« AnteriorContinua »
originally published in 1840, are far from being among Cruikshank’s best work; the less said about most of them the better for his reputation; but this convenient little edition of Ainsworth’s novel is welcome, and would be cheap enough if it were not illustrated at all.
Jeux A L’EXPOSITION UNIVERSELLE INTERNATION— ALE DE 1900 A PARIS. Rapport présenté par M. Henry d’Allemagne. Vol.1. 11§X8in. pp. 379. Illustrated. Paris: Hachette & Cie. 1903. 35 fr.
THIS sumptuous and learned book is a monumen
tal piece of work, and will surely keep its place as
the standard authority on the history of games.
Its illustrations alone will make it attractive to
the general public, though the letterpress is far
from appealing only to the student. The illustrations, which are some four hundred in number and include several coloured plates, are profoundly interesting. Drawn as they are from pictures and prints of every country and period, they give by themselves the history of the games described, many of them long since obsolete, others still played in almost the same form as centuries ago.
PANTAGRUEL. Facsimile de l’édition de Lyon, Francois Juste, 1533, d’apres l’exemplaire unique de la bibliothéque royale de Dresde, avec introduction de Léon Dorez et PierrePaul Plan. Paris: Soeiété du Mercure de France. 1904.
THANKS to the care of Messrs. Léon Dorez and
Pierre-Paul Plan, a. very curious edition of Rabe
lais's famous novel has just been published. This
is a complete photographic reproduction of the original second edition issued by Rabelais himself, which is now represented by only a single copy, preserved in the Royal Library at Dresden since 1768. I feel it a duty to draw the attention of book-lovers to this most interesting publication, which gives us the Pantagruel of 1533 in its original form, with its original text and its original gothic type. Messrs. Dorez and Plan have prefaced their edition with a learned bibliographical study. The book is printed on Arches wove paper, and the edition consists of 250 copies, of which only 200 are for sale. G. DE R.
Two CENTURIES OF COSTUME IN AMERICA— MDCXX—MDCCCXX. By Alice Morse Earle. Two volumes. New York: The Macmillan Company. 1903. 215. net.
THE value of a book upon costume may be esti
mated in some degree by the number of its illus
trations, seeing that avrrago sleeve, a whisk, or a.
capuehin are things which pictures will explain
better than words can do. Therefore Mrs. Earle’s. book is a good book, for it has many hundreds of illustrations.
These pictures are singularly well chosen. When we have put aside the unhistorical fancies which
would people North America of the past with moccassined pathfinders and crop-eared fanatics in equal number, we shall reasonably consider American costume of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries for the most part as English costume. The English fashions were eagerly followed in New England, which lagged little behind Exeter 0r Durham in knowledge of the last modishness. S0 Mrs. Earle’s pictures will fill many a gap in the English reader’s appreciation of dead and gone fashions. No costume book can well be made up without such stock ingredients as Wenzel Hollar’s beautiful plates of women’s dress and the ‘ English Antick,’ but to such well-known matter Mrs. Earle has added an amazing number of portraits of old Bowdoins, Izards, Saltonstalls, and their kinsfolk from the days of ruffs and buff coats to the days of the Belle Assemblée. With these are many excellent photographs from carefully preserved garments of the past, some of which, such as the scarlethooded cloak of Judge Curwen, who tried the witches in Salem, are of remarkable interest. Although we find none of those scaled patterns to which such popular works as those of Racinet and Hottenroth have accustomed us, we have old gowns photographed in some cases upon living models.
