NEW GUIDES TO OLD MASTERS
BY JOHN C. VAN DYKE
London — National Gallery, Wallace Collection. With a General Introduction and Bibliog- raphy for the Series net $1.00
Paris — Louvre . net .75
Amsterdam — Rijks Museum "i
The Hague — Royal Gallery > bound together . net .75
Haarlem — Hals Museum )
Brussels — Royal Museum ) , , , . , An^erp-Royal Museum ^ound together . nef .75
n. in.
IV. V.
VI. VII.
VIII. IX.
X. Florence — Ufflzi, Pitti, Academy XI. Rome — Vatican, Borghese Gallery XII. Madrid — Prado
Munich — Old Pinacothek }
Frankfort — Staedel Institute > bound together
Cassel — Royal Gallery )
Berlin— Kaiser-Friedrich }
Museum > bound together
Dresden — Royal Gallery ) Vienna — Imperial Gallery ^ Budapest — Museum of Fine > bound together
Arts ) St. Petersburg — Hermitage ,
together
net l.Oo net 1.00
net 1.00
In Press In Press
In Press In Press In Press
OLD PINACOTHEK, MUNICH STAEDEL INSTITUTE, FRANKFORT
ROYAL GALLERY, CASSEL
Photograph by Bruckmnnn. Munich
BARTOLOMMEO VENETCK PORTRAIT OF YOUNG WOMAN The Staedel Institute, Frankfort-on-Main
NEW GUIDES TO OLD MASTERS
MUNICH, FKANKFORT,
CASSEL
CRITICAL NOTES ON THE OLD PINACOTHEK,
THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE, THE CASSEL
ROYAL GALLERY
BY
JOHN C. VAN DYKE
u
AUTHOR o» "ABT FOB ART'S BAKE," "THE MEANING OF PICTURES,' "HISTORY OP PAINTING," "OLD DUTCH AND
FLEMISH MASTEBS," ETC.
NEW YORK
CHARLES SCBiEBNER'S SONS 1914
> , , > ! 1 » a .'>•'<
K3
COPYRIGHT, 1914, BY
CHARLES SCRIBNEB'S SONS
Published May, 1914
PREFACE TO THE SERIES
THERE are numerous guide-books, catalogues, and histories of the European galleries, but, unfortunately for the gallery visitor, they are either wholly descrip- tive of obvious facts or they are historical and ar- chaeological about matters somewhat removed from art itself. In them the gist of a picture — its value or mean- ing as art — is usually passed over in silence. It seems that there is some need of a guide that shall say less about the well-worn saints and more about the man behind the paint-brush; that shall deal with pictures from the painter's point of view, rather than that of the ecclesiastic, the archaeologist, or the literary ro- mancer; that shall have some sense of proportion in the selection and criticism of pictures; that shall have a critical basis for discrimination between the good and the bad; and that shall, for these reasons, be of ser- vice to the travelling public as well as to the art student.
This series of guide-books attempts to meet these requirements. They deal only with the so-called " old masters." When the old masters came upon the scene, flourished, and ceased to exist may be deter- mined by their spirit as well as by their dates. In Italy the tradition of the craft had been established before Giotto and was carried on by Benozzo, Botti-
v
393596
vi PREFACE TO THE SERIES
celli, Raphael, Titian, Tintoretto, even down to Tie- polo in the eighteenth century. But the late men, the men of the Decadence, are not mentioned here because of their exaggerated sentiment, their inferior workmanship — in short, the decay of the tradition of the craft. In France the fifteenth-century primitives are considered, and also the sixteenth-century men, including Claude and Poussin; but the work of the Rigauds, Mignards, Coypels, Watteaus, and Bouchers seems of a distinctly modern spirit and does not be- long here. This is equally true of all English painting from Hogarth to the present time. In Spain we stop with the School of Velasquez, in Germany and the Low Countries with the seventeenth-century men. The modern painters, down to the present day, so far as they are found in the public galleries of Europe, will perhaps form a separate guide-book, which by its very limitation to modern painting can be better treated by itself.
Only the best pictures among the old masters are chosen for comment. This does not mean, however, that only the great masterpieces have been considered. There are, for instance, notes upon some three hun- dred pictures in the Venice Academy, upon five hun- dred in the Uffizi Gallery, and some six hundred in the Louvre or the National Gallery, London. Other galleries are treated in the same proportion. But it has not been thought worth while to delve deeply into the paternity of pictures by third-rate primitives or
PREFACE TO THE SERIES vii
to give space to mediocre or ruined examples by even celebrated painters. The merits that now exist in a canvas, and can be seen by any intelligent observer, are the features insisted upon herein.
In giving the relative rank of pictures, a system of starring has been followed.
Mention without a star indicates a picture of merit, otherwise it would not have been selected from the given collection at all.
One star (*) means a picture of more than average importance, whether it be by a great or by a medi- ocre painter.
Two stars (**) indicates a work of high rank as art, quite regardless of its painter's name, and may be given to a picture attributed to a school or by a painter un- known.
Three stars (***) signifies a great masterpiece.
The length of each note and its general tenor will in most cases suggest the relative importance of the picture.
Catalogues of the galleries should be used in con- nection with these guide-books, for they contain much information not repeated here. The gallery catalogues are usually arranged alphabetically under the painters' names, although there are some of them that make reference by school, or room, or number, according to the hanging of the pictures in the gallery. But the place where the picture may be hung is constantly shifting; its number, too, may be subject to alteration with each new edition of the catalogue; but its painter's
viii PREFACE TO THE SERIES
name is perhaps less liable to change. An arrangement, therefore, by the painters* names placed alphabetically has been necessarily adopted jn these guide-books. Usually the prefixes "de," "df," "van/' and "von" have been disregarded in the arrangement of the names. And usually, also, the more familiar name of the artist is used — that is, Botticelli, not Filipepi; Correggio, not Allegri; Tintoretto, not Robusti. In practical use the student can ascertain from the picture-frame the name of the painter and turn to it alphabetically in this guide- book. In case the name has been recently changed, he can take the number from the frame and, by turning to the numerical index at the end of each volume, can ascertain the former name and thus the alphabetical place of the note about that particular picture.
The picture appears under the name or attribution given in the catalogue. If there is no catalogue, then the name on the frame is taken. But that does not necessarily mean that the name or attribution is accepted in the notes. Differences of view are given very frequently. It is important that we should know the painter of the picture before us. The question of attribution is very much in the air to-day, and consider- able space is devoted to it not only in the General In- troduction but in the notes themselves. Occasionally, however, the whole question of authorship is passed over in favour of the beauty of the picture itself. It is always the art of the picture we are seeking, more than its name, or pedigree, or commercial value.
PREFACE TO THE SERIES ix
Conciseness herein has been a necessity. These notes are suggestions for study or thought rather than complete statements about the pictures. Even the matter of an attribution is often dismissed in a sentence though it may have been thought over for weeks. If the student would go to the bottom of things he must read further and do some investigating on his own account. The lives of the painters, the history of the schools, the opinions of the connoisseurs may be read elsewhere. A bibliography, in the London vol- ume, will suggest the best among the available books in both history and criticism.
The proper test of a guide-book is its use. These notes were written in the galleries and before the pic- tures. I have not trusted my memory about them, nor shall I trust the memory of that man who, from his easy chair, declares he knows the pictures by heart. The opinions and conclusions herein have not been lightly arrived at. Indeed, they are the result of more than thirty years' study of the European galleries. That they are often diametrically opposed to current views and beliefs should not be cause for dismissing them from consideration. Examine the pictures, guide- book in hand. That is the test to which I submit and which I exact.
Yet with this insistence made, one must still feel apologetic or at least sceptical about results. However accurate one would be as to fact, it is obviously impos- sible to handle so many titles, names, and numbers
x PREFACE TO THE SERIES
without an occasional failure of the eye or a slip of the pen; and however frankly fair in criticism one may fancy himself, it is again impossible to formulate judg- ments on, say, ten thousand pictures without here and there committing blunders. These difficulties may be obviated in future editions. If opinions herein are found to be wrong, they will be edited out of the work just as quickly as errors of fact. The reach is toward a reliable guide though the grasp may fall short of full attainment.
It remains to be said that I am indebted to Mr. and Mrs. George B. McClellan for helpful suggestions re- garding this series, and to Mr. Sydney Philip Noe not only for good counsel but for practical assistance in copying manuscript and reading proof.
JOHN C. VAN DYKE. RUTGERS COLLEGE, 1914,
THE OLD PINACOTHEK, MUNICH
NOTE ON THE OLD PINACOTHEK
THE Old Pinacothek is one of the best-known and most-frequented galleries of Europe. Perhaps this is due to the fact that Munich lies in the direct route to or from Italy, and travellers use it as a resting-place. But, aside from its convenient location, the gallery draws visitors by virtue of its masterpieces. Some of them were acquired long years ago, for the Bavarian princes were patrons of art so far back as the sixteenth century. Albert V (1550-1579) brought together the first collection of pictures, and William V helped to in- crease it, but it took its decided impulse from Maxi- milian, the first Elector of Bavaria. Max Emanuel (1679-1726) made great acquisitions at Schleissheim, and built there his palace-gallery to hold them. In 1761 an inventory of these pictures showed over a thou- sand numbers. The various collections of the Wittels- bachs were further increased in 1799 by a third group of pictures from the Palatinate — that of Zweibrucken. Then began the concentration of the collections at Munich. In 1805 the pictures in the Diisseldorf Gal- lery were removed to Munich to escape being taken to Paris. With that gallery came many of the celebrated Rubenses in the present collection. The last large group of pictures to come here was the Boisseree Col-
3
NOTE ON THE OLD PINACOTHEK
lection of Rhenish art. It was received in 1827 and added greatly to the representation of German pictures.
The Munich Gallery is particularly rich in early Ger- man work and has some remarkable altar-pieces in the first rooms the visitor enters. In sincerity, as in dec- orative feeling and excellent workmanship, nothing could be finer than the panels here by Apt, Reichlich, Pacher, Schaffner, Lochner. Nothing could be more tragic than the Burgkmairs, or more melodramatic than the Baldungs, or more romantically picturesque than the Altdorfers. Besides these there are pictures by Griinewald, Wolgemut, Holbein the Elder, the Master of Frankfort, the Master of the Life of the Virgin, Master Wilhelm of Cologne, Cranach the Elder, and a notable group of Albrecht Diirers. In fact, the Old Pinacothek is famous, and justly so, for its presentation of German art.
But perhaps the gallery is better known to the travel- ling public because of its large collection of pictures by Rubens. There are over eighty examples of him listed in the catalogue, and many of them are of great ex- cellence and beauty. His pupil, Van Dyck, is shown in no less than thirty-six pictures, some of them much injured, but others in good condition and fairly represen- tative. To Rembrandt are given ten or more examples, including his early series of the Passion, and by his followers, Bol, Flinck, Gelder, and others there are some excellent works. Here, too, one sees a rare pic- ture by Sweerts, some fine small portraits by Terborch,
NOTE ON THE OLD PINACOTHEK 5
interiors by Steen and Teniers, and many landscapes by the Ruisdaels. In no gallery save that at Brussels can one see Bouts so brilliantly represented. Some of his most perfect work in form and colour is shown here in a small altar-piece. Here, too, one sees the Master of the Death of the Virgin (Juste van Cleve) at his best, and there are pictures by Van der Weyden, Mem- ling, Lucas van Leyden.
Striking as is the presentation of German, Dutch, and Flemish art at Munich, there is still a surprise in the Italian pictures. There are some famous names and some not unworthy pictures to represent them. Perugino and Francia are here in large and very im- portant examples. Fra Filippo, Filippino, Botticelli, Ghirlandajo, Andrea del Sarto do not, perhaps, fare so well, but to Raphael are given three very creditable pictures and to Titian eight canvases, including the Crowning with Thorns, and an excellent portrait (No. 1111). By Palma there is a small Faun that is gem- like, by Lotto a delightful Marriage of St. Catherine, by Tintoretto several pictures, including the Christ in the House of Mary and Martha, and a fine portrait. The Italian showing is important.
The catalogue (in German, with illustrations) is well printed, sufficiently descriptive and candidly critical. In case of the disputed attribution of a picture (a fre- quent occurrence) the catalogue gives the ascriptions of the authorities pro and con, while adhering to its own conviction. This method of treating conflicting opin-
6 NOTE ON THE OLD PINACOTHEK
ions seems proper and is meeting with acceptance in many of the galleries. The arrangement in the cat- alogue is alphabetical, under the artists' names, but on the wall the pictures are placed by countries and schools. The hanging is good as is also the lighting. One can usually see the pictures very well.
Photographs of the pictures can be bought hi almost any art shop in Munich as well as at the gallery. There is a Hanfstaengl publication of half-tone repro- ductions that gives the chief pictures.
THE OLD PINACOTHEK
288. Altdorfer, Albrecht. Forest with St. George and Dragon. An interesting early study of a forest with an outlook to distant mountains. It is beautifully done and, for all its minute detail, not niggled or laboured in its surface. Such work as this is astonishing when the painter's period (1480-1538) is taken into consideration. See also No. 293.
293. Mountain Landscape. A charming little land- scape in every way. Notice the trees and bushes at the right of the road with the castle in the middle distance. Here are light and air both. The sky and distant mountains are, perhaps, too blue for the rest of the picture.
289. Susanna at the Bath. A fantastic piece of
architecture in both form and colour. The little figures in the distant arcades and platforms are amusing. The left side of the picture is very charm- ing in its landscape. Altdorfer excels in landscape. And what knowledge of mountain forms he shows ! He was taught mountain anatomy by Diirer. With a good blue in the sky.
290. Battle of Arbela. Said to be Altdorfer's mas- terpiece, probably because it is littered up with many figures and countless details. It is amazing
7
8 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
in these details, but, save for the sky and distant landscape, it is somewhat like the Lord's Prayer engraved on a sixpence. No. 291 is in the same vein, and neither of them is so interesting as the landscapes, Nos. 288 and 293.
989- \ Angelico, Fra. Scenes from Lives of St. Cosmo 992 J and St. Damian. Small panels taken from the predella of a picture in San Marco, Florence. They are genuine enough, but not remarkable as art, nor are they the best Angelicos. The Entombment, with its simple figures arranged in an arch com- position (repeated in the rocky hill) and with its naive flowers, is perhaps the best of the series. Fra Angelico is to be seen aright only in Florence.
1310. Antolines, Jose. Immaculate Conception. A
Spanish picture of much beauty in the type of the Madonna, in the composition, in the colour, in the textures of the silk dress. A much stronger work than the same theme by Murillo in the Louvre. The putti below are somewhat mon- strous in size with badly drawn eyes. An early work and showing some slight influence of Van Dyck.
1588. An onello da Messina. Madonna. Hard in the lines of face and hands. The blue of the dress is cold against the dark ground, but the picture is nevertheless attractive. On wood, worm-eaten and slightly broken in spots. The attribution is questioned although the picture is in the style of Antonello.
1590. Apt, Ulrich. Altar Triptych. It is good in col-
* our and the decorative effect is excellent. There
are fine skies and landscapes in all three panels.
The Madonna at the left with the plaintive little
BASAITI, MARCO 9
Child is very nice in feeling, and the saint at the left of the central panel wears a robe of much beauty. On the reverse of the wings are figures in grisaille.
292. Pieta. A picture of much excellence, espe-
* cially in the landscape, though the figures are also given with force of line and hue. The white of the head-dresses is repeated in the hill of Calvary, the clouds, and the figure of Christ. There is strong feeling shown in the St. John and in the beautiful Magdalen.
286. Baldung, Hans. Portrait of the Margrave Philip.
An excellent portrait, carefully drawn, and good in colour as in the characterisation. Placed a little awkwardly on the panel, but it is very decorative. The hand hurt.
1441. Music. A graceful nude figure, full length,
* evidently standing in a cave, and beside her a white cat. Perhaps over-cleaned and rendered a little flat in modelling, but it is still a wonderful revelation of form largely by linear drawing. No- tice the grace of the outline of the figure. The black-and-white contrast is effective.
1440. Wisdom. Companion piece to Music (No.
* 1441) and with the same forced effect of the white figure against the dark background of a cave. Not so conventional in pose as its companion piece. A very striking piece of linear drawing — beautiful as line and for line's sake. The attitude reminds one of Cranach's Eve in the Antwerp Museum (No. 42).
1032. Basaiti, Marco. Pieta. It is too crude and hard in the drawing for Basaiti. See the much-injured
10 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
Basaiti (No. 1031) in this gallery for comparison in a general way only. One can get but a faint idea of him from these examples. His best work is in the Venice Academy.
1148. Bassano, Jacopo. 5*. Jerome. A very good Bassano, simpler in composition than usual and the better for it. What a well-modelled figure, and what excellent colour! The landscape is at- tractive and the whole pi ture has wholesome light- ing. Bassano was usually " forced" in his depth of shadows. Here he is truer to nature and his colour is the clearer for its higher illumination.
1150. Madonna with St. Anthony and St. Augus- tine (?). The reasons for ascribing it to Bassano are not very apparent. It is more likely the work of some Verona painter or some follower of Paolo Veronese. But a good picture. The colour is un- usually effective. The hand of the saint at the right is Giorgionesque, as shown in the Castelfranco Madonna. Somewhat repainted.
1444. Madonna with St. Roch and John the Bap- tist. By the same hand as No. 1150. Much re- painted and changed in colour. Notice the brown- ish clouds and the Veronese blue in the sky. The painter of this picture evidently used the same kind of pigments (fugitive and otherwise) as did Paolo Veronese.
1446. Beuckelaer, Joachim.. The Fishmonger. The
dishes are placed somewhat out of perspective, probably with the intent of filling the canvas satis- factorily. A strong picture. Beuckelaer should be studied at Brussels, where there are remarkable pictures (Nos. 782, 783) by him and his master,
BLES, HERRI MET DE 11
Aertsen. This one is excellent in the heads and hands and very well painted in the fish and kettle. 146. Bles, Herri met de. Adoration of Kings. The
painter of this picture is called the pseudo-Bles and thought to be an imitator of Bles; but Bles himself is only a name, and his pictures are con- fused in the various galleries. It is possible that the painter of this picture painted the three Adora- tions at Brussels, the Esther at Bologna, the Be- heading of John at Berlin (No. 630c), the Solomon triptych at The Hague (No. 433), the Calvary (No. 649), the Decapitation of John (No. 857), and the Adoration (No. 208) at Antwerp. He may have had two or three different manners. In this picture, for instance, there is more or less elegance of pose in the central figures; but the drawing is careless, especially in the feet. The colour and high lights are a bit spotty, and there are many small objects. It may be his decadent style. At Antwerp he draws larger and seems less mannered, which may point to an earlier style. At Madrid (No. 1361) he is well rounded, fine in colour and light, true in ensemble. This may be his mature and ripened style. Patinir and Bosch may have had something to do with forming him. Gossart and even Cornelisz van Oostsanen may also have had an influence upon him. The difficulty in at- tributing his pictures arises from our having no criterion by which to judge. We do not know what is genuinely Bles, and what is pseudo-Bles. In the attributions of these pictures thus far there has been an association of subjects rather than of styles. The landscape here is unlike Patinir. The An- nunciation here (No. 145) hardly agrees with the
12 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
Bles pictures elsewhere. See the note on Bles (No. 657) in the Vienna Gallery.
338. Bol, Ferdinand. Portrait of a Man. This is Bol when he was following the grey-golden manner of his master, Rembrandt. Indeed, the picture has passed for a Rembrandt, but it is too weak in the modelling for that master. It is, however, an excellent Bol. He never did anything surer or better. From it and its companion piece (No. 339) one can easily understand how the Bols came to pass current as Rembrandts. His best works are perhaps catalogued as Rembrandts to this day.
339. Portrait of a Lady. Companion piece to No.
338. Very Rembrandtesque, but wanting in pre- cision and certainty of touch, especially in the dress, the chain, the white at the throat, and the hair. The mouth, eyebrows, nose, and forehead are weak in modelling. Once ascribed to Rem- brandt. Both this portrait and No. 338 were falsely signed with Rembrandt's name.
1120. Bordone, Paris. Portrait of a Man. A much- attributed picture, as the catalogue suggests. If it could only be relieved from the suspicion of having been painted by a nobody of Venice it might be thought a very decent portrait. It has the sensi- tive quality of a Lotto and the serenity and poise of a Titian.
1121. Man with Jewels. Not the best example of
Bordone. The woman at the right is too much sacrificed in light and colour, and the jewels are too prominent. The man is not badly done. The picture is much repainted as one may see by a glance at the hands.
BOUTS, THIERRI 13
1010. Botticelli, Sandro. Pieta. It is perhaps not a Botticelli, but by some member of his school, yet a very good picture just the same. It is an arch composition, the arched lines of the dead Christ being repeated by the backs of the saints above and again by the rocky opening of the tomb. The drawing is coarse but virile and the action rhythmic and forceful. What a tragic feeling about the whole group! The kneeling women are pa- thetic, and the slight, graceful form of the beardless Christ is altogether lovely in death. Notice the stiff arm and the flung-down head. The sentiment of the picture is good. And so, too, the colour, only it is darker than is usual with Botticelli. The bal- anced halo on each head is a little disturbing. The panel is worm-holed, but otherwise in good condi- tion. The same painter did the Annunciation (No. 1316) in the Uffizi; the Pieta (No. 552) in the Poldi-Pezzoli Museum, Milan, and the An- nunciation (No. 1117) at Berlin.
114. Bouts, Albert. Annunciation. This painter was never the equal of his father, Thierri Bouts, but this picture appears weaker than the same painter's work at the Brussels Museum. A grey tone is apparent in it.
107] Bouts, Thierri (or Dirck). Adoration of Magi.
108 A triptych with a St. John at left and a St. Chris-
109 J topher at right. An excellent example of Bouts.
Notice the fine heads in the central panel, the head and hands of the king who kneels before the Child, and the brocade of the king back of him. The detail of gems, the hat on the ground, the present on the table, the roses growing on the wall below, are all beautifully done. Observe also the pro-
14 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
cession of the kings' followers coming down in a swinging line from the background — a beautifully clear landscape with a city in the distance. The St. Christopher panel shows an early study of sun- set with the reflection of the sun in the water. The water with its attempt at wave drawing is really remarkable. The distant hills are perhaps too blue in all three panels, but the foreground, especially in the left panel, is very lovely. The grass is in a pattern like that of a brocade. Fine figures in grisaille are on the back of the wings.
110. The Priest Melchisedek. An excellent cres-
** cent-shaped composition. The man at the right
is as stiff and unbending as the spear he holds, but how fine he is in character! The patriarch Abraham, just below him, kneels badly ; but, again, what a face and what a dress he has ! Melchisedek is superb in his green-red-gold embroidered cos- turn 3. Every detail is perfect, and every colour exactly true in value. All the heads are strong, even those in the cavalcade of riders winding down the valley at the right. And the colour is simply superb. It would seem impossible to get richer notes than these and preserve the harmony. Per- haps there is too much polish or gloss about them, yet one could not wish them different. Look at the town and landscape at back. Part of an altar- piece from St. Peters, Louvain. Other parts are in the Berlin Gallery, which see.
111. The Israelites Gathering Manna. A compan- ion picture to No. 110, and from the same Louvain altar-piece, but perhaps not so altogether attrac- tive a picture. The landscape lacks in repose and is uneasy in its hills. The figures in the fore-
BOUTS, THIERRI 15
ground are excellent. How the painter harmo- nises such colours, for instance, as the blue and yel- low in the kneeling figure of the man at left, and the blue, red, gold, green, purple in the man back of him! He is a wonder of early art. Such work- manship, such quality in colour, such fine senti- ment are rare at any period. The types should not repel one, nor the smooth, flawless surface. They are both excellent. j
112. The Betrayal. A moonlight effect in early
** art! Notice the study (over the church at back) of the blue night sky, the reflection of the moon on the clouds and the shrouded hills. The two pitiful figures in red in the left upper corner (evidently fleeing apostles) are rightly placed in the atmos- pheric envelope. The ensemble is remarkable. The figures in the foreground are huddled, but full of tragic action. Here again are fine robes and fine colours, but they have hardly the quality of those in Nos. 110-111. Is it by Bouts or by some follower of, say, Ouwater? There is some relation between the painter of this picture and the Master of the Ly versberg Passion. See the latter's Taking of Christ in the Wallraf-Richartz Museum, Cologne. This picture is somewhat hurt.
A4Q. Resurrection of Christ. There is no lack here
** of fine art. The figures are almost perfectly done the colours are superb (in the costume of the sol- dier lying on the ground, for instance), the land- scape broad and free for an early work, and the whole picture very well held together. As for sen- timent, how charmingly it shows in the little angel in white, in the Christ, in the group of the apostles witnessing the Ascension at the back! Again, is
16 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
the picture by Bouts? It is evidently by the painter of No. 112, with which it should be com- pared. Who but Bouts could do such work? Who but he ever painted such blues, greens, yellows, and golds? Yet there is a feeling that some follower of Ouwater may have done it.
880. Brouwer, Adriaen. Barber Shop. There are a dozen or more Brouwers in this gallery of his usual quality. Perhaps Nos. 879, 880, 882 are as good as any of them as regards colour and handling. Never very attractive in subject, Brouwer is always interesting in method. He is emphatically a paint- er's painter.
702. Brueghel the Elder, Jan (Velvet). Landscape.
To be studied closely for the small groups and the delightful way in which they keep their place in the landscape. A very picturesque town and country. See also No. 687, which is perhaps finer in colour.
90. Bruyn, Bartolomaus. Portrait of a Man. A
school piece, but not badly done. It has a straight- forward feeling about it.
68- 1 Altar-Piece. Honest work, but not very cun-
72 j ning technically or profound emotionally. The landscapes at the side with the richly robed saints are more interesting than the central panel.
Bueckelaer. See Beuckelaer.
222A-E. Burgkmair, Hans. The St. John Altar-Piece.
* Excellent in robes, trees, and landscape. The col- our is deep and strong, the drawing fairly good, and the handling very true and sure. The two Johns on the outside of the panels are finely given. No-
CARRENO DE MIRANDA, JUAN 17
tice also the Crucifixion Triptych near by (No. 1451A-E) for a similar but stronger landscape and sky.
1451A-E. Crucifixion. A coarse-fibred work with
* little grace of line or charm of colour, but full of pathos and tragic power. Notice the figure at the foot of the cross, the stiff, crucified form of the Christ, the stormy sky, the wind-tossed trees, the cold, hard landscape of the distance. There is a great tragedy in the very air. To this feeling the ill-drawn Madonna in white, the Magdalen, and St John give the key-note. It is a powerful group, arranged in the shape of a crescent at the foot of the cross. The hanging figures in the wings sup- plement and carry out the tragedy; the swirl of dark clouds and the standing saints below intensify it. The deep, sombre colouring, the white moun- tains, the aureole of dark clouds about the Christ are all in keeping with the sentiment. Figures of St. George and the Emperor Henry are on the re- verse of the wings. See also No. 10A at Cassel.
220. Portrait of Martin Schongauer. A fine little
portrait. However you look at it, it proves satis- factory. The drawing and colour are excellent. There may be doubts about the identity of both sitter and painter — doubts are plentiful in art criti- cism— but no matter. The work is good in itself.
1268 1 CanalettO (BelottO B.). Grand Canal Scenes.
1269 J They are no better than the ordinary variety of canal scene, done cleverly and with topographical truth, but with no great verve or spirit.
1302. Carreiio de Miranda, Juan. Portrait of Dona Maria of Austria. A very sad-faced woman — a queen and yet a piteous figure. The picture is
18 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
fairly well done — no more. That Carreiio did it is possible. It is in his style, but perhaps a little prosaic even for him.
1027 ) Catalan School. St. Ambrose and St. Louis.
1028 J The two panels are decidedly decorative in their gold stucco work. The drawing of the faces is crude. They are probably by some follower of Borgognone.
