CHAPTER XV.

[12]Died, 1904.

FIG. 66.—MILLET. THE GLEANERS. LOUVRE.FIG. 66.—MILLET. THE GLEANERS. LOUVRE.Please click here for a modern color image

Please click here for a modern color image

Paul Baudry(1828-1886), though a disciple of line, was not precisely a semi-classicist, and perhaps for that reason was superior to any of the academic painters of his time. He was a follower of the old masters in Rome more than theÉcole des Beaux Arts. His subjects, aside from many splendid portraits, were almost all classical, allegorical, or mythological. He was a fine draughtsman, and, what is moreremarkable in conjunction therewith, a fine colorist. He was hardly a great originator, and had not passion, dramatic force, or much sentiment, except such as may be found in his delicate coloring and rhythm of line. Nevertheless he was an artist to be admired for his purity of purpose and breadth of accomplishment. His chief work is to be seen in the Opera at Paris.Puvis de Chavannes(1824-[13]) is quite a different style of painter, and is remarkable for fine delicate tones of color which hold their place well on wall or ceiling, and for a certain grandeur of composition. In his desire to revive the monumental painting of the Renaissance he has met with much praise and much blame. He is an artist of sincerity and learning, and as a wall-painter has no superior in contemporary France.

[13]Died, 1898.

Hébert(1817-1908), an early painter of academic tendencies, andHenner(1829-), fond of form and yet a brushman with an idyllic feeling for light and color in dark surroundings, are painters who may come under the semi-classic grouping.Lefebvre(1834-) is probably the most pronounced in academic methods among the present men, a draughtsman of ability.

PORTRAIT AND FIGURE PAINTERS:Under this heading may be included those painters who stand by themselves, showing no positive preference for either the classic or romantic followings.Bonnat(1833-) has painted all kinds of subjects—genre, figure, and historical pieces—but is perhaps best known as a portrait-painter. He has done forcible work. Some of it indeed is astonishing in its realistic modelling—the accentuation of light and shadow often causing the figures to advance unnaturally. From this feature and from his detail he has been known for years as a "realist." His anatomical Christ on the Cross and mural paintings in the Pantheon are examples. As a portrait-painter he is acceptable, if at times a little raw in color. Another portrait-painter of celebrity isCarolus-Duran(1837-). He is ratherstartling at times in his portrayal of robes and draperies, has a facility of the brush that is frequently deceptive, and in color is sometimes vivid. He has had great success as a teacher, and is, all told, a painter of high rank.Delaunay(1828-1892) in late years painted little besides portraits, and was one of the conservatives of French art.Laurens(1838-) has been more of a historical painter than the others, and has dealt largely with death scenes. He is often spoken of as "the painter of the dead," a man of sound training and excellent technical power.Regnault(1843-1871) was a figure andgenrepainter with much feeling for oriental light and color, who unfortunately was killed in battle at twenty-seven years of age. He was an artist of promise, and has left several notable canvases. Among the younger men who portray the historical subject in an elevated style mention should be made ofCormon(1845-),Benjamin-Constant(1845-[14]), andRochegrosse. As painters of portraitsAman-JeanandCarrière[15]have long held rank, and each succeeding Salon brings new portraitists to the front.

[14]Died, 1902.

[15]Died, 1906.

THE REALISTS:About the time of the appearance of Millet, say 1848, there also came to the front a man who scorned both classicism and romanticism, and maintained that the only model and subject of art should be nature. This man,Courbet(1819-1878), really gave a third tendency to the art of this century in France, and his influence undoubtedly had much to do with modifying both the classic and romantic tendencies. Courbet was a man of arrogant, dogmatic disposition, and was quite heartily detested during his life, but that he was a painter of great ability few will deny. His theory was the abolition of both sentiment and academic law, and the taking of nature just as it was, with all its beauties and all its deformities. This, too, was his practice to a certain extent. His art is material, and yet at times lofty in conception even to the sublime. And while he believed in realism he did not believe in petty detail, but rather in thegreat truths of nature. These he saw with a discerning eye and portrayed with a masterful brush. He believed in what he saw only, and had more the observing than the reflective or emotional disposition. As a technician he was coarse but superbly strong, handling sky, earth, air, with the ease and power of one well trained in his craft. His subjects were many—the peasantry of France, landscape, and the sea holding prominent places—and his influence, though not direct because he had no pupils of consequence, has been most potent with the late men.

FIG. 67.—CABANEL. PHÆDRA.FIG. 67.—CABANEL. PHÆDRA.Please click here for a modern color image

Please click here for a modern color image

The young painter of to-day who does things in a "realistic" way is frequently met with in French art.L'hermitte(1844-),Julien Dupré(1851-), and others have handled the peasant subject with skill, after the Millet-Courbet initiative; andBastien-Lepage(1848-1884) excited a good deal of admiration in his lifetime for the truth and evident sincerity of his art. Bastien's point of view was realisticenough, but somewhat material. He never handled the large composition with success, but in small pieces and in portraits he was quite above criticism. His following among the young men was considerable, and the so-called impressionists have ranked him among their disciples or leaders.

