oil of turpentine. Thisis mi.xed as before with copal varnish and used in the same wayand with the same or better results as Mr Gambier Parry's medium.

§ 39. Oil Processes of Wall Painting. — The use of the oilmedium for painting on plaster in medieval days opens up amuch debated subject on which a word will be said in connexionwith oil painting in general. In the later Renaissance period inItaly it came into limited use, and Leonardo essayed it in animperfect form and with disastrous result in his " Last Supper "at Milan. Other artists, notably Sebastiano del Piombo, weremore successful, and Vasari, who experimented in the technique,gives his readers recipes for the preparation of the plaster ground.This with Cennino (ch. go) had consisted in a coat of size ordiluted egg-tempera mixed with milk of fig-shoots, but later onthere was substituted for this several coats of hot boiled linseedoil. This was still in common use in the i6th century, butVasari himself had evolved a better recipe which he gives us inthe 8th chapter of his " Introduction " to Painting. Overundercoatings of ordinary plaster he lays a stucco composed ofequal parts of lime, pounded brick, and scales of iron mixed withwhite of egg and linseed oil. This is then grounded with whiteoil toned down with a mixture of red and yellow easily dryingpigments, and on this the painting is executed.

In Edinburgh and other places Mrs Traquair has recently carriedout wall paintings on dry plaster with oil colours much thinnedwith turpentine. The ground is prepared with several coats ofwhite oil paint, and the finished work is finally varnished with thebest copal carriage varnish.

In most cases oil painting intended for mural decoration hasbeen executed on canvas, to be afterwards attached to the wall.This is the case more especially in France, and also in America atthe Boston public library and other places. The effort here is toget rid of the shiny effect of oil painting proper by eliminating asfar as practicable the oil. As this however serves as the bindingmaterial of the pigments the procedure is a risky one. To suppressthe oil and to secure a " matt " surface Mr E. A. Abbey employedat Boston and elsewhere, as a medium for painting with ordinaryoil colours, wax dissolved in spike oil and turpentine. In FrancePuvis de Chavannes used some preparation to secure a matt effectin his fine decorative oil painting on canvas.

§ 40. Tempera Painting on Walls. — This is a very ancient andwidely diffused technique, but the processes of it do not differ inprinciple from those of panel painting in the same method. It isaccordingly dealt with under tempera painting in general(§ 43).

§ 41. Encaustic Painting on Walls. — (See Schultze-Naumburg,Die Technik dcr Malerei, p. 122 seq.; Paillot de Montabert, Traitecomplct de la peinture, vol. ix.).

It has been already mentioned that wax is employed in modernmural painting in order to secure a matt surface. Many pictureshave been carried out within the last century on walls in a regularwax medium that may or may not represent an ancient process.Hippolyte Flandrin executed his series of mural pictures in StVincent de Paul and St Germain des Pres in Paris in a processworked out by Paillot de Montabert. Wax dissolved in turpentineor oil of spike is the main constituent of the medium withwhich the wall is saturated and the colours ground. Heat is usedto drive the wax into the plaster.

A German recipe prepared by Andreas Müller in Düsseldorf hasbeen used for mural paintings in the National Gallery', Berlin.

XX. 16 a ​In this one part virgin wax is dissolved in two parts turpentinewith a few drops of boiled linseed oil. The pigments are groundin boiled linseed oil with the addition of this medium. The plasterground, well dried, is soaked with hot boiled linseed oil diluted withan equal quantity of turpentine. It is then grounded with severalcoats of oil paint for a priming and smoothed with pumice stone.The painting can be executed in a thin water colour technique or witha full body, and dries lighter than when wet and with a dead surface.

§ 42. Encaustic Painting in general in Ancient and Modern Times.— (See Cros and Henry, L’Encaustique et les autres procédés de la peinture chcz les anciens, Paris, 1884; Flinders-Petrie, Hawara, &c., London, 1889; O. Donner v. Richter, Über Technisches in der Malerei der Alten, Munich, 1885; Berger, Beiträge zur Entwickelungs-Geschichte der Maltechnik, ii. 185 seq.; Munich, 1904).

Although in modern mural painting wax is employed to securea matt surface, in ancient times it appears to have been valuedrather from the depth and intensity it lent to colours when it waspolished. It there represented an attempt to secure the sameforce and pictorial quahty which in modern times are gained bythe use of the oil medium. We are told of it by the ancients thatit was a slow and troublesome process, and the name of it,meaning “burning in,” shows that the inconvenience of a heatingapparatus was inseparable from it; yet it seems at the same timeto have been a generally accepted technique, and Greek writersfrom Anacreon to Procopius treat “wax” as the standardmaterial for the painter. Nay more, hardly a day now passes withoutevery one of us bearing testimony in the words he uses to theimportance of the technique in antiquity. The Etymologicummagnum of the 12th century makes the process stand forpainting generally (ἐγκεκαυμένη-ἐξωγραφημένη), and the name“encaustic” came to be applied not only to painting but alsoto sumptuous calligraphy. Then it was applied to writing ingeneral, and the name still survives in the Italian inchiostroand our own familiar “ink” (Eastlake, Materials, i.151).

The technique of ancient encaustic has given rise to muchdiscussion which till recently was carried on chiefly on a literarybasis. Fresh material has been contributed by the discovery,in the eighties of the 19th century, in Egypt of a series of portraitson mummy cases, executed for the most part in a wax process,and dating probably from the first two or three centuries A.D.Previous to this discovery there was little material of a monumentalkind, though what appears to be the painting apparatusof a Gallo-Roman artist in encaustic was found in 1847 at StMédard-des-Prés in La Vendée, and has been often figured. Itshould be stated at the outset that the modern process ofdissolving wax in turpentine or an essential oil like oil of spikewas not known to the ancients, who however knew how to mixresinous substances with it, as in the case of ship-painting (Plinyxi. 16; Dioscorides i. 98). They also saponified wax by boiling itwith potash so as to form what was called “Punic wax” (Plinyxxi. 84 seq.), and this emulsion may be reduced with water,and at the same time combines with oil and with size, gum, eggand other temperas. Wax, Pliny says, may be coloured andused for painting—ad edendas similitudines (loc. cit.); but asthe name “encaustic” implies, and as we gather from another ofPliny’s phrases, ceris pingcre ac picturam inurere (xxxv.122),heat was an essential part of the process. Hence the materialmust have been employed as a rule in a more or less solid formand liquefied each time for use, and not in the form of a dilutedsolution or emulsion which could be made serviceable cold. It istrue that Punic wax mixed with a little oil is prescribed byVitruvius (vii. 9, 3) as a solution for covering and locking upfrom the air a coat of the changeable pigment vermilion laid on awall (see §35), but the solution is used hot and driven in byapplication of a heating apparatus.

The accounts of the technique furnished to us by Pliny canbe brought into connexion with the actual remains, and Bergerand others have succeeded fairly well in imitating these byprocesses evolved from the ancient notices. It is unfortunatethat the most important passage of Pliny (xxxv.149) appearscorrupt. It runs in the received text as follows: Encausto pingendi duo fuere antiquitus genera, cera et in chore cestro, id est vericulo, donee classes pingi coepere. Hoc tertium accessit resolutes igni ceris penicillo utendi, quae pictura navibus nee sole nee sale ventisve corrumpitur. Here three kinds of encaustic paintingare mentioned, two old and one new (the comparative chronologyof the processes need not come into question), and in the two lastcases the distinction is that between two instruments of painting,the cestrum and the penicillus or brush. It is natural to suggestthat instead of the word cera, which, as wax is the materialcommon to all encaustic processes, need not have been introducedand on manuscript authority may be suspected, some wordfor a third instrument of painting should be restored. An image should appear at this position in the text.(From a photograph by W. A. Mansell & Co.)
Fig. 35.—Mummy of Artemidorus with painted portrait, inscribed “O Artemidorus, Farewell.” About A.D.200 (Brit. Mus.).Berger,with some philological likelihood,conjectures the word cauterio,which means properly a “branding iron,” but which he believes to bea sort of hollowed spatula or spoonwith a large and a small end bywhich melted waxes of differentcolours might be taken up, laid ona ground, such as a wooden panel,and manipulated in a soft state aspictorial effect required. Instrumentsof the kind were found inthe Gallo-Roman tomb in LaVendée. The second kind ofpainting with the cestrum orvericulum was on ivory andmust have been on a minutescale. The “cestrum” was certainlya tool of corresponding size, andsome have seen in it a sort of pointor graver, such as that with whichthe incised outlines were made onthe figured ivory plaques in theKertch room at StPetersburg(see below); others a small lancet shapedspatula Like the tools thatsculptors employ for working onplaster. The brush, with whichmelted waxes could be laid on inwashes, as was the case on ships,needs no explanation.

An examination of the portraitsfrom the mummy cases (see fig. 35)makes it quite clear that the brushwas used with coloured meltedwaxes to paint in, in sketchy fashion,the draperies and possibly tounder paint the flesh and hair,while the flesh was executed in amore pastos style, with waxes ina soft condition laid on andmanipulated with some spatula likeinstrument, which we may if we like call “cauterium” or “cestrum.” The marks of such tool are on several of the headsunmistakably in evidence, and maybe seen in specimens in the LondonNational Gallery. There is adifference of opinion however as to the constitution of thewax. Donner vonRichter holds that the wax was “Punic,”i.e. a kind of emulsion, and was blended with oil and resinousbalsams so as to be transformed into a soft paste which couldbe manipulated cold with the spatula. Heat for “burningin” (picturam inurere) he thinks was afterwards applied, with theeffect of slightly fusing and blending the coloured waxes thathad been in this way worked into a picture. Berger, on the otherhand, believes that the coloured wax pastes were manipulatedhot with the “cauterium,” which would be maintained in aheated condition, and that there was no subsequent process of“burning in.” Flinders Petrie is of opinion that, even in the ​case of the washes laid on with the brush, pure melted wax wasemployed and not a compound or emulsion, such as is generallyassumed. Berger believes in a mixture of wax, oil and resin.

It is interesting to note that the distinguished modern painter,Arnold Bocklin, executed his picture of " Sappho " in colouredpastes composed of copal resin, turpentine and wax, manipulatedwith a curved spatula, and that he applied heat to fuseslightly the impasto. He believed he obtained in this way abrilliancy not to be compassed with oils.

The nature of the " cestron " technique on ivory is not known.The only existing artistic designs in ivory are executed byengraved lines, and these are sometimes filled in with colouredpastes. Exquisite work in this style exists in the Hermitageat St Petersburg, and there are examples in other museums, butthis can hardly be termed en caustic painting. A better idea ofthe laboriously executed miniature portraits of which Pliny tellsus can be gained from the small medallion portraits modelled incoloured wax that were common at, the Renaissance period andare still executed to-day. In these however the smaller detailsare put in with the brush and pigment.

It is known from the evidence of the Erechtheum inscriptionthat the en caustic process was employed for the painting ofornamental patterns on architectural features of marble buildings,but there is stiU considerable doubt as to the technique employedin such forms of decorative painting as the colouring of the whiteplaster that covered the surfaces of stonework on monumentalbuildings in inferior materials. Polychrome ornament on terracottafor architectural embellishment may have been fixed by theglaze as in ordinary vase painting, but Pliny says that Agrippafigulinum opus encausto pinxil in his Thermae (xxxvi. 189).The technique of the polychrome lecuthi and of the polychrometerra-cotta statuary is not certain.

The later history of wax painting after the fall of the WesternEmpire is of interest in connexion with the evolution of thepainter's technique as a whole. Its possible relation to oilpainting will be noticed later on. Here it is enough to note thatthe so-called Lucca MS. of the 8th century mentions the minglingof wax with colours, and the Byzantine Mount Athos Handbook,recording probably the practice of the nth century, gives arecipe for an emulsion of partly saponified wax with size asa painting medium. A recipe of the 15th century quoted byMrs Merrifield from the MSS. of Le Begue gives a similar compositionthat can be thinned with water and used to temper allsorts of colours.

§ 43. Tetnpcra Painting. [Cennino's rra//a/o, in the Englishedition with terminal essays by Mrs Herringham (London, 1899),is the best work to consult on the subject. The Society of Paintersin Tempera published in 1907 a volume of Papers on the subject.F. Lloyd's Practical Guide to Scene Painting and Painting inDistemper (London, 1879), is chiefly about the painting of theatricalscenery, and this subject is also dealt with in articles byWilliam Telbin in the Magazine of Art (1889), pp. 92, 195.]