1033. Cima, Giovanni Battista. Madonna, Child, and * Saints. A handsome conversation piece and an excellent Cima. The colour is exceptionally good although the drawing is a little hard, after the manner of all early Renaissance work. The types of the Madonna and the Magdalen are lovable, and there is a nice feeling about the theme, the char- acters, and the treatment. Notice the clear sky and the mountain landscape.
1324 1 Claude Lorraine. Hagar and IshmaeL A por- 1325 J trait by Titian, Rubens, Rembrandt, or Velasquez will to-day more than hold its own in conception and execution with the best work of any modern. Is it unfair to apply such a test to the landscapes of Claude? They are serene in conception, peaceful, slightly panoramic, pseudo-heroic, with only a slight basis in nature. Technically, they are thin, crude, almost boyish in workmanship. The mod- erns in landscape have gone far beyond Claude in perception, light, colour, drawing, handling. Look at these Hagar and Ishmael landscapes at close range for their feeble drawing of mountains, clouds, trees, rocks, and their timid, thin painting. Yet the general effect of a Claude is often im- pressive— perhaps unduly so. It has given him an exaggerated fame.
COLOGNE, SCHOOL OF 19
55 1 Cleve, Juste van der Beke van (The Master of
56 | the Death of the Virgin). The Death of the
57 J Virgin. An altar-piece with two wings — the painter * taking his name from the central panel. His
proper name is thought to be Juste van der Beke van Cleve, an Antwerp painter, but there is no certainty about this. Nor is there any great cer- tainty about the pictures attributed to him. Sev- eral pictures in Brussels, Antwerp, Paris, and else- where seem to be by the same hand that painted this altar-piece — that is all. But the altar-piece is an excellent one, done with much delicacy and skill, and remarkable in some of its texture paint- ing, as, for instance, in the fine portraits of donors kneeling beneath the banner of St. George. The women at left have good robes, and there are fine landscapes in both panels.
1315. Clouet, Francois. Claudia, Wife of Duke Charles
II. Colourless but careful work in a miniature style, and with some mannerisms. It is not at all certain that any Clouet did it. The attribution is only a conjecture founded on the picture's general resemblance to the Clouet style.
L314. Clouet, Jean (called Jannet). Portrait of a Young Man. Flat in the figure and hard in the drawing of the face outlines, but honest work. Possibly by some one in the Clouet School. The hands are hurt.
219. Cologne, School of (about 1470). Portrait of an Architect. An excellent portrait, now a little flat in modelling, but very good in characterisa- tion. What fine, even distinguished, colour is here! It has been variously attributed to Jan van Eyck's School, to Burgkmair, Schaffner, et al.
20 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
270. Cranach the Elder, Lucas. Madonna and Child.
Why is it not good in sentiment and colour? It has not the Italian type nor composition, but if we have any catholicity of taste we cannot choose but admire these naive creations of Cranach. This picture may be by the younger Cranach, but that does not matter. There are charming cherubs at the top and a mountain city in the background.
271. Lucretia. A picture showing the type and
style of drawing usually employed by Cranach, though this example may have been done in the school. The figure is flat in modelling, and of course there is awkwardness and constraint about it. That forms its attraction to some. As out- line drawing with a suggestion of modelling, it is excellent. It has been repainted, unfortunately, so that the line is now somewhat muffled. The red robe is still good in colour though a later addi- tion. Compare it with the Lucretia of Diirer (No. 244), across the room.
272. Madonna and Child. Small and perhaps a
little pretty, but it has charm of colour and ten- derness of feeling.
275. Moses and Aaron. What a fine spot of colour
it makes! And what sturdy figures in little! A fragment from some larger picture, probably an allegory of the Fall of Man.
279. Madonna and St. Anne. A Cranach school
piece, probably, but what a good group of figures in a fine landscape! And with a rich colour effect! Cranach had three sons, all of them painters, and presumably all of them following the father. But how many pictures by the sons do we see?
CUYP, AELBERT 21
1457. Christ on Cross. Gruesome in theme, with
brown flesh shadows, swirled drapery, and dark clouds. The Madonna and St. John are fine, tall figures, rich in colour and profound in feeling. A picture of power. It does not speak for Cranach. Notice how different the landscape here from that of No. 279 or 270 or 1460. The figures, drapery, and colour are also different. It hardly belongs even to the Cranach School.
1462. Cranach the Younger, Lucas. Venus and Cupid. It is weaker, prettier, more graceful draw- ing than that of the elder Cranach, but more en- gaging in type and colour. Seen against the dark ground, the figure has a cameo look and quality about it. The Cupid is amusing.
1016A. Credi, Lorenzo di. Madonna, Child, and Angel.
A good picture though done in a rather heavy man- ner. A little warmer in flesh-notes and robes than usual with Lorenzo. Notice the landscape at the right. See also the Leonardo da Vinci, No. 1040A, for comparison.
1017. - —Nativity. The figures fill the circle fairly well, and are types similar to Lorenzo's, but the work- manship seems a little finical and minute for this painter. Notice the painting of the hair, the leaves on the wall, the trees in the background — how Flemish-looking they are in their handling! It may be by some imitator or follower of Lorenzo.
475. Cuyp, Aelbert. Landscape. These small, unpre- tentious pictures of the Dutch painters are often more truly enjoyable than the large academic ex- amples— such compositions as those of Ruisdael, for instance. This picture is, perhaps, nearer Van Goyen than Cuyp. It has fine light and colour.
22 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
1463. Cuyp, Benjamin G. Man with Horse. Look at it for the life and spirit of the animal and the fine colour quality of the picture. It has the tang of true art about it. The pictures of Benjamin Cuyp should always be closely looked at. He is a painter of much force.
118. David, Gerard. Adoration of Magi. Hurt by repainting and never very good. Notice the poorly drawn trees, the horses and riders at back, the Joseph at right, or the legs of the negro at left. Attribution questionable. Dr. Friedlander thinks it a David copy of a Hugo van der Goes.
407. Dou, Gerard. A Lady at Toilet Table. This is a good example of Dou's small method. The mi- nutiae of it are microscopic. Look at the table- cloth, curtain, stone basin, dress. It is detail for detail's sake. This led the way to all the little art of Mieris, Netscher, and Schalken, of which the European galleries have enough and to spare. It is snuff-box painting of no great value as art, for all its skill.
238. Durer, Albrecht. Deposition. A remarkable picture, not so much for its foreground figures as for the painter's knowledge of mountain forms as shown in the background. It is a little savage in the drawing and handling of the figures, but the mountains will stand up against criticism. Re- painted in parts and by no means a satisfactory picture. For a Diirer it lacks in interest — a most deadly thing in either picture or book. It is proper to add, however, that there is disagreement on this point. Some writers think it a "hauptwerk." Much repainted, and with the false monogram of Diirer on the linen.
DURER, ALBRECHT 23
240] The Nativity: Paumgartner Altar-Piece. A
241 !• triptych with the best figures in the wings. St.
242 j Eustach and St. George, with their banners forming ** arabesques at the back, are portraits of real per- sonages not ideals of saints. Only recently these side panels were freed from over-paintings in the backgrounds. They are excellent in type and drawing as well as in colour. How well they stand! They seem to epitomise Diirer's art quite perfectly. The cupids and little portraits of donors in the lowei; corners of the central panel were pur- posely placed out of scale with the Madonna and St. Joseph. They, too, were recently brought out from under repainting. It is one of the most at- tractive of Diirer's pictures, charming in parts and forceful elsewhere. It will bear study and appear the better for it.
247. St. John and St. Peter. With large and full
drawing of drapery, huge figures, huge heads, and a somewhat bizarre effect. Not bad in colour and with considerable freedom of brush-work, but other- wise not remarkable. They are real enough but not lovable people. Nor are they interesting even though Durer did them. His work seems to lose in interest as it expands in scale. This panel and No. 248 are sometimes called The Four Preachers. Late work.
248. St. Paul and St. Mark. These figures again
are not exactly convincing apostolic types. Nor are the colour values of the white robe at all true. They may have changed. Companion piece to No. 247 and in the same style, but even less inter- esting than that panel. The usual critical esti- mate of these panels is higher than here stated.
24 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
244. Lucretia. It might be compared with the
* same subject by Cranach (No. 271) for the differ- ence in colour and drawing. The Diirer is more mature in the modelling of the figure and in the naturalistic ease with which it stands. The faded high lights in the drapery (derived from Italian art) are not exactly a success. The figure is said to have been inspired by Mantegna but such inspira- tion is not very apparent. It is a fine figure and improves on repeated seeings. Somewhat re- painted.
239. Portrait of the Painter. One of the most cele-
** brated of the Diirer pictures. Done with a very minute brush (see the strokes in the hair, beard, and fur collar), as though preparing a pattern for engraving and indicating the engraver's lines. A really wonderful portrait in that, with all its mi- nutiae, it holds together and is not a mere surface effect. It is absolute in its drawing (look at the mouth, eyes, hands) and just as true in its light-and- shade and in its colouring. Probably somewhat deepened in tone by glazes and varnishes. The signature and inscription in gold help the decora- tive effect of the panel. It has more force but less charm than the smaller Durer portrait now in the Prado, Madrid. The back of the panel was sawn away, in the last century, and a copy painted on the new face, evidently with intent to_deceive. The copy is now in the Germanic Museum, at Nurem- berg.
236. Portrait of Oswald Krell. A good portrait in
Diirer's early style. The nose and mouth are queer in drawing, the hair and beard minute, the hands nervous, the sleeve zigzagged, the trees formal. It is effective but not Diirer at his best.
DYCK, ANTHONY VAN 25
249. Portrait of Jacob Fugger. Once, no doubt, a
fine bit of portraiture, but now nearly wrecked by repainting. The green background is all of it solidly overlaid and fits up snug to the figure. Compare the fur collar with that in No. 239 for the difference between Diirer's brush and that of the restorer. A strong head and, but for its shameful treatment, a masterpiece of realism.
237. Portrait of Hans Durer (?). Effective in
spite of distorted drawing. The mouth, nose, and chin are askew. The ear, too, is abnormally placed. The same drawing is noticeable in the Krell por- trait (No. 236). Said to be an early work, but it may be questioned if it is Durer at all. A good portrait, nevertheless, and fine in colour as in char- acterisation.
825. Dyck, Anthony van. Christ on the Cross. How
far it falls below the Rubens of the same subject (No. 748) in this gallery! It is inferior in feeling, imagination, form, colour, and handling. It has blackened somewhat, but probably was never very luminous, convincing, or well drawn. Other ver- sions are in the Vienna and Antwerp galleries.
824. Martyrdom of St. Sebastian. The figure of
* the saint makes a white centre, about which is ranged a not too obvious circle of darker notes in flesh colour, red, and blue. There is some good drawing in the shoulders of the saint, as well as some bad drawing in his hips, left leg, and hand. Notice the strange head without a neck of the figure kneeling, or the bad arm and hand and thin face of the mounted soldier. The head of the man in blue is perhaps the best part of the picture. Much injured; also pieced out at the top and side,
26 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
with the work of another hand in the additions. Even so, such work as this is vastly better than that in the smooth and rather pretty subject pictures by Van Dyck in the Vienna Museum.
826. Madonna, Child, and St. John. The painter
seems to have done this with a thought of Titian in his mind. At any rate instead of getting Titian's largeness he got only Rubens's lumpiness. The figure of the Child is somewhat monstrous. The Madonna and St. John are more Italian and more acceptable. The colour is not bad save for the acrid blue. The lamb looks like a dog.
827. Flight into Egypt. The picture is merely
pretty, is badly drawn (look at the eyes of the Madonna), and is very weak in sentiment and colour.
850. Portrait of Peter Snayers. An excellent small
* head in a style that suggests Van Dyck following Rubens. It is valuable as showing Flemish paint- ing quite uninjured by cleanings or restorations. It should be kept in mind, not as being peculiar or characteristic of Van Dyck, for that it is not, but as being pure, clear writing with the brush as taught in the Flemish School of Rubens. The nose is a little curious in drawing, but that probably helped out the personality of the sitter. The good mouth, firm chin, and jaw make up for it.
830. Deposition. It is difficult in this gallery to
* get an idea of Van Dyck's handling, because so many of the pictures and portraits put down to him have been injured by restorations. This Deposition, which is painted on wood, gives the best idea of his brush-work, without being wholly
DYCK, ANTHONY VAN 27
satisfactory. The flesh colour follows Rubens, but is deeper and darker with grey or brown or reddish shadows. Of course the picture is darkened by its dark underbasing. The figure of the Christ is rather good, and the general composition is sat- isfactory though too dramatic. In colour, Van Dyck always comes into contrast with Rubens, and to his disadvantage.
844 } Colyn de Nole and Wife. The man's portrait,
845 / in the style of Rubens, is careless, but not in bad * condition. The woman's portrait, though slightly
repainted in the face, is still very good in every way. A fine type of a woman, seen with keenness and penetration, and done with good taste and feeling. This is Van Dyck in his nobler strain. The child does not help out the picture, nor yet harm it.
822. Susanna. It is about done for by much res- toration. Look at the wrecked modelling of the legs, knees, feet, hands. The faces are just as badly repainted.
828. Pieta. It is inconceivable that Van Dyck
could have left this picture as we at present see it. The drawing is too bad. There is still a feeling of collapse about the white figure and a holding to- gether of the pyramidal group. The colours and the surface are now not Van Dyck's but those of some cleaning-room artist.
823. Martyrdom of St. Sebastian. The scheme of
lighting in No. 824 is here repeated, with perhaps less effect, inasmuch as the figure of the saint is less central in its grouping. There is better draw- ing than in No. 824 — the figure of the saint being very well given. The figures at the side are hud-
28 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
died, and the white horse seems a little absurd. The light is dull and the colour hot. The cata- logue points out that the saint is a portrait of Van Dyck.
833. Portrait of the Painter. Some of the under- lying work of the brush is here apparent, but the surface has been much rubbed. It is, however, still a good portrait, done easily and with certainty. The likeness to Van Dyck is, perhaps, superficial.
834. Portrait of George PeteL It is still in fair
* condition and will bear close study, especially in
the head. For lack of a better, it might be taken in this gallery as a criterion of Van Dyck's handling, as well as his drawing. By comparison with other portraits enumerated below, it will be easy to see the differences caused by the repainting or retouch- ing of the restorer's brush. With finely drawn eyes and nose, and easily painted hair.
849. Portrait of Mary Rathven. This IS supposed
to be a likeness of Van Dyek's wife, but it is no likeness of his painting. What dreadful eyes and eyelids ! What a nose and mouth to put upon Van Dyck ! It is ruined by repainting, even if originally by Van Dyck.
861. Portrait of Jan Brueghel. Done by a follower
of Rubens, with more imitative skill and less per- sonality than Van Dyck. If one should believe the gallery catalogues Van Dyck never had a pupil, helper, follower, or imitator. He did every- thing that in any way resembles his style. What a mistake! He had plenty of imitators who followed him abjectly. Their works are now passing in the European galleries for genuine Van Dycks. How often do you see portraits by Hanneman, Belcamp,
DYCK, ANTHONY VAN 29
Jan van Reyn, Peter Thys, Beck, Merian, Stone, Dobson? They were all pupils and assistants of Van Dyck, who worked up his portraits for him and probably finished many of them. They also made copies galore of his portraits and figure pieces. But where do you see or hear anything of these shop pieces and copies? It is always Van Dyck (never his school or his assistants) who is credited with the work.
847. Portrait of Carl Mailer y. A single glance at
this picture from across the gallery must suggest instantly the presence of the restorer. The apoplec- tic flesh and the grey tones that go with repaint- ing are apparent. This is equally true of Nos. 835, 839, 840, 842, 843, and 848. They were originally fine portraits, no doubt. They still have the air of the immortals, and are well drawn, well placed on the canvas; but it is not just to Van Dyck to judge him now by such works. Look at the clean, clear surface of No. 834, and that portrait will em- phasise the difference between Van Dyck and his restorers.
837. Portrait of Duke of Pfalz-Neuburg. There is
a good deal of Van Dyck still in the finely poised figure, the column, curtain, and dog. How well the model is placed upon his feet! How easily he rests! It is a fine portrait, set in a good envelope, with just enough colour in the rug and curtain to emphasise the blacks.
841. Portrait of a Man. It has not the aplomb of
No. 837, nor the dignity. The figure is heavy and the hand mannered. It has been much injured by repainting. All the background looks done over, and the figure has not escaped.
30 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
348. Eeckhout, Gerbrandt van den. Christ with the Doctors. It may be profitably compared with some of the work ascribed to Rembrandt with so much positiveness in the various European galleries. He was one of the master's most deceptive imitators. A good picture, with good colour, light, and group- ing of the figures.
1469. Engelbrechtsen, Cornells. St. Constantine and St. Helena. Notice the sentiment in the St. Helena, - with the sad face and the tall figure. The colour of the green robe is effective. Odd and somewhat mannered art, but that does not repel us in II Greco. Why should it here? Formerly ascribed to Lucas van Leyden.
566. Everdingen, Allaert van. Northern Landscape.
In the same vein as Ruisdael, only perhaps blacker in the shadows and brighter in the light of the sky. There is no reason to think either of them found models for landscape in Norway. They painted their landscapes out of their heads, in the studio, and never worried much about the truth or falsity of the convention they were turning out with such facility.
1023. Ferrara, School of. Madonna, Child, and Saints. Excellent in colour if hard in drawing and angular in drapery. It is honest work done with good feeling and right in sentiment. Notice the archi- tecture and brocades. It is by some follower of Cossa or Tura. The figure at the extreme left, however, suggests the Vivarini. Ascribed formerly to Mantegna and now thought by Venturi and others to come from some Veronese painter.
1039. Francia, Francesco. Madonna of the Rose * Garden. A well-known Francia much admired
GADDI, AGNOLO 31
for the purity of its sentiment and the simple beauty of the rose arbour. It is cold in colour — the little scrap of red under the Child, the Ma- donna's red hair, and the pale roses not being suffi- cient to influence the larger scheme of blues and greens. It is a very tender and loving Madonna and a lovely Child. In fact, the feeling and senti- ment of the picture are its attractive features. Notice the naive arrangement of the roses, also the thin trees, the crude, almost boyish landscape, with the formal, sharp-pointed clouds that explode in puffs of white smoke. The space at the back has breadth but is rather empty.
1040. Madonna and Angels. Glassy, smooth, and
somewhat perfunctory in its doing. The colour is bright and the sentiment proper, but it is not a very important work. Art consists of something more than wistful-looking angels and pretty Ma- donnas, as Francia proved in other pictures. See No. 1039 by him.
1470. French School. Portrait of Denise Fournier. A heavy type given with frankness and with no at- tempt to disguise the small eyes and mouth or the large nose. These features were doubtless true to the model, and were put down without apology. The black of the cap and the red of the dress are well handled.
94. Portrait of a Man. With sharply drawn, ner- vous hands and wandering eyes. A good portrait, but rubbed and cleaned too much. Formerly given to the German School.
1539 1 Gaddi, Agnolo. St. Nicholas and St. Julian. 1540A / Two large panels somewhat repainted and re- gilded, but still attractive in their rich, decorative
32 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
schemes of colour upon gold and gold upon colour. The predellas are less interesting. Put down on the frames to Stamina. The Gaddi attribution is doubtful. The Giottesque pictures are not yet read as one might an open book — in fact, they are still very much confused.
1009. Garbo, Raffaellino del. Deposition. It is cold and pallid in colour, uneasy and restless in draperies, huddled in composition, and perhaps a bit over-done in sentiment. It has no repose — not even in the sky. At the back there are formal layers of blue hills. Not the best example of Raffaellino, if by him at all. Crowe and Cavalcaselle put it down to Filippino. Formerly it was a Ghirlandajo and then a Jacopo del Sellajo. It is probably a school piece of some sort, which may account for its con- tradictory features.
1080. Garofalo (Benvenuto Tisi). Pieta. A much larger picture than this master usually painted. The saint at the left in flowing robes is effective. The landscape breaks sharply from the brown fore- ground into the green-blue background.
1081. Madonna with Saints. A small but very
good example of Garofalo. The St. George is par- ticularly attractive. The colour is predominant in greens and blues; the landscape at the back a little disjointed.
355. Gelder, Aert de. The Jewish Bride. The figures at the right are sacrificed to the bride in the centre — too much so. The lighting is Rembrandtesque and not trut]iful, but effective in bringing out the central figure. This figure is badly placed on the canvas. The right side is empty and of little
GIOTTO DI BONDONE 33
value. The colour is good but the handling un- certain. The picture is by Aert de Gelder, the painter of the supposed Rembrandt at the Hermi- tage, the Prodigal Son (No. 797), which shows faults of composition similar to those in this pic- ture.
356. Portrait Study. How very like a poor Rem- brandt! The student should make a mental note of such pictures, for there are plenty of portraits with just as loose and careless drawing as this passing as Rembrandts in European galleries.
1011. Ghirlandajo, Domenico. Madonna with Saints.
The centre panel of this altar-piece is bright in colour, formal in its balanced, pyramidal composi- tion, disturbing in the angels and the radiating rays from the Madonna. It has a good if hard landscape and a poor sky. The figures at left and right stand well and have well-drawn robes. The drawing is correct enough but lacks spirit and charm. It is perfunctory shop work. The side panels (Nos. 1012 and 1013) are less pretentious and better than the centre piece.
1077. Ghirlandajo, Ridolfo. Madonna, Child, and St. John. The painter of this picture was evidently following Raphael's Madonna of the Meadow, at Vienna, and not doing it very well. It is not an important picture. Probably Ridolfo never saw it.
981. Giotto di Bondone. Crucifixion. The gold ground and colour are ornamental. The catalogue calls it a school piece. It is probably by some fol- lower of the Gaddi.
982. Christ Descending into Hell. The figures are
too frail for Giotto, and tend toward a conscious
34 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
grace, as in the figure of Christ. Also the moun- tain is too crude. The picture is Giottesque but not by the same hand that did No. 981.
983. Last Supper. The figures are sack-like, the
room is well drawn for the time, the colour varie- gated, the decorative quality rather good. Perhaps a workshop picture.
155. Gossart, Jan (Mabuse). Madonna and Child.
The attempt of a Fleming to appropriate things Italian, and with rather good results. Notice the handsome Renaissance niche at the back with the Flemish-Italian figure. The drapery is uneasy, is washed out in the high lights, and pallid in the red. The picture has charm.
156. Danae. With Gossart's reminiscences of Italy
showing in the architecture as in the type of face and figure. The Fleming, however, still crops out of it. The colour of the blue robe is too cold and the light is dull. Very elaborate and exact but not very original or sincere art.
535. Goyen, Jan van. Landscape. In Van Goyen's usual vein. Perhaps a little more carelessly done than some of his other works but still decorative in tone. No. 537 is somewhat injured but is of the same general quality. No. 536 is poorer work — a panel that aspires but does not attain.
1485. Greco, II (Domenico Theotocopuli). The Dis- robing of Christ. A crowded composition but given with the feeling of a crowd. It has most of II Greco's mannerisms of drawing and lighting, his sootiness of flesh, his morbid colouring, but perhaps the types are more rational and believable than usual. There is a fine decorative quality about it.
HALS, FRANS 35
One always feels as though his pictures would make up well in stained glass or tapestry. And there is also intensity of feeling about them.
281. Griinewald, Matthias. St. Mauritius and Bishop Erasmus. The figures are over life-size and ap- pear a little grotesque, but they are remarkable in the decorative quality of the robes and the armour. There is good painting, with loose drawing almost everywhere in the picture.
1486. Scourging of Christ. A powerful but in- tensely brutal conception. Notice the action of the man in the violet jacket, or the attitude of the man with the rope. The colours are bleached out in the high lights. An early work, very well done, and extraordinary in its colour quality. There is force in the colour — something we usually recognise in line or modelling.
1487. Guardi, Francesco. Venetian Concert. The light of the picture is neither sunlight nor candle-light and the rows of spotty high lights upon the costumes are purely arbitrary. But these high lights are effective in giving sparkle and glitter — perhaps too much so. The room is well shown, with cool hues above and warm ones below. The shadows, too, are effective. It is a forced effect, but certainly has some strength about it, though it is possibly not Guardi's strength.
1488. Hals, Frans. Portrait of William Croes. It is
small and sketchy, freely handled, but positive enough in its characterisation of the man. What cheeks, nose, mouth, and eyes he has! A bluff, physical portrait with a swagger air in the sitter. The blacks and whites are admirably handled.
16 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
359. A Family Croup. A much-attributed picture,
as the catalogue explains. Whoever painted it originally, it is now so covered with repaintings as to make any inquiry into its paternity not worth while. It is ruined.
315. Heist, Bartholomeus van der. Portrait of a Man. There is not very much colour in it, and it is somewhat too smooth in its surfaces, but an honest portrayal of an honest Dutchman.
316. Portrait of a Woman. Companion piece to
No. 315. The dress is well done; the hands are sooty, probably because underbased in black, which is now seen coming through to the surface. The face has an unnatural pallor, perhaps due to old repainting. Not a remarkable effort for Van der Heist.
170. Hemessen, Jan van. Isaac and Jacob. The picture, while showing some strength in modelling, is not up to Hemessen's average. Nor is No. 169, in the same room, an acceptable Hemessen. It is dull in light.
614. Heyden, Jan van der. City Park. The sky is cold but the buildings and trees are interesting in their detailed drawing. The aerial perspective and light are excellent. How well the little fig- ures, put in, it is said, by Adriaen van de Velde, hold their places!
570. Hobbema, Meindert. Landscape. The only ex- ample of Hobbema in the gallery, and this one not very representative. Warm in colour and light, due to underbasing in brown, to be seen notice- ably in the foliage of the central tree. Even the sky and clouds have it. It is in the vein and style of Ruisdael.
HOLBEIN THE YOUNGER, HANS 37
209- 1 Holbein the Elder, Hans. St. Sebastian Altar-
211 / Piece. By no means so skilled as the work of the younger Holbein, but it is good work, nevertheless. The St. Sebastian is carefully drawn against a somewhat mannered tree, and the soldiers are grouped about this white centre with pictorial effect if not with realistic truth. The landscape is very good. The St. Barbara at the left is a fine figure in flowing robes and with winning sentiment; the St. Elizabeth at the right is, perhaps, not so attractive. Both of them remind one of the sculp- tured figures on the outside of German cathedrals of the fifteenth century.
193-1 Altar Panels. A series of panels hung high
208 J on the wall, and possessing somewhat less interest
than, say, the St. Sebastian Altar-Piece (Nos. 209-
211).
213. Holbein the Younger, Hans. Portrait of Sir Bryan Take. If the Death and the hour-glass were out of the picture there would be a gain in simplicity. The portrait is not in Holbein's best manner. It is too smooth and porcelain-like in its textures. The hot face loses by the glitter of the sleeve and the gold chain. The work is prob- ably a school copy.
1490. Portrait of Derick Berck. Notice the heavi- ness of the brush in the hair and beard, the yellow shadows on the face and hands, the uncertain out- lines of the head and shoulders. It has, in the head, the cramped look of a copy. It is not by Holbein's hand.
212. Portrait of Derick Born. A handsome little
portrait, done with good feeling by some one who
38 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
knew how to draw and paint; but the reasons for connecting it with Holbein are not very apparent.
151. Isenbrant, Adriaen. Flight into Egypt. Isen- brant is as yet only a name upon which to bestow pictures that will not fit Gerard David. There is not a single well-authenticated example of Isen- brant's work in existence, and all we know about him is the record that he was a pupil of David. This picture is similar in theme, type, and land- scape to many examples found in European gal- leries under the name of David, or Patinir, notably at Berlin and Vienna. It has nice feeling and the figure is well placed in the landscape.
