tween Tragedy and Comedy-which is a modernizing of Hercules between virtue and pleasure. It was painted long before the reformation in his colouring; but, notwithstanding that difadvantage, it is fo perfect in all other refpects, that it must be considered as one of the happiest efforts of his pencil.

It is not my intention to enter upon a criticifin, or even catalogue of his performances, or indeed to mention any picture; unless it contains fome peculiarity, by which a more correct judgement may be formed of his fkill, or the want of it. Suffice it then to fay, that there are trifling defects in moft of them, which an ordinary genius might have avoided; and tranfcendent beauties, which few, perhaps none, could have reached but himself. The sketch* of the infant Hercules

* I call it a fketch, because it was evidently a ftudy for the great picture, but it was compleat in

cules I have ever confidered as the first production of his pencil, and the greatest effort of modern art.

He frequently painted hiftorical portraits-one of the beft is that of Mrs. Siddons in the character of the Tragic Mufe-it has grandeur in the conception and execution-but the fublimity of this picture is much abated by the abominable chair, which is fo ugly and difcordant, as to force our attention to fuch a fubordinate circumstance-nor is that the worst, for one of the odious knobs cuts the line of the arm, and fubftitutes a difagreeable break, where every thing should be broad and grand. I very much dislike the effect of the chair in the King's portrait at

the

every respect. Surely one of the grandeft characters that ever mind conceived, or hand executed! If the rest of the figures had been only a woman or two, and in the fame ftyle, the infant would have kept its confequence, which is now loft amid a group of figures that offend probability, and destroy the effect of the picture.

the Royal Academy: although it be the coronation chair, we fhould obferve, that when the King fat in it, the whole was richly covered as a plain chair, it is fcarcely good enough for a country barber's fhop-where I heartily wish it had been fent, before the imitation occurred, which has fo much hurt this capital performance.

In one of his early historical portraits, the idea seems to be a reproach instead of a compliment, he painted Lady Sarah Lennox as facrificing to the Graces. A little examination of the fubject, will, I believe, fhew that it was a wrong conception.

A poet once carried his verfes to a friend (fays Addison, from whom I take the story) who returned them with advifing him "to facrifice to the Graces" -plainly infinuating, that he thought his poetry deftitute of elegance, and that he

fhould

should endeavour to propitiate the deities who were unfavourable to him-the application is obvious.

About the beginning of this century was a painter in Exeter called Gandy,* of whose colouring Sir Joshua thought highly. I heard him fay, that on his return from Italy, when he was fresh from feeing the pictures of the Venetian School, he again looked at the works of Gandy, and that they had lost nothing in his esti

mation.

It has been observed, that Sir Joshua was shy of painting feet, and seldom ventured beyond the toe of a fhoe peeping out from a petticoat-there is some reafon for this remark-but many things might

*There are many pictures of this artist in Exeter, and its neighbourhood. The portrait Sir Joshua seemed most to value, is in the Hall belonging to the College of Vicars in that city—but I have feen fome very much fuperior to it.

might be offered to excufe, though not fufficient to defend the practice.

There are fewer drawings by this great artist than by any other of eminence. Perhaps, prevented by more important occupations, or for want of early practice, he might not poffefs the faculty of producing effect by chalks, washing, penning, or any other of the numberlefs methods by which drawings are made. The great merit of which confifts of effect quickly produced. This facility cannot be attained, however good our ideas may without immense practice. Gainsborough was for ever drawing, and had this facility; but there are not many proofs, that, in this fenfe, Sir Joshua drew at all.

be,

His judgment of pictures differed from connoiffeurs in general; was peculiar, and his own. Very moderate ones (to the common judge) he has spoken highly of, and very good ones (upon the ufual principle)