The binding substances used in the tempera processes may beclassed as follows: (i) Size, preferably that made from boilingdown cuttings of parchment. Fish-glue, gum, especially gumtragacanth and gum arabic (the Senegal gum of commerce);glycerin, honey, milk, wine, beer, &c. (2) Eggs, in the form of(i) the yolk alone, (ii) the white alone, (iii) the whole contents ofthe egg beaten up, (iv) the same with the addition of the milk orsap of young shoots of the fig-tree, (v) the contents of the eggwith the addition of about the same quantity of vinegar [(iv) wasused in the south, (v) north of the Alps]. (3) Emulsions, inwhich wax or oil is mingled with substances which bring aboutthe possibility of diluting the mixture with water. Thus oilcan be made to unite mechanically (not chemically) with waterby the interposition either of gum or of the yolk of egg.

Of these materials it may be noted that a size or gum temperais always soluble in water, and is moreover always of a ratherthin consistency. The latter applies also to white of egg. Onthe other hand the yolk of an egg makes a medium of greaterbody, and modern artists, especially in Germany, have paintedin it with a fuU impasto. The yolk of egg or the whole egg slightly

beaten up may be used to temper powdered pigments withoutany dilution by means of water, and the stillest body can in thisway be obtained. The medieval artists seem however always tohave painted with egg thinly, diluting the yolk with about anequal quantity of water. Their panels show this, and we canargue the same from the number of successive coats of paintprescribed by Cennino and other writers. The former (ch. 165)mentions seven or eight or ten coats of colours tempered withyolk alone, that must have been well thinned with water. Thispoint will be returned to later on. The yolk of egg is reallyitself an emulsion as it contains about 30% of oil or fatty matter,though in its fluid state it combines readily with water. " Eggyolk, " writes Professor Church {Chemistry, p. 74), "must beregarded as essentially an oil medium. As it dries the oilhardens, " and ultimately becomes a substance not unlike leatherthat is quite impervious to moisture. Hence while size temperawhen dry yields to water egg tempera will resist it. Sir WilliamRichmond gave a proof of this in evidence before a committeeof the House of Lords in November 1906, describing how he hadexposed a piece of plaster painted with yolk of egg medium to allweathers for six months on the roof of a church and found it at theend perfectly intact. As to the milk of young fig-shoots, it isinteresting to know from Principal Laurie ( Pigments andVehicles of the Old Masters, " in Journal of the Society of Arts,Jan. 15, 1892, p. 172) that "fig-tree belongs to the samefamily as the india-rubber tree, and its juice contains caoutchouc."He says, " doubtless the mixture of albumen andcaoutchouc would make a very tough and protective medium."

With regard to the historical use of these different media, themedieval Italians used almost exclusively the yolk of eggmedium, and this is also the favourite tempera of the moderns.In fact in Italy the word " tempera, " as used by Vasari and otherwriters, generally means the egg medium. On the other handsize or gum was more common north of the Alps. It is in mostcases very difficult to decide what temperas were in vogue indifferent regions and at the various epochs of the art, and thefollowing must not be taken for more than an approximatestatement of the facts. As far as it is known, the bindingmaterial in ancient Egypt was for the most part size, whileGreek influence from about 600 B.C. onwards may have led to theuse of wax emulsion (Punic wax). For paintings on mummycases, and on papyrus scrolls, the medium may have been sizeor gum. Professor Fhnders Petrie says it was acacia gum. Thewall paintings of ancient Mesopotamia as well as those of Indiaand the farther East generally were all in tempera, and it isnoteworthy that recipes and technical practices of the East andof the West seem to be curiously alike. The exact media usedare doubtful. The same doubt exists with regard to the exactprocesses of wall and panel painting in tempera in ancient Greeceand Italy, in the East, in Byzantine times, and in the earlymiddle ages both north and south of the Alps. The materialsand processes mentioned by Phny or in the various technicalhandbooks are on the whole clearly established, but it is verydifficult to say in particular cases what was the actual techniqueemployed. Any certainty in this matter must be based on theresults not only of superficial examination but of analysis, andthe very small quantities of the materials that can be placed atthe disposal of the chemist make it often impossible to arrive at asatisfactory diagnosis.

A story in Pliny (xxxv. 102) shows that the Greek panelpainters, when not " encaustae, " used a water tempera, butwhether size or egg was its main constituent we do not know.ApeUes is said to have covered his finished panels with a thin coatof what Pliny calls " atramentum, " which may have been a whiteof egg varnish, for spirit varnishes were not known in antiquity(Berger i. and ii. 183), and the Greeks do not seem to have useddrying oils nor varnishes made with these. Byzantine panelpainting, according to the Mount Athos Handbook, was executedas a rule in an egg tempera (Berger iii. 75), and this techniquewas followed later on in Italy. For Greek and Etruscan (Itahan)wall-paintings of the pagan period; for late Roman wall-paintingsnorth of the Alps, and for Romanesque and Gothic wall-paintings. ​we have to choose amongst the theories of size or egg tempera,wax tempera (emulsion), and the lime painting in “fresco secco”described by Theophilus. When we come to the panel paintingfrom the 12th to the 15th century we are on surer ground. Forthe north we have the technical directions of Theophilus, for thesouth those of Cennino. Theophilus (i. ch.xxvii.) prescribes atempera of gum from the cherry tree, and, with some pigments,white of egg. The finished panel was to be covered with an oilvarnish (vernition). Cennino prescribes a tempera of the yolkof egg alone, half and half with the pigments, which have beenfinely ground in water and are very liquid, so that there mightbe in the ultimate compound about as much water as egg. Atempera of the whole egg with the milk of fig-shoots he recommends,not for panels, but for retouching fresco-work on the wallwhen it is dry. Tempera panels painted with egg yolk are, likethe gum tempera panels of Theophilus, to be varnished withvernice liquida (oil varnish). In these media were executedall the fine tempera panels of the early Italian and early Germanschools of the 15th century, and these represent a limited, butwithin its bounds a very perfect and interesting, form of thepainter’s art.

The well-known group of the “Three Graces,” from Botticelli’slarge panel of the “Allegory of Spring,” at Florence, gives thequality of tempera painting very aptly (see fig.36, PlateX.).There is a Society of Painters in Tempera in London, and someartists are enthusiastic in their admiration of the process for itspurity, sincerity and permanence.

Under the heading “tempera” should be noticed another styleof painting with a water-medium that is executed as a rule on alarge scale and in a comparatively slight fashion. Painting forthe purposes of temporary decoration on canvas or wood, so muchused in the Italian cities of the Renaissance period, is of this kind.Large cartoons in colour for mural pictures or tapestry, of whichRaphael’s cartoons are the most famous examples, are other examples;while in modern times the technique is chiefly employedin theatrical scene painting. The pigments are tempered withsize or gum, and body is given to them by whitening, pipe-clay orsimilar substance. Work executed in this medium dries muchlighter than when it is put on, and to execute it effectively, as inthe case of stage scenery, requires much skill and practice. “Inthe study of the art of distemper painting a source of considerableembarrassment to the inexperienced eye is that the colours whenwet present such a different appearance to what they do whendry.” So writes F. Lloyds, but W. Telbin, though he recognizesthis difficulty, extols the process. “A splendid material distemper!For atmosphere unequalled, and for strength as powerfulas oil, in half an hour you can do with it that which in water or oilwould take one or two days!” The English word “distemper”and the French “gouache” are commonly applied to this style ofbroad summary painting in body-colour. “Distemper” to Englishears suggests house-decoration, “tempera” the work of the artist.

§ 44. Oil Painting.—(See Eastlake, Materials for a History ofOil Painting (London, 1847); Merimee, De la peinture à l’huile(Paris, 1830); Berger, Beiträge zur Entwicklungs-Geschichte derMaltechnik, esp. iii. 221 sqq., and iv. (Munich, 1897), &c.;Dalbon, Les Origines de la peinture a l’huile (Paris, 1904);Ludwig, Über die Grundsätze der Oelmalerei (Leipzig, 1876);Lessing, Über das Alter der Oelmalerei, 1774.)

Oil painting is an art rather of the north than of the south andeast, for its development was undoubtedly furthered by thedemand for moisture-resisting media in comparatively dampclimates, and, moreover, the drying oils on which the techniquedepends were but sparingly prepared in lands where olive oil,which does not dry, was a staple product.

Certain vegetable oils dry naturally in the air by a process ofoxidization, and this drying or hardening is not accompanied byany considerable shrinking, nor by any change of colour; so thatoil and substances mixed with it do not alter in volume nor inappearance as a consequence of the drying process. There maybe a slow subsequent alteration in the direction of darkening orbecoming more yellow; but this is another matter. Among theseoils the most important is linseed oil extracted from the seedsof the flax plant, poppy oil from the seeds of the opium poppy,and nut oil from the kernels of the common walnut. With theseoils, generally linseed, ordinary tube colours used by painters inoil are prepared, and oil varnishes, also used by artists, are madeby dissolving in them certain resins. Their natural dryingqualities can be greatly aided by subjecting them to heat, and ​also by mingling with them chemical substances known as" dryers, " of which certain salts of lead and zinc are the mostfamiliar. How far back in antiquity such oils and their propertieswere known is doubtful. Certain varnishes are used inEgypt on mummy cases of the New Empire and on other surfaces,and, though some of these are soluble in water, others resist it,and may be made with drying oils or essential oils, though theart of distilling these last cannot be traced back in Egypt earlierthan the Roman imperial period. (See Berthelot, La Chimie aumoyen dge, i. 138 (Paris, 1893). When Phny tells us (.iv. 123)that all resins are soluble in oil, we might think he was contemplatinga varnish of the modern kind. Elsewhere, however (xxiv.34), he prescribes such a solution as a sort of emoUient ointmentfor wounds, so it is clear that the oil he has in view is non-dryingolive oil that would not make a varnish. In two passages of hisNatural History (xv. 24-32, xxiii. 79-96) Pliny discourses atlength on various oils, but does not refer to their drying properties.There is really no direct evidence of the use among the Greeksand Romans of drying oils and oil varnishes, though a recentwriter (Cremer, U titer suchun gen tiber den Beginn der Oelmalerei,Diiss., 1899) has searched for it with desperate eagerness. Thechief purpose of painting for which such materials would havebeen in demand is the painting of ships, but this we know wascarried out in the equaUy waterproof medium of wax, with whichresin or pitch was commingled by heat. The earliest mention ofthe use of a drying oil in a process connected with painting is in themedical writer Aetius. of the beginning of the 6th century a.d.,who says that nut oil dries and forms a protective varnishover gilding or en caustic painting. From this time onwards theuse of drying oils and varnishes in painting processes is wellestablished. The Lucca MS. of the 8th or 9th century a.d.gives a receipe for a transparent varnish composed of linseedOil and resin. In the Mount Athos Handbook " peseri, "or boiledlinseed oil, appears in common use, and with resin is made into avarnish. In the same treatise also we find a clear descriptionof oil painting in the modern sense; but since the dates of thevarious portions of the Handbook are uncertain, we may referrather to Theophilus (about a.d. hoc), who indicates the sameprocess with equal clearness. The passages in Theophilus (i.chs. XX. and xxvi.-xxviii.) are of the first importance for thehistory of oil painting. He directs the artificer to take thecolours he wishes to apply, to grind them carefully withoutwater in oil of linseed prepared as he describes in ch. xx., and topaint therewith flesh and drapery, beasts or birds or foliage,just as he pleases. All kinds of pigments can be ground in theoil and used on wooden panels, for the work must be put out inthe sun to dry. It is noteworthy that Theophilus (ch. xxvii.)seems to confine this method of painting to movable works(on panel, in opere ligneo, in his lanltmi rebus quae sole siccaripossunl) that can be carried out into the sun, but in ch. xxv. ofthe more or less contemporary third book of Heraclius (ViennaQuellenschriften, No. iv.) oil-paint may be dried either in thesun or by artificial heat. Heraclius, moreover, knows howto mix dryers (oxide of lead) with his oil, a device with whichrheophOus is not acquainted. Hence to the latter the defectii the medium was its slow drying, and Theophilus recommendsas a quicker process the gum tempera already described. Inany case, whether the painting be in oil or tempera, the finishedpanel must be varnished in the sun with " vernition " (ch. xxi.),a varnish compounded by heat of linseed oil and a gum, whichis probably sandarac resin. The Mount Athos Handbook, § 53,describes practically the same technique, but indicates it asspecially used for flesh, the inference being that the draperieswere painted in tempera or with wax. It is worth noting thatthe well-known " black Madonnas, " common in Italy as wellas in the lands of the Greek Church, may be thus explained.They are Byzantine icons in which the flesh has been paintedin oil and the draperies in another technique. The oil hasdarkened with age, while the tempera parts have remained incontrast comparatively fresh. Some of them are probably theearliest oil paintings extant.

