^ CENTf Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2017 with funding from Getty Research Institute https://archive.org/details/goyaasportraitpaOOberu_O I GOYA AS PORTRAIT PAINTER TRANSLATED FROM THE SPANISH BY SELWYN BRINTON, M.A. GOYA AS A YOUNG MAN. SELF-PORTRAIT Plate I (P- 15: GOYA AS PORTRAIT PAINTER BY A. DE BERUETE Y MORET MD 813 &rfc55 BOSTON AND NEW YORK HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY 1922 PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN. HISWICK PRESS: CHARLES WHITTINGIIAM AND GRIGGS (PRINIERS), LTD. TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON. THE J. PAUL GETTY MUSEUM LIBRARY TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE T HE work of translation of the present volume — a study of a great Spanish master of old days by a very well-known Spanish critic of our own time — has been for me one of very special interest. As early as 1905, when I was editor of the Langham Series, I brought to the notice of my publisher, and subsequently myself translated, the volume which appeared in that series from the German of Dr. Richard Muther. There could scarcely be a greater contrast than that between Muther’s volume and the one which it is now my privilege to bring before the English public. In a brilliant synthesis of scarcely more than sixty pages, the German author of “The History of Modern Painting ” created a wonderful picture, both of the artist himself and of the times in which he lived and worked, a picture in which— even if some details might be open to question — the vivid impression seized and held the imagination. The work of Señor D. Aureliano de Beruete y Moret, Director of the Prado Museum, is, on the other hand, a careful, complete, and authoritative analysis of the artist and his work in portraiture, decoration, and engraving, which will be indispensable to the future student or collector of Goya’s work. In the present volume we approach only one side of Goya’s genius. The terrible analyst of his country and mankind in its v 4 2.73 VI FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES weakness, cruelty, or folly, the magician whose pencil or graver can carry us into the land of witches, goblins, and monsters, the Goya of the “Caprichos," the “Desastres de la Guerra,” and the wall paintings of the Quinta is not yet before us. We see here only Goya the portrait painter; but as such the master is no less great. I should say, indeed, with my knowledge of the present work, and after careful personal study when recently in Spain, that he is perhaps the greatest portraitist who ever lived. Not alone this. He comes before us in this volume as the direct ancestor of all that is most real, most alive, in the manifesta- tions of modern art. His deft fingers, guided by the insight of genius, caught up the torch of the past, and perpetuated the tradition handed down in his own land from the days of Greco and Velazquez. This tradition he was to develop in his own marvellous “grey " portraits (of which the finest are those of his son and of his brother-in-law, Francisco Bayeu); this tradition, as Señor de Beruete has here so ably demonstrated, was, in his later work, to be the inspiration of the new movement which arose in Paris from i860 onwards, and with which the names of Monet, Degas, Cezanne, above all of Manet, are intimately and indissolubly connected. To understand this movement we have to go back to Francisco Goya; to understand Goya we shall find authoritative guidance in the present volume. The punctuation — where it exists at all — in those wonderful lettyes intimes of the artist to Martin Zapater I have left unaltered. SELWYN BRINTON. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Né a Fuendetodos (Espagne) Le 30 Mars 1746 EsT MoRT DANS CETTE MAISON Le 16 Avril 1828 T HIS is what we are told by a memorial stone placed at a fair height upon a house of the Cours de l’lntendance, in the city of Bordeaux. These simple words, without any commentary, or indication of the activity for which the man to whom they are dedicated was distinguished, engraved as they are on a modest tablet, escape the notice of the majority of visitors to a city whose essential life is commercial. Likely enough, some passing reader may think Goya to have been an enthusiast, a philanthropist, who had befriended this country and whom chance, no doubt, had caused to be born at Fuendetodos in Spain; then, without thinking further of Goya, a name that would sound to him more Basque than French or Castilian, he will pursue his way. But for those others to whom the name of Goya is a whole evocation, and those are already many in number, the tablet needs no more words or explanation. In that hospitable city, to which destiny had carried him in his last years, there had died, old indeed and infirm, but always active and fruitful, a Spanish genius whose work is a mirror in which is reflected, with faithful and unalterable forms, all the society of his time, from the king down to the beggars, giving us the exact sensation of something that we had thought of in a vague and confused manner. And all this vii FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES viii Goya had expressed with that clearness of diction and with that sincerity which characterizes the great creations of Spain in all the arts. His works, moreover, move us and interest us powerfully through the fact that they are so spontaneous, that they are so alive; and his power of expression, with the character which he knows how to give them, place us in an intimate community of feeling with the artist. In a production so exuberant and so varied as his there will be noticed changes, there will be observed influences working out athwart his manifest originality. The picturesque note, so charm- ing and suggestive, becomes changed for another art more intense and more complex. There is a Goya of the eighteenth century and a Goya of the nineteenth century; and this is not due only to a change of technique, of artistic development which would be perfectly easy to understand. There is something deeper, a change in the creative idea, in the characteristic, the dominant features of his production, which becomes transformed in a sudden and violent manner. Compare those scenes of the tapestries and of his pictures of festive rejoicing, so courtly, so gay and gallant, easy and sometimes even trifling in their conception, with those other scenes which decorated his country house, with the drawings of his old age and with the “ Disasters of War.” 1 1 is spirit had gained in strength, and, nourished by his glow- ing imagination and holding at its disposal a technique marvellously adapted for the expression of his ideas, gave as its result this colossal art of his later years. If we study his work in its relation to the vicissitudes of the artist and with the events of which he was witness, we shall observe the connection between his works and the dates of their creation. His change of life, his progress from those easy years, so gay, so prosperous, to those other sad days of blood and fire, of shame and exile, contributed without doubt to discipline his mind FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES IX u and to arouse his intelligence; while his fondness for the fantastic and his tendency towards the world of visions found a propitious occasion in those moments of invasion and war to carry him beyond himself, until, as he himself has said: “the dream of reason produced monsters.” As artist and creator, in this second aspect of his production, rather of the idea than of the form, he shows himself to us as unequal and frequently incorrect, since he sacrifices everything to attain those qualities. Thus, in unfolding his ideas into lines and masses, and seeking to obtain the spirit which he wishes to communicate to them, he could not subject himself precisely to reality, and therefore to some extent forgets and neglects points of detail, of which he elsewhere shows his entire mastery in produc- tions of the most consummate realism. And, in fact, in this imagi- native art of the expression of ideas, correctness of detail is not the most important quality which is required. The originality of Goya, even the variety of his art, the fact of his not belonging to a glorious moment of Spanish art, and yet not appearing in some ways an isolated genius, make it difficult rightly to place and to assign to his figure its true place in the history of art. Sr. Araujo, who had studied Goya’s works attentively, arrives at the following conclusion: “Goya did not protest against the course which art followed in his time, he did not preach, did not pretend to make any new discovery or to found a school. He felt as he did, saw as he did, understood as he did and so he painted— -that is all.” To accept, however, this statement it would be necessary to believe that great artists arise to some extent by chance; that they appear from time to time in some place or other and create according to their own fancy, uninfluenced either by the race to which they belong or by its tradition or by the school in which they have learned or by the times in which they had lived. Inas- much as this view is totally inadmissible, I consider that the only b X FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES critical attitude possible toward Goya is that which investigates and fully analyses the causes of his feeling, his life, his under- standing and his art. The author of the following pages believes that he has perceived and even felt before certain of the works of Goya something of all this; and to the study of the different phases of the painter, of his changes and the influences which crossed his production, this critical review has been dedicated. This man, who seems so individual and apart, who was born in a hidden corner of the land of Aragon, and who at first sight appears as an isolated and solitary genius, independent, without tradition and without school, is not this if we look closer, but, notwithstanding his originality and his varied outlook, is quite the contrary; he is a Spaniard to the very marrow and a man of his time as much as of his race. His task is in fact the continuation of Spanish painting, of that painting of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries which had been forgotten and superseded by foreign influences in the years preceding those in which he lived. His it is to be the link which was to unite that which was to come with that which had been, determining, at the same time as his own period of transition, those principles of the graphic arts which could form part of the progress of our painting; and hence, as an ultimate result of Spanish creation, of even those elements which later came to influ- ence universal art outside our nation, originating in this way one of the most important phases of what is now called modern art. Really to grasp all this, to appreciate it as a whole, it becomes necessary to study Goya in his numerous phases and aspects. But his work is so vast and so varied that this needed a complex study, and for this reason 1 have preferred in this book to treat only one of those aspects, to describe him as a portrait painter. Being the simplest, the most attractive, and for many reasons the most appropriate point of view to study him chronologically, it was not possible to have commenced otherwise. Some new facts given, the CONDE DE FLORIDABLANCA TO T ATT? T T ÍV FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES xi notice of such and such a date which had been unknown, and the publication of various portraits hitherto not written of or little known, will, I believe, lend to this work an interest which perhaps I shall not succeed in giving to the descriptive side or to my personal comment, despite the enthusiasm and good will that have gone to their making. Madrid. October 1915 . NOTE TO SECOND EDITION. The preceding notice is that which appeared as preface to this book when first it was published three years ago. To-day, in this second edition now offered to the public, I have to make the following observation. Goya: Pintor de Retratos (1916) was the first volume which I proposed to dedi- cate to the study of the great painter; a volume which was followed by Goya: Composiciones y Figuras (1917) and Goya: Grabador (1918). In these two last were published some additions to the first volume which would find a more fitting place in this second edition, were it not that with this edition there was no question of more than revising the present work, the series being completed with the two following volumes. In spite of this — and even perhaps leaving for later the question of the fusion of the three volumes into such form as would impart to the work greater unity and completeness — there will be found in this second edition of Goya: Pintor de Retratos not a few new notes and observations, as well as some corrections, without prejudice to the additions to this same work which appear, as I have said, in the two following volumes. At the same time in the present edition the illustrations have been increased and improved. Madrid. October 1918. * CONTENTS Translator’s Preface Francisco Goya y Lucientes . List of Illustrations PAGE V vii XV EDITOR’S NOTE It is with deep regret that I have to record, since going to press with this work, the death on io June last of its author, the dis- tinguished critic and Director of the Prado Museum, Señor Don Aureliano de Beruete y Moret. The presentation in English of his great work on Goya I know to have been one of Señor de Beruete’s dearest wishes, and one which he was looking forward with keen interest to seeing fulfilled in a worthy manner. I HAVE to note to the reader an erratum of some importance. When this book had been already finally corrected for press two very fine plates, from portraits of the Duque de Alba and the Marchesa de Villafranca, came into my hands from Madrid, which were able to be included in the work, being Plates XIX and XX, but when it was too late to correct all the references in the text. All reference, therefore, in this edition to Plates subsequent to Plates XIX and XX must be carried by the reader two Plates forward. S.B. FURTHER ERRATUM P. 215, Portrait No. 276, for “ (Pacully Collection, Paris)” read “(Jaffe Collection, Nice).” CONTENTS PAGE Translator’s Preface v Francisco Goya y Lucientes vii List of Illustrations xv Chapter I. Before 1783 1 II. From 1783 to 1789 20 III. The Grey Portraits — Portraits of the Year 1795 43 IV. Bull-fighters — Majas — Portraits of the Last Five Years of the Eighteenth Century ...... 66 V. Goya as Court Painter in the Year 1799. Portraits of the Court 95 VI. The Full Power of the Artist as Por- trait Painter, 1801-1808 . . . in VII. 1808-1813. Spain Invaded .... 132 VIII. 1814-1828. The Last Portraits Painted by Goya in Madrid. The Exile . . 157 IX. Conclusion . 189 Bibliography . . . 195 List of Portraits . . 201 xiii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS TO FACE PAGE Plate I. Goya as a Young Man. Self-Portrait Frontispiece II. Conde de Floridablanca .... xi III. Don Ventura Rodriguez . . . . io IV. Self-Portrait of Goya 18 V. Unknown Youth 24 VI. Charles IV 28 VII. Portrait of a Young Giri 36 VIII. Queen Maria Luisa 38 IX. Marquesa de Pontejos 42 X. Don Sebastián Martínez .... 44 XI. Doña Tadea Arias de Enriquez ... 48 XII. La Tirana 50 XIII. Marquesa de la Solana .... 54 XIV. Francisco Bayeu 60 XV. Francisco Javier Goya 62 XVI. Pedro Romero 64 XVII. Duquesa de Alba 68 XVIII. Duquesa de Alba 70 XIX. Duque de Alba 72 XX. Marquesa de Villafranca .... 74 XXI. Marquesa de Lazan 76 XXII. Marquesa de las Mercedes .... 78 XXIII. Rita Molinos 80 XXIV. The Bookseller of Calle de Carretas . 82 XXV. Meléndez Valdés ...... 86 XXVI. Martin Zapater ...... 88 xv XVI FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES TO FACE PAGE XXVII. F. Guillemardet 90 XXVIII. Jove Llanos 92 XXIX. The Family of Charles IV ... 94 XXX. The Infanta Maria Luisa .... 100 XXXI. Don Manuel Godoy 106 XXXII. Condesa de Chinchón 108 XXXIII. Condesa de Chinchón (detail) . . .110 XXXIV. Mariano Goya 112 XXXV. Mariano Goya 114 XXXVI. Conde de Fernán Núñez . . . .116 XXXVII. Marqués de San Adrián . . . .118 XXXVIII. Marquesa de Santa Cruz . . . .120 XXXIX. Condesa de Haro 122 XL. Doña Antonia Zárate . . . .124 XLI. Mocarte . . . . . . .126 XLII. Don Tadeo Bravo Rivero . . . .130 XLIII. Don José Manuel Romero . . . . 134 XLIV. Don Juan Antonio Llórente . . . 138 XLV. General Guye 144 XLVI. Víctor Guye . . . . . .146 XLVII. I ^ord Wellington . . . . .148 XLVI II. Doña Josefa Bayeu, Wife of Goya . . 150 XLIX. Pepito Corte 152 L. Ferdinand VII . . . . . 156 LI. Duque de San Carlos .... 160 LIT Goya in 1815. Self-Portrait . . .164 LUI. Duquesa de Abrantes . . . .166 LIV. José L. Munárriz 168 LV. Tiburcio Pérez . . . . . .174 LVI. Ramón Satue 176 LVII. Jacques Galos 180 LVI II. Juan de Muguiro . . . . .186 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES CHAPTER I Before 1783 W HAT is known of the birth and first years of Goya — and in fact little is known for certain — may be conveniently sought in the small volume, which is already rare, entitled “ Goya. Noticias biográficas por D. Francisco Zapater y Gomez,” published in Zaragoza in 1868. D. Martin Zapater was a fellow pupil with Goya in the Esquela Pía of Zaragoza, the school to which they were both sent as boys. Intimate friends at that time, they preserved their friendship during their whole lifetime, as is proved by the whole series of letters from Goya to his compatriot which have been handed down to us; spontaneous outpourings in which the painter lets us know his preferences, his feelings, and interesting details of his life. More, a thousand times more, than a large volume on the subject of Goya do these brief utterances, written without premeditation and even without orthography, reflect the character of the painter, his difficulties in his earlier years, and his first triumphs. A nephew of Zapater, Francisco Zapater, was the author of the work above mentioned. This second Zapater published in Zaragoza — in touch with the village of Fuendetodos and at no great distance of time from the painter’s own life — a series of notes, written with sympathetic enthusiasm, as an honourable tribute to the family of Goya, whose good memory had been touched on by other writers a little previously. This comparatively slight work is supported — and P 2 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES indeed based upon — precisely that series of letters of unquestion- able authenticity which were addressed to his uncle, D. Martin. I propose later to reproduce certain of these letters which I consider of interest, and to make known others which contain notices or reveal details of importance about Goya. The biographers who wrote after Zapater’s publication have not ventured to give as trustworthy the anecdotes and legends which were existing before 1868, and, excepting those whom I shall mention at the proper time, the rest, notwithstanding their good intentions, have added little or nothing to our knowledge of the first years of the artist’s life; but have copied one from the other, commenting on or treating unnecessarily many insignificant details of the childhood and youth of this painter. Goya was born on 30 March 1746, of a modest working-class family, who were, however, in relatively good circumstances and even noble — since his mother, Doña Gracia Lucientes, belonged to the nobility of the country — in Fuendetodos, a poor village of 120 inhabitants, without pasture land and without a stream, situated in the midst of Aragon. lie was baptized on the following day, and the document which confirms this, copied literally by Zapater from the parish books, states as follows: “ En treinta y uno de Marzo de mil settecientos cuarenta y seis, Bautice yo el infrascripto Vic°. un Niño que nació el día antecedente immediato, hijo legitimo de Jph Goya y de Gracia Lucientes legitim, te casados habitantes en esta Parroquia y vecinos de Zaragoza: se le puso por nombre Francisco Joseph Goya: fué su Madrina Francisca Grasa desta Parroquia, á la qual advertí el Parentesco espiritual que abía contraido con el Bautizado y la obligación de enseñarle la doctrina Christriana en defecto de sus Padres, y por la verdad hago y firmo la Presente en fuendetodos dho dia mes y año ut supra, etc. — Licenciado Jph Ximeno, Vic. o.” 1 1 In this document there are certain additions which have not any value or added interest. They have placed at the head of the document: “ Francisc Jphs Goya. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 3 The parents of Goya had several children, among them Thomas, who was at first a gilder and worked afterwards upon carved altar- pieces, while Camilo became an ecclesiastic, and Rita married and lived in Zaragoza. Goya spent only the years of his boyhood in Fuendetodos; then he went to Zaragoza to study the art of painting, for which he showed a fondness and natural predilection. When Zapater was preparing his book he stayed in Fuendetodos and could see the house in which the painter was born, which was then marked (in the year 1868) with the number 18 1 of the Calle de la Alfondiga. Zapater could at the same time collect the memories which some of the older inhabitants, whose name and condition he states, preserved of the painter and his family; and, while commencing by denying all the legends which had already taken shape in this connection in those years, he says: “Those old natives of the place related that Goya was mischievous and restless as a boy, that he used to sketch figures, and that he painted in the Chapel of Relics some part of the wall in fresco, and afterwards in oil upon the doors of the Retablo the descent of the Virgin of Pilar; that in 1808, while he was staying in the village during the second siege which Zaragoza endured, he was deaf and his servant addressed him by signs, making use of an alphabet of this nature which is in use to this day. They mentioned also that when Goya saw the above- mentioned altar-piece he exclaimed: ‘You would not say that I had painted that’ ; but these poor people had no recollection of an event which must have left an impression in his native place, and per- Pintor de su Magesdad en la Cortes.” Without doubt this was inserted to mark and distinguish the document, since a matter so well known and of so much later date than the register itself could have no other object. 1 The Conde de la Viñaza in his work upon Goya states that it was number 15, and brings evidence that it was so. The idea recently realized by the distinguished artist, Ignacio Zuloaga, of preserv- ing Goya’s house as a little museum, as a homage to the great man of Fuendetodos, merits every praise. 4 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES sisted in asserting that Goya left F'uendetodos because there was already nothing there which he could learn as a painter.” Goya was a pupil in Zaragoza of D. Jose Luzan, a master of some standing who had formed himself in Italy in that period of facile mannerism. It may be safely asserted that he left no impression on the art of his young pupil — a painter of a very different temperament and inclinations totally distinct from those proclaimed by Luzan. Even when very young, almost a child, Goya betook himself to Madrid, perhaps thinking that the numer- ous and influential colony of his compatriots, which then formed the so-called party of Aragon, could help him there. If this were so, his hopes were deceived, for a few years later Goya went to Rome to perfect his study of art, and on this matter the only thing we know is that he undertook the journey with very limited resources and hindered by difficulties of every kind. The exact date of the departure of the painter for Rome is unknown. Without being able to give precise dates I incline to think, from what Zapater states and from conjectures which may be formed from letters and dates, that this journey was near to the year 1770, if not that very year. This matters very little, since it did not affect in anyway the development of the artist; the fact is that he was in Rome when still very young, and of his stay there only one certain date is known, which is that in 1772 he obtained the second prize in a competition organized by the Academy of Parma, with a picture which represented “ Hannibal contemplating from the Alps the plains of Italy.” In the official notice it is stated that Goya was a pupil of Vayeu, painter to the King of Spain. And moreover we are informed that the jury were inclined to have given him the first prize, if he had kept more closely within his subject and had put more truth into his colouring. The Conde de la Viñaza, in his book upon our painter, publishes documents relating to various commissions which Goya received approximately at this epoch in Zaragoza. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 5 To these years of his student life those writers and biographers of Goya, who have not taken the trouble to verify their sources of information, refer the anecdotes which make of the artist’s life a series of adventures, quarrels, assaults upon convents, etc. Nothing of all this seems to be proved. Araujo, Viñaza, Von Loga, and others destroy the possibility of the majority of these actions, by their descriptions of the sober character of his working life. The first portraits by Goya are not of special interest. In “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras” (pp. i, 2, 145, 146) I speak of some of these works, bringing them into relation with the creative production of the artist. To follow by the study of documents Goya as a portrait painter we have to start from the year 1783, in which are the first important works of this nature. But before so doing it is necessary to know the surroundings which Goya encountered in Spain on his return, after having obtained the second prize at Parma. Spanish art, properly so called, which had shone so brilliantly in the seventeenth century, had already ceased to exist, or had been banished to obscure monasteries and churches of the second order, where it still emitted some sparks of the pure flame. After the arrival of the Bourbons, the direction of art, the great commissions, and even instruction in the fine arts had been handed over to foreigners. Under the shadow of all this foreign influence some Spanish painters, especially Francisco Bayeu (1734-1795), José del Castello (1737-1793), Mariano S. Maella (1739-1819), and Gregorio Ferro (1742-1812), represented the national art production, which had certainly very little of Spanish life in it, since it was nothing more than the development of Italian mannerism according to the latest doctrines put forward by Amiconi and Corrado, and followed by the González, Velázquez, and other Spanish painters. These painters understood their business to perfection, drew well, were correct in their composition, succeeded in a conventional colouring through the recipes learnt in the art schools, which naturally 6 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES were always the same, and with facile rapidity painted pictures and portraits, and filled with their decorative productions church walls and cupolas, niches and lunettes, without omitting any detail or neglecting the required finish; but in all this they achieved only an expressionless art from which they had no wish to free them- selves, since they were miserably imprisoned within that cold conventionalism. This pictorial production, weighed down by so many extrane- ous and decadent conditions, had been strengthened a little before this, and was at that time under the guidance of a most famous artist whom Charles III had called to his court, Antonio Raphael Mengs — a painter and critic of doubtful nationality, since he had been born in Aussig (Bohemia) of a Danish father, had studied in Italy, and flourished in Saxony. Brought up on the classical theories then in vogue, and closely in sympathy with Winckelman — who, however, was far his superior in knowledge of the antique and depth of thought — Mengs proposed to himself to banish from painting its brilliancy of colour, its gaiety and boldness of concep- tion, and to substitute for these a pseudo-classicism in which the dominant feature should be a style of lofty nobility and a drawing which would aim at the simplicity of line of antique art. He wrote freely, and always from that point of view; convinced of his theories, he carried them into practice; and it is only fair to recognize that his art realized them with a marvellous ability and skill, with the consequence that his contemporaries became enthusiastic over his talent. Even if the style of the Spanish painters above mentioned, and of others whom Mengs encountered on his arrival at Madrid, and his own, which was so individual, were not the same, they both possessed points of agreement; and the Bohemian remained satisfied with the Spaniards who followed blindly in his footsteps, overshadowed by this intelligent and famous man, who was a thousand times less conventional than themselves. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 7 In those very years in which within our court, and in the whole of Spain and in almost the whole of Europe, these artistic conditions prevailed, Goya arrived from Italy and settled in Madrid— -Goya, the least pseudo-classic painter that can be possibly imagined, an artist of spontaneous genius with a style which is always sincere and sometimes even brutal, carrying yet unborn a whole world of pictorial revolution within his head; hitherto without fame or name, not yet in any position to take a lead, with slender resources and with a character little adapted to compromise or accommodate itself, obstinate, firm in his convic- tions, and, as we are told, inclined to grumble and of uncertain temper. It was impossible for him to come into line with his surround- ings; yet, in spite of this, he does not mark himself out with a totally distinct personality from the general art production of the time. This was reserved for later. We ought to remember at the same time that none of his works of these years are of exceptional merit; Goya appears in them as showing an individual temperament as a painter and nothing more. It will be seen that he was an artist without any precocity, since at this date, which is approximately the year 1773, he was already not less than thirty years of age. Notwithstanding that he had not attained at that time either position or renown with his works, he was not overlooked among other painters of the period. In his letters to his friend Zapater he complains and occasionally shows himself indignant at his position, but at the same time and in the very same letters he confirms what we already knew — that he had commissions in Zaragoza, that he had some work in Madrid, even if this was more through personal friendship than as a commission, and that he was on intimate terms with Francisco Bayeu, the painter of Zaragoza, who was famous at the court, a member of the Academy, etc. In the year 1775 Mengs, who decided absolutely the progress 8 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES of art at the court, addressed himself to Goya in company with other painters, who were few in number and relatively unknown, to commission from them cartoons destined to serve as models for the royal factory of tapestries, already some time previously founded in Madrid, and to which it was sought to give a fresh start . 1 Our artist took the work in hand, and in the following year delivered the first of his cartoons, which he called “The Picnic.” Breaking away from all tradition and routine he created in the following years as many as forty-five cartoons, which were really original and attractive pictures. There is disclosed in them a method of inter- preting Nature very different from the mannerism and lack of character which dominated the art of the other painters of his time. The tapestries which were to be made from these designs were destined for the royal palaces of El Pardo and Escorial, where the old-fashioned decorations and furniture had gone out of date and required complete renovation in agreement with the taste of the time. The success of Goya on this occasion consisted — more than, and sometimes even before, the novelty of his style — in his choice of subjects: they all represent scenes of popular life in the open air, many of them charming, some dramatic, all picturesque, full of life and meaning — and the people, with their attractive costumes of mano/os, majas , and chisperos , enter for the first time from the hand of our artist as a decorative element into those palaces of Spain which had been built two centuries earlier by Charles V and Philip II. With the first of these cartoons, with his sketches of bulls and some genre pictures, Goya began to achieve fame. In 1777 he appears as already married to Josefa Bayeu, sister of Francisco the famous painter, and as father, on 22 January, of a guapo muchacho (a fine boy) as he says himself. In April of the 1 This can be seen in vol. ii, “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras,” chap, iii : “ Cartoons for Tapestries painted by Goya from the year 1776 to 1791. An examination of the technique developed by the artist for this kind of painting.” FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 9 same year he says, moreover, always in his letters to Zapater, “he was painting with more public appreciation [pintaba con mas aceptación ).” In the following year of 1778 something occurred which was apparently insignificant, but which I consider of the greatest and indeed of transcendent interest, not only for the intellectual development of Goya, but for the general history of Spanish paint- ing. This was as follows. In that year Goya, already connected with Bayeu and a painter who now received commissions from the all-powerful Mengs, was employed to go through the royal collections of paintings, which until lately had been scattered in the Buen Retiro, San Lorenzo del Escorial, San Ildefonso, Aran- juez, the Casa de Campo, the Quinta del Duque del Arco, the Torre de la Parada, the Casa Palacio de las Batuecas, the Castillo de Vihuelas, and the Zarzuela. Charles III had just given orders, which were immediately put into execution, that all that scattered artistic wealth should be installed in the Palace at Madrid, then quite new. It would then become quite easy to visit and study all these paintings. There were to be found those portraits and subject paintings of Titian which form the splendid and unique collection of this master which we now possess, accompanied by other Italian creations of the best period; there were the primitive paintings, generally belonging to the Flemish School, and those of Rubens, Van Dyck, of Dürer, of Holbein, and of Murillo — which last Queen Isabel Farnese, the mother of Charles III, had admired so much in her visit to Seville, and of which she brought back to her palaces a collection composed of twenty-nine very choice canvases — and here we must not forget the paintings by French artists, of whom Philip V and Ferdinand VI, as was only natural, were enamoured. There, in a word, Goya could admire all the pictorial splendour now known through the world, and which forms the greater part of the Museo del Prado. However — and this is of special interest to us — among such a wealth of production of different schools and 10 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES such mighty masters, Goya fixed his attention especially upon the works of a painter then almost forgotten, and who naturally did not meet the favour of Mengs, 1 nor probably of anyone else. These were the creations of one who was Chamberlain of the Royal Palaces in the time of Philip IV, and who dedicated himself to painting in the spare moments left free by his official duties in the palace, and who was called Diego Velazquez. What was there which Goya found in those works that called for such special attention that they were the only ones which he copied, himself making from them a series of engravings? Some- thing surely there was which he had not found in Zaragoza, nor yet in Rome, nor yet in Madrid, up to that day. Something that spoke to him in clear accents in a language which his own educa- tion did not place at his command, but which he knew by intuition to be his own, and the only one by which he could succeed in giving expression to the art which was moving and stirring within his brain. The works of Velazquez — which reach the highest point of the whole Spanish School of the seventeenth century, models of synthetic art, of astonishing simplicity in their technique, fragments of sublime painting which beneath an apparently modest craftsmanship are none the less magic works, which seem to be spontaneously created, without in any part revealing either effort, weakness, or fatigue — after a century of neglect, found their re-birth in the mind of another Spanish genius, capable of grasping their merit, and the only man of his time who was worthy to continue their tradition. 1 Mengs, in speaking of the old Spanish painters, treated them with that deference which his high position in Spain made obligatory; nevertheless it is quite clear that the Spanish art of the seventeenth century was not to his taste. Speaking of the painters of Seville he said that they had not seen or studied the examples of the ancient Greeks, nor had any comprehension of beauty, and thus were simply imitators of Nature without knowing how to select the beauty which it contained. Speaking of Velazquez, he recognized his superiority to the others in his understanding of light and shade and in his aerial perspective, DON VENTURA RODRIGUEZ iTE III (P. 28) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 1 The chain, which seemed to be broken at the end of the seventeenth century, was once again united; and purely Spanish creation once more pursued its course through time, expressing all that the race had to say in its plastic manifestation of line and colour. These national productions, which when united together form what may be called a School, have their own characteristics, their own essential and determinate nature which in some cases meta- physical study can succeed in penetrating and bringing to our view; but they possess at the same time an external manifestation, a final expression, a style, an idiom, which I would dare to call their own, individual to themselves and to our nation, and which at the same time unites them and brings them into relation with one another. And this style in art is as fundamental as the spirit which determines the creation; all, or if not all many of us, are capable of creating in mente great works; but only the chosen artists create them, not because they were the only ones who had the idea, but because they were the only ones who could give it expression. The characteristic note of this expression, not of the idea nor of the essence but of the form, is that which the critic ought to keep in view as his first criterion to differentiate the works of one school from another, and even different works within the same school, so as to distinguish the unique and individual work of an artist from those others which, in spite of their authors, are only the reflection of the masters who inspired them. The creative idea, the spirit which animates each of these works, was, it is true, different and distinct according to the time of its creation, though still included within the limits of the same race; but to succeed in expression its form was always similar, its idiom the same. The creative ideals of our classic theatre, of our picaresque fiction, or of our romantic poetry, were in themselves distinct; but to arrive at their special expression all their authors had recourse to the same 12 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES form, and the laws of the Castilian idiom were their expressive element. In painting there is something analogous to this: there is a technique, a special language, which determines the typical pro- ductions of each race. If we come across by chance in a museum, where there are examples of all the schools, a portrait by Velazquez, an ascetic figure by Ribera, a decaying corpse by Valdes Leal, ora maja by Goya, these works may not resemble each other, nay, more than this, they most assuredly will not be alike; for each of them belongs to its epoch, owns its own creative spirit, and possesses its distinct aesthetic basis; yet in spite of all this we shall immediately distinguish them from works of other schools, because the works of these painters, however various and opposite they may appear to us, all possess a diction, a similar ultimate expression — are all Spanish paintings. And precisely this ultimate expression, this voice in art, which Goya scarcely knew and yet needed in order to express himself, was what he found and learnt within those canvases of Velazquez — the synthesis of purely Spanish creation, canvases then almost underrated, which he had to hunt out in order to copy them in corridors and in dim unfrequented corners of the new Palace of Madrid. As we have stated, and as is known, Goya had engraved several of these works of Velazquez. These engravings are works of a light character, as if they were intended rather for reminders than for serious study; and they have been the object of severe criticism. I consider that these have been only done in order to get hold of the technique of engraving, in order “to get his hand in,” as is commonly said. But whether good or mediocre, the special interest and significance these engravings possess for us lies in the fact that the models selected were the canvases of Velazquez, and not those of others who were more famous at that time. 1 1 Vol. iii, “Goya Grabador” may be here referred to. Eleven engravings of the pictures of Velazquez, pp. 7-20 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 13 In a letter to Zapater dated in December of that year, 1778, Goya remarks in speaking of these engravings: “ Dear Martin, “ By Antonio Ibanez I send you a set of the works of Belazquez \_sic] which I have engraved and which as you know are in the King’s possession; I have not sent them to you before so that it should not be known that I have had a thousand worries over them, so then, my boy, treasure them, for as they come out I will send them along to you. Sabatini pounced upon some fine sketches which I had and as I had already promised them and there was no escape I was left stranded without them. The one I have about the ball if you wish for it you could put it in some little corner for as it was useless it was left . . . now go to the Devil for you make me talk more than it is worth. “ Yours and yours yet again “ Goya.” In 1779 he had for the first time a chance of being presented to the royal family; and in a letter dated 9 January 1 with great satisfaction and Aragonese pride he says as follows: “ Dear Martin, “I could not respond to what you asked because I had no time. The little rough sketch which you have is the invention of Francesco (Bayeu) and my execution and the whole is worth three caracoles, and is not worth considering whether it is yours or mine, it is not worth a button. “ If I had more leisure I would tell you how the King and Prince and Princess honoured me who by the grace of God allowed me to show them the four paintings, and I kissed their hands which This letter, which is to-day preserved in Paris, Zapater publishes in fragments; I have been able to secure a complete copy. This copy gives instead of 1779 the date of 1773. I consider this difference as a mistake in writing the numerals. I believe that Zapater was right, and that the letter dates from 1779; as, however, the original has never been in my hands I cannot verify this last statement with accuracy. H FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES before I never had the fortune to do, and I tell you that I could not have wished them to appreciate my works more than they did, judging from the pleasure they had in looking at them, and the satisfaction which I obtained with the King and even more with their Highnesses and afterwards with all the Grandees, thanks to God, for neither I nor my work deserved what I obtained. But, my boy, luck and long life to you, no one will take this sentiment from me and even more now that I am beginning to have greater enemies and more bitter ones. “Good-bye. Yours always, “Goya.” lie was already beginning to make enemies, because he was beginning to find favour and a certain name, and because the mere fact of his having been received by the royal family was sufficient to give him a certain position. However, at the right moment Bayeu and other painters came to his aid, as is proved by his having been made a member of the Royal Academy of San Fernando in the year following, on 7 May 1780. In 1781 he takes part in an important competition and says so to Zapater, writing to him in Zaragoza with the date of 25 July of this year: “ Friend, the time has come for the greatest opportunity in painting which has ever been offered in Madrid, and that is, that II is Majesty has decided on a competition for painting for the Church of San Francisco el Grande of this Court, and has vouch- safed to name me whose letter the Minister has to-day sent to Goicoechea so that he should show it to those vile wretches who have had so little confidence in my merit, and you must also tell it wherever it will make most impression, for there is a reason for it, since the great Bayeu is also making his picture. Maella is also painting his and the rest of the Court painters are doing likewise; in short, this is a serious competition, for it seems to me that God FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 15 has remembered me, and I have hopes that everything will have a happy issue after the works have been finished. The size of the painting is nine Spanish yards high and half of that in width, it is life size. As you are so interested for my welfare you will know what use to make of this piece of news, and what most telling blows you can give.” This and other work occupied Goya until the year 1783. In his letters to Zapater of this period the following words appear: “ I have to inform you the news about the painting without keeping anything back although it might be against me, for once we understand each other we will hold our tongues about what is to be understood.” And yet further on : “ The time of the thrushes has come, so that if it were not for the painting of San Francisco I should take no count of such things.” In January 1783 the pictures by the artists selected for the above-mentioned competition were placed together in the Church of San Francisco el Grande, awaiting the day for the court to come and see them, and “ till then,” says Goya, “ my horse is not running.” In this eventful year 1783, as we shall see later, our artist commences his new and important phase of a portrait painter. He was then only a few months short of thirty-seven years of age; and this man, who was to become one of the greatest portraitists of the world, had not, up to that date, made a single striking portrait, nor one in which appeared those individual qualities which he was to show later. His productions in this respect had been limited to a few and almost insignificant works. Let us mention some of them and take first that self-portrait of the artist, in which he presents himself to us almost full face and with the appearance of some thirty ió FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES years of age (Plate I). Three examples are known of this head, which must have been done in Zaragoza, since they all come from there. I only know one of them, which belonged to the distinguished landscape painter, D. Carlos de Haes, and then went to Munich (Bhoeler Gallery). Conde de la Viñaza says that it came from the Casino Principal of Zaragoza. This work, strongly painted and with dark tones dominating throughout, has in every way more interest as a likeness than a work of art. We appreciate in that head, and in the expression of its eyes and of the mouth, all the tension and force of will which were to have such brilliant results later on. The other two examples are mentioned as having been, one in the gallery of Doña Maria Cristina (?), the other in that of D. Mariano di Ena y Villalba, who had been director of the Institute of Zaragoza. Another self-portrait, which is to-day in the Provincial Museum of Zaragoza, comes from the School of Fine Arts of San Luis in the same city. The authors of the legends of the youth of Goya relate that in Rome his boldness was such that without a diploma or previous introduction he presented himself to Pope Benedict XIV, and that, whether or no, he made a portrait of this Pope which was the immediate astonishment of the Vatican. This could not be so, since Benedict XIV died in 1758, long before Goya arrived in Rome; but even supposing there had been a mistake in the name of the Pope, and that this had been Clement XIV, who ruled over the Church from 1769 to 1774, a story of this kind does not appear probable or even possible. No one knows to-day of this work, nor in the Vatican itself is there any notice of such an event. Von Loga has made some researches on this subject, and came to the con- clusion, like all others who have thought seriously about the matter, that Goya never made a portrait of the Pope in those years. To this period would be also attributed, to judge by the age of the sitter, the portraits which Goya made of King Charles III. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES However, on this point I have my own opinion, which I believe to be well founded, and which is that our painter never made a portrait of this king before his death, taken actually from life. As I have mentioned, Goya was received for the first time by the king in the year 1779. The years which intervened between this event and the death of the monarch are perfectly well known to us through the correspondence which Zapater kept; in this correspondence every- thing is mentioned, including all the works, many of these insignifi- cant, which occupied the painter’s activities, and there is at no time any mention of a subject of such striking nature as would have been the portrait of the king. Of the different canvases attributed to Goya in which Charles III is represented there are some of indisputable authenticity, two of these especially. One is in the Banco de España, in which the monarch is represented in court dress; and the other in the house of the Duchess of Fernán Núñez, identical in its appearance with that of the museum, which I mention in this connection, although it is far superior as a work of art, in which the king is depicted as a sportsman in hunting costume and with a dog asleep at his feet, his figure detaching itself against a delicate landscape bathed in light, and with colour of blue and rose, which recalls the best backgrounds of the cartoons for the tapestries which Goya had designed certainly in the same years. In the general treatment of this work there seems to obtrude the recollection of those portraits of persons dressed in hunting costume which had been painted by Velazquez. That in the museum I consider only as a copy or perhaps a repetition of that of the ducal house of Fernán Núñez; and I even know of a second replica of this work, likewise in Madrid. In these portraits, as in that of the Banco de España, everything — the hands, the dress, the background — is stronger than the head. This last, equally seen and related with all the rest, with the tanned and weather-beaten skin which is appropriate to the huntsman who constantly spends his time in the open air, indicates to us, from the D i8 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES fact that it is weaker than the rest of the picture and identical in all the portraits, that it is nothing but a copy of another work, and probably of one of a different painter. Through documents which are preserved in the Bank of Spain we know that the portrait which is kept there coincides in date with that of the death of the king; and since we have reason to think that both these are of the same period, namely, of the first years of the reign of Charles IV, we can establish the fact that they were done on the death of the king, and this brings them into their just relation technically with those other works of which we shall speak in the following chapter. A pair of portraits, curious and of a certain charm, in which are represented respectively the Prince of Asturias, D. Carlos (afterwards Charles IV) and his wife, Maria Louisa of Parma — very young and probably then recently married, since he appears about twenty-seven years of age and she twenty-one, which was their age in 1775 when their marriage was celebrated — offer an in- teresting problem of painting both as a study in themselves and differentiating them from the work of other painters of the time. Of this pair of portraits, which are upright figures of three-cpiarter length, the prince with a red coat, resting his left hand on a table, the princess with a rich dress of silk and some flowers in her right hand which she is about to place in a vase, I know three almost identical examples; one the property of D. Luis Navas (Madrid), another in the Bank of Spain, the third in the Museum of Bilbao. The names of Mengs, of Maella, and even of Goya come into one’s mind on seeing these portraits — above all that of Goya, especially in the first of those mentioned. Notwithstanding this, and following analogous reasoning to that which we have employed in respect of the portraits of Charles III, it must be recognized that these works cannot be by Goya, or at any rate cannot be considered as painted by him from life. In 1775, or very little later, a date which may be judged by the age of the persons painted, Goya had not made portraits of the SELF-PORTRAIT OF GOYA LATE IV (P. 2 9 ) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 19 court, and much less of personages so important as the Prince and Princess of Asturias. These portraits must be by Mengs, especially from their composition; not, however, those just mentioned, as we may judge from their technique, but some earlier ones which I do not know. By their date he may have painted them in his first stay in Madrid; and from these originals by Mengs other Spanish painters could perfectly well have made copies of persons who were so much before the public, and who would be so much sought after. Those of the Bank of Spain — which are the weakest of the three pairs above mentioned — are by Maella, according to documents which have been preserved in the bank itself. Goya could quite well have received commissions for other copies, and these might be those of Señor Navas, which suggest themselves as such, and even those of the Museum of Bilbao. From all the above we arrive at the conclusion that Goya, although known already for other kinds of painting, had not yet an individual style in portraiture. And such was indeed the case; whether from want of practice or perhaps in order not to displease persons accustomed to the portraits by Mengs which were so much in favour, the Spanish painters of those years did not dare to break away from the established and approved tradition. I do not speak here of certain portraits prior to 1783, which have been attributed to Goya, since I consider these, quite apart from their merit, of doubtful authenticity. How and when our painter was to develop the other side of his genius, and to individualize his productions in the art of por- traiture, will be the subject of the following chapters. CHAPTER II From 1783 to 1789 I IE year 1783 is the first date in which we can document- arily bring into line portraits of importance executed by A Goya. These are of Floridablanca and the group of the family of the Infante D. Luis. D. Jose Moñino, Count of Floridablanca, was to be found at that date in all the height of his power as Minister of Charles III. Goya succeeded in approaching him, and the politician showed he was favourably inclined to the artist, for this last (we still follow closely the letters directed to Zapater) tells his friend under the date of 22 January of the above mentioned year: “ Although Count Florida Blanca has charged me to say nothing about it, my wife knows it and I wish you to know it, which is that I am to paint his portrait which will be of great advantage to me; I owe so much to this gentleman that this after- noon I have been with his Señora for two hours after her dinner, for she has come in to dine in Madrid,” etc. And in his letter of a few days later he says: “To-day I have put in the head of the portrait for Señor Moñino in his presence and have succeeded in getting a good like- ness and he is very pleased, I will write you another time how things are going.” This shows us that in this, as in other works in which he was reproducing persons of importance, Goya made use of studies of the head taken from life, and then passed on to the finished canvas. 