Mrs. Earle’s narrative, although her colloquial style sometimes persuades her to prattling, is on the whole the well-informed work of the student rather than of the bookmaker. There is a notable absence of sham archaeology. She is rarely out of her depth, save, perhaps in her short chapter on what the Macmillan Company’s New England compositors print for us as ‘ armor.’ The armour worn by Fitzjohn Winthrop in his portrait by Kneller is not ‘ apparently mediaeval,’ but the usual painter’s corselet and pauldrons of the period ; and the ‘ silk armour ’ described by Roger North was the ridiculous refuge of scared citizens and not the habitual wear of the English soldier. Some additional care given to the correction of proofs would have spared us such vexatious trifles as the dates in Jonathan Corwin’s tailor’s bill, in which the year 1680 is printed four times as 1680, 1630, 1868, and 1860 respectively. That the dates of one or two portraits suggest'wrong ascriptions is a. small thing; our English private galleries, in which every other portrait for the period after Holbein and before Vandyke is ticketed as by Zuccaro, are greater offenders, and only one portrait suggests that a painted ancestor may sometimes be brought forth by the demand for such in a democratic state. The portrait of Cornelius Vandun, a yeoman of the guard, from an old and untrustworthy engraving of a much-battered monu_ ment, is hardly good evidence for a very singularly cut beard, and as Cornelius was not a herald there is no reason for styling him ‘Herald Cornelius Vandun.’
It will be imagined that the puritan element in America. makes much valuable material for Mrs. Earle in its denunciations of fine clothing. Hoop petticoats were ‘ arraigned and condemned by the Light of Nature and the Laws of God ’ in a Boston book as late as 1722 ; and the story of the wife of Pastor Johnson and her garments, over which her husband’s congregation disputed for eleven years, is delectable reading. Her busks and her whalebones at her breasts ‘ were soe manifest that many of y° Saints were greeved thereby.’ She wore a ‘ Schowish Hatt ’ with a loathsome and abominable neckerchief, and the elders begged her to cease tying her bodice to her petticoat as men tie their doublets to their hose, for the fashion was plainly rebuked by I Thessalonians v. 22, and unseemly in a daughter of Zion. O. B.
GAZETTE DES BEAUX-ARTS.—A Propos d'unRepentir de Hubert van Eyck. }. Six. Little by ittle corroborative evidence of the correctness of Mr. Weale’s classification of the works of the van Eycks is accumulating. M. Six calls attention to a pentimento in the painting of the soldiers of Christ in the altarpiece at Ghent. This pentimento consists in replacing a crown on the head of one of the soldiers of Christ by a blue bonnet. He has identified this personage as Jean sans Peur, who probably, therefore, saw the painting and objected to wearing a crown while Godfrey de Bouillon wore only a fur cap, and got Hubert van Eyck to alter it to the blue bonnet which was the headdress of the partisans of Burgundy against the Armagnacs, a fact which indicates for this correction a date somewhat after 1410. The author also adduces a number of iconographical reasons for thinking that although the Ghent altarpiece was finished by John van Eyck for Jodocus Vydt, it may have been begun by Hubert for the same W'illiam IV, Count of H01land, for whom he executed the Turin miniatures. Les Enrichissemmts du Département des Objets d’A rt au Muse'e du Louvre. Gaston Migeon.—-—Owing to the generosity of MM. Bossy, Macist, and Doistau the collection of the Louvre has received important accessions in the past year. Louis XV et le Palais de Fontainebleau. Casimir Stryienski.—An account of the destruction of Primaticcio’s masterpiece, the Gallery of Ulysses, by Louis XV, and of the decorations of the Salle du Conseil carried out under him by Boucher and Vanloo. Du Suraimé an iconographie. Henri Bouchot.-—A case of the rifacimento of an old engraving by Bosse to suit the fashions of a later day., Le Renouvellement do l’Art far les ‘Mystéres.’ Emile Mile. Second article.—The author continues his extremely interesting account of the development of Christian iconography in the later middle ages through the influence of mystery plays which in turn were inspired by S. Bonaventura's Meditations. He traces many subjects to their source, such as the law-suit before the throne of God between Justice and Mercy,
which prepares and explains the scheme of salvation. This occurs chiefly in miniatures, and later on in woodcut illustrations, though the author gives one example of the subject in French sculpture. Another motive which constantly occurs in pictures of the Nativity is the pillar against which, according to S. Bonaventura, Mary leaned when the time of her delivery approached. Another change brought about in the manner of representation by the same cause is that of the Virgin and Angel both kneeling instead of standing in the scene of the Annunciation. This change he traces back to the middle of the fourteenth century. He might have added that Giotto, who was inspired directly by S. Bonaventura and not through the medium of the mystery plays, already adopted this motive by the beginning of the century. Yet again, of the meeting of St. John the Baptist and Christ as boys in the desert, of which he can find only one doubtful example in France, Italian art furnishes examples, of which we may mention the two small pictures in Berlin—one by Sellajo, the other attributed to Ghirlandajo. But of all the scenes derived from this source the most important is that of the Virgin holding the dead Christ upon her knees, of which he finds the first example in a MS. of the Due de Berry of the early years of the reign of Charles VI.