153. Presentation. The attribution again is a
mere guess, though the picture is in the manner of No. 151. Only a few years ago both pictures were assigned to Mostaert, who is now becoming neb- ulous as Isenbrant swims into our ken.
426. Janssens, P. Elinga. Woman Reading. There .- are quite a number of pictures of this kind and quality in European galleries under the name of Pieter de Hooch. The director of the gallery here at Munich frankly ascribes this example to De Hooch's imitator, Janssens. It does not improve a canvas to have a great name falsely attached to it. Yet this is by no means a poor picture. On the contrary, the light, colour, and drawing are very good. Notice also the chairs, trunk, still-life, cloth at the left. And how well the seated figure holds its place in the room! Even the picture- frames on the wall are quite right. As a De Hooch it would not be remarkable; as a Janssens it is certainly interesting. Formerly catalogued as a De Hooch.
LEONARDO DA VINCI 39
813. JordaetlS, Jakob. Satyr with Peasant Family.
tit is hot in the flesh-notes and besides is somewhat hurt and patched. A variant of a theme repeated several times by Jordaens. See notes on the Brus- sels Gallery, under Jordaens.
353. Koninck, Salomon. Christ in the Temple. A
Rembrandtesque picture that has done service as a Rembrandt in the past. It is quite as good if not better than certain pictures of the kind still ascribed to Rembrandt in the European galleries. The grouping is excellent, the light true, the atmos- phere good, the colour very fair. It has more qual- ity than Koninck usually showed. The same hand did the glittering high lights and pretty whites in The Hague picture, No. 36, and in several other so-called Rembrandts at London, Amsterdam, and Berlin. It is strange that a style and handling so diametrically opposed to that of Rembrandt should, even for a moment, be confused or mistaken for the master's work. See The Hague notes on Rem- brandt.
254- 1 Kulmbach, Hans von. St. Joseph and Other 257 j Saints. These panels are strong in their colours contrasted with gold grounds. Besides, they are well drawn and well painted. They are -good ex- amples of early German art and should be looked at carefully.
1493. Leonardo da Vinci. Madonna and Child. This picture is by the painter of No. 13 in the Dresden Gallery. He may be a Fleming following Leonardo as regards the Child, the yellow drapery, the blue mountains, and following Lorenzo di Credi as re- gards the architectural frame at the back. The flowers and vase at the right look half Flemish, as
40 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
also the Madonna's head-dress and brooch. The surface is a bit glassy for an Italian and again re- minds one of Flemish surfaces. The Madonna's face is hurt by the use of too much oil or varnish. Another version by the same hand in the Louvre (No. 1603A).
148. Leyden, Lucas van. Madonna, Child, Magdalen,
* and Joseph. An excellent picture that might be helped by a more suitable frame. The gold arches are too bright. The heads and hands are beauti- fully drawn and the donor's portrait is very strong. The Madonna gives an odd suggestion of Diirer. What a beautiful transparent head-dress she wears ! The Magdalen is a lovely type and is charmingly painted. With rich colour all through and an ef- fective landscape.
149. Annunciation. A wing of No. 148, done a
* little harsher but with sentiment and colour both very attractive. How easily but surely this painter handles the brush! And what quality he gets in his whites and blues and pinks that ordinarily lend themselves to mere prettiness! Notice the jar of lilies and at the top that soaring cherub in yellow placed against grey-blue. Lucas van Leyden is not commonplace whatever else he may or may not be. And this, too, in spite of many evidences of restoration. The panel was sawn away from No. 148 and injured in the process.
1495. Liberale da Verona. Pieta. A strong piece of hard modelling in the figure of the Christ and in the hands and faces of the women. How chipped and block-like the drawing in the sleeve of St. John! The colour is as strong as the drawing but just as un- compromising and positive. Injured, but still fine.
LIPPI, FRA FILIPPO 41
1496. Licinio, Bernardino. Portrait of a Woman. It
has been injured by cleaning and is now somewhat flattened. The colour is too warm in the flesh and the drawing wants in accent and articulation. It has a Giorgionesque look about it.
335 1 Lievens, Jan. Heads of Old Men. Two por- 336 J trait heads that show Rembrandt influence. This artist painted a number of Rembrandts in his time, and these pictures are still doing Rembrandt ser- vice in galleries and art histories. His portraits are usually marked by a scratching through the wet paint noticeable chiefly in the hair and beard. See The Hague notes on Rembrandt.
1008. Lippi, Filippino. Christ Appearing to the Ma- donna. A large but not very attractive picture. It is cold in colour with uneasy, twisting drapery and constrained action in the figures. The land- scape is cold, too, and patchy in its putting together. The sky with its groups hardly improves the pic- ture, though the little angel of the Annunciation and the Madonna (in the upper corners) are charming. The predella is more modest in scheme but perhaps more interesting than the picture above it. The attribution is questioned by some. Crowe and Cavalcaselle thought it a fine example of Filippino.
1006. Lippi, Fra Filippo. Madonna and Child. The
figures have known much repainting. The nails of the hand are almost obliterated and the faces are distorted by it. Originally a charming picture, plaintive in sentiment, good in colour, and advanced in landscape knowledge for the painter's time. Notice the white of the Florentine head-dress. Above the Madonna's head is a halo that floats
42 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
and is not fastened to the head, as in earlier work. With gold work in the patterns and edges of the robe. The Madonna type is supposed to be that of Lucretia Buti.
1005. Annunciation. The drapery under the angel
is formally folded, as in the Berlin picture (No. 69), and the flowers are like those seen in all this painter's pictures, but frailer and paler. The angel is, per- haps, the best part of the picture — a very lovely angel in feeling, graceful in movement, and charm- ing in colour. The Madonna is less attractive and the architecture and garden are cold and crude at present. The picture is much hurt by repainting — in the Madonna, the dove, and the architecture. An early work. Attribution disputed by some critics.
986. LippO Memmi. Assumption of the Virgin. Much restored, but with traces of beauty still apparent, as in the head, hands, and robe of the Madonna, for instance. Venturi thinks it a modern copy.
5. Lochner, Stephen. Madonna in Rose Garden.
Notice the little angels with the flowers and the plaintive Madonna with an ill-drawn head and questionable nether limbs. What good colour as well as sentiment! Art is not wholly a matter of correct drawing. Colour counts for much and spirit or feeling for more.
3 "\ Altar Wings. With three saints in each panel
4 J and kneeling donors below. The men are dignified
and the women have charm. The garments are better drawn than the figures. What romantic types, costumes, sentiment, feeling! The red notes are washed out in the high lights as also, in mea- sure, the greens. There are green shadows on the
MARCONI, ROCCO 43
hands and faces in No. 4. The panels are very effective as decoration, entirely aside from their sentiment or content.
6. Lochner, School of. Death of the Madonna.
These panels, such as Nos. 6 and 8, put down to the School of Lochner, are excellent in gold work, patterns, and colour. They are by no means in- ferior because placed under the caption: " School of Lochner." Their decorative value is considerable.
1083. Lotto, Lorenzo. Marriage of St. Catherine.
The St. Catherine and the Child are charming in sentiment and very graceful in their attitudes. The action of the group centres in the play of hands, as so often in Lotto's conversation pieces. The colour is rather high in key and the landscape is attractive. An early Lotto and not very strong in drawing, but it is sufficient.
192. Maler von Ulm, Hans. Portrait of Ronner. A
good portrait, now somewhat repainted. It has character and colour. The painter is usually re- ferred to as Hans Maler zu Schwaz. He is sup- posed to have been influenced by Strigel and Burgk- mair. Little is known about him.
1085. Marconi, ROCCO. St. Nicholas and Two Saints.
The saint at the right with a cross suggests a Fer- rarese painter near to Dossi, but the St. Nicholas is certainly suggestive of Marconi. The picture is rather fine in the colour of the robes, but is crude in the white clouds and not well held together in light.
Massys, Quentin. See Metsys.
Master of the Death of the Virgin. See Cleve, Juste van.
44 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
60- 1 Master of Frankfort. Deposition. Begin with 62 J this picture by studying the uniform landscape
* in all three panels to get the enclosure or setting. Then come down into the foreground and see how fairly well the grouped figures belong in that setting. In early art this is a technical excellence not always seen or felt. There are figures in fine robes, some- what uncouth of gesture and pose, but touched by grief, and full of right feeling. The donors at the sides are dignified, and their patron saints — the St. Catherine, for instance — finely poised and ex- cellent in colour. The blue robe of the Madonna is not quite the blue of Bouts, but then there was only one Bouts in art.
10. Master of the Heisterbach Altar. 5*. Bernard with Saints. This and the altar-piece, No. 9, give an excellent idea of the ornate character of early German church art. As decoration, quite aside from representation, the pieces are excellent in their gold work. The painter takes his name from these pictures.
43. Master of the Kinsfolk of the Virgin. The Circumcision. A triptych, with three men-saints at left, and three women-saints at right. Very carefully done and with good colour effect. The drawing is decidedly linear and angular, but effec- tive. Notice the brocades in the central panel and the right wing; also the attractive group of angels in landscape at left, and the little Adoration so fine in colour in the upper right-hand corner. The name of the painter derives from his picture in the Cologne Museum, showing the Kinsfolk (Parenti, Sippe) of the Virgin.
26. Master of the Life of the Virgin. Annunda-
* tion. Just as true in its religious feeling as any
MASTER OF THE LIFE OF THE VIRGIN 45
Italian picture ever painted. And what a decora- tive effect is here, with rich colours placed upon a gold ground! Notice the fine colour of the red on the bench at back, and its happy contrast with the green cushions. And what a brocade the angel wears! The picture is slightly repainted. The set of pictures, of which this is one, was originally put down to the Master of the Ly versberg Passion, but the name is now changed to the Master of the Life of the Virgin, as more appropriate. The name of the painter derives from this series of pic- tures. He is supposed to be identical with Johann van Duyren. Some influence of Bouts is appar- ent in his pictures. There are figures on the re- verse of the panels.
28. Assumption of the Virgin. It is well composed
* and simply done, but it has not quite the quality of No. 26. Notice the drawing of the feet and hands, the strong faces of the apostles, the blue cherubim, and the lovely Madonna.
23. Birth of the Virgin. Somewhat injured by
cleaning and repainting. The colour lacks in qual- ity. It is too chalky in the faces and draperies, and a little frail in the blues and greens compared with No. 26. But the general effect is the same as in the other panels of the series.
27. Visitation. A very good early landscape that
* seems to fit well into the gold sky. The gold is high in value, high enough, almost, to create the effect of a yellow sky. The figures are awkward and angular, but they are very true and sincere people. There are blue cherubim against the gold, and at the left (to balance the maid with the wooden slippers) a donor kneeling and, close by, his coat
46 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
of arms. Notice the architecture of the city at the back.
24. Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple.
* The little figure of the Virgin going up the steps is almost angelic. How she bears herself and how beautifully her drapery falls! And what a colour effect in the figures at the right! What a fine pres- ence that of the young man with the golden hair I Notice also the woman in green at the left. This is one of the best of the series by this master. It is a very interesting series, including Nos. 22 and 25, which are less interesting only by comparison with the others. The various panels are parts of an altar-piece, and have depicted on their backs the Coronation and the Crucifixion. These backs are in better condition than the fronts, being freer from repainting. One panel of the series is in the National Gallery, London (No. 706).
1505. Master Of Moulins. Portrait of Cardinal Karl von Bourbon. A sharply outlined portrait, but a good, strong one, nevertheless. The ear is placed low, and is what Lombroso would style a criminal ear, whereas the Autun Nativity by the Master of Moulins shows extraordinarily high-placed ears, following Van der Goes, by whom he was supposed to have been influenced. In other respects this portrait corresponds closely enough with work at- tributed to the Master of Moulins — identified by some critics with Jean Perreal. The background is rich in carving and brocades. Somewhat re- painted in the white robe and elsewhere.
48- 1 Master of St. Bartholomew Altar. Triptych.
50 J The screen, the formal placing of the figures, the figures themselves are all a little odd to modern
MEMLING, HANS 47
eyes; but look closely at the work — the heads, hair, robes, patterns — and the skill and beauty shown must become apparent to you.
41 1 Master of St. Severin. Christ on the Mount 42 J and Deposition. Two panels from an altar-piece, with almost grotesque types in No. 41; but with good drawing and feeling. In No. 42 the landscape is interesting. The painter is named from his panels in the chapel of St. Severin, Cologne.
1. Master Wilhelm of Cologne. St. Veronica.
Look at it a moment for early art. How very well done the head of the Saint, the little angels, the gold rays of light! With what fine feeling all these early men worked! They aspired to craftsman- ship first of all, but they wrought with a sad sincerity.
1508. Mazo, Juan Battista. Portrait of the Counf- Duke of Olivares. A small studio replica of the large Velasquez portrait at Madrid (No. 1181). There are a number of changes and differences — for instance, the horse being white here and bay there. That Mazo made the replica is not so certain. He painted in a more sombre key of light, and with a more careless brush than shows here. The picture is, however, near him. 116. Memling, Hans. The Seven Joys of the Virgin. A long, panoramic picture telling the stories or scenes in the life of Mary, with the result of having many different points of sight and many different pictures on one panel. There is a disjointed effect as a result. The picture is not well held together because of a lack of centralised grouping. But in detail it is excellent — in the figures, the prancing horses, the bright colours rather than colour, and the
48 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
fine landscape. How the horses push forward in the procession to Calvary! What splendid cos- tumes the riders wear; what armour, flags, fine robes! Of course it lacks aerial perspective and wants in envelope as well as in continuity; but it may be studied in the parts with both pleasure and profit. Not the best example of Memling, however. 115. John the Baptist. This little panel holds to- gether much better than the larger No. 116, be- cause of its one subject. The colour of the robe, as well as the figure under it, are excellent, as is also the landscape. Originally part of a diptych. It has the false signature of Hugo van der Goes upon it. Supposed to have been painted about 1472.
424. MetSU, Gabriel. The Bean-King's Feast. It is
signed below on the child's chair, but for all that it may not be by Metsu. It seems too broad in the handling and composition for him, though at times he approximated such work. Moreover, it is not exact enough in drawing. It rambles consid- erably. The catalogue says an early work, which makes the matter somewhat more difficult to un- derstand. It is good in colour at the right side only. The left side rather falls out and is disap- pointing. Notice the woman and child — the best part of the picture.
677. Momper the Younger, Joos de. Landscape. The foreground and background are not in the same tone of colour or light, not in harmony or keeping. But an interesting landscape with some force about it — perhaps the force of sharp contrast.
1123. Moretto da Brescia (Alessandro Bonvicino).
* Portrait of a Churchman. It gives one not a large
idea of Moretto, though it has a grey look about
NEER, AART VAN DER 49
it that resembles Moretto's silvery tone. Formerly ascribed to Moroni, where it hardly belonged. An interesting portrait, well drawn, especially in the hands, and well placed upon the canvas for dec- orative effect in connection with the rather pro- nounced interior at back. It has grip and char- acter about it.
1515. Muelich, Hans. Albert V of Bavaria. There is a striving for a rich, decorative effect in the back- ground, in the costume, in the chains and ornaments, with the result that the interest in the face is weak- ened. It is not of Holbein quality though a truth- ful and exact portrait. Placed high on the panel, which gives height to the figure, and with it dignity.
301 1 Portraits of Ligsalz and Wife. The woman's
302 / portrait is the more interesting of the two. It is,
in fact, an unusual effect in portraiture — something seen occasionally in the kneeling donors of an altar- piece but seldom as a simple portrait. How well the blacks and whites are related to the green curtain and the sky! The man's portrait is more perfunctory. Coats of arms are on the backs of the panels.
1304- } Murillo, BartolomS Esteban. Street Urchins.
1308 J A series of street-arab, beggar-boy pictures of which No. 1304 is probably as good as any. They are much admired, but they do not wear well, and, after many seeings, become commonplace and wearisome. They are all wanting in colour, but are rather carefully drawn for Murillo. There is no smack of genius in them, however, nor even a sense of decoration. Done about 1650.
1518. Neer, Aart van der. Landscape with Sunset. A picture that in colour reminds one of an early
50 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
Rousseau. It makes a fine glow on the wall, which is to say that it is decorative — something that is largely the mission of any art, modern or ancient.
435. Neer, Eglon Hendrik van der. Lady with Lute.
This belongs with the work of Netscher and Van der Werff — pretty and popular art. It is a long hark from them to such painters as Terborch and Ver- meer of Delft.
133. Orley, Bernard van. Portrait of Jehan Caron- delet. It looks like an inferior Holbein. The sleeve is wooden, the Jiands and head hard, the background decorative, as in the portrait of Zelle, in the Brussels Gallery (No. 334), with which it seems in agreement. There is little doubt that Van Orley painted it.
157. Preaching of St. Norbert. The arrangement
of the blues and reds under light and shade is effec- tive, and the figures are drawn with some vigour. The landscape does not recede. It is a wing from a triptych and has figures in grisaille on the back.
370. Ostade, Adriaen van. Happy Peasants. A num- ber of Ostades are in this gallery, but none of them is of remarkable quality. This interior has well- grouped figures, and a good atmospheric setting.
1058. Pacchia, Girolamo del. Madonna with Angels.
Handsome angel faces ranged about a blue-cowled Madonna, with some good drawing and sentiment. The colour is cool. The picture is a little injured.
298. Pacher, Michael. Altar of the Four Church
* Fathers. This large altar-piece has been much
restored, but is still remarkably decorative in the
gold patterns, the embroideries, the Gothic archi-
PALMA VECCHIO 51
lecture. The drawing is excellent in the hands and heads; and as for the colouring, it still has depth and strength to it. The wealth of detail everywhere would seem to argue a want of concen- trated carrying power, but one does not feel this in the panels. They are wrought with the minute skill of a goldsmith, yet hold together when seen at a distance.
298A. Legend of St. Wolfgang. At the top the
architecture, the street, the sky, the figures on the bridge should be noticed. The large figures of the saint are well done, both above and below. Notice the drawing of the nude figure below. A picture of force by a painter of power.
298s. Legend of St. Wolfgang. These side panels
are in much better condition than the central piece and are very striking. Notice the kneel- ing saint below, with the angel, and at the right, through the door, the fine little landscape.
1107. Palma Vecchio. Portrait of the Painter. It is
possibly by Palma, but if we could see it as the painter left it another hand might be revealed. It has been scrubbed to death. Notice the fore- head, cheek, neck, and hands for their flatness. The picture has been much attributed. See the note in the catalogue for the different opinions regarding it.
1094. Young Satyr Playing on a Syrinx. It has a
nice spirit or feeling. The figure is very fine, the colour cool, and the light-and-shade excellent. There are those who think it a little gem in paint- ing, and not without some reason. The picture has been variously ascribed (with a war of words) to Cor-
52 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
reggio, to Lotto, to Palma, to Titian, but it does not seem of that large importance to warrant all the pother that has been made about it. Lotto or Palma, or even a less talented Venetian might have done it without startling the Venetian art world, though it has charm and life.
1108. Madonna, Child, St. Roch, and the Mag- dalen. It seems an empty, airless, and soulless Palma. The sky and hills are not more crude than the Madonna and Child. St. Roch kneels fairly well and with some sense of reality in his move- ments. Crowe and Cavalcaselle praise the colour, but one wonders how or why. There has been repainting — as usual. Formerly attributed to Paris Bordone.
1026. Palmezzano, Marco. Madonna Enthroned with Saints. It is the long-winded effort of a man who was limited enough when he undertook small pic- tures. He was never quite equal to the needs of the large canvas. Here the composition is a formal placing of people and pilasters, with the broken line used everywhere — in the draperies and angles of the architecture especially. The little angel at the bottom is too much drawn out.
1034. Perugino, Pietro. Vision of St. Bernard. A
** very beautiful Perugino in almost every respect. The sentiment is (for Umbria) just right. It is in the silent landscape, with its fragile trees and pure sky, as well as in the tranquil Madonna and saints. A balanced composition simply put to- gether, but with unity and peace in its parts. The eye naturally falls upon the Madonna, then upon St. Bernard, then goes to the saints above and to the landscape. The drapery is rightly drawn,
PLEYDENWURFF, HANS 53
without breaks or catches in it, and the hands and faces are clearly and purely done. Just so with the simple but beautifully curved and pro- portioned arches and columns or the well-drawn prie-dieu. What charming colour! Altogether this is a masterpiece — one of the best of Perugino's. In its original setting, no doubt the chapel architec- ture helped out the architecture here shown. A little hurt.
[035. Madonna with Saints. Not so restful in com- position or so fine in quality as No. 1034. The drapery has more "eyes" in it than No. 1034, the figures are more mannered, and the lines of drap- ery flow in curves with more conscious striving for effects of grace. It is a late work and the type is a little elongated in both face and figure. The colour is simple and the landscape is little more than indicated. Too much cleaned.
L037. Perugino, School of. Baptism of Christ. It is
possibly by Lo Spagna or some one very close to him. It might be compared with the Lo Spagna in the National Gallery, London (No. 1032). The same painter probably did No. 1038 also, of which there is another version under the name of Perugino in the Metropolitan Museum in New York. In- jured.
233. Pleydenwurff, Hans. Crucifixion. The bright gold ground of the sky hurts the picture. The figures are well brought together and the landscape keeps its place. The colour also is agreeable in a scheme of warm reds tempered by greens and dull blues. The types are a little coarse and the draw- ing is sharp in contours and drapery. St. John and the three women are effective.
54 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
472. Potter, Paulus. Cattle Near a Hut. The work is dry and wiry in its painting but is fairly good in its drawing. The hardness of the sheep and trees is noticeable. It is neither better nor worse than Potter's poor average.
1049. Raphael Sanzio. The Canigiani Madonna. A
** very charming Raphael, serene in spirit, and above reproach in the manner of its presentation. It is now a pyramidal composition, though the panel was higher originally and with a group of angels in the sky. The straight lines of the pyramid are broken by the round lines of the two women forming an oval at the centre and base of the pyramid. It has a hint of Andrea del Sarto in it — especially in the St. Anne and the St. John. It is beautifully drawn, the figures are graceful, and the draperies fall just right. Notice the form of the Madonna under the drapery, and the contours of her face, throat, and shoulders. In colour it is not remarkable in either bright or deep hues, but is harmonious save for the blue which seems, per- haps, too high in key. The landscape is delight- ful in the feeling of space. A serene picture, cer- tainly designed by Raphael though perhaps painted upon by pupils. It has also been repainted upon by perhaps more than one restorer.
1050. The Tempi Madonna. It belongs to the
painter's Florentine period. The type and colour are not now Peruginesque, but more like Fra Bar- tolommeo, and not very different from the Madonna del Granduca. The landscape also has changed and become more blue-green. A picture with good sentiment and spirit. How well the Madonna clasps the Child! The surface is stained and somewhat
REICHLICH, MARX 55
repainted in spots and the drawing is hurt thereby. The colour is a little cool.
1051. Madonna delta Tenda. This picture is adapted
from the Madonna della Sedia in the Pitti Gallery. It has the same type of Child and the same round composition, but the space is not so well filled as in the Florentine picture. Still it is not poorly com- posed or drawn, save in the Madonna's arm, and the colour is rather good. Hurt by cleaning and by old repainting, as in the hand of the Madonna, where the drawing and modelling seem badly wrecked. Attributed by various critics to Alfani, Perino del Vaga, and Giulio Romano. It is Raph- aelesque but not by Raphael.
[ 320. Ravesteyn, Jan Anthonisz van. Portrait of a Woman in Black. The ruff hangs like a mill- stone around the lady's neck, and rather disturbs the otherwise very respectable portrait. The com- panion picture, No. 319, is better.
1543- \ Reichllch, Marx. Altar-Piece of Sts. James 1543s } and Stephen. Stop a moment and look at the * goldsmith quality of the work upon these embroi- dered robes. The charm and the pathos of the little figures in the niches of the architectural framing, especially the women, are also noteworthy. The stoning of Stephen at the right (No. 1543A) is brutal but the landscape is pleasing. The panel above it is good in colour, in the drawing of the robes, in the strong faces. The panel at the left, with the foreshortened saint on the slab and the tall, handsomely gowned women at the right, has interest not only for the foreshortened figure but for the foreshortened oxen and the landscape.
56 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
324. Rembrandt van Ryn. Holy Family. The hands of the Madonna are more in Rembrandt's man- ner than any other portion of the picture, and the wrists have the demarkation line of tan upon them, as in the Portrait of an Architect (No. 246) at Cassel; but even in these features the work of a pupil or follower is seen rather than the hand of the master. The colour, the drawing, the light- and-shade, the handling are all wanting in positive Rembrandt quality. They are more like Bol's work. The picture is an interesting one, but it does not agree with the Coppenol at Cassel or the Lesson in Anatomy at The Hague, both of them supposed to have been painted in the same year with this Holy Family. And how positively all three of them disagree with the Rape of Proser- pina, and the Rape of Europa at Berlin and the Simeon in the Temple at The Hague! What a very versatile man Rembrandt must have been to have painted all these contradictory and conflict- ing pictures within a few months! The head of Joseph is well done, and no part of the picture is badly done, but it is not of Rembrandt's doing.
332. Sacrifice of Isaac. It has not the certainty
of Rembrandt in its drawing, modelling, or han- dling. And it is much more pallid and scattered in illumination than is usually apparent in Rem- brandt's works. The trees and leaves at the right are not drawn, the ram is a perfunctory stage property, the distance is carelessly given. The painting of the hair and beard of Abraham, the wrinkles on the forehead, the drawing of the eyes are all Rembrandtesque, but in the dull way of an imitator rather than the originator. Like No. 324, it lacks Rembrandt's colour and quality. It
REMBRANDT VAN RYN 57
is a school picture, but a good picture in itself. The action is effectively given, and the pressure of that enormous hand over the face of Isaac, the writhe and struggle of the boy's body, the pres- ence of a real body, even though badly drawn, are all positively done. Another version in the Her- mitage, St. Petersburg. This Munich picture is declared to be a school copy and the St. Peters- burg picture the original, but there is little differ- ence between them. They are both by some Rem- brandt pupil. The Munich picture was once thought by Bol and then by Eeckhout. The model for Abraham is the same as No. 231 at Cassel — a picture done probably by Lievens.
325. Portrait of a Turk. This is certainly strong
* enough for Rembrandt. In fact, that is the trouble with it. It is too strong. The head is, perhaps, over-modelled by the insistence upon the high lights, and, as a result, it comes forward out of the canvas. That was something that Rembrandt was usually not guilty of. He made his heads and figures stand in instead of out, and he surrounded them by light, shadow, and air. However, there is little use in cavilling over a head so powerfully con- structed and decisively painted as this. By con- trast with the usual examples of the Eeckhouts, Konincks, and Victoors set down to Rembrandt it is a wonder. Notice the sureness of touch in the head-dress. The eyes are strong, the beard less satisfactory, the mouth weak, the hand flabby. It contradicts other Rembrandt pictures done at this period, and must for the present be set down as a work by Flinck. The same painter did the so- called Saskia, formerly in the Josephs Collection, London — another fine portrait; also the Old Man
58 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
(No. 1600) in the Dresden Gallery, put down to Flinck; also the Amsterdam Flinck, No. 919.
326. The Deposition. This and the five other
* pictures of the Passion series in this gallery were painted at different times for Prince Frederick Henry of the Netherlands. It is evident from the pictures themselves that Rembrandt was helped by pupils in some of them. At first his own hand is more prominent, as in the Deposition. The light is centralised upon the white body relieved upon the white sheet. The weight or drag-down of the body is well given. The grey light and the
3 s1: cool colour are harmonious. The composition and drawing are very satisfactory. It is a fine picture. And done with no insistence upon glittering high lights.