Oil painting accordingly, though in an unsatisfactory form.

is established at least as early as a.d. hoo. What had beenits previous history? Here it is necessary to take note of theinteresting suggestion of Berger, that it was gradually evolvedin the early Christian centuries from the then dechning en caustictechnique of classical times. We learn from Dioscorides, whodates rather later than the time of Augustus, that resin wasmixed with wax for the painting of ships, and when drying oilscame into use they would make with wax and resin a mediumrequiring less heat to make it fluid than wax alone, and onetherefore more convenient for the brush-form of en caustic.Berger suspects the presence of such a medium in some of themummy-case portraits, and points for confirmation to thechemical analysis of some pigments found in the grave of apainter at Heme St Hubert in Belgium of about the time ofConstantine the Great (i. and ii. 230 seq.). One part wax withtwo to three parts drying (nut) oil he finds by experiment aserviceable medium. Out of this changing wax-technique hethinks there proceeded the use of drying oils and resins as mediain independence of wax. If we hesitate in the meantime toregard this as more than a hypothesis, it is yet worthy of attention,for any hypothesis that suggests a plausible connexionbetween phenomena the origin and relations of which are soobscure deserves a friendly reception.

The Trattato of Cennino Cennini represents two or threecenturies of advance on the Schedula of Theophilus, and aboutcontemporary with it is the so-called Strassburg MS., whichgives a view of German practice just as the Trattato does ofItahan. This MS., attention to which was first caUed byEastlake {Materials, i. 126 seq.), contains a remarkable recipefor preparing " oil for the colours." Linseed or hempseed orold nut oil is to be boiled with certain dryers, of which whitecopperas (sulphate of zinc) is one. This, when bleached in thesun, " will acquire a thick consistence, and also become astransparent as a fine crystal. And this oil dries very fast, andmakes all colours beautifully clear and glossy besides. Allpainters are not acquainted with it: from its excellence it iscalled oleum preciosuni, since half an ounce is well worth ashilling, and with this oil all colours are to be ground andtempered, " while as a final process a few drops of varnishare to be added. The MS. probably dates rather before thanafter 1400.

Cennino's treatise, written a little later, gives avowedlythe recipes and processes traditional in the school of Giottothroughout the 14th century. He begins his account of oilpainting with the remark that it was an art much practised bythe " Germans, " thus bearing out what was said at the commencementof this section. He proceeds (chs. 90-94) to describean oil technique for walls and for panels that sounds quiteeffective and modern. Linseed oil is to be bleached in the sunand mixed with liquid varnish in the proportion of an ounceof varnish to a pound of oil, and in this medium all colours areto be ground. " When you would paint a drapery with thethree gradations, " Cennino proceeds, " divide the tints andplace them each in its position with your' brush of squirrel hair,fusing one colour with another so that the pigments are thicklylaid. Then wait certain days, come again and see how thepaint covers, and repaint where needful. And in this waypaint flesh or anything you please, and likewise mountains,trees and anything else." In other chapters Cennino recommendscertain portions of a painting in tempera to be put in in oO,and nowhere does he give a hint that the work in oU gaveany trouble through its unwillingness to dry. His mediumappears, however, to have been thick, and perhaps somewhatviscous (ch. 92). This combination of oil paint and temperaon the same piece is a matter, as we shall presently see, of somesignificance.

In the De re aedificatoria of L. B. Alberti (written about1450), vi. 9, there is a mention of " a new discovery of layingon colours with oil of linseed so that they resist for ever allinjuries from weather and climate, " which may have somereference to so-called " German " practice.

The next Italian writer w:ho says anything to the purpose is ​Filarete, who wrote a long treatise on architecture and the artsof design about 1464. It is published in the Vienna Quellenschriften,neue Folge, No.III. Like Cennino, Filarete (loc. cit.p.641) speaks of oil painting as specially practised in “Germany,”and says it is a fine art when anyone knows how to compass it.The medium is oil of linseed. “But is not this very thick?”he imagines some one objecting. “Yes, but there is a way ofthinning it; I do not quite know how; but it will be stood out in avessel and clarify itself. I understand however that there is aquicker way of managing this—but let this pass, and let us goon to the method of painting.” Filarete’s evident uncertaintyabout a process, which may be that of the Strassburg MS. forproducing oleum preciosum, and his reference to “Germany,”inclines us to look elsewhere than to Italy for knowledge aboutthe oil technique. As a fact the evidence of the recipe booksis borne out remarkably by that of other records which showthat a great deal of oil painting of one kind or another wenton in northern lands from the 13thcentury onwards. Theserecords are partly in the form of accounts, showing large quantitiesof oil and resins furnished for the use of painters engagedin extensive works of decoration; and partly in the form ofcontracts for executing pictures “in good oil colours.” It istrue that oil might be merely employed in mordants for gildingor in varnishes, and for oil painting merely in house-decoratorfashion over wood, or for colouring statues and reliefs in stone;nevertheless, with a use of proper critical methods, it has beenpossible for M.Dalbon and others to establish incontestablythe employment in artistic wall and panel-painting of dryingoils and varnishes before the 15thcentury, both north and, to alesser extent, south of the Alps. These passages have beentoo often quoted to be cited here. (See Eastlake, Materials,p.46 seq.; Berger, Beiträge iii. 206 seq., &c.) The earliest of theaccounts, an English one, is dated 1239: “The king (HenryIII.)to his treasurer and chamberlains. Pay from our treasury toOdo the goldsmith and Edward his son one hundred and seventeenshillings and tenpence for oil, sandarac resin, and coloursbought, and for pictures executed in the Queen’s Chamber atWestminster.” Another, about 1275 (temp. EdwardI.) runs:“To Robert King, for one cartload of charcoal for drying thepainting in the King’s Chamber, IIIs VIIId.” In Flandersin 1304 there is an account (Dalbon, p.43): “Pour 10 los d’oileacatée pour faire destrempe as couleurs,” in 1373–1374 one forXIII libvres d’oile de linnis à faire couleurs” (p. 45). This wasfor the use of a certain painter Loys, who executed muralcompositions of which some of the subjects are recorded. Inthe matter of contracts, Dalbon (p.52) prints one of 1320 prescribingfigure and landscape subjects, to be executed “en lameilleur manière que il pourront estre faites en painture,” andconcluding, “et seront toutes ces choses faites à huille,” and hepoints convincingly to such wording as a proof that thework here under consideration must be regarded as artisticfigure-painting and not mere house decoration. Lastly, justbefore 1400, the painter Jehan Malouel receives in 1399 oil withcolours for “la peinture de plusieurs tables et tableaux d’autel, "for the Carthusian convent of Champmol near Dijon, whichproves the use of oil for panel as well as for mural painting.

The further question about the survival of actual remainsof work of the class just noticed is a very difficult one. Thereseems no reason why all this mural and panel work in oil of the14thcentury should have perished, unless the medium wasfaulty, and, as is natural, many attempts have been made toidentify extant examples as representing these early phases ofthe oil technique. Mural work we need not perhaps expect tofind, for we know from the later experience of the Italians ofthe 16thcentury that it was difficult even then to find a safemethod for oil painting on plaster. With panels preservationwould be more likely, and it is always possible that some datablework of the kind may be identified that will carry the monumentalhistory of oil painting back into the 14thcentury. An exhibitionof early English painted panels was held in 1896 in therooms of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and some goodjudges believed at the time that certain 14th-century panels fromStMichael at Plea, Norwich, were in oil, but this cannot beregarded as established.

If such then be the early history of oil painting, what attitudeare we to adopt in face of the famous statement by Vasari thatthe technique was the invention of the Flemish painter VanEyck in the year 1410? The statement was first made in the21st chapter of Vasari’s Introduction to his Lives of the Artists(1550), and runs as follows: “Fu una bellissima inventione, ed ungran’ commodità all’ arte della pittura, il trovare il colorito a olio.Di che fu prima invent ore in Fiandra Giovanni da Bruggia (Janvan Eyck). In the life of Antonello da Messina, in the sameedition, Vasari dresses up the bare fact he here relates, and givesit the personal anecdotal turn that accords with his literarymethods. Here the “invention” follows on the incident of thesplitting of a tempera panel varnished in oil, that according totraditional practice Van Eyck had put out in the sun to dry.This artist then turned his attention to devising some means foravoiding such mischances for the future, and, in Vasari’s words,“being not less dissatisfied with the varnish than with theprocess of tempera painting, he began to devise means forpreparing a kind of varnish which should dry in the shade, soas to avoid having to place his pictures in the sun. Havingmade experiments with many things both pure and mixedtogether, he at last found that linseed and nut oil, among themany which he had tested, were more drying than all the rest.These, therefore, boiled with other mixtures of his, made himthe varnish which he had long desired.” This varnish Vasarigoes on to say he mixed with the colours and found that it“lit up the colours so powerfully that it gave a gloss of itself,”without any after-coat of varnish.

Such is the famous passage in Vasari that has probably givenrise to more controversy than any similar statement in the literatureof the arts. The question is, in what did the “invention”of the Van Eycks, Hubert and Jan his younger brother, consist?and the first answer that would occur to anyone knowing alikethe earlier history of the oil medium and Vasari’s anecdotalpredilections is the answer “There was no invention at all.”The drying properties of linseed and nut oil and the way toincrease these had long been known, as had also the preparationof sandarac oil-varnish, as well as a colourless (spirit?) varnish ofwhich there is mention in accounts prior to the 15thcentury(Dalbon, p.93). The mixing of varnish with oil for a mediumwas also known, and indeed the oleum preciosum may be the real“invention” of which Alberti and FUarete had only vaguelyheard, and of which the Van Eycks later on received the credit.The epitaphs for the tombs of the two Van Eycks make no mentionof such a feat as Vasari ascribes to them, and it is quite open toanyone to take up the position that it was no improvement intechnique that brought to the Van Eycks their fame in connexionwith oil painting, but rather an artistic improvement thatconsisted in using a traditional process to execute pictures whichin design, finish, beauty and glow of colour far surpassed everythingpreviously produced in the northern schools. Phnywrites of the works of a Greek painter of about 400B.C. that theywere the first that had the power “to rivet the gaze of thespectator,” and in like manner we may say of the “Adorationof the Lamb” by the Van Eycks, the titular first fruits of theoil painter’s technique, that it impressed the world of its timeso mightily through its artistic power and beauty as to elevateto a sort of mystic importance the very method in which thepaints were mixed. There is much force in this view, but at thesame time it is impossible to deny to the Van Eycks the creditof technical improvements. For one thing, an artist who hasan exceptional feeling for colour, texture and delicacy of finishwill certainly pay special attention to his technical media; foranother, the Van Eycks had a reputation long before Vasari’stime for researches into these media. In 1456, fifteen years afterthe death of the younger brother, Bartolommeo Facio, ofSpezzia, wrote a tract De viris illustribus in which he speaksof a certain “Joannus Gallicus,” who can be identified as Janvan Eyck. as specially “learned in those arts which contributedto the making of a picture, and was on that account credited ​with the discovery of many things in the properties of colours,which he had learned from ancient traditions recorded by Plinyand other writers." P'ilarete (c. 1464) also knew of the repute ofJan van Eyck in connexion with the oil technique. Hence wemay credit the Van Eycks with certain technical improvementson traditional practices and preparations in the oil technique,though these can hardly be termed " inventions, " while theirartistic achievement was great enough to force into prominencewhatever in the technical department they had accomplished.

Another and a more important question remains behind:What was, in fact, the practice in the matter of oil painting invogue before the Van Eycks, altered or at any rate perfectedby them and their successors, and in general use up to the timeof Vasari; and how was it related to the older more widelydiffused painting " a tempera "?