RASSEGNA n' ARTE—Signor Frizzoni addresses an open letter to the Director of the Verona Gallery concerning the changes desirable there in the preservation, arrangement, and attribution of the pictures. Don Guido Cagnola writes on Jacopo Bellini with intent to confirm the attribution to him of the San Crisogono on horseback in San Trovaso at Venice. He quotes Mr. Berenson as supporting this view with hesitation, but seems unaware that, in his last edition of his Notes on Venetian Painting, Mr. Berenson has definitely pronounced it to be by Giambono. Mary Logan reproduces and describes an admirable woman’s portrait by Bonifazio in the museum at Boston.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW.—Tl'le Editor publishes, with a note, an interesting and hitherto unknown drawing of St. Peter’s, made when the drum of Michael Angelo’s dome was rising just above the facade of the old basilica. Mr. Blomfield continues his interesting studies of Philibert de l'Orme, and, in discussing the circumstances of his fall from power at the accession of Henry II, controverts M. Dimier’s views as to Primaticcio's position as an architect. He takes the view that the deposition of the Frenchman and the reinstatement of the Italians was chiefly a political move of the Guise party. In a review of Mr. Wood Brown’s book on Sta Maria Novella, Mr. Horne contributes the results of some important researches into the early history of the church which bear incidentally on the history of early Florentine painting.
1M FOREIGN CORRESPONDENCE 1"
NOTES FROM PARISl
I MUST begin with bad news. The opening of the Exhibition of Engraving, which I mentioned in the March number of THE BURLINGTON MAGAZINE, has been postponed from April to a later date. In fact, it is adjourned sine die. This is very much to be regretted, for the programme of the organizers was extremely interesting.
Another among many announcements is the opening of a salon of French paintings of the eighteenth century, to be held in the gallery of the Champs-Elysées, from May 15 to June 15. We hear mention of the alluring names of Chardin, Fragonard, Watteau and others, but it remains to be seen whether the fortunate owners of their works will lend them.
Several exhibitions of modern works have been held recently, among them that of the Orientalists organized by M. Léonce Benedite, the keeper of the Luxembourg Museum. The contributions of MM. Dinet, Rochegrosse, and Dufrénoy deserve special mention. The Salon of Independent Artists continues to offer the rather disconcerting spectacle of a varied and sometimes picturesque but really stationary art, of promises not realized and wisdom that never advances. From the enormous number of 2,395 entries in the catalogue, I should single out M. Dezaunay’s Breton scenes and the pictures of MM. Diriks and Francis Jourdain. Among a host of other exhibitions I must mention the French water-colour painters, the drawings, pastels, etc. of the Union Artistique, the New Society of Painters and Sculptors, and the works of MM. René Piot, Hermann Paul, Alphonse Legros, and Ch. Genty.