PAINTERS OF MILITARY SCENES, GENRE, ETC.:The art ofMeissonier(1815-1891), while extremely realistic in modern detail, probably originated from a study of the seventeenth-century Dutchmen like Terburg and Metsu. It does not portray low life, but rather the half-aristocratic—the scholar, the cavalier, the gentleman of leisure. This is done on a small scale with microscopic nicety, and really more in the historical than thegenrespirit. Single figures and interiors were his preference, but he also painted a cycle of Napoleonic battle-pictures with much force. There is little or no sentiment about his work—little more than in that of Gérôme. His success lay in exact technical accomplishment. He drew well, painted well, and at times was a superior colorist. His art is more admired by the public than by the painters; but even the latter do not fail to praise his skill of hand. He was a great craftsman in the infinitely little. As a great artist his rank is still open to question.

Thegenrepainting of fashionable life has been carried out by many followers of Meissonier, whose names need not be mentioned since they have not improved upon their forerunner.Toulmouche(1829-),Leloir(1843-1884),Vibert(1840-),Bargue(?-1883), and others, though somewhat different from Meissonier, belong among those painters ofgenrewho love detail, costumes, stories, and pretty faces. Among the painters of militarygenremention should be made ofDe Neuville(1836-1885),Berne-Bellecour(1838-),Detaille(1848-), andAimé-Morot(1850-), all of them painters of merit.

Quite a different style of painting—half figure-piece halfgenre—is to be found in the work ofRibot(1823-), a strong painter, remarkable for his apposition of high flesh lights with deep shadows, after the manner of Ribera, the Spanish painter.Roybet(1840-) is fond of rich stuffs and tapestries with velvet-clad characters in interiors, out of which he makes good color effects.Bonvin(1817-1887) andMettlinghave painted the interior with small figures, copper-kettles, and other still-life that have given brilliancy to their pictures. As a still-life painterVollon(1833-) has never had a superior. His fruits, flowers, armors, even his small marines and harbor pieces, are painted with one of the surest brushes of this century. He is called the "painter's painter," and is a man of great force in handling color, and in large realistic effect.DantanandFrianthave both produced canvases showing figures in interiors.

A number of excellentgenrepainters have been claimed by the impressionists as belonging to their brotherhood. There is little to warrant the claim, except the adoption to some extent of the modern ideas of illumination and flat painting.Dagnan-Bouveret(1852-) is one of these men, a good draughtsman, and a finished clean painter who by his recent use of high color finds himself occasionally looked upon as an impressionist. As a matter of fact he is one of the most conservative of the moderns—a man of feeling and imagination, and a fine technician.Fantin-Latour(1836-1904) is half romantic, half allegorical in subject, and in treatment oftentimes designedly vague and shadowy, more suggestive than realistic.Duez(1843-) andGervex(1848-) are perhaps nearer to impressionism in their works than the others, but they are not at all advance advocates of this latest phase of art. In addition there areCottetandHenri Martin.

FIG. 68.—MEISSONIER. NAPOLEON IN 1814.FIG. 68.—MEISSONIER. NAPOLEON IN 1814.

THE IMPRESSIONISTS:The name is a misnomer. Every painter is an impressionist in so far as he records his impressions, and all art is impressionistic. WhatManet(1833-1883), the leader of the original movement, meant to say wasthat nature should not be painted as it actually is, but as it "impresses" the painter. He and his few followers tried to change the name to Independents, but the original name has clung to them and been mistakenly fastened to a present band of landscape painters who are seeking effects of light and air and should be called luminists if it is necessary for them to be named at all. Manet was extravagant in method and disposed toward low life for a subject, which has always militated against his popularity; but he was a very important man for his technical discoveries regarding the relations of light and shadow, the flat appearance of nature, the exact value of color tones. Some of his works, like The Boy with a Sword and The ToreadorDead, are excellent pieces of painting. The higher imaginative qualities of art Manet made no great effort at attaining.

Degasstands quite by himself, strong in effects of motion, especially with race-horses, fine in color, and a delightful brushman in such subjects as ballet-girls and scenes from the theatre.Besnardis one of the best of the present men. He deals with the figure, and is usually concerned with the problem of harmonizing color under conflicting lights, such as twilight and lamplight.BéraudandRaffaelliare exceedingly clever in street scenes and character pieces;Pissarro[16]handles the peasantry in high color;Brown(1829-1890), the race-horse, andRenoir, the middle class of social life.Caillebotte,Roll,Forain, andMiss Cassatt, an American, are also classed with the impressionists.

[16]Died, 1903.