20 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 21 I do not know the study to which this letter refers. With regard to the finished portrait, that is to-day preserved in the hands of the Dowager Marquesa de Martorell, whose family are descendants of the Minister of Charles III (Plate 2). The first impression which this portrait produces is that we are in front of a work inspired by the art of Mengs. Later, how- ever, when we have examined it with attention, we see something singular in it; these are no more than details, but even so they are sufficient to show that their author is a great colourist; the blue eyes of the person depicted, who looks out of them with vivacity and intelligence, and the coat and red breeches are strong notes which Mengs would not have approved. In the centre of the com- position (for it is almost more a subject picture than a portrait) we see Floridablanca standing upright facing us ; Goya, on the left, is presenting to the Minister a canvas; a third person in the back- ground, a portrait of Charles III hung upon the wall, and plans of the Canal of Aragon, books, papers, and scattered letters, complete the composition of this work. On the floor in the front of the picture there lies a book on whose cover may be read : “Palomino- Practica de la Pintura— 2 y 3.” In the lower portion of a plan which lies upon the table are the words: “A 1 Excmo. Sr. Florida Blanca. Ano 1783”; and on a paper at Goya’s feet: “Señor F.co Goya.” The illumination of the scene is not well thought out; the figure of Floridablanca being illuminated in the form in which it appears, with an intense light from the left, that of Goya could not remain in the shadow as it is here. The artist has obviously dis- regarded everything in order to give lustre to the figure of the Minister. The head of the painter detaches itself against a luminous plane on the left of a curtain ; this likewise is inexplicable, for if this were a window it would illuminate the scene in a different manner. This work serves as a type for other works of lesser importance, all of them portraits of the famous Minister; and in which his 22 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES figure is represented in some in full length, in others three-quarter length, always alone, and not forming a composition as in the picture just mentioned. One of these is in the possession of the Marqués de Casa Torres at Madrid, another is preserved in the Cathedral of Madrid, where it remained as an anonymous work until two distinguished Spanish artists, who were paying a visit to the Cathedral buildings, identified it in the year 1906. This portrait of great distinction, and perhaps later by some years than the large one, was made known in an article by D. Jóse R. Mélida. Of the same type, even if it is not of the same size, may be here recalled that other portrait in small dimensions which belongs to the Gallery Stchoukine (Paris), and which has been brought before the public by the German critic, Von Loga, in his book upon Goya. I myself know of some other portraits attributed to our artist of similar technique and appearance to the great portrait of Floridablanca, although of much less importance. Typical of these is that which represents I). Miguel Muzquiz (Conde de Gausa), a famous financier who succeeded to the estate of Esquiladle in the year 1768. There are two examples of this portrait, one of full length in the collection of the Marqués de Casa Torres and the other, three- quarter length, in the collection of D. José Lázaro. The figure appears the same in both, and it is natural to assign to it the date of 1785, or a little earlier, through its being the same as the one reproduced on the front of the publication, “ Elogio del Conde de Gausa,” issued by Cabarrus precisely in that year. In the Bank of Spain is preserved a series of six portraits by Goya which form a combination of great interest through their unquestionable authenticity — having a documented story which en- ables us not only to know the date of each but even the price for which they were commissioned. They came from the National Bank of San Carlos, organized by the initiative of Floridablanca in the year of 1782; and represent, one the portrait, already men- FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 23 tioned, devoted to King Charles III, and the other five the directors of that bank. The oldest of these last was painted in 1785. It represents D. José de Toro y Zambrano, the delegate of the nobility of the kingdom of Chili, painted half length, the sitter appearing in a crimson coat. The head is refined and expressive, and in it can be traced the advance the painter had already made by aiming at keeping the middle tints and details in shadow; but more delicately here and less hard than those which he made use of two years before in the portrait of Floridablanca and in others of that period. A cross of Charles III worn on the breast of this sitter gives an unharmonious note which spoils the whole effect. But the ex- planation of this seems an easy one. D. José de Toro was not decorated in 1785; afterwards, when he received this decoration, a less skilful artist painted over his breast the cross hanging from its ribbon of blue and white, and destroying in some part the happy harmony which Goya had created. This portrait costs the sum of 2,328 reales, including in this price the frame and its gilding. Two years after 1787, three other portraits came into this series. One is of the Marqués de Tolosa, similar to the last men- tioned in character and proportions, but less refined in its execution; the second is that of the Conde de Altamira, painted in full length and seated, the legs treated carelessly and in an indifferent manner, this portrait, judged by its size and importance, being the least artistic of the series. The third represents Charles III standing, full length, his figure detached against a background rich in details. This last is a typical portrait, strong, effective in colouring, but, notwithstanding this, containing something which disconcerts us and takes away from its suggestive power. The head here is hard, and harmonizes badly with the rest of the figure; it has not been taken from life, and, as it appears that its date coincides exactly with that of the death of the king, we see here another proof in support of the statement, made already by us in the preceding 24 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES chapter when we came to mention this portrait, that all those of Charles III attributed to Goya were not taken from life. For these three portraits the bank paid the artist 10,000 reales. To this same year 1787 belongs another portrait which I mention by itself because it appears in another group; this is that of D. Francisco Larrumbe, painted full length and in very advanced years. Its cost was 2,200 reales. The series terminates with a portrait of full length, the most important of all, made in the year 1788, and for which 4,500 reales was paid down. It represents the Conde de Cabarrus, a person of French extraction, who was much talked of in his time, a schemer according to some, according to others a great man of affairs, who was severely handled in a pamphlet by Mirabeau. In this work Cabarrus wears a coat and breeches of bright green colour; already here we begin to recognize Goya as a colourist and an original artist, and we can follow the development of his personality in these short five years which separate the portrait of Floridablanca from that of Cabarrús. The painter reveals himself in his portrait of this person. In another attitude, seated, dressed in black and outlined against the green armchair on which he is sitting, forming a bold harmony of colour, there exists another work which some years ago gave me an excellent impression. I am ignorant of its present possessor. It would seem that the commission given by the Banca Nacional de San Carlos to Goya had been suggested, or at least supported, by D. Juan Agustín Ceán Bermúdez, the well-known writer on Spanish art in those years, author of the “ Diccionario Histórico de los más ilustres profesores de las Bellas Artes en España,” a work to which we have so often referred when treating of art matters in Spain. Ceán Bermúdez, besides being a writer on art, was well informed on economic subjects, and from the founda- tion of the Banca de San Carlos in 1782 he held in that institution the post of Chief Clerk in the Secretary’s office. A friend of Goya, Cean Bermúdez also advised the painter in the placing of his UNKNOWN YOUTH .ATE V (P- 35) I FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 2 5 modest savings in the same bank. As a matter of fact the Banco de España still keeps 1 fifteen shares of stock to which the painter subscribed. Two of these shares were endorsed by Goya in favour of Doña Maria Olarte, six to D. José de Onis, and the other seven to D. Fermín de Almarza. The endorsements bear the date of 20 November and 22 December 1788. I believe that the portrait which is thought to be of Ceán Bermudez, and which figured in the exhibition of the works of Goya (1900) belonging to the Marqués de Corvera, may connect itself with this period of his life. This is undoubtedly an original work, although slight in character and of second rank for its artistic merit. We come now to the year 1783, in which, a few months after Goya had made the portrait of Floridablanca, he completed the important work of “The Family of D. Luis.” This Infante D. Luis Antón, second son of Philip V and of Isabella Farnese, had been consecrated to the Church, and received the red hat of a cardinal at eight years of age. He was Archbishop of Seville and Toledo, but suddenly abandoned those high dignities, and lived henceforth a retired life in Arenas de San Pedro. Jovellanos said of him that his name was destined to immortality as the pro- tector of art and artists. He gave up his career in the Church and married a lady of noble Aragonese family — famous for her beauty and one who fully shared the artistic tastes of her husband — Doña Maria Teresa de Vallabriga, in 1776. Among the various children of this marriage, who could not take for the time being the title and position of Infantes, but who were recognized at court as related to the royal family, appears the elder of the female issue, 1 I owe this information, as well as that which refers to the six portraits and that which deals with the relations of Goya with the Bank of San Carlos, to the kindness of Señor D. Francisco Belda, the present Assistant Manager of the Bank of Spain, who with great skill has brought together and keeps to-day a remarkable official document relating to these interesting details. E 2Ó FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES María Teresa, afterwards Condesa de Chinchón and wife of Gocloy, and of whose admirable portrait by Goya of much later date we shall speak in due course. Goya was received in Arenas de San Pedro in the year 1783 to make his studies for the work of which we are now treating-, and the impression which he received there is admirably shown in his expressive letter to Zapater of 20 September, in which he says : “ I have just returned from Arenas and feel very tired. His Excellency loaded me with a thousand honours, I have painted his portrait and that of his wife and boy and girl with unexpected success for other artists had been there previously and not been successful. I have been out twice shooting with His Highness; he shoots very well and last afternoon he said to me when shooting at a rabbit, why this sketching fellow is better at it than I am myself. I have been a month on end with these gentry and they are most angelic in their kindness they have made me a present of a thousand dollars and a gown for my wife all covered with silver and gold worth thirty thousand reales, as the keeper of the robes told me. And they felt so much my going away that they would not let me go until I promised to return at least every year. If I could tell you in a few words all the circumstances and all that occurred there you would enjoy hearing it but I am not able to do so; I feel quite shaken from driving in the coach which His Highness ordered to bring me here in great haste.” The studies which Goya made and the finished picture of the family to-day in Italy could be seen a few years ago in Boadilla del Monte, in the neighbourhood of Madrid, where they were then in the possession of the family of Prince Ruspoli, a descendant of Godoy. Here should be mentioned the following works of the fourteen FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 27 which are in Boadilla. I shall speak of the remainder when I come to the years in which they were painted. Head of the Infante D. Luis; this is a vulgar portrait, of coarse execution and very scanty merit. An inscription in the lower part of the picture says: “ A portrait of the Señor, which Don F. Goya made between nine and twelve on the morning of the day of 11 September 1783.” Profile head on board, and as coarse as the last mentioned, of Doña María Teresa Vallabriga; it has also its inscription which says: “Portrait which Don F. Goya made between eleven and twelve on the morning of 27 August 1783.” Both of these portraits painted, the first in three hours and the second in one, are of quite secondary interest, and merely studies for the great picture, even though that of Doña María Teresa is not in the same position as that in which she appears in the finished work. Portrait of the Infante D. Luis, in white uniform, more perfect than almost all the others of this collection. Portrait of Doña María Teresa Vallabriga, pendant to the last named (both are half length) and more slight, but refined and agreeable in colour. Portrait of a boy, the eldest son of this marriage, called Luis Maria, afterwards known as the Cardinal de Bourbon, at six years and three months of age. This is a mediocre work, but not with- out interest; the boy wears a blue dress and is occupied in putting together a puzzle map. Other maps all round him seem to show the passion of this youth, of intelligent appearance, for geography, a passion which would certainly not be that which induced his parents later to dedicate him, even when still under age, to an ecclesiastical career. Portrait of the little Maria Teresa, the eldest of the daughters of the Infante, afterwards Condesa de Chinchón and wife of Godoy. She is represented here capriciously dressed ; her head is covered 28 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES with a lace veil, and she is laced up in an exaggerated fashion for her age; she has at her side a little white dog. This and the preceding portrait of these two elder children of the house make a pair, and I firmly believe that they are those of which the artist makes mention in the letter above quoted. The picture resulting from these studies of Goya during his stay in Arenas de San Pedro, “ The Family of the Infante D. Luis,” in which are represented the husband and wife, the children, the servants, and Goya himself occupied in painting the scene, fourteen persons in all, created a veritable sensation. Its composition, in- spired by the family and domestic scenes which were the fashion in those days, is here frankly absurd. The prince and his wife in the centre of the canvas, seated at an oval table, are playing cards; the two elder children are leaning against their father, while a hairdresser is dressing their mother’s hair. Two waiting maids on the left are preparing the breakfast, which is about to be served on dishes of silver; the right of the picture is occupied by five servants who are perfectly ridiculous, among them a gardener of Moorish type and a most unattractive nurse, very much dressed up, who holds in her arms a young baby. And on the left in the back- ground we see Goya, very cleverly foreshortened, seated before the easel, painting this forced and unnatural scene. There are, it is true, in this same picture heads well painted and full of character; but perhaps because Goya was not accustomed to compose groups of this kind the result is certainly a motley and tasteless assembly of people, affected in its style, poor and dull in its colouring. It is some years since I saw this picture, and the opinion which I have just expressed is taken from my notes of that time; but I am not disposed to alter it, since I find the opinion of authorities who have seen this work since myself coincides absolutely with my own judgement. To the year following these portraits of the family of D. Luis belongs another of an important personality, D. Ventura Rodriguez, CHARLES IV Plate VI FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 29 architect to the royal household, the most famous of the Spanish architects of the eighteenth century, and to whose talent and industry Madrid owes so many monuments and such timely improvements. This portrait (Plate 3), of more than half-length — in which the sitter is showing an architectural plan, on which may be read an inscrip- tion which terminates with the signature of Goya and the date of 1784 — is but little refined in its type and execution, and has to-day become slightly blackened and faded. Notwithstanding these defects the work is broadly and freely painted, and the head, full of character, brings before us the famous architect in the last years of his life — since he died in the year following at the age of sixty-eight — years in which he developed more than before his activity and talent, and in which, becoming more satisfied with his projects and creations, he made the remark, “Now I ought to begin to work.” It seems to be the fact that Ventura Rodriguez gave his protection to Goya, and that it was he who more directly put him into those relations with the Infante D. Luis which were of such advantage to him. There are various examples of this portrait with slight varia- tions, and some copies of importance, like that which Zacarías Velázquez made and which is preserved in the Academia de San Fernando. That which we reproduce here, the most important in our opinion, belongs to the Galerie Trotti at Paris. To these years, or very little later, to judge from the age at which the artist is represented, must be attributed the small and precious self-portrait which appears in the collection of the Conde de Villagonzalo at Madrid (Plate 4), in which Goya is represented standing upright, in a short, fanciful little jacket, looking at the spectator and working on a large canvas. I do not know for what reason Mr. Calvert, in his “ Goya,” publishes this portrait as that of Asensio Juliá. It has always been considered as a self-portrait of Goya; and very properly so, to judge by the face there depicted, which is in every respect identical with that of Goya in this period. It is of choice technique, and shows already the artistic independ- FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 30 ence of the artist, who has succeeded here in realizing a more personal expression of his art than in the majority of his works of that time, in which he lowered his talent to satisfy the preferences of his sitters, who were accustomed to another kind of art. Here the figure, seen against the light, detaches itself in shadow in front of a large window; and we can appreciate the fine quality of the middle tints and the colouring in the shadows, a quality which represented then a great innovation, and which formed such an important feature in his later productions. The artist here lets us know the materials of his work, the short brushes grasped together, appropriate to the detailed art which characterizes his portraits of these years, and, above all, his palette with ten colours placed there from the white following through the clear ochres to the greens and blues, finishing with the darker colours. Only one colour, vermilion, detaches itself from the rest, occupying the first place next to the white. In the palette of Goya in later years this would not call for our attention; the reds then occupy the place of pre- ference; however, this preference had not yet been shown in his works, but notwithstanding we have seen that already the colour mentioned has a predominant place in his palette. This self-portrait brings before us the figure of the painter in those years, in which, to judge by his correspondence, it appears that, in spite of being occupied with work of a certain importance and in portraits of well-known people, he met with opposition and was discouraged in his work. “ Pray to the Virgin that she will give me more desire to work,” he says to his friend Zapater. Esteemed by Floridablanca, protected by the Infante D. Luis, and received in the Palace, the older painters, who, in their own opinion were better masters of their art than Goya, commenced in the year 1783 and subsequently, to find fault with his work and to try to block his future path. From his private correspondence it becomes clear that Goya was annoyed with them, although he says nothing definite on this subject, and still less on that of his FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 3i brother-in-law, Francisco Bayeu, who had been his protector at the beginning, but now began to show signs of jealousy at his progress in court favour. Even more than through the painter himself this state of things is known through a letter directed also to Zapater, and written by Camilo Goya, brother of the painter, on 18 October, 1784, from Chinchón. The year before, Goya had sent for his mother, already a widow, 1 and to whom he had given an allowance, which he later raised to 5 reales a day when she returned to Zaragoza, not being able to reconcile herself to the life at court. Her son Camilo, who was a priest, had come with her from Zaragoza, and was nominated by the Infante D. Luis, presumably at the suggestion or request of Goya, to a chaplaincy at Chinchón. The letter to which I have referred was written a little after he had taken possession of the chaplaincy, and in it he speaks of the many annoyances suffered by Francho in Madrid. He says in a certain passage: “ Although God has endowed him with fortune and ability they had persecuted him with so much force that, seeing they are not able to obscure his merit, they take away his patience, they criticize what he has said or not said and turning over with their lies all that they can, so that at the time I am writing my heart is altogether upset; this being so I am not able to say all I could say, the worst of it is they succeed in this way in making him abhor painting, and not being able to make him give up his work they at any rate make him less disposed to go on with it; for they cannot bear that he should get so much praise and attain such honour from every one else.” The character of Goya acquired in these years an irritability 1 The Conde de la Vinaza in the “ Adiciones al Ceán Bermúdez,” vol. ii, p. 242, informs us of the death of Goya’s father. He says that in the parish of San Miguel de los Navarros, at Zaragoza, is witnessed the following deposition of death, inscribed on p. 49 of the ninth volume of the register of deaths: “José Goya, husband of Engracia Lucientes, died on the 17 December 1781, and was buried in the principal nave of San Miguel. He did not leave any will because he had nothing to leave.” 32 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES and a violence which is not — and that by a long way — as great as has been described by some of his biographers, but nevertheless is quite apparent. The reasons for this are to be found in the fact that his artistic independence prevented him gainingthe recognition and advancement which he merited, or at any rate stood in the way of and delayed his definite triumph. We trace this in his letters to Zapater. On 3 March, 1784, after having made the portrait of Floridablanca, and having won the approval of so distinguished a sitter, Goya wrote: “ My Friend, there is nothing new and there is still more silence as regards my affairs with Señor Moñino than before I painted his portrait; the most he said was after he had looked at it with pleasure; Goya, we shall see about it later on.” This phrase sounds to our ears like something already known ; it is the eternal outlet of escape of the professional politician. “ Ya nos veremos mas despacio!” A phrase which on the lips of a Min- ister is as much as to say: “ Leave me in peace — I recommend you not to return to this subject, at any rate while I am Minister.” We see that in politics as well as art every race has its characteristics, which persist for generations and centuries. Notwithstanding all this, the hope of ultimate triumph sup- ported Goya, and centred especially in his picture for San Francisco el Grande. On 31 October, in the same year in which Floridablanca had put him off, as he might have any vulgar and importunate place- hunter, he says, referring to the competition of pictures for San Francisco, of which we have spoken in the previous chapter: “The King has just ordered the Mass for the Dead to be celebrated there [in the church of San Francisco]. I am givingthe last touches to my picture, which you will hear talked about as well as the others, since this function is much looked forward to FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 33 by the professors and dilettantes of Art. The other painters are doing the same, except my brother-in-law, who has replied that on the last day he will come from Toledo and his picture only needs a touch.” As is well known, Goya succeeded in this competition in the year following, 1785, with the picture already mentioned, which represents “San Bernardino of Siena preaching to King Alfonso of Aragon.” The triumph of Goya, initiated by the public and by competent judges of art, was confirmed by the king. From the day on which this act of justice was accomplished Goya appears, to judge from his correspondence, satisfied and in good spirits, occupying himself henceforth more calmly with his own business and those matters which refer to his art. Here is proof. He says on 11 March 1786: “ I have not what you have, for with all my work I have not more, with my shares in the bank and the Academy, than twelve or thirteen thousand reales a year, and with all this I am as con- tented as the happiest man on earth.” His career at the court from this moment was one of rapid success, and contrasts with the difficulties of previous years. In the same year in which he wrote the letter just quoted he says to Zapater on 1 August : “ My Martin, I am the King’s Painter with fifteen thousand reales, and although I have no time at my disposal I will yet suggest to you how the King sent a command to Bayeu and Maella that they should look for the two best artists they could find to paint the designs for tapestries and whatever was required in the Palace in fresco or in oil. Bayeu proposed his brother and Maella proposed me. This advice reached the King and the favour was granted ; and I knowing nothing of it, it came upon me without knowing what was happening. I have thanked the King, the F 34 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Prince, and the rest of the officials, also Bayeu who says he was the cause of Maella proposing me and Maella for my being proposed by him, and good-bye for I will write to you shortly. Yours and ever yours. “ Goya.” There follow those other intimate letters in which he speaks but little of painting, but relates instead episodes of his life in Madrid, including some comic incidents and others wittily described, as, for example, the upset that he had in a carriage which he had bought to drive out in the neighbourhood of the town and palace. Some family annoyances, the illnesses of his children, and his preoccupation as to where and how to invest his savings, are the only serious notes in the letters of the following years. It was no longer Goya who was seeking for support and protection; it was the painter who was run after and who — as he says himself — had made himself desired. In his private life he made no change beyond furnishing his house with greater comfort. In the year 1786 he was already making 28,000 reales. The two-wheeled carriage with the gipsy horse ( caballo gitano) which he had before, was now replaced by one of four wheels drawn by two mules, with which certainly, as he tells us later, he had another good tumble. Notwithstanding his new position, which obliged him to accept in a certain manner the court life, his simple habits did not change in those years; and his ideas and sentiments remained the same as, in these artless letters of his, we have been able to appreciate in the years of his youth. No great preoccupations are here outside those of his art; his life is well arranged; to his intimate friend he speaks constantly of his Pepa and their children, of his small savings, and of how and why he placed them here or there; his greatest expenses were his hunting excursions, and his one luxury the two carriages, the gipsy horse, and the pair of FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 35 mules, which he bought at Zaragoza, considering that they would be cheaper there. In the letter which he writes to Zapater on the occasion of the death of the latter’s father he says — and it is not likely that on this occasion he would exaggerate his feelings: “ January io, 1787 . “ Beloved of my Soul. With the feelings you can imagine I take up my pen to answer you; and in this matter, my friend, you know that I have passed through the same experience, and as this is the journey we all have to take one after another, I think the one who goes best prepared (as it may be supposed that your father like mine in his old age must have been so) goes the best and with the best fortune. So then, my dear, rejoice and offer it all to the service of Our Lord.” Earlier, or later in their date but within this period, must be considered as painted not a few portraits of the second order, whose authenticity seems proved. Among these are that of Altamirano, in the collection of the Marqués de la Vega Inclan; a head and shoulders which represents a young man, in the collection of the Marqués de Santillana; the portrait of D. Juan Manuel Alvarez de Faria, that of the Marqués de Bajamar, that of a boy dressed as a soldier with a landscape background, which belongs to Señor Orossen of Madrid, and, the most important of all, that of a youth of very expressive physiognomy, a work which has not been long in the charge of the Museum of Boston, and which seems to me of interest even when I cannot pronounce an opinion on this portrait, since I only know it through the photograph (Plate 5). It has been said that this is a portrait of the son of the artist; this does not seem to me likely, either from the age of the sitter, or his appearance, or even his dress, which makes one think more of a great nobleman than the son of a then modest painter. From this group of works two of special interest detach them- FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 36 selves, that interest being due to the persons they represent, two brilliant officers of his time — Admiral Mazarredo and General Ricardos. Both of these portraits come from Boadilla, where they were in the collection, which I have already mentioned, of the Ruspoli family. Admiral Mazarredo is represented in half length, seated. There is seen in the background, through a window, a view of the sea with a ship, which is curious at least, this being one of the few views of this kind that Goya ever painted. Like to the portrait of the Admiral just mentioned, which comes from Boadilla, and approximately of similar technique, is another at Zaragoza in the possession of General D. Antonio Mazarredo, a descendant of the Admiral; and with this was one of a young girl, Juanita Mazarredo, very refined and delicate in treatment, and probably of the same period, which went to the Ilavemeyer collection in New York. Of General Ricardos various different portraits are known, one of half length, in which the sitter appears younger than the other two, and which belongs to Sr. Navas (Madrid). Another is the property of D. Pedro Durán (Madrid); and a third, which I do not myself know, but of which the photographic reproduction looks very well, with a dedication, and of great im- portance and interest, is in the collection of D. Fortunato de Selgas, in Cudillero (Asturias). There exist a great quantity of portraits — all resembling each other, although not identical — of King Charles IV and Queen Maria Luisa, in which he appears with his unexpressive face and unhappy look, and she with an enormous hat of ribbons and feathers which rests on her curls, adorning with little success her head, which is deficient in feminine charm. These portraits vary in their size, since, even when they are almost all of half length, some are only extended head and shoulders; moreover, they differ in the dress and colours, in the ornaments and backgrounds; but the figure is always the same, put in slightly and with little study, PORTRAIT OF A YOUNG GIRL ,ATE VII ( P- 39) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 37 suggesting an urgent commission and haste in carrying out. Are these original portraits by Goya? I believe this question could be answered at its proper time in either way, and with the certainty, though it may appear strange, of not being mistaken in this statement. They cannot be earlier than 1788, since Charles III died in the December of the preceding year, and Charles and Luisa appear here with the crown and attributes of the throne. However, just as little can they be much later than this date, judging by the age of the persons represented. They are un- doubtedly the portraits of the new monarchs requested by ministries, public offices, etc., in which it is customary to display the like- nesses of the reigning sovereigns. On the other hand we have already seen that Goya had been nominated painter to the king in the year 1786, and further promoted to be court painter in 1789, precisely the date to which, for the reasons mentioned, these portraits must be attributed. Goya received the commission to do the first portraits ; others being immediately asked for, these were repeated; and the painter, aided by his own rapidity of execution, and by other painters, since in the majority of these works two hands may be traced, set going a veritable workshop of portraits, and in a little time was able to supply all these numerous requests. It would be impossible to state the number of these pictures actually known; many to-day are to be found in the Ministries, in the public offices, in the special schools, in the Institutes of Madrid and the provinces for which they were painted. Others left these official centres, and found a home with private individuals or museums. Ought these pictures to be con- sidered as original works of Goya? This is the question to which I now return. Of some this can be decided in the affirmative; for instance, those which were preserved in the Ministerio de Hacienda, and which not long ago came thence to the Museo del Prado (catalogued to-day under Nos. 1322 and 1323). The likenesses of the monarchs here are given in three-quarter length; the king 38 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES (Plate 6) with a blue coat stands out against a green curtain, which serves as a background ; the details of the dress, the decorations, etc., are not executed with so much precision, are more loose, more pleasing; the queen wears a mulberry-coloured dress with much trimming, and her figure is seen against a nut green curtain, forming a bold and happy harmony of colour. Of others of these portraits it may be safely asserted that they are not original works by Goya, and consequently I need not trouble myself with them; and others, the majority are and are not, from Goya’s hand, since in them, judging from the quickness with which they were painted, fragments can be traced which alone the artist himself could have carried out, and others, more mannered and heavy, have been undoubtedly entrusted to his assistants or pupils. Altogether they form a produc- tion which — without being original, in the strict sense of the word — seems manufactured out of an artist's workshop, and as such of scanty interest and on which it is not necessary to dwell. What I have said with regard to this point I believe to be correctly stated, although I only put it forward here as my own hypothesis; since neither Goya in his own letters nor any other documents tell us anything about these innumerable portraits which we suppose he made of his sovereigns between the years 1788 and 1789. 1 The productions of Goya in the years preceding 1790 must have been exuberant and fruitful. In these years he made the last designs for the tapestry factory, a quantity of pictures, and a count- less number of portraits of very varying merit, in which nevertheless, speaking generally, he does not show in any complete manner those most individual qualities as a portrait painter which he rapidly developed in the following ten years. Being thus in close relation with the great families of Spain, some of these possess accounts and documents which show the commissions and corresponding payments made to Goya for his 1 In “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras,” pp. 146-148, notes are published which seem to give expression to and establish our suppositions relating to these portraits, QUEEN MARIA LUISA Plate VIII (p. 40) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 39 pictures. The family of Osuna, undoubtedly the first with whom Goya came into such relations, preserve in their family archives interesting dates referring to our painter. The earliest of these which I know is of 1787, accounts, cheques, and orders of payment referring to seven paintings (none of them portraits) destined for Alameda, and for which the artist received the total sum of 22,000 reales de vellón. The accounts which follow — among these being several for portraits — are later, and we shall speak of these when we arrive at the period to which these works belong. With regard to the portraits, to many of which it is not possible to assign a precise date, there are, however, two which, both for their dress, and above all for their technique and certain details, I now think should be mentioned; these are of the Marquesa de San Andrés, very full of detail, yet with reminiscences of the art of Mengs, both of which left Spain recently, and which, one in Germany and one in England, are preserved in collections unknown to me. There are others in which the dress of the sitter is adorned with a certain border of fur, a particular detail which seems to belong to a passing fashion, since it is not repeated in later years. Among these may be recorded that of D. Mariano Luis de Urquijo, which is in the possession of the Royal Academy of History, and one very special portrait of an unknown gentleman which the collector, M. Van Gelder, possesses in Belgium. Likewise to this period, in my opinion, should be assigned that charming head and shoulders of a young girl in the Brussels Museum (Plate 7), No. 738 of the catalogue; a work simple yet intimate in its character, highly finished, not however with the same detail as that of Mengs, but with the treatment of one who wishes to penetrate and to master thoroughly the characteristic lines of his model. With this work can be also mentioned another not so typical, the portrait of Feliciana Bayeu, niece of Goya, which, as a gift from the Spanish artist, D. Cristobal Ferriz, has been FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 40 in the Museo del Prado (No. 1328 of the catalogue) since the year 1912. The preoccupation, the obsession, of Goya in these years for Spanish art of the seventeenth century, and more particularly for that of Velazquez, continued in a manner which can be traced, although it did not or could not manifest itself in those times. Two details prove this fact, one merely a matter of curiosity, the result on his part of a caprice, the other of more serious interest. The first of these is a portrait of Maria Luisa (Plate 8), a typical example of the numerous series which I have mentioned. This is of full length, and very delicate and careful in execution; the queen wears a crinoline, identical in its form and no less in its proportions than those worn by the ladies of the court of Philip IV, among whom Velazquez had painted the portrait of Doña Mariana de Austria. This portrait by Goya — recalling Velazquez in everything, in its arrangement, the way the sitter is placed, even in its technique — shows us how well the artist had remembered those works, which had made on him so deep an impression. The free technique, the tonality, everything here seems as if inspired by the memory of those works of the great Spanish master. This portrait was in the possession of the Ministry of War, with, as its companion, that of the King — this last a picture much weaker in character, which makes one think of some pupil. Both these were brought to notice, having been come upon in out-of-the- way places of the ministry, by the restorer of the museum, D. Federico Amutio; afterwards, and at the request of the actual Director of the Museum of Modern Art, the distinguished D. Mariano Benlliure, they passed to this museum where they have found a worthy home. The portrait of Maria Luisa, as well as her companion, King Charles IV, and that of Charles III, which was described in the last chapter (p. 17) were mentioned in the “Inventory of the Museum, drawn up in 1849,” and recently studied by the industrious FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 4i and learned secretary of the Museo del Prado, D. Pedro Beroqui. The references are as follows: “2810. Portrait of Señor King Charles III as a huntsman with a dog at his feet. Frame of pinewood inlaid with walnut. Copy of Goya. Height: 7 feet, 5 inches. Width: 4 feet, 6 inches. “ 281 1. Idem of King Charles IVwith hat under his arm, the sceptre and baton of command in his right hand. Frame of pine inlaid with mahogany. Copy of idem. Height: 7 feet, 4 inches. Width: 4 feet, 9 inches. “ 2812. Idem of Queen Doña Maria Luisa with hoop skirt and gun. Frame same as preceding. Copy of Goya. Height: 7 feet, 4 inches. Width: 4 feet, 9 inches.” It will be noted that these three portraits are recorded as “ Copies of Goya.” It is stated, moreover, that they were re- ceived from the royal domain of Buen Retiro in virtue of the royal command of 1847. As far as concerns those of Charles III and Charles IV, we are quite in agreement with their being considered as copies, but not so with reference to that of Maria Luisa, which seems to us an authentic and indisputable work of the master. The other work to which I referred is a most interesting ex- ample, which I recommend to those who take a fancy to such artistic problems. It is the copy made by Goya of the study of the head and shoulders which Velazquez had painted of Pope Innocent X, which is preserved in Rome in the Palazzo Doria. This study, marvellous in its realism, is the one which was until lately preserved in the Hermitage collection (No. 418 of the cata- logue); the copy (I cannot state precisely whether it is of the painting of Rome, of that of the Hermitage, or a third which is mentioned but is to-day unknown) is now in the collection of the Conde de Villagonzalo. It is more a study of colour than a faithful copy. G 42 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Undoubtedly Goya, impressed by the truth and life of the paint- ing by Velazquez, all force and expression, sought to preserve the memory of the work which had so completely captivated him. The copy — as I say, a very free one — is sometimes not worthy of the original: however, the relation of the values and the study of the reds is successfully attained, and what the original has here lost in character is sometimes compensated in the copy by the fineness of colour. An inscription in the lower part of the canvas says: “Innocent X, painted by Velázquez and copied by Goya.” MARQUESA DE PONTEJOS Plate IX (P- 47) CHAPTER III The Grey Portraits — Portraits of the Year 1795 I N the two preceding chapters we have mentioned a good number of portraits, some of real merit and others of interest. We also noticed at the same time marked progress in the development of the artist, who, from his first work of this nature, inspired by that of Mengs and other Spanish painters who imitated the famous Bohemian, begins to acquire his own characteristic features; but for all this he follows them, still obeying in some degree the tend- encies which determined his first steps in painting. If Goya had disappeared from the world of the living in those last years of the decade of 1780, in which he completed forty years of his life, he would not be, certainly, the famous and admired painter of portraits who to-day awakens such interest and curiosity, and whose crea- tions have had a marked and determining influence upon the most important works of the modern schools. His technique develops in a rapid manner. In the years close on 1790 he commences, still hesitating — he produces works, some of them very feeble, and then takes steps backwards which recall earlier portraits, and some fruitless attempts ; then he takes a new and decided direction in the search of a simple and synthetic art, and, above all and more than anything else, of a clear grey scheme of colour. This arrangement and degree of intensity of the different colours of his paintings is not absolutely original in Goya; we recollect having sometimes met with it already in the colour schemes of earlier periods. The men who then employed it were pursuing different ideals from those which animated our painter, but its 13 44 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES ultimate expression when reached — the expression by means of colours, which are the words of painting, and harmonies, which are the language of pictorial art — is the same, and in this respect Goya represents the development of the tendency above indicated. As a matter of fact the scale of greys, which is so delicate, the harmonies of grey and silver, the use of certain carmines and violets — which for the first time are met with in the works of Greco, and, discovered there by Velazquez, were employed in like manner by him to become the most transcendental of his qualities — are pre- cisely those which we shall discover in Goya. Velazquez understood that the great Italian School, in the same way as the schools of the north, was suffering from conven- tionality of colouring; and far from following them, being possessed of an exuberantly rich palette and endowed with an optical organ of the first order, he went direct for his study to nature. Then, with the instruction which the works of Greco offered to help his own observation and with supreme sincerity and simplicity, he employed no more than the colours necessary to obtain the grada- tions which nature presents to our eyes and the harmonies which reality offers to us; givingthe first place, by his own temperament and preference, to those in which are combined all the shades of grey. Goya, whether by study or by instinct — and it is probable that both causes affected him — attained in these years by recourse to a similar technique his own individual method of expression, and succeeded in possessing and dominating it completely by the year 1794, in which I have reason to believe two most remarkable portraits were painted; one of these is that of the Marquesa de la Solana and the other that famous portrait of Bayeu, productions of the choicest character and typical works of capital importance in the history and development of painting. The most important work of Goya in this period, in which in a marked manner he manifests the change in his palette and shows DON SEBASTIÁN MARTÍNEZ -ATE X (P- 53) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 45 this tendency to grey colour, to these harmonies in grey and grey tones, is the “ Portrait of the Ducal Family of Osuna and their children ” (No. 739 in the catalogue of the Museo del Prado). This group, mediocre in composition and in which the children have the appearance of puppets, is, notwithstanding its deficiencies, a work of great novelty in its colouring, of notable artistic independence, and is a landmark in the pictorial development of its author. Goya has here broken loose from that conventional and detailed art, of which we do not know if he was a great admirer or a silent detractor, but which he had been practising more or less from his first portraits onwards. The simplicity of this group, its truth, its loose technique, and its colouring make us think of a restoration of Spanish painting of the best period. Already we recognize in it our own art — the unmistakable and unique qualities of really Spanish painting. In detail it is unequal in construction and strength ; I consider its best feature to be the head of the duchess, of extraordinary truth and delicacy. But the most salient quality of this picture is its ensemble , its total effect without any hardness of outline, just as reality presents itself to our view. Fie tries, just as Velazquez had done in another period, and consequently in another manner, to draw without lines and to paint without making a painting — not to re- produce the things, but the sensation of things within ourselves ; only to succeed in giving us a sensation of truth and surrounding space. The tendency towards grey tonality in this painting is manifest: the children wear dresses of green grey, and their red sashes have a tint of pale grey; the duchess wears a grey dress with a pointed bodice of rose grey; the duke wears dark blue which has no tint of black in it; the long fair hair of the children tends to grey in its reflections, the floor is a warmer grey of un- defined tone, and the group of persons here painted is seen entirely against a grey-green background which has little in it of green and much of grey. One colour alone stands out here; the vermilion 46 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES which appears strongly in the collar, cuffs, and the ribbon of the duke’s hat. Vermilion, as is well known, brings out the grey tones, giving to each grey its true value. This vermilion is the colour which already some years before was occupying Goya’s attention, and which we saw in his “Self Portrait” upon the palette, detached from all the others on the right of the white. This tendency of Goya towards grey, in his productions of these years and those which immediately followed, is clearly manifest. Pie goes on re- fining these harmonies, reducing the vermilion ; this last converts itself into rose, and the rosy tone ends by disappearing altogether in the portrait of Bayeu, which may be called pure grey. This group of the “ Family of Osuna” is of known date. Among the documents belonging to the house of Osuna is a list of pictures and their prices, where we read: “Another large picture by D. Francisco Goya which represents their Excellencies and their children, full length, 12,000 reales.” There is no doubt that this is the work here mentioned. This notice is joined to a document bearing the date 1787. A few years later Goya, under the strong patronage of the Osuna family — especially the Duchess Doña Maria Josefa Pimentel Téllez de Girón y Borja, Condesa Duquesa de Benavente, famous for her riches and her good taste, and the wife of this Duke of Osuna, the ninth of his house to bear the title — made portraits of each of these his patrons. These are half-length figures. The duke is wearing a violet coat, and appears against a blue back- ground, his duchess, in a dress of the period of Marie Antoinette of light blue, is outlined against a greenish background. These are two choice examples of Goya’s oeuvre, and stronger in technique and of superior handling than the work in his group. Fortune separated this pair of pictures in the sale of the collection of the house of Osuna; the portrait of the duke found a home in the collection of Mr. Pierpont Morgan at New York, and that of the duchess remains in the collection of Sr. Bauer in Madrid. The FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 47 archives of Osuna contain also a document which can be connected with these portraits; it runs as follows: “Madrid. 