The Louvre has just made two heavy purchases that will take a large slice out of its funds, in a couple of pictures of the English school bought of Mr. Archibald Ramsden for 100,000 and 50,000 francs respectively. The first is a Young Woman and Boy with a dog in his arms, by Hoppner; the other a fine Raeburn, Portrait of Mrs. Mackonochie. Princess Mathilde’s and Baron Arthur de Rothschild’s bequests have been provisionally arranged in the Portrait Room, between the Seventeenth Century and the Eighteenth Century Rooms. I will return to these bequests later; the first has not proved all it promised to be. Carpeaux’s bust of Princess Mathilde has been placed for good in the Louvre; it is an extremely remarkable work, and one of the best examples of the great artist. At the sale of the famous Gillot collection the museum bought for 7,000 francs a statue in gilt wood of Amida, a seventh-century work; and Mme. Veuve Gillot has presented a superb example of Japanese thirteenth-century
1 Translated by Harold Child.
painting, a portrait of the priest Jitchin. Two very fine Japanese masks and an excellent piece of fourteenth-century lacquer may also be mentioned.
The Egyptian Museum of the Louvre has just bought at the Amélineau sale the famous stele known as the ‘stele of the Serpent-King,’ which was discovered in the excavations at Abydos. The unexpectedly high price of 94,000 francs was due to the fact that the Berlin museum was bidding against the Louvre, and ran it up to 93,500 francs. At the same sale the Egyptian museum bought a marble cup with an inscription in the name of Hepethepen, a master of stone-carving works (2,405 francs), two ivory bed-feet (2,600 francs), and a fragment of ivory furniture (1,850 francs). The last is in a style called the Myrenian, and of recent origin compared with some of the other objects, which go back to the first two or three Egyptian dynasties.
Before leaving the Louvre I must mention the ‘Illustrated Inventory of the Calcography in the Louvre,’ lately published by M. Henry de Chennevieres, assistant keeper of the National Museums. who is now giving a series of conférences every Saturday, in the school of the Louvre, on French painting in the eighteenth century.
It cannot be long before the Palace of Versailles opens some newly-arranged rooms devoted to seventeenth-century work. The papers have been circulating entirely false reports on this subject, which the art magazines have rashly retailed. According to them, the keepers of the Versailles Museum have made an important discovery of forgotten pictures by Mignard, Largilliere, Rigaud, etc. Information derived from the most authoritative sources enables me to state that the pictures in question are the series of portraits of the time of Louis XIV by Rigaud, Largilliere, and others which were exhibited till recently, but very badly hung, and that the keeper has lately had them reframed, and will shortly exhibit them in a new and appropriate setting. The pictures have been catalogued for years, and are familiar to all who really know Versailles, though to the general public they will come as a surprising revelation. Though the keepers of Versailles have not ‘ discovered ’ them, what they have done is no less a matter for congratulation.
On the other hand a genuine discovery has been made in the form of a bust of Nicolas Boileau by Caffieri, a replica of a bust that has now disappeared from the Library of Sainte-Genevieve, but is described by M. Jules Guiffrey in his work on the Caffieri. The replica, which is dated 1785, and appears in the Versailles catalogue of 1839, had undergone ill-treatment that fortunately was not irreparable. When discovered in the lumber-rooms it was covered with an unspeakable mass of paint. It has now regained its normal aspect. A writer in the Chronique dos Arts gives an excellent account of the discovery.
ROUND THE ARTISTIC SOCIETIES
At the Academy of Inscriptions M. Salomon Reinach is showing, with a commentary, twentytwo photographs of illuminations from a MS. of Froissart, written for the great Bastard of Burgundy in 1469, and presented to the library at Breslau in the sixteenth century. M. Heuzey is dealing with the excavations at Tello, which have resulted, among other things, in proving the existence of polychromy in ancient Chaldean sculpture. At the Society of Antiquaries of France M. Durrieu announces a discovery by M. Lucien Magne, who has recognized in one of the miniatures in the Duke de Berry’s Book of Hours at Chantilly a reproduction of the Castle of Saumur. M. Henri Martin communicates a Book of Hours from the Library of the Arsenal, which appears to have belonged to Duke John de Berry. At the Academy of Fine Arts M. Carolus Duran has been elected to the chair of M. Gérome, recently deceased. M. Holleaux has just been appointed director of the French school at Athens in place of M. Homolle, who has become director of the National Museums.