IMPRESSIONIST LANDSCAPE PAINTERS:Of recent years there has been a disposition to change the key of light in landscape painting, to get nearer the truth of nature in the height of light and in the height of shadows. In doing thisClaude Monet, the present leader of the movement, has done away with the dark brown or black shadow and substituted the light-colored shadow, which is nearer the actual truth of nature. In trying to raise the pitch of light he has not been quite so successful, though accomplishing something. His method is to use pure prismatic colors on the principle that color is light in a decomposed form, and that its proper juxtaposition on canvas will recompose into pure light again. Hence the use of light shadows and bright colors. The aim of these modern men is chiefly to gain the effect of light and air. They do not apparently care for subject, detail, or composition.

At present their work is in the experimental stage, but from the way in which it is being accepted and followed by the painters of to-day we may be sure the movement is of considerable importance. There will probably be a reactionin favor of more form and solidity than the present men give, but the high key of light will be retained. There are so many painters following these modern methods, not only in France but all over the world, that a list of their names would be impossible. In FranceSisleywith Monet are the two important landscapists. In marinesBoudinandMontenardshould be mentioned.

PRINCIPAL WORKS:The modern French painters are seen to advantage in the Louvre, Luxembourg, Pantheon, Sorbonne, and the municipal galleries of France. Also Metropolitan Museum New York, Chicago Art Institute, Boston Museum, and many private collections in France and America. Consult for works in public or private hands, Champlin and Perkins,Cyclopedia of Painters and Paintings, under names of artists.

Books Recommended: Bermudez,Diccionario de las Bellas Artes en España; Davillier,Mémoire de Velasquez; Davillier,Fortuny; Eusebi,Los Differentes Escuelas de Pintura; Ford,Handbook of Spain; Head,History of Spanish and French Schools of Painting; Justi,Velasquez and his Times; Lefort,Velasquez; Lefort,Francisco Goya; Lefort,Murillo et son École; Lefort,La Peinture Espagnole; Palomino de Castro y Velasco,Vidas de los Pintores y Estatuarios Eminentes Españoles; Passavant,Die Christliche Kunst in Spanien; Plon,Les Maîtres Italiens au Service de la Maison d'Autriche; Stevenson,Velasquez; Stirling,Annals of the Artists of Spain; Stirling,Velasquez and his Works; Tubino,El Arte y los Artistas contemporáneos en la Peninsula; Tubino,Murillo; Viardot,Notices sur les Principaux Peintres de l'Espagne; Yriarte,Goya, sa Biographie, etc.

SPANISH ART MOTIVES:What may have been the early art of Spain we are at a loss to conjecture. The reigns of the Moor, the Iconoclast, and, finally, the Inquisitor, have left little that dates before the fourteenth century. The miniatures and sacred relics treasured in the churches and said to be of the apostolic period, show the traces of a much later date and a foreign origin. Even when we come down to the fifteenth century and meet with art produced in Spain, we have a following of Italy or the Netherlands. In methods and technic it was derivative more than original, though almost from the beginning peculiarly Spanish in spirit.

FIG. 69.—SANCHEZ COELLO. CLARA EUGENIA, DAUGHTER OF PHILIP II. MADRID.FIG. 69.—SANCHEZ COELLO. CLARA EUGENIA, DAUGHTER OF PHILIP II. MADRID.Please click here for a modern color image

Please click here for a modern color image

That spirit was a dark and savage one, a something thatcringed under the lash of the Church, bowed before the Inquisition, and played the executioner with the paint-brush. The bulk of Spanish art was Church art, done under ecclesiastical domination, and done in form without question or protest. The religious subject ruled. True enough, there was portraiture of nobility, and under Philip and Velasquez a half-monarchical art of military scenes andgenre; but this was not the bent of Spanish painting as a whole. Even in late days, when Velasquez was reflecting the haughty court, Murillo was more widely and nationallyreflecting the believing provinces and the Church faith of the people. It is safe to say, in a general way, that the Church was responsible for Spanish art, and that religion was its chief motive.

There was no revived antique, little of the nude or the pagan, little of consequence in landscape, little, until Velasquez's time, of the real and the actual. An ascetic view of life, faith, and the hereafter prevailed. The pietistic, the fervent, and the devout were not so conspicuous as the morose, the ghastly, and the horrible. The saints and martyrs, the crucifixions and violent deaths, were eloquent of the torture-chamber. It was more ecclesiasticism by blood and violence than Christianity by peace and love. And Spain welcomed this. For of all the children of the Church she was the most faithful to rule, crushing out heresy with an iron hand, gaining strength from the Catholic reaction, and upholding the Jesuits and the Inquisition.

METHODS OF PAINTING:Spanish art worthy of mention did not appear until the fifteenth century. At that time Spain was in close relations with the Netherlands, and Flemish painting was somewhat followed. How much the methods of the Van Eycks influenced Spain would be hard to determine, especially as these Northern methods were mixed with influences coming from Italy. Finally, the Italian example prevailed by reason of Spanish students in Italy and Italian painters in Spain. Florentine line, Venetian color, and Neapolitan light-and-shade ruled almost everywhere, and it was not until the time of Velasquez—the period just before the eighteenth-century decline—that distinctly Spanish methods, founded on nature, really came forcibly to the front.