It is indisputable that the oil painting of the Van Eycks andthe early Flemish school, together with that of the Florentinesand Umbrians, and indeed of all the Italians up to Vasari'stime, save the Venetians, Correggio, and some other northItalians, does not greatly differ in artistic effect, nor, as far as canbe judged, in handling, from earlier or contemporary temperas.For example, at Venice in the 15th century, Crivelli paintsalways in tempera, Cima in oils, but the character of their surfaceis almost the same, and if anything the tempera is richer in effectthan the oil. The contrary is no doubt the case with the tempera" Madonna with the Violet " in the Priests' Seminary at Colognewhen compared with the somewhat later " Dombild, " also byStephan Lochner, which is believed to be painted in oils, but thetwo are still in technical character very nearly akin. The factis that tempera panels were usually coated with an oil varnish,necessarily of a somewhat warm tint, and we could hardly expectto distinguish them from oil pictures painted in or covered byvarnish, unless there were a difference in the handling of thepigments. The method of handling appears however to be onthe whole the same, and there are many who believe that in allessentials it is the same. Tempera panels, as we have learnedfrom Cennino, were not only varnished but in parts might bepainted in oils (ch. 143), and it is one view of the technique of theearly Flemings that it was only an over-painting in oils over apreparation in tempera. Berger is of the opinion that the processwas something between the two, that is to say, that it was oiltempera, the medium being an emulsion of oil and water throughthe intermediary of a gum. Such a medium would, as he pointsout {Beitrdgc, III. 247 seq.), combine the thinness and limpidity inmanipulation characteristic of a water tempera with the propertyof drying hard and impervious to moisture. This is of courseonly a theory. Of far more weight is the suggestion made byPrincipal Laurie, of Edinburgh, who has carried on for years aseries of careful experiments in the various pigments and mediaemployed in oil painting. As one result of these experimentshe has found that the ordinary drying oils and oil varnishes donot, as used to be assumed, " lock up " or completely cover andprotect pigments so as to prevent the access of moisture and thegases of the atmosphere, but that this function is far more effectivelyperformed by hard pine-balsams, such as Canada balsam,dissolved in an essential oil and so made into a varnish or paintingmedium. In pictures by Van Eyck Principal Laurie has detectedwhat he believes to be the use of pigments of a notoriouslyfugitive character, and he is convinced that the most effectualmedium for preserving these in the condition in which they havecome down to us would be a natural pine-balsam, with probablya small proportion of drying oil; he suggests therefore that theintroduction of these ingredients may be the real secret of the VanEyck technique. There is as yet no proof that the Van Eycksreally used such a medium, though it is a preparation possibleat their time, and when thinned by a process of emulsificationwith egg, as Dr Laurie suggests, would be a serviceable one; butthey and the other early oil painters certainly used a method, andin all probability media, that did not differ greatly as regardsmanipulation from those in vogue in tempera.

From the aesthetic point of view therefore we have to regardearly oil painting as only another form of the older tempera,

expressing exactly the same artistic ideals and dominated by thesame view of the relation of art to nature. To Vasari the artisticadvantage of the oil medium was, first, its convenience, and, next,the depth and brilliancy it lent to the colours, which he says it

" kindled, " while at the same time it lent itself to a soft fusingof tints in manipulation, so that artists could give to their figuresin this technique the greatest charm and beauty combined witha force that made them seem to stand out in relief from the paneLSuch a description applies very justly to work like that of theVan Eycks in the " Adoration of the Lamb, " or the later panelsof Anlonello da Messina, who, according to Vasari's often repeatedstory, introduced the Flemish system of oil-painting intoVenice. The description does not however apply to the freer,more sweeping, more passionate handling of the brush by thegreatest of the Venetians such as Titian or 'eronese, and stillless to the oil painting of 17th-century masters like Rubens orRembrandt or Velazquez. It is quite clear that whateverimprovements in oil technique were due to the early Flemings,oil painting in the modern sense owes still more to the Venetians,who first taught the world the full artistic possibilities of theprocess. Giovanni Bellini, whose noble altarpiece in S. Pietroat Murano may be called, in a phrase once applied to another ofhis pictures, " the canon of V'enetian art, " is probably entitledto be called the father of modern oil painting. Beginning as apainter in tempera and adopting the new process about 1475,Bellini was able so far to master the new medium that he handedit on with all its possibilities indicated to Giorgione, Palma andTitian. That Venetian oil painting however, with all its briDiancyand freedom, was a child of the older tempera technique is shownby its characteristic method, which consisted in an under-paintingin dead colour, over which were superimposed the transparentglazes that secured the characteristic Venetian richness of colouring.Now all the recent writers on the Van Eyck technique agreethat, whatever were the exact media employed, the temperatradition, and perhaps the tempera vehicles, were maintained forthe under painting. In the old tempera-panel technique ofCennino there was a monochrome under painting in a greenishpigment, over which the flesh tints were spread in thin layers soas never completely to obliterate the ground. Such an under paintingin a few simple colours, black, white and red, wasemployed by Titian and others of the Venetians, and over itwere laid the rich juicy transparent pigments, till " little bylittle he would have covered with real living flesh these firstabstracts of his intention " (Boschini). There is some evidencethat in many cases these under paintings were in tempera, whichwould have the advantage of drying more quickly than under paintingsin oil, and Boschini {Le Ricchc minerc ddla piituraveneziana, 1674) e.xpressly says that the blues in Venetianpaintings, e.g. by Veronese, were painted often a guazzo.There was a reason, however, why the Venetians would alter thetraditional practice of the Flemish forerunners. The latterwere almost entirely panel painters, while the Venetians usedcanvas. Now certain media, like the hard pine-balsams whichDr Laurie thinks were the basis of the Van Eyck medium, aresuitable for the immovable surfaces of a well-grounded panel,but would be liable to crack on canvas which is more or lessyielding. Hence the tougher oil vehicles were in advanced'enetian painting exclusively employed.

This distinction between the thin transparent pigments andthose of an opaque body, which is as old as oil painting in anyform, becomes in the hands of Bellini and the later ^'enetians thefundamental principle of the technique. The full advantage ofthis thinness and transparency is gained by the use of thepigments in question as " glazes " over a previously laid solidimpasto. This impasto may be modelled up in monochrome orin any desired tints chosen to work in with the colours of thesuperimposed glazes. Effects of colour of great depth and brilliancymay thus be obtained, and after the glaze has been floatedover the surface a touch of the thumb, where the under paintingis loaded and lights are required, will so far thin it as to let theunderlying colour show through and blend with the deeper tintof the glaze in the shadows. Thus in the noble Veronese in ​the London National Gallery, called the " Consecration of StNicholas, " the kneeling figure of the saint is robed in green withsleeves of golden orange. This latter colour is evidently carriedthrough as under painting over the whole draped portions ofthe figure, the green being then floated over and so manipulatedthat the golden tint shows through in parts and gives the highfights on the folds.

Again the relation of the two kinds of pigment may be reversed,and the full-bodied ones mixed with white may be struck into apreviously laid transparent tint. The practice of painting into awet glaze or rubbing was especially characteristic of the laterFlemings, with Rubens at their head, and this again, though apolar opposite to that of the Venetians, is also derived from theearlier tempera, or modified tempera, techniques. The oldertempera panels, when finished, were, as we have seen, coveredwith a coating of oil varnish generally of a warm golden hue, andin some parts they were, as Cennino tells us, glazed with transparentoil paint. Now Van Mander tells us in the introduction tohis Schilderboek of 1604, verse 17, that the older Flemish andGerman oil painters. Van Eyck, Dürer and others, were accustomed,over a slightly painted monochrome of water-colour inwhich the drawing was carefully made out, to lay a thin coat ofsemi-transparent flesh tint in oil, through which the under paintingwas still visible, and to use this as the ground for theirsubsequent operations. In the fully matured practice of Rubensthis thin glaze became a complete painting of the shadows inrubbings of deep rich transparent oily pigment, into which thehalf-tones and the lights were painted while it was still wet.Descamps, in his Vie des pcintrcs flamands (Paris, 1753), describesRubens's method of laying in his shadows without any use ofwhite, which he called the poison of this part of the picture, andthen painting into them with solid pigment to secure modellingby touches laid boldly side by side, and afterwards tenderlyfused by the brush. Over this preparation the artist wouldreturn with the few decided strokes which are the distinctivesigns-manual of the great master. The characteristic advantagesof this method of work are, first, breadth, and second, speed.The under tint, often of a rich soft umber or brown, being spreadequally over the canvas makes its presence felt throughout,although all sorts of colours and textures may be painted intoit. Hence the whole preserves a unity of effect that is highlypictorial. Further, as the whole beauty of the work dependson the skill of hand by which the solid pigment is partly sunkinto the glaze at the shadow side, while it comes out drier andstronger in the fights, and as this must be done rightly at once ornot at all, the process under a hand like that of Rubens is asingularly rapid one. Exquisite are the effects thus gained whenthe under tint is allowed to peep through here and there, blendingwith the soUd touches to produce the subtlest effects of tone andcolour.

Of these two distinct and indeed contrasted methods ofhandling oil pigment, with solid or with transparent under painting,that of the Flemings has had most effect on laterpractice. The technique dominated on the whole the Frenchschool of the i8th century, and has had a good deal of influenceon the painting of Scotland. In general, however, the oilpainting of the 17th and succeeding centuries has not beenbound by any distinctive rules and methods. Artists have feltthemselves free, perhaps to an undue extent, in their choice ofmedia, and it must be admitted that very good results have beenachieved by the use of the simplest vehicles that have been known-throughout the whole history of the art. If Rembrandt beginin the Flemish technique, Velazquez uses at first solid under paintingsof a somewhat heavy kind, but when these mastersattain to full command of their media they paint apparentlywithout any special system, obtaining the results they desired,now by one process and now again by another, but alwaysworking in a free untrammelled spirit, and treating the materialsin the spirit of a master rather than of a slave. In modernpainting generally we can no longer speak of established processesand methods of work, for every artist claims the right to experimentat his will, and to produce his result in the way that suits

his own individuality and the special nature of the task beforehim.

§ 45. Water - Colour Painting. — (Cosmo Monkhouse, TheEarlier English Water-Colour Painters, 2nd ed., London, 1897;Redgrave, A Century of Painters; and Hamerton, The GraphicArts, contain chapters on this subject.)

Water-colour painting, as has been said, is only a particularform of tempera, in which the pigments are mixed with gumto make them adhere, and often with honey or glycerin toprevent them drying too fast. The surface operated on is forthe most part paper, though " miniature " painting is in watercolouron ivory. The technique was in use for the illustratedpapyrus rolls in ancient Egypt, and the illuminated MSS. ofthe medieval period. As a rule the pigments used in the MSS.were mixed with white and were opaque or " body " colours,while water-colour painting in the modern sense is mostly transparent,though the body-colour technique is also employed.There is no historical connexion between the water-colourpainting on the vellum of medieval MSS. and the modernpractice. Modern water-colour painting is a developmentrather from the drawings, which the painters from the 1 5th to the17th century were constantly executing in the most varied media.Among the processes employed was the reinforcement of anoutline drawing with the pen by means of a shght wash of thesame colour, generally a brown. In these so-called pen-andwashdrawings artists fike Rembrandt were fond of recordingtheir impressions of nature, and the water-colour picture wasevolved through the gradual development in importance of thewash as distinct from the line, and by the gradual addition to itof colour. It is true that we find some of the old mastersoccasionally executing fully-tinted water-colour drawings quitein a modern spirit. There are landscape studies in body-colourof this kind by Dürer and by Rubens. These are, however, ofthe nature of accidents, and the real development of the techniquedid not begin till the 18th century, when it was workedout, for the most part in England, by artists of whom the mostimportant were Paul Sandby and John Robert Cozens, whoflourished during the latter half of the i8th century. First thewash, which had been originally quite flat, and a mere adjunctto the pen outline, received a certain amount of modelling, andthe advance was quickly made to a complete monochrome inwhich the firm outline still played an important part. Theelement of colour was first introduced in the form of neutraltints, a transparent wash of cool grey being used for the skyand distance, and a comparatively warm tint of brown for theforeground. " The progress of English water-colour, " writesMr Monkhouse, " was from monochrome through neutral tintto full colour." Cozens produced some beautiful atmosphericeffects with these neutral tints, though the rendering of naturewas only conventional, but it was reserved for the second generationof English water-colour artists to develop the full resourcesof the technique. This generation is represented centrally byThomas Girtin (1775-1802) and J. M. W. Turner (1775-1851),the latter of whom is by far the greatest representative of theart that has hitherto appeared. To Girtin, who died youngand whose genius, like that of Masaccio, developed early, is duethe distinction of creating water-colour painting as an artdeahng with the tones and colours of nature as they had beendealt with in the older media. W. H. Pyne, a contemporarywater-colour artist who also wrote on the art, says of Girtin thathe " prepared his drawings on the same principle which hadhitherto been confined to painting in oil, namely, laying in theobject upon his paper with the local colour, and shading the samewith the individual tint of its own shadow. Previous to thepractice of Turner and Girtin, drawings were shaded firstentirely through, whatever their component parts — houses,cattle, trees, mountains, foregrounds, middle-ground and distances,all with black or grey, and these objects were afterwardsstained or tinted, enriched or finished, as is now the customto colour prints. It was the new practice, introduced by thesedistinguished artists, that acquired for designs in water-coloursupon paper the title of paintings." ​Girtin " opened the gates of the art " and Turner entered in.If the palette of the former was still restricted, Turner exhaustedall the resources of the colour box, and moreover enriched theart by adding to the traditional transparent washes the effectsto be gained from the use of body colour. Body colours, however,were not only laid on by Turner with the solid impaste of themedieval illuminations. He was an adept at dragging thinfilms of them over a tinted ground so as to secure the subtlecolour effects which can also be won in pastel. It would beuseless to attempt any account of the technical methods ofTurner or of the more modern practitioners in the art, for as inmodern oil painting so here, each artist feels at liberty to adoptany media and processes which seem to promise the result hehas in view. The varieties of paper used in modern water-colourpractice are very numerous, and the idiosyncrasy of each artistexpresses itself in the way he will manipulate his ground;super induce one over the other his transparent washes; load withsohd body colour; sponge or scratch the paper, or adopt any ofthe hundred devices in which modern practice of painting is sorife. (G. B. B.)