327. Raising of the Cross. The rigid, tortured
* body is beautifully portrayed. The long, diagonal line of the figure of Christ is supplemented by the arms and the back of the figure in armour and repeated by the handle of the spade. This to give strength to the main line, and to help out the feeling of weight and drag downward of the figure on the cross. The head of the man in blue near the feet looks like Rembrandt's own portrait or what we have accepted as a Rembrandt likeness. Notice the realistic quality of the man in armour dragging at the cross, the nails in the hands and feet, the grouping of the crowd at the back. It should also be noticed that this picture and No. 326 are small-figured pictures, done about 1633, and that they are absolutely different in concep- tion, composition, types, colour, light-and-shade, and handling from the Rape of Proserpina at Berlin
REMBRANDT VAN RYN 59
and the Simeon in the Temple at The Hague, both of them supposedly done in 1631. Rembrandt's mind and hand must have undergone sudden and violent changes if all the pictures of 1631 attrib- uted to him are genuine.
328. The Ascension of Christ. The same general
* scheme of centralised light thrown on the figure of
Christ in white holds here as in the other pictures of the series. This figure of Christ was perhaps done by Rembrandt, but some of his pupils may have worked on the figures of the angels and the people below as well as the tree at the left. The little angels are very attractive, and the figure of Christ is fine in poise, in action, in largeness and fulness of drawing, in religious f eeling.
329. The Resurrection. An inscription on the back
says, in effect, that Rembrandt created this picture and P. H. Brinckmann resuscitated it (that is, restored it) in 1755. The latter part of the state- ment probably accounts for the angel's face being turned into a paint pie and compensation offered therefor by putting six fingers on the left hand. In general character it is not unlike the other pic- tures of the series. The work at the left is Rem- brandtesque. The violence and confusion pro- duced by the Christ bursting from the tomb are well given.
330. The Entombment. This picture, though doubt- less planned by Rembrandt and showing his com- position, shows very plainly the work of a different hand or hands from the first-mentioned pictures of the series. Compare the drawing of the heads and hands, the types, the colours, the lighting, the handling with, say, No. 326. It is poorer work all
60 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
through. The dead weight of the body in its white sheet is well given. The picture is somewhat in- jured, which may account for its blackish tone in the shadows.
331. Adoration of the Shepherds. This is, perhaps,
the least interesting picture of the series, as it is the latest, not having been painted until 1646. It is similar in conception to the other pictures, and was, no doubt, designed by Rembrandt but exe- cuted almost entirely by pupils. Notice the badly drawn heads of the shepherds at the left of the Child, the scattered lighting, the heavy and rather ineffectual handling. This is not Rembrandt in decline, but the work of those in his shop who never rose to any height. It is little more than a school piece.
333. Portrait of the Painter. It is probably an eigh- teenth-century portrait made up from Rembrandt recollections. It is too smooth for Rembrandt's painting in 1654. And why did Rembrandt always have to paint himself so differently each time? Is it not possible that his pupils could have painted him and the difference in the portraits be simply the difference in points of view? This question continually recurs to one on seeing these so-called Rembrandt portraits said to be by the painter himself.
345. Portrait of a Young Man. It carries with it
no conviction of Rembrandt as its painter. The drawing of the face, the outline of the cheek, nose, and mouth are too sharp and crude for Rembrandt. Nor is the colour his. Formerly it passed as an Eeckhout and then as a Fabritius. It is by some pupil of the school, probably the same one who
ROMANO, GIULIO 61
did the Saul and David at The Hague (No. 621) and the Christ before Pilate at Budapest (No. 368) —that is, Flinck.
91. Rhine School (Middle). Portrait of Hans von Melem. Somewhat sharp in outline but good in flesh colour. It has character and force. Notice the carefully drawn hands. The reflection in the glass does not help the portrait in any way. For- merly ascribed to Hans von Melem, who is now dis- covered to be only the sitter and not the painter.
1511. Nativity. The little angels, the landscape, the
sheep, the very formal drawing of the bricks are all very naive in their regularity. What good sentiment and good colour! The gold sky helps the decorative effect of it.
1512. Adoration of Kings. The picture has been
hurt by repainting in the hands and faces. The Child has become a small monstrosity, but the colour is still bright, the robes and their gold bor- ders are rich, and off in the distance is a fine sug- gestion of landscape. With early and not very realistic landscape, but sufficient for a background.
1052. Romano, Giulio. Portrait of a Young Man.
Thought by some to be a portrait of Raphael, by others a portrait of the young Bindo Altoviti. Also thought to have been painted by Raphael, by Giulio Romano, by Peruzzi, by Bacchiacca. In spite of the conflict of authorities, it is not a bad portrait. The head and face are well drawn, the hand a little doubtful. The scheme of colour is made up of blue, yellow, and green. No. 1087, put down to Sebastiano del Piombo, is thought to be by Giulio Romano also. Unfortunately, the picture is wrecked by repainting.
62 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
724. Rubens, Peter Paul. Death of Seneca. A pic- ture much looked at because of its morbid theme. The figure of Seneca was taken from a statue of a fisherman (now in the Louvre) and over-modelled and distorted in the taking. An early Rubens and not brilliant in colour.
726. Martyrdom of St. Lawrence. The composi- tion is too huddled and the colour too hot. It is not more than a school piece, and the accessories are divided up between Snyders, Seghers, and Brueghel.
727. Rape of the Daughters of Leucippus. A pop-
* ular Rubens, but, in spite of that, a fine group of
figures and once a fine piece of careful drawing. ~CZ-. - As form and colour it is still acceptable. How well the group fills the canvas! The colour gives the glow of life and the use of the broken line gives action. Somewhat hurt by the restoration that, sooner or later, comes to every large canvas. After hanging upon the wall for years, the canvas sags and breaks with its own weight. Then it has to be relined, the breaks patched up and made to match the original painting as nearly as possible. Of course it is never "as good as new" again. New paint cannot be made to match old paint. What fine types, these Flemish women! What backs and arms! The landscape is attributed to Wildens and some of the drawing and painting to Van Dyck. The bodies of the horses are left largely to the imagination, but their heads are spirited.
728. Children and Fruit. There is not now a stroke
of Rubens's brush to be seen in the picture, and probably never was. It is a school piece which he
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 63
may have inspired but never executed. Of course it is popular, being more or less pretty.
729. Madonna and Child. Those who have a
grievance against Rubens because of his gross types, what have they to say about this Madonna and Child? Is it coarse, gross, earthly, material, or is it the exuberant Flemish type given with some delicacy? The hands of the Madonna are hurt by over-cleaning and the Child's body by repainting in spots; but the heads and faces are, apparently, not injured. At least they are close enough to Rubens's flesh painting to be accepted as showing his early style. The picture is hurt by the arabesque of flowers done by Brueghel. They are brilliant and beautiful but do not help. Nor do the heavy cherubs that surround the Madonna.
730. Diana Sleeping. The figures are hurt by
cleaning and by the diagonal cracking of the wood. The landscape and the too-numerous items of game distributed about are supposed to have been done by Brueghel or some one of his ilk. The entire picture is probably the work of assistants in the Rubens shop.
732. Defeat of Sennacherib. What imagination
and invention Rubens has I What a hurry and roar and tumult of battle! ' Notice the movement, the action, the firm drawing, the sure, swift paint- ing. An early picture, but Rubens is early sure of himself. The shadows are blackish, as in No. 733.
733. The Conversion of St. Paul. In sort a com- panion piece to No. 732, painted about the same time and in the same manner. Both pictures are on wood, and hence the surfaces are not badly in- jured. Somewhat black in the shadows.
64 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
734. The Lion Hunt. A picture eulogised by some,
but the student will miss little if he passes it unnoticed. The landscape is supposed to be by Wildens, the animals by Snyders, the figures by Van Dyck, and just where Rubens comes in is not apparent. He is not now to be recognised in the work, though he probably designed it originally.
735. — — The Great Last Judgment. A picture done for the high altar of the Jesuit Church at Neuberg and now painfully out of place. The wonder is that with so large a composition Rubens could do anything at all worthy of art. It is a very good de- sign, being in the form of an enormous oval of figures descending at the right and ascending at the left. Some of the figures (notably the seated woman in the left-hand lower corner, just above the skeleton head) are excellent in drawing. The colour is lacking in brilliancy and the shadows are blackish. The whole picture was worked upon by pupils and is now much restored.
736. Fall of the Angels. It is probably a school
piece — something done in the Rubens picture fac- tory, for gain rather than for art. The catalogue recites that it is all done by Rubens's own hand; but the surface of the picture denies this. Now much repainted.
737. Fall of the Damned. Planned with a good
* deal of care, no doubt, but not an interesting com- position save for the diagonal fall of the figures. The nude is shown in all possible attitudes. And there is a terrific power about the downward drive of these figures. They fall like rain which seems to come down harder when seen driving in diagonal lines. But the colour is disagreeable and the shad-
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 65
ows are blackish. There is power in the drawing, but it seems ill bestowed or at least not resultant in any fine effect.
The Little Last Judgment. The smallest and
the best-preserved of the three Judgment pictures here shown. Known as the Little Last Judgment. Many of the figures are perfect in drawing. Once more it is a rain downward of figures; but notice also the upward movement of the saved on the left, high up — a counter-current in contrast to the downward movement of the damned. In the top centre Christ and the Madonna in repose. This latter part was added later by Rubens. The colour is good but the blue of the central angel is violent. The Rubens brush-work is apparent in the flesh, the whites of drapery, the hair. Dr. Bode thinks it a school piece.
The Woman of the Apocalypse. Painted for
the Church of Friesing and now much restored. It was never a good example of Rubens. In all these large pictures he was much helped by pupils. They are workshop pictures, turned out with skill, but mechanical in spirit, and poor in quality.
Adoration of the Shepherds. A heavy work,
done for the Jesuit Church of fteuberg in 1619. It is now at the disadvantage of being seen out of place, though it was never more than a perfunctory workshop picture done largely by pupils. Besides, so much of it is now restoration that one can only guess at its origin. Rubens, no doubt, designed it and there is still an Italian rush of angel wings at the top; but for the rest it is rather empty. No. 741 belongs in the same class. It is another work- shop picture.
66 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
742. Battle of the Amazons. A marvellous picture
** in invention, composition, and execution, though probably suggested by the Raphael-designed Battle of Constantine in the Vatican. Here the great art- ist shows in his invention, even in his assimilation of Raphael, and the great painter can be seen in every brush stroke. What a hurly-burly of wav- ing, arching, contrasted and repeated lines supple- mented by allied, opposed, and repeated colours! Notice the fight for the standard on the bridge, the fall of the horses at the right, the red-mantled Amazon at the left, the arching bridge and its contrast in the concave wave at the right. Through the arch of the bridge in the distance the struggle goes on — the swing of all the figures being to the right save for the back current in the wave that seems to push the figures under the bridge to the left. Battle pieces are not usually enjoyable works, and this is better than the average only by virtue of its supreme action and execution. Look at the surface closely, and see how the trained hand of Rubens strikes once with the brush and has no need to strike again. Every touch counts and re- veals a truth of form or colour, swiftly, directly, surely. Keep this surface in your eye when examin- ing early pictures by Rubens and you will not be misled by school pieces. His hand gains sweep and breadth later on but never loses in truth and force.
744. Samson Taken Prisoner. It has every indi- cation of a workshop piece with perhaps more of Van Dyck in it than Rubens. It might be com- pared with the same subject by Van Dyck in the Vienna Gallery (No. 1043).
745. Susanna at the Bath. It has been badly re- stored, or was badly painted originally, and whether
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 67
it was done by Rubens or by a pupil is now a matter of conjecture. For the coarse brush stroke, see the back of the woman (where the fur pelisse meets it) and the neck. Also the right hand of the elder, the tree trunk below him, the trees and wall in the background. It is all over the picture. Ru- bens never painted in that manner but his follow- ers and restorers did.
Christ and the Penitent Sinners. Painted
on wood and in a fair state of preservation. No- tice the brush strokes in the Magdalen's hair and also the hair of the figure with the cross and that of the Christ. The flesh-notes are also fairly well preserved. What a piteous figure that of the Mag- dalen! And what dignity and nobility in the Christ! A noble picture, though an early example of the master, and possibly, but not probably, worked upon by pupils. The catalogue says it is by Rubens's own hand.
Christ on the Cross. So far as it goes it is
a perfect picture, though an early Rubens. In mental grasp it is almost a sublime conception of the Christ on the Cross. He is hanging there in the dusk of night, alone, utterly forsaken, quite dead. The singleness of the idea, undisturbed by any accessory thought, makes it startling, power- ful, wonderful. The figure is drawn to perfection. How it hangs from its dragged-down arms, not distorted, but graceful even in its rigidity! How luminous in the unearthly light it shines! How splendid the white flesh against the dark sky! Every bit of it is painted by Rubens's own hand and is in a fairly good state of preservation, though too much cleaned and possibly darkened in the
>8 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
shadows. But it is not repainted. It is really a wonderful picture — a satisfactory Rubens, though making no display of colour. A master mind and hand worked together here on a theme hallowed by the ages, but seen by Rubens in a new way and treated in a new manner. Look at the same subject by Van Dyck (No. 825) and see how the pupil suffers by comparison!
749. The Trinity. A decorative conception of the
power and majesty of the Godhead, designed, no doubt, by Rubens, but executed in the workshop by pupils or assistants. In addition, it has been restored. The angels, the globe, and the clouds, with the figures and then* robes, all show the white- wash grey trail of the restorer — that very neces- sary but often ruin-breeding person.
751. Jacob and Esau. Another school piece, with
the poor sheep possibly by Wildens and the camels by some other equally bad painter. The surface has been repainted and the colour is now hectic.
752. Me/eager and Atalanta. A graceful if care- less work now somewhat the worse for wear and restoration. The cupid's face and wings and At- alanta's left hand probably became dislocated in the cleaning room. The landscape is said to be by Wildens and the animals by De Vos. Why not give the figures to the school and have done with it?
753. The Romans and the Sabines. A school piece
upon which Rubens may have added some surface touches not now apparent. It has been repainted. See also the War and Peace, No. 755.
754. The Drunken Silenus. It is coarse and brutal
* as comports with the theme. The figures were
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 69
done by Rubens's own hand. The accessories are supposed to have been done by Snyders. Painted on wood and hurt in spots (notably across from the knees of Silenus), yet it still has much of Rubens about it. If the figures offend, look at the grapes. They are quite perfect. Go close to the picture and see the largeness and sureness of the brush- work in the heads. A later version at Berlin (No. 776B), and a similar subject treated with more brilliancy and now in a better condition in the Nar tional Gallery, London (No. 853).
Massacre of the Innocents. Restoration has
about done for it. Look at the wrecked angels in the sky and let the rest go. Thulden is blamed for the background, but the restorer has gone over it since Thulden went to the shades. Said to be in Rubens's "late manner," which usually means almost any messy handling by his pupils. It is a questionable picture.
The Entombment. A sketch by a master- hand, and probably that of Rubens, though at first blush the work looks like that of Van Dyck.
-Pastoral with Two Figures. The shadows
seem to have been underbased in something like bitumen, which has sweated out and cracked the picture. The flesh-notes are not in good condi- tion owing to much cleaning and restoration. No doubt originally a picture of verve and fine colour effect. The shepherdess is supposed to be Helene Fourment, the shepherd Rubens himself.
Landscape and Cattle. Less pretentious than
No. 761, but better drawn and lighted. Even so, it is difficult to see Rubens in the cold colour or
70 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
the hard cattle. The figures are not bad, but they are not Rubens's figures.
761. Landscape with Rainbow. A small version,
perhaps the original, of the Rainbow Landscape in the Wallace Collection (No. 63). It is a little rigid, but nevertheless rather good landscape work for the time. There is reason to doubt that Rubens did either the small or the large picture. The general effect is good, but the drawing of details leaves much to be desired. The light on the foli- age is crude, the figures and cattle poor, the sky scattered and weak. See the note on the Wallace Collection picture and its companion in the Na- tional Gallery, London.
762. St. Christopher. A finely drawn figure of the
saint. It has the strength of a swiftly done sketch. Possibly a sketch for the shutters of the Descent in the Antwerp Cathedral.
764- ) The Medicis Cycle. These are the sketches
779 I for the Marie de Medicis pictures in the Louvre (see the Louvre notes), and are good things to study for Rubens's sketch drawing and handling. They are thinly painted — in fact, no more than rubbed in. They contain few final touches and must not be confused with his finished manner. Besides, the colour is much subdued here — his sketch work never being so high-keyed as his fin- ished pictures.
780. The Obsequies of Decius Mus. A sketch
rather more elaborated than usual, in which one can study the Rubens brush to advantage. What clear, clean colour! The picture done from this sketch is in the Lichtenstein Gallery, Vienna — one of a series of six.
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 71
782. Rubens and His First Wife, Isabella Brandt.
* This is an early portrait, done about 1609, and among the master's first portraits. It is a frank statement about himself and wife, probably done in the honeymoon season, and consequently a little gauche. The picture is hard in line and precise, even dry in handling, but very accurate, and not badly held together. Notice how well he fills the canvas with the oval of the figures, broken by a swinging cross-line in the shape of an S, made by the arms and hands. The colour and light are both a little sombre, with the flesh-notes kept high from the very start. The textures in the jacket, the plum-coloured dress, the sleeve of the painter's coat are all well given. What excellent portraits they are! What a fair and rather foolish face under the lady's hat, with its delicately cast shadow!
786. Portrait of a Man. Said to be a copy after
Juste van Cleve the Younger in the Berlin Gallery. It has a weaker look than the average portrait head by Rubens. A pupil might think it worth while to copy Juste van Cleve, but why should Rubens copy work inferior to his own? See also Nos. 783 and 787 — the latter done with consider- able sureness.
788. Elizabeth of Bourbon. It is probably the
work of a pupil or copyist, and belongs in the same class with Nos. 787 and 790. In either or any event it is inferior work. A similar head and bust are in the Vienna Gallery (No. 873).
790. Don Ferdinand of Spain. It is badly drawn
and poorly painted. The eyes do not match, the ruff is not drawn, the dress is loosely guessed at. There is no reason to believe that Rubens did it.
72 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
794. Helene Fourment. If the student by this time
has become acquainted with Rubens's flesh-notes (see No. 729 or the portraits Nos. 799-800 for them) he will not credit the apoplectic face and hands in this picture to the master's brush. It is the brush of the restorer again that has here worked with results that are almost fatal. See the restorer's work in the curtain with its whitewash high lights or in the dress or the architecture. Perhaps orig- inally a picture by Rubens's own hand. It still has much charm of presence. The left eye is odd in drawing.
795. Helene Fourment. This portrait is painted
on wood and is still free in parts from any retouch- ing. The mouth, neck, breast, left hand are a little hurt, and all of it is over-cleaned, but it is in much better condition than, say, No. 796. It is not a very pleasing portrait of Rubens's wife — not an idyllic affair as compared with other portraits of her elsewhere. She looks blousy and a little dull. Nor is the colour scheme of any great charm. That Rubens did it is questionable.
796. Helene Fourment with a Black Cap. It has
suffered from repainting, but was probably never more than a poor copy of the upper part of the Rothschild full-length, in Paris. The face is out- lined with brown edges, as also the nose, brows, and eyes. The flesh is not that of Rubens. The beadwork in the sleeve, the chain, the necklace have been wrecked in their modelling, and the neck and hair hurt by repainting.
797. Helene Fourment and Her Son. A romantic
** affair, done by the painter for the love of the sitters
and the love of art. It is beautifully composed,
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 73
the figures filling the space quite charmingly, and the column, curtain, and landscape suggesting luxurious surroundings befitting the figures. The colour is cooler than in a similar picture in the Louvre but very satisfactory. The handling has nothing laboured or perfunctory about it. In fact, it is a rapid, sketchy picture, as one may see by the manner in which the dress, bench, sky, and curtain are done. A little injured by repainting in the child's hands and feet and the mother's breast and face. The white stuff across the lap has lost its quality, and the purple skirt under it has been greyed; but beauty is still in the fine figure, and a nice, domestic, even idyllic sentiment in the group.
798. Rubens and Helene Fourment in the Garden.
The figures are evidently made to represent the Rubens family, but Rubens never made any such representation as this. He could not. The figures are short, squat, awkward, and have neither the power to stand well nor walk well. Look closely at the boy's left leg, the manikin with the bad eyes and hands posing as Rubens, the heavy, sack- like Helene, and the wooden old woman. And the formal trees, the eut-and-dried flowers, the dread- ful dog, turkey, and pea-fowls, the chateau, and the garden back of it! It is not repainting that we have here to quarrel with, but poor painting in the first place. It is a cheap affair — not even a good school piece.
799. Portrait of Jan Brandt. This is a portrait of
* Rubens's father-in-law — a hot-faced portrait but a
strong one. Notice the fine modelling of the head and its setting in the ruff. What truthful, con-
74 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
vincing work in the hair and beard, and the fore- shortening of the jaw from chin to ear! The figure rests well in the chair, and the room is suggested by the grey wall and the books.
800. — — Portrait of Dr. Van Thulden. An official por- trait of a professor, done in academic robes, but not in an official way. The background is hurt, so that the head and figure do not now fit into it. The face, considered by itself, is excellent, and so, too, the figure. It is a strong personality with well-modelled head and beautifully painted hair.
545. Ruisdael, Jacob van. Landscape. This is evi- dently a study from nature, modified in measure by an artificially focussed light. It is better than his larger work, but is by no means clever in ob- servation or firm in drawing. See also No. 546.
544. Landscape. The path and dunes at the left
are well given. The sky is too cold for the fore- ground, the trees rather large in volume for Ruis- dael, the handling freer and better than usual with him. The total result is somewhat forced but strong. A very good Ruisdael.
551. Landscape. This is up to the average Ruis- dael, though somewhat composed to order and re- cited by rote. In the same vein as No. 548.
547. Northern Landscape. It has very little body
or substance to it, but manages to make an im- pression by what is called its " tone." Most of the "tone" was seen (if seen at all) in a dark mirror. Many of Ruisdael's landscapes suggest its use. It is good decoration, if not the most truthful tran- script of nature.
SCHAFFNER, MARTIN 75
Ruysdael, Salomon van. Dutch Water-View.
The resemblance to Van Goyen (upon whose art Salomon van Ruysdael formed himself) is very ap- parent here in the diagonal composition, in the trees, and in the manner of dabbing on the foliage instead of drawing it. The greens are brighter than Van Goyen painted and there is evident in- terest in the painting of tree reflections in the water, but it is uncertainly done — the tree trunks being poorly drawn and wriggling too much. A good sky, somewhat rubbed by cleaning.
Landscape with Watch-Tower. The tower and
the wagons, with figures grouped at the bottom, are better than the trees and the sky. It is a poor affair, keeping rightful company with No. 540 in this respect.
Sarto, Andrea del. Holy Family with St. John, St. Elizabeth, and Angels. The group fills the panel with an oval composition of which the Child is the centre. It is a pretty Child and a girlish Ma- donna, with little strength in either. The colour is variegated but somewhat frail as is also the light- and-shade. There are a number of versions of this picture in European galleries, and this is hardly the original. It is much injured by repainting.
Schaffner, Martin. High Altar of We t ten- hausen. There are four large and rather im- portant panels of this altar-piece hung on a screen. One cannot get far enough away from them to see them properly, and of course they suffer much by being out of place in a museum; but, even so, they show with fine effect. The Annunciation at left is charming in the Madonna and angel, in the angel at the bed, in the interior, the light, the
76 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
draperies, the architecture. The Presentation has a fine group of figures and a glimpse of distant landscape. The Death of the Madonna (No. 217), with the group of the apostles, is perhaps less in- teresting but is very good. At the upper right is the small figure of the Madonna ascending with angels and being received by the Father. At the back, John kneeling with his head in his hands upon the bed is pathetic.
218. — —Portrait of Count Wolfgang van Getting.
With a landscape at either side sketched out with gold lines upon dark blue-green. A fine portrait, hurt somewhat by too much cleaning but still of commanding dignity. No. 1557 is done in the same vein.
174. Schongauer, Martin. Nativity. Said to be a workshop picture, but it has charming colour and holds together as though done by a trained and skilful hand.
1561. Signorelli, Luca. Madonna and Child. The
landscape seems cheaply done and the colour is by no means distinguished, but there is good draw- ing of the red drapery and a fine nude figure at the back. It is not very attractive in method, and was probably done in the shop by the same assistants who did No. 74 in the Uffizi at Florence.
955. Snyders, Frans. Still-Life. Realistic enough in drawing and colour, but a dry piece of handling, done apparently without deftness or any love for agreeable surfaces.
1073. Sodoma, II (Giovanni Antonio Bazzi). The Holy Family. An early work and yet with some- thing Raphaelesque about it — for lack of a better
STEEN, JAN 77
word. The types are slight and inclined to be pretty. The colours bright, the surface smooth, the drawing acceptable, and the sentiment satisfac- tory though leaning toward sentimentality. With a good landscape. It is not universally accepted as a Sodoma.
987 \ Spinello Aretino. Ten Saints. Two panels with five saints in each panel — the whole piece very decorative in gold grounds and haloes, long robes and patterned brocades. The predella be- low (by another hand) is small and practically intact, while the larger panels have been injured by repainting. Compare the colours (red with red, blue with blue, white with white, flesh with flesh) in the predella and the panels above to see how the larger has suffered by repainting. The colours have not now the same quality in the pan- els as in the predella. Probably when originally painted the colours were from the same or a similar palette. The predella is ascribed to the Upper Italian School and the panels to Spinello, but both attributions are doubtful.
392. Steen, Jan. The Love-Sick One. This picture
* is beautifully painted as regards its textures and surfaces. It is good also in the setting of the in- terior and in the colour. The face of the lady is a little rubbed by cleaning, so that the jaw line and the profile are now too hard. The light through the door at the left and at the window is kept down so as not to detract from the central figure.
391. Card-Players Quarrelling. A. good picture of
* a not too pleasing subject. The interior is well drawn. There is light, air, depth to it, and the
'8 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
figures are well set in it. Perhaps there is too much still-life — a predominance of small objects — but how well it is done! Steen did many poorer pictures than this.
188. Strigel, Bernhard. Portrait of Conrad Reh- linger. A kind of portraiture that Holbein, a few years later, made famous. The shadow of the fig- ure thrown on the screen at the back now hurts the otherwise fine appearance. It has blackened by time or repainting. A simple composition with upright lines and much dignity therewith.
189. Children of Conrad Rehlinger. This is a
companion piece to No. 188. Unfortunately, it is somewhat injured, but is still interesting in the white faces of the children, their plain dresses, and their quiet attitudes. A glimpse of the sea in both panels.
190. Portrait of Hatter. An honest piece of work,
perhaps too smooth and elaborate in its doing, but not at all bad. It has been retouched.
390. Sweerts, Michiel. A Drinking Shop. An excel- ** lent picture done with fine characterisation and easy painting. How naturally the figures sit or stand, how simply they are drawn, and in what a comprehensive manner they are painted ! Notice how broad and flat the painting of the costume of the man in the centre, also the bench, the hat, the drinking mug of the man at the right. The chairs and wall and floor are all seen and painted in the same large way. This is the very best kind of painting — the kind of Terborch and, in a large sense, of Velasquez. The colour looks sombre, but it is a very subtle harmony of low notes that be- comes more engaging on acquaintance. Formerly
TERBORCH, GERARD 79
ascribed to Terborch. Probably many pictures by Sweerts are still under Terborch's name in the galleries. There are very few under his own name, and this one at Munich is the best of them. 916. Teniers the Younger, David. A Guard-Room. Large and pretentious but a bit superficial for Teniers. The armour and drums at left are too high in key for the rest of the picture. It is dis- tinctly thin in workmanship all through. There are nearly thirty Teniers in this gallery, from which one may select, say, No. 918 for its unusual colour, No. 912 for its atmosphere, and No. 903 for clean, swift painting. This Guard-Room picture was one that Teniers repeated a number of times.