SPANISH SCHOOLS OF PAINTING:There is difficulty in classifying these schools of painting because our present knowledge of them is limited. Isolated somewhat from the restof Europe, the Spanish painters have never been critically studied as the Italians have been, and what is at present known about the schools must be accepted subject to critical revision hereafter.

FIG. 70.—MURILLO. ST. ANTHONY OF PADUA. BERLIN.FIG. 70.—MURILLO. ST. ANTHONY OF PADUA. BERLIN.

The earliest school seems to have been made up from a gathering of artists at Toledo, who limned, carved, and gilded in the cathedral; but this school was not of long duration. It was merged into the Castilian school, which, after the building of Madrid, made its home in that capital and drew its forces from the towns of Toledo, Valladolid, and Badajoz. The Andalusian school, which rose about the middle of the sixteenth century, was made up from the local schools of Seville, Cordova, and Granada. TheValencian school, to the southeast, rose about the same time, and was finally merged into the Andalusian. The Aragonese school, to the east, was small and of no great consequence, though existing in a feeble way to the end of the seventeenth century. The painters of these schools are not very strongly marked apart by methods or school traditions, and perhaps the divisions would better be looked upon as more geographical than otherwise. None of the schools really began before the sixteenth century, though there are names of artists and some extant pictures before that date, and with the seventeenth century all art in Spain seems to have centred about Madrid.

Spanish painting started into life concurrently with the rise to prominence of Spain as a political kingdom. What, if any, direct effect the maritime discoveries, the conquests of Granada and Naples, the growth of literature, and the decline of Italy, may have had upon Spanish painting can only be conjectured; but certainly the sudden advance of the nation politically and socially was paralleled by the advance of its art.

THE CASTILIAN SCHOOL:This school probably had no so-called founder. It was a growth from early art traditions at Toledo, and afterward became the chief school of the kingdom owing to the patronage of Philip II. and Philip IV. at Madrid. The first painter of importance in the school seems to have beenAntonio Rincon(1446?-1500?). He is sometimes spoken of as the father of Spanish painting, and as having studied in Italy with Castagno and Ghirlandajo, but there is little foundation for either statement. He painted chiefly at Toledo, painted portraits of Ferdinand and Isabella, and had some skill in hard drawing.Berruguete(1480?-1561) studied with Michael Angelo, and is supposed to have helped him in the Vatican. He afterward returned to Spain, painted many altar-pieces, and was patronized as painter, sculptor, and architect byCharles V. and Philip II. He was probably the first to introduce pure Italian methods into Spain, with some coldness and dryness of coloring and handling.Becerra(1520?-1570) was born in Andalusia, but worked in Castile, and was a man of Italian training similar to Berruguete. He was an exceptional man, perhaps, in his use of mythological themes and nude figures.

There is not a great deal known aboutMorales(1509?-1586), called "the Divine," except that he was allied to the Castilian school, and painted devotional heads of Christ with the crown of thorns, and many afflicted and weeping madonnas. There was Florentine drawing in his work, great regard for finish, and something of Correggio's softness in shadows pitched in a browner key. His sentiment was rather exaggerated.Sanchez-Coello(1513?-1590) was painter and courtier to Philip II., and achieved reputation as a portrait-painter, though also doing some altar-pieces. It is doubtful whether he ever studied in Italy, but in Spain he was for a time with Antonio Moro, and probably learned from him something of rich costumes, ermines, embroideries, and jewels, for which his portraits were remarkable.Navarette(1526?-1579), called "El Mudo" (the dumb one), certainly was in Italy for something like twenty years, and was there a disciple of Titian, from whom he doubtless learned much of color and the free flow of draperies. He was one of the best of the middle-period painters.Theotocopuli(1548?-1625), called "El Greco" (the Greek), was another Venetian-influenced painter, with enough Spanish originality about him to make most of his pictures striking in color and drawing.Tristan(1586-1640) was his best follower.

FIG. 71.—RIBERA. ST. AGNES. DRESDEN.FIG. 71.—RIBERA. ST. AGNES. DRESDEN.Please click here for a modern color image

Please click here for a modern color image

Velasquez(1599-1660) is the greatest name in the history of Spanish painting. With him Spanish art took upon itself a decidedly naturalistic and national stamp. Before his time Italy had been freely imitated; but though Velasquezhimself was in Italy for quite a long time, and intimately acquainted with great Italian art, he never seemed to have been led away from his own individual way of seeing and doing. He was a pupil of Herrera, afterward with Pacheco, and learned much from Ribera and Tristan, but more from a direct study of nature than from all the others. He was in a broad sense a realist—a man who recorded the material and the actual without emendation or transposition. He has never been surpassed in giving the solidity and substance of form and the placing of objects in atmosphere. And this, not in a small, finical way, but with a breadth of view and of treatment which are to-day the despair of painters. There was nothing of the ethereal, the spiritual,the pietistic, or the pathetic about him. He never for a moment left the firm basis of reality. Standing upon earth he recorded the truths of the earth, but in their largest, fullest, most universal forms.