16 July 1785. “ D. Manuel Cubas is commissioned to send an order of pay- ment from His Excellency in favour of D. Francisco Goya, painter, of 4,800 reales de vellón for the two portraits which he has made of their Excellencies.” As this date, 1785, is taken by some as the date of these two portraits, I should here state that I consider this a mistake, and that either this date has been misstated or, what is more probable, the document refers to other portraits which we do not know. The technique of these two pictures indicates to us that they are later by several years than the year 1785; and moreover this mistake is confirmed by the fact that both these persons are clearly depicted as older than in the family group, and this fact I consider as sufficient and more conclusive than any account. The marked change of colour in Goya’s productions of these years, and other details, such as the dress of the sitter, the disposition of the figure, the character of the landscape which serves as the background, make me place in those last years of the decade of 1780 — although I cannot succeed in stating exactly the date — the charming portrait of the Marchesa de Casa Pontejos, the wife of D. Francisco Moñino, brother of the famous Floridablanca (Plate 9) which is to-day preserved in her palace at Madrid by the Marquesa de Pontejos. This figure of Doña Ana de Pontejos, who advances through a park with a carnation in her right hand, dressed in the style of Marie Antoinette and preceded by a quaint little pug dog, gives us the impression of a French marquise who is on her way to a fete at Versailles. This work in fact recalls the art of France, but more in the lady’s dress and appearance than by its technique and colouring, which is already very Spanish. The background makes one think of other similar landscape back- 4 8 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES grounds which Goya made for his cartoons for the tapestries of the royal factory. The well-informed art critic, Señor Vegue, who studied this portrait, especially when it was exhibited in the “ Exhibition of Portraits of Spanish Women ” organized in Madrid by the Society of Friends of Art in the spring of 1918, made, in an article published in “El Imparcial,” a most telling observation in examining closely in this connection the influence of Greco upon Goya. He says: “This becomes clear in the skirt of the Marquesita. The red priming of the canvas is covered with zinc white, rubbed thin in some places and painted heavily in others, and the manner of treating the flowers recalls us to that of the surplice in the ‘ Burial of the Conde de Orgaz,’ and the roses in the ‘Assumption’ in San Vicente. Did Goya accomplish the portrait in question immediately after having undertaken in Toledo the ‘Taking of Christ ’ which we admire in the Sacristy of Santa Iglesia Primada? It seems to me so; and the dates do not prevent it, but they even confirm it.” The portrait of the Marchesa de Casa Pontejos, I consider, belongs to the end of the decade of 1780, and Goya under the date of 2 July 1788 1 speaks of the picture commissioned for Toledo. In this book and later on will be treated fully the influence, which I believe can be traced, of the art of Greco upon Goya. I know another portrait of this same Marquesa de Pontejos, when slightly older and also by Goya’s own hand, although I do not consider it a very striking work. The Marquesa wears here a white dress. This work, moreover, is in a poor state of preservation. It was to be seen in Madrid for sale; I do not know its actual home at present. Some portraits should be mentioned here of the first years of the decade of 1790, which are intimately connected with those of the preceding years — works which are as varying in their tendencies as in their artistic merit — but in some of which we are able to trace 1 See “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras," p. 35. D A TADEA ARIAS DE ENRIQUEZ Plate XI (P- 54) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 49 the evolution of the artist, while others are at the same time interesting through the persons they represent. Under the date 1790 there is a portrait of D. Martin Zapater, of which Zapater, his nephew, makes mention in his little book in the following terms : “ Of this same year is one of the portraits which I know of my uncle, on whose canvas may be read the words: My friend Martin Zapater, with the greatest care and effort I have made your portrait Goya 1790.” Here we come to know the person who was on such intimate terms with the painter — he to whom Goya communicated before anyone else every occurrence, either fortunate or unlucky, of his life, and frequently in the strictest confidence, and to whom he came to offer on a certain occasion amounts of relative importance: “ With the good will which one man can show to another, and little one you and I know that we are agreed in everything, and God has distinguished us from among others, for which we give thanks to the Almighty One.” The portrait which he made on this occasion was very simple and of slight importance; Zapater appears before us in half length, seated, with some papers, on one of which may be read the inscrip- tion above quoted, the signature, and the date. Zapater possessed an extremely large nose, which explains these lines in a letter of Goya’s: “ Do not mock at me with your big nose. ... I am going to make them prepare the canvas for your portrait for I shall not exist until I have accomplished it.” This portrait left Spain ; I saw it in Paris some five years ago when it belonged to M. Durand Ruel; I do not know its present possessor. In point of technique it agrees with that of the date H 5o FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES assigned to it. It may be noted, however, that it is less advanced than those mentioned before, although it shows no very marked change. Much better is the portrait of the same sitter which Goya was to make some years later. Approximately in the years of which we are treating, I am dis- posed to think that the portrait bust of Moratin, which is preserved in the Royal Academy of San Fernando, must have been painted. I notice in this the fineness of touch and the tendency to grey tones which characterize the work of the artist in this period. Leandro Fernandez de Moratin, who was born in the year 1760, would have been then thirty years of age as he is here represented. The portrait is simple, of intimate character, and without any pretensions; but the expression of the sitter’s face and the fineness of the head shows that this work has been done conscientiously, with love and care on the part of the artist. This portrait which, as I have said, I consider to belong approximately to the year 1790, and clearly shows itself to have been taken directly from nature, does not seem likely to have been later than 1792, since at that date Moratin undertook a long journey to Paris first of all and afterwards to London, and on his return both the age of the sitter and the technique of the painting would have been different from those which appear here. These were the times of the first triumphs of Moratin; the two dates above mentioned coincide respectively with the beginnings of “ El Viejo y la Niña” and “ El Café.” Goya and Moratin, men of uncommon character, of exceptional intelligence, and almost of the same genera- tion, were in sympathy in this epoch; and in later years in Bordeaux — where the breakers of life’s sea had carried the two glorious old men — they remembered, when Goya made the second portrait of the author of “El si de las niñas,” the days of this first portrait as times of fullness, of life, and of hope. The first relations with Moratin and with the group of his friends who represented the progressive movement which came from France, and the fact that at this time Goya devoted himself LA TIRANA Plate XII (P- 59) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 5 1 to learning French are, as it were, preludes to this change of his character, of his manner of existence, and even of his whole life, which can be noted in later years. With this change there becomes apparent in the artist a certain pessimism, and even his health passed through a critical stage. He wrote to Zapater at that time: “ I am growing old, with so many wrinkles that you would not know me save for my snub nose and my deepset eyes . . . what is certain is that I am showing my forty years very much, and you perhaps are as well preserved as when at school.” Zapater, who, in his short work, says on several occasions that the character of Goya was simple, his beliefs firmly rooted, his love for his family a part of his intimate nature, and his aspirations modest, notices the change which we are indicating in these years in the art of the painter — a change which was undoubtedly taking place at the same time in his character; he says: “ Up to the year 1789, by which time Goya occupied a more independent position and possessed a name very well known, there is no very notable variation to be found in his ideas. In the date just mentiond his correspondence shows that the change which can be traced in the society of Madrid had awakened in the Aragonese artist other desires, wider aspirations.” This evolution-— this crisis of Goya’s life — was, as everything was in him, of slow development. It did not come, as we see, until forty years of his life had passed; but as far as his art is concerned, this change determines a transformation in a reflective sense, and especially in what belongs to his work as a portrait painter it brings with it a marked progress, as we shall notice in detail later. On 28 August in the year 1790 he made a journey to Valencia to accompany his wife, for whom a change of sea air had been prescribed, He did not stay there very long. This date of 52 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1790, a year later than that in which Goya completed the two religious pictures destined for the chapel of Borja in the cathedral of that city 1 makes us suspect that he may have gone there also to install and arrange his paintings in their places. It is known that Goya took a rest during those months, that he was frequently hunting in Albufera, but that even so he did some work in that period. With this same year and journey may be connected the por- trait of a supposed housekeeper, Dona Joaquina Candado, preserved in the Academy of Fine Arts in Valencia, a person whom it has been sought to connect — in my opinion erroneously — with the famous “ Maja Desnuda.” The reasons on which I have based my opinion have been published in my work, “ Las Majas de Goya,” and I need not dwell on them here. The story has been handed down that this work was commenced by Goya in the open air in the grounds of the Patriarch of Burjasot, where he had been to enjoy a paella , the dish of the province, to which he had been invited by some Valencian friends, and that it was finished the day following in his house. To this same year 1790, during his stay in Valencia, are attributed the portrait which Goya made of D. Mariano Ferrer, the secretary of the local Academy of Fine Arts, and of the Archbishop D. Joaquin Company, both preserved in that city — the second of these in the parish church of San Martin, to which a charitable person who had inherited it from the Archbishop, gave it. A few months later Goya went eastwards, since a writing 2 in his hand exists dated from Zaragoza, 30 October of this same year 1790, expressing his thanks for having been elected a member of the Academy of San Carlos de Valencia. Always with this tendency to keep the note of grey, there 1 See “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras,” p. 33. 2 Reproduced by Manuel González Marti in his article “Goya and Valencia,” published in “Museum,” 1913. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 53 exists a portrait of a boy with fair skin, dressed in a chestnut-coloured coat with white stockings, and seen against a background of clear grey. An inscription on the canvas says: “His Excellency D. Vicente Osorio Conde de Trastamara, at the age of ten years. — Goya.” This is a very delicate work, but not a very strong one. The head in full light (this represents a novelty and marks the tendency to avoid contrasts and deep shadows) is well modelled and refined in colour; the hands are weak, and weak too is the little dog seen on the left of the person represented. This portrait be- longs to the Marquesa de Castrillo (Madrid), and comes, I am told, from a house in Galicia (that of the steward of the family of the sitter), where they think that the picture was some years later than the date at which I place it. From its technique this seems to me its place, and it could be very little later, since the fashion repre- sented so distinctly in the dress of this boy changed very soon after. Equally little known is the other beautiful portrait, dated 1792, of D. Sebastián Martinez (Plate 10). I do not know if the person here treated is the collector of Cadiz of those years; it is probable that this is so. It may be taken as a type of those simple portraits of an intimate character which a few years later Goya brought together and refined in his portrait of his brother-in-law Bayeu, leaving us for ever here a masterpiece as unique as it is powerful. Seated, his body seen in profile, his head turned three- quarters and looking at the spectator, “ D. Sebastián Martinez, by his friend Goya, 1792,” as we are told by a paper which he holds in his left hand, dressed in a blue coat with light stripes and yellow breeches of buckskin, as the sitter comes before us with a truth which seems reality itself. The background is dark grey and harmonizes as many colours as are in the portrait, dominating them all, notwithstanding, by the note of grey. This work was in Paris lately in the Trotti Galley. Similar to the preceding, and perhaps more important even while less suggestive, is the portrait of another friend of Goya, 54 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES D. Tomas Pérez Estala, a native of Aragon, who had married a lady of Segovia and had spent a great part of his life in Segovia as manager of a cloth factory. His descendants appear to have been on friendly relations with the General D. Joaquin Bouligny. The ensemble of this portrait is cold; moreover, it has suffered extensive restoration, and all this detracts from its general appearance. Goya represents his friend in half length, front view, wearing a blue cloth coat, a white waistcoat, and white neck-cloth with red stripes, with black breeches and seated on a divan of yellow damask. All this with grey suggestions and outlined against a plain wall of cold grey tone. The head, even though lightly painted and of brick red tones, is of great character. I consider that the works just mentioned suffice to make us appreciate the evolution of the artist. They are indeed typical works of Goya, which are in no way reminiscent of Mengs, and but little of the works of Goya himself in preceding years. Among his portraits of women at this stage of his development must be remembered a very choice work in the portrait of Doña Tadea Arias de Enriquez (No. 740 of the catalogue) of the Museo del Prado (Plate 1 1). Refined and simple, the moving sympathetic figure of Doña Tadea contrasts with all those rigid, conventional, detailed portraits which had been painted in Spain for the last century. Perhaps it may seem too bold to state that this portrait, though quite of its own period, recalls in some points the works of Velazquez which are so typical of his own epoch, that of the seventeenth century. When Goya had to paint the likeness of this gracious and sympathetic person he did not have in his mind the portraits of women of the Spanish painter of a hundred and fifty years earlier, and nevertheless there is something in this work which connects it with those other Spanish portraits; and this is not through the spirit which animates it, nor through its essential nature, but through its ultimate expression, through its pictorial diction, through its purity of style, through its spontaneity, as MARQUESA DE LA SOLANA Plate XIII (p. 6o) ' FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 55 directly Spanish in its manifestation as are the similar portraits of Velazquez. To be able to define, to express completely in a phrase, in a word, the wherefore of the Spanish character of this work, as of so many others, and to deduce from it the characteristic note of our painting would certainly be an admirable thing, but I think at the same time it would trench upon the ground of con- trovertible and confused abstractions. Pictorial diction is like an idiom of speech constituted by a series of details, of tints giving it a result which makes it different from others, and this result may be understood or not, but is incapable of precise definition. I make this observation before this portrait because it is one of the first of Goya’s in which, forgetting the art he had learnt, he shows in a spontaneous moment clearly and manifestly those qualities characterizing the Spanish school. The portrait of Floridablanca, for instance, could be the work of a Spaniard, or of Mengs, or of any one whatever of his Italian or German imitators; this Doña Tadea speaks to us in Spanish with that pure unmistakable accent which cannot be learnt. Compare this work with other similar works, similar in subject, by Rubens or Rembrandt, Titian or Nattier, or any other great foreign portraitist; and immediately, with no great effort, you will see the difference. And having once established this distinction, and determined the school to which this work belongs and makes it entirely separate from the others, we ought, carrying our analysis still further, to recognize the unique relation which it has with foreign creations. In the midst of its purely Spanish character this portrait has a relation with something outside, with something which has nothing essentially Spanish in it — with the productions of English portrait painters who were Goya’s contem- poraries. But the time has not yet come to treat this point, and the analogies which works of the same epoch offer; I believe that we shall grasp it better when we come to study the portrait of Conde de Fernán Núñez, a work later by a good many years than this present one. 56 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES The portrait of Doña Tadea Arias de Enriquez is suggestive, but it is not one of the strongest of this epoch of Goya. Its key- note is grey; the rose, the colour of her skirt, is softened by the gauze which covers it completely, and the greens of the landscape background are kept very low in tone. The wide ribbon, which forms her waistband, and a large bow, constitute a precious black note, giving its full value to the colour of this portrait. The black, which will eventually represent in the works of Goya’s last years what the vermilion represents in those of his middle life — the tone to which everything is subordinated and is brought into relation — makes me wonder sometimes whether this portrait may not be later than I have thought, and whether its true place may be where I have mentioned it. To judge by the age at which the monarchs are painted, this is the place to permit ourselves to mention that pair of portraits of the king and queen, three-quarter length figures, recalling to a great extent the numerous portraits attributed to Goya and of which I have spoken in the last chapter. Those which I am now mentioning are unquestionably later, but previous to the year 1794. Their technique seems equally to show this; they are unquestionably more advanced, much more free, more masterful; they are slight in their execution, and in them the artist shows that he has progressed, and has made the best combination of his oil pigments. These portraits are preserved in the collection of the Marqués de Casa Torres (Madrid). In the Museum of Bilbao is preserved a portrait likeness, very free in its execution, of the Queen Maria Luisa. It is a pity that in this work the head has suffered a lamentable restoration, a complete re-painting destroying the fine ensemble , which, to judge by the rest of the figures, this portrait must have at one time possessed. Beautiful from every point of view is the oval in which Goya had represented D. Ramón de la Posada y Soto, a person who FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 57 occupied in Cadiz, in the year 1812, the Presidency of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice. Against a dark background of grey-green is seen the seated figure of this sitter, who wears a dark green coat upon which the cross of Charles III is apparent, and a light figured waistcoat. It is a very admirable work, but one not showing in any precise manner what could be its date. It has been painted upon prepared ground of clear reddish tone, precisely that which is used by Goya in these works characterized by their grey tones; a preparation much less dark, although more intense, than that red used by him in previous years, and which he came to use again in his canvases painted after 1795. The famous architect, D. Juan de Villanueva — author of so many plans and constructor of so many buildings in Madrid at this time, among them that one which was designed for a Museum of Natural History, and which is to-day the Museo del Prado — had been born in 1731, and in the years we are studying in this chapter was between sixty and seventy; as such he is represented in the strong and masterly portrait Goya made of him, and which is to-day preserved in the Royal Academy of San Fernando. In the years which precede 1794 the correspondence, or at least the letters which have come down to us, directed by Goya to Zapater, are less frequent and less interesting than those of previous periods. On 23 April of the year just mentioned there is one which throws some light on the painter Esteve and his relations with Goya. It is as follows: “ I also would like you to tell me if you happen to see a miniature painting which has been done for the Conde de Sástago of Doña Ramon Pignatelli what you think of it, for it was done by Esteve who has turned out to be an easy painter of excellent miniatures, and I hope you will like it as much as I do, for I have been the means of his painting in this method, for I have read in his appearance, although he did not know it himself that he had 1 58 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES this talent, and I can tell you if you were here I should make him paint me one of you, and take it about in a box. I am about the same as regards to my health, at times raging with such bad temper that I cannot bear myself, at other times more calm, as at the present moment when I take my pen to write to you, and am already getting tired, so that I will only tell you that on Monday if God wills I shall go to the bull fight, and I should like you to accompany me, for the next Monday although you should tell me some nonsense about having gone mad. Thy Paco.'’ In 1794 is dated the portrait of the illustrious jurisconsult, Colon de Larriategui, which, after having belonged to more than one collection in Madrid, passed out of our country. The sitter, a Knight of Santiago, with blue uniform and silver braid, a red waistcoat with silver and black breeches, painted three-quarter length, seated almost in profile, and turning slightly his head towards the spectator, with a pen in his right hand, lets it be known that he is the author of the open book which lies upon a table, on the first page of which is to be read: “ Military Tribunals of Spain by D. Félix Colón de Larriategui.” The date of the picture appears more in the background on a sheet of paper. Considering the relative importance of this portrait it is not very strong or typical; it must have been made in one of those days on which, as Goya said in his letter just quoted, he was in such a bad temper that he could not bear himself. The observations I am making with regard to this portrait are of a relative character, since it is very fine in parts; nor must we forget that it belongs to a very important and masterly period of its author’s career. In fact, this date 1794, or perhaps the year following, re- presents the moment at which the production of the artist rose to its highest point, and when the importance of those grey tones which had for some time been insistently developing becomes completely dominant. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 59 Dated in the year last mentioned is the first of the portraits of “ La Tirana.” I say the first because there are two of these. I shall speak of the second, where the model appears at a more advanced age, when we come to study the date to which I believe it belongs. “Maria del Rosario, La Tirana Por Goya — 1794” (Plate 12). This is what we are told by the paper the sitter holds in her left hand. This date coincides with the year in which Maria del Rosario was leading lady of the company of which Manuel Martinez was director, and which was playing in the Teatro del Principe. La Tirana was leading lady in the period between April 1792 and the end of the year 1794, when her place was taken by Andrea Luna. The company in which Maria del Rosario was acting was of great importance, and in it Antonio Robles took the lead as lover, and Rita Luna was understudying for leading lady. Of middle height, standing erect and facing the spectator, with her beautiful long hair loose and falling over her shoulders, and without other adornment on her head save some flowers, the famous actress presents herself to us in this first portrait which Goya made of her with a simplicity and reality which appeal to us directly. All here is grey, perhaps even exaggerated grey, giving a certain monotony to this work which none the less is most beautiful from many points of view. Grey is the background, grey is the general tone of the dress resulting from a yellow completely covered by white gauze. The flesh tones are of a truth coming very near to perfection. The left hand, the only one which appears, is admirable in drawing, in delicacy, and in colour; this hand, slightly clenched, is real flesh. This work belongs to the Marquesa de Valdeolmos (Madrid). It should be remembered as an interesting fact that in this portrait, which appeared in the exhibition of Goya’s works in 1900, the inscription at that time did not run precisely as it does now. The date and signature were the same, but not so the name of the sitter. She was called then “ Doña Maria de las Mercedes Fernandez,” and it has been discovered that all this part 6o FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES had been repainted. Cleverly cleaned later, the true name then appeared “ Maria del Rosario, La Tirana,” which is, as above stated, what the picture shows to-day. I relate this because, apart from the curious fact of the change of name made by its old possessor, the photograph of the picture in the first edition of this book dated from the exhibition of 1900, and on it appeared as it was then the mistaken inscription differing from what the original shows to-day; the latter being the one seen in the phototype which appeared in this book in its second edition, made expressly for it, on the occasion of the “Exhibition of Portraits of Spanish Women” held in Madrid in 1918, in which this portrait figured among the most notable works then exhibited. To this year 1794 or the one following, as I have already mentioned, I consider that the two best portraits belong which Goya made in his scheme of grey, those of the Marquesa de la Solana and of Bayeu. They are the most advanced in technique and in the handling of tones of this phase of their author; and since they have both very evidently been taken from life, and both the sitters died in the year 1795, I think that with reasonable certainty we can place them as above, and attribute to them the date I have mentioned. Doña Rita Barrenechea y Morante, Marquesa de la Solana, wife of the Conde del Carpió, is seen standing upright, with her hands crossed, giving us the impression of a lady who is attractive and sympathetic, although not beautiful (Plate 13). She was a woman of intelligence and of artistic tastes, devoted to literature and especially to poetry. Her portrait, one of the most admirable of Goya’s works, must have been painted a very little time before the death of the Marquesa, which took place on 29 November 1795, when she was still a young woman. Her figure is seen against a background of diffused grey, delicate in tone, which in no way interferes with it, and seems to represent a grey-blue sky with a very low horizon, somewhat more obscure and contrasting with the FRANCISCO BAYEU Plate XIV (p. 61) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 61 ground, the note of tone being lighter and always grey. This work does not contain any brilliant effect; it is delicacy itself, quite in keeping with the complexion and frail aspect of this lady, who seems to have centred all her short life into a look. She wears a dress of black velvet, and, falling from her head, covering her body, has a white mantilla of quiet tones which strikes a middle note, with white gloves and a closed fan; white shoes with black bows cover her tiny feet, and as her ornament she carries nothing save a bow of faint rose, as dead, as pale as the head which it adorns, and some little humble flowers, which in no way jar upon a composition as faultless as it is modest. The work can be quoted as a typical example of Spanish painting. Not long ago it passed into the collection of Sr. Beistegui (Paris), coming there from the testamentary estate of the Marqués del Socorro, great-grandson of the sitter. It reached in the sale the figure of 500,000 francs. Of the same period exactly as the last portrait is that seated half-figure in which Goya represented his brother-in-law, the painter Francisco Bayeu, who died, like the Marquesa de la Solana, in the year 1795. It appears in the Museo del Prado, No. 721 of the catalogue (Plate 14). The canvas, or to speak more correctly the preparation of the canvas, as can be noticed in some parts not entirely covered, is grey very slightly tinted with red, much lighter than that employed later by the artist and identical with that of the portrait of the Solana. I consider this head of Bayeu, besides being a piece of painting of unequalled sensibility, as a marvellous lesson of technique, seeing that in full light without any shadow, the darkest point being the pupils of the eyes, there has been obtained notwithstanding a perfect modelling, and this only with middle tints. Even when it might seem done in a slight manner this is not so. The mellow softness of that head has not been obtained at the first touch; everything has been studied in order to attain its fine quality in character; and the lines of the profile, of the eyes and of the mouth, with the object of their not being lost, were drawn Ó2 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES over the canvas with pen and ink. This remarkable detail can be traced when the picture is seen in a very strong light. But this head, which has been so carefully worked out, was then simplified later, giving the sensation of a piece of easy spontaneous work and obtaining a note of unique delicacy. And, however admirable this head, no less beautiful is the rest of the work, by the side of which all other painting seems hard and dry. Certain careless details, like the drawing of the left arm of the sitter and the perspective of the armchair with its two unequal arms, are Goyesque inaccuracies, which may be passed over. As to the colouring here, vermilion is absolutely proscribed; all is grey, but with a supreme correctness. The coat with its leaden reflections does not appear metallic, but gives us just the sensation of its material; and all these greys are related, differentiated, and brought into their true values one with the other. This work is a triumph of painting, and can be considered as one of the finest harmonies of grey art has ever produced. The constant continuation of this note would have become monotonous. When we have noted that there had been attained by Goya at the same time as this scheme of colour an absolute mastery and power of technique, we shall pass on to study the productions of the painter in the following years, and shall remember in so doing especially those works, so rich in colour, of five years later, of 1800, to which date can approximately be related the portraits of the court; but before doing so we shall bring forward, even when they can merely be mentioned, several portraits of varying merit, and showing a most fruitful production in those years which were for him years of glory and of gain. Another portrait of Bayeu must be recorded here which is preserved in the Museum of Valencia. It is a beautiful work: some, especially the natives of Valencia, who are justly proud of it, con- sider it more powerful than that of Madrid. Perhaps the head is indeed more luminous: I believe this is owing to the fact that the rest Plate XV FRANCISCO JAVIER GOYA (Son of the Artist) (p. 65) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 63 of the picture, being darker, gives more effect to the head. Even though this is the same in both portraits the rest of the painting has variations, not only in the colour but in the position of the sitter, for in that of Valencia he is seen standing upright, with a canvas in front of him. I consider this work, which is dated 1786, as eight or nine years anterior to that in Madrid. The difference of age which the sitter shows seems to confirm the dates just men- tioned. This work was given to the Fine Arts of Valencia by D. Benito Monfort in the year 1851. There are two portraits of unknown ladies, foreign in their appearance and colour, in which black and white are given dominant note; foreign too is the dress of the sitters, seeming to hint at a passing fashion, as we see it but little repeated in other portraits of this period. One of them, in the Van Geldern collection in Belgium, is a beautiful work. With these can be connected another portrait of a lady, which, although weaker than those just mentioned, is none the less considered by some connoisseurs an authentic work by Goya. This was in the Palace of Riofrio, and has since been transferred to another royal residence. I will mention three portraits of ladies possessing a certain general similarity. One of these is of the Doña Maria Ignacia Alvarez de Toledo, Marquesa de Astorga, Condesa de Altamira, and her daughter, a baby girl whom she holds on her knee. It is a beautiful portrait, but has been much damaged and to-day is in a dirty condition ; another is that of Doña Maria Teresa Apodaca de Sesma in a light dress seated, and that of the Marquesa de Casa Flores, in white, two works of great delicacy. Both these portraits left Spain a few years ago: the former was formerly in the State Gallery of Vienna, and has since found its way into a New York collection. Of interest likewise is the half-length portrait of a seated figure, said to represent the wife of Ceán Bermudez. She is busied on some needlework on a large cushion. The face of this lady is 64 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES expressive rather than beautiful; the dress and the blue trimming, the best part of the picture, have been painted with much grace and lightness of touch. This work when some years ago in Madrid was dirty, and the colour cracking in several places. I was able to see it later in Budapest in the National Museum, where it is admirably preserved, cleaned, and restored. Another portrait of a lady, which ought to be mentioned here, is one representing the Marquesa de Bajamar; and no less so two others which I do not know, that of the Duquesa de Castroterreño, mentioned with approval by some critics, and that of the Marquesa de Espeja, this last in the possession of the Duque de Valencia (Madrid). With respect to portraits of men: the enumeration of those which can be attributed to these years would be too large, and it is more convenient to place these in the catalogue than to treat them in this chapter. We need here remind our readers only of the one said to be of Gasparini, a very delicate and expressive head, those of Camarón and Melia, and of the engraver Carmona, in private collections in Paris. With regard to this last it is possible from the age of the sitter to fix the date of the portrait; but it has so happened that I have not been able to decide which of the three Carmonas, who were engravers at approximately the same period, is the one whose portrait is painted here. It seems nevertheless probable that this may be the most famous of them, Salvador Carmona, who, born in 1730, died in 1807. Dated 1797 is a portrait I know of by Goya of some interest, preserved in the Groult collection (Paris); on it appears the following inscription: “ D.n Bernardo Iriarte Vice prot.r of the Royal Academy of the three noble arts. Painted by Goya in testimony of mutual esteem and affection. The year of 1797.” Although the head is well drawn and it is a well-thought-out and very complete portrait, it is more interesting in every way as a document than as a work of art. PEDRO ROMERO Plate XVI (p. 69) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 65 Lastly, before I finish this chapter, the study of the produc- tions of Goya in his grey note, should be mentioned the portrait of “ L’homme gris ” (Plate 15), very famous in Paris, although not generally well known. This “ Grey Man ” is no other than the son of Goya (not the grandson, as has been sometimes wrongly stated) represented in this portrait, which is so admirable for its delicacy of treatment, as dressed in grey against a grey background, with white waistcoat and cravat and yellow gloves. Best in this work are the head and the white portions. The dog here depicted is the weakest part, even when he comes out well as a note of colour. This portrait is in the possession of M. Ferdinand Bischoffsheim (Paris). In the same hands is to be found the portrait said to be the pendant of this last, representing the wife of young Goya. This is hard and ordinary, a work undoubtedly authentic but not very successful. According to Lefort it would treat of the same person whose portrait was engraved by her father-in-law in 1805, an engraving which Lefort himself published as the portrait of Doña Gumersinda Goicoechea, wife of the son of Goya. Likewise in the possession of M. Bischoffsheim is the portrait of a singer, Doña Lorenza Correa, a half-length of pleasing appear- ance, but not one of the artist’s best works. K CHAPTER IV Bull-fighters — Majas — Portraits of the Last Five Years of the Eighteenth Century HE years in which Goya lived are precisely those when the bull-fight developed greatly, became altered in its character, and a popular amusement. The relations of the artist with this national amusement are famous; let us see how and why. The origin of the bull-fight is Spanish; it was neither invented by the Romans, as some have said, nor brought over by the Arabs. There is a convincing reason to prove this, which is that for such an amusement to exist it is a fundamental condition that there should be courageous bulls; and this animal — which in some measure holds his own against man — when he lives and feeds on the pastures of the Iberian peninsular becomes fierce and ready to attack, and gores with his horns. Hence it is that only the Spaniards, to utilize, dominate, and, in a word, to avail themselves of this kind of cattle, have made use of proceedings and means suggested by their own cleverness. These methods, belonging in their origin to life in the country, were learnt and utilized by the knights and nobles, who thus created a proper means for displaying their dex- terity and courage. To this new sport they abandoned themselves and turned it into a public spectacle, into a holiday festival; and on horseback themselves they let loose the bulls into enclosed bull-rings, and then, dismounting, killed them with the sword when their own chargers were dead or wounded (a difficult combat called Empeño a pie), in this way training themselves for war and rivalling each other before the court and the ladies who enjoyed this exciting spectacle. From the Cid down to Charles V many were the knights, 66 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 67 and even some monarchs amongst them, who practised this difficult exercise. It continued in use and even increased during the reigns of the Austrian kings, and there was no rejoicing or great event which was not celebrated by royal bull-fights; but always with the same character of not allowing the public to attend these bull- fights, as they had not a public character. When in the eighteenth century the dynasty of the Bourbons came to rule, Philip V manifested his dislike for this spectacle, and the court, following the taste of their monarch, abandoned in great part its preference for the corridas. But while enthusiasm for bulls and bull-fighting declined in the aristocracy, the people, who had become attached to the amusement, organized another kind of bull-fight. The lower class then appeared fighting the bull on foot; these new bull-fighters had naturally to be rewarded, and were so most liberally. And there now appears the art of bull-fight- ing as a profession, and consequently the professional, the torero , a person who was completely new at that time. New bull-fighting manoeuvres ( suertes ) were invented, the apprenticeship to this craft was made more easy, and books were published giving rules to which the fighters were subject. These last practised and perfected themselves as far as they could, and thus created the art of Tauromaquia . The Spanish aristocracy now united with the people in this enthusiasm for bull-fights, and both classes applauded and welcomed their favourites in the art. The nobility no longer took an active part in the contest as their ancestors had done, but they went to the spectacle and encouraged their favourites, whom they protected and even admitted to a certain intimacy. The people’s enthusiasm increased the passion for the sport, which spread, and both the aristocracy and the lower classes made an idol of the torero. In the full heat of this enthusiasm, stimulated by the princely gift of Ferdinand VI, who constructed and offered to the public a Plaza de Toros at the Hospital of Madrid, arose in the second half of the 68 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES eighteenth century a most brilliant and famous constellation of bull-fighters. These last invented new suertes. Francisco Romero seeks to kill the bulls face to face, exciting them with a little red flag. Costillares executes for the first time the feat of volapié , and it now becomes the fashion to adorn the fighters with showy dresses of silk covered with braid and fringe. Pedro Romero (grandson of Francisco), with a style of his own which was restrained, elegant, serene, and reposeful, was the founder of the Rondena school, which had its enthusiastic partisans. And his rival, Joseph Delgado, “ Millo,’’ brave to the point of rashness, founded the school of Seville, the polished, lively, and moving art of bull-fighting, in which all is grace and adornment. The great ladies of noble lineage who lost their heads over these persons had their own seats in the Plaza from which they watched the corrida with intense emotion. We are told that in the Royal Corrida, celebrated to solemnize the accession of Charles IV, Pepe Millo, wounded by one of the bulls, was carried in the arms of his companion and rival, Romero, to the balcony of the Condesa de Benavente, Duquesa de Osuna, in the midst of a delirious ovation to the wounded bull-fighter, his generous rival, and the noble patroness of bull-fighters. As we have seen, this form of sport reached its height, and the passion of the public for it became a perfect frenzy, precisely in those years in which Goya, an enthusiast for popular life in all its forms, left us his reminiscences of those lively arenas, of the picturesque spectacles, and this very art of bull-fighting in a number of rough sketches, drawings, and studies, and in his famous collec- tion of etchings, “The Tauromaquia.” On the other hand the portraits he made of those toreros are neither numerous nor especially select. Of Costillares I know three very similar. They are only head and shoulders; one of them can be seen in the collection of the Conde del Asalto; in it the bull- fighter is represented with his head encircled behind with a blue DUQUESA DE ALBA Plate XVII (p. 7 2) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 69 handkerchief and wearing a green jacket with gold braid, a crimson waistcoat with gold trimming, a white cravat, and a black scarf hanging from his neck. The second of these portraits, seen by me in Paris, is almost identical with the one I have just described. The third, belonging to the collection of Sr. Lazaro (Madrid), has some variations; the torero is wearing a jacket of brighter hues and the ensemble of the work is lighter in colour and technique. In the exhibition of Goya’s works in the year 1900 there appeared two noticeable portraits of toreros ; one of Pedro Romero (Plate 16) in the collection of the Duque de Veragua, very refined in its execution ; and the other of José Romero, the property of the Duque de Ansola. It is not difficult to fix approximately the dates of these por- traits through the period in which the toreros are represented. They can be reckoned as belonging to the last ten years of the eighteenth century, judging by the following dates: Costillares (? -1800), Romero (1754-1839). It has been a common thing to confuse the inajos with the toreros\ thence comes the mistake which has arisen, and the report that Goya had spent years and years in painting portraits of toreros. What he did paint were portraits of majos , which is not the same thing. The majos and majas are those persons who at the end of the eighteenth century and the beginningof the nineteenth adopted the popular costume, at that time very similar to that used by the toreros. Very shortly afterwards this picturesque dress became generally used by all classes of society, including — one might even say preferentially by — the aristocratic class. Goya made a great number of portraits of ladies and gentlemen in this dress of the majo. As it happens that the lady who was the most maja of her time was the Duquesa de Alba of those years, and as the portraits which Goya made of her have to be now mentioned, this point deserves special examination. 70 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Dona Maria del Pilar Teresa Cayetana de Silva Alvarez de Toledo, thirteenth Duchess of Alba, was a woman of no common type. She was what might be called a modernist of her time. Breaking with the stiff traditions of the Spanish aristocracy, she led an independent and unconventional life, which won her im- mediately the sympathy of the people, the amazement of the middle class, and the hatred of the nobility, her equals. Haughty, graceful of figure, elegant and charming, of pale complexion and black hair, and an expressive and intelligent face, the Duchess of Alba carried all before her in Madrid, rivalling the Duquesa de Benavente, and even the Queen Maria Luisa, both of whom she equalled in ex- travagance and excelled in beauty. Devoted to and a patroness of the arts, and herself an admirable model for a refined artist like Goya, the de Alba and the painter seemed destined to meet and to comprehend each other. Their artistic relations were the source of friendship, of protection, and sympathy. The intimacy of these two persons has passed into history. Chance has lent its aid to make of it a legend, and the legend has become established. Is there any- thing in it which is certain and secure? Perhaps, even although nothing has been proved; a few sentences of some intimate letter, an engraving, not published for certain, a something which is reported and goes on growing like a snowball — these are things of no great consequence nor of capital importance. Only it can and should be stated that all the extraordinary and exceptional import- ance which tradition assigns to this connection seems inexact, or at least exaggerated. The last years of the eighteenth century were those in which the intimacy between the painter and the duchess was at its greatest. But then she was thirty years of age or more and Goya had passed his fiftieth year, and this, joined with the fact that he was in bad health and as deaf as a stone wall, leads one to think that he did not combine the conditions most suitable for appearing the bold and terrible gallant which the story relates to us. What is certain, what should be stated, for it affects the creative DUQUESA DE ALBA Plate XVIII (p. 7 2) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 7 1 genius of our artist, is that Goya, when he came to know the de Alba, captivated by the beauty of her type, by the lines of her body, by the grace of her form, recalled them afterwards a thousand times in his drawings, in his etchings, and those picaresque figures which are so artistic, made by him from memory. The duchess died in the prime of her youth in the year 1802, but in the artist there remained the memory of the graceful silhouette of his friend and protectress, and remained there all his life; for even in the last drawings made by Goya at Bordeaux, when the painter had passed his eightieth year, we recognize, like a far distant shadow in the wavering lines of the pencil or the shaky pen, that slight graceful figure, that same model who thirty years before had inspired an artist’s love. Goya painted different portraits of the duchess, which were taken from nature, and from them made others which were more slight and insignificant; but to suppose from this that the enor- mous quantity so attributed are portraits by Goya of the de Alba is a very different thing. Whenever a portrait of a lady of that period in Goya’s manner is met with it has been frequently put down as a Duchess of Alba by the famous painter. I propose only to mention here those portraits of indisputable originality, and of which it can be said that they are the typical portraits from which later so many copies and imitations were made. The first, where the sitter is at her youngest, is of three- quarter length, seated, her hair covered with a large hat and appearing against a dim background in which we can rather guess at than see a little dog and a bird. The duchess appears in this portrait as being about twenty years old. The arrangement of the portrait and its technique agree perfectly with the works of those years — from 1 780 onwards — moreover, the lack of the special care in treatment, of the love with which this figure was treated by Goya in later years, inclines me to believe that this picture was not of later date. 72 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES “To the Duquesa de Alba, Francisco de Goya, 1795”; such is the dedication of the fine portrait preserved in the Palacio de Liria (Plate 17). The charming duchess in her thirty-third year is seen standing upright, extending her right arm, pointing without doubt to the dedicatory inscription which, judged by its size, is so finely done that even when looking at the picture, close to, it is difficult to notice it. She wears a white dress of fine transparent material, spotted, and with a light trimming of gold around the hem of the skirt; a broad crimson sash of decided tone; ribbons of the same colour at her breast and on her head; the black and beautiful hair, unbound, falls in a mass of curls. Her figure appears against a very delicate open background, painted with great reserve. This portrait, by its date immediately posterior, is almost contemporary with those lately studied by us in the previous chapter, and shows this fact in its technique; the grey tones are still followed, but more clear, more white, one might almost say less grey, and combined with those other colours which will enrich Goya’s palette in later years, losing thereby much in its delicacy, and gaining in exchange much in richness and colouring. Of two years later, dedicated and signed in the same way, there is another portrait not less important than the above of the same person, in which she wears the typical dress of the maja (Plate 18). The duchess wears here a black dress with a mantilla of the same colour, and a short jacket of strong yellow. Her figure is seen against a very delicate blue sky and a dreamy land- scape — a landscape in Corot’s manner, as delicate as the sky. On the ground in the first plane appears the name of Goya and the date of 1797. She points to the name with her right hand, as if to indicate it is at her feet; and without doubt it was put there for her, for the writing is found inverted, that is to say the sitter reads it straight. This work, proceeding from the Goyena collection, is preserved in the “ Hispanic Society of America,” for which it was D. JOSÉ ALVAREZ DE TOLEDO, DUQUE DE ALBA VTE XIX (P- 73) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 73 acquired by its illustrious president, the famous lover of Spain, Mr. Archer M. Huntington. The de Alba, patroness and friend of Goya in the following years, frequented his studio, served him as model, and the intimacy between the painter and the lady of rank is reflected in a letter from Goya to Zapater, dated in jest from London, the letter being from Madrid on 2 August 1800. He says in one of the sentences: “You had better come and help me to paint the de Alba, who yesterday came into my studio to paint her face and came out with this suggestion; certainly I should like this better than painting on canvas, and she also wishes me to make her portrait in full length, and she will come as soon as I have finished a sketch of the Duque de la Alcudia on horseback.” This letter, already published, though not always faithfully, and with an interpretation as incorrect as it was maliciously intended, has been the reason for some writers, particularly foreigners, having invented anecdotes in this connection which are more or less extravagant. In the possession of the Duque de Aliaga is another portrait, perhaps the last made by Goya, of the Duchess of Alba. It is much less important than those already mentioned; it is moreover freely restored, is in a state of deplorable preservation, and, in a word, is a complete ruin; but I quote it here especially on account of its being a portrait of another type, less intimate, we might almost say more official, in which the lady painted wears a society dress, of a fashion which seems to indicate that this work is some years later than those already described. Of the husband of this Duquesa de Alba, D. José Alvarez de Toledo, eleventh Marques de Villafranca, there exists a beautiful portrait which must be reckoned as having been painted in the same years as those of his wife. Goya depicts him on foot, full length, leaning on a clavicord on which rest his black hat and a L 74 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES violin. The model here holds open in his hand a sheet of music on which may be read: “ Cuatro cone . . . con acomp . . . de Haydn.” The background of the portrait is grey in part; and the other part, that against which the head is seen, is formed by a dark green curtain. The sitter wears a crimson coat, a white waistcoat with spots, high close-fitting boots showing the stockings above the knees, and grey breeches. This Duke of Alba, husband of the Duchess, appears here as a man of aristocratic and refined type, passionately fond of music, but not very interesting. It is a work less free in comparison with the great portraits of those years, of which it is nevertheless contemporary. The mother of this nobleman, Da. Maria Antonia Gonzaga y Caracciolo, wife of the tenth Marquis of Vi llaf ranea, had likewise her portrait painted by Goya, perhaps some years before. This portrait of her is almost three-quarter length, with the hands showing, and ranks in the production of the author among his compositions of delicate grey. It is somewhat timid in its execution, as a whole smoothly treated, but the head, full of life and character, animates the figure of this high-born and beautiful lady, who still preserves in her simplicity of adornment and dress, like a trace of past festivities, some blue ribbons and a flower — a rose — modest as herself, which she carries on her breast, pinned into her white shawl. This admirable portrait might well be called “ La Señora de la Rosita,” as it is now named by its noble possessor. Curious in its composition and arrangement is the portrait of Doña Maria Tomasa Palafox y Portocarrero, wife of the twelfth Marqués de Villafranca, the brother of the one mentioned above. This Doña Maria Tomasa was undoubtedly an artist; Goya has painted her seated in full length, with the brush in her right hand and the mahlstick in her left, contemplating her work, a canvas on which appears the portrait of her husband. The tones of the picture are warm, such as in fact correspond with the date which appears on the armchair, “ Goya 1804.” The lady wears a white D A MARIA TOMASA PALAFOX Y PORTOCARRERO, MARQUESA DE VILLAFRANCA Plate XX (P- 74) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 75 and gold dress, and appears entirely against a dark background blended with reds and carmines ; on her palette, placed on a stand, are the words “ Maria Teresa Palafox.” The head, very alive in its expression, the dress, the mastery of the colour, the originality of the composition — everything, in short, makes this portrait an important work of its creator. I have mentioned these three portraits together in spite of the difference in their dates, because they are united as belonging to the same family. To their interest as works of art is added the fact that they are almost unknown; they did not appear in the “ Exhibition of the Works of Goya,” nor have they been, as far as I know, shown on any other occasion. They are preserved to-day in the house of the Dowager Marquesa de los Vélez, widow of the eldest son of the house of Villafranca. 