General Authorities on Technique.— Hamerton, The GraphicArts: A Treatise on the Varieties of Drawing, Painting and Engraving(London, 1882), a work combining technical and artistic information,is the best single book on this subject. More archaeologicalis Berger, Beitrage zur Entwickelungs-Geschichte der Maltechnik(Munich, 1897-1904; partly in second editions. The last part isyet to come). The series Quellenschriften für Kunstgeschichte undKunsttechnik des Mittclalters mid der Renaissance (Vienna, variousdates from 1871) contains many publications of much value,among them being, i., Cennino Cennini, Das Buck von der Knnst,German trans, of the Trattato, with note by Ilg; vii., Theophilus,Schedula divers arum artium, Ger. trans, by Ilg. Cennino'sTrattato has also been edited in English by Mrs Herringham(London, 1899). Mrs Merrifield, Ancient Practice of Painting(2 vols., London, 1849), and Sir Charles Eastlake, Materials for aHistory of Oil Painting (2 vols., 1849 and 1869), are valuablestandard works. Information as to Byzantine processes is to befound in the Mount Athos Handbook in " Manuel d'iconographicchretienne grecque et latine, " by Didron the elder (Paris, 1845).Church, The Chemistry of Paints and Painting (:^rAed., London, 1901),is by far the best book on its subject. Vasari on Technique, trans, byMiss Maclehose and edited with commentary by Baldwin Brown(London, 1907), contains a good deal of information. Paul Schultze-Naumburg,Die Technik der Malerei (Leipzig, no date); Vibert,La Science de la peinture (Paris, 1890), may also be mentioned.

Recent Schools of Painting

British.

At the beginning of the last quarter of the 19th centuryBritish art was held to be in a vigorous and authoritativeposition. During the years immediately preceding k had beendeveloping with regularity and had displayed a vitality whichseemed to be full of promise. It was supported by a large arrayof capable workers; it had gained the widest recognition from thepublic; and it was curiously free from those internal conflictswhich diminish the strength of an appeal for popular appreciation.There were then few sharp divergences or subdivisionsof an important kind. The leadership of the Royal Academywas generally conceded, and its relations with the mass ofoutside artists were little wanting in cordiality. One of the chiefreasons for this understanding was that at this time an almostunprecedented approval was enjoyed by nearly all classes ofpainters. Picture-collecting had become a general fashion,and even the youngest workers received encouragement directlythey gave evidence of a reasonable share of capacity. Thedemand was equal to the supply; and though the number ofmen who were adopting the artistic profession was rapidlyincreasing, there seemed little danger of over-production.Pictorial art had established upon all sorts of people a hold toostrong, as it seemed, to be affected by change of fashion. Allpointed in the direction of a permanent prosperity.

Subsequent events provided a curious commentary on theanticipations which were reasonable enough in 1S75. Thatyear is now seen to have been, not the beginning of an eraof unexampled success for British pictorial art, but rather theculminating point of preceding activity. During the periodwhich has succeeded we have witnessed a rapid decline in the

The

Grosveaor

Oallery

and the

Academy,

popular interest in picture-painting and a marked alteration inthe conditions under which artists have had to work. In theplace of the former sympathy between the public and theproducers, there grew up something which almost approachedindifference to their best and sincerest efforts. Simultaneouslythere developed a great amount of internal dissension and ofantagonism between different sections of the art community.As an effect of these two causes, a new set of circ*mstancescame into existence, and the aspect of the British school underwenta radical change. Many art workers found other ways ofusing their energies. The slackening of the popular demandinclined them to experiment, and to test forms of practice whichformerly were not accorded serious attention, and it led to theformation of detached hostile groups of artists always readyto contend over details of technical procedure. Restlessnessbecame the dominant characteristic of the British school, alongwith some intolerance of the popular lack of sympathy.

The first sign of the coming change appeared very soon after1875. The right of the Royal Academy to define and direct thepolicy of the British school was disputed in 1877,when the Grosvenor Gallery was started " with theintention of giving special advantages of exhibitionto artists of established reputation, some of whomhave previously been imperfectly known to thepublic." This exhibition gallery was designed not so much as arival to the Academy, as to provide a place where could becollected the works of those men who did not care to make theirappeal to the public through the medium of a large and heterogeneousexhibition. As a rallying place for the few unusualpainters, standing apart from their fellow^s in conviction andmethod, it had good reason for existence; and that it was notregarded at Burlington House as a rival was proved by the factthat among the contributors to the first exhibition were includedSir Francis Grant, the President of the Royal Academy, and suchartists as Leighton, Millais, G. F. Watts, Alma-Tadema, G. D.Leslie and E. J. Poynter, who were at the time Academicians orAssociates. With them, however, appeared such men asBurne-Jones, Holman Hunt, Walter Crane, W. B. Richmondand J. McN. Whistler, who had not heretofore obtained thepublicity to which they were entitled by the exceptional qualityand intention of their work. There was doubtless some suggestionthat the Academy was not keeping touch with the moreimportant art movements, for shortly after the opening of theGrosvenor Gallery there began that attack upon the official artleaders which has been one of the most noteworthy incidents inrecent art history in Great Britain. The initial stage of thisconflict ended about 1SS6, when the vehemence of the attackhad been weakened, partly by the withdrawal of some of themore prominent " outsiders, " who had meanwhile been electedinto the Academy, and partly by the formation of smallersocieties, which afforded the more " advanced " of the youngermen the opportunities which they desired for the exposition oftheir views. In a modified form, however, the antagonismbetween the Academy and the outsiders has continued. Thevarious protesting art association continues to work in mostmatters independently of one another, with the common beliefthat the dominant influence of Burlington House is not exercisedentirely as it should be for the promotion of the best interestsof British art, and that it maintains tradition as against thedevelopment of individualism and a " new style."

The agitation in all branches of art effort was not entirelywithout result even inside Burlington House. Some of theolder academic views were modified, and changes seriouslydiscussed, which formerly would have been rejected as opposedto all the traditions of the society. Its calmness under attack,and its ostentatious disregard of the demands made upon it bythe younger and more strenuous outsiders, have veiled a greatdeal of shrewd observation of passing events. It may be saidthat the Academy has known when to break up an organizationin which it recognized a possible source of danger, by selectingthe ablest leaders of the opposition to fill vacancies in its ownranks; it has given places on its walls to the works of those ​reformers who were not unwilling to be represented in the annualexhibitions; and it has, without seeming to yield to clamour,responded perceptibly to the pressure of professional opinion.In so doing, though it has not checked the progress of thechanging fashion by which the popular liking for pictorial arthas been diverted into other channels, it has kept its hold uponthe public, and has not to any appreciable extent weakened itsposition of authority.

It is doubtful whether a more definite participation by theAcademy in the controversies of the period would have been ofChanged Condtions of Britishany use as a means of prolonging the former goodrelations between artists and the collectors of worksof art. The change is the result of something morethan the failure of one art society to fulfil its entiremission. The steady falling off in the demand for modernpictures has been due to a combination of causes which havebeen powerful enough to alter nearly all the conditions underwhich British painters have to work. For example, the oldercollectors, who had for some years anterior to 1875 bought upeagerly most of the more important canvases which came withintheir reach, could find no more room in their galleries for furtheradditions; again, artists, with the idea of profiting to the utmostby the keenness of the competition among the buyers, had forcedup their prices to the highest limits. But the most active of allcauses was that the younger generation of collectors did not showthe same inclination that had swayed their predecessors to limittheir attention to modern pictorial art. They turned more andmore from pictures to other forms of artistic effort. They builtthemselves houses in which the possibility of hanging largecanvases was not contemplated, and they began to call upon thecraftsman and the decorator to supply them with what wasnecessary for the adornment of their homes. At first thismodification in the popular taste was scarcely perceptible, butwith every successive year it became more marked in itseffect.

Latterly more money has been spent by one class of collectorsupon pictures than was available even in the best of the timeswhich have passed away; but this lavish expenditure has beendevoted not to the acquisition of works by modern men, but tothe purchase of examples of the old masters. Herein may oftenbe recognized the wish to become possessed of objects whichhave a fictitious value in consequence of their rarity, or whichare " sound investments." Evidence of the existence of thisspirit among collectors is seen in the prevailing eagerness toacquire works which inadequately represent some famousmaster, or are even ascribed to him on grounds not alwayscredible. The productions of minor men, such as HenryMorland, who had never been ranked among the masters,have received an amount of attention quite out of proportionto what merits they possess, if only they can be proved to bescarce examples, or historically notorious. All this impliesin the creed of the art patron a change which has necessarilyreacted on living painters and on the conditions of their artproduction.

These, then, are the conclusions to which we are led by acomparison of the movements which affected the British schoolPortraiturebetween 1875 and the beginning of the 20th century.To a wide appreciation of all types of pictorialart succeeded a grudging and careless estimate of thevalue of the bulk of artistic endeavour. Only a few branchesof production are still encouraged by anything approaching anefficient demand. Portraiture is the mainstay of the majorityof the figure painters; it has never lost its popularity, and may besaid to have maintained satisfactorily its hold upon all classesof society, for the desire to possess personal records is verygeneral and is independent of any art fashion. It has persistedthrough all the changes of view which have been increasinglyactive in recent years. Episodical art, illustrating sentimentalEpisodical Art.motives or incidents with some touch of dramaticaction, has remained popular, because it has somedegree of literary interest; but imaginative works andpictures which have been produced chiefly as expressions of anoriginal regard for nature, or of some unusual conviction as totechnical details, have found comparatively few admirers. Thedesigners, however, and the workers in the decorative arts havefound opportunities which formerly were denied toDecorative Artthem. They have had more scope for the display of their ingenuity and more inducement to exercisetheir powers of invention. A vigorous and influential school ofdesign developed which promised to evolve work of originalityand excellence. British designers gained a hearing abroad, andearned emphatic approval in countries where a sound decorativetradition had been maintained for centuries.

The one dominant influence, that of the Pre-RaphaeliteBrotherhood, which in the fifties was altering the whole complexionWane of Pre Raphelitism and Rise of French Influence.of British art, had begun to wane early in the seventies, and it was rapidly being replaced by another scarcely less distinctive. The younger generation of artists had weaned, even before 1875, of the pre-Raphaelite precision, and were impatient of the restrictions imposed upon their freedom oftechnical expression by a method of practice which requiredlaborious application and unquestioning obedience to a ratherformal code of regulations. They yearned for greater freedomand boldness, and for a better chance of asserting their individualcapacities. So they gave way to a strong reaction against thecreed of their immediate predecessors, and cut themselvesdeliberately adrift.

With the craving of young artists for new forms of techniquecame also the idea that the " old-master traditions " wereopposed to the exact interpretation of nature, and were basedtoo much upon convention to be adapted for the needs of menwho believed that absolute reahsm was the one thing worthaiming at in picture-production. So Paris instead of Romebecame the educational centre. There was to British students,dissatisfied with the half-hearted and imperfect systems ofteaching with which they were tantalized at home, a peculiarlyexhilarating atmosphere in the French studios — an amount ofenthusiasm and a love of art for its own sake without parallelelsewhere. They saw in operation principles which led by theright sequence of stages to sure and certain results. In thesecirc*mstances they allowed their sympathies with Frenchmethods to become rather exaggerated, and were somewhatreckless in their adoption of both the good and bad qualitiesof so attractive a school.