G. de R.
NOTES FROM BELGIUM 1
THE EXHIBITION or IMPRESSIONIST PAINTERS AT BRUSSELS
To celebrate the tenth year of its existence, the ‘ Libre Esthétique ’ has organized an exhibition which brings together the pictures of the impressionist painters from Manet down to those who are now called neo-impressionists. This is the first occasion on which an attempt has been made to collect into a single whole an artistic movement which has been almost more hotly discussed than any, but is now more impartially judged than it used to be, and is beginning to have its real position recognized.
However, these discussions have brought one curious fact to light: no one seems to have any clear idea what impressionism means, and the definitions that have been attempted have satisfied nobody. If impressionism is to be restricted to the use of the Pointillé—that is, to the division of tones on the canvas—the limits prescribed are too narrow; if they are extended, there is no knowing where to stop.
The state of things revealed by the discussion is shown also by the exhibition. In Manet we are bound to acknowledge the masterly painting of the great classics. He shows it in every one of his works, be it the fine portrait of Antonin Proust, the audacious open-air of his Lessiveuse, or the sketch of the famous Bar of the Folies Bergeres, which formerly roused such extraordinary wrath against the painter. In the
1 Translated by Harold Child.
presence of his works, we find it hard to ex lain the opposition of the past; they are plain y in close touch with the solid and fruitful movement that produced men like Delacroix and Courbet in France, and we class them instinctively with the vigorous painting practised by Frans Hals and Velasquez. The revolution that seems particularly to have found definite expression in them is the quest of the beauty of modern life in its most diverse aspects, at a time when classical tradition declared the spectacle to be void both of dignit and beauty. It was a pictorial naturalism an ogous to the literary naturalism of Flaubert, the de Goncourts, and Zola. The actual painting was in a broad and easy style which renewed the tradition of the great masters, as opposed to an official and degenerate academism. This impression is continued when we come to examine the work of Degas. The two admirable portraits of men by this singular artist reveal an austere and great art and a broad and free painting which make him as secure of the future as any of the French nineteenth-century artists. And side by side with these long and lovingly handled works, we come upon silhouettes of dancing girls, dashing pastel sketches, in which the flow of the artificial life of the theatre is spiritually fixed, and in which the connexion with certain caprices of the French eighteenth-century masters, and especially of Watteau, may easily be seen. It is to these French masters, again, that Renoir shows his relationship; some of his works, especially the Loge, are among the finest and best selected in the exhibition. The landscape painters of the impressionist school, too, are descended from the same stock; among them Claude Monet, who, side by side with a solid painting closely attentive to the forms that support his colour, shows a strange falling-off in works where the substance is soft and of no consistency; and, once more, the same French tradition is responsible for Sisley and Pissarro, very unequal painters, sometimes charming and sometimes heavy and blatant in their landscapes.
In the same exhibition with these painters, who belong to the first efforts of impressionism, we have the new-comers: Pierre d’Espagnat, as directly inspired by the Muses with a vision as false and stupid as the feeblest of the classical painters; Vuillard and Bonnard, who are all but caricaturists ; Henri Cross and Seurat, who are not to be tolerated. Last of all, Maurice Denis, with whom everyone in France is violently infatuated; even in official circles they venture to compare him with Puvis de Chavannes, and it needs real courage to take up arms against him.
I am aware that, in refusing to admit his claims, I' am laying myself open to sarcastic remarks, but I cannot see in him anything but a gifted man who has never learned anything, and is incapable of using his gifts. I am certain that the future will speedily consign work so false and so void of interest to oblivion.