Technically his was a master-hand, doing all things with ease, giving exact relations of colors and lights, and placing everything so perfectly that no addition or alteration is thought of. With the brush he was light, easy, sure. The surface looks as though touched once, no more. It is the perfection of handling through its simplicity and certainty, and has not the slightest trace of affectation or mannerism. He was one of the few Spanish painters who were enabled to shake off the yoke of the Church. Few of his canvases are religious in subject. Under royal patronage he passed almost all of his life in painting portraits of the royal family, ministers of state, and great dignitaries. As a portrait-painter he is more widely known than as a figure-painter. Nevertheless he did many canvases like The Tapestry Weavers and The Surrender at Breda, which attest his remarkable genius in that field; and even in landscape, ingenre, in animal painting, he was a very superior man. In fact Velasquez is one of the few great painters in European history for whom there is nothing but praise. He was the full-rounded complete painter, intensely individual and self-assertive, and yet in his art recording in a broad way the Spanish type and life. He was the climax of Spanish painting, and after him there was a rather swift decline, as had been the case in the Italian schools.

Mazo(1610?-1667), pupil and son-in-law of Velasquez, was one of his most facile imitators, andCarreño de Miranda(1614-1685) was influenced by Velasquez, and for a time his assistant. The Castilian school may be said to have closed with these late men and withClaudio Coello(1635?-1693), a painter with a style founded on Titian and Rubens, whose best work was of extraordinary power. Spanishpainting went out with Spanish power, and only isolated men of small rank remained.

ANDALUSIAN SCHOOL:This school came into existence about the middle of the sixteenth century. Its chief centre was at Seville, and its chief patron the Church rather than the king.Vargas(1502-1568) was probably the real founder of the school, thoughDe Castro(fl. 1454) and others preceded him. Vargas was a man of much reputation and ability in his time, and introduced Italian methods and elegance into the Andalusian school after twenty odd years of residence in Italy. He is said to have studied under Perino del Vaga, and there is some sweetness of face and grace of form about his work that point that way, though his composition suggests Correggio. Most of his frescos have perished; some of his canvases are still in existence.

Cespedes(1538?-1608) is little known through extant works, but he achieved fame in many departments during his life, and is said to have been in Italy under Florentine influence. His coloring was rather cold, and his drawing large and flat. The best early painter of the school wasRoelas(1558?-1625), the inspirer of Murillo and the master of Zurbaran. He is supposed to have studied at Venice, because of his rich, glowing color. Most of his works are religious and are found chiefly at Seville. He was greatly patronized by the Jesuits.Pacheco(1571-1654) was more of a pedant than a painter, a man of rule, who to-day might be written down an academician. His drawing was hard, and perhaps the best reason for his being remembered is that he was one of the masters and the father-in-law of Velasquez. His rival,Herrera the Elder(1576?-1656) was a stronger man—in fact, the most original artist of his school. He struck off by himself and created a bold realism with a broad brush that anticipated Velasquez—in fact, Velasquez was under him for a time.

The pure Spanish school in Andalusia, as distinct fromItalian imitation, may be said to have started with Herrera. It was further advanced by another independent painter,Zurbaran(1598-1662), a pupil of Roelas. He was a painter of the emaciated monk in ecstasy, and many other rather dismal religious subjects expressive of tortured rapture. From using a rather dark shadow he acquired the name of the Spanish Caravaggio. He had a good deal of Caravaggio's strength, together with a depth and breadth of color suggestive of the Venetians.Cano(1601-1667), though he never was in Italy, had the name of the Spanish Michael Angelo, probably because he was sculptor, painter, and architect. His painting was rather sharp in line and statuesque in pose, with a coloring somewhat like that of Van Dyck. It was eclectic rather than original work.

FIG. 72.—FORTUNY. SPANISH MARRIAGE.FIG. 72.—FORTUNY. SPANISH MARRIAGE.

Murillo(1618-1682) is generally placed at the head of the Andalusian school, as Velasquez at the head of the Castilian. There is good reason for it, for though Murillo was not the great painter he was sometime supposed, yet he wasnot the weak man his modern critics would make him out. A religious painter largely, though doing somegenresubjects like his beggar-boy groups, he sought for religious fervor and found, only too often, sentimentality. His madonnas are usually after the Carlo Dolci pattern, though never so excessive in sentiment. This was not the case with his earlier works, mostly of humble life, which were painted in rather a hard, positive manner. Later on he became misty, veiled in light and effeminate in outline, though still holding grace. His color varied with his early and later styles. It was usually gay and a little thin. While basing his work on nature like Velasquez, he never had the supreme poise of that master, either mentally or technically; howbeit he was an excellent painter, who perhaps justly holds second place in Spanish art.