At first the results of this breaking away from all the oldereducational customs were not wholly satisfactory. Britishstudents came back from France better craftsmen, stronger andsounder draughtsmen, more skilful manipulators, and with aninfinitely more correct appreciation of refinements of tone managementthan they had ever possessed before; but theybrought back also a disproportionate amount of French mannerismand a number of affectations which sat awkwardly uponthem. In the first flush of their conversion they went furtherthan was wise or necessary, for they changed their motives aswell as their methods. The quietness of subject and reserveof manner which had been hitherto eminently characteristicof the British school were abandoned for foreign sensationalismand exaggeration of effect. An affectation of extreme vivacity,a liking for theatrical suggestion, even an inclination towardscoarse presentation of unpleasant incidents from modern life— all of which could be found in the paintings of the Frenchartists who were then recognized as leaders — must be noted asimportations from the Paris studios. They were the source ofa distinct degeneration in the artistic taste, and they introducedinto British pictorial practice certain unnatural tendencies.Scarcely less evident was the depreciation in the instinctivecolour-sense of British painters, which was brought about bythe adoption of the French habit of regarding strict accuracyof tone-relation as the one important thing to aim at. Beforethis there had been a preference for rich and sumptuous harmoniesand for chromatic effects which were rather compromiseswith, than exact renderings of, nature; but as the foreigninfluence grew more active, these pleasant adaptations, inspired ​by a sensuous love of colour for its own sake, were abandonedfor more scientific statements. The colder and cruder tone studiesof the modern Frenchman became the models uponwhich the younger artists based themselves, and the standardsagainst which they measured their own success. " Actuality "was gained, but much of the poetry, the delicacy, and thesubtle charm which had distinguished British colourists werelost.

For some while there was a danger that the art of GreatBritain might become hybrid, with the French strain predomi-Dangerof nating. So many students had succumbed to thetheFreacb fascination of a system of training which seemed toInfluence, supply them with a perfect equipment on all points,that they were inclined to despise not only the educationalmethods of their own country, but also the inherent characteristicsof British taste. The result was that the exhibitionswere full of pictures which presented English people andEnglish landscape in a purely arbitrary and artificial manner,strictly in accordance with a French convention which was outof sympathy with British instincts, and indeed, with Britishfacts. Ultimately a discreet middle course was found betweenthe extreme application of the science of the French art schoolsand the comparative irresponsibility in technical matters whichhad so long existed in the British Isles. In the careers of menlike Stanhope Forbes, H. S. Tuke, Frank Bramley, and otherprominent members of the school, many illustrations are providedof the way in which this readjustment has been effected.Their pictures, if taken in a sufficiently long sequence, summarizeinstructively the course of the movement which became activeabout 1875. They prove how valuable the interposition ofFrance has been in the matter of artistic education, and howmuch Englishmen have improved in their understanding of thetechnique of painting.

One noteworthy outcome of the triumph of common senseover fanaticism must be mentioned. Now that the exactWeakenlag relation which French teaching should bear to Britishof the thought has been adjusted, an inclination to revive

the more typical of the forms of pictorial expressionwhich have had their vogue in the past is becomingincreasingly evident. Picturesque domesticity is taking theplace of theatrical sensation, the desire to select and representwhat is more than ordinarily beautiful is ousting the formerpreference for what was brutal and ugly, the effort to pleaseis once again stronger than the intention to surprise or shockthe art lover. Even the Pre-Raphaelite theories and practicesare being reconstructed, and quite a considerable group of youngartists has sprung up who are avowed believers in the principleswhich were advocated so strenuously in 1850.

To French intervention can be ascribed the rise and progressof several movements which have had results of more thanGroups ordinary moment. There was a few years ago muchwithin the banding together of men who believed strongly inthe importance of asserting plainly their belief inthe doctrines to which they had been convertedabroad; and as a consequence of this desire for an offensive anddefensive association, many detached groups were formed withinthe boundaries of the British school. Each of these groupshad some peculiar tenet, and each one had a small orbit of itsown in which it revolved, without concerning itself overmuchabout what might be going on outside. Roughly, there werethree classes into which the more thoughtful British artistscould then be divided. One included those men who were inthe main French in sympathy and manner; another consistedof those who were not insensible to the value of the foreigntraining, but yet did not wish to surrender entirely their faithin the British tradition; and the third, and smallest, was made upof a few individuals who were independent of all assistance fromwithout, and had sufficient force of character to ignore what wasgoing on in the art world. In this third class there was practicallyno common point of view: each man chose his own directionand followed it as he thought best, and each one was preparedto stand or fall by the opinion which he had formed as to the true

French

Influence,

British

School,

function of the painter. Necessarily, in such a gathering therewere several notable personalities who may fairly be reckonedamong the best of English modern masters.

Perhaps the most conspicuous of the groups was the gatheringof painters who established themselves in the Cornish village ofNewlyn (q.v.). This group— " The Newlyn School, " as jhe Newlyoit was called — was afterwards much modified, and schoolmany of its most cherished beliefs were considerablyaltered. In its beginning it was essentially French in atmosphere,and advocated not only strict adherence to realism inchoice and treatment of subject, but also the subordination ofcolour to tone-gradation, and the observance of certain technicaldetails, such as the exclusive use of flat brushes and the laying onof pigments in square touches. The colony was formed, as it were,in stages; and as the school is to be reckoned in the future historyof the British school, the order in which the adherents arrived mayhere i)e set on record. Edwin Harris came first, and was joinedby Walter Langley. Then, in the following order, came RalphTodd, L. Suthers, Fred Hall, Frank Bramley and T. C. Gotch, andPercy Craft and Stanhope Forbes together. H. Detmold andChevallier Tayler next arrived; then Miss Elizabeth Armstrong(Mrs Stanhope Forbes), F. Bourdillon, W. Fortescue and NormanGarstin. Ayerst Ingram, H. S. Tuke, H. Martin and F. Millardwere later visitors. Stanhope Forbes (b. 1857) was trained at theLambeth School and at the Royal Academy, and afterwards inBonnat's studio in Paris. His best known pictures are " A FishSale on a Cornish Beach " (1885), " Soldiers and Sailors " (189O," Forging the Anchor " (1892), and " The Smithy " (1895). He waselected A.R.A. in 1892, and became full Member in 1910. FrankBramley (b. 1867) studied art in the Lincoln School of Art and atAntwerp. He gained much popularity by his pictures, " A HopelessDawn " (1888), " For of such is the Kingdom of Heaven " (1891),and " After the Storm " (1896J, and was elected an Associate in1894. Of late years he had made a very definite departure fromthe technical methods which he followed in his earlier period.T. C. Gotch (b. 1854) had a varied art training, for he worked atthe Slade School, then at Antwerp, and finally in Paris underJean Paul Laurens. He did not long remain faithful to the Newlyncreed, but diverged about 1890 into a kind of decorative symbolism,and for some years devoted himself entirely to pictures of this type.The other men who must be ranked as supporters of the schooladhered closely enough to the principles which were exemplifiedin the works of the leaders of the movement. They were faithfulrealists, sincere observers of the facts of the life with which theywere brought in contact, and quite earnest in their efforts to paintwhat they saw, without modification or idealization.

Another group which received its inspiration directly fromFrance was the Impressionist school (see Impressionism). Thisgroup never had any distinct organization like that of j-^j^ ^^,the French Soci^te des Impressionistes, but among the presslonlstmembers of it there was a general agreement on points school.of procedure. They based themselves, more or less,upon prominent French artists like Manet, Renoir, Pissarro, andClaude Monet, and owed not a little to the example of J. A. M'N.Whistler, whose own art may be said to be in a great measure aproduct of Paris. One of the fundamental principles of theirpractice was the subdivision of colour masses into their componentparts, and the rendering of gradated tints by the ju.xtaposition oftouches of pure colour upon the canvas, rather than by attemptingto match them by previously mixing them on the palette. Inpictures so painted greater luminosity and more subtlety of aerialeffects can be obtained. The works of the British Impressionistshave been seen mostly in the exhibitions of the New English ArtClub. This society was founded in 1885 by a number y^, ^ ^^^of young artists who wished for facilities for exhibition EagUshwhich they felt were denied to them in the other ^^ Club.galleries. It drew the greater number of its earliersupporters from the men who had been trained in foreign schools,and a complete list of the contributors to its exhibitions includesthe names of many of the best known of the younger painters.It was the meeting-place of numerous groups which advocated oneor other of the new creeds, for among its members or exhibitorshave been P. Wilson Steer, Fred Brown, J. S. Sargent {q.v.),Solomon J. Solomon, Stanhope Forbes, T. C. Gotch, Frank Bramley,Arthur Hacker, Francis Bate, Moffat Lindner, J. L. Henry, W. W.Russell, George Thomson, Arthur Tomson, Henry Tonks, C. W.Furse, R. Anning Bell, Walter Osborne, Laurence Housman,J. J. Shannon, W. L. Wyllie, H. S. Tuke, Maurice Greiffenhagen,G. P. Jacomb Hood, Alfred Parsons, Alfred East, J. Buxton Knight,C. H. Shannon, Mark Fisher, Walter Sickert, W. Strang, FrankShort, Edward Stott, Mortimer Menpes, Alfred Hartley, WilliamStott, J. R. Reid, Mouat Loudan, T. B. Kennington, H. Muhrman,A. D. Peppercorn, George Clausen and J. A. M'N. Whistler, and anumber of the Scottish artists, like J. Lavery, J. Guthrie, GeorgeHenry, James Paterson, A. Roche, E. A. Walton, J. E. Christie andE. A. Hornel. A number of the men who have been more or lessactively identified with it have been elected members of the RoyalAcademy, so that it may fairly claim to have e.ercised a definiteinfluence upon the tendencies of modern art. It has .certainly ​done much to prove the extent of the foreign influence upon theBritish school.

In its wider sense the Impressionist school may be said to includenow all those students of nature who strive for the representationof broad effects rather than minute details, who look at the subjectbefore them largely and comprehensively, and ignore all minormatters which would be likely to interfere with the simplicityof the pictorial rendering. To it can be assigned a number ofartists who have never adopted, or have definitely abandoned,the prismatic analysis of colour advocated by the French Impressionists.These men were headed by J. A. M'N. Whistler (q.v.), bornin America in 1835, and trained in Paris under Gleyre. His pictureshave always been remarkable for their beauty of colour combination,and for their sensitive management of subtleties of tone.They gained for the artist a place among the chief modernexecutants, and have attracted to him a host of followers. Othernotable painters who have places in the school are Mark Fisher,an American landscape painter who studied for a while in Gleyre’sstudio, one of the ablest interpreters in England of effects of sunlightand breezy atmosphere; A. D. Peppercorn, a pupil of Gérôme,who makes landscape a medium for the expression of a dignifiedsense of design and a carefully simplified appreciation of contrastsof tone; and P. Wilson Steer, an artist who, began as a follower ofMonet, and based upon his training in the Ecole des Beaux Arts astyle of his own, which he displays effectively in both landscapesand figure pictures.

The International Society of Sculptors, Painters, and Gravers,inaugurated in 1898, although not by its nature confined to Britishart and artists, who compose little more than half ofthe electorate, has its home in London. It succeeds inits object setting before the British public the mostmodern and eccentric expressions of the art of the chiefThe International society.European countries. Its exhibitions are striking and the contributionsfor the most part serious and interesting; but while thefreedom of the artist is insisted on it is doubtful if the more exaggerateddisplays by rebellious painters and sculptors have had muchinfluence on the native school. The presidents have been J. A.M'N. Whistler and Auguste Rodin, and the vice-presidents JohnLavery and William Strang: these personalities, considered alongwith their views and their vigour, sufficiently indicate the spirit andthe politics of the society.