1 Not a few of the important portraits of Goya were copied or, perhaps, repeated by the artist himself. Types of these works which I consider replicas may be found in those slightly executed paintings to-day in the possession of the Marquesa de Caltabu- turu, and which are almost identical repetitions of that of the Duquesa de Alba in the Palacio de Liria, and that of her husband, the Marqués de Villafranca above described. Perhaps the two portraits were pendants at one time, and were separated after the death of this married couple. From this noble pair there was no issue, and, on the death of the duchess in 1802, the estates and titles of Alba passed to the Dukes of Berwick. The present possessor of these two dukedoms who, uniting to his English lineage the highest Spanish nobility — this last heightened through his mother, Doña Maria del Rosario Falcó y Osorio, of the house of Fernán Núñez, from whom he perhaps 1 They were reproduced for the first time for the purpose of publication at my request on the occasion of my compiling the second volume of this series, “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” In this work (Plates 60, 6 1 , and 62) there are the above- mentioned reproductions. 7 6 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES inherits that love of art which was so strong in her — preserves in his Palacio de Liria, that model of a nobleman’s mansion, other works of Goya of great importance, and which, as they belong to these years, should be properly mentioned in this connection. The originality of one important work, the group of Doña Maria Francisca de Sales Portocarrero y Zimiga, sixth Condesa del Montijo, and her four daughters, has been disputed. The Condesa, in the centre of the canvas, is represented seated and bending over an embroidery frame ; her daughters encircle her, two of them seated and two behind standing dressed in white. The five ladies wear their hair loose and curled in the fashion of the time. This group has something very strange in its composition, technique, and colouring, which at first sight makes us exclude the idea that it can be by Goya. Some think and affirm that it is by Wertmuller. Given the age of the Condesa and her daughters, the painting should not be earlier than the year 1794, when the Condesa, born in 1754, would have been forty years of age. This work is therefore in the period we are now treating — a period already advanced, in which the mastery of the artist contrasts with this somewhat unnatural group of figures who are in certain points stiff, conventional, and wanting in freedom. Studied attentively, there may be observed details, touches of brushwork, which in fact do appear to be by Goya’s hand. It is certainly difficult to pronounce a definite opinion before works of a similar character, and admitting its originality this is a fresh reason for us to appreciate the variety of this artist. Did someone assist him in these years, someone besides Esteve — since the manner and technique of Esteve in no way resemble what this canvas shows us? There are no facts to confirm this; moreover, I fully believe that this idea ought to be excluded; and that this canvas and certain others which have a likeness with it, and which at first sight awaken doubts of their paternity, must be considered original, although somewhat strange in character. MARQUESA DE LAZAN Plate XXI (p. 77) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 77 I recollect among them one very beautiful and out of the common, always considered from certain points of view as an original work of Goya, and one which preserves certain analogies with the group just described. This is the portrait of Doña Maria Ildefonsa Dábalos y Santa Maria, in the collection of the Conde de Villagonzalo. The series of portraits by Goya within the Palacio de Liria is completed by one justly claiming its place among the choicest works of the painter, that of Doña Maria Gabriela Palafox y Portocarrero, Marquesa de Lazán (Plate 19). This lady was born in 1779, and here appears about twenty years of age. The technique of the work coincides absolutely with the last years of the eighteenth century, which are precisely those of the picture. Standing in a light and easy pose on her left leg, over which she has crossed the right, its foot appearing with grace and coyness, her swaying figure showing its womanly curves unreservedly in all their natural splendour, the Marquesa de Lazán, resting on the back of a chair, with a plain background behind her, comes before us looking out fixedly with her dark eyes, which are overflowing with life. Her black hair, curled, flowing loose and restrained only by two narrow bands of gold, frames her beautiful and wonderfully lighted face. She wears a white dress of very fine material, adorned with spots and trimming of gold, straps over the shoulders of the same colour, and, falling behind her, a dark train. Over the chair is seen her cloak, lined with ermine. The general note of this picture, its tonality — darker than those quoted as typical of Goya’s production in preceding years, which are characterized by the clear tones of grey-carries us for- ward, as if without our knowing it, to the works coinciding with the great court portraits painted in the last and first years respect- ively of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, to the study of which we shall devote ourselves in the following chapter. But before doing so we have to mention some of those characteristic ladies whom 78 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Goya painted with such telling effect dressed as majas', and certain works dated or whose date is known, belonging to the last five years of the eighteenth century — that is to say later than the portraits of the Marquesa de la Solana and of Bayeu, which we have taken as typical of the whole tendency which pre-occupied the artist for several years. Just as when speaking of the portraits of toreros I pointed out that we ought not to confuse the figures of majos with the portraits of persons dressed as majo, here I insist on something very similar, which is that we ought not to confuse the figures of majas, which are not portraits, with the portraits of ladies in the maja dress. These last fall within the subject we have chosen for this work, and are for this reason the only ones we have to mention here. A fine example of these, although not very characteristic in its technique, is the portrait of Dona Isabel Corvo de Pórcel, preserved in the National Gallery of London (No. 1473 of the catalogue). She is a beautiful and haughty blonde, whose type is so little Spanish that the classical mantilla and the dress of those times seem scarcely appropriate. Perhaps, however, the restoration has influ- enced all this. In colouring this work is very successful, the clear fresh skin of the sitter and the rose colour of the dress making a fine contrast with the black mantilla. Little talked of, and almost unknown, is the portrait of a lady dressed as a viaja , at full length, in the open air, and seen against one of Goya’s typical landscapes (Plate 20). The figure is a little less than life size, approximately one quarter less. This work belonged to the collection of the Marques de Remisa. I saw it in Paris some years ago, and it made a very good impression on me; the blacks of the dress, already intense, seem to show it as a work of the last years of the century. I do not know the present possessor of this portrait. An almost identical replica of the above work, but smaller in size, is in the Musée du Louvre at Paris, under the title of “A Young MARQUESA DE LAS MERCEDES Plate, XXII (p. 7 3) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 79 Spanish Lady” (No. 1705 of the catalogue); and it is stated that this work was painted in Madrid in the year 1799. The portrait of head and shoulders, a canvas in its proportions wider than its height, where Rita Molinos appears before us, as we are told by an inscription at the back of the work, is really very beautiful (Plate 21). It is in a private collection at Brussels; and it may be noted that this work was done with special love and care. The enchanting physique of the model and her sympathetic appear- ance perhaps were the cause that the painter did not hurry over this work, as over some others from his hand, of which it had been sometimes said that they were only “official masks.” Here, without altering his technique— -on this occasion, as in so many other works, loose and rich in oily pigment — he shows evident satisfaction in the execution of the work. One might fancy that the head was only a fragment of a painting: in any case the composition and proportions come well and their result is very original. Only two tones, combined in the most masterly manner, fill this canvas; that of the fresh and rosy complexion of Rita Molinos and the black of the mantilla and the background. The sweet and expressive glance in these eyes, the half-opened mouth, all the life which breathes from the model, make of this portrait a fascinating work. The date at which it was painted is unknown; but to judge from its tech- nique, and from the dominating note of black which we find in it, it seems to me it should be attributed to some — a few — years later than the works I last mentioned. It is, moreover, an excellent piece of painting for our study of the methods of Goya. The lace which appears in it, the open work of the mantilla seen over the flesh which it half conceals, are special notes of Goya, and worth a thousand times more than a signature. The copyists and imitators of Goya know these methods of his well. These imitators may be conveniently divided into two groups, the first those who seek to learn or to study in the works of the master his refinements, his graceful lightness of touch, in order to 8o FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES reproduce them later as far as possible — a proceeding perfectly legitimate, artistic, and honourable; and those others, who, making use of some old canvas, seek to produce a facsimile rather than a copy, which is not the same thing, and therefore give it an artificial patina and surface, and launch it into the world of picture dealers to see what will happen. These flesh tints, half covered by mantillas and white silk lace, were painted by Goya in two different ways. Either he painted them in one single sitting, obtaining his effect only by the combina- tions of colours, or he painted the flesh tints excluding the rest, and afterwards, when that was ready to bite and half dried, with a thin veil of colour and some charming touches he put in the lacework, giving a complete effect of reality. These are things easier to explain and to recognize than to imitate. Among the many majas and ladies dressed as majas painted by Goya none is so famous as the one who, repeated in the same pose, dressed and nude respectively, is the subject of the two canvases which are in the Museo del Prado (Nos. 741 and 742), known by the title of “ La Maja de Goya.” On other occasions I have already studied these works. I do not consider them as portraits, and for this reason I have neither reproduced them as illustrations of this book nor do I study nor analyse them here. However, as it happens that a false legend has grown up around them which, repeated by one and another, seems to have taken on an appearance of truth, I cannot pass them by on this occasion without stating what I have to report about these pictures and what is the result of my own investigations. We may trace back the vicissitudes of these two canvases as far as the year 1803, when they figured in the collection of Godoy. We are only ignorant who commissioned them and their first possessor, who cannot have held them more than a short time, since we cannot reasonably think that they were painted much before this date, early in the nineteenth century. It is known, L % ’ ’fm i Plate XXIII r RITA MOLINOS (p- 79) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 81 however, that they were not painted for Godoy; he acquired thenq and they appear in the inventory of his pictures in the following and somewhat misleading form: “ Number 122: Two pictures five feet and four fingers high by six feet and ten fingers wide. One of them representing a naked Venus on a couch, the other a clothed maja, their author Francisco Goya.” I believe that there is not the slightest doubt that this treats of these two canvases; it may be observed, moreover, that at that time they were not considered as portraits of any known lady. In 1808 the property of the Prince de la Paz was sequestrated. D. Pedro de Madrazo says, in speaking of this particular matter: “These two paintings went with many others to the Casa Almacén de Cristales, for safe keeping, whence they were brought to the Academy in 1813, under an inventory which was completed by a Commission of that same Body.” There is some mistake in this, since the inventory mentioned of the Academy is not of 1813 but of 1816, and does not contain in its register “ Las Majas ”; and such an omission seems incredible. Some have affirmed that “ Las Majas” were not in the Academy until 1836, with other nude figures, among them a copy of Titian; and it is also asserted that there exists an official letter of the Tri- bunal of the Inquisition, through which it is known that in 1813 there was an expurgation of the pictures of Godoy, keeping back those which did not appear moral. In any case what is certain is that “ Las Majas ” were in the Academy before the middle of the nine- teenth century, and that they left there for the first time in 1900, taking part in the exhibition of the works of Goya, and that they afterwards, in 1902, passed into the Museo del Prado. These two canvases denote in their technique the best period of their author. The dress, and even more the form, the manner of M 82 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES dressing the hair, seem proper to the years included between the second and fifth of the nineteenth century. It was said, and later affirmed by the Conde de la Viñaza, that the nude figure was painted in the open air, in the woods of the Prado. Even if we suppose that instead of “ Prado ” should be read “ Pardo ” (and nothing else seems possible), I do not find that the picture itself suggests anything of the kind. The above-mentioned biographer of Goya asserts that the blue-grey shadows of the flesh confirm this view. I do not find the existence of these tones in the nude figure of the maja , nor even am I aware that figures in the open air take a tone of blue-grey in the shadows. I observe in both “Majas” a side lighting from the left, sufficiently strongly marked in the clothed figure, creating very marked projections of shadows. A figure in the open air would be much more bathed in light than this one appears to be. The dress, somewhat showy, it is true, but luxurious in its texture and adornment, suggests a sitter, in the event of this being an actual portrait, who was of good position or at least rich. But we cannot state precisely who this person was. The story ran, as I have said without foundation, that this maja might have been the Duquesa de Alba. By the evidence above given it seems to be shown that these pictures are later than the death of the duchess; and the character of these paintings indicate to us clearly that they are a faithful and true likeness of the model, and not figures done from memory. Moreover — and this would suffice to negative any possibility to the legend — this maja and the duchess have no like- ness at all, neither in the head, which we must immediately admit to be different, nor yet in the figure. The maja is a short, small woman, of rounded form and a short neck; the De Alba was tall, slender, totally different. The only thing that I know of this maja , the only thing which merits belief through being related by persons of reputation and good standing, is the following. In the year 1868, D. Luis de THE BOOKSELLER OF CALLE DE CARRETAS Plate XXIV (p. 8s) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 83 Madrazo had a lawsuit in connection with the sale of some pictures by Goya. The only witness who could give evidence on the subject was the grandson of Goya; he was an old man who lived modestly, almost poorly, in the village of Bustarviejo. D. Luis de Madrazo managed to bring to Madrid this valuable witness, and won his case. The grandson of Goya, the old man who appeared here in the year 1868, was in bygone times that little boy whom we know by those most precious portraits which his grandfather made of him, and of which we shall speak later on. It is clear that this grandson of Goya was not only a witness for the lawsuit; he was a witness likewise of a thousand intimate facts of his family, in those first years of the century when his grandfather was producing his works. This old grandson was questioned by Madrazo with regard to details and matters of interest. When the conversation turned on these doubts as to the model for “La Maja Vestida” and “ La Maja Des- nuda,” the good old man laughed at the idea of this figure having been taken for the Duquesa de Alba, and then related the following story. In those years — he did not give the date, but he was referring to the first years of the nineteenth century — a great favourite in that court was a friar named Padre Bavi. He dedicated himself especi- ally to the Christian mission of helping people to die well. He was a man of good means, generous, much loved by the common people, known by everybody and described everywhere by the name of El Agonizante (the monk who assisted dying persons). But perhaps seeing himself so repeatedly face to face with death inspired him with a fondness for life, and on a certain occasion he came across a girl of Madrid, whom he took under his protection afterwards for a certain time. Goya and El Agonizante were friends. Goya knew this Madrileña, and, making use of her as his model, made two pictures, one in which she was dressed as maja , and the other in which she shone forth in all the splendour of her youthful nudity. This story was related by the grandson of Goya in 1868. I do not make it public as a novelty; two writers have already published it — 3 4 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES D. Pedro de Madrazo as the first, and later, Vicente Blasco Ibánez in an article in “ El Imparcial ” in the year 1907, with the title of “ La Maja Desnuda; su verdadera historia.” However, both these writers give to their statement, through the details which adorn it, an aspect of romance which deprives it of the likelihood which in my opinion it possesses. I, notwithstanding, neither affirm nor deny it, and relate it as it came to me. That distinguished artist, D. Ricardo de Madrazo, to whose kindness I owe not a little of the information given in this work, and who heard the story from his seniors, approved my suggestion of publishing it. I Iowever, the most interesting thing about the “ Maja Desnuda” is the picture itself. This simple work, without any pretensions to transcendental art, is a piece of life taken right out of nature; and is at the same time one of the most famous works which Spanish art has produced in all times, and marks a moment of inspiration. In its creation the profound painter, the man of thought, the ironical Goya, the Goya of tragedy has disappeared. Independently of the rules of tradition, its author abandons himself to his own impressions; and forgetting all else, overcome by the enchantment of his model, fascinated by his subject, here it is only the tenderness of a lover which guides the artist’s hand. The drawing is secure and firm, we do not find in it the smallest incorrectness, and it seems to compete with reality itself, neither neglecting nor losing any detail. The feet, the hands, have the same value as the head itself. The bosom which seems to heave, the expressive eyes, the delicate contours of this whole body, quivering with nervous life, dark-skinned and pale, make of the figure a most unique work of refined voluptuousness, and one which denotes a supreme sensibility. Had the classic marbles, the “Venus” of Giorgione, the figures of Venus and Danae of Titian, the “Venus with the Mirror” by Velazquez, all these marvellous nudes never existed, Goya on such an occasion before this model would have created this same work. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 85 The portrait of the bookseller of the Calle de Carretas is not a portrait of a maja (Plate 22). Standing upright, painted down to her knees, covering her head with a long white mantilla which she gathers together with her right hand, the famous bookseller looks at us full face, showing a head of truly Spanish beauty with a frank and simple glance and noble expression. This is a most beautiful work, judging by its photographic reproductions; and I can say no more than that. It left Spain many years ago; I have never seen it, and it is not my wont to speak of works I do not know. In this case its good report, and the praises it has obtained from all who have seen it, are sufficient to justify its existing celebrity. It is preserved in the Havemeyer collection of New York. To these last years of the eighteenth century should belong the portrait of the famous actress, La Tirana, since she appears in it slightly — but not much — older than in the portrait already described in the preceding chapter, and dated in that case 1794. This work, standing upright in full length, in which the model presents herself with great stateliness, front view, to the spectator, is preserved in the Royal Academy of San Fernando. The style of this second portrait of La Tirana, very free, as is characteristic of the painter in those years, recalls to us especially the very individual technique of those decorative paintings made by Goya in San Antonio de la Florida. On another occasion I have sought to explain that in those wrongly-called frescoes of San Antonio de la Florida — since in the greater part they are painted in tempera — it may be noted, studying attentively certain details, that in some parts (it is evident that w r e here except the heads, profiles, points of importance, etc.) that work is not painted with either large or small brushes, nor even with those called de peine (comb) which, through being flat, are the most fitted to fill with colour large spaces with few strokes of the brush. A prolonged investiga- tion, which I do not propose to repeat here — since this is not the occasion for it — and a lucky discovery have convinced me that that 86 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES uniformity in the painting, that fusion which did not show any trace of the brush, was obtained with rapid strokes of sponges soaked in colour. But observe: in this portrait of La Tirana — though, being painted in oils, it is clearly absurd to think that in its making sponges were employed in any way — there is something, neverthe- less, which obtained with the brush seeks to bring to mind that likeness, that fusion of colours, attained in this case by means of paints mixed with oil. This similarity existing between the treatment of her dress and the folds, sashes, and girdles, and all the finery of those angels of San Antonio de la Florida, whose beauty has but little of the celestial, is evident. Without a doubt Goya, delighted with the methods which gave him such good results in those tempera paintings, had tried on this occasion to apply them to oil painting. From this point of view it seems natural to think that both these works were done in the same period, since it does not seem probable that he would revive a special method of treatment years later. The decoration of San Antonio de la Florida belongs to the year 1789. For various reasons I consider that this portrait was painted in the same year. We know some works dated in the last three years of the eighteenth century. “A Melendez Valdes su amigo Goya, 1797” (Plate 23). Thus says in large letters, in which we recognize the handwriting of the painter, the inscription which may be read in the lower part of the bust portrait of the distinguished poet and writer, D. Juan Melendez Valdes. It is preserved in the Bowes Museum of Barnard Castle in England. It is of value to us as a fine and characteristic example of this period of Goya. I know two replicas of it, one, of considerable importance, in Madrid. However, in this last example I believe that its interest lies rather in its value as a portrait than in its artistic merit, although this latter is not a small one. It brings before us the sitter at forty-three years of age, as is indicated to us by the unquestionable date, written in Goya’s hand. Meléndez Valdés had arrived at Madrid, preceded MELENDEZ VALDES Plate XXV (p. 86) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 87 by literary renown and very wide erudition, in the year 1781. In Madrid his relations with Jove Llanos, and with all the then intellectual circle in the capital of Spain, shortly brought him into a position to make himself known and to shine. Various journeys in Spain, some of them taken more from necessity than personal desire, made him absent from the court up till precisely this year 1797. The date of this portrait marks in Meléndez Valdes a change in his style, as being more polished and perfect than that which pre- ceded it, and fixes his consecration among the masters, giving him a place in the Academies of Language and of San Fernando. This portrait, with its friendly dedication, proves to us what I have already indicated by the not less intimate character of the portrait of Moratin of some years before, and what is confirmed by the relations of Goya with Jove Llanos and with all that group of intellectuals who were open to the new and reforming ideas which came from the whole of Europe, and especially from France; namely, that Goya was in friendly relations with this group of reformers, and consequently that he sympathized with their manner of thought and ideas. The letters of Goya of these years tell us nothing clearly about this; nothing definite has come down to us, showing us the change which, as I have indicated, was beginning to show itself in the painter in those years. However, by a reasoned hypothesis, and by not a few productions of that date (not precisely by the portraits but by his caprices, fancies, etc.), we can be fairly certain that the mind of Goya, with those simple ideas shown to us in the first period of his life, became developed, disturbed — de- veloping a new Goya of more powerful intellect and imagination, who even had to suffer further profound transformations before the spectacle of blood and horror which destiny was reserving to our country some years later. The not very scrupulous writers, who described to us Goya in his youth as a depraved character and a libertine devoid of conscience, present him to us in these years of his matured life as a terrible revolutionary. The one view is as false 88 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES as the other; and, from the fact that his intelligence and culture became modified in a certain sense, to consider him as a revolu- tionary and a dangerous man of action is to bridge over an abyss which Goya never crossed. It ought not to be forgotten at the same time that in those years, and even in other later years, the painter, though in relation with the intellectual and progressive elements of Spain, was none the less — and continued so to be, until the national conditions, to his own regret, prevented him — the painter of the aristocracy and the court. To this same date, 1797, belongs the other portrait of Zapater (Plate 24). The letters do not mention this last, and notwithstand- ing, the portrait is considerably better than the one we have already mentioned, painted seven years earlier. This is an oval head and shoulders, the head very fine and characteristic. In the features of the sitter can be traced the years passed since the earlier portrait. The nose to which Goya had alluded, calling it impudently nari- gón (large nose), continues by its size to be a marked feature of the physiognomy of his good friend. I do not know whence this por- trait came, but I imagine from Zaragoza; I have only seen it once not lone: aofo in the famous collection in Paris of M. Durand Ruel. Zapater, the nephew, as I have said, does not point out in his book the existence of the earlier portrait, whose dedication says: “ Goya. To his friend Mam Zapater. 1 797- '* Instead he says: “Among the different portraits of my collection there is another portrait of my uncle D. Martin Zapater signed: Goya to Jus friend 1798.” I am absolutely ignorant of this third portrait which the painter made of his friend ; but I consider that it existed, and that there is not here a confusion with the earlier; since it would be strange that the author of the book should be mistaken in the dedication and the date, especially when he is treating of a picture which he had in his own collection. MARTIN ZAPATER Plate XXVI (P. 88) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 89 Belonging to the year 1798 is an important work, the “ Portrait of General Urrutia” (No. 736 of the Museo del Prado). We see here this soldier in the sixtieth year of his age, and shortly after having been named Captain-General of the army. His brilliant career had ended, for from this time forward, forgetting his suc- cesses, no command was offered to him, and he died neglected a little later in 1800, since his independent character did not permit him to become a courtier of Godoy. This work, considered artistically, is a beautiful example, solid and strong, of this period of the artist. The faultless head, well constructed and finely proportioned, its characteristic features clearly marked, gives an idea of absolute realism. It is very refined in treatment, and its refinement is heightened by the richness of the colouring of the rest of the canvas. The sky of the background is not one of those skies which had delighted Goya in years before, light and delicate of hue; it is relatively obscure and leaden coloured, and foretells those other works where this note is more exaggerated in later years, as we shall come to observe. In the lower corner on the right maybe read the inscription: “ Goya, The General Urrutia.” This portrait, which is in the Prado Museum, having come there from the sale of the collection of the Duque de Osuna, appears as mentioned in the archives of the family, and by the documentary information preserved there, which includes the account for the price of the work, we can arrive at a knowledge of its date. This statement is as follows: “Madrid 27th. of June 1798. “ Don Francisco Goya. Painter. His account for a full length portrait which he has done for the house of His Excellency in this Court, representing the Captain General D. José Urrutia, which amounts to “ Reales de Vellón . . . 6,000” N 90 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES In these archives, where we have already seen some facts of great value referring to Goya, we meet with another object of interest, which is a receipt dated a few months after the preceding, on 4 January 1799, by D. Agustín Esteve, of 12,000 reales for the full-length portraits of the four children of the Duke and Duchess, D. Francisco, D. Pedro, Da. Josefa, and Da. Joaquina, priced at 3,000 reales each. The portrait of the elder of these, D. Francisco, must be without doubt the one which has been studied and repro- duced, where he appears standing upright, seen against a curtain, and with a telescope in a window which is on the right of the canvas. This work is now in the possession of the Duque de Tovar, who gives it the following very correct attribution: “Portrait by D. F. Goya and D. Agustín Esteve.” Persons of very high authority have recognized in it the art of Goya in many details, and give it correctly as belonging to Goya. Goya in his commission for this work would have had the assistance of his pupil Esteve, and this last would take his share in the receipts of the painting in which there is but little by his hand. And once we have accepted this simple and reasonable explanation we must likewise admit what follows from it, and consider that there are not a few portraits going about the world attributed to Goya, completely inspired by his art, painted perhaps in his own studio with like colours and materials, on the same canvases as those of the master, and which, none the less, are by Esteve, who worked with and assisted him constantly in those years. Of the same year as the portrait of General U rrutia, in 1 798, there is another portrait of different technique, but likewise a work, in a certain measure, of parade and ostentation. This is the “ Portrait of F. Guillemardet, Ambassador of the French Republic in Spain” of that date. This work is in the Musée du Louvre, No. 1704 of the catalogue (Plate 25). The presence of this man as ambassador in the court of a Bourbon is a strange occurrence. Guillemardet was a village doctor, who, carried away by revolutionary ideas, took part in P rench politics F. GUILLEMARDET Plate XXVII (p. 90) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 9 1 after the fall of the Bastille. As a deputy of the Convention he voted for the death of Louis XVI ; he later joined with the men of Thermidor, and pursued mercilessly the Terrorists, from whose clutches he had miraculously escaped before. Having now become a partisan of the Directoire, this government made him a great man and sent him as ambassador to Spain in 1798, in order that, in conjunction with D. Manuel Godoy, courtier and minister of a Bourbon, they should plan out between them the most direct and certain road to Trafalgar. His stay in Madrid was not a long one. Recalled by Buonaparte, when he was elected First Consul, he had to content himself with the Prefecture of Charente Inférieure and later of the Allier. Guillemardet died in a state of insanity in the year 1808, leaving to posterity a page of revolutionary activity and a portrait painted by Goya. Goya here represents the ambassador as seated, with a slightly bombastic appearance, his figure almost in profile, but turning his head towards the spectator. He wears his official dress, blue, with red, white, and blue sash, and a sword which appears in the front of the painting. Behind him, on a table covered with a blue cloth, is seen a large hat with feathers, and the famous tricolour cockade. In this work, in the details it contains, in its arrangement and colouring, we find a difference from others by Goya in the same years. If we did not know its exact date it might be difficult to assign it. Also belonging to this year 1798 is a portrait of special interest, more for its importance as a portrait than a work of art, which Goya made of his friend, the great Jove Llanos, to-day belonging to the Duque de las Torres (Madrid) (Plate 26). Jove Llanos, open to all ideas, influenced in a decisive manner by the French Encyclopedia, was nevertheless able to preserve that essentially Spanish character which distinguishes his mental out- look, not handing himself over, like Fray Benito Feijóo, to foreign influence unrestrainedly and to the superficial universality of know- ledge claimed by the encyclopedists apart from their real greatness, Q2 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES A man of discipline and activity, his task was to create and work, and the fruit of this work was the Spanish Institute of Studies of Secondary Instruction. A lover of art and beauty, he wrote not a little in favour of the popularization of Fine Arts, and in his panegyric of Ventura Rodriguez he described, in an admirable manner, the character and antiquity of Gothic art in Spanish cathedrals. In literature, in his theatrical works and poetry, he meets us always as a writer of solid merit; and there are some points in his productions which bring him before us as a precursor of our romanticism, one of the most brilliant manifestations of the Spanish genius of the nineteenth century. Jove Llanos, a man of his time and much before the public, with his coat, powdered wig, and small sword, was nevertheless the most complete representative of our culture in those years, and was able, without disdaining the spirit of the age in Europe and especially in France, to know how to cast it in an eminently Spanish die formed in the school of the U umanists. It would seem natural that the portrait made by Goya of Jove Llanos should have represented a great effort on the part of the artist, and should have been a very complete work; but this was not entirely so. Moreover, having been very badly treated in its time, it has suffered very considerable restoration; and this, although cleverly carried out, none the less leaves us the impression of a picture which in its present condition has been indifferently pre- served. The famous native of Asturias in this full-length portrait, seated and resting his head on his left hand and the arm beneath it on a table, regards the spectator in a reflective attitude. A statue of Minerva is seen in the background. In his right hand the sitter holds a paper on which is written: “ Jovellanos por Goya.” The date of this portrait has been a matter of much discussion. Von Loga puts it down to the year 1780. The possessor of the portrait itself, D. Antonio Botija, at the time of the exhibition of Goya’s works in 1900, asserted that this work had been painted in JOVE LLANOS Plate XXVIII (p. 91) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 93 Jadraque in the year 1808, when Goya and Jove Llanos met in the house of Saavedra, on the occasion of the return of Llanos from his exile in Majorca. Everything makes this date seem probable; in fact, at that date in the picturesque Jadraque — an historic village on the banks of the Henares, dominated by an ancient and ruined castle, famous since the ninth century, which served as a prison for the son of Amzu, Califa of Toledo — these three famous persons had met. Jove Llanos stayed there for some time; and in the famous mansion where he lodged is even preserved his chamber, with the furniture and objects of its period. However, judging by all these dates, and by what tradition has handed down in Jadraque, the portrait was not of that year. D. Elias Tormo, with great judgement, supposed it of the intervening period between 1788 and 1800. In my first edition of “Goya. Pintor de Retratos,” I was not able to assign to it a certain date. Since then, thanks to the labours of the distinguished and learned writer, Don Julio Somoza y Garcia-Sala, I am convinced that the portrait is of the year 1798. 1 With this portrait that of Saavedra by Goya which is at Paris in the possession of the distinguished academician, Baron Cochin, 2 is closely connected. Something similar to what we have already noticed in the portrait already mentioned of Guillemardet appears in another not less important work dated in the year following, in 1799. This is the portrait of D. Manuel Lapeña, Marqués de Bondad Real, re- presented as standing full length and in front view, wearing the uniform of Colonel of the Guards, the Cross of Calatrava, and the baton of command. His figure is seen against a delicately painted background, with a sky covered with light grey clouds, and in the middle distance some buildings which could very well be the barracks of Vicalvaro or of Aranjuez, before which some soldiers, who give us the sensation of being little toy soldiers rather than of 1 The reader may consult “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras,” p. 1 5 1 . The reader may consult “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras,” p. 153, and plate 59. 94 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES flesh and bone, are exercising. On the sand, in the first plane, there is a large inscription which says: “ D. Manuel Lapeña P. Goya año 1799.’’ To judge by the delicacy shown in this picture, and by its signature, date, and undisputable originality, taken as a whole there is something uncommon in it, differentiating it from the works of Goya produced in those years. Can it perhaps be that the sitter had indicated to Goya his own wish that the portrait should be more in detail than others from his hand; and that the painter in consequence made this work, which — without being an official mask, since it is, as I have remarked, minutely finished — has something in the carriage of the sitter, and, above all, in the appearance of military discipline it transmits, that could be inter- preted as a delicate irony? However, apart from some works of Goya, like the last men- tioned, which are really an exception to the progress of development of this painter’s art, his general production is very different, and resembles the works we have studied as typical of the painting in this period of his life. Thus it does not appear to us a mistake to think that with them can be mentioned others whose date is actually later. Among these are the “ Portrait of the Draughtsman Pérez de Castro,” now for some years in the Musée du Louvre, and the “ Portrait of Dr. Peral,” belonging to the National Gallery of London, works in which the grey note predominates; and two other portraits besides, strong and full of colour, tending towards the art about to dominate the artist in the succeeding years, both being portraits of unknown persons. One of these is of an engraver, to judge by the tools he holds in his hand; the other is the bust of a man with a black greatcoat and a large white neckcloth. Both these works were lately in Madrid, but have since then come into the hands of the great dealers in London in search of a buyer worthy of them; and they must have found one, for the portraits of these two unknown persons — of which, as I say, it is not known whence they came, or whither they have gone to stay — have dis- appeared from the exhibitions and the market. THE FAMILY OF CHARLES IV Plate XXIX (p. ioi) CHAPTER V Goya as Court Painter in the Year 1799 Portraits of the Court “T TIS MAJESTY wishing to reward your distinguished I I merit and to give in person a testimonial which will serve A A as an encouragement to all professors, showing how much he appreciates the talent and knowledge you possess of the noble art of painting, has vouchsafed to name you as his Chief Court Painter with the yearly salary of 50,000 reales de vellón, which you will receive from this date; and moreover 500 ducats yearly for carriage expenses; it being also his will that you should occupy the house at present inhabited by D. Mariano Maella, in the case of his dying before you. I make this known to you by the Royal Command for your own satisfaction, and I do so under this date at the Ministry of Grace and Justice and Exchequer for your own ordering and fulfilling. “ May God preserve you for many years. — San Lorenzo, 31 October 1799. “ Mariano Luis de Urquijo. “ Sr. D. Francisco de Goya.” Such is the ordinance in which Goya was named First Painter of the Court. A firm and tenacious will, and a constant industry at the service of a powerful talent, had made of that little boy, who had been born fifty-three years before of a family of rustics in the village of Fuendetodos, the most conspicuous painter in Spain. The contentment of Goya, his emotion, and his gratitude are reflected in the letter in which he gave the notice to his old friend Zapater, so that he should spread the good news in Zaragoza. 95 96 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES “ I offer to you all that this order expresses and I want you to do it in my name in your house, and to all friends without forgetting those of the Calle de la Sartén: I have no more time, good-bye. “ Being on the point of entering my carriage to go to Madrid whence I am writing to you, I have to-day received your letter, and Esteve to whom I sent this copy of the favour which the King has done me, will save me repeating it, receive it with all my heart and offer it to Goicoechea with my best regards and to Yoldi, and to all friends. I will write to you later on for it is very late, and I am worn out. The Sovereigns are mad about your friend “ Goya.” And Goya was mad with contentment, as we see from his simple and spontaneous letter. It often happens that, when fortune and fame are attained after great efforts, those who acquire them think that the hardships are already ended which intense and constant labour carries with it; and, satisfied with what they have already learnt, they repeat what has become easy for them, while their art becomes mannered and decays irretrievably. This result, which I have qualified as frequent, could, I believe, be described as general, for unfortunately there are very few exceptions. And one of the most striking exceptions in this respect was Goya. Our painter had attained the maximum of facility and rapidity of execution years before. We have pointed out and studied this in speaking of his portraits, such as that of the Marquesa de la Solana, in its tendency to grey tones, and those of the Duquesa de Alba, less showy but no less masterly and easy. Having attained the effect which he sought to give his works through the note of grey, having mastered his technique up to a point which could be called perfect, as is shown in the head of the portrait of Bayeu, it would not be improbable that Goya, relying on his own knowledge and repeating this note, should have continued his production without great effort up to the end of his days. And yet this was FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 97 not the case; and the creations of these years, the last of the eighteenth century and the first of the nineteenth, show him with new powers, always in search of a personal art inspired by reality, attaining even higher results than in the preceding works, and gaining above all in richness and truth of colour. These years are those which can and should be called the great years of Goya, the years of his triumphs and of his splendour, of his life as a courtier and his great attainment as an artist. The great portraits of the sovereigns and of the persons of the court, to-day preserved in the Museo del Prado and the royal palace, coincide exactly with the date when he was named First Court Painter. His fame as a portraitist had reached the court ; the great ladies and nobles of the period sought to have their portrait by Goya, and no less so the sovereigns and the royal family. It is known that the date of these great portraits is from 1799 to 1800. 1 I am able to bring forward something of uncommon interest, some 1 There exists the account and order for payment, made known by the Conde de la Viñaza in his “Goya.” It is interesting and I think ought to be reproduced. It is as follows: “ Account of D. Francisco de Goya, First Court Painter of His Majesty, of the ex- penses incurred in his stay at Aranjuez to execute the portraits of Their Majesties and the Royal Family. Canvases and stretchers for the said ten portraits, I paid .... 980 Two cases to hold them and their carriage, I paid ...... 420 A large canvas to contain the whole Royal Family 860 Carriages, four journeys ........... 1140 Expenses for maintenance .......... 3200 Six ounces of gold which the Queen sent me to pay Dacher and to include them in my expenses, according to the accompanying receipt . . . 1920 To D. Manuel Ezquerra y Trapaga for colours and other goods pertaining to the faculty of painting . .2114 10634 “Madrid 13th. June 1800. — Francisco de Goya. — The Palace 27th. July 1800. The Lord Chamberlain.” “ Your Excellency. Notifying under this date the Treasurer General to make good to the Court Painter D. Francisco de Goya the 10,634 reales which his expenses have O 93 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES hitherto unpublished letters which have been kept in the secret archives of the palace; letters of an intimate character from the Queen Maria Luisa to Godoy, which gave us the exact notice of the years, even the months and place, in which each of these portraits was painted. I only propose to give here those paragraphs which refer to the pictures of Goya. The first in point of time of all the portraits composing this series is the one where the queen, standing upright, her figure seen against a very delicate landscape, is wearing the dress of a maja. She has on a black silk skirt, an orange-coloured bodice with short sleeves, and a silk lace mantilla. Keeping to the rigorous accepta- tion of what is the maja dress, which carries generally something very showy in its colour, in its form, and in its cut, this dress of the queen would not be a typical example; however, in those years the innovation which it represents, the influence which it shows of popular costume, the mantilla, the upper skirt, the way of dressing the hair, the bow on the head, and the white embroidered shoes with their high heels, give us the characteristics of the costume of the people. It should be remembered that a decree of the period prohibited ladies from wearing the maja dress, on account of the showy character which it presented. For this reason ladies of high standing, the queen among the first, made a compromise by inventing this fashion, this dress with the cut of the maja dress, but without the vivid colours, black or of very subdued colours. amounted to for the ten portraits of the King Our Lord and his August Family, I advise this to Your Excellency for your guidance. May God, etc. — San Ildefonso, 7th. August 1800. — Miguel Cayetano Soler. — Sr. Marqués de Ariza.” (Arch de Pal.) “In compliance with the Royal Command of the 30th. of January and the 7th. of August of 1800 the originals of which are here included, they will pay to the Court Painter D. Francisco de Goya twenty four thousand and eighty eight reales de vellón, the amount of the expenses incurred in the two paintings of the portraits of Their Majesties and the Royal Family for which he gave two receipts with the same date as the above mentioned Royal Orders, one of 13,454 reales and the other of 10,634.” (Archivo grab de Simancas, Dirección del Tesoro, invento 16, guión 23, leg. 32.) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 99 Of this portrait we know two identical examples, one in the royal palace at Madrid which I consider the better, the stronger, that which through the study of character appearing in the head shows itself to be the first of these, the one done from the living model; and the second in the Prado Museum (No. 728 of the catalogue), very delicate but less secure, which I consider as a fine replica of the one preserved in the palace. The letters I have mentioned inform us when and where this portrait was painted. In one of them Maria Luisa says to Godoy: “San Ildefonso 24th. Sept. 1799. “Goya is painting my portrait in full length with a mantilla; they tell me it is coming out well, and when I go to the Escorial I will go on horseback, for I wish him to paint Marcial.” 1 The letter here quoted speaks to us of the portrait on horse- back preserved in the Museo del Prado (No. 720), where the august lady is riding Marcial astride, according to the custom of the time, wearing the uniform of a Colonel of the Body Guard. The exact date of this equestrian portrait is made known to us in another of these letters, in which the queen says as follows: “San Lorenzo, 9th. October 1799. “The portrait on horseback has been completed in three sit- tings, and they tell me it is even more like than the one with the mantilla.” The three sittings referred to in this letter would clearly have been those necessary for drawing in the figure, the head, and the general lines of the body. This equestrian portrait, a very superior work to its companion picture of the king, I consider of very great importance. The painter is searching for his effect as a whole, for the general scheme and appearance, and really attains it. The artist shows here his new effort and tendency towards an art as 1 A horse presented by Godoy to the queen a little before this, IOO FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES involved and as synthetic as that which he attained years before in his portraits in grey; but he looks for and attains it now with a combination less monochrome and more robust. In no way is his character of purely Spanish painting lost; but he goes on in- dividualizing it to such an extent that he keeps it far away from those Spanish antecedents to which this work might have compared. The work is eminently pure in style; it follows his latest utterance, which is always the same and that of his nation ; it speaks to us always in Spanish, but with its own tendency and technique it tells us things completely new which up to then no painter had uttered. This work resembles in no way the equestrian portraits painted by Velazquez, and much less similar compositions of other schools. An original work is this, complete and impressive, and one which did not pass unnoticed by a great French painter when he made a now famous equestrian portrait. I refer to Henri Regnault in his portrait of General Prim, preserved in the Musée du Louvre. The arrangement of this portrait is different; but the general plan of the picture, and above all the relation of the values of the head with the sky against which it stands out, giving it distance and the sensation of the surroundings and of atmosphere, is what Regnault certainly had studied in this Goya portrait. This method was a novelty in that time, and the keen discernment of Regnault was great in having noticed it, and drawn from it his inspiration. I permit myself here to call attention to this observation of my own as being the first of a series of influences I have to note of the art of Goya upon the painters of the period of Regnault. I shall in- dicate them further in their proper place. In a letter a little later the Queen says to the Minister: “ 15th. October “ I am also glad you liked the portraits, and I hope that Goya will paint the copies well for you. I also want you to have another copy done by Estevez of the one with the mantilla and the one THE INFANTA MARIA LUISA Pt.atf. YYY ÍP. IO FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES IOI on horseback, so that you may have Marcial always alive or present ...” Perhaps this copy — that which Goya had to make of the por- trait with the mantilla — may be the one to-day preserved in the museum; as regards those Esteve had to execute, if indeed they ever were carried out, I know absolutely nothing about them. In a letter of a few months later in the year following we find some interesting notices: “Aranjuez 22nd. April 1800 “ My friend Manuel, we are very glad to hear you are well, as well as your wife who we hope will go on well until everything is over; we are also glad that she is going to be painted, and if Goya can do the work there well and really like her it would be better he should do so for in that way we shall be free from any disturbance, but if it does not come out well let him come here, although we should be disturbed by it . . .” And King Charles IV himself in the same letter writes to say: “ Let Goya do the portrait of your wife and having painted it let him return to the Sitio to paint the portraits of all together.” This portrait of all together undoubtedly refers to the family of Charles IV, one of the most important works preserved in the Museo del Prado, No. 726 (Plate 27). Charles IV, and Maria Luisa occupy the centre of the picture, the latter holding by the left hand the little D. Francisco de Paula Antonio and clasping with the right hand the Infanta Maria Isabel. On the left of the canvas a group is formed by the first-born, Prince of Asturias, in the foreground with his brother, Carlos Maria Isidro, behind him ; next these is Maria Antonia who married the prince two years later, and more in the background, looking out with her owlish face, is Maria Josefa de Bourbon, elder sister of Charles IV. On the right of the composition is the young married couple composed 102 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES of Prince Luis de Parma, afterwards King of Etruria, and his wife Maria Luisa, with a baby girl in her arms; and between this group and the figure of the king we see the heads of the Infante D. Antonio, brother of Charles IV, and the Infanta Carlota Joaquina. The court painter himself appears in the background before a great canvas — I will not venture to say painting, and much less painting this scene, since he is turning his back upon it, and moreover in the corner where he has placed himself there is no light for anyone to paint. The description of this family group and the name of each one of the persons have been handed down to us securely by D. Pedro de Madrazo in his descriptive and historical catalogue of the Prado Museum, and by D. Cristóbal Ferriz, who is so competent in these matters that I leave aside any other description than his, which entirely agrees with that of Madrazo in the schedule referring to this work, in the Junta de Iconografía Nacional. Lately, however, 1 ). Joaquin Ezquerra del Bayo has published a clever article, according to which the figure described in the catalogue as Maria Antonia of Naples would be no other than the Infanta Carlota Joaquina; and the figure which in the traditional description was this Infanta would be, conformably to this rectification, the Infanta Maria Amalia, second daughter of Charles IV. As it happened that this person died in 1798, that is to say two years before this picture was painted, we should have to suppose that this was done by memory and through notes made, or some earlier portrait. I do not know this point sufficiently to give an opinion on it. The arguments developed by Sr. Ezquerra del Bayo are worthy of consideration: for my part I will only say that the profile head appearing between the Prince of Parma and the Infante D. Antonio, and which certainly, it maybe remarked in passing, does not come well into the position where it has been placed, is much weaker than the rest of the picture; and this seems to suggestthat it is not from nature, but made from some portrait no longer in existence. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 103 On the other hand, this lady seems much older than would have been the Infanta Maria Amalia, who, born in 1779, died when she was only nineteen years old, on 27 July 1798. I do not know anything more on this point, which, as a matter of fact, I consider of secondary interest. “The Family of Charles IV” is a most unique work, essen- tially pictorial, and one of the leading works which painting has produced either in Spain or elsewhere. It reveals the powers of a mighty artist in the exact moment of his maturity and fullness, and is the summary, the synthesis, and the archetype of his whole creation. What secret can this picture possess which attracts and fascinates, seduces and enchants? It cannot be certainly through the composi- tion, which by the very reason of its natural simplicity becomes — with all these figures standing upright and almost in a row, in a series of vertical lines — monotonous and unfortunate. Some slips in the drawing, like the clumsy legs of the heir to the throne, would have been easy to remedy. But these deficiencies are of little importance and can be explained. The artist, obsessed by his desire to attain a colour which was true, natural, brilliant, and an effect of ensemble , has not troubled to correct, nor wished to think of any other thing than the completion of his purpose. All the colours of the palette are represented in this canvas, a fact explained by the showy dresses of the court; the gold tissue and the silk, the embroideries worked upon plush, the sashes, coats, breeches, and waistcoats of violet, blue, and red, and the vermilion of the dress and trousers of the little Infante D. Francisco de Paula, domin- ating and giving value to all these colours and tones, make the richest combination that has ever issued from any palette. And as if the colour of the dresses was not sufficient, all this has been still more highly seasoned by the tissue of gold, the silver, the necklaces of precious stones, the jewels, the small swords with hilts of marcasite or of steel, and the orders, many set with diamonds and precious stones. io4 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES All this gleams under a light which, coming from the left, tally illuminates the heads and figures who are on this side, and descends diagonally towards the feet of the central group embracing equally the rest of the foreground. And this light brings into relation all these figures and all this colour with such justice that, by placing everything in its own plane, it gives exactly the sensation of atmosphere and of life. The mastery of the art of painting shown by this work is perhaps what we admire most in it; for here, in a few days of work, he has shown us all the knowledge acquired in fifty odd years of toil and constant effort. The rendering of this picture is completely free and original; it recalls nothing and is like nothing else. In its ensemble it has been made from a first impression, but with a vigour and nervous power which are easily apparent. It is truth itself, translated from nature to the canvas without formulas or preoccupations; and set there with paint brush, the palette knife, the finger, and with the soul, with a spontaneity which enchants us, for it has something in it of the childish, and in its entirety astonishes us by its many traces of genius. This group of persons of the court has been compared with the scene which occupies one of the most famous pictures of Velazquez, “ Las Meninas,’’ and which has been justly described as the theology of painting. I have already indicated in the preceding chapters what Goya had learnt from Velazquez in his tones, in his palette, in his simplicity of treatment, in those qualities which some might describe as somewhat commonplace, but which are, none the less, the secret of painting. But when once the continuity of this school has been established with the ancient Spanish painting of the time of Velazquez, Goya works absolutely on his own account; and in this work of his — even though both represent a scene at court, and the respective authors have in both put in their own portraits in the second plane on the left — I fail to understand that any close resemblance can be found. I do not understand it, I repeat, when I compare the one work with the other; but neverthe- FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 105 less I appreciate that both works, without appearing to show it, do possess in common the same artistic inspiration, the same simplicity of conception, and an identical sincerity in ultimate expression. That is to say, that what brings them together is the mysterious bond which connects the schools of art, the productions due to the same race throughout the necessary changes which different times impose. Speaking of “Las Meninas” a Spanish critic has said something very happy and exact, which could be applied equally to “The Family of Charles IV,” although neither appears to resemble the other: “ What a set back does this picture give to all those who estimate the importance of works of art according to the transcendent qualities of the subject! Of how many historical or religious com- positions, of how many subject pictures have we not for ever lost the memory, while the clear unblemished freshness of this intimate family scene remains the same. This is due to the fact that the picture of ‘ Las Meninas ’ (like ‘ The Family of Charles IV ’) stirs our emotions to a high point, independently of the subject it represents ; and as the diverse elements contained in this picture, the lines, colour, light, proportions, chiaroscuro, etc., all have no other finality than that of art itself, it can be deduced that the attraction it has for us cannot lose its intensity.” The impression which the works of Goya, and especially “The Family of Charles IV,” produced on Mariano Fortuny, the leading Spanish painter of his period, was a profound one. When Fortuny arrived at Madrid, in the year 1867, what had brought him there especially was the desire to study the works of great Spanish masters and to copy some of those of Velazquez. He prepared a canvas to copy “ Los Borrachos.” D. Federico de Maclrazo, Director at that time of the Museum, to help the young Catalonian artist, already famous in the world of art, in the realization of his copy under the best conditions of light, placed the original painting of p ioó FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Velazquez in the room now devoted to the works of Ribera, where, hung in the centre of one of the walls, was then to be found the canvas of “ The Family of Charles IV.” Fortuny saw and compared, studied and understood the greater advantage which, given his qualities as colourist, could be obtained by copying Goya. From that time dates the group made by him — a perfect copy, whose fame brought all the painters of Madrid at that time to the Museo del Prado — of the central part of this picture, and which is to-day preserved in the choice collection of the Comte de Pradére in Paris. Becoming more and more fascinated by the art of Goya, Fortuny made use of his stay in Madrid to take other copies of this master’s work, such as the portrait of Bayeu, which belonged to the collection of the Marquesa de Carcano (Paris), the portrait of Mocarte, and that of Julia. Just as Goya, eighty years before, had copied Velaz- quez, so did Fortuny afterwards copy Goya. The link between the greatest figures of each epoch of Spanish painting continued un- broken in its splendid tradition. The enthusiasm which the art of Goya had awakened in Fortuny remained constant; and when, years afterwards, having become a fashionable painter and famous in Paris, he could impose his opinion on the dealers, he pointed out to them the advantage of buying and exhibiting some works of Goya. Goupil bought a portrait, but had it many years before he could sell it to advantage. Those years had not even yet arrived, fortunately present with us now, which Quintana predicted when he wrote: . . . Yes, the day will come, Will likewise come, O Goya! when to thy name The ecstatic stranger will bow down. I promise you this; the happy audacity Of your ardent brush, the boldness, The beautiful gesture, the tender grace, That brilliant and magic harmony With which in your beautiful tints the colours Of the light, of the dawn and of the Orient, Show themselves as conquerors DON MANUEL GODOY Plate XXXI (p. 1 1 2 ) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 107 Command eternity. Oh! thou, stranger, Who abandoning thy paternal hearth To see and to admire across the seas Keep joyfully on your way And come to Spain. Two centuries of ignorance Have not been able to extinguish the divine flame Which lit up Murillo and Velazquez. With it Nature adorns the brow Of Goya, and to his energetic daring Yet again she yields herself. The studies for the picture of “ The Family of Charles IV ” were painted on canvas with a red preparation. It should be observed that the tone of this preparation has changed in comparison with that used years before by Goya in his paintings; it is more ... I will not dare to say more bright, but more cold, more grey. The Prado Museum contains several of these studies of heads; that of Doña Maria Josefa (No. 729); that of the little Infante D. Francisco de Paula Antonio (No. 730), in half length and reflecting all the infantile charm of the model; that of D. Carlos Maria Isidro (No. 731); that of the Prince of Parma (No. 732), and that of the In- fante D. Antonio (No. 733). I am aware of some others which were dispersed, I do not know when; that of Prince D. Fernando, to-day in a private collection in Brussels; that of the Queen Maria Luisa, a full half length — -not identical with that appearing in the picture, since she wears a mantilla, and her right arm and hand have a different movement — is preserved in the Pinacoteca at Munich, and last of all the most beautiful portrait of the Infanta Maria Luisa with her baby in her arms (Plate 28). This work was lately in Paris, and I am informed that it has since been sold for a North American collection. The two last mentioned, that of the Queen and of the Infante, are real portraits rather than studies. I imagine that, having pleased the sitters, the painter finished them, covering the portions of canvas which in the others are left in the real type of studies, but without covering the whole of the canvas. They are all magnificent, and equally realistic io8 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES and simple. Generally speaking, studies for portraits or groups of this kind are superior in artistic interest to the resulting picture, that is to say, to the figures resulting from them when they pass into the finished work. However, in spite of the general truth of this observation, I think that in this case the figures in the large painting are each so thoroughly in their place, and form such a complete and just combination, that they come out artistically even better in the painting than in the preparatory studies. With these studies may be mentioned two others, which, if they are not precisely for this picture, are in close relation to it. One of them is the head and shoulders of the Infanta Isabel, after- wards Oueen of the two Sicilies, in the possession of the Marqués de Viana; and the other is the portrait of Goya himself, likewise a head and shoulders, almost the same as that appearing in his figure of the large painting. This work, fine in quality and most precious, was acquired by the distinguished FYench artist, M. Leon Bonnat, and appears to-day in the museum founded by him and which bears his name in Bayonne. Quite recently I have seen in Madrid another portrait, identical with this, which seems to me more like a successful copy than a replica by Goya of the one before mentioned. Of the period of the great work, “The Family of Charles IV” we know of a letter from Goya to Zapater, confirming what we were already aware of; that is to say, that the painter was highly thought of by the sovereigns, so much so, that he had to suffer from the intrigues and jealousies of those persons of second rank who had the entrée to the palace. This letter says: “ I am somewhat better and stronger: to-day I have been to see My Lord the King and he received me very happily, he spoke to me about the smallpox of my Paco (which he already knew of) I told him about it and he shook my hand and then began to play the violin. I was rather perplexed about going because there was a certain person of my profession who said in the same room CONDESA DE CHINCHON Plate XXXII (p. ii3 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 109 that I did not wish to serve him, and other things which vile men do to me without my knowing why. The rest of the household like me and those that were present, of whom I don’t know who they were, were very indignant and made the scene an ugly one, and very confusedly recounted to me what I am telling you. You may think that I am making the worst of what you know happens in other places: for there is yet a good deal more as regards the Chief, I mean my Chief Baldecarzana, Secretary and Majordomo for great they all wish to be and with these more venom has been found, but they are not within an inch of Porfido . . . for they will sooner tear each other to pieces than make him give in a hair’s breadth.” The letters already quoted of Maria Luisa to Godoy at the same time let us know the dates of some other court portraits. The queen says in one of them, dated 9 June 1800, from Aranjuez: “Tomorrow Goya will begin another portrait of me; all the others are finished and are very successful . . .” And a few days later, on 14 June, she says: “Goya has painted my portrait which they say is the best of all; he is now painting that of the King in the Casa del Labrador; I think it will come out equally well . . .” This portrait of her will be undoubtedly the one preserved in the royal palace of Madrid, in which she wears a bright dress of oriental character with yellow trimming, and her figure is seen against a choice background of pearl grey. With regard to that of the king we cannot say precisely which it is; but, as the portraits that he made of Charles IV are pendants and similar to those of the queen, I do not think we shall be mistaken in assigning to them the same date, with the obvious difference of months or even days before or after. We may recall the equestrian portrait preserved in the Museo del Prado (No. 719), less interesting and I IO FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES spirited in my opinion than the companion picture of Maria Luisa, where the monarch, turning somewhat to the left, wearing the uni- form of a Colonel of the Body Guard, is mounted on a piebald horse, chestnut and white. As pendants of these portraits of the queen, upright, in full length, already mentioned, must be recalled those of the king — the one preserved in the palace, which appeared under No. i of the Exhibition of the Works of Goya in 1900, where he is represented in the dress of a huntsman; and another where he wears the uniform of the Colonel of the Body Guard, crimson breeches and stockings of white silk, with his hat in his left hand and cane in his right. One of these portraits is in the royal palace and the other in the Museo del Prado (No. 727). Of this type of portrait, either identical or with small variations, there are replicas of more or less importance; some of these have found a home in different collections, for instance, that belonging to the heirs of the Duque de Tamames; others are preserved in centres or institutions of official character, such as that which exists in the University of Salamanca. CONDESA DE CHINCHON (Detail) Plate XXXIII (p. 1 14) CHAPTER VI The Full Power of the Artist as Portrait Painter 1801-1808 I N a letter of Goya to Zapater dated 2 August 1800, certain sentences of which we have referred to in connection with the expansive relations of the painter with the Duchess of Alba, there are at the end some lines in which he says, while speaking of another subject: “ I am making a sketch of the Duque de la Alcudia on horse- back as he sent to say that he would send for me and would settle my lodging in the place for I shall be here longer than I thought: I assure you that it is one of the most difficult subjects that could be offered to a painter.” Don Manuel Godoy, Prince de la Paz and de Basano, Duke of Alcudia and of Sueca, Minister of Charles IV in this year of 1800, was a man loved and hated passionately; and though there is no need to enter into his story here, he should be mentioned as having honoured and protected Goya, who relates to us in an in- timate letter to Zapater: “Martin mine: The day before yesterday I arrived at Aranjuez and that is the reason I have not answered you. The Minister has gone beyond himself in showing kindness to me taking me for drives in his carriage, making me the greatest expressions of friendship which can be possibly imagined, allowing me to dine with my cloak on because it was very cold, he learned to talk with the hands and left off eating to talk to me, he wanted me to stay I 1 2 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES until Easter and paint the portrait of Sabedra (who is his friend) and I should have been glad to do so only I had no canvas nor a shirt to change into, so I left him ill-contented with me and came away; here you have a letter which just describes him, I don’t know if you will be able to read his hand which is worse than mine; don't shew it to anybody or say anything about it but return it to me.” The portrait, the first sketch of which Goya had made on 2 August 1800, will have been probably finished a little later, and apparently is the one preserved to-day in the Royal Academy of San Fernando (Plate 29), where Godoy, wearing the uniform of Captain- General reclining on a bank of ground, is examining a letter. An aide-de-camp in the second plane, a Portuguese flag on the left of the canvas, and horses and orderlies in the background, complete the portrait, which I am doubtful whether to describe as original or in- fluenced from without. All this subject-painting, rather than portrait, may be without doubt connected with and reminiscent of the Portuguese campaign, commonly called the War of the Oranges, which the Prince de la Paz directed as Generalissimo. The aide-de-camp who appears in the second plane is said to be the Conde de Tepa; and I, if I cannot confirm this, can at least say that it is the same person who appears in a bust portrait which belonged to a collection in Madrid, and to-day is to be found in North America, always of the same individual. The head of Godoy is fine in quality; and the colouring generally of the picture is strong and intense. I may observe here with reference to this colouring, with its leaden sky, its intense and gloomy tones, that it is the first time that Goya shows this method in a decided manner. Later it persists in him in the first years of the nineteenth century, and comes to fix itself definitely as a step, as a transition in his colouring, through which he is to arrive at the extraordinary tones of his last years. It is a curious MARIANO GOYA Plate XXXIV FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 13 thing; all this gloomy intense tonality is not general in his pro- duction; it seems that he reserved it for military portraits made in the open air. He begins this in the portrait of Urrutia (the sky of this picture should be noted as distinct from the previous skies of Goya); he marks it in a decided manner in this presentation of Godoy, and exaggerates it afterwards in other portraits which I shall mention later on. In the same period, with the difference of a few months, Goya made the portrait of the wife of Godoy, the Condesa de Chinchón. In one of the letters already referred to, from Maria Luisa to Godoy, she says, speaking of his wife, . . we hope she will go on well until all is over; we are also glad she is going to be painted.” The work here referred to is that one — so little known through having been kept for many years in the Palace of Boadilla, and but seldom visited — which I consider one of the most singular portraits that ever came from the brush of Goya. It is a work we could call vaporous, and surprising in its delicacy and harmony. The Condesa de Chinchón, a type of attractive beauty, has beautiful fair hair, white skin, and a pair of eyes, not large but alive with a sweet and kindly look that is truly captivating. She is represented as seated, wearing a white décolleté dress, short sleeves with light blue trimming, her figure appearing against a dark background and with a grey floor beneath her feet. Goya, as a realistic painter, could not be false to anything showing itself markedly in this figure. The queen said in her letter: . . we hope she will go on well until all is over . . .” and, in fact, this woman, already so interesting, shows in the posi- tion and lines of her body that she is in that situation when the interest of her sex is increased by the hope of approaching maternity. But Goya has expressed this in her portrait with such exquisite taste, with such artistic reserve that, without failing in truth, this would perhaps be overlooked by anyone who had no need to be informed of it. And I seem to recognize in this work the love with which it has been made, the sympathy and affection which the Q FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 14 painter had for his model. This can be explained, and speaks well of that natural nobility and affectionate disposition which Goya shows us in his intimate letters. This countess was Doña Maria Teresa de Borbon and Vallabriga, issue of the love marriage of the Infante D. Luis and a lady of Aragon, Doña Maria Teresa de Vallabriga. She was at the same time the little girl whom Goya had painted some years before in Arenas de San Pedro, and some expressions of the artist have shown with what sympathy he regarded her. Protected by the Infante, in those first moments of his career, the painter did not forget either the gratitude due to the father or his affection for the daughter; and when, years later, as First Painter of the Court, he made the portrait of this little girl, now become a woman, almost a mother — to whom once had been denied the title and rank of Infanta, but whom they made use of later in order that, having married her to Godoy, the latter could acquire rank and a royal connection — our artist knew how to express the sympathy due to an interesting and beautiful woman, who had been driven by royal intrigues into a difficult position, in a court which even in its corruption was ridiculous. The technique of this work is on a level with its importance. Undoubtedly the best feature is the head (Plate 31) drawn and indicated with light touches; everything is suggested rather than said, the hair has been boldly rubbed in with a light hand and flowing colour. It is a supremely clever piece of painting and a marvellous lesson for painters. Its covering of colour is very slight in the light parts and in the points of light; not so, however, over the flesh, but in the trimmings and ribbons of the dress. What really belongs to the person of the sitter — the features, the complexion, the hair — has no trace of brush work. It has been painted with the mind; all here is spirit, and the material and plastic part disappears as far as possible, giving the sensation of a line of verse — a suggested caress. The Condesa would in this period, in 1800, have been twenty- MARIANO GOYA Plate XXXV (p. 116) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 15 three years of age; since at six years old, in 1783, Goya painted her portrait for the first time. Between these two portraits another may be conveniently mentioned, in which, as yet unmarried, Doña Maria Teresa suggests some seventeen years. She is represented full length and standing; the general tone is rose grey, seen against a very dark, almost black, background. The work is delicate, but very light and hasty in execution. This portrait, as well as the study of head and shoulders, with the arms and hands, which the artist made for it, are not of the first importance. They were preserved with the other pictures here mentioned in the Palace of Boadilla del Monte. The brother of the Condesa de Chinchón, D. Luis Maria de Borbon and Vallabriga, who, like his sister, had been painted by Goya at Arenas de San Pedro when they were quite young, had his portrait again painted in these later years in the work to-day preserved in the Museo del Prado (No. 788), standing with a book in his right hand, his left hand falling naturally, and dressed as a cardinal, a high post in the Church which this individual obtained when still young. I know of various replicas with variations, not however copies, of this portrait in the museum; and I consider those of most interest as being the one preserved in Boadilla, in the gallery I have so often mentioned as belonging to the Prince of Ruspoli, the head very light and finely executed; another in the collection of the Marqués de Casa Torres, in Madrid. In the catalogue of the museum this cardinal appears with the name of D. Antonio de Borbón; I consider this a mistake, since the person is no other than that D. Luis Maria, known in his time as Cardinal Bourbon, who made a great figure later in Spanish politics. Goya, a painter of exquisite delicacy and simplicity, knew how to give to the portraits of children which came from his brush that particular interest, that tenderness which infancy brings with it. Approximately speaking, to the years which are occupying us in this chapter can be attributed three portraits of children, all of FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 16 great charm. One of them, seeming earlier by its style, is a head and shoulders representing Manuel Cantin y Lucientes, the nephew of Goya; it is fine in colour, the dominating note being the nut- brown of the coat and the rose of the waistcoat. It is a curious fact that this work was painted on an old board of the fifteenth century, on which, without doubt, there had been an image of a saint, since in course of time a halo which had surrounded the head of the saint has come through, and thus little Manuel Cantin appeared later with a halo. The painting comes from Zaragoza, where Goya had probably painted his little nephew upon one of his journeys to that city. Not having on that occasion a canvas handy to his command, he had made use of a panel of what we call to-day a primitive. This portrait passed some years ago into the Havemeyer collection in New York. The other two portraits of children to which we refer are both of the same person, the grandson of Goya, called Mariano. The first belongs to D. Enrique Crooke, who keeps it at his palace in Madrid (Plate 32). This work is painted with very few colours. The white and black alone dominate, and it is as if it were a step from the grey tones of preceding years to the nearly white and nearly black. The little sitter, standing upright in front view and very serious, is dressed in a kind of black dress-coat with a white waistcoat, the whole suit badly cut and showing the shape of his little stomach, giving to this child, who cannot be more than three years old, a very quaint appearance. His right hand is hidden, and with the left, almost covered by his large sleeve, he holds a cord which draws a little toy carriage. In the second of the portraits made by Goya of his little grand- son the latter was two or three years older (Plate 33). This is a head and shoulders almost in profile; his head is covered with a little high-crowned hat, and with a paper rolled up like a conductor s baton in his right hand he is occupied in beating time to some sheets of music which he has before him. This little boy, as time CONDE DE FERNÁN NÚÑEZ Plate XXXVI (p. ii 7 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES ”7 went on, was to be that old man whom D. Luis de Madrazo brought to Madrid in 1868, and who related so many curious things about his grandfather; and amongst them revealed to us who had been the person who served as model in the famous picture, “La Maja Desnuda.” The years which come between 1800, the date of the portrait of the Condesa de Chinchón, and the memorable year 1808, are marked by a succession of portraits of ever-increasing interest. To the year 1803 — not to 1808, as has been sometimes stated — should be dated the portraits of the Conde and Condesa de Fernán Núñez, preserved in the illustrious family of their descend- ants, at present dukes under the same title. This one of the latter is a portrait attractive in colour, but whose ensemble is spoilt by the way the legs are placed. Dressed as a maja , the Condesa is seated on a sloping bank, in rather a forced pose, and looking out with an expression of lively intelligence. The colour, though dark in tone, is the best thing in the picture; the yellow sleeves are the striking note of the composition, and the branches and leaves of a shrub filling the first plane on her left are simplified and show a complete command of technique. Notwithstanding the importance of this portrait, the superiority of its companion is such as to admit of no comparison. The Conde de Fernán Núñez advances serenely in his portrait painted by Goya (Plate 34), wrapped in the ample folds of his dark green cloak and looking to his right. This portrait is one of those satisfying and complete works which captivate the spectator from the first instant, and in which there is nothing hidden or needing explanation, since its simplicity is supreme and on a level with its art and its beauty. With all its certainty of drawing, the colour here is even better. The dominant note in this is given by the dark greens; the landscape which serves as background is composed of a series of intense greens, losing themselves in the dark ground of the lower part, while in the distance the most luminous point in 1 18 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES the background melts into the horizon and is lost in the sky above. Against this effect, so finely attained, appears the figure of the count. It is signed on the ground, in the lower part on the right: “ Goya F. 1803.” This work, the happy creation of a great portrait painter in the great period of his life, is an excellent example for studying the qualities of the artist who created it. We have pointed out, in the chronological method of this book, the influences which Goya received, and how he formed himself as an artist. What is there left here of the style learnt from Mengs and the portrait painters of that time? In my opinion nothing, absolutely nothing; we may compare this portrait with any one whatever by the famous Bohemian, and I believe we shall find no two works could be more different. And then it occurs to us to ask, how is it possible that Goya should have forgotten absolutely his earlier training, all that he had learnt in his youthful years, and of which it seems that there is always some trace in every artist, however much he may develop? And the answer is that Goya did not form himself on Mengs; he compromised with him — which is a very different thing. Goya only formed himself, as far as I can trace, upon the works of the old Spanish school and especially upon those of Velazquez, in his style, his technique — the ultimate expression which he needed to give form to the art which even he did not entirely create, but which was fermenting in his brain. In fact, apart from the distance of time, and without saying that Goya is an imitator of Velazquez, I believe that it can be affirmed before this portrait that it is the continuation of Spanish painting, and that the canvas would have been different had not Velazquez painted those pictures of his a hundred and fifty years earlier. Whence, save from Velazquez, comes this background, this surrounding atmosphere, this relation of the values of the figure with the background and the sky, and, above all, and more than all, the due proportion to all this of the figure itself? Whence MARQUES DE SAN ADRIÁN Plate XXXVII (P. I 2 I ) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 19 comes this typical drawing, this profile, these lines, this silhouette, which are so unmistakable, which no one save Velazquez had created, though so many had vainly imitated him, and which alone in this portrait gives us the sensation of supreme simplicity and mastery; so that we almost think that the great D. Diego must have risen from the tomb to depict this gentleman at the beginning of the nineteenth century? Let us admit, then, this work as a continuation of the great Spanish school, with its marvellous and purely national qualities represented by Goya, and by Goya alone, in that epoch; and, admitting this, let us recognize immediately the influence, I might say better, the resemblance, which this work has with the great pro- ductions in the world precisely in the years when it was created. I think that this will not be difficult for anyone who has seen some of the English portraits, and especially those of Gainsborough. The contemporary, the person belonging to the same period, has necessarily a similarity with those of his time; and this is based not alone on dress, manner, fashion, things totally external, but on something spiritual and indefinable which regulates and determines all this, exists on all sides, is in the very atmosphere, and enters as necessarily into the intelligence of man as the air into his lungs. This determining factor, this time spirit, strengthened and repeated again by external qualities, like the similarity of dress and — to take another instance — the fashion of painting the sitters with their heads covered and in the open air, is what makes these works of Goya resemble those of English artists; but if we come to see them together, if we should find this Conde de Fernán Nuñez among portraits by Reynolds, Gainsborough, or Lawrence, imme- diately we should distinguish it as Spanish — and this indeed by its leaven of Velazquez — from those others who have their ancestry in the art of Van Dyck, who passed a long time in England, and left there the seed which the English knew how to bring to fruit later in such brilliant fashion. 120 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Goya knew engravings of the English portraits, and perhaps some actual portrait of his own was due to these painters, and resembled them in its whole expression; but from that to consider him an imitator of the English is a very different matter. Thus, having established that this portrait, like so many other works of Goya, is a continuation of the purely national Spanish creation and yet obeys the spirit of the time, I think now there only remains to us to indicate the third of these constituent elements — and that is the part that is his own, the original part of his art, the Goyesque. For these portraits by Goya are always unmistakably his own. A constant study of nature — never satisfied with what had been acquired and desiring always to go forward, going ever deeper into the aspects presented by nature in order to reproduce them later as a whole in their synthesis, and united to his inherent and excep- tional ability as a colourist — gave as its fruit in this aspect of Goya’s production, marvellous portraits, among which the one holding the first place is that of the Conde de Fernán Nuñez. These works represent an enormous effort; they are the result of daily work for years and years, of the whole life of a man; and yet in their appearance they are simple and go down to posterity as if created by magic, and we admire them with delight and affection as the spontaneous product of the genius of a race. Belonging to the year 1804, two companion portraits are known to us, that of D. Ignacio Garcini and of his wife, Doña Josefa Castilla-Portugal de Garcini. These are three-quarter length por- traits; that of the husband is standing upright, dressed as a Brigadier of Engineers, with an inscription in the lower left corner saying: “ Don Ignacio Garcini. For Goya 1804.” In that of his wife she appears seated, wearing a light dress, displaying her beautiful long hair unbound. It is a work — and this is an interest- ing fact to be noted — in a certain manner inspired by blemish art, where the qualities of fleshiness and softness predominate. In the MARQUESA DE SANTA CRUZ Plate XXXVIII FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES I 2 I lower córner on the right we read: “ Da. Josefa Castilla de Garcini. pr. Goya 1804.” Both these portraits are preserved in the collection of Colonel Payne of New York. Of the same date is the beautiful full-length portrait, standing upright, with a landscape background, where the Marqués de San Adrián (Plate 35), dressed as a horseman, with a white waistcoat and breeches of a showy orange colour, rests against a stone pillar. Signed and dated in 1804. This work belongs to the existing Marqués de San Adrián. Dated a year later is an important work by Goya, the portrait of the Marquesa de Santa Cruz (Plate 36), belonging to the heirs of the Conde de Pie de Concha, in Madrid. This painting is an import- ant work, although little known. The Marquesita here appears about eighteen years of age. She is seen resting on a rose-coloured couch with large cushions and dressed in white; her head, admirable in its modelling and a very delicate type of feminine beauty, is adorned with leaves and some pale yellow flowers. The background is filled with a very dark crimson curtain. The sitter is holding with her left hand a musical instrument, a lyre, the original of which is to-day preserved by the side of the portrait, and which certainly is not identical with the one painted. The ensemble of this work, as far as its colour is concerned, is a most happy harmony of whites and crimsons. On the lower part of the canvas may be read: “ Doña . . . Girón Marquesa de Santa Cruz por Goya 1805.” This work recalls to me somewhat — and this not so much by the position of the model as by the harmony of colours — the “Venus at the Mirror” by Velazquez, which Goya might in his time have seen in the collection of the Duque de Alba, or in that of the Prince de la Paz. With the portrait just mentioned, both by its origin and the family ties between the sitters, may be connected the beautiful portrait of Doña Manuela de Silva y Walstein, Condesa de Haro (Plate 37). A very refined work, recalling in some points the art of R I 22 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES France and especially that of Prudhon, is this portrait of the enchanting little countess, with bare neck and shoulders, the latter draped with a scarf of white and gold. It belongs to the Duquesa de San Carlos, Madrid. Very realistic in their character are the portraits of a mother and daughter, two sitters who lack the distinction of those previously mentioned, all the more that they have both followed the fashion of adorning their heads with flowers, a fashion which, it would seem, became the rage, and passed from the ladies of the aristocracy to the middle class. These portraits, dated in 1805, are, according to the inscription appearing on them, of Doña Leonor Valdés de Barruso and of Doña Maria Vicenta Barruso Valdés. Evidently pendants from their size and proportions, they are painted three- quarter length and in both cases seated. Doña Leonor, the mother, her profile turned towards the left against a leaden grey background, and upon a crimson chair, wears an under-dress of rose showing through silk net, and looks at the spectator with anything but a friendly expression. The daughter, Doña Maria Vicenta, is also seen against a grey background, and is seated in a crimson arm- chair. Her profile is turned to the right, and she is wearing a yellow dress which shows through flowered net; she holds on her knee a little white dog, and looks at the spectator with an expression of kindness and sympathetic innocence. Both portraits are dated. I do not know their present possessor. About the same period, perhaps a little later, although I cannot state precisely the date, there are two portraits of the same lady, Doña Antonia Zarate, the mother, as I believe, of the famous poet, D. Antonia Gil y Zárate. In one of these she is represented in three-quarter length, seated on a sofa of dull yellow damask. The sitter, who is seen almost full face, is dressed in black, with a mantilla of the same colour and white gloves. In the whole work there is predominant a reddish tone, giving it a certain opaqueness; I wonder if perhaps this may not have been caused by the decom- CONDESA DE HARO (P. i: Plate XXXIX FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 123 position of the preparatory tint of the canvas. The second of these portraits (Plate 38) is only of head and shoulders. The sitter, very pale and of delicate appearance, gives to her likeness here a special interest which is lacking in the first-named. The tones of this work are light, clear grey tints dominating in the hood with which she covers her head, adorned with blue stripes and a little half moon. She carries a transparent scarf covering her neck, and a red wrap hanging from her shoulders with a white fur collar. Similar to this last as a type of portrait is another even more interesting portrait, in half length, of an anonymous lady who covers her head with a veil of tulle and her shoulders with a golden yellow scarf. There is life itself in the expression of this head, this mouth, and above all in the vivid and deep glance of her eyes which look out fixedly. This work was in Madrid not long ago; I believe that it was then unknown. To-day it belongs to Dr. James Simon, in Berlin. It is a unique work, and one which leaves an ever- lasting memory. With these portraits I think that others of the same time might be mentioned, like those two companion pictures which, though not included in the catalogue, appeared at the Goya Exhibition as the property of Sr. Modet, and afterwards changed hands, that of the lady, Da. Narcisa Barañana de Goicoechea, going to the Have- meyer collection in New York, and that of her husband, D. Juan Bautista de Goicoechea, into the possession of M. Durand Ruel (Paris). And of this period, more precisely in the year 1805, would be the portrait of D. José de Vargas y Ponce, of the Academy of History. This director of the above-mentioned Academy wrote to his friend Ceán Bermudez on 8 January 1805, a letter in which he enumerates in a graceful way the cares of a director of the Academy, and where he says in one sentence: “In this character of Director, velis nolis , I ought to have my portrait painted one of these days. I want Goya to do it, to whom 124 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES it has been proposed and who has come forward in the matter very graciously. But I also ask and beg of you to give him a note saying who I am and our mutual relations , so that if this earthen jar has to be filled in the Academy it should not be with an ugly mask but as he can when he likes.” 1 The portrait, as may be seen to-day, is not precisely an ugly mask; but is not more than a work of secondary interest, an official portrait and nothing more. Special mention is claimed by two portraits of those years. That of Mocarte (Plate 39), in half length, is a work of intimate character full of force and marrow. This person was an organist of the Chapel Royal; but he appears more like a torero to judge from his apparel. Perhaps he was an amateur who discussed with Goya the bull-fights of that time; and in fact the portrait seems to be speaking confidentially to the painter, to judge by his expression, which is marvellously true to life. It is preserved in “The Hispanic Society of America” of New York. Fortuny considered this work as a piece of extraordinary painting, and as such made of it a beautiful copy in which he succeeded in preserving all the spon- taneity shown by the original; a copy which that eminent lover of Spain, Mr. Huntington, who directs and presides over the above- mentioned society with such knowledge and splendid success, has obtained and placed beside the work of Goya. The second of the two portraits to which I referred is a small one of Asensi, which I have not yet succeeded in seeing. It left Spain many years ago, and I do not know its present possessor. This is a charming figure, very alive, full of expression, and, to judge by the photograph, must be a fine work of art. It is dedicated : 1 Bulletin of the Royal Academy of History, vol. xlvii (July-September 1905). “Correspondence by letter between Don José de Vargas y Ponce and Don Agustín Céan Bermudez, during the years 1S03 to 1805, existing in the Archives of the Directors’ Office of Hydrography and of the Royal Academy of History.” Published by the Marqués de Seoane. D A ANTONIA ZARATE Plate XL (p. 123) o FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 125 “ Goya a su amigo Asensi.” This was the painter who assisted his friend on more than one occasion. I do not know whether this Asensi is the painter known as Juliá, as has been sometimes said. It seems more likely that one was this Asensi, and another Ascensio Juliá. This work comes from the Gallery of San Telmo in Seville. I know of a work dated in 1806, a superb painting of a gentle- man rider, a deputy of the city of Lima, on which is read the inscription: “ Don Tadeo Bravo Rivero por su amigo Goya 1806,” on the ground on the lower part on the left (Plate 40). This person, dressed in uniform with his hat in his left hand and pointing with the right to some object which I do not know, is seen against a dark landscape and a leaden grey sky threatening a terrible storm near at hand; I have already pointed out in preceding portraits where the sitters wear uniform (beginning with that of Urrutia, very marked in that of Godoy and others) the intensity of the colour of the sky. Can it be that perhaps this scheme of colour attracted Goya as contrasting with the red of the uniforms? What is certain is that this leaden colouring is only used by him in the portraits of soldiers. In this one the intensity of this tone reaches its highest point, and it must be owned that the very intense red of the coat against this colour gives a very fine effect. The composition is completed by a somewhat hideous dog, which is looking at D. Tadeo. This portrait must have left Spain many years ago. I saw it for the first time in Berlin, and later in the Spiridon Gallery in Paris. “ Da. Francisca Vicenta Chollet y Cavellero. Por Goya ano 1806.” Thus says a portrait belonging to the Groult collection (Paris), where this lady appears, dressed in white and accompanied by a little dog. Very fine here is the composition, no less admirable the head, and the whole work is in a state of perfect preservation. It seems, indeed, as if it has been just painted; this painting, very little known, is a curious example of Goya’s work of that date. In 1807 was painted the portrait of the Marqués de Caballero, now for some years in the possession of the Museum of Budapesth. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 26 It is a work of vulgar appearance, but possesses qualities of ingenuous charm and beauty. At first sight we are not pleased with the many embroideries, ribbons, and crosses of this person, who appears before 11s seated in three-quarter length, with a sheet of paper in his left hand on which may be read: “ Excmo. Señor Marques de Caballero, Ministero de Gracia y Justicia. Por Goya, 1807.” Apart from the official character of this work, it wins the mind of the spectator by its splendid technique, and should be considered as a beautiful example of the portraits of those years. The head is painted in a free and open manner, and if we did not divine a great master’s hand through this apparent simplicity we might say that it was the work of a child. It has no clever brush work or parade of execution; it is only love for truth interpreted in the very simplest manner. The modelling of the nose, the mouth, and chin are grand, when we consider all this is in full light. The expression of life reflected in the sitter’s look is most noticeable. The rest has been painted with Goya’s habitual freedom, at first hand for the most part, without any previous study; yet keeping all the drawing in its true place, without sleight of hand or attempts at effect. The colour is truth itself, and has nothing conventional in it. The scarlet cloth of the waistcoat and of the breeches is clean and bold; the black of the coat is deep in tone, and the blue of the sash and order painted in its full brilliancy form a whole as rich and even as showy as would have been its actual appearance in nature; yet, admitting this, we are impressed by the sincerity this work displays. Of this portrait I know two replicas of very different merit. To the same date, 1807, belongs the portrait of the Marquesa de Caballero, a three-quarter length, seated, in front view; a not very impressive work and retouched and repainted in the head. The whole effect is successful, and the greys of the dress are a fine note and the best thing in the work. A good replica exists of this portrait. MOCARTE Plate XLI (p. 124) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 127 Of the same date is another portrait of very different character, that of Máiquez, in the possession of the Prado Museum (No. 734 of the catalogue), a bust portrait of very great life and expression. This work is more restless, and in it seem already foreshadowed those characteristics which were going to make the productions of the artist so singular in later years. It corresponds with the period of the greatest triumphs of the famous actor, who, for having taken an active part in the year following on the day of the 2nd of May, was carried off to France, for a short time only, as guilty of treason. This work is signed and dated “Goya, 1807.” The Marques de Casa Torres has in his collection at Madrid a replica of this work with certain variations. Of the year following I know one portrait, that of the soldier in uniform, D. Pantaleón Pérez de Nenin, belonging to D. Pedro Labat y Arrizabalaga, at Madrid. It is of the same type as the other persons dressed in uniform of those years by Goya, and I find in it the same characteristic notes and peculiar dark tones. In the lower part of the sabre which D. Pantaleón is holding with his left hand we may read: “Don Pantaleón Perez de Nenin. Por Goya, 1808.“ We have now arrived at the decisive date of 1808. It has been made clear that before this time Goya had been going through a profound transformation in his inner life. Jove Llanos and all the brilliant constellation of men of intellect of that epoch were friends of Goya, and influenced in a very beneficial and stimulating manner his whole spiritual development. It would be important for us to know the intimate letters of these years, in which undoubtedly the mental attitude of Goya went through a very profound change. However, these letters do not exist; I do not know whether because they were not written, or because the nephew of Zapater did not wish to give them publicity. This writer tells us that his collection concluded with the corre- spondence of 1801. He says, however, later in his little book, speaking of Goya: 128 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES “A genius more or less venturesome, an intelligence and a heart more or less addicted to novelty, always united to his family and to society, at whose defects he laughs and even turns them into satire.” And in another very significant sentence we read: “In this period [referring to the first years of the nineteenth century] Goya already flattered by fortune, breathed an atmosphere so impure that it intoxicated him, while at the same time he was excited by the new ideas which overran Europe in the wake of conquering armies among nations foreign to Spain.” This is undoubtedly true. These years are those of the evolution of the artist, and those in which he creates his art of transcendental qualities, his art of thought. It is not precisely in the way of portrait painting that this change can be best appreciated; yet in this also he is evolving himself, and I shall have some remarks to make on this in the following chapters. Before doing so, basing our inquiries on certain dates, and advancing otherwise upon the ground of reasonable supposition, we may note that the change Goya underwent in this period, which affects decisively his paintings, his etchings, and his tragic and terrible drawings, is not only due to this evolution of his ideas by discussion and reading, but by the scenes seen and lived through by him, which invasion and war had brought in their train. In the year 1808, Goya was living in the Puerta del Sol, at No. 9, on the second floor. His signature appears, followed by this address, in the register taken in Madrid of heads of families on whom it was enjoined, under oath, to render support, love, and fidelity to Joseph Bonaparte. 1 From his balcony Goya certainly 1 Two important articles which appeared in “La Ilustración Española y Ameri- cana,” “How in Madrid the oath was taken to King Joseph Napoleon,” due to the erudition and to the elegant pen of the illustrious Academician, D. Juan Pérez de Guzmán, bring to our knowledge this interesting detail. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 129 saw the arrival on that 2nd of May, by the Calle de Alcalá, of the mamelukes who preceded the cavalry of General Léfebvre-Des- nouettes, and he was witness of the defence of the people of Madrid, who at the very same place received them with firing, commencing their unequal struggle. Those scenes of the 2nd and 3rd of May, not to mention others depicted by our painter of similar subjects, are scenes at which he was himself present. That mameluke with red breeches, who is falling from his horse, and those figures of the people — seen in one of these pictures attacking with fury and in another in despair awaiting the moment of their being shot— -are scenes lived through and profoundly felt by the artist, who has expressed in them all the magnitude of the tragedy which commenced with the combat in the Puerta del Sol, and of which only God knew from that time when, how, and where it would end. A few days later General Verdier gave siege to Zaragoza, the city of Goya’s affections, where his fellow countrymen did not seem disposed to let themselves be dominated by the invaders. Little is known of what Goya did during those months between May and December, 1808, but as in any case at the end of this year the painter appeared in the region of Aragon — as is stated by Zapater and as we shall see confirmed in the following chapter — it seems to me we shall not be mistaken in the conclusion that the painter remained in Madrid until the first siege of Zaragoza was raised, but when the French troops had retired in August of that year upon Miranda, leaving the road from Madrid to Aragon open, Goya went to his own city where he had so many affectionate memories. There the new advance of the French surprised him, and, before Marshals Moncey and Montier had commenced the second siege of the city, the painter escaped, and not venturing or being able to reach Madrid it occurred to him to take refuge in the out-of-the-way village of Fuendetodos, where he had been born sixty-two years earlier. To the First Court Painter of Charles IV, s 130 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES flying for his life, deaf and old, his existence at that time may have appeared, amid those scenes where he had played as a child, like a happy dream with a sad awakening. The world in which he had lived, the position, so valuable in itself and still dearer to him for the sacrifices and toil it had cost him to attain, had crumbled away into the dust — and perhaps for ever. His property, his works were gone; and his patrons, dispersed or ill-treated, were scattered throughout the world. The court seemed then to have ended its existence; the sove- reigns were driven out of their country by main force. Not a few gentlemen, among them Count Fernán Núñez, that very model of noble bearing, were condemned to death; and the duchesses, countesses, and the gay ladies of fashion had disappeared, along with the facile and delightful life of those last years of the artist. To add to all this, Zaragoza was in flames on every side, the soldiers, among them the originals of his portraits of the leaden skies, were fighting with scanty forces in the strategic points of the Peninsular; and the people — that people whom Goya had so loved and who had so often served him as models for his majas , his toreros , his chisperos , his manotas , and his chiquillos — were being on all sides shot down, cut to pieces, and trampled on by the soldiers of Napoleon. The painter, like his nation, did not give up the struggle. These times even brought to old Goya the strength to create a greater art — that which fills the last twenty years of his life, and which represents the strongest, the most forceful, part of his production. The leading part in this was taken by all those scenes of war and disaster which, even when filled to the brim with profound pessimism, are not without a certain clean sharp humour, showing without reserve of any kind the gloomy view he held of the merits of mankind. These works of Goya belong to neither one nor the other side, they are not political, nor have they any party. They Plate XLII DON TADEO BRAVO RIVERO (P- 125) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 131 are simply human. In them his greatness reaches its summit, and his sense of actuality lays hold of the eternal; they will be forever priceless documents, both to bring before us those days of sorrow, and to guide us towards the true conception of the action of Spain in that supreme moment of her history. CHAPTER VII 1808-1813. Spain Invaded I N the short stay of Goya within the capital of Aragon, in the year 1808, and precisely during the only months when it was possible to enter that city — that is to say after the first siege had been raised, and before the second had commenced — Gil y Alcaide relates in his work, “The History of the Siege of Zaragoza,” that the painter made sketches of the ruins, depicting in one of them the fact of the boys having dragged the dead French through the Coso (public square) in the battle of 4 August. These sketches were lost through having been covered with a coat of paint when the French again approached the city, a coat which could not after- wards be removed. These works being lost, we know of only one painted, according to tradition, in those months — “The Equestrian Portrait of General Palafox ” (No. 725 of the Prado Museum). When Goya, as we are told, was called to Zaragoza by its defender, General Palafox, to perpetuate by means of some pictures the victori- ous defence against the first siege, nothing could be more natural than that he should have then made the portrait which remained in the possession of the sitter, since it was given later to the museum by one of his descendants, D. Francisco de Palafox y Soler, Duque de Zaragoza. The heroic general is depicted riding at full gallop on a grey charger, with his sabre drawn, as if cheering on his troops, in the direction of a battery seen firing on the left. If, as seems likely, the portrait was painted in those gloomy and anxious days between the two sieges, there is nothing particularly surprising in the slight- ness with which it was handled, and the faults of drawing of the horse, which are sufficiently obvious. Probably Goya neither had FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 133 at his disposal a horse which would serve as a model, nor found those days favourable for painting horses. The figure, on the other hand, is strong; the head expressive. It seems to have been done before the living model. Palafox must have been able to give the artist some moments for a sitting when he made that sketch of the general seated in a chair, with a sabre in his right hand, and narrating to the painter some of the incidents of the defence. Afterwards Goya would have finished the work rapidly and from memory. I insist on this point because it is not infrequent, when Goya is spoken of by some enthusiasts of his art, to have the bad drawing of this horse brought forward, as if they had made some great discovery; and as if we did not know, from what we have studied of the painter’s creation, that this horse of Palafox is truly lamentable in the carelessness and inaccuracy of its drawing. The figure and harmony of composition of this work as a whole do not differ greatly from the military portraits by Goya of pre- ceding years. Even if the background here is not very dark, these intense tones are accentuated in the figure, the darks tend towards black, the vermilion towards carmine; and, in a word, the whole tendency of the painter is marked towards the accentuated darkness of tone which was to become later one of the characteristic notes of the works of his last period. The journey, or rather the flight of the artist, to Fuendetodos is fixed by Gil y Alcaide in the month of November. He did not stay long in his native village, seeing that in December Goya was to be found again in Madrid. In 1809 it seemed that the reign of Joseph Bonaparte would be maintained. Not a few Spaniards, some of them of high position, gave in their adhesion more or less to the new state of things. The French king, on his side, did all that was possible to attract around him men who in some degree represented the country. Among these may be mentioned Goya, who continued in his official position in the palace. So, at least, we are generally told by the biographers 134 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES of Goya when they arrive at this point. Some of them make this statement as a simple notice, without any commentary. Others in so doing blame severely the painter; but not one of them has given himself the trouble to prove the certainty of this statement. Where is it made clear, what document, letter, indication, however slight, does there exist to prove to us that Goya was Court Painter to Joseph 1 ? I believe firmly that he was not anything of the sort; although I may not be able to prove it — since this negative proof is almost impossible to obtain — I will give two facts which I believe have some force, and seem to confirm my own opinion in this matter. 1 The first royal favour of which there is any notice as bestowed on Goya by Joseph Bonaparte appears in the decree of n March 1 8 1 1 , and is his nomination for the “Royal Order of Spain.” In the list of those so rewarded, his name appears in the following form: “Goya (D. Francisco) pintor”; and on the other hand, when coming to Maella, the words used are: “ Maella (D. Mariano) nuestro primer pintor de Cámara” (our First Court Painter). Inas- much as Goya is not mentioned with the same title — and it is not likely that from what we know of his character he would be recon- ciled to a second place — it seems logical to come to the conclusion that Goya was not Court Painter to Joseph I. The second point to which I would refer is an aviso (notice) inserted in the “ Diario de Madrid ” under the date of i September 1812. Speaking of a portrait, which we shall mention in its place, it is stated that “ it has just been executed by the First Painter of the King, D. Francisco Goya.” At this date the Spaniards were in power in Madrid, for the allied Anglo-Spanish army was then in the city, and consequently the king who was referred to by the “Diario de Madrid” can be no other than Ferdinand VII. And 1 These and other data which refer to the relations of Goya with Joseph I and his court have been published in the book of D. Felipe Pérez y González, “ Un cuadro . . . de Historia.” DON JOSÉ MANUEL ROMERO Plate XLIII (p. 142) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 135 as it would be absurd to think that Goya would have kept the place he had held with the French, this notice shows to us that the Spaniards replaced in their official position all those function- aries who had performed these duties in the reign of the Bourbons, who, naturally, would not have admitted any continuity with the Bonapartes. Goya, as painter of Charles IV, continued to be that of Ferdinand VII: therefore, as a consequence, he could not have been that of Joseph I. On the other hand, there is no doubt that Goya maintained relations with the court, and with certain French individuals among those who came over with the Bonapartes. This is proved to us by the portraits of which I shall speak later. He had likewise to accept the new king, as all heads of families had to recognize him, under penalty, at the very least, of banishment or extradition if he did not do so; and it seems also that in their own time he had been a partisan of those tendencies and ideas which were founded in France by the political Code of 1789. But all this, which is quite capable of explanation, is not sufficient to make us consider our painter as a partisan of France, above all with the significance which this qualification had in those moments. He had never been in fact a politician, and had taken no part in the scheming or intrigues of court circles; and this notwith- standing his official position in the palace, and his personal relations with all the persons of the court from the sovereigns downwards. If circumstances brought it about that his position in Madrid, attained by him after the work of a whole lifetime and through an unequalled talent, changed its master, the fault was not his; it would have been to expect very much from a man of sixty-two years of age that he should abandon his life work in those difficult moments to go and commence anew his career or die of hunger in some remote place, forgotten by all. At the same time we must remember that between our not having to consider Goya as a French partisan, and our thinking of him as does Ferrer del Rio, I3Ó FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES as a patriot in the sense in which this word is commonly under- stood, and as supposing that the artist did not take up arms against the French because he was already old, there is a gulf which it does not seem that Goya attempted to cross. One only of his actions has the appearance of having com- promised him in having lent his support to the invaders; that he formed part of a commission with Maella and Napoli to select works of great painters which were to be sent to France to the Musée Napoleon. We are surprised at first sight, and we may be even disposed to censure the fact that a Spanish artist could point out what masterpieces of the nation’s art should be sent out of the country in that manner. But it is worth the trouble to give our attention to the list , 1 and it will be seen with what cleverness — and we might almost say cunning intention — this was done. There appear in this list, even mentioned with praise, names of masters of the rear rank; and when there is no escape from the works of great painters appearing, they seem to be chosen with scarcely less lack of judgement. By Velazquez only three works appear here; a portrait, the “ Martirio de Santiago ” — a canvas which has disappeared — and, as a work of exceptional importance and a fine composition, “The Coat of Joseph,” to-day preserved in the Escorial. I do not believe we shall be wrong in thinking that of the many known works by Velazquez, an artist of such weight, such perfection and such high level, perhaps this picture of “The Coat of Joseph” is the least interesting, the least successful, and the one we should miss the least. And, moreover, in that list “the cat was often given for the hare,” since in the case of two pictures where there existed both an original and copy, the latter was sent and made to pass for the original. Goya regarded the invasion and the war as a subject of thoughtful study; his works referring to them are not patriotic i Published by Conde de la Viñaza in his “ Goya, su tiempo, su vida y sus obras.” This list was made on 25 October 1810. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 137 and much less are they Gallophile. He reproduced the horrors his own eyes had seen, and in his vision we come to know that he noticed more the cruelties and outpouring of evil passions than the exploits of daring and feats of heroism; our painter, indeed, left in those works — which we have not to study in this volume, since they are not portraits — a most terrible and bitter judgement upon war itself. 1 Now let us return to his portraits. The same writers who gave us the information, without any proof, that Goya was then Court Painter, speak to us of various portraits painted by him, without telling us clearly where they are or how they were painted. I do not know them at all, and form the reasonable conclusion that they never existed. There would be surely some notice when, how, and where they were painted ; there would be preserved engravings of works of such importance; and, as a matter of fact, neither here, nor in France, nor anywhere is there any such notice of works of this kind. And if, as I assume, Goya never painted from life the portrait of Joseph Bonaparte, it is one more fact in favour of the supposition that he was never the latter’s Court Painter, since the least that could be required from an artist holding such a high position would be that he should make a portrait of the king. What we do know, and, in my judgement, there is nothing in this that is strange and much less blameworthy, is that, on one occasion at least, he painted the figure, not taken from life, of King Joseph. This was due to the following circumstances: D. Tadeo Bravo de Rivero, a Peruvian gentleman, deputy of the city of Lima, a person whose figure is known to us by the portrait Goya made of him in 1806, described already in the preceding chapter, took no little part in the tumultuous politics of those years. In 1809 there was appointed a Governor of the Municipality of Madrid, and inasmuch as it would be correct for him to have a portrait of the new king, he commissioned D. Tadeo Bravo, who 1 On this point may be consulted “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras,” chap, vi, T 138 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES passed as a good judge in matters of art, to find a painter, and to complete the details referring to the portrait. A little later D. Tadeo communicated to the notary, who acted as secretary to the municipality, in writing the results of his efforts; and, after letting him know that he had commissioned the portrait by the most able professor, he concluded by saying: “ He is so without question. I refer to D. Francisco Goya, whose talent has enabled him to conquer difficulties arising from the King’s absence, and from not having procured until now any other copy except the print in half profile which, engraved in Rome, 1 had the honour to present to one of the Municipal Assemblies. With this slight assistance Sr. Goya has already composed a painting certainly worthy of all the objects to which it is dedicated, and for which I have made some anticipations which the actual situation of this clever professor requires. “At the same time they are working on an entrance corre- sponding to the size of the picture, which, so arranged, cannot come down in its price below fifteen thousand reales. “ On this understanding I must beg Your Excellency to put the matter before the illustrious Municipality. Madrid. February 27th. 1810. Tadeo Bravo del Rivero.” This communication lets us know both date and price of the picture, and, moreover, in speaking of “the anticipations which the actual situation of this clever professor requires,” gives us another fact tending to show that he was not Court Painter with 50,000 reales, as he was in bygone years to Charles IV. The work Goya then made is less a portrait than a picture, in which the figure of the king appeared, and is no other than the famous “Allegory of the City of Madrid,” to-day preserved in the Town Hall for which it was painted. In it appears the crowned city, personified in a beautiful woman who leans upon her shield DON JUAN ANTONIO LLORENTE Plate XLIV (p- 143) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 139 and points to a large medallion, which, on the right of the picture, is upheld by two angels; Fame and Victory occupy the upper part of the canvas. Everything in this picture is intact and well preserved except the medallion, from which the portrait of Joseph Bonaparte has disappeared, and its place is now taken by the inscription “Dos de Mayo” (2nd of May). The transformations this picture has suffered from the year 1810 up to the present are curious, and reflect the series of changes through which the politics of Spain passed in the nineteenth century. Two years after this picture was painted, and as a consequence of the battle of Salamanca, won by the Angio-Spanish army, the French had to abandon Madrid, where the advance guard of the army of the Duke of Wellington — recently named by the Spanish Cortes “Duque de Ciudad Rodrigo” — was already arriving, on 10 August 1812. Celebrations were being prepared in the Town Hall, and the picture clearly could not remain in its existing form. It was arranged that it should pass for an allegory of the City of Madrid, only the portrait which appeared on the medallion being effaced, substituting for it the word “ Consti- tución.” However, the stay of the allied army was not then to be lasting in Madrid. On 2 November in the same year, 1812, King Joseph returned to enter with the French. Those persons were quickly noticed who, during his forced absence from the city, had removed all the political tokens of the Bonapartist domina- tion. Among these last was included the portrait of our picture. In the session of the Municipal Council of 30 December of that year it was agreed: “ ... to give notice to D. Francisco Goya, the author of the said picture, that he should immediately assist at the Consistorial Assemblies, and that it should be placed once more in the condition and state in which it was before, erasing the word ‘ Constitución ’ and substituting the countenance of King Joseph.” 140 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Goya was not slow in this restoration, since, on the date of 2 January 1813, he made the following official communication to the Secretary: “ You can inform the Municipality of the City of Madrid that the Allegorical picture is already in its original state, with the painting of His Majesty, the same which I painted, as it was when it came from my hands. “Which I communicate to you for your information. “ Fran. co de Goya.” Five months after the date of this communication, in May of that same year of 1813, Joseph Bonaparte and all his following left Madrid to return never more. A little later the municipality agreed that there should be effaced, this time definitely, the portrait of King Joseph, and that it should be again replaced by the word “Constitución.” Goya once again intervened in this simple task, which he entrusted to a pupil named Dionisio Gomez. The year following, Ferdinand VII, inflamed by the re- actionary elements which were around him, began to display a tendency in Spanish policy in which any manifestation whatever of Constitutionalism might lead to imprisonment with hard labour or banishment. The word “Constitución” suddenly disappeared from the picture and its place was taken by a portrait of the king, made, as it appears, badly and in a hurry, I do not know by whom. It was apparently so faulty that in 1826 the municipality decided that another should be painted, but this time of the same person. The painter commissioned to make this new transformation was the famous portraitist of those years, Vicente Lopez. The curious receipt referring to this says as follows: “ I have received from the Commissioners of the most Excellent Corporation of this very heroic City the sum of two thousand reales de vellón, for the portrait of Our Lord the King FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 141 whom God preserve, which I have placed in the painting of Don Francisco Goya. . . . “ Madrid 28th. of September of 1826. “Vicente Lopez. “—Namely 2,000 reales de vellón — ” We know that in the year 1841 other winds were blowing, since a document exists, a paper among the municipal archives of Madrid, which reveals the fact that the portrait made by Vicente Lopez was effaced, and in its place was set the book of the Constitution. In this condition the picture reached the year 1872, when the Marqués de Sardoal, then Mayor of Madrid, was informed by his two friends, D. Cristóbal Ferriz and D. Luis Foxá, both very competent in matters of art and learning, of the vicissitudes through which this picture had passed. By order of this mayor the picture was handed over to the distinguished artist, D. Vicente Palmaroli, with the object of disclosing the successive layers of paint, in order to see if it were possible eventually to leave it in its original state with the portrait of Joseph Bonaparte. There were, in fact, found traces of all these inscriptions and portraits, but in a very dilapidated state, since each artist undoubtedly had partly scraped off what had preceded in order to work more easily. On arriving at the last painting beneath there was scarcely a trace to be found of the brushwork of Goya. Palmaroli was preparing once more to fill the medallion with the inscription “ Constitución,” when the ingenious Luis Foxá exclaimed: “Constitución another time . . . ? By no means! In Spain reaction is always waiting for us and continually reappears; this word has been already erased from the picture several times, and we have now to give the picture a lasting character.” And he proposed to the mayor that something should be put on with which all would be agreed, and which would have in a certain way a relation with Madrid and with Goya — namely: “ Dos de Mayo.” 142 FRANCISCO COYA Y LUCIENTES So it was done, and so is the picture now preserved in the City Hall of Madrid. I know this curious history through having heard it related by my good friends, Sres. Ferriz and Foxá, from whom I learned so much, and to whom it is right to dedicate a word of remem- brance in a book about Goya, the painter of their special enthusiasm. Their narrative on this point agrees entirely with that of D. Felipe Pérez y Gonzalez in his book already mentioned, where appear documents and dates, some of which I have made use of, and which in their greater part were brought to light by the learned librarian of the city, D. Carlos Cambronero, a friend and to some extent a collaborator of the Sres. Ferriz and Foxá. There is no doubt, and it is proved by the portraits of which we are about to speak, that Goya maintained relations with persons who belonged completely to the court of Joseph I. As a type of these portraits that of the Minister, D. José Manuel Romero (Plate 41), may serve us, with the uniform of his high office which, with all its gold lace, decorations, ribbons and crosses, seems as if it were too large for him and weighed him down, and that his insignificant person could not bear the weight of all these honours. The Francophile Minister rests his right hand on the opening of his unbuttoned waistcoat; this is of scarlet with wide embroidery and is partly covered by the blue coat, em- broidered also over scarlet on the facings of the sleeves; he wears breeches or trousers of blue, embroidered shirt frills, and lace cuffs. The red ribbon crosses his breast, a distinction which Bonaparte had instituted in Spain, known by the people with the contemptu- ous name of the Order of the Egg-plant. From the point of view of art this work is very striking, and the fine quality of the head and expressiveness of the face are on the level of the technical skill appearing in the rest of a picture rich in details, yet simple in its ensemble , expressing as a whole a most complete artistic mastery. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 143 We may also mention here the sober and powerful likeness — with that note of black which we have already described, and a vermilion as strongly defined as is the black, while the expression of the sitter possesses extraordinary reality and life — of D. Juan Antonio Llórente (Plate 42), a person of interest and one who has perhaps been unfairly blamed, since in him there were not lacking traits of generosity and courage which make him sympathetic; and whose life, in any case, is a reflection of those times of trans- formation and disturbance. Llórente was a native of Rioja who had entered the Catholic Church very young. He gave himself later to studies which brought him into the Liberal camp and to Rationalism, but without abandoning his ecclesiastical position, through which he believed he could render great benefits to his country. Appointed Secretary- General of the Inquisition, he formed in 1794 a plan for reform of the Holy Office, in which it would seem that Godoy and Jovellanos were ready to assist him. When these politicians fell into disgrace Llórente was attacked as a disturber of the peace. A great enthusiast for France, in whose Revolution and principles he believed that he saw the salvation of humanity, he became noted for his protection of all French interests. He had already protected and helped years before the French priests who had fled from their country, and in 1808 he accepted Joseph Bonaparte with enthusiasm, in the belief that the ideas he brought with him would be the regeneration of Europe. He was admitted into the Council of State; and when the French had to fly he followed Joseph Bonaparte into exile. In France he published, among other works, the “ History of the Inquisi- tion”; and remained there until 1823, when he abandoned this country of his affections. He arrived in Madrid, and died the same year of grief and sadness, discouraged by the fickleness of men and the ingratitude of nations. His figure has passed down to history known by the one party as the Inquisitor Llórente, and by the other with the epithet of the Rationalist Canon ; by all, however, 144 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES as a man who represented his times. The portrait belongs without doubt to the years of his triumph, those of the Bonapartist domination. Not only did our painter make the portraits of Spanish persons who were connected with the French party, but also of the French themselves, as, for instance, General Nicolas Guye and others. The portrait of this general (Plate 43) and the other of his nephew, Victor Guye, were destined for a little village of the French department of the Jura, whence this family derived its origin. Unknown by critics and art-lovers, these portraits appeared in Paris a few years ago. I saw them for the first time in the Galerie Trotti, and was cordially invited to write on them and make them known. My work on this subject was published in the French review, “ Les Arts,” in April of 1913 under the title of “ Deux Portraits Inédits de Goya.” They went later to the Galerie Knoedler. Nicolas Guye was one of those soldiers of the Empire who rose to fortune rapidly and brilliantly. Fie received his baptism of blood at Austerlitz, and took part later in various succeeding campaigns. Made a general in 1808, he came to Spain as aide-de- camp to Joseph I, and remained there until the French army abandoned the Peninsula, since he was wounded on the heights of I run protecting the passage of the Bidasoa when the French rear- guard was retiring. Ilis king had entrusted him with difficult missions during his stay in Spain. He fought with the guerrilleros, influenced Marshal Suchet in his decision to initiate a manoeuvre in conjunction with the army of the Sur which, according to the French, saved Valencia, and in February of the year 1812 obtained a victory near Siguenza at the head of picked troops, in which a part of the Royal Guard and Corps under the command of General Hugo took part. Goya shows us this person seated in three-quarter length, with his legs crossed, dressed in his brilliant uniform, and with his cocked hat in his hands. The head, the best GENERAL GUYE Plate XLV (p. 144) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES H5 part of the work, is very fine, and its life and expression seem reality itself. Dark in its general colouring and background, the figure itself stands out as very strongly coloured. Painted in the year 1810, this work is typical of those of Goya of that date, especially with its colouring. On the back of the canvas could be read the following inscription, which naturally would have disappeared when the picture was framed and backed: “ S ar Dn Nicolas Gnye , Marquis de Rio-Milanos, Général Aide de Camp de S. M. Catholique. Membre de la Legion d' Honneur de 1 ' Empire Francais, Commandeur de l' Or dr e des Deux-Siciles et Commandeur de I'ordre Royal de Spagne, etc. Né á Lonsle-Saíinier [Jura] le ler. Mai 1773. Donné á Vincent Guye , son frbre. A Madrid le 1 er. Octobre 1810.” And then in Spanish: “Painted by Goya.” The portrait of this sitter’s little nephew (Plate 44) is typical of the portraits of children made by Goya during this period. He is a little fair boy about six years of age, with a very French type of face, who, standing upright with a book in his hand, appears to us in front view, dressed in the uniform of a page of Joseph I, in dark blue with gold lace. The general tone of this work, however, is also dark. Even though inferior to the portrait of the general, it is all the same a fine example, in which he has caught the simple and spontaneous expression of childhood. Serious and a little mistrustful, to judge by his expression, with the eyebrows slightly knitted, the little Victor seems somewhat tired of standing as model and anxious for the sitting to end. This canvas also contains an inscription in the lower part which says: “ Ce portrait de mon Fils a ¿té peint par Goya pour faire le pendant de celui de mon Fr ere le General." Signed: “ Vt Guyed The fact that Goya had painted portraits of Frenchmen, and partisans of France, did not prevent him later painting those of Englishmen and Spaniards. He was a painter, an artist whom war had made to think very deeply — as he shows us in works drawn from his own reflections. However, as far as portraits u 146 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES were concerned he painted those who gave him commissions, with- out the nationality of his sitters having for him other importance than that of showing, accordingto the race, the characterof themodel. In the first days of August, the Duke of Wellington entered Madrid, where he stayed for some months, and with him came the generals of the Anglo-Spanish-Portuguese army, España, Alava, and the Conde de Amarante. It is from this time that the portraits date which Goya made of the famous English generalissimo. Legend relates — for I should not dare to describe as history what has no base of proof and no appearance of likelihood — that when Goya was painting the portrait of the Duke of Wellington, he interpreted a gesture of the latter as a sign of disapproval or contempt, and that forthwith the painter seized hold of some pistols which he had on the table, with the intention of killing the general, a tragedy which was prevented by the persons who were present. It does not seem probable that such a scene could ever have taken place. Neither would Wellington have committed the indiscretion which is mentioned as its motive, nor would Goya himself have been capable, above all with a sitter of this importance, of having yielded to such a fit of passion; nor yet again do artists usually paint with loaded pistols on the table of their studio, nor still less would such a piece of folly in those times of war have escaped prompt punish- ment. This may remain then as one of the many anecdotes which are told, in connection with Goya and his brusque and irritable char- acter, by those writers who believe they will give greater interest to their work by relating extraordinary things, even though they may inflict injury on the persons to whom that work is dedicated. What portrait or portraits did Goya make of the Duke of Wellington? I know two of importance painted in oil, and a draw- ing of yet greater interest. This drawing, made in red chalk, is only of head and shoulders; the head, however, is very carefully drawn, and the characteristic traits of the features thoroughly worked out. It is now preserved in the British Museum. I can think of no VICTOR GUYE Plate XLVI (p. 145) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 147 more impressive praise to bring out the artistic interest and im- portance as a likeness of this drawing than to repeat what the English writer, Mr. Hugh Stokes, in his valuable book “Francisco Goya,” says in speaking of it: the red chalk sketch “ is cer- tainly the most faithful portrait in existence of the great General.” I do not know all the portraits extant of Wellington, but this is in fact a marvellous characterisation, and shows that it has been made, without any doubt, from the life. A notice accompanying this portrait signed by Goya (undoubtedly written by Javier, the son of the painter) and dated in the year 1808, says: “A drawing made in Alba de Tormes after the battle of Arapiles of the Duke of Wellington, for whom the portrait was made.” All this seems to be correct, except that it was made in Alba de Tormes, since we do not know — nor is it likely — that Goya was ever on such a field of battle. The portrait was probably made in Madrid during Wellington’s stay at the court. Would this drawing then be the only portrait which he made directly; or would he have painted at the same time one of those heads which he was accustomed to make of the great persons whose portraits were entrusted to him? The study, if it existed, is unknown to-day, and in any case it seems that it would have been like the drawing as to position, etc., since in the two portraits he made of Wellington the sitter appears exactly as he is in the drawing. Goya, at any rate, made no delay in painting the most important of these, since, as we have said, the English general did not arrive in Madrid until the month of August, and in the “ Diario de Madrid ” of the 1 st of September of that same year, 1812, we read a notice, which says as follows: “ From tomorrow, Wednesday the 2nd. until Friday of the present month will be opened to the public the rooms on the first floor of the Royal House of the Academy of the Three Noble Arts. In one of these will be on view the equestrian portrait of the 148 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES General-in-Chief Lord Wellington, Duque de Ciudad Rodrigo, which has just been executed by the First Painter of the King and Director of the Academy, D. Francisco Goya." This portrait, little known to-day and of which I do not be- lieve a photograph exists, is in the possession of the present Duke of Wellington in his fine country house at Strathfieldsaye. I was able to see it some years ago, thanks to the courtesy of its noble possessor. The victorious general appears in this portrait riding towards the left upon a black horse with a white mark upon its forehead, over a smooth green turf, while in the distance some blue mountains make a broken line. The rider, who carries his hat in his hand, wears a dark blue coat, black breeches, a sash of red, and a white waistcoat. In spite of the importance which this work presented for the artist, it shows clear traces of having been done in a hurry and with the greatest carelessness. To this is added its lamentable state of preservation, dirty, blackened, gone dead in colour, cracked in portions; and we shall understand the disap- pointment which is felt before this work by the few visitors it has had in recent times. The other portrait (Plate 45) of the same person, shows him at half length, wrapped in a blue coat, his right hand appearing through the opening of the fold, leaving visible a shirt with frills and a red ribbon which seems to belong to some order. The head, covered here with a large cocked hat with white feathers, is the same as appears in the portrait previously mentioned, and in the drawing by means of which it was probably made. It is weak, the weakest point of the painting, nor does it seem to be copied from life. It preserves, in spite of this, the character of those fine features, with their eagle glance. The dark background, of a tone of bluish earth colour, harmonizes very well with the colours of figure and dress, giving a fitting resultant note of colour. This portrait was in the possession of the descendants of the General Alava, who LORD WELLINGTON Plate XLVII (p. 148) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 149 fought at Wellington’s side against the French, which makes us think it was either a present from the general to his companion at arms, or a commission of the Spanish soldier who wished to have the portrait of his general-in-chief. To-day it is to be found in the Havemeyer collection in New York. There is yet another portrait mentioned, this last preserved in England; but as I have not seen it I cannot express any opinion. Its appearance is, however, excellent in the reproductions which have been made of it. The head is always the same, and identical with that of the drawing above mentioned. From the artistic point of view, the portraits of Spanish soldiers, made by Goya at this date, are of slight importance. In the Artillery Museum some are to be found, like that of the Baron de Eróles, attributed to our artist. Others have appeared in private collections. The most interesting of these is the one representing Juan Martin, “ El Empecinado,” which brings before us the popular guerrilla leader. Reproduced several times, perhaps copied later, the first and perhaps the best which I know is the one which appeared from the collection of Sr. Navas, in the Exhibition of the Works of Goya in 1900: I do not know its present owner. The years of war following 1808, when Goya was not Court Painter, and when, as we have seen by documents already referred to, his economic position was difficult and required advances upon his few commissions, are those years when he lived withdrawn from the city in a house then very isolated on the other side of the Manzanares, known to the people around as “ La Quinta del Sordo.” This “quinta,” this modest house which the national negli- gence has permitted to perish a few years ago, was situated on the left of the bridge of Segovia, as we leave the town and royal build- ings, upon a height whence is obtained a view of Madrid. From his windows Goya could see the picturesque outlines FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 150 of that city, which had been the scene of his triumphs, but was embittered at that time by the passions of parties, stained with blood, and terrorized by reprisals and sieges; and as if dominating it, that vast structure of the Palace, where our artist had so often worked, and the seat of that ancient kingdom for which the armies of different mighty nations were struggling. And there upon the horizon arose the Guadarrama mountains, serving as a background to that most exquisite landscape whose beauties had been often reproduced by Velazquez and by Goya himself, in works which seem to be precursors of the so-called luminist movement, which has given in our own time its best results. In this move- ment certain Spanish artists have been distinguished, among them notably a landscape painter who, a faithful observer of nature and a lover of the cities of Castile, has continued the Spanish tradition in harmony with the modernism of our own day. Perhaps the contemplation of this wide-stretching view served to soothe the saddened and over-strained spirit of the artist. For that such was his state of mind seems to be proved to us by his works of those years. It was at this time that he took in hand the decoration of his country house; nor could he be more intimate than he is in those works, to-day preserved in the Museo del Prado, whose study and analysis merit a lengthy work which this is not the moment to attempt. Behind those scenes, all of them of terrible character, of gatherings of witches and wizards, of Fates, of fan- tastic visions, we trace his creative spirit busily at work. “Saturn devouring his own children” served as decoration to the dining- room of that house. “ La Manola,” the most nearly human figure of all that he produced on those walls, placed at the entrance, seemed to receive the visitor. Yet she is not one of those majas which the painter had created years before, overflowing with life and grace; she is a veiled figure — mysterious, almost sinister. The effect of all these works of supreme originality reaches to the highest level of art. > D A JOSEFA BAYEU, WIFE OF GOYA Plate XLVIII (p. 152) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 151 Well did Goya say that “ the dream of reason produces monsters and within these walls, thus decorated, Goya produced those drawings and etchings with subjects of the war, wherein he depicted the Spaniards attacking the French — “ With reason or without”; a group of wounded, “Cure them for another time — they can still be of service ” ; or a field of battle covered with corpses, which makes him exclaim, “ It does not matter; it is for this that they were born.” I seem to see clearly and unmistakably the sudden and violent change which the war stamped upon the character of Goya and his native art, and I consider it unnecessary to insist on this point. The painter of the majas , of the gay scenes of court and popular life and of the portraits had become trans- formed into the creator of these other scenes of grief and terror; and the man of the eighteenth century into the man of the nineteenth century. We cannot tell precisely how many years nor with whom he lived in the Quinta. It seems probable that he did not leave it until he left his own country; and it seems at the same time reasonable to suppose that, at least in the first years of his retire- ment, he had been accompanied by his wife, Josefa Bayeu. We have spoken but little of this person in this book of ours. She is an insignificant figure, who enters but little or not at all into the pictorial work of her husband. Moreover, educated under the influence of her brothers, the Bayeu, whom she thought of as perfect artists, she had, like them, a view of art very different from her husband. Yet again she possessed a strong and obstinate character; and, in a word, it seems that Doña Josefa Bayeu, apart from her domestic virtues, did not reach the level of the wife whom that man of extraordinary genius deserved. In spite of this, their matrimonial life slipped by in tranquillity and harmony, as is shown in the allusions in letters to Zapater, where Goya always speaks of his wife with respect and affection. Opposed as I am to tales of gossip, even when more or less learned, I do not propose to give, nor does 152 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES my subject require it, an account of the gallantries which the painter permitted himself outside his own home. I will confine myself to the established fact that he had twenty children by his wife alone, which may perhaps be taken as indication of a continued affection and of conjugal felicity considerably above the average. Of those twenty children one only, Francisco Javier, was living in these later years and survived his father. I cannot state precisely the date of the death of Josefa Bayeu. Some biographers say that this took place in 1804; but this is not possible, since there exists 1 the will of Goya and his wife, dated in Madrid 3 June 1811, where they name as their single and universal heir their legitimate son, Francisco Javier. Doña Josefa must have died shortly afterwards, since we have evidence to show she was already dead in 1814. We know the features of Goya’s wife by the portrait (Plate 46) which tradition states to be of her and which is preserved in the Museo del Prado (No. 722). In this Goya has depicted her in half length, her hands clasped and covered with large gloves. She is quietly dressed; her appearance is modest, and expression sym- pathetic, her complexion fresh, her eyes light in colour, and her hair of a delightful red gold; the whole effect is frankly pleasing. The technique of this work shows it to have been made in these years; the pronounced blacks and the touch, more reserved, more restrained than is shown by works of preceding years, con- firm this opinion. Dating from the year 1810 are an interesting pair of portraits painted by Goya, in both cases work of an intimate character, in which are depicted respectively, D. Juan Martin de Goicoechea and his wife Da. Juana Galarza Goicoechea, friends of the artist and relations-in-law, since Javier Goya married Gumersinda, their daughter. These portraits appear to-day in the collection of the 1 Published by the Conde de la Viñaza in his “Goya.' 1 PEPITO CORTE Plate XLIX (p- 153) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 153 Marqués de Casa Torres. They are figures in half length, simply and lightly painted, and somewhat dark in tone; the heads very true to life and expressive, and the deportment and dress of the sitters present them to us as worthy and simple persons of the middle class. That of the husband says in the lower part of the canvas on the right, in Goya’s handwriting: “ D. Martin de Goicoechea Pr. Goya 1810”; that of the wife: “Da. Juana de Galarza, por Goya 1810.” Those portraits, which we might call show portraits, made by Goya years before of ladies and gentlemen of the aristocracy, he did not go on producing in this period of the war. I only know one, and that certainly not one of the best of the artist, which can be connected with them, and which, as it appears, is of the year 1812 or 1813, that of the Duquesa del Parque, to-day in the pos- session of the Marquesa de Bermejillo, Madrid. The figure of the little duchess, who does not seem to be more than twelve years of age, is represented with a white dress in Empire style, seated on a rock in the middle of a landscape with great trees, which cover a large part of the background. With her hair cropped in such a way that this sitter appears a boy rather than a duchess, she holds a rose in her right hand, and with the left grasps a basket within which two doves are billing in a loving way. Some plants in the first plane and a rivulet running at the feet of the sitter are not of a pleasing effect, and contribute to disfigure the whole of this con- ventional and forced work. Apart from these shortcomings and its indifferent state of preservation, the work in general is refined; the head seems to be somewhat thinly painted, swept in with the brush, especially in its outlines in the hair and, above all, of the ear. Totally different in character is another portrait of these years, a model of freshness and artistic simplicity; that of the little Pepito Corte (Plate 47), signed and dated, although the date is so rubbed that we cannot be sure if it is a 13 or an 18. It seems to be the former, and perhaps the notice which tells the name of the x 154 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES sitter and the “ Por Goya” is later in date. Its authenticity is in- disputable. Pepito is a little boy of dark complexion and fair hair, who joins to his infantile expression a look of sadness which gives him a great charm and sympathy. He appears in front view sur- rounded by his toys; he wears a little green jacket adorned with a white lace collar and purple border, white trousers, rose coloured stockings, and light yellow shoes; to all this colour must be added the blue of the drum, the red and the white of the plumes of his hat, the reddish floor, the horse of dark pasteboard, and the back- ground of slate grey, which give a peculiar delicacy to this delightful portrait. Its technique is apparently slight, its brush- work very oily, and it can serve as a type of these works of transition and of progress towards the portraits of the later years of the artist where all is expression and life. To this period which we are now studying it seems that various portraits should be referred where character is the quality especially aimed at by their author. As a type of these may be taken the bust portrait of an elderly person, who is said to be the historian, Padre La Canal, very fine in character, and which is in the possession of D. José Lázaro; and the head of “El Tio Paquete,” a blind man of the people who frequented the steps of San Felipe, treated in a manner very original and involved, the property of the Conde de Doña Marina, a work perhaps not pro- perly speaking a portrait so much as a study of the head. I consider that to this phase of the artist’s life, which occupied these first years of the nineteenth century, should be accredited the portrait of a monk preserved in the Royal Academy of History. This is a portrait bust, very fine in colour, made with so little i/upasto that it has the appearance of a water-colour, and express- ing the most characteristic qualities of the artist’s latest years. The fact of its being so little known, and of the sitter having been finally identified, give it a special interest. The subject treated here, as we are told by Fr. Macario Sanchez y López, a learned FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 155 and artistic Augustinian, is another Father of his Order, the Augustinian Fr. Juan Fernández de Rojas, of the convent of San Felipe el Real. This monk, without doubt a man of intellectual acquirements, as we may judge from the expressive features which Goya here brings before us, was a learned theologian, a man of culture and charm, an enemy of bad taste, which he detested in every form, and the author of the witty satire, “Crotalogia o ciencia de las castañuelas,” against the analytic philosophy of the school of Condillac and the geometric method of the followers of Wolff. As we are told by Menendez y Pelayo, the Father Fernandez de Rojas was to no small extent a Jansenist, and even perhaps a follower of Voltaire; though a monk by profession he was very gay and by no means narrow in his views, seeing that in his un- published verses he laments that he is a friar, while still in full possession of his faculties and young. He carried forward the work of the “ España Sagrada”; and at the same time, as a poet and disciple of Fray Diego González, cultivated the Muses in Salamanca in his younger years; to his pen is due an eclogue and a lyric poem on the death of Delio, his works of this nature being published under the pseudonym of Liseno. He made use of another pseudonym by which he is better known — that of Licenciado Francisco Agustín Florencio , under which he publishes his “ Crotalogia o ciencia de las castañuelas,” a humorous work where he makes fun of the scientific pedantry of his contemporaries. He was a great friend of Jove Llanos and Meléndez Valdes, and with- out doubt must have been so of Goya as well. His portrait has all the character of an intimate work. Moreover, in connection with this portrait, there is preserved in London in the British Museum a drawing by Goya representing the head of a dead man. This is said to be that of Fernández de Rojas, and in fact it possesses a certain likeness with the known portrait in the Royal Academy of History. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 156 I think, too, that in this place may be mentioned the portrait of a Franciscan friar of exceptional interest, preserved in the Berlin Museum (No. 1 61913), acquired by its director, Dr. von Bode. More than full length, seated, and resting his right hand on atable, this nameless friar appears before us almost front view. His is a figure full of life and most happy in its expression; it is truth itself. It is a work where few colours have been used; the dress, of bluish slate colour, is seen against a warm grey background, and only the red of the cloth covering the table stands out in some measure from the neutral dominating tones. Sober and simple in its execution, sincere and open in its expression, this is a work having a close artistic relationship with those of Velazquez. It shows clearly that Goya, in spite of his fluctuations from the de- velopment of his personality and his powers, never forgot the strong impression he had received from the art of Velazquez in the years when he was forming himself as a portrait painter; and it proves once again that those qualities, so definite and clearly marked, of the Spanish school continued through all the external transformations of character brought about by passing circum- stances, and imposed by him on the taste and preferences of each epoch. FERDINAND VII Plate L (p- 159) CHAPTER VIII 1814-1828 The Last Portraits Painted by Goya in Madrid The Exile "TT7THEN Ferdinand VII came into possession of the throne of Spain, Goya enjoyed the same titles and official ~ * position as had been his in the reign of Charles IV. But, none the less, his position in the palace was very different, and far more difficult than in the period before the invasion. King Ferdinand, who was not exactly distinguished for his qualities of affection and generosity, was inevitably disposed to see in the painter a favourite of his parents, and a friend and protégé of Godoy, and of the courtiers of those bygone times. On the other hand, to the artist himself, the person of the Rey Deseado (Longed-for King) could not be welcome, as being one who, besides having been a bad son to those who had treated Goya with such favour, and a bad patriot even in his exile, seemed now to have returned with the firm resolution of matching his conduct as a monarch with that which had already made him notorious as a son and a Spaniard. To this may be added, that when for the first time Goya presented himself to Ferdinand we are told that this latter received him in a violent manner, and let him know that he deserved to be hanged, but that he pardoned him, and that he should continue painting as before. Some critics, especially von Loga, suppose that many of the portraits made by Goya of Ferdinand VII are not of these years but of the years preceding that brief time, later than the 157 158 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Mutiny of Aranjuez and before the French invasion, when the Prince of Asturias held the office of King. This does not seem probable; in those few weeks the conditions of life were far too disturbed for the painting of works of official character. If we examine attentively these portraits, we shall notice that in some, very few — I only know of two — the sitter actually appears some- what younger than in the others. One of these is the head and shoulders with an ermine fur collar, which appeared, outside the catalogue, in the Exhibition of the Works of Goya in 1900, in the possession of the Conde de Valderro; and the other is the equestrian portrait preserved in the Royal Academy of San Fernando, where the young king is riding a dark charger through an arid landscape, with a cane in his right hand. This work recalls to our mind similar portraits by Velazquez. Seen in its outlines against the light (in a photograph) and consequently reversed, this likeness can be better appreciated, in a very striking way, especially in that of the “ Equestrian Portrait of Prince D. Baltasar Carlos.” It can be then established that these two Goya portraits are of 1808; but the remaining ones, and there are not a few of these, are undoubtedly of the period immediately following 1814. In this period something similar occurred to what had happened on the elevation to the throne of Charles IV. The Ministers, official centres, academies, etc., desired to have a portrait of the monarch, and many of these were commissioned from the court painter, who painted quickly and rapidly and in haste the works intended to satisfy the demand, and in so doing had the assistance of pupils. Even when the head in almost all these portraits is identical, which proves that they were made from the same study and not directly from nature, these portraits are distinct in their proportions and differ likewise in the dress of the sitter and the background of the work. There are some in which Ferdinand VII appears with the royal mantle, like that of the Museo del Prado (No. 735), and FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 159 others — and these are the greater number — where he is dressed as a soldier with varying uniforms, and those where he may be taken to be upon a field of battle, or at least engaged in manoeuvres, to judge from the horses and troops seen in the background. Various critics — Araujo amongst them — have said that these portraits, one and all, are the worst thing that their author ever did of the kind. Such a statement does not seem to me to be strictly exact. These portraits are, generally speaking, weak, for the reasons I have already set forth, and this is accentuated by the very limited interest which could be taken in that physical type, in no way attractive, and features in no way expressive. Some of them, however, are of masterly technique. As an example may be taken that of the Museo del Prado, No. 724 (Plate 48), where the king is represented standing upright, with some horses in the background ; and another of the same kind which could be seen some years ago in the Supreme Council of War, where it had been almost forgotten. This last is a work slightly painted, very loose and easy; here, too, in the background are troopers and horses, but more distant than in the picture of the Prado, and at a gallop, as if they were making a charge. The head is always the weakest part, through having been copied from a study. This work seems to be later by some years than those before mentioned, for the reason, as I have been told, that the tighter coat, opened here, denotes a change in the cut of the uniform, which was not in use until the years following 1814. To this year seems to belong another portrait of Ferdinand VII— -important for its composition and surroundings, where he appears in red uniform and wearing the royal crown — in the Director’s Office of the Canal of Aragon, at Zaragoza. Von Loga mentions yet another portrait, a bust of the same king, by Goya, preserved in Pamplona in the Provincial Assembly. For this painter, whose activity knew no repose, and who from his youth, with prompt and keen observation, had been accustomed to see quickly, it was not difficult, when at this time the quickness i6o FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES and certainty of his hand were so great, to undertake pictorial problems which have for us to-day the greatest interest. The year 1815 is the date when he painted different and very remarkable portraits. One of them is that important likeness of the Duque de San Carlos, the third to bear that title, one of the most influential figures in Spanish politics at that period. He was Majordomo of Ferdinand VII in the years of his exile at Valencey, and later Lieutenant-General and Ambassador in Lisbon and Paris. He died in 1828. In his portrait (Plate 49), preserved in the Director’s Office of the Imperial Canal at Zaragoza, the duke appears as an aristocratic figure of noble bearing, who advances with dignity, wearing a court dress of dark colour, seen against a grey background and resting his left hand upon a high cane. It is a work of freshness of colouring which recalls the portraits of the years preceding the war. In the lower part may be read : “El Excmo. Sr. Duque de San Carlos por Goya. Ano 1815.” It was carried out, without any doubt, by the same method used by the painter in years before of copying before the sitter the head, and making from it later the large portrait. This head, the preliminary study, very fine in colour and slight in execution, is preserved in the collection of the Conde de Villagonzalo. It differs from the studies of heads for the picture of “The Family of Charles IV” in that it is painted on a board, certainly very thick, coarse, and in the lower part without being even trimmed, but the priming is almost the same, of a grey-red, somewhat lighter than had been used in preceding years. In the lower part of this board, where it is not entirely covered by the painting, he has left portions of colour mixed together with the palette knife, and resembling the cleanings of the palette. Almost identical with this large portrait of the Duque de San Carlos is another, of reduced size but of very high quality, where the figure brought into proper relation with the background comes out in a very pleasing manner, with a most brilliant tech- DUQUE DE SAN CARLOS Plate LI (p. 160) y FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 161 ñique and a great security of brushwork. It is preserved in the collection of the Marqués de la Torrecilla (Madrid). It has been considered as a study for the large picture; but to me it seems more than a study — being far more advanced than this last — a happy and careful replica on a small scale. Of the same year is also the portrait of the Valencian engraver, Rafael Esteve, preserved in the Museum of Valencia, also a very striking work. Esteve was a friend of Goya; he held the position from 1803 of Court Engraver, and the painter praised more than once the art of his friend. This superb portrait has a certain intimate character which makes it doubly attractive. It was bequeathed to the Museum, where it is to be found to-day, by D. Antonio Esteve, nephew of the sitter. Curious in the extreme is another portrait, a prolonged head and shoulders, of a nameless person dressed in uniform, who carries in his right hand a paper on which is said “ Auctibus Reipublicae expulsus. Pintado pr. Goya. 1815.” This belongs to D. Enrique O’Shea (Madrid). I have stated that this portrait, which is little known, is singularly curious from the technique which it displays. It has been painted on a very thick canvas, almost black, and put in with small touches of the brush as if to obtain a special vibration. This is a style denoting an absolutely new departure in the art of its author, an innovation of the greatest interest in those years; and one which, while an effort at a new technique, is one of the first steps of Goya towards the manner which characterizes those last works of his which are so remarkable and in my opinion have had such great results. In this work we may detect an evident change in the values of the colour, due probably to the dark nature of the first preparation, which with time has appeared in different points, changing the tonality of the whole work. I do not know the present possessor of this work, which is so important for the study of the pictorial develop- ment of its author. Y 1 62 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Here also should be mentioned the portrait in uniform of the “ limo. Sr. Dn. Ignacio Omulryan y Rousera, M. itro del Consejo y Cámara de Indias. Por Goya 1815,” as is announced by a sheet of paper painted by the author’s hand. This is a full head and shoulders, a work similar to the preceding, and little known up to the present. Signed, and dated in 1815, is the bust portrait which the artist has left us of himself, preserved to-day in the Academy of San Fernando (Plate 50). The head is marvellously lifelike. It reflects the good state of health, and the relative and apparent youth which the artist preserved in his sixty-ninth year. The stormy times of the war had passed, and the painter hoped to return in the full possession of his powers to his serene labours. It is the most sympathetic portrait we know of him, and it shows him to us at the most interesting period of his life. To his mouth, slightly contracted by a melancholy smile, is joined the expression of his eyes, looking at us with a kindly glance, and somewhat sunk under the grand and massive brow, which is crowned by locks not altogether white. The intimacy of this work, reflected in his expression and in every detail, places us in community of spirit with the artist. He seems to smile at what we have ven- tured to say of him — omitting so much that we were unable to say, and on the other hand saying not a few things which are probably in excess of the truth. When we study the countenance and production of one of these extraordinary men, something happens which not infre- quently occurs in personal relations, when the continuity of these relations, the course of conversations, various details of life, awake in 11s a bond of sympathy; just as the study of the works, the incidents of life, some special result of our investigation, some false report which is overthrown, determine in the former case a state of enthusiasm, of admiration, of affection no less remarkable. Thus, when we see before us the portrait of the FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 163 person of whom we have ventured to speak, and have had the courage to criticize, and the portrait is, like this one, so sincere and so simple — made in many cases by a friend or by an intimate — it seems to us that we are communicating with the subject of the portrait as with some dear person with whom we have been once on terms of intimacy and affection, and in whom we see more than the mere picture. I can say for myself that this portrait bust, which has now completed its hundredth year, is, if I may so express myself, of all the portraits of the artist the one to which I give most importance and regard with most devotion; perhaps because it is the one representing to me most faithfully the Goya I have tried to know, or at least have imagined to myself in my study of his work and life, freed from all prejudice and with all the good will of which I am capable. There exists a beautiful replica of this work with variations in the Museo del Prado (No. 723). Some say it is a copy, and even go so far as to state that it was made by Alenza. This has always seemed to me a mistake; I consider it by Goya and a very fine work. Lately, by placing this work in a very strong light I have been able to decipher a very blurred inscription which is on the left half-way down the canvas. This says: “ Fr. Goya. Aragonés. Por el mismo.” The writing is indisputably by Goya, and the authenticity of the work thus seems to be proved. The portrait of D. Manuel Garcia de la Prada 1 is very typical 1 D. Manuel Garcia de la Prada was a friend of Goya and of Moratin, and it was he who delivered to the Royal Academy of San Fernando, in the year 1828, the first portrait which Goya did of Moratin. I make a point of speaking of this picture, already mentioned by me in this work, because the Conde de la Viñaza in his work gives us to know the date of the canvas, attributing it to 1799, and I make it, judging from the age of the portrait and other technical details, a few years earlier; and as it refers to a work of exceptional value as a likeness, I desire that my judgement should not be given lightly or without foundation. Conde de la Viñaza, who speaks with such documentary authority in his work, may perhaps be right on this point; but, as he does not bring forward any conclusive proof, I continue in my belief, founded on the reasons above given. 1 64 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES of this period, to judge by the dress of this sitter, who wears a blue frock coat with gilt buttons and nankeen trousers; he is standing upright, supporting himself against a chair with his left hand, and with the right caressing a little dog. This work has been abroad more than once, and in different places; I believe that it left Spain a good many years ago. “ Doña Manuela Giron y Pimentel Duquesa de Abrantes. Pr. Goya 1816” (Plate 51) is the description on a sheet of music which the young and beautiful duchess holds in her right hand in this half-length portrait. She is elegantly dressed, and her head is adorned with a wreath of flowers. The bold colouring shown in this work, its general tone and technique, are in complete harmony with its date. It belongs to the Conde de la Quinta de la Enjarada (Madrid). In the same year there is another very important portrait. It is that of D. Francisco Tellez Giron, Duque de Osuna, preserved in the Musée Bonnat at Bayonne. This duke, the tenth of his name, was the son of Goya’s patrons in the early days of his career, and the eldest of those children who appear in the family group, “ Portrait of the Duke and Duchess of Osuna and their children ” (No. 739, of the Museo del Prado), of which we have taken count in our study of the grey works of Goya. Standing upright, his head uncovered, resting his right arm on a rock which is situated on a steep hill dominating a valley, the sitter — very fair in colouring and a little inclined to be stout — is reading a sheet of paper that he holds in his right hand. On the second plane, and on aslope of the ground, his horse awaits him under the charge of a groom. The Duke wears a black tail-coat and buckskin breeches. The whole effect of the work, with the rocks, trees, and sky, is grey; but it does not recall the grey tones of his works twenty years before. It is darker, more intense, warmer. The colouring, which is a little monotonous, gains animation from the red of the servant’s dress. This is very fine Plate LI I GOYA IN 1815. SELF-PORTRAIT (P. 162) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 165 as a painting and very typical of those years. Painted with an absolute indifference as to whether this or that portion comes out JL well, what we notice is the whole effect, the total result of the painting, to which all the rest has been subordinated. In previous portraits of this importance we have seen that the artist was wont to make a study of the head from the model, which was to serve him as a preparation for the finished picture. Of this painting all that I know is a very loose sketch of the whole picture— a sketch showing that the figure was not of great import- ance, since we notice that this has been done from another model who has no likeness whatever to the duke; the main point on this occasion was the composition and the whole effect. In spite of this, the head in the large picture is highly finished, and has great character and distinction. This work is signed: “El Duque de Osuna por Goya 1816.” This portrait and other works of these years have an intimate general connection in style, tonality, and pictorial treatment. They vary very much, it is true, in their subjects. Some are fantastic, others have fragments of landscape, which also have something of the fantastic, and there are various portraits in which the artist’s fancy seems to have a place. But their technique has always a similarity which brings these works into relation as being of the same period, and differentiates them from the preceding works of Goya. No longer does he create those majas , models of grace and elegance; but he still paints some figures of ladies with the mantilla, with lace and openwork over portions of the bare flesh, which are of a rare mastery and show an unsurpassed power of technique. As an example of works of this class may be taken that “ Portrait of a Lady ” which, after having figured in various exhibitions, is to-day preserved in Dublin, in the National Gallery of Ireland. This is a charming and attractive lady, not very young, who is slightly smiling. In this work the broad brushwork, full FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES ió6 of pigment, has absolutely disappeared, together with the use of the full blending of colours, and their place is taken by small strokes of the brush which are not united or blended, with the object of giving to the painting a vivacity and vibration which it needs to replace the full broad use of the brush. This technique — the speciality of Goya in those years — is in my opinion the commencement of a whole school of technique which developed afterwards many years later, and which, with the name first of Impressionism and later of Pointellism, in one of its developments aimed at avoiding the planes of colour in a painting, and at making painting into what we see in nature, that is to say as differentiated into a multitude of tints. The fusion of colour is then only realized in the retina, in the image we form for ourselves, but is not in the work itself. I assign to this innovation of Goya the greatest importance, and, united to something else of which I wish to speak later, I consider it as the foundation of that technique of Goya’s works which is going to show itself in the following years. This seems to be the place to mention, even when we are not very certain of its exact date, the portrait of “A Young Spanish Woman ” (No. 1705.Y) of the Musée du Louvre, remarkable for its truth to life and its simplicity. In the year 1817 Goya received the commission for the important painting in which he had to depict Saints Justa and Rufina for the Cathedral of Seville. In spite of his advanced age, he took this long journey, and received in the Andalusian city cordial hospitality in the house of the painter, D. José Maria Arango, whose son he painted as a token of his gratitude. This is not the place to speak of the picture of these female saints, which is of purely religious character; nor of its admirable study, at one time in the possession of the learned and intelligent collector — whose memory can never be forgotten by the lovers of the art of our land — D. Pablo Bosch, who died only recently, and by his last DUQUESA DE ABRANTES Plate LUI (p. 164) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 167 testament bequeathed this work, with his whole collection, to the Museo del Prado. The following years are of the greatest interest in the progress of the painter. We cannot follow them by mentioning one work after another, in a strict chronological sequence; but there may be observed in his productions of the years 1818, 1819, and 1820 something particular, a very marked influence in this man who was always ready to learn, and that with the same enthusiasm at seventy-four as he had shewn in the period of his youth. Of his works of these three years the most important for its com- position, for the number of figures represented, its dimensions, etc., was executed in the year 1820, being “ La Comunión de San José de Calasanz,” for the Escuelas Pías de San Antonio, where it is yet preserved in its own church, so popular in Madrid and better known as San Antón, in the Calle de Hortaleza. The interesting sketch for this picture is preserved in the Musée Bonnat, which has been already mentioned, at Bayonne. Goya painted, after he had made his picture for the Cathedral of Seville, various compositions of a religious character, among which may be mentioned “The Tears of Saint Peter,” “Santa Isabel,” “San Ildefonso,” and the “Garden of Gethsemane,” this last dated 1819. Was it a mere accident, due only to his commissions, that he was producing works of a religious character in this period; or, on the contrary, was it Goya’s own wish in those years to under- take these subjects and to compose sacred works? It does not seem easy to answer this question; but, on the other hand, it may be asserted that in “La Comunión de San José de Calasanz ” we find an atmosphere of sadness, an expression of renunciation and of ascetic feeling which are entirely new in Goya, and which certainly do not connect themselves in our thoughts with the decorator of the Chapel of San Antonio de la Florida. In the work of “San José de Calasanz” the saint is depicted infirm, almost dying, and receiving from the hands of a priest the FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES ió8 last communion; several figures in the background are watching this sad scene, which is taking place in the interior of a temple whose grey bare walls are dimly illuminated by the weak and cold light of morning. Goya, at the same time that he sought to express a greater life and spirituality in these figures, was developing his technique in the direction we have noticed; and this in con- sequence resulted in an art which appears in him as new and less brilliant than that to which we have become accustomed, but of a delicacy of form and sensibility superior to that of his earlier pro- ductions. This result was undoubtedly due to his condition of mind, his preferences, exaltations of spirit, and his experiences; and as thirty years before he had found in the technique of Velazquez the ultimate expression which he had needed to evolve those most delicate portraits in grey which he at that time was creating - , so he found in this later date, in the works of another artist but little appreciated in those years, El Greco, the spiritual expression, the life, the soul, with which he sought to endow his later creations. Let us recall to our thoughts, in the picture already mentioned of “La Comunión de San José de Calasanz,” the general tone, the whole effect of the work. The whites, so typical of Greco — those cold silvery whites which never are really white, and yet have never been excelled by any artist in giving the sensation of white — we now discover in the work of Goya. The relation of the two tones — one leaden grey, the other old gold — of the chasuble of the priest, the red of the cushion seem to have been drawn out of the works of Greco and produced with the same palette; and, above all, the spiritual quality of those faces, and the dominant idea of the work surprise us in Goya, and lead us to search for the influence which has been at work. To my mind it is clearly what I have said. Goya knew the works of Greco, for he had been in Toledo years before; but this was when his art, then of a com- pletely different order, required in no way the qualities which JOSÉ L. MUNÁRRIZ Plate LIV (p. 169) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 169 dominate the works of Theotocópuli. The painter returned to Toledo at this time, perhaps on his way to Seville, and I believe that — even when it is only a supposition — it is not rash to think that in those years he had seen in the works of Greco something which he knew how to reflect later in other works of his own, especially in that one of which we are now treating. 1 Let us trace this influence in Goya’s work as a portrait painter. Better than in any other of his works of this kind do I consider that it may be noticed in the portrait in half length of the instructor, D. José Luis Munárriz (Plate 52), preserved in the Royal Academy of San Fernando. The sitter — seated at a table, on which he rests his left arm, the hand holding between its fingers a half-opened book — seen almost front view, wears a kind of cape with a high collar, showing the neckcloth and a frilled shirt; the books in the background, without doubt the favourite works of Munárriz, 1 Goya had seen, as we have said, the works of Greco in Toledo, where at that time were almost all the canvases of that master. In two moments of his life we notice this influence, in the first more isolated instance in the year 1780, as we have already indicated earlier in this book, the other in a more clearly marked, and above all in a more systematic manner, in this period. Do these coincide with the two visits to Toledo? Probably they do. Of the relations of Goya with the imperial city in the way of commissions, etc., which he received from it we have already spoken in this work and more than once in “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” I would only point out here that the portraits of the Archbishops Cardinal Lorenzana and Cardinal de Borbón, which appear in the Sala Capitular of Toledo Cathedral, are not in my opinion original works of Goya. I should not mention them otherwise here, as I did not in the first edition of this work, but as some one of great and deserved authority might regard this omission as an oversight, I clear this point by saying that it was not by forgetfulness or error. In my opinion these two portraits do not seem in any way by Goya, neither do I believe, at least to the best of my knowledge, that there are documents which go to prove that attribution. I only know, thanks to the kindness of the very learned Dean of the Cathedral, D. Narciso Estenaga, that the portrait of Cardinal Lorenzana, which the Chapter placed in Madrid on the death of the Cardinal, did not please the Canons, and then another was ordered which is the present one. Was, then, the rejected one by Goya? The present one and that of Cardinal de Borbón seem to me by the same hand, but in neither case by that of Goya, which, even though varying and unequal, was never vulgar, as is shown in these two canvases. Z FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 170 are the works of Horace, Virgil, Camoens, Quintilian, Boileau, Petrarch, with “El Quijote” and “The Spectator.” In this painting, one of the strongest portraits by its creator, may be noticed not so much an inspiration as a haunting memory of the portraits of Greco, so full of life, so spiritual and so unique in their colour: but though seen, remembered, and carried out throughout with delicacy of perception and supreme knowledge, the work is by Goya. The life reflected in the eyes, the expressive mouth, the fine- ness of the hair, the violet tones which appear in the shadows, all seem to have been drawn from the heads of Greco; and the same is the case with the hand — so well constructed, although but slightly drawn, in its lights and shadows, and so true in its colour. This subordination of all artistic qualities to the attainment of expression will now characterize the works of Goya from this epoch up to the very end of his life. This portrait of Munárriz is dated and signed “ D. José Munárriz. P r . Goya 1818.” It has always been assigned to this year, as was stated in writing by Sr. Sentenach, and as I believe also, judging from his style of this period, which is so characteristic of the painter. However, on examining anew this signature and date, I seem to read in the last numeral a “5” rather than an “8.” In any case this difference of three years would not effect in its general lines the evolution we have observed at this period in the production of the artist, which I consider clearly established. Goya, a man open until his last years to every kind of im- pression and influence, and one who went in search of the elements of expression which were most appropriate and most in harmony with what his art needed in every moment of its pictorial develop- ment, never was an imitator. His originality quickly asserted itself, and gave as its result that personal art which, although having its origin in elements strange to itself, yet became quickly individual and Goyesque. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 171 There recurred in these years a similar process to that of his youth. As then he found in the works of Velazquez elements of expression which he assimilated, to make of them later an art of his own, without our being in any way able to say that he imitated Velazquez, so now he saw in the style and peculiar technique of Greco elements from which he drew, to create later this art of these last years of his life, more spiritual than that which had gone before, more secure, more expressive; an art in which the material part and its mastery yield no small place to sensibility, and in which may be noted a determination to penetrate into the depth, into the inner life of his sitters, to obtain a new sensation of art, though frequently at the cost of shortcomings of form and lessened brilliancy of colour. To the grey notes of the first manifestation of himself, already definite and personal, had followed his works of the richest colour, so audacious and so varied in their treatment. Then can be defined this third manifestation, as that in which black and white seem to dominate, no less apparently, in the colour of his works; but ex- amined with care there become evident most varied colours, count- less hues, all in little brush strokes, separated, not forming even planes of colour and as if dominated by the white and black which, like those of Greco, appear to us as such — although they are not really so, since neither white nor pure black are ever found in nature, nor have been reproduced by any painter of observation or colour sense. The precise moment of direct relation between Goya and the art of Greco is marked by the two works above mentioned, “ La Comunión de San José de Calasanz ” and the portrait of Munárriz. What our painter had learned from Greco is shown in the works which he produced from those years up to his death; but not, how- ever, in such a definite manner as in these two paintings, which are without doubt those which fix the moment of that influence, and are a culminating point in the evolution of the art of Goya. 172 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Various portraits of great importance in these years are known to us. One of them is that of the architect, D. Tiburcio Pérez (Plate 52), a great friend of Goya, whom the painter has portrayed in his shirt sleeves with his arms folded, thus creating a work of unsurpassed force and realism. This is preserved to-day in the Havemeyer collection in New York. With it also left Spain — but afterwards took a different course — the portrait of another architect, D. Juan Antonio Cuervo, dressed in uniform and working on some plans. The artist suffered from a serious illness at the end of the year 1819. He recovered from it, thanks to the skill and attention of his doctor and personal friend, Doctor Arrieta. The painter wished to repay with a kind of votive painting the loving assistance of this doctor. He depicted himself in a very grave condition, with his eyes closed, in the arms of Arrieta, who, with an anxious ex- pression, was making him drink a potion, while he, with his hands clenched, is clutching at the sheets. Some figures, apparently monks, in half light in the background, characterize the gravity of the situation. This work was exhibited in the Academia de San Fernando, and we are told that “it attracted the attention of all by the likeness and expression of both persons, by the spontaneous character of the brushwork, and by the effect of the dimly-lighted scene, without any great parade of chiaroscuro.” It is known at the same time that almost the only pupil of Goya at that time, Juliá, made two copies of it in Goya’s own studio. We do not know where the original now is. One of the two copies by Juliá, which, besides its artistic merit, has the interest of bringing to our knowledge this curious composition, is preserved in the possession of the heirs of D. Lorenzo Moret y Remisa (Madrid). An inscription upon the lower part, where even the writing of Goya has been faithfully copied, says: “ Goya, in gratitude to his friend Arrieta for the cleverness FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES US and efficiency with which he saved his life in his sharp and dan- gerous illness suffered at the end of the year 1819 in the seventy- third year of his age. He painted this in 1820.” There is also another replica of this painting which I do not know, preserved in the province of Guipúzcoa. Perhaps this may be the other copy Juliá made. As I have said already in speaking of the self-portrait of Goya made in the year 1815, the one which, according to some people, passed by mistake as the study for the head of this painting, so I hold that this portrait has nothing in common with the figure of the painter just described; even though not more than five years had passed, the appearance of Goya had totally changed. He comes before us here as already an old invalid with wrinkled skin and white hair. Having recovered from his illness, the painter went on working, and from this year 1820 until 1824 we know of some portraits of the greatest importance. We may take as an example of them D. Ramón Satue (Plate 54), in the collection of Doctor Carvallo, Tours (France). This figure, standing upright, shown three- quarter length, appears wearing a plain black costume, a red waistcoat, and a white frilled shirt, with his hands in the pockets of his trousers and seen against a plain grey background. The head, delicate and brilliant, has been carefully studied, the rest treated lightly but very well in the way that the relation of values are kept together. The state of preservation of this work is ex- cellent. In the background on the left and lower part, an inscription tells us: “Don Ramón Satue, alcalde de Corte. Pr. Goya. 1823.” Signed and dated in 1824, there is another portrait of very great interest, that of Doña Maria Martinez de Puga. She is shown standing upright in three-quarter length, with a simple black dress, white gloves, a shawl, and a fan; a watch placed in her waistband is held by a chain which is round her bare neck. This lady of the middle class belonged to a family on friendly terms [ 74 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES with the painter. The work being very typical of those years, one of those works which undoubtedly impressed Manet so much by its simplicity and clear vision of the human figure, belongs to-day to the Knoedler Galleries (New York, London, and Paris). Even though it is only a drawing there should be mentioned, in this place, the interesting portrait which Goya made of his son, to-day in the possession of that intelligent collector, D. Félix Boix. This is signed and dated in 1824. There exists a magnificent work by Goya in the Museum of Castres (France), which can find a place in our enumeration of Goya’s portraits through its being a gathering, a group of persons assembled together. It has passed unnoticed, and been given but little attention by almost all the critics who have written about Goya. M. Lafond alone, who has occupied himself so much with Spanish art, has acknowledged the remarkable interest of this work, and attributed it, I believe correctly, to this period. We have here before us a large canvas (4.30 m. wide by 3.18 m. high) whereon is depicted a reception room, seen immedi- ately before us and lighted from left to right. The perspective here recalls to some extent that of the famous canvas of Velazquez, “Las Hilanderas”; the reflection of the sunlight, somewhat golden in hue, is thrown across the red pavement covering this part of the composition, the rest of the painting being more grey and the half-lights very pronounced. The background of this interior is filled by a large table at which twelve persons are seated, dressed in different uniforms, some of them in the garb of priests, and presided over by an officer in whom I seem to recognize Ferdi- nand VII. In the foreground, to right and left, are seen many figures, a whole crowd, very excited, and among whom may be remarked a general agitation. They are seated on chairs in different positions, some of these far from correct or ceremonious; some with their legs crossed or stretched out, their arms behind their backs; others with their hands in their pockets; some talking to TIBURCIO PÉREZ Plate LV (p. 172) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 175 their neighbours, others looking in a bored way at the floor or the ceiling. They wear, moreover, strange and different costumes, some even in old-fashioned style, with wigs, others in modern dress, beside monks and country folk. What I am absolutely ignorant of is what subject is depicted in this composition. It is a meeting — but nothing more can be stated. Is it the Council of the Philippines? Or perhaps a gathering of the Five Greater Corporations, as Von Loga thinks, through those present being arranged in five rows? What is certain is that nothing at all is known about the commission of this picture and its first possessor, circumstances which might have revealed to us its subject. The study for this work is preserved in the Berlin Museum. This curious canvas was bequeathed to the city of Castres by the son of the painter Briguiboul, and, according to M. Lafond, is the same which appeared in Madrid in the possession of D. Angel M. Terradillos. With it were also bequeathed to the city of Castres two more portraits attributed to Goya; one of these, earlier than the period of this picture, is a replica with variations of that which appears at Bayonne in the Musée Bonnat, which I have already mentioned, and the other is of an unknown gentleman of less artistic interest. I believe that to this period of the artist should be attributed the bust portrait of a lady of somewhat strange face and expression, who, with short hair, large ear-rings, and covered with a shawl, made her appearance in the Exhibition of Ancient Spanish Masters held in London at the Grafton Galleries in 1913- 14. Up to that time it had been little known. The delicacy of the tones, the greys, the whole effect of this work, bring it into relation with the art which Degas made so justly famous at the end of the nineteenth century. This picture figured in the sale of the Collection Rouart in Paris in December 1912, and came thence into the possession of the late Sir Hugh Lane. 176 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES It may be noted that the portraits above mentioned, and described in this last period of the artist’s life, are in almost every case intimate portraits of simple people — friends, without doubt, of the painter. They are not like those whom Goya had painted in the epoch of Charles IV, princes, aristocrats, and high personages. They are not, however, for that less interesting from the point of view of their art, for the critic, for the amateur, or for posterity; but in the life of the painter they had a very different result and consequence. Those portraits of former days had been very liberally remunerated; these last do not seem to have other value than an offering of friendship. The notices which we have of the life of Goya seem to confirm the consequences which may be deduced from this observation of mine; the painter in those years lived a very modest life, contrasting with his relatively brilliant life of past years. The journey of Goya to France took place in the year 1824, not in 1822 as some have supposed. What proves this is that, having only on one occasion returned from France in 1827, when he made a brief stay in Spain, and knowing works of his as dated in 1824, these could only have been done before his last journey. Moreover, all the references belonging to his stay in France — and there are not a few of these — are of 1824 and the years following. The causes which determined Goya to absent himself from Spain were various and complex. It cannot be said that he left the country only from fear of the then dominant reaction, and that he might have been attacked for the subject of his engravings. He was Painter to the King, and that would have been sufficient to prevent anyone annoying him; but, none the less, his life was difficult in the midst of the political unrest, of the struggle for the Constitution, and the continual persecutions of one party or another. On the other hand his friends — those of them who were still alive — almost all of advanced ideas, had been in some cases exiled and in others had left the country, the majority RAMÓN SATUE Plate LVI (p- 173) FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 177 of them being outside the borders of Spain. His son was married and away from him, and his art in some ways had gone out of fashion, since new ideas and preferences had come to take the place of those of preceding years. Thus there was nothing to keep him in his country, and on the other hand his curiosity to know France, which had been shown years before, was even more powerful than ever. The motive — perhaps the pretext — for this expatriation of himself was the state of his health. On 13 May 1824 he obtained leave of absence for six months to go to take the mineral waters of Plombiéres. It seems to be a proved fact that all the affection of the painter in those years had centred in a relative of his, Leocadia, the widow of a merchant of German origin called Isidro Weiss, and her daughter, Rosario, a child of ten years of age, who showed for art an enthusiasm and aptitude of such precocious nature as might seem to have been born in her and inherited, and for whom Goya displayed a truly paternal affection. The painter left Madrid for Paris in the month of June. He stopped on the way at Bordeaux, where there was a numerous Spanish colony which included not a few friends of Goya, among them Moratin, who in his letters to another of his friends, D. Juan Antonio Melon, 1 speaks on various occasions of Goya. I will give here the sentences where he gives an account of the painter. Moratin writes from Bordeaux with the date of 27 June: “ Goya actually arrived, deaf, old, stupid and feeble, and without knowing a word of French, and without bringing a servant (and no one needs one more than he does), and with all this so pleased and so desirous of seeing everthing. He was here for three days; two of them he dined with us in the character of a young 1 These letters are published in “The Posthumous Works of D. Leandro Fernández de Moratin,” Madrid, 1868. Those in which Goya is mentioned will be found in the third volume of the aforesaid work. r 7 8 FRANCISCO COYA Y LUCIENTES student; I have begged him to return in September, and not to loiter in Paris and allow himself to be caught by the winter which would be the end of him. He takes a letter so that Arnao should see where to settle him, and to take all the precautions necessary for him, which are many, and the principal of which, in my opinion, is that he should not go out except in a carriage; but I do not know if he will agree to these conditions. We shall see later whether this journey will leave him alive. I should be very sorry if any misfortune should happen to him.” The painter continued his journey, and on 8 July Moratin relates to Melon the arrival of Goya in Paris, still coming from Bordeaux, in the following manner: “ Goya arrived in Paris in good health. Arnao, by reason of a letter which I gave Goya for him, engaged himself to look after him and to advise him in all that he could, and from the first he settled him with a cousin of his daughter-in-law’s relations. He proposes to continue his good offices in favour of the young traveller, and has given consent to send him back here by the month of September.” What especially interests us is to remember that in these months of his stay in Paris he made two very fine portraits; that of D. Joaquin Maria Ferrer, a person who was later, in 1841, President of the Council of Ministers in Spain, and that of Doña Manuela de Alvarez Coi ñas y Thomas de Ferrer. Both these appeared in the exhibition of Goya’s works in 1900, the first belonging to the Conde de Caudilla and the second to the Marqués de Baroja. They are signed and dated: “Goya. Paris, 1824 ” and “Goya 1824,” respectively. These two portraits arc of very special interest for those striking and exceptional qualities of simplicity, true reflection of life, and even life itself which we value in the art of Goya in these FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES i 79 last years. But if some famous French artists of that time in Paris had seen these portraits, how they would have caught their atten- tion, and how strange they would have seemed to them ! For they have no connection with the art in vogue at the date when they were painted, the school of which, as the art of David had declined, the most famous artists were Gros, Prud’hon, Géricault, Ingres, and the young Delacroix. Nevertheless, the sincerity of those works, their tonality, the art which they reflect, were going to become a fountain of inspira- tion years later to the school which certain rebellious and innovating painters were to develop in Paris, whence it attained world-wide renown. I do not know any other works of importance made by Goya in the French capital. He made, it is true, drawings, records of what he saw and what impressed him, more or less creations of his fancy. Other drawings are of a realistic character, as, for instance, a little self-portrait made with the pen, where he repre- sents himself in profile, with a cap with a large peak in the French style. This drawing, published by Araujo in front of his “ Goya,” is in the possession of the Marques de Seoane, a descendant of D. Joaquin Maria Ferrer. Goya returned to Bordeaux at the time fixed, as Moratin lets us know by his letters, this time with the date of 20 September: “ Goya is already here with the lady and the children in a well furnished apartment in a good locality. I think he will be able to spend the winter there very comfortably. He wishes to paint my portrait and from this I infer how charming I must be, since such able paint-brushes aspire to multiply my original self.” The widow of Weiss and her daughter Rosario accompanied Goya from these months onwards, since Moratin says on 23 October: i8o FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES “Goya is here still with his Doña Leocadia; I do not notice in them the greatest harmony.” The painter asked for an extension of six months to the leave of absence which he had already made use of, and that was granted him with the date of 13 January 1825, still under the pretext of ill health and that he wished this time to take the waters of Bagnéres. In April of this year Moratin says: “ Goya with his seventy-nine birthdays and his continual grumblings neither knows what he expects nor what he wishes; I entreat him to remain quiet until the end of his holiday. He likes the city [this is still Bordeaux] the country, the climate, the food, the independence, the tranquillity he enjoys. Since he has been here he has not had any of the complaints which troubled him before; and nevertheless at times he gets it into his head that he has a good deal to do in Madrid; and if he were allowed he would set on his way back mounted on a vicious mule with his cloth cap, his cloak, his walnut wood stirrups, his leather bottle and his saddle bags.” However, his desire to visit Madrid must have passed away quickly, for there are other notices by which we can see that he became acclimatized and was content to remain in Bordeaux. On the other hand, what made life agreeable to him were the many and good Spanish friends who had left their country and whom he encountered there, such as Moratin himself, Silvela, Goicoechea, Muguiro, the marine painter Antonio Brugada, and some French- men like M. Galos. He, on his side, showed himself sympathetic and affectionate, and the people there were pleased to have him amongst them, and recognized him when he passed with his great coat, his hat a la Bolivar , and his large white cravat. He came well through the first winter, and Moratin wrote on 28 June 1825: “Goya escaped this time from greedy Acheron; he is very JACQUES GALOS Plate LVII FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 8 1 saucy, and paints for dear life, without ever correcting a single thing which he paints.” The most important works which he painted in these years were portraits; more precisely the portraits of his friends. From that time date the two very excellent ones of Moratin and of D. Manuel Silvela, respectively, which are to-day in the possession of the widow of D. Francisco Silvela, Marquesa de Silvela (Madrid). They appeared in 1900 in the Exhibition of the Works of Goya, but at that time there was a mistake about the persons represented; for he who appears in half length with a letter, on which the signature of the painter can be read, and who passed for De Silvela, is really Moratin, while the other, without a signa- ture and supposed to be Moratin, is that of De Silvela. The artistic interest of these works is on a level with their importance as likenesses. This D. Manuel Silvela, famous in himself and ancestor of a family which shone with such brilliancy in the nine- teenth century, kept at that time a school at Bordeaux. Moratin lived with him, and this fact explains the joke which appears in the first of the letters above quoted, when he says of Goya that he dined for the two days with them “ in the position of a young student.” Moratin continues on other occasions to speak of the painter, and writes in October 1825: “ Goya says he has been a bull-fighter in his time, and that with the sword in his hand he fears no one. In two months time he will complete his eightieth year.” And a little later: “ Goya has taken a very convenient little house with windows looking north and south, and with a little strip of garden; a detached and quite new little house, where he finds himself very comfortable. Doña Leocadia, with her accustomed intrepidity, grumbles at times, and at others enjoys herself. La Mariquita FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 182 (the name by which he designates Maria del Rosario Weiss) speaks French already like a wood lark, sews and skips and amuses her- self with some native children of her own age.” The best, perhaps, of the portraits painted by Goya at this date is that of the Frenchman, Jacques Galos (Plate 55). It is known that this person was a great friend of Goya. He was a man of business who advised the painter on economic subjects. This portrait is only a head and shoulders, with an energetic and intelligent face crowned with grey hair. His dress is dark, and in the background on the right we read: “ D. Santiago Galos pintado por Goya de edad de 80 anos en 1826.” This marvellous portrait, marvellous for its own fine quality and as much or even more so for being the work of an octogenarian, belongs to the Condesa d’Houdetot. Curious through its peculiar technique — we might almost say executed in masses, which seems to show a method of sculpture adapted to painting — is the bust portrait supposed to be of a young lady of the Silvela family, belonging to the Marqués de la Vega Inclán. The expression of the features, the search for its character- istic traits, and the general intonation, very fine in its character, of this work give it a value for us and a special charm. Other portraits painted in Bordeaux are also mentioned whose present resting-place has been lost. He made at the same time figures like the admirable “ Milkmaid,” preserved in the possession of the Conde de Alto Barcilés (Madrid), and drawings and engravings of very great interest, and various miniatures, of which some are known to-day. These works and his gossip and daily discussions with the Spaniards residing there — who used to come together in the house of Braulio Poc, an Aragonese who had installed a chocolatería in the Rue de la Petite-Taupe — with the care and supervision of the artistic education of Rosario Weiss, filled the life of the old exile in those days at Bordeaux. The FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 183 artistic abilities of the child were constantly in Goya’s mind. Rosario took part in the drawing classes which were given in his studio by the Bordelais painter, Antoine Lacour, a disciple of David. We are told that when Goya went to visit this studio of Lacour, as he passed before the easels of the pupils, he kept muttering, “ That is not it! That is not it! ” And this was natural, because the outlook in art and the practice and school of a French artist of those years and his own, so individual, so personal to himself, were totally opposed. Later, Goya aspired to send Rosario to Paris, and wrote with this purpose to Ferrer: 1 “This famous creature wishes to learn to paint miniatures, and I also should like it because it would be the greatest phenomenon in the whole world for anyone of her age to do this. . . In other sentences he lets us know his condition of mind: “You should appreciate very much these badly written letters for I have neither sight nor pulse, nor pen, nor ink bottle, every- thing is wanting to me and only the will remains. From month to month I take up my pen to write to Paco who is the only one I have written to in Spain.” The painter desired to return to Spain, even although he proposed to come back later to Bordeaux, since he left his house installed there. Moratin says to Melon, under the date of 17 Mav 1826, speaking of the news which he had of his friends of Bordeaux : “ One is the journey of Goya, which will be accomplished in three or four days time, arranged as he always settles his journeys; he goes alone and not well pleased with the French. If he has the good fortune to have no pain during the journey he can be 1 I do not publish the letter in which these sentences are included nor others of these years, as they lack any special interest. They would be included in a biography of Goya, which I have not proposed to make on this occasion. Moreover, these letters are already known by the preceding publications. 