SCHOOL OF VALENCIA:This school rose contemporary with the Andalusian school, into which it was finally merged after the importance of Madrid had been established. It was largely modelled upon Italian painting, as indeed were all the schools of Spain at the start.Juan de Joanes(1507?-1579) apparently was its founder, a man who painted a good portrait, but in other respects was only a fair imitator of Raphael, whom he had studied at Rome. A stronger man wasFrancisco de Ribalta(1550?-1628), who was for a time in Italy under the Caracci, and learned from them free draughtsmanship and elaborate composition. He was also fond of Sebastiano del Piombo, and in his best works (at Valencia) reflected him. Ribalta gave an early training toRibera(1588-1656), who was the most important man of this school. In reality Ribera was more Italian than Valencian, for he spent the greater part of his life in Italy, where he was called Lo Spagnoletto, and was greatly influenced by Caravaggio. He was a Spaniard in the horrible subjects that he chose, but in coarse strength of line, heaviness of shadows, harsh handling of the brush, he was a trueNeapolitan Darkling. A pronounced mannerist he was no less a man of strength, and even in his shadow-saturated colors a painter with the color instinct. In Italy his influence in the time of the Decadence was wide-spread, and in Spain his Italian pupil, Giordano, introduced his methods for late imitation. There were no other men of much rank in the Valencian school, and, as has been said, the school was eventually merged in Andalusian painting.

EIGHTEENTH AND NINETEENTH-CENTURY PAINTING IN SPAIN:Almost directly after the passing of Velasquez and Murillo Spanish art failed. The eighteenth-century, as in Italy, was quite barren of any considerable art until near its close. ThenGoya(1746-1828) seems to have made a partial restoration of painting. He was a man of peculiarly Spanish turn of mind, fond of the brutal and the bloody, picturing inquisition scenes, bull-fights, battle pieces, and revelling in caricature, sarcasm, and ridicule. His imagination was grotesque and horrible, but as a painter his art was based on the natural, and was exceedingly strong. In brush-work he followed Velasquez; in a peculiar forcing of contrasts in light and dark he was apparently quite himself, though possibly influenced by Ribera's work. His best work shows in his portraits and etchings.

After Goya's death Spanish art, such as it was, rather followed France, with the extravagant classicism of David as a model. What was produced may be seen to this day in the Madrid Museum. It does not call for mention here. About the beginning of the 1860's Spanish painting made a new advance withMariano Fortuny(1838-1874). In his early years he worked at historical painting, but later on he went to Algiers and Rome, finding his true vent in a bright sparkling painting ofgenresubjects, oriental scenes, streets, interiors, single figures, and the like. He excelled in color, sunlight effects, and particularly in a vivacious facile handling of the brush. His work is brilliant, and in his late productions often spotty from excessive use of points of light in high color. He was a technician of much brilliancy and originality, his work exciting great admiration in his day, and leading the younger painters of Spain into that ornate handling visible in their works at the present time. Many of these latter, from association with art and artists in Paris, have adopted French methods, and hardly show such a thing as Spanish nationality. Fortuny's brother-in-law,Madrazo(1841-), is an example of a Spanish painter turned French in his methods—a facile and brilliant portrait-painter.Zamacois(1842-1871) died early, but with a reputation as a successful portrayer of seventeenth-century subjects a little after the style of Meissonier and not unlike Gérôme. He was a good colorist and an excellent painter of textures.

FIG. 73.—MADRAZO, UNMASKED.FIG. 73.—MADRAZO, UNMASKED.

The historical scene of Mediæval or Renaissance times, pageants and fêtes with rich costume, fine architecture and vivid effects of color, are characteristic of a number of the modern Spaniards—Villegas,Pradilla,Alvarez. As a general thing their canvases are a little flashy, likely to please at first sight but grow wearisome after a time.Palmarolihas astyle that resembles a mixture of Fortuny and Meissonier; and some other painters, likeLuis Jiminez Aranda,Sorolla,Zuloaga,Anglada,Garcia y Remos,Vierge,Roman Ribera, andDomingo, have done excellent work. In landscape and Venetian scenesRicoleads among the Spaniards with a vivacity and brightness not always seen to good advantage in his late canvases.