Finally, after M. Van Rysselberghe, who shows a masterly skill and knowledge in the process of the division of tones, we come to two artists, curious and incomplete indeed, but exceedingly interestin for the very excess of their practice: Van Gog and Gauguin. Both are dead. Van Gogh was mad, and the lack of mental balance which declared itself in the sickness that terminated his life found earlier expression in his works. His saturated excess Of colour and the violence with which it is laid upon his grimacing and tortured forms resulted nevertheless in a genuine artistic impression. In the case of Gauguin, who died nearly a year ago in Tahiti, his painting, with its saturated and sumptuous tones likeharmonies Of Asiatic fabrics, reveals his composite origin and a vision belonging to another race. In spite of his faulty drawing, in spite of his failings and mistakes, the contemplation Of his works gives the impression of an artist who, in the shock of uncertain powers, possessed impressive gifts not far removed from genius.
From the exhibition as a whole, then, we may draw a conclusion that will help, perhaps, to put the impressionist movement in its proper place in the history of modern art. Its masters belong to the tradition which developed the French art of the nineteenth century; they hold an important place in it, and react equally against the cold academism of the classical schools and the black painting and excessive agitation of the bastard romantics. They upheld the right of modern life to be rendered asthetically, and they restored the feeling for light into the processes of painting. But, as a definite school, their part is played. The pointillé remains a technicality without the suppleness or the variety necessary to maintain its use, and, with the exception of lawless individualities like Van Gogh or Gauguin, the neO-impressionists Show nothing but exhaustion, mannerism, and the artificial cultivation of a tradition of which they have let the fruitful elements slip, and which is dying in their hands.
The chapter of the church of Aerschot is thinking Of rebuilding the marvellous gothic choirstalls in their original form. The work would be very ex nsive, for about 1833 the upper parts of the stal s were taken off and sold to certain antiquaries. They now form one of the finest specimens of wood-carving of the pointed tertiary style in South Kensington Museum. _ '
In order to restore the ancient stalls, the
chapter of the church wishes to take copies of the old woodwork now in the English museum. It is to be hoped that the state will help in the expense, and facilitate the execution of the project. It is to be wished also that, in order to avoid the repetition of this kind of mutilation, the inventory of artistic treasures recently decreed by the Royal Commission on Monuments were drawn up. R. PETRuccr.
NOTES FROM HOLLAND
THE Ryks Museum at Amsterdam, so famous for its rich picture gallery of works by old masters, but until some months ago not very strong in representative works by the new ones, has lately been enabled to exhibit a more complete series by Dutch masters of the 1870 school. The fact is that MRI]. C. J. Drucker, of London, the wellknown co lector, has recently lent to the museum a very fine collection of fourteen pictures and fifteen water-colours by Mauve, \Villiam Maris, Weissenbruch, Neuhuys, and Sir Laurence Alma Tadema. The major part of these works are excellent specimens of Mauve’s art, which could until now only be judged from two pictures.
A temporary exhibition of Dutch woodcuts has been opened in the print department of the same museum. The art of woodcutting was already in very early times exercised in Holland; samples of it are to be found onl in rare books of the fifteenth century, especiaily interesting ones in the Biblia Pauperum, but of these none are exhibited. The earliest ones shown are two anonymous cuts of I5oo—the Mass of S. Gregory, and a bust of Christ, both of a very primitive feeling and execution. But better specimens follow by masters of the first half of the sixteenth century, like Jacob Cornelisz of Oostsanen; Jan Swart, an unknown master of 1522, making diableries in the Flemish style; Cornelis Anthonissen; and last not least, Lucas van Leyden, whose woodcuts are extremely original, while other work displays now and then German influence of Diirer, Aldegrever, etc. The art was carried on during the second half of that century by several masters, and was especially skilfully exercised by Hendrick Goltzius, who often printed his cuts in more than one colour with more blocks. During the sixteenth century Bloemaert, Moreelse, van Sichem, Salomon and Dirck de Bray made good work, which was surpassed however by the highly attractive portraits and landscapes by Jan Lievens. The art thereafter got more and more neglected until recently, when it was successfully taken
.up by Veldheer, Nieuwenkamp, and 'Graadt van