Generally speaking, the very large class of artists who fell onlyto a limited extent under the spell of French teaching includesmost of the figure and landscape men and practicallythe whole of the portrait painters. In all sections offigure painting individual workers in improved technicalmethods have appeared, but most of them have gradually lostFigure Painters.their distinguishing peculiarities of manner, and have year byyear assimilated themselves more closely to their less advancedbrethren. The section in which their energetic propagandise hasbeen most effective is certainly that of imaginative composition.A definite mark has been made there by men like S. J. Solomon(b. 1860; A.R.A. 1896; R.A. 1906)., trained at the Royal Academy,the Munich Academy and the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris,and widely known by such pictures as “Samson” (1887), “TheJudgment of Paris” (1890) and the "Birth of Love" (1895);and Arthur Hacker (b. 1858; A.R.A. 1894; R.A. 1910), educatedat the Academy and in Bonnat’s studio, and the painter of a considerableseries of semi-historical and symbolical canvases. Theyexercised a considerable influence upon their contemporaries, andintroduced some new elements into the later practice of the school.At the same time admirably effective work has been done inthis section and others by many painters who have kept muchmore closely in touch with the older type of aesthetic belief, andhave not associated themselves openly with any of the newermovements. Among the more prominent of these figure paintersthere are, or have been, some excellent craftsmen, whose contributionsto the record of native British art can be accepted asfull of permanent interest. In the school of historical incidentgood work was done by Sir John Gilbert (1817–1897; R.A. 1876),a robust and ingenious illustrator of romantic motives, with anever-failing capacity for picturesque invention; John Pettie(1839–1893; R.A. 1873), a fine colourist and a clever manipulator,whose scenes from the life of past centuries were full of rarevitality; P. H. Calderon (1833–1898; R.A. 1867), a graceful andsincere artist not wanting in originality; and H. Stacy Marks(1829–1898; R.A. 1879), who treated medieval motives with atouch of real humour. Besides these, there are Sir J. D. Linton(b. 1840), who has produced noteworthy compositions in oil andwater colours; Frank Dicksee (b. 1853; A. R.. A. 1881; R.A. 1891),who has gained wide popularity by pictures in which romanceand sentiment are combined in equal proportions; A. C. Gow(b. 1848; R.A. 1881), whose "Cromwell at Dunbar" (1886),"Flight of JamesII. after the Battle of the Boyne " (1888),and “Crossing the Bidassoa” (1896) may be noted as typicalexamples of his performance; J. Seymour Lucas (b. 1849; A.R.A.1886; R.A. 1898), trained at the Royal Academy Schools, and abrilliant painter of what may be called the by-play of history;W. Dendy Sadler (b. 1854), trained partly in London and partlyat Düsseldorf, and well known by his quaintly humorous renderingsof the lighter side of life in the olden times; G. H. Boughton(born in England, but educated first in America and afterwardsin Paris; A.R.A. 1879; R.A. 1896), a specialist in paintings ofold and modern Dutch subjects; the Hon. John Collier (b. 1850),trained at the Slade School, at Munich, and in Paris, and a capablepainter both of the nude figure and of costume; and EdwinA. Abbey, an American (b. 1852), educated at the PennsylvaniaAcademy of the Fine Arts. Abbey came to England in 1876with a great reputation as an illustrator, and did not begin toexhibit oil pictures until 1890; he was elected an Academician in1898. Then there are to be noted classicists like Lord Leighton,Sir L. Alma-Tadema, and Sir E. J. Poynter’s students of theEast like Frederick Goodall (b. 1822; A.R.A. 1853; R.A. 1863;d. 1904), and idealists like Sir W. B. Richmond, K.C.B.; R.A. 1895— all of whom have done much to uphold the reputation of theBritish school for strength of accomplishment and variety ofmotive.

The painters of sentiment have in the main adhered closely tothe tradition which has been handed down through successivegenerations. Among these may be noted Marcus Stone(b. 1840), elected an Academician in 1887, an original artist whose dainty fancies are familiar to students of modern art. His pictures nearly all appeared in the exhibitions ofPainters of Sentiment.the Royal Academy. Another popular artist is G. D. Leslie (b. 1835),elected an Associate in 1868 and an Academician in 1876, whohas been responsible for a number of domestic old-world subject picturesremarkable for freshness of treatment and delicacy offeeling. The list may also be held to include Henry Woods(b. 1846; A.R.A. 1882; R.A. 1893), and since 1877 a painterof scenes from Venetian life; R. W. Macbeth (b. 1848; A.R.A.1883; R.A. 1903), whose elegant treatment of rustic subjectsdisplays a very attractive individuality. Among the painters ofsentiment should also be included Sir Luke Fildes (b. 1844),educated at the South Kensington and Royal Academy Schools,elected an Academician in 1887, the painter of such famouspictures as " The Casual Ward " (1874), " The Widower " (1876)," The Return of the Penitent " (1879), and " The Doctor " (1892);and Sir Hubert von Herkomer, C.V.O. (b. 1849; A.R.A. 1879; R.A.1890; knighted 1907), famous not only by his many memorable canvasesand by his extraordinary versatility in the arts, but also as ateacher and a leader in a number of educational movements.

Not many military pictures of high merit have been producedduring the period. The artists, indeed, who occupy themselveswith this class of art are not numerous, and theymostly devote their energies to illustrate picturesrather than to large canvases. Lady Butler (néeElizabeth Thompson), whose “Roll Call,” exhibited in 1874,Military Painting.brought her instant popularity, continued to paint subjects ofthe same type, among which " Quatre Bras " (1875), " TheDefence of Rorke’s Drift" (1881), "The Camel Corps" (1891)and " The Dawn of Waterloo " (1895) are perhaps the most worthyof record. Ernest Crofts (b. 1847; A.R.A. 1878; R.A. 1896),trained in London and Düsseldorf, has taken a prominent positionby such pictures as " Napoleon at Ligny " (1875), " Napoleonleaving Moscow" (1887), "The Capture of a French. Battery bythe 53rd Regiment at Waterloo " (1896), and by many similarrepresentations of historical battles. Occasional pictures havecome also from A. C. Gow, R. Caton Woodville, W. B. Wollen,J. P. Beadle, John Charlton, and a few more men who are betterknown by their work in other directions.

The number of artists who have devoted the greater part oftheir energies to portraiture has been steadily on the increase.Most of the men who have taken definite rank amongthe figure painters have made reputations by theirportraits also, but there are many others who have kept almostexclusively to this branch of practice. Into the first divisionPortraiture.come such noted artists as Sir John Millais, Sir E. J. Poynter,G. F. Watts, Sir Luke Fildes, Sir Hubert von Herkomer, SirL. Alma-Tadema, Sir W. B. Richmond, Seymour Lucas, the Hon.John Collier, S. J. Solomon, Arthur Hacker, Sir W. Q. Orchardson,J. A. M'N. Whistler, Frank Dicksee, Stanhope Forbes, FrankBramley, H. S. Tuke, T. C. Gotch, P. W. Steer, John Bacon andFrank HoU. In the second must be reckoned J. S. Sargent(A.R.A. 1894; R.A. 1897), an American citizen (b. 1856), a pupilof Carolus Duran, who after 1885 was recognized as one of themost brilliant painters of the day; J. J. Shannon, also an American(b. 1862), trained at the South Kensington School, and electedan Associate in 1897, a graceful and accomplished artist, with asound technical method and a delightful sense of style; A. S. Cope(b. 1857), trained in Paris, and elected an Associate in 1899, whocarries on soundly the better traditions of the British school;James Sant (b. 1820), elected an Academician in 1870, a strongfavourite of the public throughout a long career; W. W.Ouless (b. 1848; A.R.A. 1877; R.A. 1881), trained in the RoyalAcademy Schools, an industrious and prolific worker; H. T. Wells(b. 1828; A.R.A. 1866; R.A. 1870), trained in London and Paris,who produced a long series of portraits and portrait groups, andmany miniatures; W. Llewellyn (b. 1860), educated at the SouthKensington Schools and in Cormon’s studio in Paris, an abledraughtsman and a thorough executant; C. W. Furse (q.v.), trained ​first in the Slade School under Professor Legros and afterwards inParis, whose early death removed a master of his art; and otherslike Walter Osborne, Richard Jack, Glyn Philpot and Gerald Kelly.

In the class of figure painters, who are individual in their work,and owe little or nothing to the suggestions of foreign teachers, anumber of artists can be enumerated who have in commonlittle besides a sincere desire to express their personal convictionin their own way. Among them are some of themost distinguished of modern artists, who stand outIndividual Figure Painters.

Decorative Painters.

as the unquestioned chiefs of the school. Sir John Millaisoccupies a place in this group by virtue of his admirablepictorial work, and with him are W. Holman Hunt, Dante GabrielRossetti, G.F. Watts, Sir Edward Burne-Jones, Albert Moore andFord Madox Brown, each one of whom may be regarded as a leader.There are also J.M. Strudwick (b.1849), R. Spencer Stanhope(d.1908) and Evelyn de Morgan, followers of Burne-Jones, andJ.W. Waterhouse (A.R.A. 1885; R.A. 1895), in many ways themost original and inspired of English imaginative painters; and,again, M. Greiffenhagen, F. Cayley Robinson and Mrs Swynnerton.Into this class come also the decorative painters, Walter Crane(b.1845), a prolific illustrator and picture-painter andproducer of an extraordinary amount of work inbranches of decoration; Frank Brangwyn, whosepictures and designs are marked by fine qualities of executionand by much sumptuousness of colour; and several others, likeH.J. Draper, Harold Speed, R. Anning Bell, Gerald Moira andG. Spencer Watson. As a branch of the decorative school, a smallgroup of artists who have revived the practice of tempera-paintingmust also be noted. It includes MrsAdrian Stokes, J.D. Batten,J.E. Southall, Arthur Gaskin, and a few others with well-markeddecorative tendencies.

During recent years a movement has begun which apparentlyaims at the revival of Pre-Raphaelitism. It is headed by a fewyoung artists, whose methods show a minglingtogether of the precision of the 19th-century Pre-Raphaelites and a kind of decorative formality. Theinfluential of the artists concerned in the formationThe New Pre-Repahelite School. of this new school is J. Byam Shaw (b.1872), whoseoriginality and quaintness of fancy give to his pictures a more thanordinary degree of persuasiveness. A strong colourist and an abledraughtsman, he possesses in a high degree the faculty of imaginativeexpression, allied with humour that never degenerates into farce.His strongest preference is for symbolical subjects which embodysome moral lesson. Other prominent members of the group areF. Cadogan Cowper (A.R.A. 1907) and Miss Eleanor Fortescue-Brickdale,who is in manner much like Byam Shaw, but yet doesnot sink her individuality in mere imitative effort.

The painters of landscapes and sea-pictures have for the mostpart been little affected by the unrest which has caused so manynew departures in figure-work. A love of nature hasalways been one of the best British characteristics,and it is proved itself to be strong enough to keepthose artists who seek their inspiration out of doors from fallingLandscape Painters.to any great extent under the control of particular technicalfashions. Therefore there is in the school of " open-air " paintinglittle evidence of any change in point of view, or of the growth of anymodern feeling at variance with that by which masters of landscapewere swayed a century or more ago. Impressionism has gained afew adherents, and the French Barbizon school—itself created inresponse to a suggestion from England—has reacted upon a sectionof the younger artists. But, on the whole, in this branch of artthe British school has gained in power and confidence, withoutsurrendering that sturdy independence which in the past producedsuch momentous results. The absence of any common convention,or of any set pattern of landscape which would lead to uniformityof effort, has left the students of nature free to express themselvesin a personal way. The most devout believers in the value of Frenchtraining, and in the infallibility of the dogmas which emanate fromthe Paris studios, have not, except in rare instances, demanded anyradical remodelling of the British landscape school on French lines,as local conditions affecting the practice of this branch of art makeimpossible all drastic alterations. Most workers in the front rankcan claim to be judged on individual merits, and not as membersof a particular coterie. Still, it is convenient to divide the membersof the landscape school into such classes as realists, romanticistsand subjective painters of landscape.

Among the most notable of the first class are H. W. B. Davis(b.1883; A.R.A. 1873; R.A. 1877), the painter of a long series ofdainty scenes which suggest happily the charm ofrural England; Peter Graham, elected an Academicianin 1881, who has alternated for the greater part of hisworking life between Scottish moorland subjects, with cattleRealistic Landscape.wandering on bare hillsides and pictures of coast scenery, withsea-gulls perched on dark rocks; David Murray (b.1849; A.R.A.1891; R.A. 1905), an artist whose career has been marked byconsistent effort to interpret nature's suggestions with dignity andintelligence; Sir Ernest A. Waterlow (b.1850; A.R.A. 1890; R.A.1903), trained in the Royal Academy and afterwards President ofthe Royal Society of Painters in Water-Colours, a graceful painter,with a tender colour feeling and an excellent technical style; YeendKing (b.1855), trained partly in England, and partly in Paris underBonnat and Cormon, a sound craftsman who made a reputation bylandscapes in which are introduced groups of figures on a fairlyimportant scale; Alfred Parsons (b.1847), elected an Associate in1897, who paints rich river scenery with careful regard for actualityand with much minuteness and exquisiteness of detail, especiallyin the rendering of flowers; and Frank Walton (b.1840), who chooses,as a rule, landscape motives which enable him to display unusualpowers of accurate draughtsmanship. To the same class of realistsbelonged Vicat Cole, R.A.; Birket Foster, J.W. Oakes, A.R.A.;Keeley Halswelle, and perhaps Alfred W. Hunt, though in his caserealism was tempered by a delicate poetic imagination.