PRINCIPAL WORKS:Generally speaking, Spanish art cannot be seen to advantage outside of Spain. Both its ancient and modern masterpieces are at Madrid, Seville, Toledo, and elsewhere. The Royal Gallery at Madrid has the most and the best examples.Castilian School—Rincon, altar-piece church of Robleda de Chavilla;Berruguete, altar-pieces Saragossa, Valladolid, Madrid, Toledo;Morales, Madrid and Louvre;Sanchez-Coello, Madrid and Brussels Mus.;Navarette, Escorial, Madrid, St. Petersburg;Theotocopuli, Cathedral and S. Tomé Toledo, Madrid Mus.;Velasquez, best works in Madrid Mus., Escorial, Salamanca, Montpensier Gals., Nat. Gal. Lon., Infanta Marguerita Louvre, Borro portrait (?) Berlin, Innocent X. Doria Rome;Mazo, landscapes Madrid Mus.;Carreño de Miranda, Madrid Mus.;Claudio Coello, Escorial, Madrid, Brussels, Berlin, and Munich Mus.Andalusian School—Vargas, Seville Cathedral;Cespedes, Cordova Cathedral;Roelas, S. Isidore Cathedral, Museum Seville;Pacheco, Madrid Mus.;Herrera, Seville Cathedral and Mus. and Archbishop's Palace, Dresden Mus.;Zurbaran, Seville Cathedral and Mus. Madrid, Dresden, Louvre, Nat. Gal. Lon.;Cano, Madrid, Seville Mus. and Cathedral, Berlin, Dresden, Munich;Murillo, best pictures in Madrid Mus. and Acad. of S. Fernando Madrid, Seville Mus. Hospital and Capuchin Church, Louvre, Nat. Gal. Lon., Dresden, Munich, Hermitage.Valencian School—Juan de Joanes, Madrid Mus., Cathedral Valencia, Hermitage;Ribalta, Madrid and Valencian Mus., Hermitage;Ribera, Louvre, Nat. Gal. Lon., Dresden, Naples, Hermitage, and other European museums, chief works at Madrid.Modern Men and Their Works—Goya, Madrid Mus., Acad. of S. Fernando, Valencian Cathedral and Mus., two portraits in Louvre. The works of the contemporary painters are largely in private hands where reference to them is of little use to the average student. Thirty Fortunys are in the collection of William H. Stewart in Paris. His best work, The Spanish Marriage, belongs to Madame de Cassin, in Paris. Examples of Villegas, Madrazo, Rico, Domingo, and others, in the Vanderbilt Gallery, Metropolitan Mus., New York; Boston, Chicago, and Philadelphia Mus.

Castilian School—Rincon, altar-piece church of Robleda de Chavilla;Berruguete, altar-pieces Saragossa, Valladolid, Madrid, Toledo;Morales, Madrid and Louvre;Sanchez-Coello, Madrid and Brussels Mus.;Navarette, Escorial, Madrid, St. Petersburg;Theotocopuli, Cathedral and S. Tomé Toledo, Madrid Mus.;Velasquez, best works in Madrid Mus., Escorial, Salamanca, Montpensier Gals., Nat. Gal. Lon., Infanta Marguerita Louvre, Borro portrait (?) Berlin, Innocent X. Doria Rome;Mazo, landscapes Madrid Mus.;Carreño de Miranda, Madrid Mus.;Claudio Coello, Escorial, Madrid, Brussels, Berlin, and Munich Mus.

Andalusian School—Vargas, Seville Cathedral;Cespedes, Cordova Cathedral;Roelas, S. Isidore Cathedral, Museum Seville;Pacheco, Madrid Mus.;Herrera, Seville Cathedral and Mus. and Archbishop's Palace, Dresden Mus.;Zurbaran, Seville Cathedral and Mus. Madrid, Dresden, Louvre, Nat. Gal. Lon.;Cano, Madrid, Seville Mus. and Cathedral, Berlin, Dresden, Munich;Murillo, best pictures in Madrid Mus. and Acad. of S. Fernando Madrid, Seville Mus. Hospital and Capuchin Church, Louvre, Nat. Gal. Lon., Dresden, Munich, Hermitage.

Valencian School—Juan de Joanes, Madrid Mus., Cathedral Valencia, Hermitage;Ribalta, Madrid and Valencian Mus., Hermitage;Ribera, Louvre, Nat. Gal. Lon., Dresden, Naples, Hermitage, and other European museums, chief works at Madrid.

Modern Men and Their Works—Goya, Madrid Mus., Acad. of S. Fernando, Valencian Cathedral and Mus., two portraits in Louvre. The works of the contemporary painters are largely in private hands where reference to them is of little use to the average student. Thirty Fortunys are in the collection of William H. Stewart in Paris. His best work, The Spanish Marriage, belongs to Madame de Cassin, in Paris. Examples of Villegas, Madrazo, Rico, Domingo, and others, in the Vanderbilt Gallery, Metropolitan Mus., New York; Boston, Chicago, and Philadelphia Mus.