389. Terborch, Gerard. Boy and Dog. It is not
only a good picture technically but an interesting and truthful study of life. The intentness of the boy, the apprehensiveness of the dog are capital. And what drawing and handling withal! What a piece of painting in the hair! The hat is a master- piece by itself. What drawing in the hands, the chair, the wooden block at the left! The colour, too, is excellent, and the angles and atmosphere of the room are well given. A fine little picture.
1586. Portrait of a Man. A masterpiece in little.
** How could one give the truth of character in this
dignified Dutchman better than here? What a gentleman he is! How well he stands and how
r'et and restful about it he is! What drawing in hat, cloak, figure! The blacks against the grey, accented by the white, make up the scheme of colour.
1587. Portrait of a Woman. It could hardly be
** added to or taken away from without hurting it.
80 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
It is just right as it is. The body has weight and substance under the ample folds of the dress, and the whole figure holds its place charmingly in its grey envelope. There are dignity, candour, and simplicity about it, which are necessities of the best portraiture. How well the lady stands! And what a lady she is! This and its companion piece (No. 1586) are almost devoid of colour, yet how fine they are in their sobriety of hue! The colour, such as it is, has distinction and refinement.
388. — — The Ambassador of Love. More pretentious than the other pictures put down to Terborch in this gallery and not so good. The white satin gown is a little frail and flickering and suggests the work of some follower. The picture is hurt in the background by cleaning and repainting. The colour of the woman's dress is repeated in the dog.
1271. Tiepolo, Giovanni Battista. Adoration of Kings.
A large and rather heavily handled Tiepolo. It has not the lightness of touch nor the imagination nor the colour quality that we usually expect from this painter. No doubt it suffers from its present surroundings — all Tiepolo pictures look badly in galleries, because of their light colour schemes — but, in any event, the picture seems to lack inspiration. It has the look of something done in the studio by pupils or assistants.
1127. Tintoretto, Jacopo (Robusti). Portrait of an * Architect. A very good portrait, rather fine in character, full of spirit and life, and well placed on the canvas. Notice how the figure is fitted in around the open window. Only the landscape suggests Tintoretto — the man was done by some
TITIAN (TIZIANO VECELLIO) 81
one near the Bassani. But no matter about who did it, the work itself is excellent.
1574. Christ in the House of Mary and Martha.
* It has the advantage of the other and larger Tin- torettos hanging in the same room in that it is really by Tintoretto. The three figures are ar- ranged in a circle and the action is to the right. The two women are graceful in form and agreeable in colour. The setting of the room, the cupboard with still-life at right, the doorway out are all well given. A really fine picture. Brought here from the gallery at Augsburg.
1128. Tintoretto, School of. Venetian Nobleman and Sons. The man at the right has the face of one long dead, and the other figures are petrified. The picture is much damaged. The landscape has been scumbled and whitewashed. It is not likely that Tintoretto ever saw the picture, though pos- sibly Jacopo Bassano may have had something to do with it, as Mr. Berenson suggests.
1112. Titian (Tiziano Vecellio). Portrait of Charles V.
* It is not possible that Titian, the prince of all portrait-painters, left that wild sky and column, or that dreadful red floor with the black feet upon it, or that lead-coloured face and bad brocade back of it, in their present condition. The sur- face of the picture has been completely repainted. It is even assumed that Rubens repainted it, but Rubens was just as wonderful a painter in his way as Titian, and could not have left any such crude surface as this. The repainter was a medi- ocre person in the cleaning room, of name unknown. The design and the drawing are still sufficiently ap- parent in the portrait to show how simply Titian
82 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
could see and paint an emperor. It is still a fine
composition, the figure restful in pose, serene,
self-poised as befits a sovereign. But the surface of Titian has vanished.
1110. Vanitas. The grace of the design, the fine
* type, some of the charm of the figure, and some of the surface are still here; but there has been over-cleaning in the face, bust, and hand, and some repainting. It is, nevertheless, a beautiful pic- ture— one of the early types of beauty belonging to the Laura Dianti series that Titian painted for the cabinets of noble patrons. The still-life in the mirror seems odd for Titian. The picture has been variously attributed by different writers. It was for a long time thought to be by Giorgione.
1111. Portrait of a Man. A very commanding por-
** trait in Titian's best manner and comparable to
the Duke of Norfolk portrait in the Pitti or the Man in Black in the Louvre. What an epitome of manliness, dignity, and repose! It is useless to indicate pin-points of error in such a superb por- trait. The only thing to do is to admire it. It is worthy of unstinted admiration, and is almost a perfect portrait. Titian never did anything better. It was considered a portrait of Aretino at one time, but that idea has been abandoned. In good con- dition.
1113. Madonna and Child. A majestic conception
* of the Madonna and Child. It is not religious or pietistic in an early Italian way. The Madonna is of the patrician type, material perhaps, but beautiful none the less. The lines of the Child are graceful, and the robes of the Madonna are done in a broad, free way. There is large drawing, too,
TRAUT, HANS 83
in the Child's figure. Both the figures and robes are rich in colour, and the landscape is warmed by a sunset sky. It is somewhat hurt — the Child's hand is destroyed, and the ear has been repaired, and there is old repainting elsewhere — but on the whole it is in fair condition.
The Crowning with Thorns. A late picture,
done when Titian was a very old man. The han- dling is heavy, much thumbed and kneaded, inco- herent in parts. It is a repetition of the Louvre picture (No. 1583), with a different illumination and much looser drawing. It seems less physical in types and more elevated in feeling than the Louvre picture, but it lacks in sureness as regards both form and colour.
Portrait of a Venetian Noble. Unfortunately,
this portrait has been much repainted, but it still possesses nobility, with great dignity and repose. The attribution has been questioned. It was as- signed by Crowe and Cavalcaselle to Tintoretto, but the workmanship hardly carries out such an assignment. Nor is Titian positively proclaimed in it. In any event, a very good portrait.
Madonna, Child, St. John, and Donor. The
Madonna is badly drawn in the figure and a little theatrical in pose, while the Child is almost im- possible in attitude; but St. John is well indicated, the donor is respectable, and the landscape is fairly good. Titian never did it. It is by some follower of his.
Traut, Hans. Madonna with Angels. These primitives of Germany should be looked at in the same way that we now look at the Vivarini of Venice
84 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
or Gentile da Fabriano in Umbria. They are by no means perfect technically, but how sincere they are, and what fine decorative instinct they have! As an arrangement of colour upon gold, this picture is excellent. Look at the pattern of the angel's wings or that of the Madonna's brocade!
1293. Velasquez, Diego de Silva y. Portrait of a Young Man. In the early style of Velasquez and never quite finished, as may be seen by the lines in the collar and the sketched hand. A portrait of vigour and force, the face and head well modelled, the eyes deep sunk, the nose sharp, the mouth ex- cellent. There is no reason to doubt its being by Velasquez.
1292. Portrait of the Painter. The attribution of
the picture as well as the identification of the sitter may be questioned. This is only super- ficially in the style of Velasquez, only superficially a likeness of the painter. His portrait in the Sur- render of Breda or Las Meninas in Madrid does not entirely correspond. A very good portrait, though somewhat repainted. Compare it with the early Velasquez, No. 1293, in this gallery. It shows a different handling.
1133. Veronese, Paolo Caliari. Jupiter and Antiope. A fragment cut from a larger picture. It has been much cleaned and conveys in its present state very little idea of Paolo Veronese. Formerly given to Titian, and, by Morelli, to a follower of Titian's.
1145. Adoration of Kings. It is a fairly good pic- ture, but is probably a school work, as the catalogue States. How Paolo himself treated this theme is best seen, perhaps, in the Dresden Gallery (No. 225).
WERTINGER, HANS 85
1. 146. Portrait Croup. It is not probable that Paolo
ever did it, though its present condition is too bad to say anything about it except that it is ruined. Formerly known as a Titian and also as a Tintoretto.
1. 135. Portrait of a Lady. Somewhat too brown in
tone to be pleasant, but a substantial personality is shown. It was never too well done, as the cur- tain shows us. The suggestion of Zelotti in the catalogue note indicates its probable origin.
L137. Holy Family. The head of the Joseph is fairly
well done, but the rest of the picture speaks for Carlo Caliari, or a copyist, or a restorer, or almost any one save Paolo. The placing of all these medi- ocre works of the school to the master's account merely confuses history and makes connoisseurship appear more untrustworthy than it is in reality.
812. Vos, Cornells de. The Hutten Family. It is pallid in the flesh-notes and cold in the landscape, but interesting as regards the children. The lady is too china-like. Not the best example of De Vos. Formerly given to Frans Hals.
251. Weiditz, Hans. Holy Family. At various times ascribed to Gossart, Baldung, Diirer — a picture which is still seeking the author of its being under various names. It shows some of the influence of Diirer, but is not remarkable in any way.
223 1 Wertinger, Hans. Portraits of the Duke and
224 / Duchess of Bavaria. Two portraits with rich dec- orative effect, produced largely by the use of gold in the costumes, the jewellery, and the arabesque at the top. Despite this and their elaborate landscape backgrounds, the heads have force and realistic truth about them, and hold their own in the picture very well. Formerly attributed to Burgkmair.
86 THE OLD PINACOTHEK
347. Wet the Elder, Jacob de. Abraham and Hagar.
A diagonal composition, good in light, air, and col- our. It has a nice tone about it. By a pupil of Rembrandt — or at least a follower. Of course, it was once assigned to Rembrandt.
100. Weyden, Roger van der. St. Luke Drawing the Virgin. A large but not very good picture. The landscape is crude and pallid, the waves formal, the drawing of the figures timid. The picture looks like a copy. It has been retouched in the bargain. A better version is in the Hermitage (No. 445). Perhaps neither of them is by Roger.
101- 1 Altar-Piece of the Three Kings. A triptych
103 J with an Adoration in the centre and a Presentation ** and an Annunciation in the wings. This is the only good picture ascribed to Roger here at Munich. Excellent types and good grouping, with splendid costumes and jewel work, are to be seen in the central panel. Notice the brocade of the king at the right or the presents held in the hands. The drawing is sharp and the colour not so fine in qual- ity as usual with Roger. The landscape and back- ground are airless, but the buildings are interesting as architecture. The Presentation shows fine archi- tecture, good heads and robes; and in the An- nunciation, what a glow of red tempered by blue and white! A good triptych, but it is, perhaps, just a trifle frail for Roger's own hand. In style it is not unlike the Bladelin altar-piece in Berlin (No. 535) — the best of the attributed Van der Weydens at Berlin.
229- \ Wolgemut, Michael. Altar-Piece. These four
232 / panels of an altar-piece show much brilliancy of
colour and also indicate the Netherland influence
ZURBURAN, FRANCISCO DE 87
of some painter like Bouts. In No. 229 the Bouts influence seems apparent in the colour scheme of the sleeping soldier in blue and yellow, in the Christ, the three women, the landscape, and the red- streaked sky. In No. 230 the landscape is cruder, the colour less vivacious, the drawing poorer, as though another hand were at work. In No. 231 the grouping at right, the colour, the distant city all suggest a crude following of Bouts. There are figures on the reverse of the panels.
580. WynantS, Jan. Evening Landscape. This is, perhaps, better than its companion piece, No. 579, but is still a cold canvas with little sentiment or charm about it. Landscape in Wynants's hands was usually perfunctory and conventional. The roadway, the trees, the patch of reflecting water, the spotty ends of the tree trunks are almost al- ways presented in an uninspired way.
582. Sand-Hills. With the usual porcelain sky
but rather interesting in the foreground work.
Ysenbrandt, Adriaen. See Isenbrant.
1291. Zurburan, Francisco de. St. Francis of Assist.
A well-painted head, said to be in the late style of the painter, but once attributed to Guido Reni.
INDEX OF PICTURES BY NUMBERS
1. Master Wilhelm of Co- logne. 31 4 I Lochner.
.*!
6. Lochner, School of. 10. Master of Heisterbach Altar.
Bouts, Dirck. 114. Bouts, Albert.
118. David.
133. Orley, B. van.
|
23 24 26 |
Master of Life of Virgin. |
1*0. 1481 149 |
.Dies. Lucas van Leyden. |
|
27 28 |
151 ; 153 J |
> Isenbrant. |
|
|
41 42 |
Master of St. Severin. |
1551 156 J |
> Gossart. |
|
43. Master of Kinsfolk of |
157. |
Orley, B. van. |
|
|
Virgin. |
170. |
Hemessen. |
|
|
48 |
Master of St. Barthol- |
174. |
Schongauer. |
|
50 |
omew Altar. |
188' |
• -; ' • |
|
55 |
189 |
> Strigel. |
|
|
56 |
Cleve, Juste van. |
190 |
. • .- |
|
57 |
192. |
Maler von Ulm. |
|
|
60 AO |
Master of Frankfort. |
193 |
|
|
(MB 68 |
209 |
Holbein the Elder. |
|
|
72 |
Bruyn. |
211 |
|
|
90 91. |
Rhine, School of. |
212 213 |
Holbein the Younger. |
|
94. French School. |
214- |
1 - • |
|
|
100 |
218 |
J kcnaffner. |
|
|
101 102 |
Weyden, Roger van der. |
219. |
Cologne, School of. |
|
103 |
222A |
| Burgkmair. |
90
INDEX
233. Pleydenwurff.
236-
242
244
247
248
249
251. Weiditz.
Durer.
270 271 272
Kulmbach.
Cranach the Elder.
275
279.
281. Gninewald.
286. Baldung.
2881
289 > Altdorfer.
290 J
292. Apt.
293. Altdorfer. 298 1
298A } Pacher.
298BJ
3011
302]
^ | Heist, B. van der.
324-1
333 J Rembrandt.
|j;}LievenB.
338 \ T, i
339 / Bo1'
345. Rembrandt.
347. Wet, Jac. de.
348. Eeckhout. 353. Koninck.
359. Hals.
370. Ostade, A. van.
390. Sweerts.
S)**
407. Dou.
424. Metsu.
426. Janssens.
435. Neer, Eglon van der.
472. Potter.
475. Cuyp, Aelbert.
535. Goyen, J. van.
544
Ruisdael, J. van.
547
551
566. Everdingen.
570. Hobbema.
614. Heyden, J. van der. 677. Momper, Joos de. 702. Brueghel the Elder, Jan.
INDEX
91
Rubens.
724
726-
730
732-
740
742
744
745
746
748
749
751-
754
757-
762
764-
779
780
782
786
788
790
794-
800
812. Vos, C. de.
813. Jordaens. 822-
830
833
834
837
844
845
847
849
850
861
880. 'Brouwer.
916. Teniers.
955. Snyders. 9811
982 } Giotto.
983 j
986. Lippo Memmi.
988 I Spinello Aretino. ^}Angelico,Fra.
}{^j Lippi, Fra Filippo.
1008. Lippi, Filippino.
1009. Garbo, R. del.
1010. Botticelli.
1011. Ghirlandajo, Dom. 1016Alc ,.
1017 /Credl-
1023. Ferrara, School of.
1026. Palmezzano.
10271
1028]
1032. Basaiti.
Catalan School.
Dyck, Anthony van.
|
1034 |
|
|
1035 |
Perugino. |
|
1037 |
|
|
1039 1040 |
Francia. |
|
1049 |
|
|
1050 |
Raphael. |
|
1051 |
|
|
1052. Romano, Giulio. |
|
|
1058. Pacchia. |
|
|
1066. Sarto, Andrea del. |
|
|
1073. Sodoma. |
|
|
1077. Ghirlandajo, R. |
|
|
3S}*"*- |
|
|
1083. Lotto. |
|
|
1085. Marconi. |
INDEX
|
1094] |
1444. |
Bassano, Jac. |
|
1107 } Palma Vecchio. |
1446. |
Beuckelaer. |
|
1108] |
1449. |
Bouts. Dirck. |
|
fflrj»» |
H5ir(B^kmair- |
|
|
1120 1 -D |
1457. |
Cranach the Elder. |
|
1121 J ^ordone- |
1462. |
Cranach the Younger. |
|
1123. Moretto. |
1463. |
Cuyp, B. G. |
|
1127. Tintoretto. |
1469. |
Engelbrechtsen. |
|
1128. Tintoretto, School of. |
1470. |
French School. |
|
1133 |
1485. |
Greco, 11. |
|
1135 Veronese, Paolo. |
1486. |
Griinewald. |
|
1137 |
1487. |
Guardi. |
|
|J4g Veronese, P. |
1488. 1490. |
Hals. Holbein the Younger. |
|
1150 Bassano, Jac. |
1493. 1495. |
Leonardo da Vinci, Liberale da Verona. |
|
J2gg Canaletto (B.Belotto) |
1496. 1505. |
Licinio, Bern. Moulins, Master of. |
|
1271. Tiepolo. |
1508. |
Mazo. |
|
1291. Zurburan. |
15111 1C10 f |
Rhine School. |
|
12Q3 1 Velasquez. |
J-O1 w 1 1515. |
Muelich. |
|
1302. Carreno. |
1518. |
Neer, Aart van der. |
|
1304 1305 M m |
1539 1540A |
Gaddi, Agnolo. |
|
1306 Murmo- 1308 |
1543 1543B |
Reichlich. |
|
1310. Antolines. |
1561. |
Signorelli. |
|
1314. Clouet, Jean. |
1574. |
Tintoretto. |
|
1315. Clouet, F. |
1578. |
Traut. |
|
J325 Claude Lorraine. |
15861 1587 J |
Terborch. |
|
Eg Baldung. |
1588. 1590. |
Antonello da Messina. Apt. |
STAEDEL INSTITUTE, FRANKFORT
NOTE ON THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
THE Frankfort Gallery, usually known as the Staedel Institute, is neither very large nor fully representative of the schools of painting, but it is, nevertheless, an interesting gallery because of some unusual pictures it holds. There are nearly a thousand numbers, and among these are some old masters of fame and impor- tance. Here, for instance, one finds the name piece of the Master of Fle*malle, the Lucca Madonna by Jan van Eyck, two interesting panels attributed to Gerard David, an excellent picture ascribed to Christus, a good portrait by Memling, a large altar-piece by Cra- nach, some panels given to Diirer. Here, too, is a huge canvas of Samson and Delilah usually accepted as a Rembrandt, two very good portraits by Bol, an interior by Gelder, portraits by Hals, genre pieces by Brouwer, a King David by Rubens.
Most surprising of all, one finds in this gallery some excellent and rare Italian pictures. The Portrait of a Young Woman by Bartolommeo Veneziano is repro- duced as the frontispiece of this volume, the Carpaccio of the Madonna and Child is well known and a fine picture, the Fiorenzo and the Perugino are both excel- lent works, and the two large Morettos are of unusual quality. Perhaps the most interesting Italian picture
95
96 NOTE ON THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
in the gallery is the Palma, Resting Nymphs. It is not only excellent but it is puzzling to trace in its ante- cedents and in its suggestion of things Giorgionesque. There are many other Italian pictures in the gallery that will bear study. The collection is growing rapidly. It is by no means negligible, and the student passing from Germany to France or going down the Rhine will do well to give at least two days to it.
The Institute building is spacious and imposing if a little tedious in its bad taste. But the light is very good, the pictures well hung, and for the rest the visitor need not be too exacting. The unabridged catalogue (in German) has notes of critical value that should be consulted and, in the main, accepted.
There is a Municipal Historical Museum at Frank- fort which contains a few early German masters that should be seen if possible. Darmstadt is only half an hour by train from Frankfort, and the student should go there to see Holbein's Burgomaster Meyer Madonna in the Ducal palace and also the pictures in the Darm- stadt Museum, especially those by Backer and Bernaert Fabritius, with two pictures attributed respectively to Rembrandt and Maes. The museum is admirably ar- ranged and contains many pictures of importance.
STAEDEL INSTITUTE FRANKFORT
639. Aertsen, Pieter. Christ and the Adulteress.
The figures at the back are excellent in colour and in arrangement. Those in the foreground are, of course, not interested in the background happen- ing. They are rustic folk selling produce, strongly drawn, and just as strongly painted. Look at their heads and hands with the colours of the dresses. And what still-life painting! This latter is, of course, Aertsen's metier. He is a painter of still- life with figures, and the incidents put in at the back give a name to the picture and are helpful in producing a decorative pattern.
7. Angelico, Fra. Madonna Enthroned with Angels.
A pretty circle of angels in Fra Angelico's manner but probably by some assistant. It has not the largeness nor the skill of the master himself. Nor is the sentiment entirely his. A handsome little picture, nevertheless.
659. Antwerp, School of. Adoration of Kings. It
has a look of Herri met de Bles, but this is, perhaps, misleading. Probably a school piece of the Bles time or later, done with some skill but with little spirit or fine feeling.
73. Baldung, Hans. Witches' Sabbath. It is in
Baldung's style, with good outline drawing and 97
; THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
colour. Whatever this painter's failings may be (he often produced "forced" effects), he is not commonplace in theme or in treatment. What body and weight in the seated figure! See also No. 73*.
13. Bartolommeo Veneziano. Portrait of a Young * Woman. This, as an early example of Bartolommeo and, in itself, as a study in whites, is one of the most interesting pictures in the gallery. It was thought at one time to be by Albrecht Diirer be- cause of the German feeling in it, but Morelli rightly gave it to Bartolommeo without saying any- thing about his German influences. Critics do not allow of his ever having had any, but surely they are apparent here in the type and the drawing, especially in the drawing of the hair. The portrait belongs in the same class with the Daughter of He- rodias at Dresden (No. 201A) — both of them sug- gesting Northern influence. Very interesting in its whites, in its facial outline, its drawing of the bay-leaves, its painting of the flowers. A hand- some work in spite of its oddity, and in spite of sad repainting, showing so conspicuously in the hand, the face, the figure.
35. Bellini, Giovanni. Madonna, Child, St. Eliza- beth, and St. John. This looks like a Bellini school piece — the sort of thing done by a pupil, possibly after one of Bellini's designs, and with so much good work about it that the master felt no com- punctions in allowing his name to go on it. It is, perhaps, lacking in feeling and is a little hard and mechanical in method, but one can find little fault with the drawing, the colour, the types. They are Bellinesque to a deceptive degree. The Madonna
BOL, FERDINAND 99
in her white head-dress is attractive. The dark- skinned figures on either side of her enhance her beauty by contrast. How well the hands of the St. John are drawn and the hah* of the Child is painted! It is good work but not inspired by any deep emotion. The suggestion of Rondinelli offered by the catalogue is pertinent.
701. Belotto, Bernardo. Dresden. Done with a good deal of feeling for the lift of the sky, for colour, for the relations of light and shade. But Belotto is seen at his best only in the Vienna Gallery. There he is a wonder and a surprise.
184. Bol, Ferdinand. Portrait of a Young Man.
This is as good a picture intrinsically as any so- called Rembrandt in the gallery, and yet it is signed as a Bol — a signature we cannot doubt because Bol was not great enough as a painter to make it worth while to forge his name upon can- vases. Besides, it gives evidence of being a genu- ine Bol. And will you look at it closely for a few minutes to see how much it looks like a genuine Rembrandt? It is weak in the drawing and modelling of the forehead, chin, eyes, nose, hands; but it makes a very good pretence at the Rembrandtesque, and one can understand how it could be mistaken for a Rembrandt. See also the smoother Bol, No. 185.
658. The Philosopher. Here is another Rem- brandtesque Bol done with good colour and draw- ing. The left hand is like that of Abraham over the face of Isaac in the Abraham's Sacrifice at Munich (No. 332), assigned to Rembrandt but probably by Bol. A very good picture, but in al- most all of the pictures left to Bol in the European
100 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
galleries one feels the attempt at strength which ends rather weakly compared with the man he followed — Rembrandt.
18. Bonsignori, Francesco. An Apostle. It has
some strength of drawing and depth of colour. The handsome architectural frame about the figure reminds one of Mantegna, of Gentile Bellini, of Crivelli, of Ferrarese art. An interesting picture now somewhat darkened. Put down earlier as by Mantegna, probably because of the inscription on the ledge, but he did not paint the picture. It comes nearer to Justus of Ghent than any one else.
11. Botticelli, Sandro. Portrait of a Woman. See
the catalogue note for the identity of the sitter. It looks more like an idealised head of some Virtue or classical character than the exact likeness of a Florentine woman. It is given with spirit and truth of outline drawing. There is a swing of line in the head and bust which the coil of pearls about the shoulders and the necklace seem to emphasise. The profile is well done especially in the nose and mouth. And notwithstanding its meagre use of light-and-shade, there is a roundness to the figure. But it is not a Botticelli original.
12. Madonna, Child, and St. John. There are
versions of this picture in other European galleries. They are all originals or replicas and by no chance mere copies, according to the various catalogues. This one is probably a school piece done with some sharpness and crudity of outline. Notice, for in- stance, the jaw line and arms of the St. John. The Botticelli sentiment and colour are present but not his peculiar quality.
BROL1 WEH, &ppV '». 101
97. Bouts, Thierri. Vision of the Emperor Augustus.
This picture is in the style of Bouts but somewhat feeble and laboured for that master. Several of the heads have been changed upon the panel as the outlines still indicate, the drawing of some of the faces and hands is not good, the Emperor is a marvel of awkward line, the figure in black at the right is flat and his red sleeve unbelievable; the dog, the sheep, the buildings, the landscape are all poorly done. In addition we miss the Bouts brilliancy of colour, his fine robes and jewelling. It is possibly a shop piece or the work of a follower.
108A. Madonna and Child. The picture was for- merly attributed to Memling but is now given to Bouts by the catalogue. It probably came from neither painter directly. A work with some feel- ing and good colour about it. Other pictures, sim- ilar in type and colour, in the Berlin and London Galleries are put down to Bouts, Memling, and Van der Goes. This Madonna with a bumpy forehead seems difficult to locate.
149. Brouwer, Adriaen. The Bitter Drink. An ex- cellent sketch by a most capable painter. Brouwer seems to have played with it, rubbed it with his thumb, stirred it with his forefinger into a resem- blance of life. Look at the drawing of the mouth, the hair, the hat, the hand, the cup. And what good colour!
147. Operation on the Foot. Excellent work if not
very pleasing or elevating in theme. Brouwer never makes a pretence of elevating the masses or bettering the race. He is simply a good painter with an eye for colour and pictorial effect. These
102 THE Si'AEDEL INSTITUTE
he gets from peasants better than from people of high life. See also his No. 148.
122c. Brueghel the Elder, Jan (Velvet). Landscape. One of the picturesque little scraps of landscape that this Brueghel did many times and with very enjoyable results.
95 1 Bruyn, Bart. Portraits of Man and Woman. 96 J They are typical Bruyns, good in decorative qual- ity but not especially forceful, though honest, truthful work.
21. CarotO, Francesco. Madonna and Child. This is not a remarkable picture in any way but it has some good feeling and good workmanship about it. The Child's figure is well drawn and the colour is acceptable.
38. Carpaccio, Vittore. Madonna, Child, and St. John. Here is a well-known Carpaccio, of the painter's early period, and done in his frankly awk- ward manner, as witness the drawing of the faces or the Madonna's hands or the Child's legs. It is naive, too, in feeling, as may be seen in the girlish Madonna and the two odd-looking children — the Christ child with the cap, book, and slippers of a Venetian child. How often in Italian art does the Child appear in the costume of the time and coun- try— that is, Venetian costume! What very good colour! It is mellow all through and in perfect harmony with the justly valued whites of the head- dress. And what a charming landscape! A fine picture and representing truly the Carpaccio spirit.
36. Catena, Vincenzo. St. Jerome. Said to be a replica of the picture in the London National Gal- lery (No. 694) with variations. It may be a school copy.