The romanticists and pastoral painters have in many cases beenperceptibly affected by the example of the Barbizon school, but theyowe much to such famous Englishmen as Cecil Lawson,John Linnell (both of whom died in 1882), George Mason (A.R.A. 1868; d.1872) and Frederick Walker (A.R.A. 1871; d.1875). The most prominent laterRomantic and Pastoral Painters.member of the group is, perhaps. Sir Alfred East(b.1849), trained first in the Glasgow School of Art and afterwardsin Paris, elected an Associate in 1899, a painter endowedwith an exceptional faculty for suggesting the poetry of natureand with an admirable sense of decorative arrangement; butthere are, besides, Leslie Thomson (b.1851), whose art is especiallysound and sincere; J. Aumonier, a pastoral painter with veryrefined appreciation of subtleties of aerial colour; C.W. Wyllie,a painter of delicate vision and charm of presentation; J.S. Hill,whose sombre landscapes are distinguished in design and impressivein their depth of tone; R.W. Allan (b.1852), who uses a robusttechnical method with equal skill in landscapes and coast subjects;J. Buxton Knight (b.1842; d.1908), a vigorous manipulator,with a liking for rich harmonies and low tones; Joseph Knight(b.1838; d.1909), whose well drawn and broadly painted picturesin oil and water-colour have been for many years appreciatedby lovers of unaffected nature; Lionel P. Smythe (A.R.A.1898), a colourist who handles exquisitely the most delicate atmosphericeffects and is unusually successful in his rendering ofdiffused daylight; J. W. North (A.R.A. in 1893), a painter offanciful landscapes in which definition of form is subordinated tomodulations of decorative colour; Claude Hayes, who studied in theRoyal Academy Schools, and carried on the tradition establishedby David Cox and his contemporaries; J. L. Pickering, a lover ofdramatic light-and-shade contrasts and a student of romantic mountainscenery; A.D. Peppercorn, who gives breadth and dignitywith sombre colour and delicate gradation of tone; Adrian Stokes(b.1854; A.R.A. 1910) and M. Ridley Corbet (who died in 1902, onlya few months after his election as an Associate of the Royal Academy),a classicist in landscape, in whose pictures can be perceived a definitereflection of the teaching of Professor Costa, the Italian master.There must also be noted, as leaders among the pastoral painters,George Clausen (b.1852), trained first in the South KensingtonSchool and afterwards in Paris under Bouguereau and Robert-Fleury,and elected an Associate in 1895 and R.A. in 1908, whobegan as a strict realist and afterwards developed into a rusticidealist; H. H. La Thangue, trained in the Royal Academy Schoolsand in Paris, elected an Associate in 1898, an artist of amazingtechnical vigour and an uncompromising interpreter of ruralsubjects; Edward Stott (A.R.A. 1906), trained in Paris underCarolus Duran and Cabanel, who paints delicately the more poeticaspects of the life of the fields; J. Arnesby Brown (b.1866;A.R.A. 1903); Oliver Hall, Albert Goodwin, A. Friedenson andothers.

The painters of landscape subjectively considered, who conventionalizenature with the idea of giving to their pictures a kindof sentimental as distinguished from emotional suggestion,are most strikingly represented by B. W. Leader (b.1831), trained in the Worcester Schoolof Design and in the Royal Academy Schools, and elected anSubjective Landscape.Academician in 1898. He became a strong favourite of thepublic, and his academic and precise technical methods werewidely admired by the many people who are not satisfiedwith unaffected transcriptions of natural scenes and of the passionof nature.

In marine painting no one has appeared to rival Henry Moore,perhaps the greatest student of wave-forms the world has seen;but good work has been done by the late Edwin Hayes, an Irish painter, whose powers showed no sign of failure up to his death in 1904. after some half-century of continuous labour; W.L. Wyllie (b.1851; A.R.A. 1889;Marine Painting.R.A. T907), trained in the Royal Academy Schools, who paints seaand shipping with intelligent understanding; T. Somerscales, a self taughtartist, with an intimate knowledge of the ocean derived fromlong actual experience as a sailor; and especially C. Napier Hemy(b.1841; A.R.A. 1898; R.A. 1910), trained at the AntwerpAcademy and in the studio of Baron Leys, a powerful manipulator,with a preference for the dramatic aspects of his subject. J.C.Hook (d.1907), retained into old age the subtle qualities whichmade his pictures notable among the best productions of the Britishschool. Mention must be made of John Brett (1830-1902; A.R.A.1881), the one Pre-Raphaelite sea painter, and Hamilton Macallum ​(1841–1896), who painted rippling water in bright sunlight withdelightful delicacy and charm of manner.

The school of animal painting is a small one, and includes only afew of marked ability. The chief members include Briton Riviere,(b. 1840; A.R.A. 1878; R.A. 1881), one of the most imaginativeand inventive of living artists; J. M. Swan (1847–1910; A.R.A.1894; R.A. 1905), trained first at Lambeth, and afterwards in ParisAnimal Painting.under Gerome and Fremiet, a skilful manipulator and asensitive draughtsman, and especially remarkable for hisintimate understanding of animal character, mainly ofthe felidae (see also Sculpture); J.T. Nettleship (1841–1902), trainedchiefly in the Slade School, whose studies of the greater beasts ofprey are admirably sincere and well painted; Miss Lucy Kemp-Welch(b. 1869), trained in the Herkomer School at Bushey, whopaints horses with unusual power; and John Charlton (b. 1849),trained in the South Kensington School, also well known by hispictures of horses and dogs.

There are local schools which claim attention because of thevalue of their contributions to the aggregation of British art.The most active of these belong to the Scottish school,the centres of Glasgow, Edinburgh, and Aberdeen,which have produced some of the most distinguishedBritish artists. The Royal Academy of London, indeed, withScottish Schools.most of the other leading art societies, has been largely recruitedfrom Scotland. There have been added to its modern roll thenames of W. Q. Orchardson. Peter Graham, J. MacWhirter,J. Pettie, Erskine Nichol, T. Faed, David Murray, Colin Hunter,R. W. Macbeth, D. Farquharson, J. Farquharson, George Henry:all of them painters of well-established reputation; and there aremany other well-known Scottish artists who have made Londontheir headquarters, like Arthur Melville, a portrait and subject painterand a masterly water-colourist; E. A. Walton, who isequally successful with portraits, landscapes, and decorative compositions;J. Coutts-Michie, who alternates between portraitureand landscapes of admirable quality; John Lorimer, who hasexhibited a number of excellent subject-pictures and many fineportraits; T. Graham, an unafTected painter of sentiment, anda good colourist; Grosvenor Thomas, known best by his freelyhandled and expressive landscapes; T. Austen Brown, who paintssemi-decorative pastorals with unusual vigour of statement; JohnLavery, who has taken rank amongst the best of recent portraitpainters; and Robert Brough, another portrait painter of vigour,with a subtle sense of colour, whose early and tragic death cut shorta promising career. The most notable of the men who remainedin Scotland include Alexander Roche, whose remarkable capacityhas brought him many successes in portraiture, figure compositions,and decorative paintings on a large scale; W. Y. MacGregor, a leaderof the school of landscape painters, fine in style and a master ofeffect; D. Y. Cameron, an admirable oil-painter and a famous etcher;and Sir James Guthrie, P.R.S.A. well known for his excellentportraits; James Paterson, R. B. Nisbet and Robert Noble, alllandscape painters of marked originality and sound technicalmethod; W. McTaggart (d. 1910), the brilliant impressionist; E. A.Hornel and W. Hole, decorative painters who have produced manycanvases remarkable for robust originality and rare breadthof treatment; W. Mouncey, a landscape painter who united thedignity of the Barbizon school with a typically Scottish freedom ofexpression; and Sir George Reid, ex-P.R.S.A., one of the ablestand most distinguished of portrait painters.

The water-colour painters can fairly be said to have keptunchanged the essential qualities of their particular form of practice.They have departed scarcely at all from the executivemethods which have been recognized as correct fornearly a century, but they have amplified them and haveadapted them to a greater range of accomplishment, developing, itWater-Colour.may be added, the “blottesque” or the accidental manner suggestiveof summary decision. Latterly water-colour painting has cometo rival oils in its application to all sorts of subjects; and it is usednow with absolute freedom by a very large number of skilful artists.Many of the men who have done the best work in this mediumare known as oil painters of the highest rank; and among livingworkers the same capacity to excel in either mode of expression isby no means uncommon. There have been in recent times suchmasters as Sir John Gilbert, Sir E. Burne-Jones, Ford Madox Brown,Dante Gabriel Rossetti, A. W. Hunt, H. G. Hine, Henry Moore,Albert Moore, C. E. Holloway, and perhaps should be includedE. M. Wimperis, whose water-colours are at least as worthy ofadmiration as their oil pictures. As water-colourists, much creditis due to Sir E. J. Poynter for his landscapes, portraits, andfigure drawings; Sir L. Alma-Tadema for his minutely detailedclassic subjects; Sir J. D. Linton for his historical and romanticcompositions; Sir E. A. Waterlow for his delicately expressivelandscapes; Sir Hubert von Herkomer for his admirably handledfigure subjects; George Clausen for pastorals charming in sentimentand distinguished by fine qualities of colour; J. Aumonier, A. D.Peppercorn, J. S. Hill, J. W. North, Leslie Thomson, Frank Waltonand R. W. Allan for landscapes of special excellence; E. J.Gregory (d. 1909), and Cadogan Cowper, for figure compositionspainted with amazing sureness of touch; Alfred Parsons for landscapesand flower studies; J. R. Reid, W. L. Wyllie, E. Hayes andC. N. Hemy for sea and coast pictures; R. W. Macbeth, ClaudeHayes and Lionel Smythe for rustic scenes with figures in the openair; J. M. Swan for paintings of animals; and G. H. Boughton forcostume subjects and delicately poetic fancies. Besides, there isa long list of noteworthy painters whose reputations have beenchiefly or entirely made by their successful management of watercolour,and into this list come Birket Foster, the head of the old fashionedschool of dainty rusticity; Carl Haag, a wonderful manipulator,who occupied himself almost exclusively with Eastern subjects;Thomas Collier, A. W. Weedon, H. B. Brabazon, G. A. Fripp, P. J.Naftel, G. P. Boyce, Albert Goodwin, R. Thorne-Waite, F. G. Cotman,Harry Hine, Clarence Whaite and Bernard Evans, whose landscapesshow thorough understanding of nature and distinctive individualityof method; Mrs Allingham, an artist of e.xquisite refinement, whoseidealizations of country' life have a more than ordinary degree ofmerit; Clara Montalba, an able painter of impressions of Venice;Kate Greenaway, unrivalled as an interpreter of the graces of childhood,and endowed with the rarest originality; Mrs StanhopeForbes, an accomplished executant of well-imagined romanticmotives; and J. R. Weguelin, one of the most facile and expressivepainters of fantastic figure subjects. By the aid of these artists, andmany others of at least equal ability, such as J. Crawhall, J. Paterson,R. Little, Edwin Alexander, Arthur Rackham and J. WalterWest, traditions worthy of all respect have been maintained sincerelyand with intelligent discrimination; and to their efforts has beenaccorded a larger measure of popular support than is bestowedupon any other form of pictorial production.

See Richard Muther, History of Modern Painting (Eng. ed.,1895); R. de la Sizeranne, English Contemporary Art (Eng. ed.,1898); Ernest Chesneau, The English School of Painting (2nd Eng.ed., 1885); Clement and Hutton, Artists of the 19th Century (Boston,U.S.A., 1885); David Martin and F. Newbery, The Glasgow Schoolof Painting (1897); W.D. McKay, R.S.A., The Scottish School ofPainting (London, 1906); E. Pinnington, George Paul Chalmers andthe Art of his Time (1896); Gleeson White, The Master Painters ofBritain (1897); E.T. Cook, A Popular Handbook to the NationalGallery, vol. ii. (1901); J.E. Hodgson, R.A., Fifty Years of British Art(1887); A.G. Temple, Painting in the Queen’s Reign (1897); CosmoMonkhouse, British Contemporary Artists (1899); G.R. Redgrave,History of Water-Colour Painting in England 1750–1889 (1889).Also the Transactions of the National Association for the Advancementof Art (Liverpool, 1888; Edinburgh, 1889; and Birmingham,1890); the magazines devoted to the arts; and the principalreviews, such as “English Art in the Victorian Age” (QuarterlyReview, January 1898). The Year’s Art (1879–1910; ed. A.C.R.Carter) is an invaluable annual publication fully and accuratelychronicling the art institutions and art movements in GreatBritain. (M. H. S.)