Books Recommended: Busscher,Recherches sur les Peintres Gantois; Crowe and Cavalcaselle,Early Flemish Painters; Cust,Van Dyck; Dehaisnes,L'Art dans la Flandre; Du Jardin,L'art Flamand; Eisenmann,The Brothers Van Eyck; Fétis,Les Artistes Belges à l'Étranger; Fromentin,Old Masters of Belgium and Holland; Gerrits,Rubens zyn Tyd, etc.; Guiffrey,Van Dyck; Hasselt,Histoire de Rubens; (Waagen's) Kügler,Handbook of Painting—German, Flemish, and Dutch Schools; Lemonnier,Histoire des Arts en Belgique; Mantz,Adrien Brouwer; Michel,Rubens; Michiels,Rubens en l'École d'Anvers; Michiels,Histoire de la Peinture Flamande; Stevenson,Rubens; Van den Branden,Geschiedenis der Antwerpsche Schilderschool; Van Mander,Le Livre des Peintres; Waagen,Uber Hubert und Jan Van Eyck; Waagen,Peter Paul Rubens; Wauters,Rogier van der Weyden; Wauters,La Peinture Flamande; Weale,Hans Memling(Arundel Soc.); Weale,Notes sur Jean Van Eyck.

THE FLEMISH PEOPLE:Individually and nationally the Flemings were strugglers against adverse circumstances from the beginning. A realistic race with practical ideas, a people rather warm of impulse and free in habits, they combined some German sentiment with French liveliness and gayety. The solidarity of the nation was not accomplished until after 1385, when the Dukes of Burgundy began to extend their power over the Low Countries. Then the Flemish people became strong enough to defy both Germany and France, and wealthy enough, through their commerce with Spain, Italy, and France to encourage art not only at the Ducal court but in the churches, and among the citizens of the various towns.

FIG. 74.—VAN EYCKS. ST. BAVON ALTAR-PIECE (WING). BERLIN.FIG. 74.—VAN EYCKS. ST. BAVON ALTAR-PIECE (WING). BERLIN.Please click here for a modern color image

Please click here for a modern color image

FLEMISH SUBJECTS AND METHODS:As in all the countries of Europe, the early Flemish painting pictured Christian subjects primarily. The great bulk of it was church altar-pieces, though side by side with this was an admirable portraiture, some knowledge of landscape, and some exposition of allegorical subjects. In means and methods it was quite original. The early history is lost, but if Flemish painting was beholden to the painting of any other nation, it was to the miniature painting of France. There is, however, no positive record of this. The Flemings seem to have begun by themselves, and pictured the life about them in their own way. They were apparently not influenced at first by Italy. There were no antique influences, no excavated marbles to copy, no Byzantine traditions leftto follow. At first their art was exact and minute in detail, but not well grasped in the mass. The compositions were huddled, the landscapes pure but finical, the figures inclined to slimness, awkwardness, and angularity in the lines of form or drapery, and uncertain in action. To offset this there was a positive realism in textures, perspective, color, tone, light, and atmosphere. The effect of the whole was odd and strained, but the effect of the part was to convince one that the Flemish painters were excellent craftsmen in detail, skilled with the brush, and shrewd observers of nature in a purely picturesque way.

To the Flemish painters of the fifteenth century belongs, not the invention of oil-painting, for it was known before their time, but its acceptable application in picture-making. They applied oil with color to produce brilliancy and warmth of effect, to insure firmness and body in the work, and to carry out textural effects in stuffs, marbles, metals, and the like. So far as we know there never was much use of distemper, or fresco-work upon the walls of buildings. The oil medium came into vogue when the miniatures and illuminations of the early days had expanded into panel pictures. The size of the miniature was increased, but the minute method of finishing was not laid aside. Some time afterward painting with oil upon canvas was adopted.

SCHOOL OF BRUGES:Painting in Flanders starts abruptly with the fifteenth century. What there was before that time more than miniatures and illuminations is not known. Time and the Iconoclasts have left no remains of consequence. Flemish art for us begins withHubert van Eyck(?-1426) and his younger brotherJan van Eyck(?-1440). The elder brother is supposed to have been the better painter, because the most celebrated work of the brothers—the St. Bavon altar-piece, parts of which are in Ghent, Brussels, and Berlin—bears the inscription that Hubert began itand Jan finished it. Hubert was no doubt an excellent painter, but his pictures are few and there is much discussion whether he or Jan painted them. For historical purposes Flemish art was begun, and almost completed, by Jan van Eyck. He had all the attributes of the early men, and was one of the most perfect of Flemish painters. He painted real forms and real life, gave them a setting in true perspective and light, and put in background landscapes with a truthful if minute regard for the facts. His figures in action had some awkwardness, they were small of head, slim of body, and sometimes stumbled; but his modelling of faces, his rendering of textures in cloth, metal, stone, and the like, his delicate yet firmfacturewere all rather remarkable for his time. None of this early Flemish art has the grandeur of Italian composition, but in realistic detail, in landscape, architecture, figure, and dress, in pathos, sincerity, and sentiment it is unsurpassed by any fifteenth-century art.

Back to Index Next