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
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11