CIMA DA CONEGLIANO . 103
99. Christus, Petrus. Madonna, Child, and St.
* Jerome. This picture considered as a Christus — and it is as well authenticated as any Christus in the European galleries — simply emphasises the va- rious and divergent views held about this painter at the present time. There are really few data by which to judge or attribute his works, except the dates and signatures on the pictures. This pic- ture is something emanating from the Van Eyck School to which, probably, Christus belonged. The catalogue points out that the Adam and Eve on the arms of the throne are similar to the work of the Van Eycks, which indicates the Van Eyck influence even if the Madonna and Child do not. It is a fine picture and almost worthy of the Van Eycks themselves (see the Van Eyck, No. 98) save for the want of precise modelling in the heads and hands. The baldachin is beautifully done, and the indicated landscape is excellent. What true tone and colour! What fine robes and what a good interior! The sentiment is not very profound and the faces are a little heavy, but for the rest it is excellent. The picture is dated 1457, which would make it the latest of the assigned Christus pic- tures.
40. Cima da Conegliano. Madonna, St. Catherine, and St. Nicholas of Bari. Not a remarkable Cima in any way. It seems to be true in tone and has a good landscape, but the surface looks somewhat dead as though it might be much repainted.
39. Madonna and Child. A very sad-faced Ma- donna with small eyes and mouth, a neck that does not fit too well on the body, and a prettily turned head-dress. The large-headed Child has
104 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
animation, and the landscape seen through the win- dow is excellent. The figures are placed in the centre of the panel with no attempt at subtlety in the grouping. It is an ordinary Cima.
93. Cleve, Juste van der Beke van (Master of Death of Virgin). Altar-Piece. A triptych with a Pieta in the central panel and saints in the side panels. There is trite sentiment about it and a great deal of ordinary workmanship. The drawing is fairly effective, but the colour has slight depth to it. The blue-greens of the dark landscapes have something to them that suggests the tragic nature of the scene. There are interesting little figures at the back — among them Judas hanging from a tree. Not a great work.
58A. Coello, Claudio. Charles II of Spain. It is
another version of the larger picture at Madrid (No. 648), there put down to Carrefio de Miranda. This version shows more display of colour and dress. It is a fairly good portrait.
22A. Correggio, Antonio Allegri da. Madonna, Child, and St. John. It is not a picture that can be regarded with any satisfaction in its present condition. As any one can see, it has been re- painted (in the hands, faces, figures) and then rubbed down. It now reveals a pitted and cracked surface. The rather weak and sentimental spirit that Correggio put into his Madonna pictures is here. The pyramidal composition is restful, the lines of the children's figures are graceful, and the arrangement of hands and arms is attractive. Perhaps there is too much grace for strength. But the technique of the picture is stronger than its sentiment.
CRIVELLI, CARLO 105
87. Cranach the Elder, Lucas. Crucifixion. Notice the lovely figure of the Magdalen in green at the foot of the cross. The figures below are well grouped and are fine in colour. How the thieves hang from the crosses! The Christ recalls Durer's Christ on the Cross at Dresden (No. 1870). The whole scene (types and all) is very different from the Crucifixion at Munich (No. 1457), attributed to Cranach.
88. Venus. The repetition of a theme much used
by the elder Cranach and also by his pupils. The outline is graceful, though the figure may seem awkward as realistic presentation.
655. The Kinsfolk of the Virgin. A large altar- piece not too successfully handled. The arrange- ment of figures in the central panel is in three rows of three figures each, and in the side panels of two figures each, placed diagonally on the panels. This formality, with the "jumpy" floor and the protruding grey walls, is very disturbing. The pic- ture has been injured by repainting and was pos- sibly not by Cranach in the first place, though it may be an early work by him. The drawing is not very good, nor the colour too fine in quality. The children are amusing. On the outside of the wings are figures of St. Anne and the Madonna. The whole work is probably of shop origin.
33 1 Crivelli, Carlo. The Annunciation. Two small
34 J panels of some decorative beauty. The angel with
the wry face is shown in waving garments against an architectural background that is not quite right in its drawing. The Madonna is kneeling in a well- set room, with curtains, bed, wall, ceiling, all of them well enough drawn. The light is coming
106 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
through the window grating, as in the National Gallery picture (No. 739). At the top a rug and a jug fill in the space gracefully. Two parts of an altar-piece. See the catalogue note upon them.
307. Cuyp, Aelbert. The Meadow. With a warm sunset light, a high sky, and drifting clouds. Not perhaps the best of Cuyps, but certainly an agree- able kind of art. Cuyp reproduced this sunlight and river effect many times. See also No. 308A.
308. Cuyp, Jacob G. Portrait of a Child. Attrac- tive in its colour, but thinly painted and weakly drawn. It is not so good as the De Vos (No. 131) — not so well done technically.
108. David, Gerard. St. Jerome. A very good little * picture that may not be rightly attributed, but is true enough as art. It is picturesque in the lit- tle lake, the rocks, the trees, the sky. The figure kneels well and is well drawn in the head and hands. The robe on the ground and the picture on the tree trunk lend spots of bright colour. It is decidedly better in spirit than the works in Euro- pean galleries usually attributed to David, Isen- brant, or Patinir. See also No. 110.
110. Annunciation. Both the spirit and the tech- nique of this picture seem in flat contradiction of No. 108, and the two are hardly to be reconciled by attributing them to different periods of the painter's career. The angel is a little dramatic, the heads and hands are sharp in line and pasty in colour, the drapery is formal, hard, blackish in hue. By no means of the same or similar quality as No. 108. Stand back in the room where you can see both pictures together. Yet this No. 110
EECKHOUT, GERBRANDT VAN DEN 107
is, perhaps, more like the usually accepted David than No. 108.
83. Diirer, Albrecht. Job. Even if this were a well- authenticated Diirer, one would hardly be justified in falling down in worship before it. The Job is well enough drawn and has an attractive dark rim about the legs, arms, and hands. And the figure in red has some interest as colour. But the picture is not to be raved over or set down to Diirer with- out reservations.
85. Portrait of Katharina Furlegerin. Whatever
its history or whatever may be under its present surface, there is very little Diirer in it now. The hands and faces show drawing of his kind, but they seem to have been carefully gone over with some sort of a small brush and a palette of muddy colour. The hair and the background are not his at all. It looks like a modern attempt to paint a Diirer.
144A. Dyck, Anthony van. Portrait of Hendrik du Bois. The head is well drawn, especially in the forehead, eyes, nose, and mouth — features which Van Dyck understood and drew with astonishing skill. And the head is well placed on the body. The hand is not exactly Van Dyck's, and the cloak might have been done by almost any one, but both of them are well enough done. Van Dyck at times did poorer work than this.
188. Eeckhout, Gerbrandt van den. Portrait of Isaac Commelin. This painter's works have been so juggled with and handed around under the name of Rembrandt that it is difficult to establish a definite idea of his portraiture. This portrait,
108 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
for instance, is very different from his figure work, yet it is signed and is probably by Eeckhout. It is a very good little portrait, carefully drawn and easily painted. It is not a wonder, but it seems an unusual performance for Eeckhout — something one comes up to with surprise.
98. Eyck, Jan van. Madonna and Child (The Lucca * Madonna). A picture of charm, feeling, and beauty. For Early Flemish craftsmanship it has, perhaps, few superiors. Every feature of it is done skilfully and exactly. The figure is large in the mass, is well placed in an ample room, well lighted, well drawn, and well painted. The draw- ing has been hurt a little in the head, hair, and hands, but still shows well in the outline and modelling of the Child's head, the Madonna's face, her hair and robe. Notice the detail work in the jewels of the robe borders, or the band about the head, or the basin, bottle, and window-panes. No- tice, again, the depth and beauty of the red, the pattern and colour of the baldachin at the back. How absolutely they are placed in that light from the window and that air of the room ! A notable picture in its skill without being a great work. It is a version or variation of the central panel of the Bruges Van Eyck, and is assigned by some critics to Petrus Christus. Compare it with No. 99.
197. Fabritius, Bernaert. Portrait of a Man. Here is probably a fair example of a painter whose pic- tures one finds — where? They are seldom seen in galleries and one wonders if most of his work is not down under the name of Rembrandt. He cul- tivated depth of colour, blackness of shadow, flat-
GIROLAMO DI BENVENUTO 109
ness of brush-work, paleness of high lights. There is an example of his work at Dresden (No. 159) and also two works in the Darmstadt Gallery. This Frankfort picture seems early and somewhat im- mature. A good portrait, especially in colour.
15. Fiorenzo di Lorenzo. Madonna, Child, and * Saints. The patterned gold ground gives the pic- ture richness and decorative value at the start. The Madonna is a flat figure placed upon the gold, counting for something as sentiment and colour, but not very truthful as drawing. The saints at the left have better relief, and the St. Sebastian is handsome as outline. He is a pathetic creature in every way. Notice the good colours of red and blue in the St. Christopher. How well he stands with his stiff legs! A picture of much interest.
22. Garofalo (Benvenuto Tisi). Holy Family. It
is an unusual interior for Garofalo and very good in its light, its setting, its floor, and its little garden at the back. The forlorn Joseph is well painted, as also the Madonna. The Child is monstrous in size — a young Hercules, in fact. There is good colour in the greens and blues.
193. Gelder, Aert de. The Painter in His Workshop.
In De Gelder's style and a repetition of his conven- tion of a sacrificed figure at the side. The colour is good, and the drawing not as bad as usual, per- haps. The palette is interesting as showing some of the colours used by the Dutch painters. The painter figure holding the palette has a realistic ap- pearance.
5. Girolamo di Benvenuto. Crucifixion. A trip- tych done in distemper, with sincerity of feeling
110 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
though crude in drawing. The landscape is wide, the colour good, the composition satisfactory.
111. Goes, Hugo van der. A Triptych. The middle panel of the Madonna and Child is by a different hand from the side panels. The latter are poorly done by comparison. The central panel may be by Van der Goes, as claimed, and still not be startling as a work of art. One may regard it with perfect calmness. The coats of arms on the frame are as interesting as the paintings.
242s. Goyen, Jan van. Path in the Dunes. A grey scene with good colour, good sky, and good air.
173 \ Hals, Frans. Portraits of a Man and Woman.
174 / The man's portrait is excellent, being done with * swiftness, sureness, and truth. How well the face
is given with the well-drawn, penetrating eyes, the riotous moustache, the black hat, and all that! It is skimped a little in the jaw and chin and guessed at in the hands, but full-rounded in the body, with an excellent ruff and black coat. The figure fits into the oval of the frame exactly. One feels that the woman's portrait is less well placed on the panel — fills the space less perfectly. It wants something at the sides and top. But how cleverly it is painted! The curious drawing of the mouth gives it life and character. What a white in the head-dress! And what a ruff, travelling as it does about the neck! The dress and hands are more carefully done than in the man's portrait. They are both spirited, lifelike impersonations and rep- resent Hals very well.
291A. Hobbema, Meindert. Fisherman's Huts. How
very much to be preferred are these small, sketchy
JANSSENS, P. ELINGA 111
pictures by Hobbema, done evidently from the scene before him, to those tedious water-mills that he did out of his head with unvarying monotony! What spirit it has! What wind and clouds are here!
71. Holbein the Younger, Hans. Portrait of Sir George Cromwell. A good portrait, with what is called "a Clouet look" about it that may be something more than a mere superficial resem- blance. The drawing is a little soft for Holbein, and the handling is, perhaps, too finical for him. Notice this soft drawing not only in the outline of the face, but in the eyes, mouth, ear, and hand. Notice the smoothness of the brush in the hair, the beard, the flowers, the hat, the feather. This may be Holbein in his last years, as the catalogue sug- gests, but it is more like a following of his work by some imitator.
217. Janssens, P. Elinga. Holland Interior. This picture once served time as a Pieter de Hooch, but is now given to Janssens, where it perhaps rightly belongs. It is a fairly good picture, though a bit spotty in its lights, and overdone in such features, for instance, as the mirror on the wall or the sun- light on the floor. How badly the mirror frame is done! The picture has not the quality of Pieter de Hooch, but it seems to have some of the man- nerisms of certain pictures at Amsterdam, The Hague, and London that are now masquerading under the name of Vermeer of Delft. The doing of the spotty chair-nails and the mirror is like that in the Vermeers mentioned! See the notes upon them, and also in this gallery the note upon the Vermeer, No. 217A.
112 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
20. Lombard School. St. Catherine. A handsome little picture without a parent, or, at least, not one that any two people can agree upon. As it stands at present it is a pretty harmony of greens — it might almost be called a symphony.
19. Macrino d'Alba. Altar-Piece. An important triptych by a painter whose pictures are not fre- quently seen in European galleries. He was influ- enced by Leonardo and the Milanese, but was not the strongest or most famous of the Leonardo fol- lowers. The central panel here shows the Ma- donna and Child in a rather fine landscape. The figures are not very well drawn (see the hands), and the outlines are sharply cut. The drapery is prettily disposed in the loops of the blue at the sleeves, but the red robe is wooden. The action is graceful but not realistic, for the Madonna holds neither the Child nor the book in a convincing manner. The St. Joachim and St. Anne in the right panel seem better done than the Madonna as regards their heads and hands, but are just as sharp in the drawing of their robes. This is equally true of the left panel. The trees, water, and sky seem hard. The sentiment is a little frail. Some- what injured.
102- 1 Master of FISmalle. Wings of an Altar-Piece.
104 / These panels came from the Abbey of Flemalle, * and it is from them and their place of finding that the Master of Flemalle takes his name. The Trinity (No. 102) is in grisaille, and is the reverse of the St. Veronica panel (No. 103). On the re- verse of No. 104 there is also a Madonna Dolorosa in grisaille, of later and inferior workmanship. The St. Veronica and Madonna and Child (Nos.
MASTER OF FRANKFORT 113
103 and 104) are carefully done, with almost pain- ful accuracy in the heads and hands, the haloes, the jewels, flowers, leaves, and background patterns. They are very elaborately executed for such large figures, and yet in spite of it they are not finical or fussy. St. Veronica seems small of stature, with a fine white head-dress and beautiful red and green robes. The Madonna, in white with blue shadows on the white, is a little uneasy so far as her drapery is concerned, but she is not only lovely in her sincerity and honesty of feeling, but queenly in dignity and elevation of spirit. She is directly and closely related to the figures that are now being attributed to the "School of Robert Campin" in the National Gallery, London (notably No 654). The type is practically the same.
L05. The Thief on the Cross. This is part of an
altar-piece of the Crucifixion. The Liverpool Gal- lery has what is thought to be a copy of the whole scene of the Crucifixion. The right wing of it shows these figures of the Frankfort panels in their entirety. The gold ground of this Frankfort bit has been hurt in some way so that it now has a fumbled look. The figures are interesting but have been weakened, possibly by retouching. Notice the hands of the men below.
81. ^Master of Frankfort. Altar-Piece of the Cruci- fixion. A triptych of considerable archaeological in- terest, as the note in the catalogue suggests. As art it is also of some importance. The figures are well done, keep their place in the landscape, have good colour. The religious feeling is genuine, true in every way. The portraits of the donors at the sides are a little chalky, perhaps, but honest. The
114 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
landscape at the back is excellent. See the same master's work in the Berlin Gallery (No. 575).
107. Memling, Hans. Portrait of a Man. This por- * trait is thought to be a likeness of the painter him- self— at least that is the tradition that accompanies it. The picture was originally very well done, and a characteristic portrait, no doubt, but now it has been cleaned and retouched until even the red cap seems to have lost its purity of colour. Notice the grey scumbles rubbed into it, as also into the face and hands. A fine picture for all that, with some very good drawing in the face and an attrac- tive landscape at the back.
113. MetSVS, Quenthl. Portrait of a Man. It is done with much largeness of vision and drawing. The face is forcefully given, as are also the hands, the hat, the cloak. The colour is sombre and dull, the landscape blue. There are several versions of it. It does not look much like the work of Metsys, though strong enough to have passed at one time for a Holbein. It is now thought by some critics to have been done by a painter in the Bles group. A fine portrait in any event.
44. MorettO da Brescia. Madonna Enthroned with * St. Anthony Abbott and St. Sebastian. An altar- piece that (with No. 45 in this gallery) would look better in a church chapel, where the architecture of the chapel might supplement that of the picture. Here, framed up in a gallery, it appears empty and meaningless, with too few figures and too much architecture in evidence. It has, nevertheless, good colour and light, and Moretto's silvery tone is ap- parent in it. The Angel below playing the lute is childlike, the green cloth at the back of the Child,
NEER, AART VAN DER 115
the blue drapery of the Madonna, the banner are all well enough done. The picture is not one of Moretto's great ones, however. It has been hurt by repainting.
45. Madonna Enthroned with Four Church
Fathers. It is a large and important Moretto — the catalogue intimates the most important north of the Alps, which is putting it positively when one thinks of the fine St. Justina at Vienna. It has Moretto's silvery tone, and is in colour and com- position a handsome altar-piece; but one fails in seeing much inspiration in it, or getting much in- spiration out of it. It is a little prosaic for all its fine drawing of the Cardinal in red with the good shadows, or the painting of the kneeling Pope op- posite in his handsome brocade. The side figures serve to balance the group, but are as heavy as the Madonna and Child. However, the total result of the figures, colours, architecture, sky, flowers is imposing and certainly handsome. Per- haps the altar-piece at Berlin (No. 197), certainly the St. Justina at Vienna, have more inspiring fea- tures about them than this, but all three works are decorative and to be admired.
47. Moroni, Giovanni Battista. Portrait of a Monk. It is a strong, well-drawn head with un- brushed hair, a wrinkled forehead, and rather posi- tive, realistic features. It may be by Moroni, but the characteristics of that master are not too ap- parent in it. In a monk's white robe. Somewhat repainted.
S55. Neer, Aart van der. Landscape. The sky is a
bit weak but the ground, trees, and water are well done. A rather unusual Van der Neer.
116 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
205. Ostade, Adriaen van. Interior of a Peasant's Cottage. A fine piece of colour. What a mystery in that background, so thinly laid in that you can feel the material of the ground in the colour! This is workmanship of a very good kind if not great art in a matter of thinking. See also No. 205s. They are both excellent panels.
668. Palma Vecchio. Resting Nymphs. This is a * very perplexing picture and may be interpreted in several ways. In spirit it seems too modern to be ancient and yet not modern enough for one to be sure of its modernity. The conception of the two figures by a pond or river, out-of-doors, under a rose-bush, seems foreign to the old Venetians, certainly different from anything we know of theirs or of Palma specifically — the Giorgionesque things being in a somewhat different style and spirit. The attempt to treat the figures in an intimate, genre manner, as a part of the landscape, has been awkwardly met. They seem much too large for the foliage back of them. They dominate the whole picture and make the landscape and water mere accessories. In other words, the picture is one of figures with a landscape rather than a landscape with figures. The arch of the figures — a very beautiful arch and peculiarly Palmesque — is re- peated in the hill and foliage at the back and the shore and water lines repeat the base of the arch. The figures themselves are again Palmesque, well drawn, graceful, reminding one forcefully of the brown-skinned beauties in the Giorgione of the Louvre (No. 1136). The woman at the right is, in pose, arm, and leg, very like the seated figure in the Louvre picture, and the figure at the left, in the thighs, torso, and arm, corresponds again to the
PARMIGIANINO 117
standing figure in the same picture. They are well rounded by shadow and are beautiful in contours as in colour. Of course, they make a spot of high light in the picture. Unfortunately, they are some- what repainted, as one may see in the hair, or the shadows, or the hands.
The very modern-looking shore or bank is put in with leaves and flowers, some of them shown in reflection in the water; but there is no reflection of the women in the water. The duck is absurd, out of place, and it, too, has no reflection. The land- scape at left and right is the most believable por- tion of the picture. It is an odd amalgam, this picture. See the article upon it in the Burlington Magazine, vol. 10, p. 315, by Sir Claude Phillips. See also in these guides the note on the Louvre Giorgione (No. 1136).
692. Palmezzano, Marco. John the Baptist. An
altar wing with the single figure of the saint given with considerable relief and very good action. The figure stands well, is well drawn, and well related to its background. The blue sky is luminous.
42. Parmigianino (Francesco Mazzola). Portrait of a Lady. At first the portrait is a little chilling in its cool greens which the spot of red in the chair does not temper nor the flesh-notes materially af- fect. It is somewhat pretentious but not disa- greeably so. There is style about it for all its hint of the coming Decadence in its round lines and pretty hands. The drawing is good and there is a pleasant landscape seen through the window. The lady is patrician in type and perhaps is con- scious of her beauty. The picture has been much attributed. See the catalogue note.
118 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
16. Perugino, Pietro. Madonna, Child, and St.
* John. It is evidently a picture done in Perugino's mature period. The feeling is really profound, the sentiment of the Madonna very apparent, the ten- derness of the children more than obvious. The workmanship is good in the hair, head-dress, and shadow about the Madonna's head, though the oval of the face and the line of the neck are sharply given. The children's heads are also cut clean and round against their background. The colour is deep, especially in the upper sky, and there is a light horizon with a feeling of dawn. Somewhat injured.
N. N. Piero di Cosimo (?). Holy Family. Evidently a recent acquisition and not a very valuable one. It is hardly by Piero or any other master of rank. The drawing is hard (look at the Joseph) and the work generally rather crude. Moreover, the pic- ture has been badly rubbed and repainted. The colour is good and the feeling is right. 14A. Pontormo (Jacopo Carucci). Portrait of a Lady. In a bright red dress with a dog held in the lap. The figure is weak in the proportions of the arms and hands, rather unreal in its seating, a little harsh in drawing, and somewhat crude in colour. It has a smooth surface and something of Andrea del Sarto's influence is apparent in it.
75 1 Ratgeb, Jerg. Portraits of Claus Stalberg and 76 / Wife. These are two full-length portraits noticea- ble more, perhaps, for their decorative quality in the figures and their backgrounds than anything else. They are fine works in that respect.
642. Rembrandt van Rijn. The Triumph of Delilah.
The picture is signed and dated 1636 — which
REMBRANDT VAN RUN 119
proves nothing at all. In spite of signature and date, one may venture to think that a painter who did the Anatomy Lesson in 1632 and the Coppenol and Saskia at Cassel about 1633 did not do this coarse, brutal picture in 1636 or at any other time. It is not the theme that is referred to as coarse or brutal but the drawing and the brush-work of it, the light-and-shadow of it, the colour of it. Look at the flat black profile of the man with the hal- berd, his dreadful eye, nose, and mouth, his flat figure, his lumpy left hand, and the clumsily drawn halberd head. Look at the exposed breast of Sam- son and think of it in connection with the dead figure in the Anatomy Lesson. Look at the man in armour driving the dagger into Samson's eye — the drawing of the head, the arm in armour, and the mailed head in relation to the body. Look at the scarecrow warrior coming in at the extreme right with open mouth and round eyes. Look at the curtains, the cave, or whatever it represents, with the theatrical Delilah, in baby-blue surround- ings, taking a flight into space. You have heard, time out of mind, that Rembrandt was the master of light-and-shade and that he painted the most luminous of shadows; but where are they here? You have also heard that he surrounded his figures by atmosphere, set them in an envelope of air; but where is it here? Again, Rembrandt has been de- clared a great colourist more than once, but there is no intimation of it here. Besides, in his grey period he was almost a perfect brushman. Go close and look at the handling here. It is crude, coarse, unskilled, without a particle of subtlety in it. Fi- nally look at the picture as a whole and ask yourself where in Rembrandt's celebrated works its like-
120 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
ness in technique is paralleled or even suggested. The painter of the Anatomy Lesson, the Night Watch, the Syndics, the Manoah, the Sobieski (St. Petersburg), the Cassel Saskia, and Coppenol, never did this work. It is something done by a follower and an imitator. The picture has been pieced out at the top.
183. David before Saul. This is no more of a
Rembrandt than No. 642, though there is no coarse- ness or brutality about it. On the contrary, it is the exact opposite of No. 642 and is all sweetness — a quality just as foreign to Rembrandt as coarseness. No painter in art history ever turned such artistic somersaults as this. This prettified work belongs Somewhere near such pupils as Koninck or Poor- ter. The same hand that did this probably did the Minerva at Berlin (No. 828c), there assigned to Rembrandt but in reality by a pupil or follower of much less force. The theme is the same as in a larger picture at The Hague, assigned to Rem- brandt, but again the pictures are totally different in style and workmanship. That at The Hague was probably done by Flinck and this at Frankfort by even a prettier painter than Flinck. Notice the badly drawn hands and harp of David, the questionable figure of Saul, the bleached light, the diaphanous background. It will not do as a Rem- brandt.
182. Portrait of Margareta van Bilderbeecq. It
is an honest Dutch picture of good quality that is not convincingly Rembrandt's though possibly by him. The ruff comes the nearest to him. The askew head-dress and the face are less Rembrandt- esque though the latter is quite right in its paint-
ROSSO, IL 121
ing. The reddish-coloured flesh, the drawing of the eyes, the handling of the high lights on the nose and forehead, the painting of the hair are all somewhat different from what we know of Rem- brandt's workmanship. Certainly it is not what one would call a characteristic early Rembrandt, such, for instance, as the Burggraeff portrait at Dresden (No. 1557). Yet this Frankfort picture is declared to be the companion piece of the Dres- den picture. It seems as though there must be some mistake in associating them as companion pictures.
181. Rembrandt, School of. The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard. This picture is rightly enough, perhaps, put down to the Rembrandt School. It was possibly painted by the same hand that did the Christ before Pilate at Budapest (No. 368) and is not unlike the Cornelius the Cen- turion in the Wallace Collection (No. 86). The manners of doing the noses, the hands, the head- dresses are similar. This picture is, however, darker and duller in colour than the Wallace Collection picture and differs in other respects. The same hand that did the Parable possibly did the Saul and David at The Hague (No. 621) and the Young Man at Munich (No. 345), all of them given to Rembrandt or his school, but none of them by him. They are nearer to what, for the present, we must call Flinck, at least until Flinck's artistic person- ality is definitely established.
14. Rosso, II (Giovanni Battista di Jacopo). Ma- donna, Child, and St. John. Both the Madonna and St. John are reminiscent of Andrea del Sarto in types and drawing, though the flesh is hotter,
122 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
the colour brighter, and the drawing less accurate than with Andrea. Also the little affectation of tying up the green curtain at the back is Rosso's own, not Andrea's. It makes a good panel of col- our but in spirit it is just as earthy as anything Andrea ever painted.
683. Rubens, Peter Paul. Portrait of a Man. This was probably a sketchy portrait originally and has now been rubbed flat in the face so that much of the modelling is destroyed. The fur of the coat and the ruff were perhaps never carried any further than their present state. The portrait still has character and force about it. Look at the black hat — how well it fits down on the head! What exact value it has ! The head fits into the ruff and the ruff travels around the neck. And what well- drawn forehead and eyes ! The picture is well made — well put together.
127. King David. A work of Rubens's own hand
* and still showing his brush-work all through it. Stand in the middle of the room and see, first, the depth through of the figure and the relation of the hands to one another. Nothing could be truer or finer. See, in the second place, how the head joins the trunk of the body — in the precise middle, as it should. In the third place, see the depth through of that head. What drawing it has! There are foolish people these days to tell you that Rubens had no bone or muscle in his figures, that they are jelly-like, poured into a mould, and all that. But look at this head and see if it has not bone struc- ture under it as well as real hair over it. Notice how the forehead, ear, nose, beard are done. And, finally, what a piece of colour it is! From a mere
TIEPOLO, GIOVANNI BATTISTA 123
technical point of view the picture is beautiful. And nothing has been said about the fine character of the old man and the king. The picture is prob- ably a finished study for some larger work.
272A. Ruisdael, Jacob van. Waterfall. This is one of Ruisdael's slate-coloured landscapes with an or- namental play of water in the foreground that is truer to ornament than to nature. The sky is very dark and all nature seems to be in a tremble. There is no serenity or repose about it.
216A. Steen, Jan. Leyden Fish-Market. An unusual Steen in the smallness of the figures, but, taken as a whole, it holds together well and has light, colour, and air. No. 214 is hardly by Steen at all.
153. Teniers the Younger, David. The Smoker. A
number of Teniers of similar quality to this are in this gallery. In a gayer mood and with poorer results pictorially are Nos. 157c and 152.