184 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES congratulated when he arrives; and if he does not arrive do not be surprised, because the slightest discomfort may leave him lying stiff in the corner of an inn.” However, the veteran artist arrived at Madrid. He was well received by all. His art was esteemed, and his character and temperament were beginning to be widely appreciated. At the court he received his annual salary, and at the king’s suggestion his portrait was made by the then Court Painter, who was Vicente López. This portrait is that which is so well known and preserved in the Museo del Prado (No. 864). It deserves the fame it has, since López left to posterity in his beautiful work a faithful image of the Goya of this last period, in whose expressive features, with their penetrating glance and magnificent brow, the least observant will find the striking likeness with another genius of that time. Even though there was no direct relation existing between them, their features, their temperament, their force of will, even the fact of their both being deaf in their old age, connects them together: it seems indeed as if Fate had created these twin souls in that epoch of transformation in art and every side of life — in which they come forward, as if summing up within themselves the past — and of the beginning of new developments in two nations remote and very different, but which, in that moment and thanks to them, represented respectively the supremacy of painting and the supremacy of music. The portrait by López pleased Goya beyond measure. It is one of the finest examples of that famous portrait painter; less highly finished, less carried forward, detailed, than other works of López, and this — as the story goes — very likely at Goya’s own suggestion. He wished in fair return to make the portrait of López, but when he took up the brushes his cold and trembling hand no longer obeyed him. The physical decline of Goya passed quickly away, mastered FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 185 by his still vigorous constitution, and he now traversed the city on the arm of his son. He was more than once in what had been his own house, at the Quinta del Sordo, where he took delight in seeing those walls which he had decorated in the tragic moments of the war, and which the French critic, M. Lafond, describes as frenzied, in speaking at length on this point and others of these last years of Goya. He visited also others of his canvases scattered here and there, and went down to the Chapel of San Antonio de la Florida, whose decoration was his favourite work and one which brought back to his memory the days of his good fortune and artistic triumphs. Flis stay in Madrid was not a long one; he returned to Bordeaux, accompanied this time by his grandson Mariano, who was already a man. On 15 July of the same year, 1826, Moratin writes again, always from Bordeaux: “ I have received from the hand of Goya (who arrived quite well) the pamphlet you sent me . . . etc.” The last letter, in which he speaks once more of the painter, a letter without date, 1 but certainly later than those already men- tioned, says: “Goya is quite well; he amuses himself with his sketches, walks about, and sleeps during the siesta ; it seems to me there is now peace in his home.” The last important work of Goya, and one which seems like his artistic testament, is a portrait, that of his friend Muguiro, to-day in the hands of the Conde de Muguiro (Madrid), a descendant of the person painted (Plate 56). 1 In the “ Posthumous Works of D. Leandro Fernandez de Moratin ” it is supposed that this letter is of the year 1828, and that it was written in Paris. In this there is evidently a mistake; the letter would be of 1827 or 1828, but it is written from Bordeaux, since Goya was not in Paris except in the year 1824. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 186 D. Juan de Muguiro e Iribarren, who was then forty-one years of age, since he had been born in 1786 in Navarre, and who afterwards held political appointments in Spain, was a banker, a man of business. He was at that time a refugee at Bordeaux through his liberal ideas. He was a great friend of Goya, whom he befriended more than once; the fact of Goicoechea being his manager was another bond of union between Muguiro and Goya. He appears in his portrait, in three-quarter length and front view, seated, and with a letter in his right hand. He is wearing a blue frock-coat and trousers, very dark, almost black. His cravat is in a large bow, which was the fashion of the time, as well as to wear the shirt front very open. The figure is somewhat less than life- size; a small figure, as are almost all those of the last years of the painter. I do not pretend to explain the reason of this, especially in portraits like that of Muguiro, of whom we know he was a man of good stature. The extraordinary feature of this work lies in its vibrating technique, in its execution with small strokes of the brush, more exaggerated even on this occasion than in the works already mentioned. In the whole portrait may be noticed a certain pre- meditated reserve, as if the artist were wishing to do without that method of his own, of which he had such knowledge, in order to reflect only the impression which nature gave him; that is to say, to abstract the quality of the painting, and the painting itself as far as possible, and to aspire to the spiritualization of human images in order to give us the sensation of what these feel, speak, and think — in a word, of their actual life. This effort of Goya at the period of life which he had now reached is really marvellous. He would scarcely have thought that that manner of interpreting nature would be one of the starting- points of a school which would fill fifty years of the story of art with the names Naturalism, Impressionism, or whatever else it might wish to be called; and which, with all its extravagances and JUAN DE MUGUIRO Plate LVIII (p. 185) FRANCISCO GOYA Y r LUCIENTES 187 exaggerations, would be none the less, as a tendency, the only new original and interesting one which was left to posterity by the painters of the second half of the nineteenth century. All those qualities, in fact, of truth and life, which were such an object of pursuit to the painters who were able to call them- selves fin de sücle , we find in these works of the last period of Goya, many years before they appeared in any others. I do not know whether the portrait of Muguiro was painted with the assistance of a powerful magnifying glass, as has been stated, a fact which can be explained by reason of the weak sight which remained to the octogenarian painter. I only know that it reveals a supreme effort, and manifests to us a complete artistic personality. On one occasion Goya said that Velazquez, Rembrandt, and Nature were his only masters. The influence which may be felt in his art, produced above all by his study of the works of Velazquez, has been one of the points more especially treated in this book. With regard to what Goya learned from Rembrandt, I believe that this must be limited to his engravings; as a painter, it may be said that he had scarcely known him. But his true mistress, Nature, continued to inspire him up to the last moment. This fact is shown clearly in this very work- — this portrait which represents a last effort to advance still further, an “aun aprendo,” 1 when it seemed he knew everything. An inscription in large letters on the portrait of Muguiro says: “ Dn. Juan de Muguiro por su amigo Goya a los 81 anos, en Burdeos, Mayo de 1827.” (Dn. Juan de Muguiro by his friend Goya at the age of eighty-one years, in Bordeaux, May of 1827). I do not think it necessary to comment upon this reference of the artist to his age. 1 There exists a drawing by Goya preserved in the Museo del Prado which, in spite of its humorous character, contains a sublime lesson. It represents an old, a very old man with a long beard, who, leaning on sticks, advances with great difficulty; and an inscription in Goya’s hand says “ Aun aprendo.” Needless to say, this drawing is of the last period of the artist’s life, FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 188 In the last letters of Goya to his son he speaks of money matters. He hoped to live ninety-nine years like Titian, and desired to bring together his little fortune and to instruct his son Javier of his intentions. Muguiro, Goicoechea, and Galos were his advisers and confidential friends. Javier announced to his father his intention to visit Bordeaux, and probably in answer to this Goya wrote with his own hand: “ Dear Javier: I can only tell you that from the great joy I experienced I have become a little indisposed and I am in bed. God grant that I may see you coming to fetch them so my contentment may be complete. Good-bye, “Your P e F co .” This letter is to be found among the papers which belonged to D. Valentin Carderera, and, to-day preserved in the Museo del Prado, has a note at the foot by Mariano Goya, the grandson of the painter, saying: “The last lines written by my grandfather.” On 1 6 April 1828, a few days after the arrival of his son, Goya died in Bordeaux, bequeathing to posterity his marvellous creations and to Spain his glorious name. CHAPTER IX Conclusion G OYA left no school. The few pupils whom he had, among whom the most significant were Esteve and Juliá, were rather his collaborators than his pupils. Of both these, and of some other painters who helped them, I shall speak in their right time. In Spain, Alenza alone seems to have been influenced by the works of Goya, and shows that influence on several occa- sions. In years later Eugenio Lucas, who did not even know Goya, made a quantity of works which must be considered rather as imitations than as inspired by his art. But neither Alenza nor Lucas were other than isolated artists, whose creations were entirely independent of the artistic movement and predilections of their time. The influence of Goya is wider and its field more extensive than could have been brought about by any number of actual pupils at his death. A group of young independent artists, for the most part French, sought about the year i860 in Paris, that centre of artistic culture, to break with the conventional and false painting which was prevalent in the entire world. They were especially inspired by the works of Corot and Courbet, who were the artists represent- ing at that time the new idea of inspiring their art by the direct observation of Nature and of life. This group of young artists — Pissarro, Renoir, Mile. Morisot, Cézanne, Monet, and Degas — were rejected by public opinion and criticism. They persisted, and some then began to praise them; but they were again rejected in exhibitions and competitions by the 189 190 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES members of the Institute, the famous painters, the veteran artists, the School of Rome, the fashionable writers, and the public in general, who remained subject to tradition. At this moment, in the year 1865, Manet made his appearance, breaking completely with all the so-called essential rules of art in his two works, “ Breakfast in the Country” and “Olympia.” The hostility which Manet had aroused, the criticism, carica- tures, etc., which his originality inspired, gave him rapidly an immense notoriety; and he knew how to take advantage of it and to unite in his favour the rebellious youth, and to appear as representative of the innovating tendency in art. There is no question here of writing the story of these painters; but this is the moment to enquire into the origin, the historical antecedents, which preceded that movement. Manet showed his preference for Frans Hals, Rembrandt, Tintoretto, and Velazquez, as he himself declared, and as he showed by copying their works in the Louvre. In the same year that they rejected his “Olympia” in Paris, Manet came to Madrid, and made public his enthusiasm for Greco, Velazquez, and Goya. From this period of his art and from the years following date the many works of Spanish character which Manet painted. The direct inspiration, the influence that the Spanish Masters had over Manet, his successors and, in fact, over the whole of that movement, is as evident as it is well known. And this influence was not confined precisely to anything so outwardly apparent as that Manet in painting his “Olympia” may have sought inspira- tion in “La Maja Desnuda” — a fact which, moreover, is not certain, since “La Maja” obeys tendencies of an earlier date, which in no way interested Manet. “ La Maja” is very eighteenth century, as we say now, and Manet is entirely nineteenth century; these are two pictures of a similar subject — nothing more. The real influence is very different, and has to be sought for in certain qualities in the works of Greco, in almost the entire art of FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 191 Velazquez, and in the works of Goya’s last period — works which are a summary and synthesis of these three great Spanish masters. From this epoch, and even from this moment, Spanish art acquires the importance which it holds to-day. This is no question of fashion, nor can its glory be a passing one. If it was slow to become thus recognized, that was because it remained hidden for a long time in this country of ours; a country admirable in many ways, but strange in its character, in which — I know not whether through indolence, or sometimes through distrust of ourselves, and at other times through vanity — we do not value what we have, or wish to believe in ourselves. After those foreign painters, who have found such inspiration in our ancient art, there came the historians and critics who made it famous and gave it universal renown. May heaven reward them for their work. But these works, dealing with Spanish art, have a certain character of new discovery, which sometimes becomes, even without any intention on the part of its authors, humiliating for ourselves. Happily those times are now passing away, and to-day it is common to find Spaniards who, in Spanish and in other languages, enjoy the highest position as historians, critics, and students of our past. Not a few, indeed, of their authoritative and admired works are famous throughout the world. This book of mine, a work of simple character and composed without a break during the year 1915, does not aspire to so much. It is only a sincere work, dedicated to a Spanish genius in these warlike days of national exaltation; and which, for lack of other or better service, I offer to my country, in these moments when the men of my generation, through half the world, are ready to offer their lives for their own land. BIBLIOGRAPHY AND LIST OF PORTRAITS BIBLIOGRAPHY Araujo Sánchez (Zeferino). “ Goya.” Madrid. Araujo Sánchez (Zeferino). “ La España del siglo XIX.” Colección de conferencias Históricas. 26 conferencia: Goya y su época. Balsa de la Vega (R.). “ Exposición de obras de Goya.” La Ilustración Española y Americana. Madrid, 1900. Barcia (A. M. de). “ Goya en la sección de estampas de la Biblioteca Nacional.” Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos. Madrid, 1900, IV, Abril y Mayo. Barcia (A. M. de). “ Catálogo de la Colección de Pinturas del Excmo. Sr. Duque de Berwick y de Alba.” Madrid, 1911. Barcia (A. M. de). “Catálogo de los retratos de personajes españoles que se conservan en la Sección de Estampas y de Bellas Artes de la Bib- lioteca Nacional.” Madrid, 1901. Baudelaire (Ch.). “Goya.” Le Présent. Octobre, 1857. Bensusan (S. L. ). “ Note upon the paintings of Francisco Goya.” The Studio. London, 1901. Vol. XXIV, page 155. Bensusan (S. L.). “ Goya his times and portraits.” Connoisseur. London, 1902. Bertels (Kurt). “ Francisco Goya.” Klassische Ilustratoren. München, 1907. Brieger (Lothaire). “ Francisco de Goya.” Paris. Brinton (Christian). “Goya and certain Goyas in America.” Art in America. New York, 1916. Brinton (Selwyn). “ Some Aspects of the Art of Goya.” A series of articles. The Connoisseur. London, 1919-21. Brinton (Selwyn). “ Francisco de Goya.” By Richard Muther. Translated and edited by Selwyn Brinton, M.A. Langham Series, 1905. Brunet (M. G.). “Etude sur Francisco Goya, sa vie, et ses travaux.” Paris, 1865. Caffin (Charles H.). “Goya.” New York, 1912. 1 95 igó FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Calvert (A. F.). “ Goya.” The Spanish Series. London, 1908. Carderera (Valentín). “ Francois Goya. Sa vie, ses dessins et ses eaux- fortes.” Gazette des Beaux- Arts, i860, VII y 1863, XV. “ Catálogo de la Exposición nacional de retratos.” Madrid, 1902. “ Catálogo de las obras de Goya expuestas en el Ministerio de Instrucción Pública y Bellas Artes.” Madrid. Mayo, 1900. “ Catálogo de la Exposición de Pinturas Españolas de la primera mitad del siglo XIX.” Madrid, 1913. “ Catalogue of the Exhibition of Spanish Old Masters.” London, 1913-14. “ Catalogue of the Exhibition of Spanish Paintings.” Royal Academy, London. November 1920 — January 1921. Caveda (José). “Memorias para la historia de la Real Academia de San Fernando.” Madrid, 1867. Cole (Thomas). “Goya.” Old Spanish Masters. New York, 1907. Cossio (Manuel B.). “ Enciclopedia popular ilustrada de Ciencias y de Artes. Pintura.” Madrid, 1885. Crastre (F. R.). “ Goya.” Cruzada Villaamil (G.). “ Los Tapices de Goya.” Madrid, 1870. Cruzada Villaamil (G.). “ La Casa del Sordo.” El Arte en España. Madrid, 1S6S. D’Achiardi (P.). “Les dessins de D. Francisco Goya y Lucientes au Musée du Prado.” Rome, 190S. Domenech (Rafael). “ Traducción española con apéndices al Apollo de S. Reinach.” Madrid. Ezquerra del Bayo (Joaquín). “ La familia de Carlos IV.” La Esfera. Madrid, 1914. Gasquoine Hartley (C.). “ Goya.” Art Journal , LV. Gasquoine Hartley (C.). “ A Record of Spanish Painting.” London, 1904. Gauthier (Théophile). “ Francisco Goya y Lucientes.” Le cabinet de I amateur. Paris, 1S32. Gauthier (Théophile). “ Voyage en Espagne.” Paris. González Marti (Manuel). “ Goya y Valencia.” Museum. Barcelona, 1913. Gouse (Louis). “ Goya par Lefort.” Ckronique des Arts. Paris, 1877. Gutiérrez Abascal (Ricardo) (Juan de la Encina). Cuatro artículos dedica- dos al aspecto de Goya como grabador. Espaiia, 1916. Madrid. Hamerton (P. G.). “Goya.” The Portfolio. London, 1879. Hein (Marguerite). “A l’école de Goya.” Paris, 1909. Hoffmann (J.). “ Francisco de Goya.” Vienna, 1907. BIBLIOGRAPHY 197 Ivins (William M.). “ A Note on Goya.” New York, 1912. Laban (F.). “ Die Farbenskizze zu einem Reprasentationsgemalde Goyas.” Koniglich Prenss Kunstsamm. Jahrbuch, 1900. Lafond (Paul). “Goya.” Paris. Lafond (Paul). “ Nouveaux Caprices de Goya.” Paris, 1907. Lafond (Paul). “ Trois tableaux de Goya au Musée de Castres.” Chronique des Arts. 1896. Lafond (Paul). “ Les derniéres années de Goya en France.” Gazette des Beaux- A rts. 1 907. Leclerc (Tristan). “Les Caprices de Goya.” Paris, 1910. Lefort (Paul). “ Francisco Goya: étude biographique et critique suivie de 1’essai d’un catalogue raisonné de son oeuvre gravé et lithographié.” Paris, 1877. Lefort (Paul). “ Francisco José Goya y Lucientes.” (En Charles Blanc). Paris. Lefort (Paul). “ Ecole Espagnole, collection Pacully.” Paris. Lefort (Paul). “ La peinture Espagnole.” Paris. Lefort (Paul). “Doha Isabel Corbo de Porcel.” Gazette des Beaux- A rts. Paris, 1897. Loga (Valerian von). “ Francisco de Goya.” Berlin, 1903. Loga (Valerian von). “ Vier lithographische Einzelblátter von Goya.” Berlin, 1905. Loga (Valerian von). “ Goyas Lithographien und seltene Radierungen.” Berlin, 1907. Loga (Valerian von). “ Francisco de Goya.” Meister de Graphik. Band IV. Leipzig. Lücke (H.). Zeitschrift fiir bildende Kunst. Leipzig, 1875, pág. 193. Lücke (H.). “ Francisco Goya.” Dohme, Kunst und Ktinstler. Leipzig, 1880, Madrazo (Pedro de). “ Catálogo descriptivo e histórico del Museo del Prado de Madrid.” Madrid, 1872. Madrazo (Pedro de). “ Goya.” Almanaque de La Ilustración Española y Americana. Madrid, 1880. Matheron (Laurent). “Goya.” Paris, 1858. Mayer (August L.). “ Geschichte der Spanischen Malerei.” Leipzig, 1913. Mayer (August L.). “ Die Gemáldesammlung des Bowes-Museums zu Barnard Castle.” 1912. Mélida (Enrique). “Los desastres de la guerra.” El Arte en España. Madrid, 1863. 198 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Mélida (Enrique). “ Goya.” El Arte en España. Madrid, 1864. Mélida (José Ramón). “Goya y la Pintura contemporánea.” Discurso hecho en la Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando. Madrid, 1907. Mélida (José Ramón). “El arte de Goya.” La Ilustración Española y Americana. Madrid, 1900. Mesonero Romanos (M.). “ Goya, Moratin, Meléndez Valdés y Donoso Cortés.” Madrid, 1900. Momméja (Jules). “ Un tableau de Goya du Musée de Lille.” Gazette des fíeaíix-Arts. Paris, 1905. Moratin (Leandro F. de). “ Obras postumas.” Tomo III. Correspondencia particular desde Burdeos. Muther (R.). “ Geschichte der Malerei im XIX Jahrhundert.” München, 1893. Muther (R.). “ Studien und kritiken.” Wien, 1900. Nait (A. de). “Les eaux-fortes de Francisco Goya. Les Caprichos gravures fac-similé de M. Seguí y Riera.” Paris, 1888. Ossorio y Bernard (M.). Galería Biográfica de Artistas Españoles del siglo XIX.” Madrid, 1883-84. Pardo Bazán (Emilia). “Goya.” La LectiLra. Madrid, 1906. Pérez y González (Felipe). “Un cuadro de historia (de Goya).” Madrid. Piot (E.). “Catalogue raisonné de l’oeuvre gravé de Francisco Goya.” Le cabinet de l' amateur. Paris, 1842. Rada y Delgado. “ Los techos de San Antonio de la Florida.” Rios (R. de los). “ L’exposition des oeuvres de Goya a Madrid.” La ChroniqiLe des A rts. Paris, 1 900. Rothenstein (W.). “Goya.” London, 1900. S. “The Variotisness of Goya.” The Magazine op Art. London, 1902. Sánchez Cantón (Javier). “ Los pintores de Cámara de los Reyes de España. Los pintores de los Borbones XXIV (Goya).” Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Excursiones. Madrid, 1916. Schulze-Berge (A.). “ Einiges uber die Goya-Ausstellung. Madrid in Mai 1900.” Zeitschrijt fiir bildcnde Kunst. Leipzig. Berlin, 1900. Sentenach (Narciso). “ Catálogo de los cuadros, etc., de la antigua casa ducal de Osuna.” Madrid, 1896. Sentenach (Narciso). “ La pintura en Madrid, desde sus orígenes hasta el siglo XIX.” Madrid, 1907. Sentenach (Narciso). “Los grandes retratistas de España.” Madrid, 1914. BIBLIOGRAPHY 199 Solvay (Lucien). “ L’Art Espagnol.” Paris, 1887. Solvay (Lucien). “Les femmes de Goya.” L' Art et les Artistes. Paris, 1906. Stirling Maxwell (Sir William). “Annals of the Artists of Spain.” London, 1891. Stokes (Hugh). “ Francisco Goya. A Study of the Work and Personality of the eighteenth century Spanish Painter and Satirist.” London, 1914. Temple (Sir A. G.). “Catalogue of the Exhibition of the Works of Spanish Painters (Guildhall).” London, 1901. Tormo y Monzó (Elias). “ Las pinturas de Goya con motivo de la Exposi- ción de sus obras en Madrid.” Revista de la Asociación Artístico Arqueológica Barcelo 7 icsa. Barcelona, 1900. Tormo y Monzó (Elias). “Mis mañanitas vallisoletanas: tras de Becerra, y Goya al paso.” Boletín de la Sociedad Castellana de Excursiones. Tomo V. Valladolid, 1912. Tormo y Monzó (Elias). “Goya.” (Los Amigos del Arte y la Pintura Española de 1800 a 1850). Por el Arte. Diciembre, 1913. Tormo y Monzó (Elias). “ La Pintura Aragonesa.” Boletín de la Sociedad Española de Excursiones. Madrid, 1909. Utrillo (M.). “ Lugar de Goya en la Pintura.” Forma. Barcelona, 1904. Viñaza (Conde de la). “ Goya, su tiempo, su vida, sus obras.” Madrid, 1887. Viñaza (Conde de la). “ Adiciones al diccionario histórico de los más ilustres profesores de las Bellas Artes en España,” de D. Juan Agustín Ceán Bermúdez. Madrid, 1894. Watsin (M.) und Stassow (W.). “ Francisco Goya.” Woltman und Woermann. “ Geschichte der Malerei.” Leipzig, 1888. Yriarte (Ch.). “Goya.” Paris, 1867. Yriarte (Ch.). “ Goya aquafortiste.” Les Arts. Paris. London, 1887. Zapater y Gómez (Francisco). “Goya. Noticias biográficas.” Zaragoza, 1868. Zapater y Gómez (Francisco). “Apuntes históricos biográficos acerca de la Escuela Aragonesa de Pintura.” Madrid, 1863. X. “ Análisis de un cuadro que pintó D. Francisco Goya para la catedral de Sevilla.” Madrid, 1817. X. “ Les Grands Graveurs. Francisco Goya.” Paris, 1913. LIST OF PORTRAITS On having seen some excellent portraits made by Goya 1 : La Naturaleza excedes Y tu fama sera eterna Se de envidia no la tnata La misma Naturaleza. I N this list of portraits painted by Goya only the name of the sitter has been mentioned. When this is not sufficient, through possible confusion with another portrait of the same person, there is added the statement whether it is of head and shoulders or the entire figure, the way the figure has been arranged, or some other characteristic note which could differentiate one portrait from another. There follows — in parenthesis — the name of the possessor of the work, or of the place where it is to be found, and last of all the dimensions of the canvas in the case of all those in which this can be ascertained, and the page of the present work in which it has been mentioned. I consider this sufficient to form my list. The important works included in this list have been described in the text ; and those which only appear in the list I consider either as of secondary interest or I do not know them myself, and therefore can express no definite opinion about them. In spite of my only mentioning works the authenticity of which is evident or established, the list attains, as will be seen, the very considerable number of 292 works. If there were added those which I do not mention, owing to their being repetitions, with more or less variations, of others already described, I believe it will be no exaggeration to say that the portraits which are known to us would reach the number of 350; and as it may occur that new works might appear, which are unknown to critics and not in any catalogue, I incline to think that the number of portraits made by Goya will eventually reach 400, a very large number in any case, and still more so if we consider that portrait work was only one element in the output of this most prolific painter. These lines are found in the “ Biblioteca de Autores Espáñoles,” vol. lxvii, page 545. D D 202 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1. Self-portrait, Goya as a young man. Full length bust. (Boehler Gallery, Munich. Two replicas of this work are mentioned. Page 1 6. Plate i. 2. Self-portrait of Goya. Head and shoulders. (Provincial Museum of Zaragoza.) Page 145 and Plate 57 of “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” Page 16. 3. Self-portrait of Goya, upright and painting. A small figure. (Conde de Villagonzalo, Madrid.) 0.42 by 0.28. Page 29. Plate 4. 4. Self-portrait of Goya. Head resembling his portrait in the painting of “ The Family of Charles IV.” (Musée Bonnat, Bayonne, France.) Page 108. 5. Self-portrait of Goya, resembling that of the Museum of Bayonne. (Musée de Castres, France.) Page 175. 6. Self-portrait. Head and shoulders. Dated from the year 1815. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) Panel, 0.46 by 0.40. Page 162. Plate 50. 7. Self-portrait, very similar to the above, of which it may be as considered as a replica. (Prado Museum). 0.46 by 0.85. Page 163. 8. Self-portrait, resembling the two preceding, to judge by its description, with the difference of wearing a red dress. I do not know this work. (M. Barroilhet, Paris.) 0.66 by 0.51. 9. Self-portrait, very reduced in size. (Carmen Berganza de Martin, Madrid.) 0.18 by 0.12. 10. Charles 1 1 1 , dressed as a sportsman. (Prado Museum.) 2.ioby 1.27. Page 17. 1 1. Charles III, dressed as a sportsman. Same dimensions as preceding; of more striking artistic merit. (Duchess of Fernán-Nüñez, Madrid.) Page 17. 12. Charles III, dressed as a sportsman. Same dimensions as preceding. (Royal Palace of Madrid.) 13. Charles III, dressed asa sportsman. Same dimensions as preceding. (Private collection, Madrid.) Page 17. 14. Charles III, in court dress. (Bank of Spain.) 1.94 by 1.10. Page 17. 15. The P'amily Group of Charles IV. (Marqués de Villavieja, Madrid.) Plate 58 of “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” 16. Charles IV, in court dress, half length. (Prado Museum.) I do not mention the many replicas which, with more or less variations, have been made of this portrait for the reasons already set forth in the text. Page 36. Plate 6. LIST OF PORTRAITS 203 17. Charles IV, in court dress. (Marqués de Casa-Torres, Madrid.) 18. Charles IV, equestrian portrait. (Prado Museum.) 3.35 by 2.79. Page 109. 19. Charles IV, in uniform of the Body Guard. (Prado Museum.) 2.02 by 1.26. Page 110. 20. Charles IV, in shooting costume. (Royal Palace of Madrid.) 21. Charles IV. (Belonging to the Gallery of the Royal Palace of San Telmo, Seville.) 0.82 by 0.66. 22. Charles IV, dressed as a huntsman. (Naples, Capo di Monte.) 23. Charles IV, in the uniform of the Body Guard. Resembling that of the Prado Museum. (University of Salamanca.) 24. Queen Maria Luisa, standing, three-quarter length, in court dress and with a large hat. (Prado Museum.) As in the case of the pendant of this picture before quoted, I do not mention the many replicas which, with more or less variations, have been made of it, for the reasons set forth in the text. Page 36. 25. Queen Maria Luisa, in a dress which recalls the time of Philip IV. (Museum of Modern Art, Madrid.) 2.20 by 1.40. Page 40. Plate 8. 26. Queen Maria Luisa, in court dress. (Marqués de Casa-Torres.) 27. Queen Maria Luisa, in court dress. The whole composition is original, but the head has been entirely re-painted. (Museum of Bilbao.) Page 56. 28. Queen Maria Luisa, equestrian portrait. (Prado Museum.) 3.35 by 2.79. Page 99. 29. Queen Maria Luisa, with a black mantilla. (Royal Palace of Madrid.) Page 99. 30. Queen Maria Luisa, with a black mantilla, replica of the above. (Prado Museum.) 2.09 by 1.26. Page 99. 31. Queen Maria Luisa, wearing court dress of Oriental character. (Royal Palace of Madrid.) Page 109. 32. Queen Maria Luisa, with a dress which recalls the preceding portrait. (Naples, Capo di Monte.) Two more portraits also mentioned of this type, one in New York and one in Paris, which I do not know. 33. Queen Maria Luisa. (Belonging to the Gallery of the Royal Palace of San Telmo, Seville.) 0.82 by 0.66. 34. Family of Charles IV. (Prado Museum.) 2.80 by 3.36. The studies for the heads for this picture are those which are now mentioned in order. Page 10 1. Plate 27. ló vo NOO o ó H fi to Tj- to VO CO ON O ►* ro Tj- ‘O (O to fO to CO Nd" tt tt ct" tí- tJ- tJ- tí* Tf to iO «O ,r> uo 'O 204 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES Charles IV. (Mentioned in the collection of the Countess of Paris.) I do not know this work. Queen Maria Luisa. (Munich, Pinacothek.) Page 107. Prince of the Asturias. (In a private collection at Brussels.) Page 107. Infanta Doña Maria Josefa. (Prado Museum.) 0.74 by 0.60. Page 107. Infante D. Francisco de P. Antonio. (Prado Museum.) 0.74 by 0.60. Page 107. Infante D. Carlos Maria Isidro. (Prado Museum.) 0.74 by 0.60. Page 107. D. Luis, Prince of Parma. (Prado Museum.) 0.74 by 0.60. Page 107. Infante D. Antonio. (Prado Museum.) 0.74 by 0.60. Page 107. Infanta Maria Luisa, with her son in her arms. (Private property, New York.) Another study is also mentioned which I do not know. Page 107. Plate 28. Infanta Isabel, afterwards Queen of the Two Sicilies, at twelve years of age. (Belonging to the Gallery of the Royal Palace of San Telmo, Seville.) 0.82 by 0.66. Page 108. Infanta Isabel, afterwards Queen of the Two Sicilies. (Marqués de Viana, Madrid.) Page 108. Maria Teresa of Austria, Empress of Germany, Queen of Hungary and Bohemia. (The Duke of Alba, Madrid.) 0.54 by 0.57. The Prince of Asturias, afterwards Ferdinand VI I. (Belongingto the gallery of the Royal Palace of San Telmo, Seville.) 0.82 by 0.66. Ferdinand VI I, equestrian portrait. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) 2.90 by 2.10. Page 15S. Ferdinand VI I, head and shoulders. (Conde de Valderro.) Page 158. Ferdinand VII, with royal mantle. (Prado Museum.) 2.12 by 1.46. Page 158. Plate 48. Ferdinand VII, resembling the preceding. (Office of the Imperial Canal of Aragon, Zaragoza.) Page 159. Ferdinand VII, in military uniform. (Prado Museum.) 2.07 by 1.44. Page 159. Ferdinand VII, in military uniform. (Supreme Council of War.) Page 159. Ferdinand VII. (Provincial Assembly of Pamplona.) Page 159. The Family of the Infante D. Luis, son of Charles III. (Belonging to the collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte To-day to be found in Italy.) 2.48 by 3.15. Pages 25 and 28. LIST OF PORTRAITS 205 56. Infante D. Luis de Borbón. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) Panel, 0.42 by 0.35. Page 27. 57. Infante D. Luis Maria de Borbón. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 0.79 by 0.60. Page 27. 58. Doña Maria Teresa de Vallabriga. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) Panel, 0.42 by 0.35. Page 27. 59. Doña Maria Teresa de Vallabriga, standing, and resting her arms on the back of a chair. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 1.48 by 0.93. Page 27. 60. Doña Maria Teresa de Vallabriga, equestrian portrait. Without doubt Goya created this work, as he speaks of it in his private corre- spondence. I do not know it. To be found in Italy. 61. The Infante Cardinal (Cardinal of Bourbon), as a child. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 1.30 by 1.16. Page 27. 62. The Infante Cardinal (Cardinal of Bourbon). (Belonging to the collec- tion of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 1.95 by 1.30. Page 1 15. 63. The Infante Cardinal (Cardinal of Bourbon). Comes from the Spanish church of Our Lady of Montserrat, Rome. (Prado Museum.) 2.14 by 1.36. Page 1 1 5. 64. The Infante Cardinal (Cardinal of Bourbon). (Marqués de Casa- Torres, Madrid.) 2 by 1.14. Page 115. 65. The Infante Cardinal (Cardinal of Bourbon), half length. (Collection of the Marqués de la Vega Inclán, Madrid.) 66. Doña Maria Teresa de Borbón y Vallabriga, Condesa de Chinchón, as a child. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 1.30 by 1. 16. Page 27. 67. Condesa de Chinchón, in a grey dress, standing. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 1.95 by 1.30. Page 115. 68. Condesa de Chinchón, of the same character as the preceding, with the difference of being half length. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) Page 1 1 5. 69. Condesa de Chinchón, full length, seated. (Collection of the Palace of Boadilla del Monte.) 2.08 by 1.39. Page 113. Plate 30. 70. Condesa de Chinchón, half length. Replica of the last. (Havemeyer Collection, New York.) 71. Conde de Floridablanca. (Marquesa de Martorell, Madrid.) 2.62 by 1.66. Page 21. Plate 2. 72. Conde de Floridablanca, a small portrait, probably a study. (Belong- ing to the Gallery Stchoukine, Paris.) Page 22. 206 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 73 * Conde de Floridablanca. (Marqués de Casa-Torres, Madrid.) Page 22. 74. Conde de Floridablanca. (Cathedral of Madrid.) Page 22. 75. Conde de Gausa. (Marqués de Casa-Torres, Madrid.) Page 22. 76. Conde de Gausa. (José Lázaro, Madrid.) Page 22. 77. Conde de Gausa, reproduced in “ Hispania.” As I do not know this portrait I cannot state whether it is not one of the two previously mentioned. (Belonging to D. Pablo Milá.) 78. Ventura Rodriguez, portrait of head and shoulders. Pages 28-29. 79. Ventura Rodriguez. (Trotti Gallery, Paris.) Page 29. Plate 3. 80. An unknown youth. (Boston Museum.) Page 35. Plate 5. 81. Altamirano. Page 35. S2. Portrait of a young girl, head and shoulders. (Brussels Museum.) Page 39. Plate 7. 83. Feliciana Bayeu. (Presented by Cristóbal Ferriz to the Prado Museum.) 0.38 by 0.30. 84. José de Toro Zambrano. (Bank of Spain.) 1.13 by 0.78. Page 23. 85. Conde de Altamira. (Bank of Spain.) 1.77 by 1.08. Page 23. 86. Marqués de Tolosa. (Bank of Spain.) 1.12 by 0.78. Page 23. 87. Conde de Cabarrus. (Bank of Spain.) 2.10 by 1.27. Page 24. 88. Francisco Larrumbe. (Bank of Spain.) i.i3byo.77. Page 24. 89. Mariano Luis de Urquijo. (Royal Academy of History.) r. 28 by 0.97. Page 39. 90. Juan Agustín Ceán Bermudez. (Belonging to the Marqués de Corvera, Madrid.) 1.22 by 0.88. Page 25. 91. Marqués de Bajamar. Page 35. 92. Juan Manuel Alvarez de Faria. Page 35. 93. Portrait of a boy dressed as a soldier. (Sr. Orossen, Paris.) Page 35. 94. Unknown portrait. (Van Geldern Collection, Brussels.) Page 39. 95. Feliciana Bayeu. (Prado Museum.) Page 39. 96. Juan Agustín Ceán Bermudez, head and shoulders. Page 60. 97. The wife of Ceán Bermudez. (National Gallery of Buda Pesth.) 1.2 1 by 0.85. Page 63. 98. Pope Innocent X. Copy of Velazquez by Goya. (Collection of the Conde de Villagonzalo.) Page 41. 99. Marquesa de San Andrés, seated, three-quarter length. (Out of Spain.) Page 39. 100. Marquesa de San Andrés, head and shoulders. (Out of Spain.) Page 39. LIST OF PORTRAITS 207 101. Marquesa de Pontejos. (Marquesa de Martorell, Madrid.) 2.10 by 1.28. Page 47. Plate 9. 102. Marquesa de Pontejos. (Not long ago for sale in Madrid; I do not know where it is at present.) Page 47. 103. Maria Ildefonsa Dábalos y Santa Maria. (Conde de Villagonzalo.) 1.08 by 0.80. Page 77. 104. Francisco Javier Goya, full length, dressed in grey. (L homme gris .) (Ferdinand Bischoffsheim, Paris.) Page 65. Plate 15. 105. Gumersinda Goicoechea, wife of Goya’s son. (Bischoffsheim collection, Paris.) Page 65. 106. Sebastian Martinez. (Trotti Gallery, Paris.) Page 53. 107. Portrait of an unknown youth. (Marqués de Santillana, Madrid.) Page 35. 108. Martin Zapater, head and shoulders, profile to the left. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) 0.78 by 0.60. Page 49. 109. Martin Zapater, head and shoulders, full face. Oval. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) 0.80 by 0.60. Pages 49 and 88. Plate 24. no. Gabriel de Aristizábal, lieutenant of the Royal Navy. (Naval Museum.) 1.14 by 0.95. in. Admiral Mazarredo. (From the collection of Boadilla del Monte.) 1.05 by 0.84. Pages 35-36. 1 12. Admiral Mazarredo. (Antonio Mazarredo, Zaragoza.) Page 36. 1 13. Juanita Mazarredo. (Havemeyer Collection, New York.) Page 36. 1 14. General Ricardos, half length, standing. (Navas collection, Madrid.) Page 36. 1 1 5. General Ricardos. (Pedro Durán, Madrid.) 1.09 by 0.81. Page 36. 116. General Ricardos, three-quarter length, seated. (Fortunato de Selgas, Cudillero, Asturias.) Page 36. 1 1 7. The artist Asensi. (From the collection of the Royal Palace of San Telmo, Seville.) 0.55 by 0.42. Page 124. 1 18. An unknown lady, full head and shoulders. Condesa de Gondomar, Madrid.) 1 19. Conde de Trastamara, child. (Marquesa de Castrillo, Madrid.) Pages 52-53. 120. Maria Teresa Apodaca de Sesma. (Arteta family, Madrid. Now in New York.) 1.28 by 0.96. Page 62. 12 1. Maria del Rosario Fernández, la Tirana. (Marquesa de Valdeolmos, Madrid.) 1.12 by 0.79. Page 59. Plate 12. 208 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 122. Maria Ignacia Alvarez de Toledo, Marquesa de Astorga, with her daughter. (Marqués de Corvera, Madrid.) 1.95 by 1. 15. Page 62. 123. Doña 1 adea Arias de Enriquez. (Prado Museum.) 1.90 by 1.06. Page 54. Plate 1 1. 124. Rita Barrenechea, Marquesa de la Solana. (Beistegui Collection, Paris.) 1.83 by 1.24. Page 60. 125. Bernarda Tavira, head and shoulders. (Mario Adán de Yarza, Zubieta, Lequeitio, Vizcaya.) Page 150 of “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” 1 26. Antonio Adán de Yarza, half length. (Mario Adán de Yarza, Zubieta, Lequeitio, Vizcaya.) Page 150 of “Goya. Composiciones y P'iguras." 127. Ramona Maria de Barbachano de Adán de Yarza, half length; com- panion picture to the last. (Mario Adán de Yarza, Zubieta, Lequeitio, Vizcaya.) Page 1 50 of “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” 128. Conde de Campomanes. A portrait which Goya certainly painted, as can be proved by documents. I do not know the work or its present possessor. 129. Bartolomé Sureda. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) 130. Leandro Fernández de Moratin. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) 0.72 by 0.56. Page 50. 1 3 1 . Juan de Villanueva. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) o.93byo.68. Page 57. 132. Ramon de la Posado y Soto. (Knoedler Gallery, London, Paris, New York.) 1.97 by 0.96. Pages 56-67. 133. Félix Colón de Larriategui. 1.20 by 0.85. Page 58. 134. P'rancisco de Paula Caveda y Solares. 135. The engraver Carmona. (Private property, Paris.) Page 64. 136. The painter Camarón. Page 64. 137. Tomas Perez Fstaia, an important portrait, the present possessor of which I do not know. (Belonged to the Cedillo collection.) 1.02 by 0.97. Pages 53-54. 138. Juan Meléndez Valdés, head and shoulders. (Bowes Museum, Barnard Castle, England.) Page 86. Plate 23. 139. Juan Meléndez Valdés. Replica of the last with some variations. (Suárez Inclán, Madrid.) Page 86. 140. Juan Meléndez Valdés. Replica of the last with some variations. (Private property, Madrid.) Page 86. 141. Doctor Perak (National Gallery of London.) Page 94. LIST OF PORTRAITS 209 142. Duke and Duchess of Osuna and their children. (Prado Museum.) 2.25 by 1.74. Page 48. 143. Duke of Osuna. (Pierpont Morgan collection, New York.) Page 46. 144. Duchess of Osuna. (Bauer collection, Madrid.) Page 46. 145. Francisco, eldest son of the Duke and Duchess of Osuna. The work of Goya and Esteve. (Duque de Tovar, Madrid.) Page 90. 146. Pedro Romero, full head and shoulders. (Belonging to the collection of the Infante D. Sebastian, Pau, France.) 0.95 by 0.75. 147. Pedro Romero. (Duque de Veragua, Madrid.) Page 69. Plate 16. 148. Pedro Romero. (Private collection, Paris.) 0.80 by 0.60. 149. Pedro Romero. (The Spanish Society of America, New York.) 150. José Romero. (Duque de Ansola, Madrid.) 0.92 by 0.76. Page 69. 1 5 1. Costillares. (Lázaro collection, Madrid.) Page 69. 152. Costillares. (Conde del Asalto, Madrid.) Page 68. 153. Costillares. Almost identical to the last. (Private property, Paris.) Page 69. 154. The torero Martincho, head and shoulders. (Belonging to Eduardo Cano.) 0.57 by 0.77. 155. Maria Teresa Cayetana de Silva, XIII Duquesa de Alba, head and shoulders. (Trotti, Paris.) 0.88 by 0.66. 156. La Duquesa de Alba. (The Duque de Alba, Palacio de Liria.) 1.94 by 1.30. Page 72. Plate 17. 157. Duquesa de Alba, in the dress of a maja. (The Spanish Society of America, New York.) Page 72. Plate 18. 1 58. Duquesa de Alba, a small replica of the last. (Belonging to D. Manuel Urzaiz, Seville.) 0.52 by 0.42. I do not know this work, men- tioned by Viñaza. 159. Duquesa de Alba, a replica of the one preserved in the Palacio de Liria. (Marquesa de Caltabuturu, Madrid.) Page 75. 160. Duquesa de Alba. (Duque de Aliaga, Madrid.) Page 73. 16 1. A group, Doña Maria Francisca de Sales Portocarrero y Zúñiga, IV Condesa de Montijo, with her four daughters. (Conde del Montijo, Palacio de Liria, Madrid.) 2.15 by 1.45. Page 76. 162. Maria Gabriela Palafox y Portocarrero, Marquesa de Lazán. (Duque de Alba.) 1.93 by 1.15. Page 77. Plate 19. 1 63. Marqués de Villafranca, Duque de Alba. (Condesa de Niebla, Madrid.) Page 155 and Plate 61 of “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” Page 73. E E 210 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 1 64. Marqués de Yillafranca, Duque de Alba, replica of the last. (Marquesa de Caltabuturu, Madrid.) 165. Marquesa de Yillafranca, Doña Maria Tomasa Palafoxy Portocarrero. (Condesa de Niebla, Madrid.) Page 155 and Plate 62 of “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” Page 74. 166. Marquesa de Yillafranca, Doña Maria Antonia Gonzaga y Caracciolo. (Condesa de Niebla, Madrid.) Page 155 and Plate 60 of “Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” Page 74. 167. Francisco Bayeu. (Provincial Museum of Valencia.) 1.12 by 0.85. Page 62. 168. Francisco Bayeu, half length, life size. (Prado Museum.) l.icbyo.Sg. Page 61. Plate 14. 169. An unknown gentleman, half length. (Van Geldern collection, Brussels.) 170. Rita Luna, small head and shoulders. (Belonging to D. Valentin Carderera.) 0.41 by 0.34. 1 71. An unknown gentleman. Perhaps an actor, and probably one of the company of Rita Luna. Head and shoulders. A person of middle age. (Formed part of the Carderera collection, Madrid.) 0.38 by 0.30. 172. Lorenza Correa, a famous singer. (Ferdinand Bischoftsheim, Paris.) Page 65. 173. An unknown lady. (Van Geldern collection, Brussels.) Page 63. 174. Portrait of a lady, by the dress of the sitter and other details con- nected with the preceding. (Palacio de Riofrio.) Page 63. 175. The bookseller. (Havemeyer collection, New York.) 1.50 by 0.76. Page S5. Plate 22. 176. Marquesa de Santiago, a portrait which it is certain Goya painted, but I do not know its present possessor. 1 77. Vicenta Chollet y Cavallero. (Of the Groult collection, Paris.) 178. Rita Molinos. (Private collection in Brussels.) Page 79. Plate 21. 179. Marquesa de las Mercedes. (Belonged to the collection of the Marqués de Remisa. To-day out of Spain.) Page 78. Plate 20. 180. Figure of a maja , reduced size; seems connected with the preceding portrait. (Louvre Museum.) 0.52 by 0.34. Page 78. 18 1. Joaquina Candado. (Provincial Museum of Fine Arts, Valencia.) 1.63 b)’ 1. 1 8. Page 52. 1 82. Mariano Ferrer, secretary of the Academy of Fine Arts of Valencia. (Valencia.) Page 52. 183. Archbishop D. Joaquin Company. (Parish Church of San Martin, Valencia.) Page 52. LIST OF PORTRAITS 21 1 184. A lady with a white mantilla. (Belonging to the Gallery of the Royal Palace of San Telmo, Seville.) 1 by 0.60. 185. Maria del Rosario Fernández, La Tirana, standing full length. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) 2.10 by 1.40. Page 85. 186. Marquesa de Espeja. (Duque de Valencia, Madrid.) Page 64. 187. Marquesa de Casa- Flores. (Boehler Gallery, Munich.) 1.12 by 0.79. Page 63. 188. An unknown girl, dressed in a white frock trimmed with blue ribbons. An unfinished work. I do not know this work. (Belonged to J. Lozano, with other works of Goya, Madrid.) 0.21 by 0.16. 189. Duque de Castroterreho; this picture keeps by its technique close relation with the group of “ The Condesa de Montijo and her family,” to-day in the Palacio de Liria. (Comes from Alcalá de Henares.) 190. Duquesa de Castroterreño, companion picture to the preceding. (Comes from Alcala de Henares.) Page 64. 19 1. Marquesa de Bajamar. Page 64. 192. Miguel Cayetano Soler. I do not know this portrait or its possessor, although it is evident that it was painted by Goya. 193. Gasparini. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) Page 64. 194. D. Manuel Godoy, Prince de la Paz. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) 1.80 by 2.65. Page 1 12. Plate 29. 195. Leonor Valdés y Barruso. (Orossen, Paris.) Page 122. 196. Maria Vicenta Barruso Valdés. (Orossen, Paris.) Page 122. 197. An unknown lady, full head and shoulders. (Condesa de Gomar, Madrid.) 198. Antonio Pórcel. (Belonged to the Pórcel family, Granada.) 1. 13 by 0.82. 199. Isabel Corvo de Pórcel. (National Gallery of London.) 0.82 by 0.55. Page 78. 200. The designer Pérez de Castro. (Louvre Museum.) 0.99 by 0.69. Page 94. 201. Antonio Foraster. (Javier Millán, Madrid.) 0.45 by 0.37. 202. Juan José Mateo Arias Davila, XII Conde de Puñonrostro. (Mar- qués de Almaguer, Madrid.) 2.34 by 1.50. 203. The actor Máiquez. (Prado Museum.) 0.77 by 0.58. Page 127. 204. The actor Máiquez. (Marqués de Casa-Torres, Madrid.) 0.92 by 0.70. Page 127. The engraver Rafael Esteve. (Provincial Museum of Valencia.) 1.63 by 1. 1 8. Page 161. 205. FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 212 206. Mariano Ferrer. (Provincial Museum of Fine Arts, Valencia.) 0.85 by 0.64. 207. The naturalist Azara, a portrait of more than half length. (Belonged to D. Lorenzo Azara.) 208. Ramón de Pignatelli, an important work which I do not know. (Belonging to the family Pignatelli.) 2.19 by 1.37. 209. Ramón de Pignatelli. (Duque de Luna, Madrid.) 0.80 by 0.62. 210. José Maria Arango, a painter from Seville. (Belonged to a private collection in Seville.) 0.55 by 0.40. Page 166. 21 1. José Maria Arango, son of the painter who sat for the preceding. (Comes from Seville.) Page 166. 212. José de Vargas y Ponce. (Royal Academy of History.) 1.04 by 0.82. Page 123. 213. Portrait of a lady. (Joaquin Gutiérrez Martin.) 0.75 by 0.52. 214. Conde de Fernán-Núñez. (Duquesa de Fernán- Núñez, Madrid.) Page 1 1 7. Plate 34. 215. Condesa de Fernán-Núñez. (Duquesa de Fernán-Núñez, Madrid.) Page 1 1 7. 216. Mariano Goya, grandson of the artist. (Henry Crooke, Madrid.) Page 116. Plate 32. 217. Mariano Goya, head and shoulders in profile; his head is covered with a high hat with a narrow brim. (Old collection of the Duque de Sexto, Madrid.) Page 116. Plate 33. 218. Manuel Cantin Lucientes, represented as a boy. (Havemeyer collec- tion, New York.) 0.50 by 0.44. Page 116. 219. P'ernando Guillemardet, ambassador of the IYench Republic in Spain. (Louvre Museum, Paris.) 1.85 by 1.25. Page 90. Plate 25. 220. Marqués de San Adrián. (Marqués de San Adrián, Tudela.) 2.09 by 1.27. Page 121. Plate 35. 221. Bernardo I riarte. (Appeared in the Groult collection, Paris.) Page 64. 222. Doña T. Sureda. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) 1.20 by 0.80. 223. Ignacio Garcini. (Colonel Payne, New York.) 1.04 by 0.82. Page 1 20. 224. Josefa Castilla-Portugal de Garcini. (Colonel Payne, New York.) 1.04 by 0.82. Page 121. 225. Portrait of an unknown person. (Manuel Soler y Alarcon, Madrid.) 226. Antonio Zarate. (Outside Spain.) 1.05 by 0.84. Page 123. 227. Antonio Zarate. (Outside Spain.) 0.71 by 0.58. Page 123. Plate 38. LIST OF PORTRAITS 213 228. An unknown lady, head and shoulders. (Doctor James Simon, Berlin.) Page 122. 229. Father La Canal. (José de Lázaro collection, Madrid.) 0.59 by 0.49. Page 154. 230. Conde de Tepa, in military uniform, head and shoulders. (Lázaro collection, Madrid.) 231. Tio Paquete. (Conde de Doña Mariana, Madrid.) 0.39 by 0.31. Page 154. 232. Manuel Lapeña, Marqués de Bondad Real. (Joaquin Argamasilla, Madrid.) 2.25 by 1.40. Page 93. 233. Pedro Mocarte, head and shoulders portrait. (The Hispanic Society of America, New York.) Page 124. Plate 39. 234. P'riar Juan Fernández de Rojas, of the Order of St. Augustine. Is this portrait the one which was before considered to be of Bishop Rojas? (Royal Academy of History.) Pages 154-155. 235. A Franciscan friar. (Berlin Museum.) Page 156. 236. Friar Miguel Fernández, Bishop of Marcopolis. Is this portrait, coming from Seville, and mentioned by Vinaza, the same which to-day, as a portrait of a monk, is preserved in the Berlin Museum ? In this case its authenticity is indisputable. If this is not so, I do not know the work and cannot make any statement about it. 237. Marquesa de Santa Cruz. (Heirs of the Conde de Pie de Concha, Madrid.) Page 121. Plate 36. 238. Condesa de Haro, head and shoulders. (Duquesa de San Carlos, Madrid.) Page 121. Plate 37. 239. General Urrutia. (Prado Museum.) 2 by 1.36. Page 89. 240. Tadeo Bravo Rivero. (Spiridon Gallery, Paris.) Page 125. Plate 40. 241. Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos. (Duque de las Torres, Madrid.) 2.05 by 1.33. Plate 26. Page 15 1 of “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” Page 91. 242. Francisco de Saavedra. (Baron Cochin, Paris.) Page 153 and Plate 59 of “ Goya. Composiciones y Figuras.” Page 93. 243. Pantaleón Perez de Nenin. (Pedro Labat y Arrizabalaga, Madrid.) 2.05 by 1.24. Page 127. 244. General Palafox, equestrian portrait. (Prado Museum.) 2.48 by 2.24. Page 132. 245. Marqués de Caballero. (National Museum of Buda Pesth.) Page 125. 246. Marquesa de Caballero. (Duque de Andria, Madrid.) 1.06 by 0.84. Page 126. 214 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 247. José Manuel Romero, in the dress of a minister of state. (I do not know its present possessor; recently it left Spain.) 1.02 by 0.81. Page 142. Plate 4 1 . 248. Juan Antonio Llórente. (Outside Spain.) i-9obyi.i4. Page 143. Plate 42. 249. Nicolas Guye, French general. (Knoedler Gallery, London, Paris, New York.) Page 144. Plate 43. 250. Victor Guye, nephew of the general mentioned above. (Knoedler Gallery, London, Paris, New York.) Page 145. Plate 44. 251. Lord Wellington, equestrian portrait. (Duke of Wellington. This portrait is preserved in his country seat of Stratfield Saye House, England.) Page 148. Plate 45. 252. Lord Wellington, standing, half length. (Havemeyer collection, New York.) Page 148. 253. Juan Martin, “El Empecinado.” (Luis Navas.) 0.84 by 0.65. Page 149. 254. Baron de Eróles. (This and the other portraits of the series are of very doubtful authenticity. I have mentioned them for their interest as portraits. Artillery Museum, Madrid.) 255. Josefa Bayeu, wife of Goya. (Prado Museum.) 0.81 by 0.56. Page 152. Plate 46. 256. Juan Bautista de Goicoechea. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) Page 123. 257. Narcisa Baraftana de Goicoechea, companion picture to the preceding. (Havemeyer collection, New York.) Page 123. 258. Juan Martin de Goicoechea. (Economic Society of Aragon of Friends of the Country, Zaragoza.) 0.82 by 0.60. 259. Juan Martin de Goicoechea. (Marqués de Casa-Torres, Madrid.) 0.82 by 0.59. Page 152. 260. Juana Galarza de Goicoechea. (Marqués de Casa-Torres, Madrid.) 0.82 by 0.59. Page 152. 26 1 . Duque de Osuna, tenth of his line. (Bonnat Museum, Bayonne, France.) Page 164. 262. Duque de Osuna, sketch for the preceding portrait. (I do not know its possessor.) Page 165. 263. Pepito Corte. (Outside Spain. I cannot state precisely where.) Page 153. Plate 47. Duque de San Carlos. (Office of the Imperial Canal of Aragon, Zaragoza.) 2.80 by 1.25. Page 160. Plate 49. 264. LIST OF PORTRAITS 215 265. Duque de San Carlos, sketch of the head for the large portrait. (Conde de Villagonzalo.) 0.59 by 0.43. Page 160. 266. Duque de San Carlos, small figure. (Marqués de la Torrecilla, Madrid.) 0.77 by 0.60. Page 160. 267. José L. de Munárriz. (Royal Academy of San Fernando.) 0.84 by 0.64. Page 169. Plate 52. 268. An unknown gentleman, who holds in his hand a paper on which may be read: “ Auctibus Reipublicae expulsus.” (Outside Spain.) Page 16 1. 269. An unknown gentleman, resembling by its technique and period the preceding portrait. (I do not know its present possessor.) 270. Ignacio Omulryan, resembling by its technique the two last mentioned. Pacje 162. o 271. An unknown lady. (Conde de Penalver.) (Is mentioned in the supplement to the catalogue of the Exhibition of the Works of Goya, 1900.) 272. Joven Española (Spanish Girl). (Louvre Museum, Paris.) Page 166. 273. An unknown lady, head and shoulders; the head adorned with a black mantilla. (National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin.) Page 165. 274. Duquesa del Parque. (Marquesa de Bermejillo, Madrid.) Page 153- 275. Manuela Girón y Pimentel, Duquesa de Abrantes. (Conde de la Quinta de la Enjarada, Madrid.) 0.92 by 0.07. Page 164. Plate 51. 276. Manuel Garcia de la Prada. (Pacully collection, Paris.) Page 163. 277. Group with various portraits, representing an assembly. (Museum of Castres, France.) Page 174. 278. An unknown gentleman. (Museum of Castres, France.) Page 175. 279. Doctor Arrieta attending Goya. (In a private collection in Paris.) 1. 17 by 0.79. Group of various persons. Of this picture I only know the copy made by Juliá. Page 172. 280. Tiburcio Pérez. (Havemeyer collection, New York.) 1.02 by 0.81. Page 172. Plate 53. 281. Juan Antonio Cuervo. (Durand Ruel Gallery, Paris.) 1.28 by 0.87. Page 172. 282. Ramón Satue, Alcalde de Corte. (Carvallo collection, Tours, France.) 1.50 by 0.85. Page 173. Plate 54. 283. Maria Martinez de Puga. (Knoedler Gallery, London, Paris, New York.) Page 173. 2 1 6 FRANCISCO GOYA Y LUCIENTES 284. Joaquin Maria Ferrer. (Conde de Caudilla, Madrid.) 0.73 by 0.59. Page 178. 285. Manuela de Alvarez Coiñas y Thomas de Ferrer. (Marqués de Barojo, Madrid.) 0.73 by 0.60. Page 178. 286. Leandro Fernández de Moratin. (Marquesa de Silvela.) o.óobyo.49. Pare 1 8 1 . o 287. Manuel Silvela. (Marquesa de Silvela, Madrid.) 0.95 by 0.68. Page 18 1. 288. An unknown lady, head and shoulders. (Formerly belonged to the late Sir Hugh Lane, England.) Page 175. 289. A lady of the Silvela family, head and shoulders. (Marqués de la Vega Inclán.) Page 182. 290. Jacques Galos. Signed and dated in 1826. (Condesa d’Houdetot.) 0.60 by 0.44. Page 182. Plate 55. 291. Juan Bautista de Muguiro. (Conde de Muguiro, Madrid.) 1.02 by 0.85. Page 1S5. Plate 56. 292. José Pio de Molina. Probably the last portrait made by Goya. Of supreme interest. As it has only appeared lately I cannot speak of it in detail in this edition. (In the collection of D. Eduardo A. Rodenas, Madrid.) CHISWICK PRESS : CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND GRIGGS (PRINTERS), LTD. TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON. I I