204. Terborch, Gerard. The Class of Wine. A pic- ture of some charm in colour and in painting. It is simply composed and very well handled, as you may see by the white jug, or the grey dress, or the writing materials. The face, hands, and back- ground have been injured by cleaning and retouch- ing. Several other versions in the European gal- leries. See the catalogue note upon this one.
50. Tiepolo, Giovanni Battista. The Continence of Scipio. The colour of it is a little warm but very effective — in fact, quite charming. The picture is handled with much spirit and painter's verve and drawn with that energy that Tiepolo was capable of on occasion. It is enough better than the larger picture, No. 690, which is so wanting in any fine
124 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
sense of colour that it appears tawdry beside the smaller example.
652. Head of a Man. An excellent head, very
cleverly brushed in, possibly by the hand of Do- menico Tiepolo rather than by his father, Giovanni Battista Tiepolo. There seems little or no distinc- tion between father and son in the Tiepolo attri- butions made in the different galleries of Europe. This picture shows a more flowing and less flaky handling of pigment, more facility and less accuracy than were peculiar to Giovanni. Besides, the sub- ject and type were ones that pleased Domenico. He did a number of these portraits of Oriental- looking people that have been given to his father. The handling of the buckle at the belt is something that of itself speaks the younger man.
43A. Titian (Tiziano Vecellio). Portrait of a Young Man. It is a well-drawn and well-painted head with some fine feeling about it and a good deal of warm colouring. The style of it resembles some- what the early work of Titian but it has not his accuracy in the drawing and the handling. The eye, the nose, and the face line are hardly his. Somewhat over-cleaned.
68. Velasquez, Diego de Silva y. Portrait of the Infanta Margarita Teresa. This is another ver- sion of a portrait seen in several of the European galleries, Vienna, for example (No. 619). It ap- pears to be a school piece which possibly Velasquez had under supervision. The dress, the room, the curtain, the chair, the rug are fairly well done. The hair is a little coarse for Velasquez, and the red bows, the slashings of the sleeves, the face, the neck are not sure enough for him. But it is
VERMEER 125
a good school work. Beruete, however, thinks it is a genuine Velasquez.
57. Portrait of Cardinal Borja. There is small
reason to suppose that Velasquez ever saw this picture. It is not at all in his style and appar- ently not even of his school. It is sparely but not badly done — the drawing being simple, direct, harsh, quite untutored, lacking in finesse and sensi- tiveness. The hair and beard are strangely hard and inadequate in texture. The colour is rather good. It seems a little earlier than the time of Velasquez.
284A. Velde, Willem van de. Calm Sea. The theme is hackneyed in Van de Velde's hands, but this is certainly a good example of it. The effect is much better than usual.
49A. Venetian School. Head of a Man. The head has evidently been cut out of a larger picture, where the character may have figured as a donor or in some similar capacity. It has what has been vaguely called "a Giorgionesque look." The mouth and nose are well drawn.
217A. Vermeer (Van der Meer) of Delft, Jan. The Astronomer. Here is the painter whom we have called the pseudo-Vermeer to distinguish him from the accepted Vermeer. He has pictures at Amster- dam (No. 2528), at The Hague (No. 625), at the London National Gallery (Nos. 1383, 2568), and elsewhere. There is no quality to his colour, his high lights are spotty, his drawing is hard, his inte- riors airless, his dotting (as in the cloth here) is crumby and often (as at Amsterdam) over-done. He is as cheap an imitator of Vermeer as Janssens is of Pieter de Hooch. And it is some Janssens, some
126 THE STAEDEL INSTITUTE
Netscher or Hoogstraten grown hard and man- nered in treatment, who produced these pictures. There is, of course, a possibility that it is Vermeer himself in decay, but that is hardly a probability. How poor this alleged Vermeer is in light, in the drawing of the hands, the sleeves, the head, the window, the wall, the picture hanging on the wall, the chair! Think of it being done by the painter of the exquisite Lady with the Pearls at Berlin (No. 912s), or the Girl at the Window at Dresden (No. 1336), or the Portrait at Budapest (No. 456), or again at Brussels (No. 665)! Lest you should have doubts about its being a Vermeer, it is signed twice — a forged signature on the wall, and another, half obliterated, on the panel of the cupboard.
9. VertOCChio, School of. Madonna and Child.
The painter of several pictures superficially of this character (at Berlin and London) seems no nearer detection now than twenty-five years ago. Who did them is still a question. It seems likely^they are the work of some Florentine eclectic who was near to Verrocchio's workshop, knew the work of the Pollajuoli, of Lorenzo di Credi, and others. They are not bad pictures; in fact, they are very good, but they have not the spirit or the knowledge or the originality of a great master. This, for in- stance, is a handsome Madonna and Child, with good sentiment and colour, but is lacking in great skill or care or tenderness in such features as the Child's hair, the Madonna's head-dress, the robes, the gold borderings. The Berlin and London ex- amples seem better done.
131. Vos, Cornells de. Portrait of a Child. It is
smoothly but agreeably painted, with a good deal
WEYDEN, ROGER VAN DER 127
of facility of handling and truth of drawing. As a characterisation of a Dutch child it is decidedly effective. At one time thought to be a Rubens.
100. Weyden, Roger van der. Madonna, Child, and Saints. This is a picture that perhaps shows more skill than spirit. Certain small details, such as the vase with the flowers, the glass, the book, are well done, but as a whole the work is not inspired. The white throne, the canopy, the angels are out of tone, somewhat after the manner of Roger's followers; and the colour is a little tame. The work probably belongs somewhere with Roger's following. Wauters thinks it an early example, done at Louvain. M. Paul Lafond also seems to think it a Roger. The gold ground has been re- painted.
101. Altar-Piece. In three panels, showing the Birth
of the Baptist, the Baptism of Christ, and the Be- heading of the Baptist. It is a smaller version of the St. John Baptist altar-piece at Berlin (No. 534fi), and the question which is the original and which the replica is a mooted one. Perhaps neither of them is more than a copy, though this Frankfort example seems freer in the doing than the one in Berlin. It is an interesting picture for all that the architecture is out of tone, though it is not so much out as in the Berlin picture. The colour of the robes, the figures, the picturesque little scenes, such as that at the back of the right panel or the bed- room scene at the left, are all well done. See the note on the Berlin altar-piece (No. 534s). They are both probably exact old copies.
INDEX OF PICTURES BY NUMBERS
|
5. Girolamo di Benvenuto. |
571 |
|
7. Angelico, Fra. |
58} |
|
9. Verrocchio, School of. |
58A |
|
i \ Botticelli. |
71. |
|
12 / |
73. |
|
13. Bartolommeo Venezi- |
751 |
|
ano. |
76} |
|
14. Rosso, 11. |
81. |
|
14A. Pontormo. |
83 |
|
15. Fiorenzo di Lorenzo. |
85 |
|
16. Perugino. |
87 |
|
18. Bonsignori. |
88 |
|
19. Macrino d'Alba. |
93. |
|
20. Lombard School. |
951 |
|
21. Caroto. |
96] |
|
22. Garofalo. |
97. |
|
22A. Correggio. |
98. |
|
^ 1 Crivelli, Carlo. O4 J |
99. 100 1 |
|
35. Bellini, Giovanni. |
101 / |
|
36. Catena. |
102 |
|
38. Carpaccio. |
103 |
|
39 1 p. |
104 |
|
40 } ^lma" |
105 |
|
42. Parmigianino. |
107. |
|
43A. Titian. |
108. |
|
44l ,- > Moretto da Brescia. |
108A. 110. |
|
47. Moroni. |
111. |
|
49 A. Venetian School. |
113. |
|
50. Tiepolo, G. B. |
122c. |
Velasquez.
Coello, Claudio.
Holbein.
Baldung.
Ratgeb.
Master of Frankfort.
Diirer.
Cranach the Elder. Cleve, Juste van. Bruyn.
Bouts.
Eyck, Jan van.
Christus.
Weyden, Roger van der.
Master of Fl&nalle.
Memling.
David.
Bouts.
David.
Goes, van der.
Metsys, Q.
Brueghel the Elder, Jan.
129
130
INDEX
127. Rubens.
131. Vos, C. de.
144A. Dyck, Anthony van.
153. Tenders.
181. Rembrandt, School of. }|j} Rembrandt.
184. Bol.
188. Eeckhout.
193. Gelder.
197. Fabritius, B.
204. Terborch.
205. Ostade, A. van. 216A. Steen.
217.
217A. Vermeer of Delft. 242s. Goyen, Van. 255. Neer, Van der. 272A. Ruisdael, J. van. 284A. Velde, W. van de. 29lA. Hobbema.
307. Cuyp, Albert.
308. Cuyp, J. G. 639. Aertsen. 642. Rembrandt. 652. Tiepolo, G. B. 655. Cranach the Elder.
658. Bol.
659. Antwerp School. 668. Palma the Elder. 683. Rubens.
692. Palmezzano. 701. Belotto. N.N.Piero di Cosimo.
THE CASSEL GALLERY
NOTE ON THE CASSEL GALLERY
CASSEL is well known in the art world. Every one goes there to study the Rembrandts. The gallery holds high rank because of them, even though all of the twenty-one examples cannot be accepted as genuine. However, the perfect early portrait of Coppenol, the brilliantly hued Saskia, the Portrait of a Young Woman of later date, the famous landscape — to mention no more — are there, and those four pictures in themselves are worth a trip from Berlin, Cologne, or Frankfort. Besides, the remaining Rembrandts are very good pic- tures, notwithstanding the fact that some of them were done by pupils and followers.
And Rembrandt is not the only feature of the gallery, as the student finds to his surprise, when he walks through the rooms. There are eleven pictures by Ru- bens, twelve by Van Dyck, twelve by Jordaens, seven by Frans Hals. Some of these are excellent. In addi- tion there is a perfect little masterpiece by Terborch, and good pictures by Steen, Keyser, Wouwerman, Moro, Scorel. There are several fine works by Cranach, Baldung, Altdorfer, and others of the German School. Add to this many examples of the Italians, some French and Spanish works, and you have a collection of no mean proportions.
133
134 NOTE ON THE CASSEL GALLERY
The bulk of these pictures, or at least the best of them, came to the gallery in its early days. In the eight- eenth century the Landgrave William VIII was in Hol- land as governor of Breda and Maastricht, and at that time began the collection of Dutch pictures. He pur- chased in one lot sixty-four pictures, including eight Rembrandts, for the now trifling sum of forty thousand guilders. These with the purchases made after his re- turn to Germany were the real beginnings of the present gallery, though the Landgrave's predecessors had col- lections of pictures, chiefly portraits, before his time. In 1806 some of the pictures that had been boxed for safety, because of the presence of the French, came into possession of the Empress Josephine and, in 1815, were sold to the Emperor Alexander of Russia. They are now in the Hermitage. These were not, however, the most valuable pictures in the collection, and the gallery has long since outgrown their loss. Many additions have been made since then, and to-day the catalogue of the gallery lists nearly a thousand numbers.
The new catalogue of 1913 (in German) has some critical notes of value and also some good illustrations. It is arranged alphabetically, according to the painters' names, and answers very well as a finding list. The elaborate catalogue published some years ago is now out of print. The gallery is spacious and in the main well lighted. The larger and more celebrated pictures are well placed in the central galleries, while the smaller pictures are to be found in the side cabinets. Ad-
NOTE ON THE CASSEL GALLERY 135
mission to the gallery during the day hours is usually obtainable by ringing the bell and inquiring for the sacristan. Photographs are to be had in the town. Hanstaengl has a book of cheap reproductions of the pictures.
THE CASSEL GALLERY
10A. Altdorfer, Albrecht. Christ on the Cross.
* Grim and grisly in its realism — the blood being too disagreeable for aesthetic pleasure but possibly not for religion in Altdorfer's day. The picture, in spite of its angular, ill-drawn figures and its want of just proportions, is tragic and compelling. The sky is sketchy and the background is only slightly indicated, but there is strength in it, as in the fig- ures and the sombre colour. The picture is, per- haps, not by Altdorfer but nearer to the painter of No. 1451A-E at Munich, there ascribed to Burgk- mair.
833. Amberger, Christoph. St. Augustine. Done with good robes and good colour. The drawing in the face is a little hard, perhaps, but, then, one expects no less from these early men. The wonder is that they had so true and yet so picturesque a point of view, and that they were such excellent workmen. A little hurt in the background.
32. Apt, Ulrich. Transfiguration. With fine colour effect in costume, landscape, and sky. The drap- ery is angular and the figures somewhat awkward but they are honestly conceived and painted. Notice the donor and the coat of arms. Formerly attributed to Scorel.
484. Bacchiacca (Francesco Ubertini). Portrait of an Old Man. Somewhat in the style of Francia- 137
138 THE CASSEL GALLERY
bigio but with Bacchiacca's colouring and with his questionable drawing. The picture is dark, som- bre, and more impressive at first blush than on closer acquaintance.
7. Baldung, Hans. Hercules and Anteus. A good * piece of drawing, with insistence upon the muscu- lar strain of the action. Baldung's most attrac- tive works are at Munich, Nuremberg, and Basle, where he is more graceful in line and less violent in pose. But here is strong drawing — the drawing of a northern Pollajuolo.
482. Bartolommeo di Giovanni. Christ on the Cross. A large picture in the style of no painter in particular. It is prosaic and formal in both form and colour. Probably by some Florentine eclectic of neither great imagination nor skill. Mr. Berenson thinks it by Granacci. Formerly ascribed to Raffaellino del Garbo.
41. Beuckelaer, Joachim. The Market Woman.
It is a good study of still-life but not up to Beucke- laer's pictures at Brussels. The figure here is lost in the wilderness of vegetables. Formerly attrib- uted to Aertsen.
256. Brouwer, Cornells. The Unfaithful Servant.
Good as an effect of light, shadow, and air in an interior. The inset of the figures — their placing in atmosphere — is well given and the picture is not bad in colour. As to whether Cornelis Brouwer painted it or not, who knows? It is said to be his only known work.
54. Brueghel, the Elder Jan (Velvet). A Village Street. Not a Brueghel of the finest quality but
CORNELISZ VAN OOSTSANEN 139
it is picturesque and attractive in colour. Notice the costumes in the group at the right. See also No. 55.
20 1 Cleve, Juste van der Beke van (Master of the
21 / Death of the Virgin). Portraits of a Man and
Woman. Companion pieces, large in scale, per- haps a little over life-size. The sleeves of the woman, with the hands and head, make too loud a note, perhaps, but the portrait is well done. Both pictures represent dominant personalities. Both of them a little over-cleaned. Formerly ascribed to Barthel Bruyn.
26. Portrait of a Man. A rather strong, self-re- liant sitter, and given by the painter with sincerity and honesty. It is a little flat in technique — that is, not up to Diirer, but comparable, perhaps, to Cranach. The attribution is questionable. See the Munich note under Cleve.
151. Coques, Gonzales. The Young Scholar and His Sister. Fairly well drawn and painted though a little thin. It is too ornate in colour and too fine in detail for the best results. The picture is also divided in composition by the two figures and the doorway. The painter was influenced by Van Dyck and possibly by Terborch.
29. Cornelisz van Oostsanen (or Van Amsterdam), Jacob. Christ in the Garden. The whitish sur- face of the picture is probably produced by the use of too much white in the high lights. There is harsh drawing, but the detail in the robes is fine and the colour is excellent. The religious feeling is very strong. Notice the trees in the landscape. It is an interesting picture, but it bears but a super- ficial likeness to the Salome (No. 1) at The Hague
140 THE CASSEL GALLERY
and little or no likeness to the Berlin picture (No. 607). See also No. 30 in this gallery. 112. Gossiers, Jan. The Nativity. It has some spir- ited action about it and some good painting, though there is affectation in the face and hands of the Madonna. Neither the drawing nor the col- ouring is wonderful, but they are sufficient. The Rubens followers, such as dossiers, were not all mere journeymen painters. Notice, for instance, the good colour in No. 94, put down to the Rubens workshop. The attribution of No. 112 is open to question.
14. Cranach the Elder, Lucas. Lucretia. The flesh is a little brown but otherwise the picture is good in colour and drawing. It has a delightful little landscape.
13. St. Barbara. The red of the robe and the
brocade hardly seem to comport with the piteous bowed figure of the saint who is only a German peasant girl. But it is an effective type. The work is none too well done. Notice the poor draw- ing of the hands and of the cup, also the boyish doing of the halo. No. 12 was probably done by the same painter. The attribution to Cranach is questionable. It is probably a school piece.
15. Portrait of a Man. Very decisively drawn in
the hat, head, face, and beard. It is a very good portrait and in Cranach's best style of portraiture. This and No. 16 are declared to be studio pieces by the ultra-critical.
19. Cranach the Younger, Lucas. Nymph. No- tice the pretty if fantastic landscape at the back. The figure is slight and pretty even for the younger Cranach.
DYCK, ANTHONY VAN 141
263. Cuyp, Benjamin Gerritz. 5*. Peter Released from Prison. It is rather absurd — almost ludicrous — in the conception but a very good piece of colour and painting. Notice the figure in green for the manner of its doing.
257 1 Dou, Gerard. Portraits. Said to be portraits of
258 / Rembrandt's father and mother. In Dou's smooth
style, following Rembrandt, but with a whole world of difference between him and his master.
6. Durer, Albrecht. Portrait of Elizabeth Tucker.
Interesting in the type and the revelation of Teu- tonic character, but the drawing and painting are spiritless. The picture is probably a copy or a cheap modern composition after Durer. At any rate, it gives no indication of Diirer's drawing or method of work. Look at the bad landscape. Or- dinarily this would pass as a "fake" Durer.
124. Dyck, Anthony van. Double Portrait of Man and Wife. It has been repainted in the face of the woman and the hands. A somewhat dull composition that may have emanated from Van Dyck but has not any very pronounced quality of his. The curtain at the back is disturbing and the placing of the figures on the canvas is wanting in good arrangement. The colour is mediocre.
123. Sebastian Leerse with Wife and Child. The
faces are very good, especially the woman's, with the fine eyes and rather sharp-cut nose. The boy in green at the side is also well done in the head. The picture wants a little in balance. The man is ample in body but fails to balance the woman and boy. It has been cleaned and rubbed too much. The columns in the background mean nothing.
142 THE CASSEL GALLERY
See also the Van Dyck, No. 839, in the Munich Gallery.
121. Portrait of an Italian Nobleman. Somewhat
* hurt in the flesh-notes of the face, in the modelling of the hands, and in the dress, but still an imposing portrait done with good effect in costume, column, and curtain. The brown-red of the dress is un- usual. There is a decidedly swagger air about it.
126. Portrait of Justus van Meerstraeten. A fine
* Van Dyck, large in the figure and in the painter's method of recording it. Both the composition and the treatment are broad. Notice the ample folds of the dress, the large hands, head, and general bulk. With well-drawn mouth, moustache, and eyes. And what a forehead and hair! A portrait of a manly man, done after the Van Dyck formula, but with much skill.
127. Portrait of Isabella van Assche. A slight and
very flat figure in an ample robe. The outline of the figure is sharply drawn and the eyes, nose, and mouth are a little curious for Van Dyck; but possibly he did them as well as the characteristic hands and the unusual landscape. The rock and curtain background are uneasy — the whole of the background is disturbing, for everywhere the out- lines wriggle.
128) Portraits of Joost de Hertoghe and Wife.
129 / Two large full-lengths. At one time they were doubtless impressive if somewhat flashy portraits, as the composition and colour still indicate. The original surface and handling have disappeared under ancient restoration. Notice the now crude look of the red curtain and green leaves or the star-
DYCK, ANTHONY VAN 143
ing whites in No. 129. The faces have the apoplec- tic look of the repainted. The lady's face appears as though hidden under powder and rouge. The man's portrait was cut down at one time and after- ward the missing parts were restored. The seam still shows on the surface. But in spite of injury these portraits are still remarkable. What a grand air they have!
119. Madonna and Child, Magdalen and Sinners.
The catalogue says this picture was painted under "the strong influence of Rubens," but perhaps it would be nearer the mark to call the work a Rubens weakened by the influence of Van Dyck and others. The picture was possibly designed by Rubens and he perhaps retouched with his own hand the hair of the Magdalen as also the flesh-notes of the Madonna, Child, and Magdalen, though this is by no means certain. Van Dyck appears in the work at the extreme left and in the background figures. It is a good group of people and still good in colour. The picture is injured, stitched together, and repainted in spots.
120. Portrait of a Lady. A hasty, sketchily done
Van Dyck showing his brush in the eyes and in the high lights of the nose and brow. Cleaned but not repainted. The face is pallid but not rasp- berry-hued with overlaid paint. Notice how the nose is flattened by cleaning though still retaining some colour.
125. Portrait of Snyders and Wife. A double por-
* trait in Van Dyck's early style. The faces are still very pure and as the painter left them save for some cleaning that has bleached them. Notice the drawing of the eyes, nose, and forehead with
144 THE CASSEL GALLERY
the dragging of the white paint in the high lights. Van Dyck used this effective method of modelling in his early work. It is one of the earmarks whereby his work can be detected, though it was followed by imitators, pupils, and copyists. The Van der Geest portrait in the National Gallery, London, shows it to advantage. The hands in this No. 125 are not very solid, and are now a little blackened by the underbasing showing through.
Flemish School. See Netherland School.
213. Hals, Frans. Portrait of a Patrician. A splen-
* did type of the merchant-patrician Dutchman of the seventeenth century. It is an intelligent but not an intellectual face, with life and energy about it but no evidence of high thinking or midnight study. Done in a sure manner and yet with free- dom of handling. Look at the drawing of the hat, the belt, the fluffy ruff, the dress. The large figure is well suggested, the hands well drawn, the face perhaps a little skimped in the drawing of the chin and under jaw but acceptable. Look again at the coat of arms for the ease and certainty of its doing as also for its effective placing in the pic- ture. An excellent portrait.
214. Portrait of a Patrician's Wife. A companion
* piece to No. 213 and possibly done at the same time. It has more colour but seems a little harder in the drawing and in the surfaces. The face is weaker, the ruff more brittle, the head-dress a little askew, the chain not so effective as the belt in the companion picture, and the coat of arms much more perfunctory in its doing. Hals painted men better than women. He was, in fact, a man's painter, devoted to the physical presence, the bluff,
HALS, FRANS 145
even the boisterous and the blowsy, but not fond of the effeminate. He usually painted women with some impatience. Dirck Hals and others of the school were, however, given to doing this sort of por- trait and later it was charged up to the elder Hals.
215. The Singing Boys. Apparently Hals in a
sketchy mood and not too sure of his drawing, as notice the head of the larger boy, especially the back of the head. The hands are a little laboured ; the lute fairly well drawn. The spirit of it is lively. Hals was no sentimentalist, no painter of poetry or pathos; he was devoted to the physical life. So, too, were his pupils. Among them, Judith Leyster had the habit of doing just this theme, this diagonal grouping, with this rather in- effective drawing and handling. She probably did this work.
216. The Happy Drinker. A sketchy affair in
reds, yellows, and browns. The handling is very broad and in the main fairly effective, but not exactly in the manner of Hals. The picture is not convincingly by the master but possibly of his workshop. Look at the poor handling in the hair and beard, or on the front of the dress, or the drawing of the mouth and chin. The background shading is false.
2171 Portraits of Men. Small portraits, very true
218 J in a large way and showing abundant good humour and physical presence. No. 217 is a little free in the handling, as though through impatience, but is truthful. No. 218 shows excellent painting in the collar and hat — the inevitable black hat with its sharp corner at the right. Both portraits may have been done in the Hals School.
146 THE CASSEL GALLERY
219. The Young Man with the Slouch Hat. In
* Hals's late manner, and very sketchy in the hat, hands, head, and figure, but wonderfully effective. What a massive head and face! And what indi- cated bone and bulk of flesh in the jaw, cheeks, and forehead! And, again, what eyes! It is in the grey key of colour that Hals shows in his later works, sombre, almost black and white, but excel- lent in tone. It is the strongest Hals in this gal- lery as a piece of pure painting, though not too correct in drawing.
269. Heist, Bartholomeus van der. Portrait of a Man. A rather heavy-faced character with a gloomy, pessimistic outlook. The face is weaker than the hands or the dress and ruff. The draw- ing and the painting are good. To be compared with the Velasquez, Admiral Borro, at Berlin (No. 413A). There is a slight resemblance in hands and pose. See the note on the Berlin picture.
101. Jordaens, Jakob. Satyr with Peasant Family.
Rather hot in colour, especially in the flesh. The drawing and handling are very good. Probably a variant of the Brussels picture (No. 238), though it is now impossible to say which of the many ver- sions is the original. It is freely done, well painted, and has body and bulk to it with good colour to match. It is as good as many so-called Rubenses.
107. Family Group. The figures are life-size and
* intended for portraits. The workmanship is un- even and some of the heads have been injured a little. The good nature and healthfulness of the group are very apparent. The seated mother is excellent in the painting of her hair, and the rib- bons and flowers make a burst of colour.. The
LASTMAN, PIETER 147
father is less interesting. The whole group is well held together and fills out a decorative panel of much beauty. See also No. 104 across the room.
100A. Family Group. A little hot in colour, and
purely human, almost animal in feeling, but very honest work. Besides, it is original and individ- ual. Jordaens is here following his own impulses. What peculiar reds and blues ! What a good group ! What force it has!
103. Bacchus as a Boy with Satyr and Nymphs.
In a large, Rubensesque style with a landscape broad in scope. A fine colour effect with some good painting. As decoration it holds up very well. See also the injured No. 109.
222. Keyser, Thomas de. Portrait of a Man. It is
* hard in the ruff, beard, and hair, and glassy in the dress, but exactly true in drawing. Look at the eyes and brows with the drawing of the large, flat nose! And what a mass of boneless flesh in the right hand!
223. Portrait of William VI of Hesse. A whey-
* faced youth with no great force of character but resting quietly while the artist paints him. And the artist did his work very well. Notice the hair and the drawing of the face. Also the nice sug- gestion of colour in the dress. Perhaps too much cleaned in the hand and face. Attribution not certain.
188. Lastman, Pieter. Midas. The suggestion of Rembrandt's masses of light surrounded by dark is already apparent in this work of his master, Lastman. It is rather coarse in the drawing but is, nevertheless, a considerable picture.
148 THE CASSEL GALLERY
479. Lippi, Fra Filippo. St. Francis with Nuns. It
is true in sentiment if a little monotonous in colour and formal in the drawing of the draperies. Prob- ably a school piece and of no great importance.
512. Lotto, Lorenzo. Portrait of a Cavalier. A thin, * elongated body and face as though some Parmi- gianino had had the doing of them. The portrait has merit, whoever did it. The angles of the wall are offset by the round lines of the figure. The costume is unique and the colour very good.
265. Marienhof, A. St. Peter Released from Prison.
Compared with the same subject in No. 263, it is a more dignified conception but not so good in colour nor so well handled.
Master of the Death of the Virgin. See Cleve, Juste van.
300. Metsu, Gabriel. The Almsgiver. A nicely painted picture but impossible so far as the light of the white dress is concerned. The note is forced and is too high in key. It makes a spot on the canvas and hurts the unity and ensemble of the picture. But it is a clever work.
301. The Lute Player. Compare this with the
same subject by Terborch (No. 289), on the oppo- site wall, to see how Metsu falls below Terborch. And yet this Metsu is very well done. Notice the hand on the lute, the blue dress, the fur.
511. Moretto da Brescia (Alessandro Bonvicino). Adoration of the Shepherds. A very large, double composition with little angels at the top. The picture is empty in the centre and has now lost any silvery tone it may have had through repaint-
MOSSCHER, JACOB VAN 149
ing. The blue at the left is a little high in key. Not Moretto at his best though perhaps at his largest.
37. Moro, Antonio. William of Orange. A large and rather pretentious portrait. It is hurt by the in- sistence upon the armour at the expense of the man, as in modern portraiture the painting of the dress at the expense of the woman's head. The head here is very well done, but too much subordinated. And placed too high on the panel. Moro, in com- mon with other painters, believed that placing the figure high up on the panel gave dignity to the sitter. See Nos. 35 and 36 for this high placing. The at- tribution is questioned.
351 Portraits of Johann Callus and Wife. The
36 J man's portrait represents Moro in his soberer mood. It is well drawn. The woman's portrait is hectic in flesh colour which may have come from repainting. She has an attractive personality, and the portrait is interesting — dog and all. These are freely painted Moros and yet done with accuracy.
39. Don Carlos of Spain. A true-enough portrait
of a sad-faced boy — the costume, perhaps, more regal than its wearer. The picture has darkened and the face has the apoplectic colouring of No. 36 — due again, possibly, to some restoration. An odd picture with a Spanish look about it.
395. Mosscher, Jacob van. Landscape. It shows the influence of Molyn or Salomon van Ruysdael, but it also has a Rembrandtesque look, indicating that there were a number of painters in Holland doing dark foregrounds and light skies in and after Rem- brandt's time.
150 THE CASSEL GALLERY
23. Netherland School (about 1500). Portrait of a Man. Originally a good portrait but now hurt by repainting in both the face and hands.
386. Nolpe, Pieter. Village Scene. A landscape by some follower of Van Goyen with Van Goyen's mannered trees and skies. Nolpe answers to this description and may have painted this picture. 9. Nuremberg School. Portrait of Johann Neu- dorfer. It is hard in the drawing. The sitter has cocked eyes, which may suggest that the portrait was at least truthful. The gold lettering is decora- tive.
10. — — Portrait of Magdalena Neudorfer. The com- panion piece to No. 9 and in the same vein. The Teutonic type is strongly expressed with perhaps less hardness of line than in No. 9. The colour is very good, the hands excellent, the face outline true, and beautiful in the manner of its doing.
24. Orley, Bernard van. Triptych. The attribu- tion is open to question, in common with that of many other pictures placed under the name of Van Orley. But this picture is rather fine in its types of the Madonna and Christ in the central panel. The figures are short, but the draperies fall fairly free and the colour is excellent. It is somewhat injured, as in the faces of the angels and their hands, for instances.
500. Palma il Giovine, Jacopo. Andromeda. An il- lustration of the rather heavy art of the younger Palma. He was a follower of Tintoretto and dis- played more hasty facility than accuracy or right spirit. See also No. 502.
368. Potter, Paulus. In the Meadow. This time Potter omits the poison green of his foliage but sees
REMBRANDT VAN RYN 151
to it that the cattle are well whitewashed. The drawing of the cattle is not bad so far as the anat- omy goes, but they are dead, turned-to-stone cattle. And the tree is made of what?
369. A Peasant with His Herd. With the usual
meagre inventory of hard cattle and Paris-green trees. The beast at the left is well drawn and fairly well painted.
459. Poussin, Nicolas. Bacchanalian Scene. An ex- cellent Poussin in both drawing and colour. And with fine trees. The centralised spot of white in the figure of the nymph, of which there is a re- peated note in the white cloth above, is noteworthy. With good grouping and action in the figures.
237. Rembrandt van Ryn. Portrait of the Painter.
* It is dated 1634 and shows the supposed Rembrandt as a young man. The shadows on the face and cloak are clear and luminous and the eyes, nose, and mouth are well drawn. The helmet also is excellent, especially in the high lights. A broad method of seeing and doing, a certainty of touch are apparent here. The colour is rich in the red- dish-browns of the dress although it is dated 1634. Apparently in good condition.
234. Portrait of Coppenol the Writing-Master. A
** dull, stupid character with a fat face and fore- head, the flesh rather soft, the hair rather moth- eaten, the eyes narrow and wandering, the mouth small and petty, the hands fat and practically use- less. What a perfect epitome of a more or less commonplace character! As a psychological and physiological study, it is perfection; as a portrait, it is one of Rembrandt's very best. Was there
L52 THE CASSEL GALLERY
ever before such flesh painting as here or such a realisation of actual bone structure under flesh as here! Notice the forehead, the eyes, the nose, and the mouth — how wonderfully they are rendered! And what hands — what wonderfully living, actual hands of flesh these are! Notice also the luminous envelope of air and the luminous shadow on the side of the face. It is a masterpiece that should be accepted as a Rembrandt criterion of style, method, and manner during his grey period. In good condition.
242. Landscape with Ruins. The foreground be-
* low is darkened, and the sky above also is darkened by a thunder-cloud in order to focus the light strongly in the central sky. The result may be called "forced," but it is also forceful in giving the feeling of penetrating light. The colour of the foreground is effective, cooled somewhat by the sky, but still helping to produce a warm-toned pic- ture. The movement of the thunder-cloud is well suggested. The central idea of the picture, how- ever, is the light that penetrates and permeates. It is not so wonderful a performance as is sometimes given out, and, for all its excellence, might have been done by Pieter de Molyn or Hercules Seghers. That is to say, they did things in this manner and almost as forceful, as see the Molyn landscape in the Berlin Gallery (No. 960B) and the so-called Rembrandt follower in the Dresden Gallery (No. 1575). But the picture is to be accepted as an effective and beautiful landscape. It is worthy of Rembrandt, but whether by him or not is un- certain. The thunder-cloud is a Seghers earmark to which frequent reference has been made in these volumes.
REMBRANDT VAN RYN 153
236. Saskia. This is the famous Saskia with the
*** velvet hat of red cockscomb colour. It is a pic- ture of Rembrandt's early time, really supreme in its splendour of colour and wonderful in its accu- racy, truth, and beauty. There is perhaps too much colour, too many jewels. The dress is a lit- tle ornate and barbaric. But Rembrandt planned just that riot of brilliant hues. How marvellous is the painting of the hat, the dress, the throat- piece with its jewels, the earrings, the bangles, the fur, the velvet! It is all free work yet accu- rate; it is not niggled like a Dou, or sweetened like a Poorter. Notice the peculiar flesh tone that goes with a woman of auburn hair — how infallibly he has hit it! The neck is small; Saskia here looks ill. The face is a little thin and the profile some- what hard, but how perfectly it is cut, with what a mouth, nostril, and eye! And what very lovely hair as Rembrandt has painted it! The hands are under shadow and subordinated, but suggestive in their reality. A masterwork of the most bril- liant quality, though perhaps not so enduringly satisfactory as some of his later and simpler por- traits.
231. Portrait of a Man with a Golden Chain. It
shows a spare, meagre face with the waste of flesh and the wrinkles that come with age. The flesh is somewhat kneaded and the beard a bit tortured. The shadow under the cap is luminous. A good work but not among the best portraits in this gal- lery. It is the same model that appears in No. 233 and in the Abraham Sacrificing Isaac at Munich (No. 332), assigned to Rembrandt. This portrait (No. 231) was probably done by Lievens. It agrees with Nos. 229, 230, 233 in this gallery.
154 THE CASSEL GALLERY
239. Portrait of an Unknown Man. A full-length,
supposed to have been done in 1639, with a yellow- brown flush about the background. The man is short, red-faced, and wholly uninteresting save for the manner of his painting. The light is more or less diffused through the room and the man is standing against a pilaster. He rests well on his feet. The black clothes are carefully done — better, perhaps, than the face and hair, which leave us unmoved. It is somewhat injured by repainting, but it never could have been one of Rembrandt's successes. It somehow reminds one of the figure of Captain Frans Banning Cock in the Night Watch at Amsterdam, though of course not nearly so well done.
240. The Holy Family. A small picture, rather
fine in colour and freely, even carelessly, done as regards the drawing. It has no earmarks of Rem- brandt about it and is probably the work of some follower of Adriaen van Ostade. The curtain is drawn back as though a scene in a theatre were being disclosed. In measure like the alleged Rem- brandt at the Hermitage of the Holy Family (No. 796), and the picture in the Louvre (No. 2542).
245. Portrait Called The Watch. It is dated
1655, and if we accept the date as genuine the picture must be referred to Rembrandt's late period. The hands are large but not square or sooty, and the shadows are dark but not blackish. The handling is heavy in face and hands and the lights are a bit uncertain. Not Rembrandt at his best, if Rembrandt at all. It comes nearer, perhaps, to Fabritius but there is little to substantiate such a suggestion. The forged signature of Rembrandt
REMBRANDT VAN RYN 155
and the date of 1655 are placed over an illegible in- scription that is probably genuine.
249. - — Isaac Blessing Jacob. The date says 1656, but the picture itself indicates that Rembrandt or a follower possibly started it earlier and never finished it, that it was possibly sold among his effects after his death, and that it is not to be con- sidered a finished product. All painters die leav- ing unfinished work and unsatisfactory "starts" behind them. The background and the condition of the hands in this picture show this incomplete state. The colour is good and the feeling of the old man rising up in bed is well given, but the picture has no air or space or distance in it and the handling is heavy. Notice the dress and hands of the woman at the right, and the square ribbing in the sleeve of Jacob. Neither has a Rembrandt- esque look.
243. Portrait of Nicolas Bruyningh. It has a sug- gestion of golden-browns about it and is interest- ing in its treatment of shadows about the face and hair and across the figure. There is something of mystery about the shadows that is attractive, but in realising the model or showing the actual truth of appearance this work is not to be compared with, say, No. 234. It is less definite and has not the firmness or positiveness of Rembrandt. The face is similar to that of the face of the angel in Jacob Wrestling with the Angel, at Berlin (No. 828). Possibly Bol did both works.
247 1 Two Study Heads. They are evidently studio
248 / memoranda made by pupils or followers of Rem-
brandt. A number of these small portraits are in existence. See those in the Antwerp Gallery, Nos.
156 THE CASSEL GALLERY
294-295. Any one of half a dozen pupils might have done them.
229. Portrait of the Painter. A small picture with
a dark shadow over the eyes and forehead that does not indicate Rembrandt. There is no cer- tainty about either the subject or the painter. The hair is scratched with the wooden end of the brush to make ringlets. This is a mannerism of Jan Lievens. The portrait bears other indications of being by him, such as the soft modelling.
232. Study Head of an Old Man. As fine a piece
* of skull and head drawing as one may see in a
day's journey through any gallery. And not less so the drawing of the brows, the half-hidden eyes, the nose, and the indicated mouth. An excellent piece of work, but is that of itself sufficient for calling it a Rembrandt? Aside from the general Rembrandt formula, followed by a score of painters, it has not too much of Rembrandt's quality or individuality about it. The man who painted the Hermit Reading in the Louvre (No. 2541A) might have done it, but that man was probably Dou. Dou and his imitator, Brekelenkam, besides others of the school, did this same head again and again, but it must be admitted with never the strength of this example. See the note on the Louvre pic- ture. It is there put down to Rembrandt.
233. Head of an Old Man. Rather red in the face
and laboured in the flesh painting, as though the painter had gone over it again and again or it had been repainted by a later hand. It is effec- tive at a distance but disturbing by its super- abundance of wrinkles. The head and hair are put in with many strokes of the brush and then,
REMBRANDT VAN RYN 157
as though still dissatisfied with the result, the sur- face is cut into by the wooden end of the brush through the wet paint. Notice this in the forehead. The handling, drawing, modelling show the brush of Lievens. The model appears at Munich in the Sacrifice of Abraham (No. 332).
235. Portrait of the Poet KruL A sneering and
somewhat disagreeable personality in black on a grey ground, done easily enough, but not an in- spired or inspiring piece of work. It looks a bit perfunctory. The flesh is hot, the left hand and arm badly placed, the background formal. A large picture but with little pronounced colour.
238. Portrait of a Young Woman. This is a later
** work than the Saskia (No. 236) and in some re- spects nearly as good, though, of course, not so astonishing a picture nor so celebrated, not so sure in drawing and handling. The colour effect is quieter, more harmonious, more restful, more altogether pleasing. The handling is broader, freer, more mature, as notice the doing of the dress, the lovely white at the throat, the beautiful hair, the glove, the flower, the jewels. The shadows about the throat are almost perfect, and the golden tone of colour most decorative. The type of woman here shown is not bothered by her want of good looks. She is serene and simple in her un- consciousness— a plain type not given to pose or pre- tence. Perhaps that is why the portrait satisfies. It has no striking effect or elaborateness of detail as in the Saskia. It is of a golden colour, not only in the hair and robe but also in the background.
244. -Portrait of the Painter. The so-called Rem-
* brandt is here shown well along in life, square of
158 THE CASSEL GALLERY
face, and penetrating of eye. The tone is dark — darker than in his golden period — the flesh inclined to be hot, the shadows still luminous. Again one must ask how it happens that the Rembrandt por- traits are so different one from another if one hand did them all? Is it not conceivable that his room- ful of pupils might have used him for a model or used a model which is now called Rembrandt, and that the difference in the portraits is one of point of view and temperament? Here the work rather in- dicates Rembrandt's own hand, but one need not be too certain about it one way or the other. It is a good portrait, but it may be school work for all that.
246. Portrait of an Architect. It is dated 1656,
* and is usually referred to Rembrandt's late period. The shadows are luminous, the brush is a little fumbling about the hair but gives a mystery of shadow in the face with marked effect. The fur is somewhat tortured, as is also the beard, and there is some softness in the modelling. There is an interest shown in such accidental effects as the white flesh on the wrist above the line of sun tan and in the protruding veins of age in the back of the left hand. The portrait was possibly painted by Nicolas Maes in his middle period. See the resemblance to the portrait of a similar old man at The Hague (No. 90) by Maes; and again in a supposed Rembrandt portrait of an old man at one time in the Carstanjen Collection. Again it must be admitted that The Hague portrait is much weaker than this one at Cassel. Perhaps that is why it still passes as a Maes. His best works have been handed over to Rembrandt.
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 159
230. Rembrandt's Father. One might quarrel over
the title, but it is hardly worth while. This is a study head, not done in the style of No. 234 or 237 but with much repetition of stroke for effects of age and wrinkles. It belongs in the category of No. 233 (which see) and was probably done by Lievens.
241. Landscape. This may be accepted as a mere
guess, so far as the attribution goes. As art, the picture is of no importance.
590. Ribera, Jusefe (Lo Spagnoletto). Mater Do/o- * rosa. It is not blackened by shadows and has a good colour effect. The surface is somewhat over- cleaned, but the brush-work in the face and head- dress is still plainly shown. A very good Ribera, following Titian.
502A. Romanino, II (Girolamo Romani). The Apostle Peter. A very acceptable apostle, not too badly drawn and of fair colour quality. The sleeve and the high light on the red underdress are rather disturbing, but for the rest, including the landscape, it is very good. Romanino was a weaker brother following Giorgione but not incapable of producing good work.
503. Apostle Paul. This is a companion piece to
No. 502A and of the same or similar quality. The hand is a little small and harshly drawn in the joints as in No. 502A. The landscape a bit crude.
93. Rubens, Peter Paul. Diana and Nymphs Sur- prised by Satyrs. The picture is a negligible work and is in poor condition. It is a question whether it is more than a school piece. The hands are badly drawn, the colour is lacking in quality,
160 THE CASSEL GALLERY
and the picture wants verve throughout. Notice the grey sky and the coarse landscape. The figures are somewhat like them. The dog is said to be by Snyders and the landscape by Wildens.
91. Hero Crowned by Victory. It is similar to
a picture of the same title in the Dresden Gallery. There are here some good flesh painting, fine robes, and resplendent armour. The hair and flesh of the Victory and of the bound captive are almost in their original state, though the picture, as a whole, has been over-cleaned and some of the surfaces and modelling destroyed. Moreover, much of it was done by pupils or added later, as, for instance, the head, hand, and wing of the second small Vic- tory at the top, the shield of the warrior, and all the paraphernalia at the right. A smaller version of this picture is in the Vienna Gallery.
92. Nicolas de Respaigne in Oriental Dress. A
fine portrait. The figure stands firmly on both feet, in more of a Teutonic than an Oriental fashion. The bulk and body are well given and with an unusual display of colour for a portrait. The Oriental rug helps out the colour scheme of the costume. The portrait has the surprise of the un- expected. Stained in the shadow on the rug, and the background does not now recede as it should. The sitter appears as one of the kings in Rubens's Adoration of the Magi at Antwerp.
87. Flight into Egypt. Possibly a study for some- thing larger, done sketchily and hastily but effec- tively. The centralised lighting and grouping are distinctly like the work of the smaller Netherland painters of the time. The artificial light of the figures is repeated faintly in a moonlight at the
RUBENS, PETER PAUL 161
back. Joseph is seen looking behind him as though apprehensive of pursuit.
89. Portrait of a Young Man. This portrait is
very nearly as it was when originally painted — a little slippery, soapy, and flowing in the handling, and dark in the shadow of the neck, but effectively drawn and easy in brush-work. The young man is not exactly an intellectual type. He probably had more blood in his veins than brains in his head. A good portrait of physical life but perhaps not by Rubens.
86. Jupiter and Calisto. A picture probably done
* by Rubens's own hand and a good example of his early art. How lovely the head of Calisto with her wealth of golden hair so beautifully brushed in by the painter! The legs and the entire figure of the nymph have been flattened by too much cleaning, and the more delicate modelling in the knees, feet, and arms badly hurt. Again the shadows have blistered and darkened somewhat, notably in the wings of the eagle, the back of Ca- listo, and on the arms. There has also been some repainting. But in spite of this the picture remains a most graceful piece of grouping in a fine landscape. How different the landscape from the spotty af- fairs usually attributed to Rubens ! And yet this is hardly the Rubens landscape. Notice the colour as compared with, say, No. 85.
85. Venus, Cupid, Bacchus, and Ceres. A group
of figures now much changed in the colour of the flesh and stained in spots. It is not so fine a work as No. 86. Compare the hair of these women with that of the Calisto in No. 86; also the drawing of
162 THE CASSEL GALLERY
the hands, arms, and feet, the quality of colour, and the wide gap between them will be apparent. The Calisto is by Rubens himself, whereas this picture is only a school piece or by some follower.
88. Meleager and Atalanta. It still has fine quali-
* ties, but, like many of the Rubenses painted on wood, it has been much cleaned. The modelling of Atalanta's left arm is almost gone and the bracelet upon it has been fairly scrubbed away. Notice also the bad shape of the man's hand at the right, caused by scrubbing again, with perhaps some bad drawing originally. The boar's head is intact, also the heads at left and right. Atalanta's hair is still in good condition, but the shadow on the neck has changed in value, due to over-cleaning, which allows the under-basing to show. A fine work, in spite of its injuries, and still possessing much bril- liancy of colour. The dog and boar are said to be by Snyders. A version of this picture was in the Kann Collection, Paris.
90. Lady with a Mirror. Originally, no doubt, it
* was easily and sketchily painted, but now, as seems the fate with almost all pictures, it shows too much cleaning in the face and too much repainting in the hands and arms. The hands are far removed from Rubens. And what a strange scheme of colour — green upon blue-grey, set off by flesh-notes as the high light! A very engaging picture — orig- inally, no doubt, beautiful in the hands, wrists, ruffs, and the dress with the pronounced feeling of the figure under it. Some features of it, such as the ruffs at the wrists and the hands, suggest Van Dyck's brush, but none of it reminds one of Rubens.
SCOREL, JAN VAN 163
94. The Drunken Silenus. The catalogue calls it
a part replica of the Munich picture, but it never- theless shows some good work in the head of the faun, in the grapes, and in the heavy body of Si- lenus. It was never a perfect piece and is now injured by cleaning.
398A. Ruisdael, Jacob van. Sea Beach. With well- painted dunes at the right. The clouds and sea are carelessly and indifferently done. A little un- usual in theme and acceptable on that account after the many examples of the mountain water- fall. But see No. 374, by Van de Velde, for per- haps better work.
398. Landscape with Waterfall. It is the usual
Ruisdael performance, though perhaps a little more perfunctory and unreal in the dashing water and the stained sky than he usually gives us.
34. Scorel, Jan van. Madonna and Child. Look at it a moment for the large if rather hard drawing and the odd Flemish-Italian colour. It has much strength and is not without a touch of true senti- ment. The attribution is questionable.
33. Family Party at Table. What a strong piece
* of work! The drawing of it is savage and the col- our perhaps unreal but they are certainly positive. The heads and hands are wonderfully rendered. And where could one see better painted still-life! The more one studies it the more wonderful it becomes. Look closely at the drawing of the man's eyes, nose, and mouth, his hand with the glass, the children's faces and their astonishing life, the mother's hands, the fruit, the basket. A very fine picture. Formerly catalogued as a Holbein and then as a Heemskerck.
164 THE CASSEL GALLERY
115. Snyders, Frans. Still-Life. Rasping and sav- age painting, but effective in giving a certain real- istic appearance with good colour. Snyders, with an inordinate reputation as an animal painter, has always seemed secure in a lofty niche, though he was not the equal of Rubens in this genre, and even Velasquez and Van Dyck went beyond him in painting dogs.
485. Spanish School (?). Portrait of a Man. The queried attribution on the frame is pertinent. One cannot say with any positiveness who did it or what school it belongs to. It would seem more French than Spanish or Italian in spite of the table- cloth and a Sanchez-Coello look to the dress. The face and hands have been repainted. Formerly attributed to Pontormo and then to the Florentine School.
296. Steen, Jan. The Bean Feast. With a huge, * lounging woman in a yellow skirt and red bodice in the centre. Look at the abandon of this figure —the half-tipsy sag and settle of it — and the leer- ing face. In contrast, notice the charming, naive quality of the child, the repetition of the yellow note in his little coat, and the excellence of the painting of the coat. The group at right, with the tall buffoon (the Bean King), is less well done. A good Steen.
141. Teniers the Younger, David. Christ Shown by Pilate. Look at the figures in the mob below, or on the platform above for their free painting and excellent colour. There are a number of small Teniers here worth looking at, such as Nos. 142 and 143.
TITIAN (TIZIANO VECELLIO) 165
288. Terborch, Gerard. A Family Concert. A well- known Terborch and an excellent one, though not so simple in grouping as is usual with this painter. Again the satin dress, and this time with good re- sults. It is beautifully done, as also the brown coat. The table-cloth, the figure back of it, and the still-life are well given. Notice the good draw- ing of the room and how the picture on the wall keeps its place. Injured a little by cleaning and retouching.
289. The Lute-Player. One of the most charm-
** ing of Terborch's satin-dress pictures. A perfect
piece of drawing as of colour. Notice the draw- ing of the hands, especially of the right one, and of the lute, the table-cloth, the chair, the wall, the room. The grey of the wall and the atmosphere between the wall and the player are attractive. Perhaps the lady's dress is a little high in key. As for the lady herself, what a charming person- ality she has! A very popular but very good Ter- borch. Injured in spots.
497. Tintoretto, Jacopo (Robust!) (?). Portrait of a Man. Time was when gallery directors would have scheduled this as a Spanish picture and seen a "black-muzzled Spaniard " in its subject; but now it is put down to Tintoretto with a query. Berenson gives it to Farinati. But may it not be nearer the Bassani whom II Greco followed? The II Greco look of it would, perhaps, thus be accounted for, since he was much influenced by Leandro and, perhaps, Francesco Bassano. A haughty, noble character and a very good portrait.
488. Titian (Tiziano Vecellio). Portrait of the Duke of AtrL At one time an impressive if preten-
166 THE CASSEL GALLERY
tious portrait, though the effect of the man's legs being too short and the body too long (produced by the small-clothes) must always have been dis- turbing. The colour of the costume is flamboyant and the plumed helmet at the left is gorgeous. The picture has been hurt by repainting. The flesh is now hectic, the hand is nearly wrecked, the cupid and the landscape are much scumbled over, made messy and uncertain. It is not by Titian though possibly done in his school and under his influence.
374. Velde, Adriaen van de. Sea Beach. What a fine study of a beach with people! And notice the well-drawn waves such as you can see at this day on the beach at Scheveningen. The sky is a little thin but high and expansive; the dunes at the left are excellent.
420. Velde the Younger, Willem van de. Calm Sea. A very good Van de Velde, a little frail in colour and thin in sea and sky, but it has a pleasant, silvery tone.
421. Calm Sea. It is one of Van de Velde 's thin
repetitions of a picture grown familiar to every habitu£ of galleries. He finally became almost as mechanical with this theme as Ruisdael with his waterfalls.
496. Venetian School. Portrait of a Lady. It is too
badly damaged to make out its painter. The hands, face, and hair have all been daubed over by some old-time restorer with a paint pot in one hand and a careless brush in the other. Notice the now hard drawing of the eyes, the mouth, or the face outline. But it still has style about it. Now (1913) catalogued as a copy of a lost Titian.
WOUWERMAN, PHILIPS 167
504. Veronese, Paolo (Caliari). The Dying Cleopatra.
The attribution is very questionable. Even a hasty glance at the picture reveals likenesses to, say, the decadent school of Guido Reni rather than that of Paolo. Look at the dropsical hands and the pulpy body. The robe and landscape are like the work of the late Venetians but not the figure. Repainted in parts.
98. Vos, Cornells de. Portrait of a Man. A fine type but ill drawn in the eyes. Unfortunately the canvas is in bad condition, and it is impossible to judge De Vos by it.
377. Weenix, Jan. Still-Life. If the realistic paint- ing of rabbit's fur and chicken's feathers consti- tutes fine art, then here we have it. The picture would reproduce in a colour print very well, and perhaps that was its destined mission on earth.
355. Wouwerman, Philips. The Harvest. This pic- ture is painted with so much verve and so well that one wonders if Wouwerman did it. Notice the fine and effective handling all through it. No. 346 is not unlike it.
INDEX OF PICTURES BY NUMBERS
|
6. Diirer. |
100A |
|
|
7. Baldung. n ^ |
101 |
Jordaens. |
|
1 Q > Nuremberg School. |
103 107 |
|
|
10A. Altdorfer. 13 |
2221 223 J |
Keyser. |
|
14 \ Cranach the Elder. 1 " I |
229-1 O A f\ |
> Rembrandt. |
|
15 J |
249 |
|
|
19. Cranach the Younger. |
256. |
Brouwer. |
|
20 1 21 f Cleve, Juste van. |
2571 258 J |
Dou. |
|
23. Netherland School. |
263. Cuyp, B. G. |
|
|
24. Orley. |
265. |
Marienhof. |
|
26. Cleve, Juste van. |
269. Heist, Van der. |
|
|
29. Cornelisz van Oost- sanen. |
I^Terborch. |
|
|
32. Apt. |
296. Steen. |
|
|
oo |
qnn "j |
|
|
34 Scorel. |
OUU 1 301] |
Metsu. |
|
35' |
355. |
Wouwennan. |
|
37 Moro. |
369 J |
Potter. |
|
39 |
374. Velde, A. van de. |
|
|
41. Beuckelaer. |
377. |
Weenix. |
|
54. Brueghel the Elder, Jan. |
386. |
Nolpe. |
|
Q, > Rubens. |
395. OQO |
Mosscher. |
|
98. Vos, C. de. |
oyo 398AJ |
> Ruisdael, J. van. |
170
INDEX
, W. van de.
459. Poussin.
479. Lippi, Fra Filippo.
482. Bartolommeo di Gio- vanni.
484. Bacchiacca.
485. Spanish School. 488. Titian.
496. Venetian School.
Romanino.
497. Tintoretto.
500. Palma the Younger.
502A
503
504. Veronese, P.
511. Moretto.
512. Lotto. 590. Ribera. 833. Amberger.
14 DAY USE
RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED
LOAN DEPT.
This book is due on the last date stamped below, or
on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate recall.
|
LlbKAKI UJi. - Q I M j I 1 |
|
|
«&r:u d |
|
|
APR 9 1970 |
|
LD 21A-60?n-10.'65
General Library
/K2
393596
UMVERSITV OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY