JERROLD’S 
 
 GUIDE TO THE EXHIBITION. 
 
 HOW TO SEE THE 
 ART TREASURES EXHIBITION; 
 
 I 
 
 A GUIDE, 
 
 .SYSUEMATICALLY AERANGED, TO ENABLE VISITORS TO TAKE 
 A VIEW, AT ONCE RAPID AND COMPLETE, OF THE 
 ART TREASURES PALACE. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 W. BLANCHARD JEREOLD. 
 
 MANCHESTER 
 
 A. IRELAKD AND CO., PEIIfTERS BY STEAM POWER, FALL MALL. 
 
 1857. 
 
POSITION OF CONTENTS, APPROACHES, ETC. 
 
 PAINTINGS BY ANCIENT MASTERS: Saloons A, B, and C, on 
 the South Side of the Building ; also in Saloon H ; in South Side of 
 Clock Gallery, and South Staircase to ditto, and Railway Gallery. 
 
 PAINTINGS BY MODERN MASTERS : Saloons D, E, and F, on 
 the North Side of the Building ; in the North Side of Clock Gallery, 
 and North Staircase to ditto. 
 
 THE CLOCK GALLERY : East End of the Building, near the Grand 
 Entrance. 
 
 THE ORIENTAL COURT: North-west Saloon. — Entrance from North- 
 west Side of Transept. 
 
 WATER-COLOUR DRAWINGS : West Saloons, behind the Orchestra. 
 — Entrance from Transept. 
 
 HERTFORD COLLECTION : South-west Saloon. — Entrance from 
 
 South-west Side of Transept. 
 
 GALLERY OF BRITISH PORTRAITS : North and South Walls of 
 the Nave. 
 
 SCULPTURE : Nave and Transept. 
 
 MUSEUM OF ORNAMENTAL ART, including THE SOULAGES 
 COLLECTION: Nave. 
 
 THE MEYRICK COLLECTION OF ARMOUR : Nave. 
 
 PHOTOGRAPHS : North and South Transept Galleries. 
 
 HISTORICAL MINIATURES : South Transept Gallery. 
 
 ORIGINAL DRAWINGS & SKETCHES, BY THE OLD MASTERS: 
 North Transept Gallery. 
 
 ENGRAVINGS, ETCHINGS, PRINTS, LITHOGRAPHS, CHROMO- 
 LITHOGRAPHS, &c.: North and South Transept Galleries. 
 
 REFRESHMENT ROOMS: 
 
 First Class — Entrance from North Side of Transept. 
 
 Second Class — Entrance from Railway Gallery, and also from South 
 Side of Transept. 
 
 BOTANICAL GARDENS — Entrance from Court on North Side of 
 Transept. 
 
 GRAND ENTRANCE, at the Eastern End of the Building. 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2015 
 
 https://archive.org/details/jerroldsguidetoe00artt_1 
 
HOW TO SEE THE AET-TEEASUEES EXHIBITION 
 
 INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 We propose to conduct the visitor through the Art-Treasures Exhibition o)i 
 a systematic plan, — to point out to him the most striking specimens of the Old 
 Masters in Saloons A, B, and C (on his left as he enters the palace) ; the 
 Nfodern Masters assembled in Saloons D, E, and E (on his right) ; then to take 
 him across the Transept into the Oriental Court ; thence through the Water 
 Colours to the Hertford Collection ; afterwards through the Gallery of British 
 Historical Portraits, the Photographs, the Sculptures (including busts of 
 eminent men, living and dead) , F urniture, Carvings, the wonderful Soulages 
 (Mllection, the Armoury, the specimens of China, Porcelain, Glass, &c., the 
 Ivory Carvings, the Gold and Silver Work, Bronzes, &c., the Mather Collection 
 of Miniatures and Cameos, the valuable Historical Miniatures, the Engravings 
 on Wood, Copper, and Steel — and, finally, the original Drawings and Sketches 
 by the Old Masters. There is here a splendid history of art from its birth to the 
 present time, told in noble works, and arranged by gentlemen whom special 
 knowledge has qualified for their respective departments. Xor should the 
 visitor enter the building unprepared for a lesson. There are truths in this 
 building which it would be well to treasure up and carry home. The question 
 is not whether there are 44,000 square yards of lining paper, or three quarters 
 of a ton of copper and zinc tacks in the building to whicli Manchester has in- 
 vited the cultivated and intellectual men of Europe. It is for the observer to 
 inquire whether or not the managers of the Art-Treasures Exhibition have suc- 
 ceeded in constructing a hall in Avhich the wealth of colour, and design, and form, 
 they have to display, may be fairly studied. The object in view was, not to 
 construct a great building, but to protect and arrange great works for exhibition. 
 Therefore, we hardly care to decide whether the exterior of the building, witii 
 its arched galleries, its red and white masonry, and its low wings, is in good 
 or bad taste. The effect as the visitor approaches the entrance from Trafford 
 Bar, is certainly not imposing. Yet, behind these brick walls, all the choicer 
 gems are gathered, upon which the princely aristocracy, the wealthy merchants 
 of England have, for many years past, expended no mean part of their fortunes. 
 As the presence of these gems in England attests the wealth and culture of our 
 race, so their appearance in Manchester is honourable evidence of the regard 
 their professors have for the art-culture of the people. 
 
6 
 
 THE GENERAL EFFECT. 
 
 The scene within, when the visitor has fairly cleared the turnstiles, is a 
 wondrous contrast to the building’s exterior. One long central gallery or nave, 
 with its deep coloured walls, its bronzed columns, its Greek and Vitruviaii 
 ornamentation ; its cold blue panelled roof ; the long line of sky, tapering like a 
 fairy wand of silver to the distant organ at the further end ; the passage, formed 
 by groups of milk-white sculpture ; the restless, chattering crowd ; the glittering 
 cases of gold and silver work, and sparkling jewels ; the martial armour, mounted 
 imposingly upon modelled steeds ; and, looking down upon all, the living faces of 
 the gTeat, and brave, and good of England, make up an effect on which we have 
 better reason to pride ourselves — aye — than upon the industrial wonders of the 
 world the year 1851 sav/ in Hyde Park ; for we have here not only matchless 
 pictures and perfect sculpture, but also the history of art and industry told in its 
 choicest works. We have the great story, from the first rude elaboration of iron 
 plates to protect warriors, to the triumph of the engTaver’s genius ; the rude 
 delf ware, and Eaifaelle and Palissy wares. Here are spread the heirlooms of 
 the twelfth century to the civilised nineteenth ; the exquisite Limoges enamels, 
 defying the skill of any living fingers. The show is a glorious one, in truth — a 
 show with a wondrous moral in it. Let us pass at once to take a nearer view. 
 
 It is our object to give the visitor a clear notion of the history of art, as 
 shown in this Exhibition ; and to this end we shall beg him to follow us straight 
 down the nave to the transept, and there, unmindful for the present of the many 
 objects that may attract his eye, to turn sharply to the left, and through the 
 doorway on his left into 
 
 SALOONS A, B, C. 
 
 He is here, in Saloon A, in the nursery of Art ; and we would beg him to seat 
 himself for a few minutes at this point, while w'e endeavour to prepare him a 
 little for the journey through the ages he is about to undertake. For, in pro- 
 ceeding to afford our readers a complete review of the contents of the Art- 
 Treasures Exhibition, it should be understood that we address ourselves more 
 particularly to those persons who have never wandered through the gorgeous 
 galleries of the Louvre, who are strangers to the Pitti Palace ; who have never 
 pressed the floors of the Venetian Galleries, nor found their way to the Art 
 Collections of the German capitals. For to these there is much in our Exhibi- 
 tion which, left unexplained, must remain wholly incomprehensible. The 
 glorious colours of Eubens, the tender tints of Yandyk, and the patent beauties 
 of the Modern School, appeal to the untutored in art, and charm them — if not 
 precisely as they charm the learned connoisseur. But Giotto, unexplained, is 
 passed by. It is with an effort that the visitor will leave the grove of Sculpture, 
 backed by England’s worthies, in which he stands ; but the opportunity before 
 him is without precedent, and should not be trifled with. From the turmoil 
 
:aiid the dust of life — from the whirr of wheels ever revolving, and the hiss 
 and heat of steam — from creaking cranks, gently dropping cottons destined 
 to adorn the sable races of the far south — from the cares of pounds and 
 pence, and from the chaffering of the market place — ^let him for a while remove 
 himself, and, trusting to our guidance, wander to cycles long since gathered to 
 the past, there to note the small and quaint beginnings from which the glorious 
 arts that make this Palace precious, have sprung. We shall find that, as we 
 fondly hold in manhood the poorest efforts of our early spring ; as our feet linger, 
 when time has scarred us, upon the fields where we gathered wild flowers, and 
 wove daisy chains — so the modem student turns to the cradle of his art, and 
 lingers over all evidences which mark its infancy. With a knowledge of this 
 infancy, he shall turn with a new zest to the successive stages of Art develop- 
 ment. 
 
 We are in Saloon A, devoted to the earliest Italian and German painters 
 who flourished before the year 1000. Against the end wall are the samples 
 which the promoters of the Art-Treasures Exhibition have been able to gather 
 together of Art in its cradle. First of all, let the visitor remark the contributions 
 of Mr. Dilke, Sir W. Eidley, and the Earl of Pembroke. Mr. Dilke’s contri- 
 bution is a very interesting section of wall painting, that was taken from a Roman 
 sepulchre. It illustrates, together with the contributions of the Earl of Pem- 
 broke, and Sir M. Ridley, Augustan Art. The sample contributed by the Earl 
 of Pembroke is from the temple of Juno, at Rome; and, in immediate proximity, 
 Mr. Scharf has arranged the specimens of the formal, church-ridden Byzantine 
 school, contributed by Prince Albert and others. No. 5, “ The Death of the 
 Virgin,” supposed to have been painted in the thirteenth century; No. 8, “The 
 Sudarium,” surrounded by ten pictures relating to the Legend of King Aligarus, 
 inscribed with Greek characters, and painted probably a century and a half later 
 than the foregoing. “ The Nativity” (4), painted, it is presumed, in the 17th 
 eentury; “The Death of St. Ephraim Syrus ” (9), probably of the 11th or 
 12th century ; and the “ Monastery of Solowetzk, on the White Sea ” (6), 
 supposed to belong to the 14th century — represent, in the Art-Treasures 
 Exhibition, the Byzantine School. Between this school, the he^d-quarters 
 of which were Byzantium, or Constantinople, and the Greeks of classic 
 times, there is an absolute void in art. We wander through centuries of 
 darkness from Apelles to the foundation of Modern Art, based upon that of the 
 Persians and the Saracens. On the shores of the Bosphorus, bound down by 
 the strong laws of the Greek church, priests took up the pencil, and continued 
 the singular and quaint figures before which we have conducted the visitor. 
 These figures have only the faintest relation to nature ; but then, it has been 
 fairly urged, it was not human nature, which their creators sought to embody. 
 They aspired to realise the Divine image, while the Chresmalogia bound them 
 within narrow rules ; rules that, to the present moment, bend the religious 
 painters of the Greek church, as the modern Russian triptych of brass, with 
 blue ground, at hand (11a), very clearly demonstrates. As strong a hold does the 
 Greek church still hold over the painter-monks, at this present moment, as when 
 
8 
 
 yonder “ Death of the Virgin ” was drawn. So fettered, how should it advance-V 
 The early Christian church was the relentless enemy of Art, and bore heavily upon 
 it through centuries. The visitor can watch this influence for himself as he passes 
 the specimens here presented of the early Christian Art of Byzantium and Italy. 
 He will especially remark that all the subjects were painted upon a flat gold 
 ground, from which the coloured figures are strangely relieved. It was a high 
 honour for a hero to have his features painted upon a gold shield, and hung in 
 a public place ; and this form of honour — this early recognition of the precious 
 metal as best able to afford distinction to the great — was long after retained as a 
 sort of nimbus or shield, faded, from the solid gold plate to the mere ring of gold^ 
 and then disappeared altogether. Of the solid nimbus, the visitor may remai’k 
 many specimens along the west wall. Gold, too, represented the sky, and trees 
 were painted against it ; but, by degrees, fresh truth to nature prevailed ; gold 
 was confined to the borders of dresses ; and then disappeared from painting 
 altogether. Golden tints about sacred heads replaced the solid gold, as may be 
 observed in the paintings of Correggio, Titian, and Tintoretto. 
 
 It will be seen that, in these early paintings, light and shade were little 
 attended to. Even Cimabue, who, together with Giotto, has the merit of hav- 
 ing cast the fetters of the Greek church from art, began by painting figures 
 without shadow. By slow degrees did art advance in those times ; and it was 
 before the beginning of the 15th century that a genius arose, with eyes to see, 
 and the power to render, true masses of shadow. This genius was Masaccio, 
 and to him both Eaphael and Michael Angelo were indebted. But before tJiem 
 came the renowned painters of northern Italy, as Perugino and Leonardo da 
 Vinci. Their severe studies of the antique gave them a strength, of which 
 their works bear indisputable evidence. We notice these progresses, that the 
 visitor, as he passes along the southern walls of the gallery, may recognise and 
 examine them in the Italian schools, and subsequently in the German, Flemish, 
 and French schools, with samples of which the northern wall is covered. When 
 the visitor stands at last before the glowing colours of Titian; before the 
 wonders of Michael Angelo, Eaphael, and Correggio, he will be in the presence 
 of masters, unrivalled, even now, in the realms of art. Then, along the northern 
 v/alls, he will trace the centuries of art (corresponding to those on the southern 
 wall) as developed in the north of Europe; the Van Eycks, Albert Durer, 
 Quintin Matsys, &c. But we must not advance too rapidly. The great lessons 
 in this long southern gallery are worth more than a passing note or two. We 
 are still before the Byzantine school ; and while making every thankful ac- 
 knowledgment for the specimens afforded to us, must remind the visitor — the 
 antravelled visitor — that these few pictures convey to the mind only the 
 faintest notions of the splendours of this early but glorious dawn of art at 
 Byzantium. The school expressed itself in colossal Mosaic pictures in the 
 old churches of Greece and Eavenna, not simply in small works and illuminated 
 manuscripts. The glow of the school’s oriental origin shone in it ; and it is in 
 its more ambitious works that we must seek its history of four centuries. The 
 specimens available, however, fairly considered, the visitor will allow that Mr. 
 Scharf has made the most of them. 
 
9 
 
 Let us now pass fi’om the Byzantine to the early Italian school, as founded 
 by Cimabue and Griotto. The specimens of this school, here exhibited, are neces- 
 sarily poor representatives of it ; since, in the time of these authors, art was 
 the slave of the church, and worked exclusively to embellish her sacred edifices. 
 There are, undoubtedly, two Giotto’s here (24 and 32), but then they are simply 
 fragments of frescoes, cut from the walls of the Church of the Carnival, at 
 Florence. And then there are “ The Last Supper” (30), from the Bisenzio col- 
 lection ; “ The Death of the Virgin” (66), where the Apostles kneel about Mary’s 
 recumbent figure, with Christ above, and holding the soul of the Virgin, typified 
 by a praying child ; and “ The Crucifixion” (26), all attributed, except the last, but 
 on doubtful evidence, to Giotto. It will suffice, however, for the visitor to remark 
 in these pictures the progress in art they illustrate, when compared with the 
 Byzantine school. Here, more especially in the two undoubted Giottos, we 
 remark a freedom and a grace, in which the painter-monks of Byzantium were 
 altogether deficient. As further evidence of progress, let the visitor also remark 
 the “Altar-piece,” by Taddeo Gaddi (47) ; the second specimen of Giotto’s remark- 
 able pupil (37), Simone Memmi’s “ Christ returning to his Parents,” dated 
 1342 ; Cimabue’s triptych (7), representing the “ Madonna and Child enthroned., 
 attended by Angels and the pictures of Duccio da Sienna (11 and 12). These 
 works, while, we repeat, they cannot satisfy the enquiries of the serious student 
 of art, — for Giotto, for instance, cannot be fairly appreciated north of the Alps, — 
 will nevertheless afford to vast masses of people, if earnestly studied, some clue 
 to the great story of the pencil, so gloriously told in the Exhibition. 
 
 Let us now point the visitor’s attention to various pictures which he should 
 notice in the three saloons, which stretch from the point on which he stands, 
 almost to the eastern extremity of the building. 
 
 We take the pictures chronologically as they are numbered — bearing in mind 
 to draw the attention of the visitor as he proceeds, to the more remarkable 
 specimens of the various old masters. Let him remark, before starting, that the 
 pictures are so arranged as to offer, upon opposite walls, the contemporary works 
 of Italy and Germany. Italian art, for instance, is confined throughout, and 
 most appropriately, to the southern or right-hand wall of the gallery, — German, 
 Flemish, and French art finding its room opposite. AVe now start on our 
 journey from before Masaccio’s own portrait (51), painted by himself. Masaccio, 
 who may be considered the earliest of portrait painters, flourished early in 
 the fifteenth century. The “ Study of an undraped figure” (49) is also his. Let the 
 visitor now study (72) the exhibition of a relic containing Portraits of Cosmo 
 de Medici, his son Piero, and his grandsons Lorenzo and Guiliano, by Pesellino, 
 a contemporary of Masaccio ; (71) “ St. Peter and St. John healing the lame man,” 
 by Fra Filippo Lippi (time 1412-1469), and 65, 70, and 71, by the same 
 artist, also his “The Martyrdom of St. Sebastian (69) ; “The Adoration of the 
 Kings” (78), by Sandro Botticelli (date 1447-1515), and (74) by the same master, 
 subject, “The story of Ulysses and the Sirens,” said to have originally formed 
 part of a chest given formerly, filled with presents, at weddings ; (64) “Virgin 
 and Child surrounded by Angels and Saints,” by Sano di Pietro (about the middle 
 
10 
 
 of the 15th century) ; (68) “The Sacrifice of the Mass,” an altar-piece by Gosmo 
 Koselli, of the fifteenth century ; (95) by Matteo da Siena, who worked towards 
 the close of the fifteenth century, subject, “Madonna and Child, with the Infant St. 
 John ; ” (70) Pietro Perugino — “ Noli me Tangere,” and four following numbers, as 
 also 109 and 110 — ^pictures that “ seem to be fatted in the very atmosphere of purity 
 and Christian tenderness.” We are reminded here, that even this painter was 
 accused of impiety ; and that it was against the art of his time that Savonarola 
 “preached his stern crusade in 1497, and lighted the bonfires in the market-place 
 of Florence, at which many of the most excellent works of Florentine artists, in 
 painting and sculpture, including the busts and portraits of many Florentine 
 women, were committed to the flames.” From Pietro Perugino the visitor will 
 advance to the pictures of Leonardo da Vinci, the great painter who flourished 
 at the end of the 15th and beginning of the 16th centuries. The specimens of this 
 master, in the Exhibition, are numbered 104, 135, 143, 144, 183. He should be 
 carefully studied. At once painter, sculptor, architect, engineer, and author, he 
 had the strength to paint in competition with Michael Angelo in the same hall at 
 Florence. He died early in the sixteenth century, in France, whither he had 
 been invited by Francis the First. His masterpiece is “ The Last Supper,” on the 
 wall of the refectory of S. M. della Grazie, now nearly destroyed. His works here 
 offered to the notice of the visitor are, (143) “Portrait of a Youth, Antonio 
 Beltraffio”; (135) “Madonna, with Infant Christ, and St. John”; (144) “La 
 Vierge aux Eochers,” a small study on wood; (104) “St, Jerome in the 
 Desert”; (183) Portrait of “Mona Lisa” (formerly in the possession of the 
 poet Wordsworth). From Leonardo, the visitor passes to Fra Bartolommeo. 
 Let him note the following: — (92) “Madonna, with Infant Christ, and St. 
 John the Baptist; ” (157) “ Marriage of St. Catherine ; ” and (147) Eaphael and Fra 
 Bartolommeo, “ The Legend of the Cintola ; the Ascension of the Virgin 
 from the Tomb, and Dropping her Girdle to St. Thomas,” formerly in the 
 Cathedral of Pisa. Keeping still to the southern wall, and leaving the northern 
 for subsequent inspection, the visitor passes “ The Coronation of the Virgin,” and 
 “ The Holy Family ” (113-56), by Lorenzo di Credi ; “ Portrait of an Old Man” 
 (182), by Baccio Bandinelli, of the end of the fifteenth and beginning of the six- 
 teenth century; Marcello Venusti’s “ Scourging of Christ ”(186) (a reduced 
 copy of the famous fresco by Sebastiano del Piombo, after the design by 
 Michael Angelo) ; and (224) a “ Silentium,” after Michael Angelo; (107) “Holy 
 Family, with Four Angels holding Scrolls,” and (184) “ Christ and the Woman of 
 Samaria,” by Michael Angelo Buonarotti; “ The Story of Francesco da Eimini,” 
 a tempera picture of Michael Angelo’s period (219) ; three specimens of Sebastiano 
 del Piombo, marked respectively 161, 241, 249 ; “ Andrew del Sarto’s portrait” 
 by himself (174) ; and, by the same artist (173), “Joseph Discovering himself to 
 his Brethren,” “Holy Family” (212) ; Da Volterra’s small “Descent from the 
 Cross” (201), and “The Entombment” (179), Pontormo’s “Venus and 
 Cupid” (170). Here let the visitor pause to note the progress of painting in 
 Italy down to this period, viz., 1493-1558. The Times' critic thus touches upon 
 it 
 
11 
 
 ‘‘ If real spirituality lingered in any school of art after the youth of Raphael, it 
 must he looked for in that of Bologna, whose great master, Francia, represented 
 here by several fine and important works, in none appears so eminently and cha- 
 racteristically pure and devout as in a small predella picture of the ‘ Baptism of 
 Christ ’ (132), which many may overlook as one of the series of predella pictures by 
 Perugino, among which it hangs. Small as it is, it is by far the finest example 
 of Francia in the Exhibition. But Francia left no school behind him. His 
 purity and spirituality were not transmitted even to his own son, in whose hands 
 they degenerated into mawkishness. If we wish to estimate how utterly devotion 
 had departed from even the Tuscan and Roman schools, while Raphael still lived 
 as a teacher and guide, we have but to glance at the large works which fill the 
 remainder of the wall of this first saloon — the huge altar-pieces of Innocenzo da 
 Imola (155-159), for example — of which one would surely have been sufiScient, 
 or the still more heartless work of Girolamo Marches! da Cotignola (174), the 
 crowded and elaborate Academicisms of Daniele Da Volterra (201, 179), or the 
 colossal decorative nudities of Pontormo (170). If we would see art still vital 
 we must turn to Venice.” 
 
 We must now invite the visitor to pass rapidly forward to where Raphael shines 
 from the walls. In the centre of the wall space, marking the year 1500, is the 
 famous boyish painting by Raphael (123), “The Crucifixion,” now in the 
 possession of Lord Ward, painted before the artist had completed his seventeenth 
 year; next to this is the celebrated Gabrielli Raphael, “The Agony in the 
 Garden” (134) ; also another picture on the same subject, formerly in the Orleans 
 collection; — it is a small fragment of the predella of Raphael’s “Altar-piece,” 
 executed for the nuns of St. Antonio, at Perugia (137), and is interesting, as 
 having been hung for many years over the writing table of Rogers, the poet. The 
 Raphaels, let the visitor remark, are 121, 123, 126, 128, 131, 133-4, 136-41. The 
 rest of the space on this southern wall of the saloon is given up to works of Giulio 
 Romano (160-163), — “the immediate successors of the great luminaries of the 
 first part of the sixteenth century.” The visitor may now pass rapidly forward — 
 past Sassoferrato’s “Madonna and Child” (357), Zucchero’s “Don Carlos, when 
 young” (226), — past Crivelli’s “Madonna and Child Enthroned,” and a “Pieta” 
 (191-192), Bellini’s “Portrait of a Young Man,” and “ St. Francis in the Desert” 
 (193-194), Giorgione’s “ Daughter of Herodias between St. Francis, with the Head 
 of St. John” (199), his “Music Party” (202), “Judgment of Paris” (203), 
 “Caesar Receiving the Head of Pompey” (205), “Titian’s Mistress” (206), 
 Sebastian del Piombo’s “Holy Family” (213), and, lastly, halt before Titian’s 
 splendid works. Of the Titians here set before the visitors, the Times has thus 
 written : — 
 
 “ Here are no fewer than 27 pictures ascribed to his hand. Of these we may 
 at once dismiss a considerable number as palpable copies — first and foremost the 
 six portraits of the Caesars (264-269), versions by an inferior hand of a portion 
 of that series of heads which formerly belonged to Charles I., and of which some 
 of the originals are now in the possession of Lady Marian Alford. With equal 
 confidence we may set aside the portrait of ‘ Verdizotte’ (255) and the ‘ Duke 
 
12 
 
 of Alva’ (272). But, this done, there remain works enough to represent 
 Titian here as he deserves to he represented. We have the sketch for the large 
 picture in the Escurial, known as ‘ La Gloria di Tiziano,’ painted by order of 
 Charles V. for the convent of Yuste, to which he retired on his abdication. 
 Whether it was this sketch or the large work which by his own request was held 
 up to his dying eyes we know not. But there is nothing here which more 
 powerfully proclaims the power of the painter in splendid fusion of colour and 
 hardihood of form. Above is the central glory of Paradise, with the Father and 
 the Son, invested with the globe and sceptre of sovereignty, to whom the 
 Virgin meekly ascending looks back, mediatingly, to earth, while lawgivers and 
 prophets are grouped below, and, ushered by angels into the awful presence, a 
 king kneels reverently, his crown doffed and his sceptre laid by his side. Then — 
 to pass from Heaven to earth— we have from Buckingham Palace, the 
 rich wooded landscape, with a drove of cattle, filling up the hollow way 
 in the foreground, and a sky in which sunbeams dart from behind intercepting 
 cloud — one of those wholes of subdued, yet splendid impressiveness, of which 
 Titian caught the secret in his mountain birthplace at Cadoro. Another sketch, 
 even more remarkable for power, is the ‘ Pape of Proserpine ’ (sent by the 
 speaker), where the four black horses of the infernal chariot paw the river into 
 foam, and one of her attendant nymphs catches at the wheel, in vain effort to 
 stay the gloomy king, who is clasping Proserpine in his arms. 
 
 “ ‘ Titian’s daughter, holding up a Casket,’ (277) was one of the glories of the 
 Orleans Gallery, under the name of ‘ La Casette de Titian,’ and is now the 
 property of Earl de Grey. There is a better replica of this subject in the Berlin 
 Museum where the maiden lifts up a plateau of flowers, instead of the casket. 
 
 “ Lord Darnley’s large picture of the ‘ Eape of Europa’ (259), broad and un- 
 finished as it is, is perhaps the finest example of the painter here exhibited. It 
 belongs to his later period, but glows with a flush of colour, and shows through- 
 out a mastery of even the failing hand of this great master which dirt cannot 
 conceal, and which, fortunately, cleaning has not marred. It is worth the while 
 of the painter to look into this picture, which is fortunately hung near the eye, 
 that he may see by what slight indications of the brush a desired effect may be 
 conveyed when the painter is thoroughly possessed by his intention, and perfect 
 master of his material. 
 
 “ Of the sacred subjects the best here is the ‘ Marriage of St. Catherine’ (278), 
 from the collection of Lucien Bonaparte, reminding one of, though inferior to, 
 the great composition of the same subject in Vienna. But it is in the two por- 
 traits of Ariosto (257) and Alessandro de Medici (256) — the former contributed 
 by Lord Darnley, the latter by Her Majesty, from Hampton Court — that we 
 may best learn the magic of Titian’s power, in giving individuality of character, 
 with all the magic of broad and mellow colour. In such works is united, per- 
 haps, the highest conceivable perfection of the conceptional and technical, 
 elements of the painter’s art. 
 
 “ Herein consisted, indeed, the crowning achievement of the Venetian school,, 
 when it rose above mere splendid decoration. To this, or to portraiture, living 
 
13 
 
 art was henceforth limited. The religious pictures of the Venetians are rather 
 magnificent church decoration than helps to devotion.” 
 
 From the Titians the visitor may pass onwards to the Tintorettos, and to 
 the performances of Paolo Veronese. Titian’s pupils occupy the interval. 
 Let the visitor note, however, ]\{oretto’s “Armourer at his Anvil ”(255), 
 as a fine specimen of what the great man’s pupil could do. It has been 
 said that there is no finer portrait than this, for simple, manly ren- 
 dering, in the whole of this great gallery. There are about a dozen pictures by 
 Tintoretto, the daring. Only three or four are worthy examples of the master. 
 Take, for instance, the “ Sacrifice of Isaac ” (258), “ Esther before Ahasuerus” 
 (312), “ The Temptation ” (313), &c. The Venetians said that Tintoretto had 
 three pencils, one of gold, one of silver, and one of brass. The Tmes’ critic 
 points out the productions of the three pencils : — 
 
 “ Every one may have been used in turn in ‘ the Nine Muses,’ magnificent, 
 fully developed, undraped female figures, flung about in a sea of cloud. At first, 
 the colossal scale and the dash of execution rather repel than invite careful 
 examination of the work. But if we get over the first impulse, we shall be 
 repaid by discovering the beauty that is enshrined in their gigantic forms and 
 faces, the grand sweeping line of the composition, and in the centre an altogether 
 original conception of Apollo, the centre of the group. At first, you think the 
 Sun-god absent, only represented by the central orb, which darts its beams on 
 every side, lighting up the edges of rolling clouds, and playing upon the colossal 
 Muses. But as you look you become aware of a godlike face, forming the centre 
 of that splendour, from whose eyes and brow those rays are shooting, the 
 brightest from his brow. No one before Tintoretto had coneeived the idea of 
 painting the Sun-god in the sun. In comparison wdth this piece of magnificent 
 mythology, the ‘Leda’ and the ‘Milky Way’ seem uninteresting. Of the 
 portraits, two (296 and 300) give no adequate idea of the painter’s power. It is all 
 kept for the third, — Lord Abercorn’s picture, a keen man with grizzled brow, 
 overhanging eyes where the fire of youth still burns, and a long white beard 
 flowing down over an ermine-bordered robe of crimson cut-velvet, painted with 
 a splendour of colour, of which no words can give an idea. And yet, gorgeous 
 as the dress is, it is secondary to the face, so full of relentless determination and 
 piercing insight. When we see such a picture as this we are led to think that 
 only with such sitters, so arrayed, was such painting possible.” 
 
 The visitor now passes to the exhibited specimens of Paolo Veronese. 
 Of these examples the more prominent are the four large allegorical com- 
 positions from the Orleans collection. The subjects are “ Le Kespect ” 
 (285), “L’Amour Heureux” (286), “ Le Degout” (288), “ L’Infidelite ” 
 (287). They are not considered first-rate specimens of this Venetian 
 master. 
 
 “ Here, too,” we are reminded, “ is the large sketch from Mr. Eogers’s col- 
 lection of ‘ The Magdalene Anointing the Saviour’s Feet ’ (306) — the study for 
 the great picture in the Durazzo Palace at Genoa, ‘ The Eebecca at the Well’ 
 (304), and ‘The Marriage of St. Catherine’ (280), the former exhibited at the 
 
14 
 
 British Institution in 1856 by Lord Yai’borougli, both genuine works of the 
 painter, with enough of his gem-like colour preserved from the hands of the 
 cleaner to give us an imperfect conception of what their splendour may once 
 have been. A raw and recent-looking half-length female portrait, with hair of 
 that warm auburn which we should call ‘ cavotty ’ — attributed to Paris Bordone 
 (A.D. 1500-1570), and a weak treatment of the ‘Baptism of Christ’ (193), by 
 Baptista Franco (A.D. 1458-1561) — a, painter who made a feeble attempt to 
 combine the style and colour of the Venetian and Roman schools, with three 
 unimportant examples of Bassano (291, 276, 284), complete the series of 
 Venetian painters whose original power — ^after stooping from the high region in 
 which moved the Bellinis, Giorgione, Titian, and Tintoretto to the ignoble sub- 
 jects and unidealized rendering of still life and low life of the Bassano family — 
 degenerated into vicious and destructive mannerism by the close of the 16th 
 century. Zucchero carried some reflex of the magic of Venetian colour with 
 him to England, where he became one of the favourite painters of Elizabeth. 
 We should have noticed in its place a fine portrait by Pordenone (171), the con- 
 temporary and rival of Titian, of a young Venetian gentleman, full of thoughtful 
 and refined beauty.” 
 
 Hence the visitor passes to the large collection of works from the school of 
 Bologna, at the head of which stand the Caracci ; of this school little notice 
 need be taken. The visitor should remark, however, a “ Madonna and Child 
 adored by Saints ” (325), by Ludovico Caracci, for it has strength and dignity 
 in its treatment. Then there are the works of Annibale Carraci, including the 
 well known “Three Marys” (310), described as the first work of the school to 
 which its author belonged. But see how rapidly the painter could descend from 
 something like sublimity of conception to the details of a “ Butcher’s Shop,” 
 containing portraits of the Caracci Family (342). The visitor will now turn to 
 the sweet and tender canvasses of Guido Reni, who carries us nearly to the 
 middle of the 17th century. The Guidos are, “ Cleopatra and the Asp ” (344) ^ 
 “ Assumption of the Virgin ” (311), “ The Assumption ” (362), “ Europa and 
 the Bull” “Venus attended by Cupid” (362), Half-length figure of “St. 
 Sebastian ” (343), “ Salome receiving the head of St. John the Baptist ” (361), 
 “Infant Christ sleeping on the Cross ” (319). We now beg to conduct the 
 visitor with rapidity through the re naining specimens of the more modern 
 Italian school ; for it is a gradual, but unmistakeable descent. He will pass 
 fcur Albanis, viz.: “The Expulsion,” “ A Riposo,” “The Judgment of Paris,” 
 and “Cupids with Torches” (344-347) ; specimens of Domenichino, including his 
 “David and Goliah ” (248), “St.John the Evangelist” (341), “Grand Land- 
 scape” (337), specimens of Guercino (reaching to the middle of the 17th 
 century) including “The Magdalen” (332), “Christina of Sweden” (353), 
 “Lot and his daughters ” (.365) ,“ The Martyrdom of St. Lawrence” (370), 
 “ Portrait of a Cardinal ” (363) ; specimens of Correggio, with whom we 
 return to the beginning of the 16th century. These specimens are not, 
 it is true, so numerous as the admirers of this great painter could have 
 wished, but they will suflice to give the visitor some sense of his power. For 
 
15 
 
 other specimens he may at a future time turn to our national gallery. “ They 
 include,” however, to quote the Tirms' critic yet once more, “ works of high 
 and peculiar interest, particularly the colossal angels’ heads (166, 167), in 
 fresco, from Lord Ward’s collection. These heads undoubtedly formed part of 
 the celebrated decorations of the apse of the Church of San Giovanni at Parma, 
 removed in the last century for the purpose of enlarging the choir. They are 
 deserving of careful study as exhibiting the breadth which the painter put into 
 work intended to be seen from a distance, and as examples of masterly skill in 
 indication of form by the simplest and largest means. Here, too, is the cele- 
 brated ‘ Reading Madonna,’ the repetition of that still more famous one of the 
 Dresden Gallery. This picture is little, if at all, inferior in serene expression, 
 melting sweetness (ff colour, and perfection of modelling, to the Dresden picture. 
 The background is much fuller than the Dresden picture of detail, due probably, 
 in great measure, to the Roman painter Vallati, who recently restored the pic- 
 ture at Rome. Its history is curious. When it was originally purchased by 
 the person from whom Lord Ward obtained it, it had another picture in distemper 
 painted entirely over it. Probably, the first purchaser had detected traces of 
 the underpainting when he bought the picture. Be this as it may, he had the 
 upper picture removed, and the Correggio was revealed. But on this beautiful 
 work coming to light, the seller laid claim to a restitution of the picture, as not 
 being that which he had sold for we forget what small amount of scudi. The 
 cause was in litigation for several years, and ultimately, if we remember aright, 
 the purchaser’s full right over the picture was confirmed. But the Pope forbade 
 its removal from his dominions, and it was only by the personal influence of 
 Lord Ward that the embargo was at length taken off, and the picture given up 
 to him in exchange for his English guineas. Beyond doubt the picture is 
 masterly, and, after close examination of it, with the recollections of the Dres- 
 den picture present to us, we cannot detect any marks of inferiority to that 
 celebrated work in Lord Ward’s repetition. The sweet little head of ‘ The 
 Virgin Kissing the Child’ (168), from Lord Carlisle’s collection, is full of the 
 peculiar tenderness and grace of the master, visible even on the infinitesimal 
 scale of this diminutive oval ; the fine portrait of the Sculptor, ‘ Baccio Ban- 
 dinelli’ (182), from Hampton Court, is no doubt familiar to most of our 
 readers.” 
 
 From Correggio the visitor may turn to Salvator Rosa’s powerful classic land- 
 scapes, marked 772, 805, 770, 873, 775-777 ; and then, with a glance at the two 
 specimens of Spagnoletto (803), leave behind him the Italian school. * ^There are 
 still Italian painters of altar-pieces living, but the soul is gone, and the hand is 
 feeble. ^ 
 
 Turn we now to the northern wall of the galler;f5^ where we shall find 
 
 THE SOUTHERN SCHOOLS. 
 
 The specimens of the early Cologne school will probably not greatly interest the 
 ordinary visitor. They are indeed chiefly remarkable in contrast with the con- 
 
16 
 
 temporary productions of Italy, hung opposite. We should recommend the 
 visitor to pass them rapidly in review, noticing the following : — “ St. Catherine of 
 Alexandria, and St. Matthew and St. John the Evengelists” (380), by Meister 
 Stephan, painted about the middle of the 15th century; “ St. Peter and Dorothea” 
 (44:1), by Meister Cristoph, date 1471 ; “ The Infant Saviour Learning to Walk,” 
 by Martin Schaffner (427), painted in the early part of the sixteenth century ; 
 “Pilate W^ashing his Hands,” by Michael Wohlgemuth, date 14344519; “An 
 Altar-piece” (386), by Griinewald Asschaffenberg, date 1450-1510; and “The 
 Elector of Saxony, Luther and the Eeformers ” (463), by Lucas Cranach, date 
 1470-1553. It should be remarked that towards the close of the fourteenth 
 century, Meister Wilhelm was the chief of the Cologne school, but he is said to 
 have been surpassed by his pupil, Meister Stephan. There is delicacy in the 
 colour of these pictures, and grace of form, let the visitor observe, as well as a 
 peculiarly placid and pure expression in the heads, which, as well as the 
 draperies, are quite free from that contortion and ugliness to which the Flemish 
 and Nuremberg schools showed so overpowering a tendency. We have already 
 called the visitor’s attention to the Yan Eycks in this collection; and, more 
 especially, to the masterpiece of the two brothers, “ and the greatest picture in 
 the Flemish school “ The Mystic Lamb” (375) — of which the Exhibition con- 
 tains the only perfect copy. These works should be attentively studied, as a 
 product of the early part of the fifteenth century ; and then we must beg the 
 visitor to pass rapidly onward to the pictures of Hans Holbein. The two por- 
 traits of “ Francis the First ” (461-499), and his “ Henry the Eighth ” (471), are 
 fair specimens of his power. Their wondrous minuteness, and their wondrous 
 truth to life, must at once strike the spectator. Hereabouts, too, is Albert Durer’s 
 Portrait of his Father (462), date 1471-1528. We are now before the works of 
 John Van Eyck’s pupil, Roger Van der Weyden. The Times' critic thus notices 
 this master : — 
 
 “His ‘Ecce Homo’ (388) and his ‘Mater Dolorosa’ (389), with all their 
 strong expression of suffering, and their forcible presentation of the incidents of 
 torture, — ^the eyes red with weeping, the thorns of the cross actually piercing 
 the skin, or shown in the blue swelling under it, and the profuse tears produce 
 an effect rather repulsive than affecting. The suffering and sorrow are too 
 material and commonplace. We are most impressed neither by the divine 
 resignation of the Saviour, nor the maternal agony of the Virgin, but by the 
 mere expression of physical pain in both. In the painter’s more crowded com- 
 positions, as ‘The Descent from the Cross’ (412), or ‘The Adoration of the 
 Kings’ (415), the mind is distracted from its contemplation of the expression of 
 the heads, and the dramatic proprieties of the action, by the multifarious details 
 of elaborate ornament, the play of contorted and highly coloured drapery, or 
 the intrusion of some grotesque form or face in an attendant or bystander. 
 There is a deficiency in the power of subordinating parts to the whole, and a 
 Avant of grandeur and repose in all the lines of the composition. Taken indi- 
 vidually, many of the faces have profound expression, and many of the move- 
 ments and attitudes are truthful and appropriate. But the sense of this comes 
 
17 
 
 last instead of first. There are several pictures here ascribed to an imaginary 
 ‘ Koger Van der Weyden the younger’ (387, 407, 414), of whose existence there 
 is no satisfactory proof. The name seems simply a convenience for classing 
 works of the school of Van der Weyden which are clearly unworthy of the 
 hand of the master himself.” 
 
 From Van der Weyden, we advance to the works of his great pupil, Hans 
 Memling, the ornament of the School of Bruges. He is described as one of the 
 most interesting and mysterious figures in the history of Flemisli art. His 
 most remarkable works, it appears, are in the Hospital of St. John, at Bruges. 
 He died in 1489. His works here exhibited are nine in number, one of which 
 is a portrait of the artist. From Memling, we advance to that wondrous picture 
 by Quentin Matsys, date 1450-1529, known as “ The Misers ” (445). The story 
 of the blacksmith of Antwerp is widely known. It is well for us — seeing the 
 fresh and powerful picture before us, that he left the anvil for love, and seized 
 a brush. It has been fairly said of this picture, that it makes a decided advance 
 in art. It is held to be as fine in chiaroscura, and as forcible in modelling, as 
 any work of Titian’s. The character of the two old burghers is intensely true. 
 The public is indebted to the Queen for the loan of this masterpiece. 
 
 We now approach Dutch art, with Lucas Van Leyden, the wondrous boy who, 
 at nine years of age, published copper-plates of his own designing and engraving. 
 His. “Card Party” (422) is considered his best exhibited work. His contemporary, 
 Mabuse, is represented in this gallery by his masterpiece — ^held by some to be, 
 indeed, “the masterpiece of Teutonic painting.” This is ‘ The Adoration of the 
 Kings’ (436), upon which the artist is said to have spent seven years’ labour. 
 Its wondrous elaboration supports the story. From Mabuse, we advance to the 
 works of an old English painter of the sixteenth century, viz : Sir Antonio 
 More. They are — (503) “ Queen Mary I.,” (523) “ Philip II. of Spain,” (512) 
 the “Artist’s own Portrait,” (513) “ Sir Francis Drake,” (526) “ Queen Mary. 
 And now the way is clear to the space that glows with Eubens’ wealth of colour. 
 We leave the visitor to contemplate his works — ^assured that we can add 
 nothing to his pleasure by remark or criticism. The list of his exhibited pic- 
 tures is, happily, a long one. The Portrait of “Ignatius Loyola (547); 
 the Landscapes, “ David with the Elders of Israel ”(575) ; the six “Sketches 
 from the Life of Achilles” (558-563), “His own Daughter” (578), 
 “Eubens and his Wife carrying Fruit and Game” (548), “Prometheus” 
 (534), “ The Boar Hunt,” by Eubens and Snyders (565), “ Triumphal 
 Procession of Henry IV., after the Battle of Ivry” (538), “The Eeturn 
 of the Holy Family from Egy^Dt,” “ Portrait of His First Wife ” (551), 
 “ The Tribute Money ” (536), “ Sketch for the Elevation of the Cross ” 
 (566), “ The Woman taken in Adultery ” (592), “ Sketch for Whitehall Ceiling,” 
 “ His own Portrait ” (550). From Eubens we pass to Vandyk, of the seven- 
 teenth century, whose chief works, however, will be found in the Portrait 
 Gallery presently. Here, however, are his “Einaldo, Armida, and Siren” 
 (653), “Cupid and Sleeping Nymph” (599), “Daedalus and Icarus” (603), 
 “ St. Jerome ” (606), a “Pieta ” (610), “Portrait of Snyders ” (662), “ Madonna 
 
 B 
 
18 
 
 and Child” (589), “Achilles Discovered among the Daughters of Lycome- 
 des” (929), “John, Duke of Nassau, Wife and Children” (615), “Margaret, 
 Princess of Lorraine and Duchess of Orleans,” “Mrs. Margaret Leman” mis-* 
 tress of the painter (586), “The Magdalen” (595), “Descent from the Cross” 
 (596). Hereabouts, too, let the visitor remark some pictures by Jacob J ordaens, 
 viz : (608) “ Girl with Parrot ” and (610) “ Wisdom and Folly.” The next 
 remarkable master, before whose works the visitor will pause, is the well-known 
 and popular David Teniers, date 1582-1619. The specimens of this painter in the 
 gallery are fifteen in number. The first, viz: (1021) “Four Boors at Table,” is 
 one of the painter’s more characteristic subjects. Then there are “Three Per- 
 sons at a Fire-place ” (1030), “ Village Festival ” (1031), “ The Triumphs of 
 Neptune” “The Death of Leander” (896), “A Guard Room” (533), “A 
 Drinking Party” (1068), “Christ Crowned with Thorns” (1022), “Nine-pin 
 Players ” (1018), “ His own Chateau, with Portraits of himself and his three 
 Children ” (532), “ Neptune and Amphitrite ” (841). Near Teniers are the well- 
 known groups of game — the Boar Hunts, etc., of famous Franz Snyders, date 
 1579-1657. And now we approach grave and stately Renibrandt. His works 
 need some introduction, which the Times' critic once more affords us : — 
 
 “ If Rubens may be called the embodiment of pictorial profuseness, Rembrandt 
 is the type of pictorial concentration. An obscurity hangs about the life of the 
 man not unlike the mysterious gloom which shrouds his pictures ; and, as the 
 touch of light in his compositions often falls on some hideous or mis-shapen 
 thing, so the few reliable facts in his history are most of them sad ones. 
 Rembrandt,- of the Rhine, is so called from his birth (1606) on the banks of that 
 river, between Leydendorp and Koukerk, in the house belonging to his father’s 
 mill. They still show a mill, with his name in gold letters over the door, but. 
 it is not the mill which Rembrandt etched, and which is usually thought to 
 have been his father’s. His parents had means to send their son to Leyden for 
 the study of the law, but his bent to painting was declared, and he was allowed 
 to follow it. We know the names of his masters, Zwaanenburg, a mere 'iwmims 
 mvJbra^ without a biography or a known work ; Lastman and Pinas, third-rate 
 members of that large family of Dutch artists who haunted the studios of 
 Elzheimer, Poelemburg, Sandraert, and their contepiporaries at Rome, for 
 Holland and Flanders seem to have supplied the bulk of the painters at the end 
 of the 16th century, both to Italy and the North. In 1627 an accident revealed 
 to Rembrandt, then at the Hague, the market value of his pictures. In 1628 
 he set up a studio in Amsterdam. In 1645 he married. In 1656 he was insol- 
 vent. In 1665 the small balance of his property was paid over to his only son 
 Titus. How he was brought to ruin, when he died, w^here he is buried, are 
 things at which his biographers have guessed, but as to which nothing is 
 positively known. There is no record of his death or burial in any of the 
 Amsterdam registers down to 1674, 10 years after the latest recorded date of a 
 picture by him. One story makes him die in Stockholm in 1670, another in 
 Hull, another in Yarmouth. Quien sabe^ The painter lived as he painted, in 
 shadow. His insolvency is the high light of the picture ; thanks to the Dutch 
 
19 
 
 law, which has preserved in the Court register of Amsterdam the inventory of 
 his effects. This inventory is the best guide we have to the way of life, tastes, 
 and habits of the painter. The furniture of eight rooms is enumerated in it, 
 including antechambers and entrance-hall.” 
 
 The specimens of this master exhibited are numerous. Here is his own Por- 
 trait at the age of 3G, sent from Buckingham Palace by Her Majesty (085), this, 
 and the “ Young Man in the Turkish Costume” (678), are esteemed fine works 
 of Rembrandt’s earlier manner. Lord Overstone’s “ Old Woman ” (677) is won- 
 drously life-like. The power of the painter has given an indescribable charm 
 to the worn house-wife, whom we should scarcely care to contemplate in the life. 
 Then there is the portrait of the aged “ Duchess of Lorraine,” where the 
 master’s power over details rivals that of the camera. Let the visitor notice, too, 
 the following vrorks by this mysterious master : ‘‘ The Entrance to the 
 
 Sepulchre” (842), large ‘‘Landscape” (698), “Samuel and Eli,” “Jacob 
 Kats and the Prince of Orange,” “A Plain traversed by a River” (844), 
 “ Portrait of a Standard Bearer” (680), “Virgin and St. Joseph reading, the 
 Infant in a cradle” (1043), “ Daniel before Nebuchadnezzar ” (691), “ The^reach- 
 ing of St. John in the Wilderness,” unfinished (675), “Jacob’s Dream” (687), 
 Belshazzar’s Feast ” (695). 
 
 AVe pass from Rembrandt to his pupils, De Koninck, F. Bol, Gerard Dow, and 
 Nicholas Maas. There are four Dow’s in the gallery, viz : — “ A Young Woman 
 cleaning a Saucepan,” known as “ La Managere ” (1075), “ Rembrandt’s AV^ife as 
 a Jewish Bride,” “Girl at a AVindow ” (1045), “A Goat lying down, etc.” 
 (1039). De Koninck is represented by three Landscapes, viz : — Nos. 691-2-3. Of 
 F. Bol there is a single specimen, viz : “ Man and his AA^ife ” (690). Whereas, 
 of Nicholas Maas, date 1632-1693, there are six specimens, including “ The 
 Listener” (1079), “Lace Alaker at AVork, etc.” (1050), and “ St. Anne teach- 
 ing the Virgin to read.” 
 
 The visitor must now pass rapidly various painters of the Dutch school, to 
 Gabriel Metzu’s “ Intruder ” (1059), and Franz Van Mieris’s exquisite “ Pedestrian 
 with a Flask” (1078). AVe see here perhaps “ prosaic art,” but let us note also 
 that in command over material these old Dutch painters defied the rivalry of any 
 school. Let the visitor notice the Ostades, Adrian being represented by five 
 and Isaac by three pictures. Paul Potter’s wonderful animals, ranged from 
 996 to 998 ; Jan Steen’s domestic bits, all wondrously worked out, from 932 to 
 936; Philip Wouverman’s canvasses, from 783 to 793 Nicholas Berchem’s land- 
 scapes, peasants, etc. marked from 802 to 809 ; Albert Cuyp’s cattle (813 to 822) ; 
 and Jacob Ruysdael’s powerful landscapes, ranged from 832 to 851. We have now 
 reached the works of Mindert Hobbema, who painted in the middle of the seven- 
 teenth century, and is ranked by critics as the first of Dutch landscape 
 painters. His scenes belong chiefly to the timbered land about Haarlem. The 
 gallery is particularly rich in Hobbemas. The two Van de Veldes are also 
 well represented : Adrian by his landscapes, and William by nine sea-pieces. 
 Nor should the visitor fail to notice Jan Van Huysum’s fresh flowers 
 943 and two others). Especially beautiful, too, hereabouts is that picture cf 
 
20 
 
 an old woman with bed-clothes on hei’ arm calling to a child standing at a glass 
 door (945) by Pieter de Hooge. And now the visitor approaches a well-known name, 
 that of Sir Godfrey Kneller, who flourished in the seventeenth and eighteenth 
 centuries, and to whom we shall find ourselves largely indebted when we 
 wander presently into the Historical Portrait Gallery. Here, there are only two 
 specimens of this well-known portrait painter, viz : “ Peter the Great ” (729), 
 and a sketch of “ Louis the Fourteenth.” [Many of the paintings by the Flemish 
 masters, originally placed in Saloon C, are now hung in Saloon H, alongside the 
 Hertford Collection.] 
 
 We now pass some old German pictures, and reach some masters of the 
 French school. Jeannet is represented by three or four pictures. Eemark 
 “Marguerite de Valois” (510), “Francis II. as a Boy,” and “Jean d’Albret, 
 King of Navarre, and Father of Henry IV. of France” (480). These 
 pictures lead the visitor to Nicholas Poussin, date 1594-1665. His pictures 
 are well known to all frequenters of art galleries. There are no less than 
 sixteen specimens of his power in this gallery. Eemark “View of the 
 
 Campagna” (601), “Jupiter and Antiope” (931), “Einaldo and Armida” 
 (587), “The Woman of Megara” (607), “The Arts enquiring of Eome 
 why they do not flourish in modern times” (619), “The Preservation of 
 the Infant Pyrrhus” (582), “Venus and Cupid” (616), “Spring” (939), “Holy 
 Family” (602), and “The Triumph of Bacchus” (598). Here, too, are four 
 Landscapes by Gaspar Poussin. Hence, the visitor advances to gaze 
 upon the sunny canvasses of Claude Lorraine (date 1600-1682). No less 
 than sixteen of his pictures are in the gallery. They speak for themselves, 
 and we would recommend the visitor to study them attentively, as he will 
 be presently challenged to decide between them and the fine water colours and 
 oil paintings of our own Turner. From Claude the visitor should turn to Pierre 
 Mignard (date 1610-1695), and Charles Lebrun (date 1619-1690), two conspicuous 
 painters of the French school. Eemark by Mignard, “Julie d’Angennes. 
 Duchess de Montansier” (752), and “Our Saviour at the Well” (707), by 
 Lebrun; “Perseus and Andromeda” (592), “Centaurs and Lapithse” (580). 
 Then there are others, less celebrated illustrators of the French school, as, 
 Philippe de Champagne (584), Watteau, with his elegant rural figures (993) 
 and Greuze, with his sweet soft faces (959-961). And now let us turn the 
 visitor’s attention to some fine specimens of the Spanish school. First, 
 there are eight religious works by Zurbaraii. Then there are the Murillos.* 
 Eemark “ St. Anthony of Padua, and Madonna, etc., “ Infant Christ 
 Sleeping in the arms of Joseph” (638), “The Madonna and Saviour with 
 St. John” (637), “Woman Drinking” (629), his own Portraits (632-640), 
 “ St. Anthony on his knees, etc. ” (634), “Sposalizio” (900), “Miracle of Feeding 
 the Five Thousand,” “St. Augustine and the Infant Saviour” (622), “St. 
 Francis, kneeling,” “Landscape” (633), “Abraham Entertaining the Angels’* 
 (631), and “St. Giles standing in a transport of religious ecstasy before Pope 
 
 The Murillos are an'aiiged in Vestibule II., between Saloons B and C. 
 
21 
 
 Gregory IX.” (6-20). From Murillo we turn to Morales (508-801), and to 
 Velasquez, the quaint and powerful painter, of whom Spain may be justly 
 proud. There are no less than twenty-four paintings by him amid these 
 art-treasures. Let the visitor remark the “ Duke Olivarez on Horseback” (789), 
 “ Henry de Halmale on Horseback” (782), “A Cardinal” (1069), “Philip IV. 
 in Shooting Dress” (779), “The Cardinal Infant Don Ferdinand of Austria 
 in Shooting Dress” (785), “The Infant Don Balthazar Carlos” (1072), 
 “Queen Mariana of Austria ” (1074), “A Miracle by St. Anthony of Padua” 
 (1075), “Philip IV. of Spain” (728), “The Queen of Philip IV.” (1077), 
 “Venus” (1079), “St. John” (795). Having noticed two pictures by 
 Bellini, viz: — “Dominican Monk” (76), also a “Virgin and Child,” by 
 Innocenza da Imola (213), the visitor may take leave for the present of the 
 ancient masters. He has travelled rapidly through the art of the dead centuries 
 to the genius of the present time. [Many of the paintings originally placed in 
 Saloon C, are now arranged in the south side of the Clock Gallery, in the South 
 Staircase to ditto, and in the Kailway Gallery ; including specimens of the works 
 of Claude Lorraine, Canaletto, Guido, the Flemish School, &c.] 
 
 PAlNTINaS BY MODEHN MASTERS. 
 
 SALOOISrS D, E, and F. 
 
 The visitor should leave the gallery of the ancient masters by its most eastern 
 exit, cross the nave, past the clock ; the hours of which are marked by the 
 letters of the words “Art- Treasures,” and enter the southern gallery by its 
 most eastern opening. He is now in the Gallery D, devoted to the earlier 
 masters of the Modern English School . 
 
 The visitor should here deliberately begin from the beginning, noticing the 
 earlier, if obscure, works by English painters. This systematic examination 
 will enable him to form an estimate of the advances our living artists have 
 achieved. He should resolutely take his place in Saloon D, and begin with 
 Michael Dahl’s Portrait of “Miss Margaret Cavendish Harley” (1). The 
 Athenceum has thus touched upon the early English Artists : — 
 
 “We pass to the great collection of modern pictures, commencing nominall}- 
 with a few works of Dahl, Wootton, &c. ; but really with the productions of 
 Hogarth, that sturdy, satirical, dogged, blunt, thoroughly English painter. He 
 is very well represented here, not in his novel pictures, but in portraits and 
 miscellanea, — ^among which break out like suns, ‘ The March to Finchley ’ an(?. 
 his ‘ Bartholomew Fair,’ — the latter sadly dealt with by time, who seems tc 
 have owed it a spite, since the painting of the little man of Leicester Square was 
 always solid, and never tricky or experimental. His clear bright paint stood always 
 thick and fresh, and wears as well as your wainscot or your mantel-piece. O 
 that inimitable and most ridiculous march ! — the caricature of which made King 
 George so very angry. Here it is, with the pitiless drummer whose tongue is 
 
22 
 
 i:i Ills cheek, heedless of child and mistress. Here, too, are the soldier emharassed 
 with a brace of wives, — the prize-fighters at the Adam and Eve in Tottenham 
 Court Eoad, naked and bleeding, — watching the struggling milkw^oman, the 
 thief wdio catches in his cocked hat the white flood from her cans, to the infinite 
 amusement of Tiddy Doll, the di’oll pieman. Above fly the red and blue colours, 
 and away straggle the drunken, thievish file, who are to shed their scurvy blood 
 breast to breast wuth hairy Cameron men, on the dark heath of Culloden. Pray 
 observe, too, the frightful child swung at the suttler’s back, which poor dear 
 J^amb, who w^as not on very firm ground when he came to pictures, says Ho- 
 garth introduced to thrown quietness and contrast into the mob. Most unlovely 
 cliildhood is that ; but mark the spies talking, and the fat woman wdth her eyes 
 and hands thrown up, and the strutting drummer-boy to the left.” 
 
 The Saturday Revieio has also passed the early English school in review^ ; and 
 olfered the public a fair estimate of the claims of dead English artists upon our 
 attention. e entreat the visitor to give his attention to the following rapid 
 summary : — 
 
 ‘‘ It is customary to assign to Sir Joshua Reynolds the honour of being, as it 
 were, the founder of the modern English school. But this is scarcely true in the 
 sense w^hich these words would bear in PI aiiders or Italy. His great rival and 
 contemporary, Gainsborough, has nearly as much right as Sir Joshua to stand 
 at the head of the native succession. Before their time the outbursts of native 
 genius wxre but partial and irregular. The England of the sixteenth and seven- 
 teenth centuries never produced an indigenous school of painting, though it 
 liberally patronised a succession of foreign artists of great eminence, especially 
 in portraiture. It is sufficient to name Holbein, Horebout, Yandyck, Rubens 
 himself, Antonio More, Honthorst, M}Tens, Van Somer, Hollar the engraver, 
 Kneller and Lely, most of wdiom settled and died in London. From some of the 
 latter of these it is probable that a direct descent could be traced for the native 
 English artists of the eighteenth century — Sir Godfrey Kneller not having died 
 till 1723, the very year in which Reynolds w^as born. But we have yet to desi- 
 derate a thorough handbook of English painters, from Hilliard and Oliver, in 
 the reign of Elizabeth, through Walker and Dobson, to Hales, Richardson, and 
 Thorrdiiil. Specimens of several early English artists, such as these last- 
 mentioned, are to be seen at Manchester, not indeed in the Saloons of Modern 
 Art, but in the British Portrait Gallery, Vhere their historical interest wholl}' 
 subordinates their artistic importance ; but Richardson, as the master of Hudson, 
 who was in turn the master of Reynolds, is a name^^oi some mark in the annals 
 of English painting. Of other early names, such as Dance, Gandy, Hoppner, or 
 Liotard, we find no examples at Manchester. The last two w'ere of foreign 
 origin, as also were Yan Loo and Yanaaken ; — the latter immortalised in Ho- 
 garth’s caricature as the dauber of draperies and attitudes to Hudson and other 
 fashionable portrait painters of the time. On the other hand, the Exhibition 
 catalogue leads off w ith w'orks by the little knowui names of Dahl, xiikman, Kent, 
 and Jervas — all portraits, and none of them very remarkable. A piece of Luke 
 Orgdock’s ‘Poultry’ (5), is spirited and able; and tw'o view's by S. Scott, 
 
23 
 
 representing ‘Westminster Bridge in progress ’ (6), and ‘Old London Bridge 
 (7), are almost worthy of Canaletto. Vanderbank’s ‘Portrait of Gay’ (10) 
 should be looked at. Hayman’s ‘ Garrick as Eichard III.’ (11) follows next in 
 order — it is a work of small merit. Hayman’s own Portrait, by Sir J. Keynolds 
 (28), hangs near. Next we come to a far more interesting array of works by 
 Hogarth — one of our greatest original painters, but wholly unsuccessful in the 
 higher works of art, and as inferior to the Dutch school in finish and technical 
 skill as he is superior in moral purpose and genuine humour. All his styles can 
 be studied in the present collection. The half-length of his wife (16) , who was 
 Sir James Thornhill’s daughter, is interesting; but ‘Captain Thomas Coram ’ 
 (30), the philanthropist — whose likeness has just been translated into stone from 
 this picture for the Foundling Hospital — is wooden in expression and displeasing 
 in colour. There is much more character and power in the Hon. E. Phipps’ 
 ^ Portrait of an Old Woman’ (20). Mr. Anderdon’s ‘ Sigismunda ’ is theatri- 
 cal and pretentious ; and the ‘ Garrick as Eichard III.’ (22) — so well known by 
 engravings — ^is a monstrosity of disagreeable action. But this was probably the 
 player’s own fault. On the other hand, two ‘ Scenes from the Beggar's Ojpera ’ 
 (17 and 25), are in Hogarth’s more characteristic style ; and, ‘ The March of the 
 Guards to Finchley’ (26), and ‘Southwark Fair’ (31), are among the most 
 famous of his mocking, but earnest caricatures. Hogarth, as he had no prede- 
 cessor in English art, so he founded no school. His fame rests on his prolific 
 invention of details, his minute delineation of character, and his trenchant satire 
 on the manners and vices of the time. His technical method was always 
 defective ; and his attempted religious painting, as seen conspicuously in those 
 large scriptural subjects which used to hang in the Eedcliff Church, at Bristol, 
 was pitiable in the extreme.” 
 
 Hereabouts, too, the visitor may notice, as a matter of curiosity, De Louther- 
 bourg’s Naval Battles, and a “ Landscape” (94) ; some Portraits by Eomney, 
 “ Lady Hamilton as a Bacchante” (83) ; “ Lord Stanley and his Sister” (125) ; 
 Wright of Derby’s “ Siege of Gibraltar” (81), and “ Eousseau” (84a). But the 
 visitor need not linger long among the minor British artists of the eighteenth 
 century. He has still a long journey before him — through the brilliant rooms, 
 glowing with the fine colours of Turner, Etty, and others. He has not yet 
 reached our immortal water-colours, nor wandered, as in a dream, past the great 
 historic men who look down from their canvasses in the great Nave. And in 
 that Nave are the Armour of the middle-age warriors, the wondrous works of 
 Cellini, the Bernal and Soulages Collections, and a glorious grove of marble 
 figures. 
 
 In the gallery of the English school, let the visitor again remember, there is 
 a complete history of English painting. It is a history that he should study 
 carefully, since it is more than probable that the living generation will 
 not enjoy a like opportunity again. We have samples here even of Dahl, Wm- 
 Aikman, Kent, Jervas, Luke Cradock, Eamsey, Wootton, and Hayman. But 
 were these the founders of the British school ? Poor enough would it be, if fed 
 only from their inspirations. But no ; last century saw the men arise who weire 
 
24 
 
 destined not only to create a British school of painting, but also to found a 
 national academy. Of art in England, before Hogarth’s time, very little need 
 be said. The curious visitor may notice Sir Antonio More’s skill in the Portrait 
 Gallery. The Miniatures, too, afford some notion of pictorial art in this 
 country centuries back. Still, there was nothing like an English school in 
 existence when Rubens arrived in England. Holbein, who had worked so 
 industriously here in the previous century, had failed to arouse any latent 
 genius worthy to be ranked with him. Rubens contributed to produce Vandyke, 
 to say nothing of the Scotch Vandyke, Geo. Jamesone. But no school arose. 
 The artist’s brush was almost exclusively given up to portrait painting. The 
 result is a noble gallery of English worthies and iinworthies, it is true, but the 
 chief performances are due to foreign genius. There was something cold and 
 uncongenial to art in the social state of England up to the eighteenth century. 
 Charles the First made an attempt to establish a gallery ; there was the dawn of 
 bright promise, but it quickly disappeared in the dust and blood of civil war. 
 And were the Puritans likely to encourage art ? or was Charles the Second 
 likely to do more than satisfy his personal vanity ? No; art in England had 
 made good only the smallest claim to be regarded as a school before Hogarth 
 and Reynolds lived. 
 
 And here we have evidence of the power and the wondrous originality of both 
 masters. In the first place, here is ‘‘ Southwark Fair ” (81) . The revelling, drunken 
 crowd is inimitably thrown together. The falling booth, the crowded windows, the 
 dense mass of people in the street, belong to Hogarth, and to Hogarth alone. Just 
 as the wondrously-varied figures in the “ March to Finchley” (26) — the women 
 parting with the soldiers, the emeinte lady in the foreground, the prize-fighters, 
 the thief catching the milk in his triangular hat — all are cast together with 
 wondrous life, till you almost catch the excitement and the noise of the rollick- 
 ing fellows bound for the field of Culloden. The painting, apart from th®^ 
 composition, charms you with its strength — its freedom from every trick. It is 
 solid, honest paint. Let the visitor note all the pictures by this true English 
 master — this man of inexhaustible humour — this sterling moralist. “ The 
 Harlot’s Progress” (13, 14), of which series of eight pictures, painted by the 
 artist, only two escaped the fire at Fonthill, in 1755, is surely a moral drama. 
 There is a lesson in every touch of the pencil ; just as iifthe “Rake’s Progress,’^ 
 in the National Gallery, from the death of the miser till the climax of the 
 d^ama, there are innumerable touches full of suggestion. Then the visitor may 
 see both Mr. and Mrs. tiogarth (16, 17). Here the painter is represented* 
 painting tlie comic muse. There are in the gallery two subjects from the 
 “ Beggar’s Opera,” by Hogarth (17, 25), in both of which Miss Fenton (after- 
 wards Duchess of Bolton) figures as “ Polly.” The first was painted for John 
 Rich, the harlequin ; the second for Sir Archibald Grant, of Monnymusk. 
 They are remarkable not only as paintings, but as revelations of the stage a 
 hundred years ago. The visitor will not fail to notice notable people seatedJ 
 upon the stage. In the same way the “ View of Rosamond’s Pond,” in St. 
 James’s Park (filled np in 1770), marked 19, is a welcome revelation of the 
 
25 
 
 times gone by. At hand, too, by the same fertile master, is “ Garrick as Richard 
 the Third,” painted in 1746, and for which the artist received £200, “which 
 was more,” says the exulting Hogarth, “ than any English artist ever received 
 for a single portrait.” The above selection from Hogarth’s works very fairly 
 exhibits his excellencies. They will prove that none of his imitators have 
 reached his level — that the humour which has since been put upon canvass 
 cannot claim to rank for variety and for point with his. In every square inch 
 of his painting there is a new idea. He will never, probably, be understood by 
 our neighbours, just as they fail to understand all the genius of young Gustave 
 Bore (who, by the way, deserves to be known as the living Hogarth of France). 
 But we have reason to be proud of the man who painted the “ Rake’s Progress,’^ 
 and who drew the story of the “ Harlot ” with the pencil of a profound moralist. 
 His line of beauty, his theory of the beautiful, is beyond the province of a 
 book like the present. We touch upon his works simply, and we direct the 
 attention of Englishmen to them, that they may acknowledge his genius, and be 
 thankful for the possession of his name. His “ Garrick” is finely tragic — the 
 crime and the dread of its punishment are there ; and, by way of contrast, take 
 the blunt Captain Coram, or the solid Martin Folkes. You see at once how 
 various and how strong was little Hogarth. 
 
 We pass Jervas rapidly; nor do we care much for Wootton, nor Hayman,, 
 nor the pleasant mediocrity of Scott — although we are pleased to get an idea of 
 Westminster bridge, as it appeared in his days. But whom have we here? 
 Claude ? No ; Richard Wilson. A very proper landscape painter. His trees 
 are heavily massed, — for in this way Poussin massed them ; his clouds never 
 condescend to flutter in silver flakes — they roll, very daintily edged with silver. 
 The people who inhabit these scenes are not ordinary people, but Apollos, if you 
 please. There is power here, undoubtedly ; but it is chiefly the strength of 
 education, not the native fire. The greenish yellow light reminds one of Claude. 
 The trees are all the most regular of trees — never descending to the slovenliness 
 of dead branches, ragged suckers, or an environment of fern and briars. Trees, 
 it would appear, have degenerated since the time of Wilson. Yet of this proper 
 landscape (we have referred particularly to the “ Niobe,” 32,) no less than five- 
 samples are in existence. The original was painted and exhibited in 1760, and 
 was bought by the Duke of Cumberland, the hero of Culloden. The visitor 
 will find in the gallery, by the same master, “ Rome, with St. Peter’s” (34) ; 
 “Cicero’s Villa” (36) ; “View of the Thames, near Marble Hill” (37) ; “Vale 
 of Llangollen” (38) ; “View on the Arno” (39); “Landscape” (40, 41). From 
 Wilson we turn to Sir Joshua Reynolds. The change is most welcome. For 
 how many lovely faces has he not bequeathed to us, in his broad, rich, flowing 
 colours ? Alas ! will they live much longer ? Let us pass this sad inquiry, and 
 be glad in the glorious show just before us. Here, children of wondrous beauty ; 
 there female grace idealised under the painter’s pencil ; and there, again, solid, 
 manly heads are before us. You know at once that all these people lived, and 
 spoke, and fought. The blood courses in their veins — their eyes talk to you. 
 You would hardly be surprised if a voice came from one of those rosy mouths. 
 
26 
 
 And then there is a charm about the story of these pictures. We remember 
 that sturdy old Johnson probably knit his brows before them when they were 
 upon the easel. Eound-headed Groldsmith intrudes himself upon our thoughts, 
 but only to warm them, and make us pass a kindly verdict, even when we see 
 positive defects. But were angelic faces ever better conceived than in those 
 Heads” (46) ? The “ Girl Sketching” (56), too, is an especial favourite of 
 ours. There, opposite, is “ Puck” — a very fairy, with much of the devil in him. 
 He appears to be very naturally seated upon the mushroom ; he is native to the 
 woods, and has no more to do with the nursery, and the perambulator, than the 
 swallows have. It is worth the 980 guineas Lord Fitzwilliam gave for it at 
 Eogers’s sale, in 1856. For female beauty, as rendered by Sir Joshua, turn we 
 to Viscountess Althorp” (47), and “ Mrs. Tollemach, as Miranda” (44). Smiles 
 are breaking about the mouth of the lovely and stately countess, and soft and 
 sweet is the entire figure ; and Miranda beams upon us, till we can hardly sum- 
 mon the philosophy to declare, once and for all, — that she is paint, simply paint. 
 For masculine dignity w'e turn to ‘‘ Sir W. Chambers,” the architect (53), — a 
 very stiff personage. Here, too, is “ Sir Joshua” himself, in his robes, as doctor 
 of civil law (48), — ^his drapery solidly and broadly painted. Eemark, too, 
 heavy-looking “Foote,” the actor (68); the Duke of Portland” (51); the 
 “ Braddyl Family” (52), with the young gentleman in top boots, elaborately 
 dressed ; the “ Eev. J. Eeynolds” (54) ; “ Sir Eichd. Worsley” (65) ; “ Guiseppe 
 Marchi,” painter (67) ; Geo. John, Viscount Althorp” (71) ; “ Archbishop Mark- 
 ham” (42). Nor should the rest of Sir Joshua’s ladies be passed by. They are 
 ail beautiful women. Whether the artist added “perfume to the violet ”-r- 
 whether his success lay in a capacity “ to paint the lily” — it is impossible for us 
 to determine. We may envy him the privilege he enjoyed in being permitted 
 to study so many female countenances ; but we must do him the justice to allow 
 that he succeeded admirably in an endeavour to make his sitters immortal. He 
 is accused of having utterly neglected his back grounds ; to have contented 
 himself, having painted the head and figure, with a jumble of colour for the rest 
 of the picture. This fault belonged to his time. It is a grievous one, un- 
 doubtedly ; but it is greatly palliated by the genius thrown into the heads. It 
 is almost impossible to take the eye from Sir Joshua’s faces, and quietly examine 
 the dark distance that throws them up. They will live, and be admired, as 
 long as art is cultivated. We shall glory still in his genius, let a supreme 
 master arise to-morrow in the midst of us. Nor is he alone. If art was obscure 
 in England, through centuries, when the Italian, Flemish, and Spanish schools 
 flourished, it rose, a vigorous child, in the 18th century. Hogarth and Eeynolds 
 were great men, of genius peculiar to their country. No sordid imitators, born 
 to perpetuate an old idea ; but new observers of nature, with strength to take 
 something fresh from her. It is very satisfactory to see both masters strongly 
 represented in the Art-Treasures Exhibition, that foreigners, who may visit us 
 during the summer, may learn that there was sterling stuff in the British school 
 a century ago. 
 
 We pause before Gainsborough’s “Blue Boy,” Master Buttall (156). The 
 
27 
 
 picture is in every respect a remarkable one, showing not only the versatility of 
 the artist, but also that Sir Joshua was wrong when he declared that a good 
 effect in a picture was incompatible with a predominance of blue. The problem 
 is solved — completely solved ; but then how masterly is the proof! How sweet 
 and various the gradations of colour ; how fine and flowing the folds ! Here is 
 all the force of Vandyke, shown by the homely painter of yonder “ Market Cart” 
 (153), or yonder “ Cottage Door” (161) ! The gallery is rich in Gainsboroughs. 
 His force and truth are here triumphantly displayed. Not that we care so much 
 for his landscape, as for rural nature painted by Constable ; still, whenever 
 Gainsborough put pencil to canvass, sweet colour flowed from it. The daintiest 
 of roses lay upon the whitest of pearls, when he approached female beauty — see 
 “Mrs. Graham, Lord Lynedoch’s wife” (157). His rustic children, too, are 
 glowing with life. His white horse is finely managed, against the broad 
 shadows — not too liquid, by the way — of the trees, tugging the cart to market. 
 But his landscapes have no new passages in them — ^nothing fresh from nature, 
 shown to us for the first time. They are sweet in colour, but they have a 
 tendency to weakness. Let the reader note the following specimens of this 
 master : “ Portrait” (50), “ Landscape” (70), “ Mrs. Siddons” (74), “ Landscape” 
 (76), small “Landscape” (90), “ Two Boys and Fighting Dogs ” (92), “Landscape” 
 (95), “Coast Scene, with Cattle” (150), “The Cottage Door” (161) ; and then, 
 between Saloons D and E, “ Children with Donkey” (1), “ Beggar Boys” (26). 
 
 We now turn to Opie’s “Age and Infancy” (124). It is the strong, coarse, 
 hard work of an uncompromising man. And hereabouts are poor Morland’s 
 swine, and doorways, and his whit© horse. A sad story is about these can- 
 vasses — of genius cast away — of life misspent and degraded. Alas I the contrast 
 between the promise and the realisation is strong and broad. We know that we 
 had here a painter who might have added much to the renown of our national 
 fine arts, but who fell away to alehouse tippling, and let his head grow wild and 
 his hand unsteady. Let us turn away, and mark as we pass, George Komney’s 
 “Lady Broughton” (77), Angelica Kauffman’s “Jane Maxwell, Duchess of 
 Gordon” (73); “The Siege of Gibraltar,” by Wright, of Derby (81); “Lady 
 Hamilton, as Bacchante,” by Komney (83) ; Weatley’s “ Children and Birds,” 
 &c. (85-86); “A Lion and Lioness,” by George Stubbs (89); “Horses in a 
 Storm,” by Sawrey Gilpin, K.A. (91) ; Zoffany’s Scene from “ Love in a 
 Village” (93) ; a “ Coast Scene,” by the pupil of Eichard Wilson, James Farring- 
 ton, E.A. (96) ; Garrick, in the “ Farmer s Eeturn,” also by Zoffany (101) ; and 
 “ Mrs. Siddons, as Zara,” by William Hamilton, E.A. (106). And here we pause 
 awhile, for we approach Fuseli, and West, and Eeinagle, and Ward. It is, 
 however, curious to note the E.A.’s to whom academic honours have been of no 
 avail against the verdict of the world. How they have passed away, and left 
 no mark behind them ! Nor is this fact without its significance. The Eoyal 
 Academy, to maintain a place in popular esteem, must include in its ranks all the 
 really promising men of a period ; for the next generation, if the Academy fail to 
 do this, comes and declares that the E.A. is no guarantee whatever of artistic 
 excellence. It points to the men who have worn the distinction, and who have 
 
28 
 
 failed to earn it. It hints at jobbery. It is not well for art where such taunts 
 can be fairly thrown out ; but the impartial observer of the lists of the Royal 
 Academicians, from the date of its foundation down to the present time, might 
 show, we fear, that such taunts might with fearful justice be brought against 
 the governors of this national institution. How many, even educated men. 
 remember aught of the genius of William Hodges, R.A. ? 
 
 But we turn to more pleasant topics. We are before Reinagle and Fuseli *(iih 
 represented), and West. Fuseli’s works in the Exhibition are, “Hotspur and 
 Glendower ” (102), and “Thor battering the Serpent of Midgard in the Boat of 
 Hymen, the Giant Edda of Somundus” (104). Reinagle is represented by his 
 “ Eagle and Vulture disputing with a Hysena ” (120) ; West by “ Christ blessing 
 Little Children ” (103) ; the “ Departure of Regulus (113) ; “ Cupid and Psyche’^ 
 (114) ; the “ Death of General Wolfe ” (115) ; the “Battle of the Boyne” (116) ; 
 the “Battle of La Hogue ” (109). West, who had a firm, but not over-sagacious 
 friend in Geo. III., shines, not in Scripture, but in the life and confusion of the 
 battle-field. He has filled these pictures with happy illustrative groups. He 
 has given air and breadth to the scene. The genius was not commanding that 
 presided over these canvasses, but there was a strong and a conscientious mind 
 here. Englishmen must love to linger hereabouts, for there is some suggestive 
 anecdote belonging to every picture. What if he stand between Sir J. Reynolds 
 and hapless Angelica Kauffman ? There is a story between them, now almost 
 buried in gloom, but that is said to live on the stage — aggravated, let us hope, 
 to strengthen the dramatic interest — in Sir Edward Lytton’s “Lady of Lyons.” 
 Was the villain who betrayed “Pauline” fine old Sir Joshua? We would fain 
 believe that it was not so : that he who could so well see the gentleman in his 
 sitters, and who could so completely seize the essence of gentility, and make it 
 flow from his pencil, was a man himself touched by the keen honour that is the 
 chief ingredient of the true gentleman. But the cypress hangs above both 
 villain and victim, and we pass forward charitably in the hope that our great 
 master did not wrong Angelica. We must pass other stories that linger about 
 these rooms with an equal charity ; for we hold that one of the most important 
 lessons the world may learn here, in this Art-Treasures Exhibition, is to see 
 two distinct men, compact and moving, in one individual. The cjmic may see, 
 in Wilson’s landscapes, only so much foaming beer ; in Morland, so many tap* 
 room scores paid up , just as he “sips the foam” of Goldsmith’s life, and calls 
 the man a good-natured fool and fop. It is told of Jas. Barry, that he regaled 
 great Edmund Burke in gloomy, dirty, Soho, on a steak which the orator turned 
 for himself, whilst the painter fetched the beer. Let us grant the impeachment. 
 And what then ? Do we esteem Burke the less ? Have we less to say of 
 Barry ? Ay, in certain circles, where silver forks make more effect than silvery 
 voices — where the gold of sunset pales before the produce of Australian diggings, 
 lips will be curled, and the men who illustrate and glorify their period will be 
 set down as Bohemians — gipsies, to receive the crumbs of great banquets in 
 return for their learned antics. But must we not advance from circles so con- 
 stituted ? Shall we never learn that in the simplicity of ai’tist and literary life, 
 
29 
 
 but especially in artist life, there is a dignity that is worth something ?, Shall 
 the lessons, before us in this gallery go for nothing ? Why, the creatures 
 painted by the plebeian hands of Gainsborough, Eeynolds, and Lawrence, have 
 passed away, and the memory of most of them in no way interests us, but the 
 genius that set down and glorified their faces, lives, and is our pride. Even 
 Barry’s humble banquet to Burke is more celebrated than many of the preten- 
 tious orgies given by their contemporaries. 
 
 The moral of the story lies deep, and should be a comfort to the working 
 world about us. It points to simple habits and modest ways. It argues for 
 that respect which we owe to intellectual force, through all its infinite develop- 
 ments ; it points through the coat to the man behind it ; and we need the teach- 
 ing now-a-days, for we have reached a time when wealth threatens to master 
 every worship, and be supreme. 
 
 We are before the works of Lawrence, the tavern keeper’s son ! There was 
 not the faintest tint of blue in his blood ; yet, how' graceful is his genius ! Is 
 there, in the history of painting, a man, with a long list of ancestors to his 
 back, who understood the qualities of gentility better than he ? Look at the 
 “ Countess of Derby,” Miss Farren, be it remembered (15, between Saloons D 
 and E) ; and “ Lady Leicester, as Hope” (202) ; and “ Sir Sidney Smith” (6, 
 Saloon E) ; and the “ Countess of Wilton” (10). These are fine pictures, 
 without a touch of coarseness or awkwardness in them. The tavern keeper’s 
 son was evidently at home in the drawing-rooms of Mayfair. It is this lesson 
 which we seek to impress upon visitors to the Art-Treasures Exhibition. They 
 have a sacred duty to perform towards the artist who is dead, through the artist 
 who still lives. Jewels are dazzling; gold lace has a certain magic in it, but 
 there are men, without a single riband, who are worth higher honour than the 
 most starry of men. And is not the Art-Treasures Exhibition proof of this ? Mil- 
 lions of money have been spent upon this collection — to buy what ? Why, that 
 which the possessors of those millions had not in themselves. Yet they almost 
 despised the men with whom they dealt, because the dealers were in manners 
 simple as children — in their possessions of worldly goods almost paupers. And 
 shall this disregard of the high nobility of the artist and the author be a charac- 
 teristic of Englishmen ? Shall it be said that, in the social scale, intellect has 
 no distinct place assigned to it? We trust not. We trust that the citizens of 
 Manchester will make good the reputation they are gaining as lovers of art, by 
 proving, in the coui’se of the summer, the honour in which they hold the artist. 
 
 The visitor is now fairly in Saloon E ; having passed De Loutherbourg, and 
 some Lawrences, Ward’s Bull, &c., in the space between this and Saloon D. 
 
 The visitor is now in the midst of Callcotts, Ettys, Turners, Collinses, Con- 
 stables, Wilkies, Friths, Grants, Sir E. Landseers, Websters, Copes, Leslies, 
 Eastlakes, Mulreadys, Stanfields, Creswicks, Danbys, &c., Sic. The glories of 
 the British School are here, and will claim his honest admiration. 
 
 “We note an average Constable,” says the Saturday Revieio., “ ‘ The Fustic 
 Bridge’ (195), and the same artist’s far more poetical view of ‘ Salisbury Cathedral’ 
 (243), with the magical spire standing out in relief .against a black storm sky 
 
30 
 
 ai’ched by a rainbow. Another of bis ‘Landscapes’ (277) is bigbly noticeable. Sir 
 A. Callcott suffers grievously from unfortunate juxtaposition. An ordinary 
 ' Landscape’ of bis (270), belongingto Lord Durham, is positively extinguished by 
 the adjacent Turners; and his sea-piece of the ‘Scheldt, near Antwerp’ (207), 
 belonging to the Duke of Bedford, is scarcely more happily placed in contrast to 
 the ‘Wreck of the Minotaur.’ ” 
 
 The supreme men in this room however are, undoubtedly, Etty and Turner. 
 “Etty,” says the Atlmimum^ “whom Manchester may be said to have dis- 
 covered, and which had the honour of fostering his genius, makes a splendid 
 stand here. His women, with their voluptuous bosoms, raven hair, killing 
 eyes, spaced out with driving blue skies, and scarlet draperies, and fruit and 
 jewels, shine out here like lamps amid the quieter works of lower-toned men. 
 His ‘ Satyrs and Nymphs ’ is gorgeous in its contrasts of brown and white skin. 
 His ‘ Cleopatra on the Cydnus ’ is a prodigal eastern galaxy of colour, with its 
 adoring slaves and the diving girls ; of thought not much, but a prodigality of 
 artful contrasts and composition ; — the flying Cupids spoil it and turn it into 
 mere allegory. Then there is the ‘ Storm,’ a sort of Tom Moore fancy, and the 
 ‘ Idle Lake,’ two people swimming in an oyster shell, and the ‘ Sirens,’ a fine 
 imagination. Who can match his carnations — he, the pink of painters ? Wilkie 
 is not so well represented. There is, however, his ‘ Katcatcliers,’ ‘ Distraining 
 for Eent,’ The Jew’s Harp,’ ‘ Guess my Name,’ and ‘ Blind Man’s Buff.’ ‘ The 
 Eatcatchers’ is a small diploma picture, painted small because it was a gift. 
 
 ‘ The Distraining for Eent ’ is beautiful in its expression of the varieties of 
 grief, from petulant scolding to the sleepy torpor of despair. The touch, fairy- 
 like and silvery, super-delicate often, but always true, precise, cool, and sure. — 
 A few interesting pictures preserve the memory of Turner. ‘ Saltash,’ a deep- 
 toned wonderful piece of work, and a ‘ Sunrise on the Coast,’ with a white 
 burning sea and a blue film of haze, as delicious as if it had been distilled from 
 the salvia blossom. To Turner a single pearl was a universe of colour. — 
 Phillips has a portrait of Lord Thurlow, and Duncan the ‘ Entry of the Pre- 
 tender into Edinburgh,’ ghastly and almost putrid, as Scotch colour generally is 
 since Wilkie’s day, but brim full of character,— the barber frightened by the 
 rush of the Lochaber axe man, the old Lord cheering, the pretty and hooded 
 girls, are all excellent. 
 
 “Among the living artists, Mr. Frost, with his statuesque flesh and high 
 finish, stands well ; his syrens, nymphs, and scene of ‘ Una and the Satyrs,’ 
 show him quite at his best, before he turned so much to clay and stone. Two 
 specimens of Mr. Eippingale are interesting as studies of character, — ‘ Ban- 
 xlitti,’ and ‘ The Country Post Office,’ the colour wooden and monotonous, 
 but the faces varied and true. The second picture is an amusing collection of 
 the heads of a village, fat and pompous, thin and prying, with a touch here and 
 there of pathos. Constable s dewy, speckled, shiny impasto, is well seen in a 
 picture of his here, with a dull coloured rainbow and an earthly look about the 
 grass. Mr. Mulrcady’s pleasant Goldsmith feeling is shown in his ‘ Barber’s 
 'Shop,’ a heavy black picture, almost a caricature; his ‘ Forgotten Word,’ 
 
31 
 
 which, below Etty’s ‘Joan of Arc,’ and his ‘Mercy interceding for 
 the Vanquished,’ perhaps the finest thing the York man ever did, are 
 as refreshing as spring blue sky after winter rain. It is a pity Mr. 
 Mulready’s boys should all wear cinnamon-coloured jackets, though it may 
 be good for colour. His ‘ Travelling Druggist ’ is a good example of his larger 
 style ; the subject is good, and the sick boy’s face excellent, though we wish he 
 had been younger ; but Mr. Mulready generally paints boys about fourteen. 
 Here, too, we see his ‘ Haymaking,’ that is, just a bit of one of Tennyson’s 
 Idylls.” 
 
 But we must note, for the guidance of the visitor, the numbers of the more 
 remarkable pictures. Turner’s pictures are marked 221-228-229 ; Etty’s 
 “ Homeric Dance ” is marked 281 ; his “ Combat ” (360), and Sir E. Land- 
 seer’s “ There’s Life in the Old Dog yet ” (331), his “ Dignity and Impudence” 
 (337), and “Alexander and Diogenes” (336), should also be noticed. But 
 introduction hereabouts is all but useless. Engraving has made the more re- 
 markable of the pictures in the two remaining saloons familiar to the English 
 public. Wilkie’s “Blind Man’s Buff” is marked 258, and his “Card 
 Players ” 275. The Atheno&um has thus noticed the Landseers and Herberts: — 
 
 “ Of Sir E. Landseer we have a splendid specimen — ‘ There’s Life in the Old 
 Dog yet,’ a low-toned picture, but such a picture, such a block of a man’s life 
 and mind in it. The poor dog with a glazing eye and feeble gaze, the dead deer, 
 the momentariness of the shock, the depth of the chasm, the grey slabs of table 
 rock, the eager and business-like look of the gillie, raise this picture to the 
 highest rank. The visitor would do well, too, to compare Sir E. Landseer’s 
 ‘ Ratcatching ’ with Wilkie’s, and observe the difference of style. The ‘ Blood- 
 hound ’ is like a line from an epic, it is so robust in its painting. Close by is 
 Mr. Hart’s ‘Cellini,’ and not far off his fine head of an Italian architect, thinking 
 out some Duomo. Mr. Herbert, with his ascetic and severe style, has many 
 works in the Exhibition. The ‘ Choice of Cordelia,’ the ‘ Brides of Venice,’ 
 ‘ St. John the Baptist reproving Herod,’ are pure and elaborate, every Vandyke 
 and jewel given, with a full daylight effect, and much vigour and fullness of 
 imagination.” 
 
 The Pre-Raphaelite pictures will undoubtedly claim attention. The effect 
 which they have produced upon art in England cannot be denied ; and the visitor 
 who examines the specimens here exhibited conscientiously, wnll be able to 
 see cause for this undoubted effect. “ The Strayed Sheep ” of Mr. Holman 
 Hunt (488), for instance, is a picture that may be advantageously contrasted 
 with other landscapes in Saloon E. It is not like any of them : it looks even 
 strange beside them ; but examine it conscientiously, and the visitor shall 
 perceive wonderful touches of nature, and fresh touches, too, in it. “ The 
 Awakened Conscience” (550), is by the same artist ; and so is the “ Claudio and 
 Isabella” (565),— the latter a most masterly picture of expression. Let the 
 visitor remark the eyes of Isabella! “Autumn Leaves” (543), by Millais, is a 
 fair sample of the master — it needs no explanation ; just as the “ Death of 
 Chatterton,” by Wallis (371), tells its own sad story. And now the visitor must 
 
32 
 
 pass onward towards Saloon F ; passing by the way Frith’s “ Trial of a Witch ” 
 (394) ; Cooke’s “Salute at Yenice” (324) ; Poole’s “ Song of the Troubadours,” 
 (326) ; Creswick’s “ Kocky Lake ” (321) ; Webster’s “ Slide” (350), a Leech in 
 oil colours ; Leslie’s “ Uncle Toby and Widow Wadman ” (369) ; Egg’s “ Peter 
 the Great and Catherine’s First Interview” (398) ; Mulready’s “ Train up a 
 Child” (356), and “Wolf and Lamb” (361) ; and Cooper’s “ Battle of Bosworth,” 
 (399). 
 
 There is a Vestibule between Saloons E and F, in Yv^hich the visitor may 
 remark some pictures by Liverseege and others — his “ Captain Macheath” and 
 “ Cobbett’s Register” (412-13), for instance. Here, too, are Sir W. Allan’s 
 “Death of the Regent Murray;” “The Mock Election,” by the unfortunate 
 B. R. Haydon; “The Fall of Babylon,” by Martin; David Roberts’s “Rome;” 
 and some Flowers by Miss Mutrie. 
 
 The visitor should now enter Saloon F, where he will find more specimens 
 of English masters, including : — “ The Battle of Roveredo” (483), by Stanfield; 
 Elmore’s “Novice” (500); Ward’s “ Charlotte Corday led to Execution” (464); 
 Elmore’s “Origin of the Stocking Loom” (501); Maclise’s “Ghost Scene in 
 Macbeth” (522); Linnell’s “ Morning in Autumn” (556); Horsley’s “Madrigal” 
 (549); Cope’s “ Martyrdom of Saunders” (560); Linton’s “ Return of a Greek 
 Armament” (524); Gordon’s “ AVilliam Fairbairn ” (570), especially interesting 
 in the Art-Treasures Exhibition; “Moses setting out to the Fair,” and “Return” 
 therefrom, by Maclise (579-85); Ward’s “Louis XVI. and Marie Antoinette in 
 the Temple” (597), in which the figure of the king is wonderfully drawn and ex- 
 pressive. In this Saloon will be found a large number of admirable specimens 
 of our living artists, all worthy of most careful inspection. Before pro- 
 ceeding to the Oriental Court, the visitor should spend some time in the north 
 side of the Clock Gallery, and Staircase to ditto, where he will find an 
 interesting collection of Paintings by Modern Masters, both Foreign and 
 English, including works b}^ Ary Scheffer, Delaroche, Rosa Bonheur, Tideman, 
 Wilkie, Maclise, Linnell, &c. 
 
 THE ORIENTAL COURT. 
 
 The glowing colours here obtruded upon the eye ; tlic ivory carvings ; the 
 curious mats, and rugs, and carpets against the Northern Wail, showing the 
 Indian uses for cotton; the silk carpet manufactured at Wurrangul, in the 
 centre of the East Wall ; the shawl-patterned wool carpet, from Herat, on 
 the Southern Wall ; the embroidered floor coverings from Cashmere, on the 
 South Wall ; the specimens of calico printing, for which India was long famous, 
 on the West Wall, together with the splendid specimens of printing in gold 
 from Madras ; specimens of Indian weaving, embroidery, and printing, in the 
 two long cases which reach from west to east, at the northern side of the 
 court; silk goods worn by the natives; paintings by native artists, in- 
 cluding architectural drawings of some of the tombs, mosques, and palaces of 
 
33 
 
 tke north-west of India; and small paintings on the Eastern Wall, representing 
 a native family of rank with their attendants witnessing a Natcht, a native 
 dance ; specimens of Indian jewellery, nose-rings, toe-rings, filigree-work, in a 
 case ; a collection of Oriental arms, contributed by the Queen and the Prince 
 Consort ; carvings in black wood, sandal wood, ebony, horn, etc. ; the tent in 
 the centre of the Saloon, filled with gorgeous Indian embroidery, emblems of 
 royalty, fly-flappers, etc. ; silks, carvings, and porcelain from China ; jewellery 
 from Burma ; and a complete suit of armour in lacquered ware from Japan — 
 all make up a room full of Oriental treasures that must keenly interest the 
 untravelled visitor. 
 
 Passing out from this court by its western opening, the visitor at once 
 reaches the 
 
 WATER-COLOUR GALLERY, 
 
 which stretches across the western extremity of the Palace. This brilliant, 
 lively Gallery is the glory of the British School. Here, at least, English artists 
 reign supreme. The AthencEum has offered its readers the following rapid 
 summary of the claims of the water-colour artists here represented to the 
 attention of visitors : — 
 
 “While the corners of the Modern Gallery display so many foreign names, as 
 Canaletto, Dahl, Lely, Kneller, and our portrait collection has its Holbein, 
 Mabuse, Yandyck, &c., the Water-colour Gallery, at the west end of this 
 building, boasts of none but the pure English names of Absolon, Branwhite, 
 Collins, Callow, Chambers, Corbould, Cattermole, Cox, Duncan, Dodgson, 
 Edridge, Fahey, Evans, Copley Fielding, Fripp, Gilbert, and Goodall. This 
 collection is contained in three rooms, at the west end of the Exhibition. The 
 chief one is 200 feet long, and is entered through the Oriental Court and the 
 Hertford Gallery, — the lesser rooms, one devoted to Turner’s works, and another 
 to the works of dead men, open like side chapels out of this, and are each 52 feet 
 long. The collection, chronological and historical, numbers 1,000 drawings, all 
 carefully selected for peculiar interest or for their value as instructions. The 
 living men are arranged alphabetically, so jealousy is impossible, and the dead 
 men, who no longer know what jealousy means, according to their dates. 
 Messrs. Smith and Colnaghi have been of much service to Mr. Holmes, as 
 Messrs. Agnew have in other ways. The Queen and Dowager-Countess of 
 Ellesmere are also liberal contributors. 
 
 “ To show how water-colour began as by mere accident, Mr. Holmes shows 
 sketches by Eembrandt ( 1 ), Ostade ( 2 ), Yan Huysum ( 11 - 22 ), and others; and 
 by themselves stand some chalk studies of great men: Eaphael’s ‘ Entombment,’ 
 and ‘Madonna’ in red chalk, and Mulready’s ‘Life Studies’ ( 618 - 624 ), finished 
 like enamels, with all the care, love, and labour of the wise old man, who still 
 considers himself a student in the life school, and is still a patient child at 
 nature’s knee. Then come studies by the old masters, washed in with bistre, sepia, 
 pr loW'toned colour, and edged and heightened with chalk. Under this head are 
 
 g 
 
34 
 
 some ‘Children,’ by Reynolds, done as a tamed giant would do theni; some 
 ‘Cupids,’ by Cipriani (38-41); and ‘A Lady,’ by Gainsborough (46), graceful and 
 free. To this succeed the works of Sandby (23-37), the real founder and fore- 
 seer of the art. Born in Nottingham, an unlikely place, in 1725, he visited 
 France, and probably studied with Watteau, whose opera graces and quaint 
 elegance he not inaptly caught. His style is simple, and he shows a wish for 
 atmospheric effect — a prerogative of English art — born under a dull but pic- 
 turesque and fitful sky. Then comes Hearne (99-104), with his heavy dark- 
 lined abbeys ; and countless works of Cozens (48-57), rocks and skies good, 
 Wheatley (60), Rowlandson (63-65), Williams, Leitch, and others, — some carica- 
 tures, some conventional dark landscapes. 
 
 “ More truth and air came with Girtin (66-82), and a new epoch began. Of 
 his broad, sombre manner there are some excellent specimens here. Then we 
 have seas by Chambers (181-184), and wrecks by Bentley (381-387), and dull 
 Westalls (171-173), and graceful Stothards (150-167), and Rosses, and Ibbotsons, 
 and Edridges, and Robsons, and Clennels (175-177), and glowing Yarleys 
 (202-212), and vigorous Glovers (256-258), Muller (231-243) can be judged by 
 his bold, strong-coloured Turks and palm-trees, with the broad blues and reds, 
 and Haydon (247) by a sketch for his own ‘Judgment of Solomon,’ decidedly 
 his best work, and better in conception than many a Domenichino or Sasso 
 Ferrato. Some Nesfields (276-280), Reinagles, Barrets, and Inglefields make up 
 the list. About them all there is less lightness, animal spirits, distance, and 
 atmosheric effect than we now obtain, since Turner taught us better. Of Wilkie 
 (185-192), there is a ‘ Grace before Meat,’ the painter gave it to Lady Blessington. 
 Of John Martin (416-420), there is a landscape entitled, ‘Diogenes and the 
 Rustic,’ — the cynic is casting away his gourd when he sees the peasant drink 
 out of his hand. Trees and palaces fill the scene : the figures are mere puppets. 
 These early water-colours before Turner came are dull and heavy, though often 
 ambitious. No painter seems to have learnt the full power of his materials. 
 Prout is here with the ‘ Venice,’ which is his own; Cattermole (445-474) with his 
 knights and monks, and Copley Fielding with the seas and coasts he rules 
 (388-408). There is a drawing by Mr. Stanfield of the wreck, with gulls 
 screaming over a Mazeppa seaman bound, not to a horse, but a mast (834-850). 
 Dadd (281-283), now insane, has some sketches of dead camels and caravan halts, 
 a Nubian cave, and a vale of rocks. All our living artists are represented here. 
 Mr. Jenkins (655-661), with his pretty sentiment in ‘ Hopes and Fears,’ Mr. 
 Lewis, with his ‘Englishman in the Desert,’ and his ‘Pilgrims in Rome,’ the 
 most elaborate of his careful and singular works. Mr. Collingwood has a 
 ‘Girl Weeping,’ Mr. Oakley an ‘Italian Boy’ and some ‘Ladies Singing.’ Mr. 
 Corbould comes out quite as a king, with his great scene from the ‘Prophets,’ 
 and his ‘ Godiva,’ the Coventry lady ’s flesh being as pulpy and sunny as woman’s 
 flesh can well be ; the tone the mellow gold of the parted nectarine. Mr. J. B. 
 Pyne has some broad bits of Italy, Mr. Naish some old English mansions, with a 
 scene from Athens, Mr. Fahey a scene in a hop-garden, and Mr. Bennett some rare 
 works. Messrs. Hart, Pickersgill, and Herbert all send studies of well-known pic- 
 
t 
 
 35 
 
 tures. Mr. Harding has some clean and yet bold landscapes, one of a Viaduct, with 
 broad shadows, very full of daylight. Mr. Bartholomew contributes some capital 
 flowers, rich in colour, tall swaying hollyhocks, with black red cups, and a blue 
 sky above. Better than most men’s summer scenes is (601-606) Mr. Branwhite’s 
 ‘ Ferry in the Frost,’ the sun fiery red, the snow purpled, and the ice here and 
 there refractive. Mr. "William Hunt (518-547) has an excellent show of gems, — 
 brown stable boys, grinning of course, odd drudges of the Topsy class, curling 
 farmer’s children ready for the soiree^ Indian girls, maidens praying, and, above 
 all. Fruit of melting gold. Humour, colour, all Hunt’s qualities, may be seen 
 here, epitomized in a dozen works. M. Haag sends some Flemish Interiors, full 
 of men with trunk hose, and well-arranged cavaliers that you cannot tell apart 
 except by their blues and reds. M. Louis Haag appears in Monks and Italian 
 Shepherds, and especially in his great pictures of the doings at Balmoral — Going 
 to and Eeturning from the Chase. Mr. Lance has some glorious Fruit, and Mr, 
 Gilbert, the hundred-fingered, his ‘ Eastern Bazaar,’ and a ‘ Musician,’ clever 
 enough. Old David Cox (480-496) could not be seen better than by his wet 
 sands, rainy blowy moors, and rank country churchyards, while Mr. Cattermole 
 (445-474) has swarms of red and brown monks, Macbeths, and battling cavaliers, 
 produced with great talent, but too much of the fatal facility of the ephemeral 
 book illustrator. Mr. Burton’s ‘ Moldavian Peasants’ are, as usual, beautiful 
 and smoothly picturesque. Mr. Absolon has a perfect flower garden of fresh 
 daylight sketches, apparently too swiftly and skimmingly executed, yet always 
 cheery and pleasing, and pretty, and light-hearted, always full of April blood, 
 and the dash and freshness of a gentleman’s light-hearted youth. His ‘ Sleeping 
 Nun,’ his ‘Village Dance,’ his ‘ Church Porch,’ are all in this vein ; so is his 
 ‘ Tambourine Player’ and his ‘ Stage Eustic Lovers.’ He ahvays delights, and 
 to instruct he does not care. What a Watteau of a scene painter he would make! 
 and for ballets he would be worth a stage box crammed full of guineas, Mr. 
 Fripp’s bridge, trees and water are admirable, and so are his rocks with the 
 water spilling over them. Mr. Warren shows us the Magi in an Eastern twilight 
 not unlit with stars. Mr. Vacher has a clear-headed view of the blues and 
 yellows of Italian scenes. Mr. Tayler catches the spirit of the Squire Western 
 days, of the tie wig and long boots, and gives us pretty horsewomen and bowing 
 cavaliers. Mr. L. Price has a glimpse of the painter’s city, Venice, and Mr. 
 Duncan a loch weltering with moonlight. Nor are Jackson, Whichelo, Wyld, 
 and Wright by any means to be forgotten. Mr. Eiviere has some cockney Irish, 
 and Mr. Goodall some pretty children and effective decorous countrymen. 
 
 “ Mr. Topham comes out well with his picturesque share of beauty and 
 pleasing colours. His Spanish and Irish peasants are equally national and good. 
 Mr. David Eoberts (734-770), contributes some of his Holy Land sketches, and 
 and his bull-fight in the grand square of Seville.” 
 
36 
 
 We now entreat the visitor to pass into 
 
 t 
 
 THE TUENEE, EOOM, 
 
 one of the small rooms, to the west of this long and brilliant Gallery, which 
 is devoted to the exhibition of eighty-five drawings by Joseph Mallard William 
 Turner, whom the country lost three years ago. A strange, gloomy man— 
 not social— a solitary dreamer. He spent a long life, as this series of his 
 water-colour drawings will amply testify, in a noble devotion to his art. 
 The dates on the first and last of the drawings are the two extremes of 
 the long years that came and went, and still found him at his easel. So far back 
 as 1782, Turner, with the figure of whom we are all familiar, produced a picture, 
 the excellence of which the English public has now an opportunity of examine 
 ing. It is marked 296, “ Euins of Tynemouth Abbey.” We have ample 
 promise of the glorious fruit in store for us. Who, like Turner, could toss up a 
 foaming sea ; make ships wildly dance upon its bosom ; awe with his storms, 
 and enchant with his sunlight ? There is no effect of sky or water, no shadow 
 of a passing cloud, no reflected light, no sunset glory, no chilly morning, no 
 tangled brushwood, no solid massive foliage, no parching heat, beyond the con- 
 trol of that magic pencil. Now he lifts the proud points of a cathedral into the 
 air, as with the wave of a magician’s wand— now his brush throws a solemn 
 gloom over the ruins of an abbey — now it casts crimson boats upon an emerald 
 sea — and now, athwart a dripping landscape, traces the glory and the promise of 
 the rainbow. Stanfield trims his ships with precise Imowledge of their sailing 
 qualities, but Turner governs them with the force of a giant. He scorns petty 
 details, and casts them upon his turbulent waters with the courage of genius. 
 And he is, let it be noted, truer to nature than the sailor-artist, because he saw 
 more, and had a large store of knowledge to select from. See how his waves 
 thunder against pier-heads ; watch them leaping like pleased hounds about Eddy- 
 stone. Why, you look on in wonder at the daring which was necessary to 
 produce these effects. That sense of power, which we have already noticed as 
 the charm of a sketch, is that which all Turner’s pictures convey. They appear to 
 be almost too powerful. You have an idea that you are in the presence of a giant 
 who has never found a work to perform that has taxed the full extent of his 
 force. No two works are similar ; here wondrous sunlight, and there pro- 
 foundest gloom. Comparing him with Martin, and allowing for the majesty of 
 Martin’s one idea, see how he dwarfs him with his inexhaustible fund of ideas. 
 From the most unpromising subjects — from the least picturesque of objects — 
 Turner could extract a living and an immortal beauty. Claude, and Eousseau, 
 and Creswick, and Lee— all fade before him, shrivelled to the proportions of 
 children. He is an answer to boastful France, who defies all the world to pro- 
 duce pictures like hers, — who glorifies her capital as the cradle of art. Theopile 
 Gauthrie may cry out before the English school “ masquin but in this little 
 room, where there are masterpieces no bigger than the “ Mother and Daughter,” 
 by Meissannier, he will be compelled to recognise the lesson Turner teaches to 
 
37 
 
 his countr 3 rmen, viz. : that grandeur be achieved — that the highest art may 
 
 he realised — upon a surface no larger than the palm of the hand. To Turner 
 water-colour artists owe an infinite debt of gratitude. It was he showed them 
 the strength and all the brilliant qualities of their materiaL It was he who cast 
 heavy metallic colours aside, and proved, in the transparent tints we have 
 before us, the superiority of his own well-chosen palette. 
 
 Let the visitor particularly examine the “ Bamborough Castle,” (331), 
 “Durham” (335), “ Carew Castle” (339), “ The Mewstone” (325), “Llanberris 
 Lake” (334), “The Bass Eock” (357), “Lofty Launceston” (340), and that 
 wondrous scene of snowy sail and bright blue sea, “ Plymouth” (329). He will 
 see in these various effects the fertile genius of the artist, that gave to every 
 scene he represented his own unmistakeable mark. These scenes are, in one 
 sense, photographic. They have a truth to nature which the cultivated eye 
 alone recognises. Here is the study of all nature brought to bear upon a narrow 
 scene — elevating, idealising it. No cloud ever swam above Turner’s head — no 
 wave ever rolled to his feet — without bearing with it a lesson to him. Does he 
 set about painting “ The First Steamer on the Thames” (307). He gives so 
 peculiar a tone to his picture — he so sifts the subject — that you know, at once, 
 there is a deep meaning in the scene. Then see the blue rocks in his “ Har- 
 borough Lands” lie as in fairy land ; and his “ Mont Blanc from Aosta” (311). 
 There is not a picture that should be passed by: “Nymphs Bathing” (298); 
 “Christ Church, Oxford” (300); “Beech Trees, Norbury Park” (302); “Wind- 
 mill and Dyke in Holland” (304); “ Bridge at Abergavenny” (308); “Tivoli” 
 (309); “View of Leeds” (312); “Eton” (315); “Temple of Minerva, Cape 
 Colonna” (316) ; “ Vesuvius in Eruption and in Eepose” (319-320) ; “ Edinburgh” 
 (323) ; “ Bridport” (327) ; “ Wreckers” (330) ; “ Holy Land” (338) ; “ Hampton 
 Court” (344) ; “ Pendennis Castle” (349) ; “ Dover, from the Sea” (356); “ Florence” 
 (359); “Colosseum at Verona” (362); “Yarmouth Fishing Boats” (374); 
 “Marathon” (376); and lastly, “An Alpine Pass” (388): his last drawing! 
 The variety of effect is absolutely startling. And then, notice his sketches — wild, 
 but most skilful dashes of colour — for Scott and Milton illustrations, happily 
 made familiar to us all by the engraver. No wonder that he vfas the engraver’s 
 idol. 
 
 Many readers will remember Turner’s “Heidelberg,” engraved by Prior ; a 
 lovely effect of light and shade, so filled up and tossed about that the gaze is 
 confounded by its wild majesty. This engraving has a peculiar interest belong- 
 ing to it — if the story of its production, current in London, be true. It is said 
 that Prior, when almost unknown, aspired to the honour of engraving one of 
 Turner’s pictures ; and that he saved his money steadily till he had amassed suf- 
 ficient to give the master a commission. Turner, so the story runs, painted his 
 Heidelberg for Prior, — and Prior was worthy of the honour to which he aspired 
 for which he so nobly laboured. 
 
 In the presence of Turner — so often misunderstood — so savagely reviled by 
 men whose sight could not grasp the profundity of his knowledge of nature — it 
 is necessary to add to a passing notice of his works arranged in this room, some 
 
,S8 
 
 few words of warning. He is not to be thoroughly understood, unless ap- 
 proached reverently. There are blue hills and red clouds, trees of strange tints, 
 coats of dazzling colours in his pictures. They have a strange appearance, be- 
 side the studies of other artists. He stands alone, based, it has been asserted, 
 upon Claude, yet, taking nothing whatever from his master. His request that 
 he might figure next to him challenges comparison. Turner was a man of strange 
 mind, whom our grandchildren will probably understand better than we under- 
 stand him. As in photography, you must remove the camera to a certain 
 distance to focus the sitter, without distorting his features ; so in viewing — 
 in painting a man’s life and character you must have distance if you want 
 truth. He was eminently jealous of his fame ; but shall we blame him for 
 this — we who have inherited all the wealth he garnered about him ? And as we 
 accept his life for the present as a curious puzzle to be unravelled presently, so 
 let the visitor who can claim no special knowledge of art, and whose opinion is 
 rather the offspring of prevalent prejudices than the result of study, enter the 
 room devoted to the Turner drawings, and reverently examine them from begin- 
 ning to end. Let him be assured that many of the startling effects he will see, 
 are true to nature. Let him remember how long and how sedulously the artist 
 studied — how he penetrated into the deep retreats of his darling mistress — and 
 how he spent a long life in arranging his discoveries. For these works are 
 discoveries in nature, as clearly as any made by Newton or Galileo. They are 
 the revelations of a man who, having studied nature phenomena, ordered and 
 arranged them to his own design ; and wrought from them images of beauty to 
 live for ever. He erred in judgment often ; he grew weak, perhaps, as he grew 
 old. The brave hand shook ; the bright eye became dull. It is the human lot. 
 Turner, in his prime — in the vigour of manhood and of intellect — is the man to 
 contemplate. And in this little room he may be seen — various, rich, and true — 
 the supreme master of landscape in this present century. Besides his canvas, 
 all other interpretations of nature become tame, and sharp, and matter-of-fact. 
 You see all in these at a glance. But, before Turner your imagination goes on 
 a vagabond expedition. Your eye wanders hither and thither, catching upon 
 every square inch of the picture some new meaning, or fresh beauty. Master 
 of gloom and sunlight, of wave and rivulet, of rock or teeming corn, of 
 fowls, as of all that is grand in life, — nature never had a dearer student, 
 nor a more poetic interpreter. He lived a hermit’s life, — with art, and only art, 
 for his mistress. The bounties of the world — the ease and joys of wealth — had 
 no power over him. He died, and left the rich harvest of a long life to the 
 country that honoured him, and that will boast the possession of his name more 
 haughtily, as the people become more educated and better able to appreciate the 
 difficulties and the results of the profession to which he belonged. 
 
 The visitor’s way now lies to the southern extremity of the long Water- 
 colour Gallery, where, on his left, he will find an opening into Saloon H, 
 where is arranged 
 
39 
 
 THE HERTFOED COLLECTIOlSr. 
 
 The visitor will notice some noble pictures in this room. Here are five 
 Murillos, viz.: “The Adoration of the Shepherds” (1); “St. Thomas” (2); 
 “Joseph being carried by his Brethren to the Mouth of the Well” (3); 
 “ Assumption of the Virgin” (4) ; and a “ Holy Family” (5). There are also, 
 in this room, four Portraits by Vandyck (6 to 9); four Figures by Velasquez 
 10 to 13); four Kembrandts (14 to 17); Sir Joshua Eeynolds’s “Strawberry 
 Girl” (18); his “Nelly O’Brien” (19); and his “Miss Bowles caressing a Dog” 
 (20) ; Eubens’ famous “ Eainbow Landscape” (21) ; and three more pictures by 
 the same master (22 to 24) ; two Holbeins (23, 24) ; a Salvator Eosa (25) ; an 
 Andrea del Sarto (26); one of Watteau’s “Fetes Champetres” (27); two 
 Greuzes (32, 33) — the former being the Portrait of Cardinal Fesch ; a Nicholas 
 Poussin (35); a “Landscape,” by Gaspar Poussin (36) ; “ Mother and Child,” by 
 Paul Delaroche (40); a Gainsborough (42); an “Exterior,” by Decamps, so 
 famous for his white walls and Turkish children (43); “Camp Scene,” by 
 Horace Vernet (44). 
 
 The visitor’s way is now eastward, into the Great Transept, and so down the 
 Nave, passing along the southern side of it. 
 
 Against this wall, at back of Saloon A, he will commit himself to the 
 guidance of Mr. Peter Cunningham, who has arranged here a splendid 
 
 BRITISH PORTRAIT GALLERY. 
 
 Let us now calmly pass the figures in review, as they stand in their frames. 
 First then, and number 1, is “ Henry IV.;” then (2, 3) comes “ Henry VI.;” 
 then “ King Edward IV.” (5); then “Jane Shore ” (6); then “ Eichard III.” 
 (7) ; then two Portraits of “ Anne Boleyn ” (10, 11) ; then “ Lord Darnley, the 
 ill-fated Husband of beautiful Mary Queen of Scots, with his Brother ” (13) ; 
 then “ Mary Tudor, Daughter of Henry the Seventh ” (14) ; then “ Eichard the 
 Second ” (15) ; then we come to Holbein’s wondrous work. His pictures include 
 “ Queen Katherine Parr ” (16), “ Earl of Surrey, the Poet ” (attributed to Hol- 
 bein by Walpole), “ Sir Nicholas Carew ” (26), “ Sir Walter Ealeigh ” and 
 “ Lady Ealeigh ” (27-28), “The Earl of Southampton (Shakspeare’s patron), 
 with the Cat, his companion in the Tower” (31) ; his Wife (32), and “William 
 Camden” (34). Hereabouts, too, at the back of Saloon A, the visitor may 
 remark “ Queen Elizabeth standing on the Map of England,” and “ The Earl of 
 Essex,” both by Zucchero, (18,19); “ Sir Christopher Hatton, the Lord Chan- 
 cellor of Queen Bess ” — observe that he holds Her Majesty’s Portrait — (20) ; and 
 “ Marj^ Queen of Scots ” (25). We now advance to the back of Saloons B and 
 C. We must pass rapidly forward. The more interesting portraits upon this 
 southern wall are — Zucchero ’s “ Queen Elizabeth in a Fancy Costume ” (35), and 
 the same artist’s “ James I.” (36) ; “ Henry Prince of Wales, James the First’s 
 
40 
 
 eldest Son,” in robes, and in pink suit (38, 38a) ; George Yilliers, first Duke of 
 Buckingham,” by Jansen (44); “Charles the First, Queen Henrietta Maria, 
 and Sir Jeffery Hudson,” by Mytens (45) ; Holbein’s “ Henry the Eighth ” 
 (48), and the same painter’s “ Cardinal Wolsey ” (49), “ Queen Jane Seymour ” 
 (50), “Lady Grey, Grandmother to Lady Jane Grey” (53), “ Lady Jane Grey” 
 (53a), “ King Edward the Sixth ” (54, 55, 55a, 56) ; Mabuse’s “ Three Children 
 of Henry the Seventh” (57), and his “Queen Mary I. and Philip II.” (58); 
 more “ Queen Elizabeths ” (62, 63, 64, 65) ; the “ Queen Elizabeth when 
 Princess,” by Holbein (67); Holbein’s “Sir Thomas Gresham” (67a); “Sir 
 Henry Lee, Champion to Queen Elizabeth,” by Mark Garrard (72) ; also, by the 
 same artist, “ Lord Treasurer Burleigh ” (73) ; “ Elizabeth” (77), “ Lord Burleigh 
 seated in the Court of Wards” (78), and “ King James I.” (80); Yandyck’s 
 “ Sir John Suckling holding a volume of Shakspeare ” (83). “ The Chandos 
 Shakspeare!” Here the visitor cannot fail to pause aw'hile. It is the present 
 to the nation of the late Lord Ellesmere. About it are grouped Shakspeare ’s 
 actors and contemporaries. Kemark “ Eichard Burbage ” (87), “Nat Field, the 
 Actor” (88), “ John Lowen,” one of Shakspeare’s fellow-actors (89); then come 
 “Ben Jon son ” (86), “John Fletcher, the Dramatist” (86a), “James Shirley, 
 the Dramatic Author” (90), etc. We now approach Yandyck once more. 
 Eemark “ William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury ” (94), “ Inigo Jones ” (a 
 copy by Hogarth) (95), “Charles I.” (96), “ Earl of Pembroke ” (99), “ Sir 
 William Killigrew ” (105), “Queen Henrietta and Sir Jeffrey Hudson ” (108), 
 “The Earl of Strafford ” (HO), “ The Daughter of Charles I., and Wife of the 
 Duke of Orleans, brother of Louis XIY.” (HI), “Princes Maurice and Eupert, 
 Nephews of Charles I.” (114, 115), “Charles I., Wife, and Family” (116), 
 “ Countess of Southampton” (119), “ The Duke of Newcastle” (121), “Earl of 
 Bedford” (123), “ Earl of Northumberland ” (124), Hereabouts, too, are “ Sir 
 Christopher and Lady Nevill,” by Jansen (100, 101), together with his “ Sir Hugh 
 Myddleton,” who brought the New Eiver to London (104) ; Eubens’s“ Earl of Arun- 
 del ” (107). And now we pause before “ Oliver Cromwell,” in armour, with a 
 truncheon in his strong right hand, painted by Walker (130) ; in the neighbour- 
 hoodof“ Hampden” (131), “ Sir John Eliot” (132), and “ John Pym ”(133). We 
 may pass from the stern Eoundheads to the interesting Portraits of “ Abraham 
 Cowley, the Poet,” when young (143). From Cowley we skip to “Eichard 
 Lovelace, the Poet,” in armour (146) ; the famous “Duchess of Eichmond” 
 (147) ; “John Selden” (149); “Jane Cavendish,” who kept garrison for her 
 father at Welbeck against the Parliament army (150); “Admiral Blake” 
 (151) ; quaint “ Sir Thomas Browne” (152) ; “ Edmund Waller, the Poet,” by 
 Lely (154); and “Samuel Butler, the author of ‘ Hudibras,”’ by the same 
 artist (155) ; “ Lady Betty Sidney,” by Yandyck (157) ; “ Dr. William Harvey,” 
 by Jansen (165); “Lady Mandeville in her Wedding Dress,” by Yansomer 
 (169) ; “ Charles the Second when Prince of Wales,” by Dobson (170) ; “Lucius 
 Cary, Yiscount Falkland” (173) ; “James, Duke of Monmouth” (174) ; “Earl 
 of Clarendon” (175); “Lord Chancellor Bacon,” by Jansen (178); “Sir 
 Nathaniel Bacon, the Painter,” by himself (179), 
 
41 
 
 Here the visitor should cross to the north side of the Nave, and begin his 
 examination of the second half of the British Portrait Gallery, with the 
 paintings at the back of Saloon D. Here he will find himself in the midst of 
 the Court and mistresses of the Second Charles, as bequeathed to us by Lely. 
 Let him observe, by this master, “ The Duchess of Portsmouth ” (180) ; “ The 
 Duchess of Eichmond, la Idle Stuart, as Bellona” (181) ; Charles the Second in 
 his Eobes” (182) ; “ The Duchess of Newcastle” (183) ; “The Duchess of Cleve- 
 land” (184-185) ; the proud “ Duchess of Albemarle and Montague,” whom Lord 
 Montague courted and married as Emperor of China, the lady having deter- 
 mined to give her hand only to a sovereign prince (189) ; “ Nell Gwynne, with 
 a Lamb” (197); “Anne Hyde, Duchess of York” (206); “King James the 
 Second, when Duke of York, with his first Wife, Anne Hyde, and two Children, 
 the future Queens Mary and Anne” (208) ; “ The Earl of Devonshire” (213) ; 
 “ Catherine of Braganza, Wife of Charles the Second, in her Portuguese Dress ” 
 (215); “Countess of Grammont” (216); “The Countess of Southesk” (217) ; 
 “ Countess of Eochester, Mother of the celebrated Earl ” (218) ; “ The Earl of 
 Shaftesbury,” in buff and armour (229) ; “ The Earl of Eochester Crowning his 
 Monkey with Laurel,” attributed to Lely (227a). Let us now turn to Kneller’s 
 portraits, hereabouts. Eemark “ King William III. in his Coronation Eobes ” 
 (195), and his “Queen” (196); “Duchess of Somerset” (212); “Sir Isaac 
 Newton” (222); “John Locke” (223); “John Evelyn, holding his Sylva ” 
 (225); “William, Lord Eussell, the Patriot” (227); and “Sir Christopher 
 Wren” (229c). Against this wall let the visitor also remark “ Mary of Modena, 
 Queen of James the Second,” by Verelst (220); gossipping “Samuel Pepys,” 
 by Hales (224) ; and “Jacob Hall, the Eope Dancer, Dressing his Hair” (226). 
 
 Against Saloon E, the visitor will remark “Queen Anne,” by Closterman 
 (230d) ; “King George the Second,” and his “ Queen Caroline,” and “George 
 Frederick Handel” (236, 237, 238), by Hudson; “Sir Isaac Newton,” by 
 Yanderbank (240) ; “ Grinling Gibbons, the Sculptor” (241), and “ The Great 
 Duke of Marlborough,” by Kneller (242) ; “ George the First,” painted by his 
 Mother, the Electress Sophia, as Cupid (244) ; “John Locke,” by Kneller (248) ; 
 
 “ The Earl of Oxford holding a Medal of Queen Anne ” (249), by Dahl; “ Sir 
 Isaac Newton in his Old Age,” by Sir James Thornhill (251); “The Duke of 
 Cumberland, Hero of Culloden,” by Arthur Pond (252); “ The Young Pretender,” 
 by J. S. Copley, E.A. (257); his “Wife,” by the same artist (258); “Eob Eoy ” 
 (259), “Eobert Flarley, subsequently Earl of Oxford, as Speaker of the House 
 of Commons,” by Kneller (260); “Jacob Tonson, the Bookseller,” (264), by 
 Kneller ; “ John Dryden holding a Laurel Wreath ” (265) , also by Kneller ; as also 
 “Sir John Vanbrugh, Dramatist ” (266) ; “William Congreve” (267), “Sir 
 Eichard Steele” (268), and “Joseph Addison” (269). Here, too, are “Matthew 
 Prior, the Poet,” by Jonathan Eichardson (270) ; “Alexander Pope (by the same 
 artist) with his Dog, ‘Bounce’” (271), “Dean Swift,” by Charles Jervas (272) ; 
 
 “ Head of i^lexander Pope,” by Kneller (273); “ Lady Mary Wortley Montagu,” 
 by Chevalier Eusca (274); “Dr. Young, the Poet,” by Highmore (277); 
 “Thomson (author of ‘The Seasons’),” by Aikman (278); “The Great Lord 
 
 D 
 
42 
 
 Cheatham,” by Hoare, of Batli (281). We now approach Reynolds. He begins 
 with the good “Lord Littleton, Poet and Historian” (282); and “Garrick, as 
 ^Kitely’” (286). We have here, too, his “ George the Third in his Coronation 
 Robes” (288), “ Queen Charlotte in her Coronation Robes” (289),“ TheEarl of Bute” 
 (290), and “ Warren Hastings” (291.) Remark, also, the “ Duke of Wellington,” 
 by H. W. Pickersgill, R. A. (292) ; “ George Stephenson, the Engineer,” by Lucas 
 (294); “John Smeaton, the Engineer,” by Mather Brown (296) ; “Lord Am- 
 herst” and “ Mr. and Mrs. Garrick,” by Gainsborough (297-284-285) ; “ Sir 
 Benj. West,” by Sir Thomas Lawrence (301) ; Sir Thomas’s own Portrait, un- 
 finished (302) ; “ Dr. Samuel Johnson,” by Gainsborough (304) ; “ Boswell, 
 Edward Gibbon, and himself,” by Sir Joshua Reynolds (305, 306, 307) ; “ Mrs. 
 Siddons, aged 29,” by Sir Thomas Lawrence (308) ; “ J. P. Kemble,” also by 
 Sir Thomas (309) ; “ Gainsborough’s Portrait of himself” (310) ; “ David Hume, 
 the Historian,” by Allan Ramsay (313) ; “ General Wolfe,” by Sir N. Dance, R. A. 
 (31.5) ; two Portraits of “ Robert Burns,” by Alex. Nasmyth (317-318) ; “ William 
 Pitt, Prime Minister,” by Gainsborough (319) ; “ Sir Joseph Banks,” by 
 Thomas Phillips, R.A. (322); “Sir Humphrey Davy,” by Sir Thomas Law- 
 rence (324) ; “John Murray, of Albemarle-street,” by H. W. Pickersgill, R.A. 
 (328) ; “ Sir Walter Scott,” by Sir Henry Raeburn, R.A. (329) ; “ Lord Byron,” 
 “ George Crabbe,” “Robt. Southey,” and “ S. T. Coleridge,” by T. Phillips, R.A. 
 (330, 331, 332, 333) ; “ William Gifford, editor of the Quarterly Review^"' by 
 John Hoppner, R.A. (334) ; “ Lockhart,” by H. W. Pickersgill, R.A. (335) ; 
 “ Samuel Rogers,” by S. Lawrence, Esq. (336) ; and “ John Keats,” by S. W. 
 Severn. 
 
 The Athenceum has thus rapidly and pleasantly discoursed of this noble 
 Gallery : — 
 
 “ The Historical Portrait Gallery has been reserved for English worthies and 
 unworthies — ^kings, queens, nobles, poets, lawgivers, lawbreakers, and sages. 
 We begin with a curious Byzantine sort of painting, with a diapered gold back- 
 ground, of that weak-looking fop, Richard the Second, with his dull, fat face and 
 hobbledehoy look, armed with his sceptre, orb, and all the pomp of ill-used 
 sovereignty. Next him is the grave and calculating Henry, who cuckooed the 
 spendthrift stripling — a grim Wickliffe — and a truculent looking Richard the 
 Third, nervous and guilty, fidgetting at his signet, as Hollinshed tells he used to 
 do when he was not fingering his dagger or biting his lip. No jury would acquit 
 such a gallows bird. Then, by easy stages, we move on to Henry the Eighth. 
 His dress is a marvel of jewels, lace, and needlework. On one side of him is his 
 victim, the Earl of Surrey, a poet Achilles, dressed like his master, and apeing 
 his manner, legs straddling and thumb in his girdle. He is all in scarlet, many 
 shades of carnations deepening to blood red, and his robes multitudinous as those 
 of a jockey sweating for a race. A ponderous tassel decorates his pouch and 
 dagger, and his ruffles are of the fairies’ needlework. Observe how frank, and 
 brave, and proud his gaze is compared with Henry’s pig eyes and ef)iscopal chin. 
 Lady Jane Seymour has the angular tire, square-cut dress, and hanging sleeves 
 of the period— formal, but in fine taste, or rather tasteful yet no fine. Near her 
 
43 
 
 is Wolsey, the butcher’s son, with his red cape and hood and crinkly linen sleeves, 
 with his two caps and tasselled Cardinal’s hat hanging up close by — ^his mouth 
 firm and tight, his chin monastically full, his brow clenched and frowning. He 
 looks more the man to break other men’s hearts than his own, this red man, so 
 insolent and swollen with pride. Sir H. Guilford has a lowering brow, and an 
 uneasy, dyspeptic look, as if he were musing of the scaffold— and next to him 
 enters that pretty babe of grace, Edward the Sixth, at all ages — fat as a sackling, 
 with cap and feather — then in his furred robe and dagger, then with his cropped 
 head and ermine and white satin worked with spider’s webs of gold — just the 
 clever child, the phenomenon, born only to go to heaven unstained. We have, 
 too, on the same wall, above and below, ladies of his father’s Court, with their 
 gold net sleeves, Venetian tires, angular and jewelled, their pendant gems 
 and straight skirts faced down the middle with pearls and rubies. Leaving 
 Windsor, we come to the Tower, and see Spanish Philip, with his prominent jaws 
 and squinnying and prying eyes — and poor hard-featured Mary, the image of an 
 ill-favoured maid-of-all-work, dull and plain. AVe have left the matter-of-fact, 
 brown, careful Holbeins, and come to the Sir Antonio Mores, and the dry, quaint, 
 but more refined Zuccheros. Here is Elizabeth, plain and picked with the carica- 
 ture nose, full eyes, prim mouth, and reddish hair in all shapes that a harlequin 
 vanity can assume. Now, sentimental and demure, she eyes her thin, long, white 
 hands ; now, in a strange white dress and transparent ruff, she treads proudly on the 
 map of England veined with rivers. Now, in an absurd, narrow Eastern dress 
 of figured chintz or Persian foolscap and blue shoes, she simpers self-approval. 
 Here, again, she is borne in a litter in the Hunsdon House procession, nobles in 
 red, white, and green, with short cloaks and rapiers, pacing before her like so 
 many mad dancing-masters. These red walls with the blue labelled names hold 
 a vast number also of lesser worthies. Sir Christopher Hatton, ‘ Lids,’ as his 
 mistress affectionately called him, with thin, dancing legs, in white rolled stockings 
 and cloth-of-gold breeches, — the ruff quilled to perfection, the suit spotless and 
 of a rare make. Then there is the Earl of Essex, the Deputy of Ireland, in blue 
 and gold with a polished gorget and square beard; and there are men with great 
 peaked beards, chains, and slashed sleeves. Kaleigh, the bold-faced, too, and a 
 wonderful lady with short blue and red gown, red stockings, and green shoes ; 
 soon the fardingale widens, the ruff becomes gilt, the men’s hair falls and the 
 dress grows more sedate and Spanish, the hand loops in the plain cloak, the 
 slashes vanish. Here is an old Lady Capulet in black and pearls with a crooked 
 cane. Next her flaunts a gayer bird, with red bows, lavender suit and gold- 
 thread borderings, with little feet creeping in and out beneath. Nor must we 
 forget to contrast Mary of Scotland with her greater-souled and less frail cousin 
 of England. Here she is with plain dress and blue cloak and red cross, — her 
 brow broad and full, her features milder and sweeter than her Amazonian rival’s. 
 The fringed chairs, the tapestry, the banded armour, the swords, are all signifi- 
 cative, and bring before us the outer life of past ages. We remember Ealeigh’s 
 face as we read of his adventure, and we think of the pearl embroidered suit he 
 donned and the brooch that looped his hat. Here is a gallant in yellow and 
 
44 
 
 white, — here a hunting scene, where men in gTeen prepare to slice the deer’s 
 throat. Not far off is Leicester, the gipsj earl, with his dark close-cut hair, and 
 suffused vindictive-looking face, handsome and hawk-like enough, but no honour, 
 no virtue ; and see how Mephistophelian is the arch of his eyebrows. He is not 
 the man to tweak by the nose. In a cluster about this spot is Lady Jane Grey’s 
 grandmother, a wise old age, — the Marquis of Winchester, with a gerkin-looking 
 nose, — the Duke of Norfolk, ever angry, — chivalrous Fletcher, — Shakspeare, 
 calm and full-faced, — Ben J onson, dogged and aggressive, — and Lucy Harring- 
 ton, the great Countess of Bedford, — starred round with many lords and ladies 
 of worth or wisdom. Now we come to James the First with his Scotch Latin, 
 his pedantic commonplaces, his love of the flagon and hatred of tobacco, his 
 promising son Henry, his daughter the Queen of Hearts and Bohemia, — Lord 
 Bacon, ponderously wise,— Wotton, on the watch for a joke, — Sir Charles 
 Cavendish and Falkland’s father,— and the Duke of Buckingham, pert and 
 impudent, with his green suit, painted shoes, and scarf-like garters. In this 
 series we pass by countless ruffs and cloaks, lined and edged, and loaded with 
 gold. The Earl of Lincoln, for instance, with his pottle-cap, fur robe, loose 
 sleeves, white beard and ruff, — and a brave lordly-looking man in complete 
 armour and orange scarf of a later epoch, — and Lord V ere of Tilbury, with dark 
 armour and broad blue scarf, — and the Countess of Pembroke, — and the Earl of 
 Oxford, fiery and chivalrous. 
 
 “ Patience and time bring us to the stately Yandycks, row by row. We pass 
 Charles the First, weak and melancholy, with his tottering children and proud, 
 despotic, mischievous wife, — Prince Eupert, hot and heady, — Prince Maurice, a 
 born negative, — Hamilton, Huntley, Newcastle, Carlisle, and Wentworth, 
 malignant and scheming, with his scowling eye and long thin hand, — the Earl 
 of Arundel, fierce in full armour, — Harvey, worn and abstracted-looking — 
 Hobbes, with his vivacious and animated face all in motion, — Lady Kirk, in 
 yellow satin, — the Cavendish that held Welbeck against the Parliament, quiet and 
 lady-like, — Sir H. Middleton, in black, with a severe meditative look, — Killigrew, 
 the careless cavalier, — Lovelace, the poet, — the Earl of Pembroke, whom 
 Clarendon does not praise, — and Lord Brooke, with a matchlock in his hand. 
 Then there is Inigo Jones, combative and full of speculation, — Yandyck him- 
 self, Dobson, his pupil, — Waller and Suckling. Then after all these reds and 
 yellows, and laced and square-toed boots, and tags and points and plumes, come 
 the simple, almost rudely-clad Eoundheads who swept them away. Hampden, 
 grave, plain, and earnest, — Sir John Eliot, with his thin, hollow face, — sturdy 
 Pym, — bold Blake, the model of a stout Englishman, — and, last of all, Crom- 
 well, not friendly and sour, but gravely smiling, and full of quiet serene 
 majesty. 
 
 “ Crossing over, we find Lely hard at work at the Eestoration, with all its 
 pimps, parasites, and bare-bosomed Yenuses. Charles the Second, swarthy and 
 hang-dog, and his unlucky wife, Catharine of Portugal, — Monk, fat and com- 
 monplace, the tool of faction, — Wren, looking at St Paul’s, — the Duke of 
 Ormond, honest and bold, and somewhat hot of temper, — H. Locke, ascetic and 
 
45 
 
 benevolent, — Lord Russell, fat and phlegmatic, — the Duke of Newcastle,chivalrous 
 and old fashioned, — his dilettante wife, good, but rather a butt of the Duchess 
 of Portsmouth, and such French cattle. There is Evelyn undressed and 
 anxious, and Arlington with his white rod and beadle robes, with a bow on his 
 shoe and a dancing-master’s antic, and the black cut over his nose that Rochester 
 laughs at and mimics. On we go to James the Second, narrow-minded and 
 obstinate, with the huge nose that always implies some weakness, — and that 
 poor smart boy Monmouth, — then William and Mary, discreet and respectable, 
 — and the favourite Bentinck and Newton, rapt, and looking like a wise old 
 clergyman. Now, breaking away from la belle Hamilton, Nelly, and all the 
 loose-robed voluptuously clad beauties of the Stuart harem, let us pass over 
 sternly to Marlborough, with his blue and red, his armour, staff, and volu- 
 minous ermine, and his full-fleshed face so diflicult to read when you get beyond 
 courage and far-seeing powers of combination. Leaving Harley with his full 
 face, we come to the rather foolish looking Pretender, with his powdered hair, 
 full forehead, and undeniably regal bearing, about the only good gift he had, — 
 and not caring for Lord Chancellor Harcourt or the Countess of Tankerville, 
 and leaving Somers and pompous Vanbrugh, we come to Dry den, with his 
 eager vehement look, — and old Tonson, always ready for business. Steele, 
 honest, sympathetic Steele, with the portly face and farmer’s look, — Addison, 
 cold and wise, the king 
 
 —o’ the douce folk that live by rule, 
 
 Grave, tideless blooded, calm and cool, 
 
 that Burns, when rather drunk, delighted to rail at, believing demureness too 
 often hypocrisy, and ‘ o’er gude ’ a decent mask for a devil. A careless, loose- 
 dressed Lady Mary points the way to Pope, sickly and lean, but with such a 
 brow as God seldom gives a man, — Prior and Swift, cynical, but with no habitual 
 frown of ill-nature, — and we come to George the First, supported by Harley 
 and Walpole, fat and squire-like, George’s son. Queen Caroline and her favourite 
 Lady Sundon. Pelham, Chatham, Lyttleton, and Thomson, the fat pastoral 
 poet, follow. The handsome, shrew d-looking Earl of Bute, with his rather 
 malicious smile, shines in a full-length, and opens the long reign of George the 
 Third ; but we must not forget Young, with his affected leer and twisted mouth, 
 or jovial Gay, or Mason, with his ugly coarse face of a Bow-street runner. 
 Round Johnson’s seamed face all the great men of his age are placed : — Gibbon, 
 with the pudding-bag cheeks ; Reynolds, beaming through his spectacles ; West, 
 the king of mediocrity; Garrick, cunning and versatile ; Sir Joseph Banks, with 
 the look of an old sea-captain ; Wilson, heavy and naked-looking, while Hume 
 struts in scarlet, and Smeaton bends his calculating and sagacious head. Then 
 come the later men Sir H. Davy, more like a country gentleman than a great 
 philosopher ; Burns, with his lamps of eyes ; Scott, so like a plain grazier, but 
 with a column, a very hat-full of brain, and thoughtful eyes not full open. Here 
 is Coleridge, with his fat, beaming smile; a young Brougham, like a cross 
 Dominie} Gifford, the executioner; Dr. Wollaston, Southey, the hawk-eyed; 
 
46 
 
 Byron, the English Apollo, ever scornful, with a worm at his heart’s core } 
 Lockhart, looking young and smart ; and Campbell, dandyish. 
 
 “ With the exception of the Queen and Prince Albert, no living celebrities 
 are admitted into this preserve. Many a dusty corridor and mouldy oak-pan- 
 nelled chamber have been scanned to collect this rich collection of rarities, that 
 photography and engraving will now keep together for ever, and which, from 
 mere curiosities, will henceforth become household words in every Art -loving 
 family.” 
 
 Hence, the visitor should turn to the north-western entrance to the Orchestra 
 Gallery, where he will find 
 
 THE PHOTOGRAPHS, 
 
 and a miscellaneous collection of pictures. 
 
 The Photographs need little or no introduction. “ As usual,'” says the 
 Athenceum^ “ Mr. Thurston Thompson contributes a long series of careful copies 
 of Eaphael’s drawings, the very rub and catch of the chalk imitated, their fire 
 and fervour and intensity of love perfectly reproduced. Mr. Fenton is great in 
 distances and rough stone gateways. Mr. Claudet is great in portraiture; a 
 branch of the art in which he fears no rival. Dr. Diamond’s Studies of the 
 Insane excite deep wonder, art contending for admiration and respect with 
 nature. Messrs. Bisson are grand in their architectural views, the Louvre, for 
 instance, proud of a better atmosphere for the purpose than London has. Mr. 
 Watkins is admirable for his touched portraits, complete works of art, and 
 remarkable for rare simplicity and breadth. Mr. Taylor’s studies of the tangles 
 of plants astonish nature. Messrs. Dolamore and Bullock are transparent in 
 their Kenilworth studies. Mr. Bedford’s Welsh views pass belief for needle- 
 point finish and minuteness ; and Mr. White’s rustic bits are matchless. Every 
 different exhibitor has , some peculiar merit, either of choice or execution. One 
 gives the clear, sharp shadows of sunlight best ; another likes a predominant 
 golden mellow middle tint. A takes corners of hedge-rows, prickly and flower- 
 spangled ; B follows the owl to crumbly towers and ivied belfries high up among 
 the bells ; C, perhaps more adventurous, tries to make a picture and throw half 
 Eembrandt’s mystery over Newman-street models. No. 1 is all for children, 
 and No. 2 settles down perseveringly with most commendable energy to still-life 
 studies of ivory cups and luminous light focussing armour. So by turns we get 
 all the world done, — and one taking the joint and another the side-dish, the 
 whole dinner is eaten.” 
 
 Upon Screens A and B, the visitor should remark some portraits of Crimean 
 heroes from the ranks, photographed for Her Majesty, by Mr. Joseph Cundall. 
 Upon Wall C, M. Baldus’s wonderful view of the Clock-tower of the Louvre, 
 Messrs. Fenton and Bedford’s productions ; and Le Gray’s well-known sea and 
 cloud pictures. Upon Wall D, a collection of views of Italian buildings, con- 
 tributed by the Prince Consort, and Mr. Delamotte’s views of Oxford. Upon 
 Wall E, a view of the Alps, upwards of six feet in length, and Thurston 
 
47 
 
 Thompson’s wonderful photographic fac-similes of the Eaffaelle drawings in 
 the Royal Library. Wall F, some of Bisson Frere’s specimens, and some 
 English landscapes, by Messrs. Llewelyn, F. Bedford, Roger Fenton, Bullock, 
 and Pouting, and some copies of the Raffaelle drawings in the Louvre, by Mr, 
 Thurston Thompson. 
 
 THE CLOCK ENTRANCE GALLERY 
 
 Should he carefully examined, for here are some cartoons by Ary Scheffer, his 
 four pictures from “Faust” (644, 647), etc. Here, too, the visitor may 
 examine a “ Cattle Piece,” by the famous Rosa Bonheur ; a “ Landscape,” by 
 Auguste Bonheur, her sister (652); Linnell’s “ Spring” (610) ; “Columbus in 
 the Convent,” by Sir David Wilkie (618) ; Delaroche’s “ Napoleon at Fontaine- 
 bleau” (642) ; and his “ Crossing the Alps (659) ; Ary Scheffer’s “ Christ Teach- 
 ing Humility” (680) ; Ziem’s “ Venice ” (660) ; “ The Queen of Hungary Distri- 
 buting Alms,” by De Keyser (678). 
 
 TAPESTRY. 
 
 On leaving the Gallery, the visitor should ente»r the Transept. There are here 
 many objects that will engage his attention. In the first place he should notice 
 the Tapestries from the Eaffaelle Cartoons, hung against the northern and 
 southern ends of the Transept — the Silk Tapestry from Buckingham Palace 
 being to the north. Let us note here that, on his way to the Refreshment 
 Department, the visitor should notice some fine Gobelin Tapestry. Specimens 
 of Tapestry will also be found in the Gallery leading from the South Side of 
 the Transept to the Second Class Refreshment Rooms. More, two glass cases 
 in the Transept call for examination, especially on the part of ladies, since they 
 contain wonderful Embroidery and Lace. 
 
 SCULPTURE. 
 
 We now beg the attention of the visitor to the Sculpture, — the more important 
 pieces of which are hereabouts, and in double file on either side of the Nave. 
 It is hardly necessary to give a list of the pieces, since they are chiefly marked ; 
 but we may reasonably draw the visitor’s attention to a few of the more remark- 
 able groups. In the Transept, the visitor will notice, as the central group, 
 M‘Dowall’s “Yirginius, Sacrificing his Daughter (75); Thomas’s “ Boadicea” (70); 
 Wyatt’s “ Ino and Bacchus” (79) ; Raffaelle’s “ Boy and Dolphin” (89) ; and 
 Canova’s “ Dying Magdalen” (84). In the Nave, the visitor should presently 
 remark, Gibson’s “Hunter” (7) ; Marshall’s “ Ophelia” (8) ; Canova’s “ Venus” 
 (18); “Children at Play,” by Alex. Munro (24); “Venus Disarming Cupid,” 
 by Schwanthaler (43) ; Baily’s “ Eve at the Fountain” (1) ; Gibson’s “ Narcissus 
 at the Brook” (44) ; nor should we pass from this part of the Exhibition without 
 reminding the visitor that “ Gibson’s Wounded Amazon” (96) is in Saloon F; 
 Hiram Power’s well -exhibited “Greek Slave” (95) in Saloon H; and Mrs. 
 
48 
 
 Thorneycroft’s Statues of “ Prince Alfred” and “ Princess Alice,” in the Water- 
 colour Gallery. In the Transept, the visitor will find many busts of eminent 
 men, living and dead. Among these, he should not omit to examine, the busts 
 of Adam Smith, Sir Eobert Peel, the Duke of Wellington, the Earl of Derby, 
 Mr. Hallam, Mr. Layard, Professors Owen and Faraday, Dr. Simpson (of 
 Edinburgh), Moore, Wordsworth, James Watt, John Eennie, Alfred Tennyson, 
 and Douglas Jerrold. Of the latter the Atkenceum says, “ The only Art- 
 memorial which completely and truly represents Douglas Jerrold to the many 
 who are left to mourn his decease, is Bailey’s bust, now in the Manchester Art- 
 Treasures Exhibition.” The Aihenceum thus fairly comments t)n the sculptured 
 treasures of the Exhibition : — 
 
 “ The modern sculpture stands in double file on either side of the great hall, — 
 the less important examples of modern genius and modern imitation being in a 
 more humble, but no less honourable, position in the side walks, so that Yenus 
 hides behind a man-at-arms in complete steel, and Cupid smiles out in front of a 
 Mars, all black and gold, of the fifteenth century, on which the figures of the 
 Gobelin Tapestry look down with that grave complacency with which a Pawnee 
 brave watches the boiling rage and throbbing spasms of a Mississipi steam- 
 engine sawing wood, as Coleridge said, “ like a giant with one idea.” The sculp- 
 ture consists almost entirely of the works of Canova and those of living men, 
 with the results also of the life of a few thinkers in stone not yet fairly settled 
 in their too early graves. We should have liked to have seen some attempts, 
 however scanty, to trace the history of Bristish sculpture from Cibber down- 
 wards, with one work even, or a cast of it, of such historical men as Nollekins 
 and Bacon. There would have been, too, in the galleries quite room enough 
 for good casts of the best works of such men as Bailey, Foley, Gibson, and 
 Bell, and even for the French, as Pradier, and others. 
 
 “ The man who is invited to ox-tail soup has no right to grumble because we 
 do not give him turtle ; and on this principle we say no more about the defi- 
 ciencies of a collection which has never before been equalled — not in England, 
 perhaps scarcely in the world. To go, first, down among the dead men, whose 
 tombstones these statues are, we come to Canova ’s sweet meretriciousness, de- 
 tecting everywhere the jaunty curls and the theatrical and exaggerated inno- 
 cence of Pauline Bonaparte, who, if she were the means of creating many of 
 Canova’s statues, broke herself a great many statutes undoubtedly divine. The 
 Italian’s grace, sentiment, and feeling of beauty render luminous his dying 
 Magdalene, Psyche, and Yenus. The visitor should not neglect to carefully 
 compare his school of idealism, somewhat Byronic, only quieter, with the 
 modern naturalism which exults in girls sewing and maidens spinning a yarn. 
 
 “ In the noble army of martyrs who have at various times sat for busts, 
 chiefly, as we have very good reason to suppose, on the ground of their superior 
 ugliness, and who now make death hideous and uncomeliness immortal, we must 
 single out Chantrey’s busts of Hunter and Clive, — the former intensely saga- 
 cious, the latter supernaturally plain, as we think Bell observes in his ‘ Anatomy 
 of Expression.’ 
 
49 
 
 “ Some specimens of Flaxman would have been most appropriate here ; but 
 we cannot have everything; and we must remember not only that Life is 
 short and Art long,” but that time was short and art long in getting these 
 spoils together in the great black city of white cotton. Old Westmacott, 
 soberly classical and coldly judicious, is represented by his ‘ Euphrosyne,’ a 
 dancing figure quite beside itself in a respectable and classical way with the joy 
 of ‘dancing taught in six lessons.’ It is one of old Westmacott’s best works. 
 The flowers at the nymph’s feet are delicately undercut, and wrought with a 
 finish that would make a nursery gardener fall down and worship. This is 
 perhaps the earliest instance of Pre-Raphaelitism in English sculpture. Benj, 
 Wyatt, though dead, under a quiet stone at Rome, where olives crisp and black 
 cypresses nod and bow, still lives at this Manchester show. His ‘ Nymph 
 preparing for the Bath,’ is the finest statue in this whole Pantheon of Art, 
 Exquisite grace, and a poise perfectly momentary and startlingly life-like, 
 animate this marble body. The innocence is not that of the ballet dancer when 
 the flowers fall at her feet, but of Ruth when Boaz gazed at her amid the yellow 
 sea of corn.” 
 
 There are too, in the Transept and Nave the following bronzes : the “ Praying 
 Boy,” by Fischer, after the antique; “Mercury,” after John of Bologna; 
 Weekes’ “ Young Naturalist,” &c. In the Transept, let the visitor not fail to 
 examine, in addition to the above works, the splendid Shield presented to Her 
 Majesty by the King of Prussia. 
 
 FURNITURE, CARVINGS, &c. 
 
 While the visitor remains in the Transept, he would do well to give his atten- 
 tion, for a few minutes, to the carved furniture arranged hereabouts, and under 
 the Organ Gallery. Let him pause to consider the bed, by a working man of 
 Warrington, who was stimulated to the work by the sight of the Great Exhibi- 
 tion of 1851. Under the Organ Gallery are some Venetian chairs, about three 
 cen turies old, together with some Elizabethan bed-posts, inlaid cabinets, side- 
 boards, and the celebrated Alscot buffet. To the south of the Transept is a book- 
 case of the early part of the 16th century ; and hereabouts, too, are some bold, 
 old wood carvings. 
 
 We would now direct the attention of the visitor who is desirous of following 
 the carvings and furniture systematically to the north side of the Nave. Here 
 are some precious specimens of art-workmanship, including a large throne seat, 
 dated 1559, and the Medici coffer. Against the south wall, opposite, the visitor 
 will find an Italian marriage coffer of the 16th century ; a carved dressoir of the 
 15th century ; a frame of carvings in ivory ; a model of York Minster, carved in 
 cork; carved chairs from the wonderful Soulages Collection (a catalogue of 
 which may be had in the Palace for the use of serious students). 
 
THE SOULAGES COLLECTION 
 
 Was formed by M. Jules Soulages, an advocate of Toulouse, in the intervals 
 between the years 1830 and 1840. This magnificent depositary of decorative 
 art was the result of repeated tours made through the principal cities of Italy, 
 for the purpose of acquiring examples of the fine arts of the Eenaissance. Its 
 founder, in the commencement of his labours, devised for himself a definite 
 scheme of a collection, and all his acquisitions were made with reference to that 
 scheme. His aim appears to have been to collect a perfect series of decorative 
 objects of utility, and of minor productions of celebrated artists, which are not 
 ordinarily assumed to meet the denomination of “ high art.^^ The collection, 
 which had its original habitation in Paris, was subsequently removed by M. 
 Soulages to Toulouse, where, for many years, it enjoyed an extended celebrity, 
 some of the principal objects having been engraved in Continental journals of 
 high standing. During this time tempting offers from various amateurs and 
 lovers of art, to acquire isolated objects by purchase, were made, but M. Sou- 
 lages consistently resisted all inducements [to dismember his collection, resolv- 
 ing to dispose of it in its entirety ; pending these negotiations, however, he could 
 not ignore the astonishing enhancement of the value of the works in his posses- 
 sion; and he, consequently, progressively augmented the price at which he was 
 willing to part with his collection. He ultimately obtained a fair price for it — 
 viz., thirteen thousand five hundred pounds, which was, in the first instance, 
 subscribed for by a London committee, composed of three members, Messrs. 
 Dudley Coutts Marjoribank, Matthew Uzielli, and Henry Cole. Subsequently, 
 the collection was offered to the Government, and the purchase was declined ; 
 and it has since been purchased, upon their own responsibility, by the members 
 of the Executive Committee of the Manchester Art-Treasures Exhibition. 
 
 It behoves us to say a few words in this place, not only as regards the Soulages 
 Collection itself, but with respect to the marvellous specimens of ceramic art 
 which form the most important part of this famous collection of decorative art- 
 treasures. We will commence, therefore, with a brief account of Majolica 
 ware, more commonly called among English amateurs, “ Raffaelle Ware,” or 
 
 Fairy Ware.” This beautiful species of pottery had a high prestige. There 
 was a belief among lovers of porcelain and earthenware, that Kaffaelle had, at 
 one period of his brilliant career, painted plates and dishes, but we have no 
 absolute means of knowing that the great artist of the “Transfiguration” and the 
 “Cartoons” ever lent the magical aid of his pencil to works of this description. 
 Though now deprived of the interest attached to it by its reputed association of 
 the “ divine ” painter of Urbino, modern collectors have acknowledged in the 
 Majolica ware an importance which is every day being more fully recognised, 
 and is now allowed to be one of the most valuable and important departments 
 of decorative art which we possess. The manufacture of Majolica in Italy, 
 was, it appears, much promoted by the decorative earthenware already manu- 
 factured by the Arabs in Spain, and which throughout the middle ages continued 
 
51 
 
 to be imported into Italy. Towards the fifteenth century this peculiar ware 
 was imitated by the Italians, who were most probably assisted by Moorish 
 workmen. From the fifteenth to the seventeenth century, Majolica ware was 
 a staple manufacture of Italy, manufactories being founded and fostered by 
 princes, just as has since been the case with porcelain manufacture, the artists 
 were “maestri,” enjoying extensive individual repute; and the towns which 
 were the principal seats of manufacture, Faenza, Urbino, Castel Durante, 
 Gubbio, Pesard, became cities famous in art topography. The Majolica in the 
 Soulage Collection is renowned for the many specimens of the class known as 
 “ lushed,” and affording examples of the “ iridescent colours,” “ reflects 
 metalliques,” “ colori cangianli,” or “ madre perla,” all of which are 
 simple pigments of a metallic nature deposited in the surface of the ware in 
 a state of extreme division. The secret of one of these lustres, the famous 
 crimson or ruby, died out early in the sixteenth century, and has said 
 to be so confined — though the aspersion has since been disproved — to one cele- 
 brated master of Majolica, Maestro Giorgio, of Gubbio. Of this great artist 
 there are several admirable specimens in the collection, as well as by his son, 
 Vincenlio, better known as Maestro Cencio. There are also some beautiful 
 specimens of enamelled sculpture in Majolica, by Lucca della Robbia. The 
 attention of the visitor should be particularly directed to the works of the 
 last-named artist, of which there are numerous specimens, numbering from 437 
 upwards. A circular relievo, “Virgin and Child” (437), and “The Adoration 
 of the Kings” (438), are admirable specimens of enamelling in Della Robbia 
 ware ; also a “ Chimney-piece,” in carved stone (442), from its elaborate work- 
 manship will not fail to interest either the connoisseur or general visitor. The 
 series of twenty-eight circular Medallions of Painted Glass (445-472) exhibit a 
 variety of Scriptural and historical subjects, all of them of the highest merit. 
 
 The works of the unfortunate Bernard Palissy (whose romantic history is so 
 well known) are among the most interesting of this valuable collection. His 
 talent as a ceramic artist, and not a hero of romance, would have been quite 
 sufficient to entitle him to the fame he enjoys to this day. Nos. 134 and 135, 
 two large oval dishes, are undoubtedly the works of Palissy himself, far surpas- 
 sing the other specimens in the glaze and purity of the enamel tints. No. 58, a 
 small tazza, or cup, by Giorgio, 1525, is an exquisite example of his powers as a 
 colourist. The harmonious quality of colour displayed in this work has never 
 since been surpassed in any ceramic medium. The numerous examples 
 included in this collection render it impossible to give but a slight idea of its 
 grandeur, consisting, as it does, of 700 specimens of all that is beautiful and 
 instructive. 
 
 In addition, under this head, we would draw the visitor’s attention to the 
 antique furniture, inlaid with China (in cases near the Grand Entrance) ; and to 
 some fine Florentine inlaid caskets, &c.; and (near the armour) a buhl cabinet, 
 made for Cardinal de Retz ; the Fonthill jewel cabinet, and a cabinet, executed 
 by eminent artists, after a design by Horace Walpole. The ivory carvings are 
 chiefiy in the Southern Wall Cases. 
 
62 
 
 The following letter to the Editor of the MancTitsUr Examiner and Times^ 
 with reference to the Soulages Collection, from the pen of Thomas Fairbairn, 
 Esq., Chairman of the Executive Committee, will be interesting to the reader : — 
 
 “ The history of the Soulages Collection of works of decorative art, and the 
 fact of the collection being now the property of the members of the Executive 
 Committee of the Art-Treasures Exhibition, have been noticed from time to 
 time in your columns, and must be known to many of your readers. I am 
 induced, notwithstanding, to ask your insertion of a few remarks on the subject. 
 
 “ The European celebrity which the collection enjoyed whilst located at 
 Toulouse induced frequent applications from collectors to purchase separate 
 specimens for the enrichment of their own museums. These offers, however 
 tempting in price, were uniformly refused by M. Soulages, on the ground that 
 it would be a public wrong to break the completeness of the series he had 
 brought together with infinite pains, upon a definite and pre-arranged plan, and 
 to dismember a collection which possessed an especial value for purposes of 
 public instruction and art education. His desire was to part with the collection 
 as a whole ; and thus, after a careful examination and valuation had been made 
 of it by a competent authority from England, it was purchased for the subscri- 
 bers to a guarantee fund, in the names of three gentlemen in London, well 
 known for their efforts in promoting art education. In the beginning of this 
 year, the collection was arranged at Marlborough House, where it was inspected 
 by many thousands of visitors ; and its purchase for the nation was strongly 
 urged upon the government by eminent individuals, and by memorials from the 
 various learned and artistic societies of the metropolis, and from the schools of 
 art and design throughout the kingdom. 
 
 “ Her Majesty’s government declined the purchase just at the time when the 
 Exhibition Committee were busily occupied in their arrangements for attempt- 
 ing the formation of a grand museum of ornamental art, and at a moment when, 
 I assure you, we had little idea that our applications to the collectors of these 
 interesting and instructive objects, and to the owners of such priceless treasures, 
 would be responded to with the gratifying liberality which has filled the central 
 hall of the Palace at Old Trafford wilh an unrivalled profusion of the most 
 choice and rare art specimens. It was felt by the present owners of the collection, 
 that the managers in London had been guided in their proceedings by right 
 motives and sound judgment ; and believing that it was worth another effort 
 to secure the collection for permanent exhibition and public instruction, we pur- 
 chased it, upon our own responsibilities, for the sum of £13,500, and determined 
 that its merits and value should be pronounced upon by the wider circle of the 
 visitors to the Art-Treasures Exhibition. The deed of purchase imposed upon 
 us certain conditions and obligations which I am desirous of bringing promi- 
 nently under the notice of my fellow citizens, because the future of the Soulages 
 Collection is now in their hands.” 
 
 “ The conditions are these : — 
 
 “ ‘1. Until the expiration of twenty-eight days next after the close of that Exhi- 
 bition, the corporation of Manchester or any other person or persons who 
 
63 
 
 may be desirous to purchase the collection entire, for purposes of permanent 
 public exhibition and instruction in Manchester, and will en^a^e to devote 
 it to such and no other purposes, shall have the pre-emption of tlie collection 
 at the sum of fourteen thousand one hundred and seventy-five pounds. 
 
 “‘2. If such ris:ht of pre-emption he not claimed, and a contract to that effect 
 si^^ned within such twenty-eight davs, the President of the Committee of 
 Her Majesty’s Privy Council on Education shall then have the option of 
 purchasing the collection entire, for public purposes, at the like sum, during 
 the then next twenty-eight days. 
 
 *“3. If such purchase of the entire collection be declined by the President of 
 the Committee of Her Majesty’s Privy Council on Education, then he and 
 the Manchester managers shall have the further right to purchase it between 
 them in equal portions. 
 
 ‘‘‘4. If the collection be not disposed of as above mentioned, or only half of it 
 be so disposed of, then the Manchester managers shall (with the concurrence 
 of the London managers) cause the collection, or the undisposed portion of 
 it, to be sold by public auction in London with all reasonable speed, and not 
 later than the first of June, one thousand eight hundred and fifty-eight.’ 
 
 “ The Executive Committee have recently had the whole collection, as far as 
 practicable, brought together, in order that it might be carefully examined by 
 all who may be disposed to share their opinion that it is desirable it should not 
 be dispersed. With the exception of eight valuable and curious pictures, which 
 are hung in the saloons of the Old Masters, and the interesting medallions in 
 stained glass, which are fixed in. the corridor leading from the South Transept, 
 the whole series is now grouped together in one court, and may be conveniently 
 studied. 
 
 “ It is not for me, sir, to make any suggestion with reference to the ultimate 
 destination of the collection ; and I may add that I have ventured thus especially 
 to direct public attention to it upon my own responsibility, and without consul- 
 tation with my colleagues. I began to fear that its beauties might lie undis- 
 covered, and its merit remain unknown amidst the aggregate of splendour by 
 which it is surrounded; and I determined to write this appeal, because I had 
 noticed that it was the habit @f many, nay most of the visitors to the Exhibi- 
 tion, drawn, no doubt, by the more prominent and popular attractions of the 
 pictures, to saunter along the central hall, apparently unconscious of the trea- 
 sures it contained, or at least ignorant of the instructive lessons which were to be 
 gathered there. Now, sir, what is true of the Exhibition of Art-Trea- 
 sures as a whole, is especially applicable to that department of it which 
 constitutes the museum of ornamental art. Patient investigation and sys- 
 tematic study are essential to anything like a true appreciation of the importance 
 and value of the Art-Treasures. Knowledge is a further condition to their per- 
 fect enjoyment. The latter faculty must be calculated upon as possessed by few 
 only ; but precisely in proportion as the former are exercised will be the grati- 
 fication to the visitors themselves, and the permanent good to our country which 
 the Exhibition will produce. The language of art, we all know, is universal ; 
 but, like all other languages, its grammar, construction, and technicalities must 
 be mastered before its real enjoyment and teachings can be felt : and thus the 
 meaning, beauties, and moral lessons of the pictures, carvings, and treasures of 
 
54 
 
 art generally, are no more disclosed to the mind of him who lounges in idle 
 vacancy through the courts and galleries at Old Trafford than are the inspira- 
 tions of the poet, the truths of the historian, or the principles of the philosopher 
 revealed to the holiday stroller past the bookshelves of a show library. 
 
 “ Without study, the value of the Soulages Collection, as a museum of 
 reference for our designers, cabinet makers, and artisans, will never be known. 
 It should be examined by those upon whose decision its fate now depends, in 
 company with the instructive and excellent catalogue which has been written by 
 Mr. J. C. Robinson, of Marlborough House. If this be done, and our leading 
 merchants and employers are satisfied that there is in it the nucleus of an useful 
 institution, I feel sure the means will readily be devised of retaining in Man- 
 chester a collection which would give reputation to the city, and afford means of 
 permanent study and considerable enjoyment to its inhabitants, 
 
 “ I am, &c., 
 
 “ THOMAS FAIRBAIRN. 
 
 “ Northwood, July 25, 1857.” 
 
 We now approach the 
 
 GOLD AND SILVER WORK. 
 
 How it glitters like “ a swarm of fire-flies” tangled, indeed, in many gilded 
 braids. But first let us remind the visitor not to pass by, near the Grand En- 
 trance, on the north side, a tortoise-shell and amber clock, mounted with silver, 
 belonging to the Queen. The wealth of silver and gold, of glistering croziers, 
 and sparkling cups, of collars of office, and sacred utensils, is now before the 
 visitor. 
 
 “ Stepping out once more into the centre hall,” says the Athenceum^ ‘‘footing 
 it through bronze statues of Elizabeth and huge iulaid buffets of French work» 
 we come to Messrs. Hunt and Roskill’s case, shining like the offerings of the 
 Magi with huge silver flagons, three feet high, presentation cups, and gold vases. 
 In the midst of them is the Cornelius shield the King of Prussia gave the Prince 
 of Wales, a trophy of art, and not far off the return shield, covered with reliefs, 
 by Yechte, in clouds and processions of figures. The work as fine as if steel 
 were clay, and could be pinched into shape at a moment’s pleasure. At one 
 corner of the case are some vases of work in dead silver, equal to Cellini’s 
 
 labours, built up of struggling and battling Titans, on whom Jove from a calm 
 summit looks down with majesty. On the left-hand side is a great curiosity, — 
 a trophy of the smith’s art ; it is Florentine work of a doubtful age, probably 
 not later than Elizabeth. It is a chariot, surmounted by a canopy, drawn by 
 four horses, and containing five figures, — a king, a jester, and three courtiers,— 
 the faces in a strain of energetic expression ; the jester dancing and gesticulating, 
 the king cheering and exhorting, and the attendants quarrelling. On the box 
 sits a coachman, and under the box swings a lamp. The horses’ reins are studded 
 
56 
 
 with turqoises and the wheels with rubies. Some presentation sabres and some 
 old silver-mounted mirrors, pixes and chalices make up the costly show. 
 
 “ Another case, a mountain of gold, consists chiefly of corporation plate,— a 
 legend about every mace and badge, — and some of the rarest specimens of the 
 Queen’s mediaeval plate, — some crystals, cut into the shapes of fish and monsters, 
 the well-known nautilus, — and all sorts of salt-cellars, fire-dogs, salvers, and 
 flagons.” 
 
 Let us specially draw the visitor’s attention, under this head, to the silver 
 table and tripods, near the armour, presented by the city of London to Charles 
 the Second ; then to a silver statuette of Queen Elizabeth; Napoleon (in bronze) 
 planning his Egyptian Campaign ; locks, keys and bells, in the North Wall 
 Cases. In the south, remark Yechte’s Kings of France, in case H. The 
 chariot referred to by the Athenceum is in case K, north side. We now beg the 
 visitor’s attention to 
 
 THE AEMOUE, 
 
 As arranged by M. J. K. Planche, Eouge Croix. There is an interest about 
 this old metal work that will not fail to draw the visitor to a close examination. 
 Let him wander about it, gossiping pleasantly, as the Athenceum critic did. Our 
 gossip said : — “ From the cumbrous pot-helmets of Stephen — not the saint, but 
 the saint worshipper — down to the times when armour grew thin as a flower- 
 leaf, yet strong as adamant — so useful, so beautiful, that a Francis the First 
 knight might have exhibited himself and cleared a handsome sum by holding 
 somebody else’s hat at his own castle-gate — specimens are here ; in stars of 
 swords, in knife-boxfulls of halberds, in suits of armour hung up to dry, nests of 
 the spider and homes of the rat ; in cases of slender rapiers and two-handed 
 swords, that would cleave a giant to the brisket, and would take a whole club of 
 round-collared fops even to lift. Here are poinards, too, with which angry men 
 used to lift the steel crab-shells of Maximilian’s troopers, just as one opens the 
 familiar native for the sweet mouthful of our own oyster. Here are axes that 
 would split a rock, and hunting-knives, just the very thing to open and scrape 
 your red-skinned filbert. Here are more bills than were ever discounted in 
 Lombard-street, and the very bows that spoke so shrilly at Cressy. Daggers 
 that have glistened in dying men’s eyes — pistols that, hot and smoking, have 
 been flung at the gleaming flies of bayonets—spears that have shivered on brave 
 men’s hearts— blades that have been swung at Morgarten by rough men of 
 Uri, bent on taming the Austrian or the Burgundian — lie here in cases, mere 
 fossils of a bygone age, innoxious now as museum thunderbolts. The guisarme 
 of the German schwartz Reiter^ the bill of the English yeoman, once clashed 
 together in war, now jostle each together like cronies in the velvet-lined 
 repository* 
 
 This collection of armour is partly from Windsor and the Tower, and partly 
 from the inestimable collection of Sir Samuel Meyrick, whose castle of Good* 
 rich has been rummaged by Mr, Planche and his learned colleague. The worthy 
 
56 
 
 baronet had much learning and small taste. His great delight was to [stuff 
 doll-faced dummies, with disunited legs and angular arms, and invest 
 them with suits of ringed mail or deck them with the elaborate re;pousse- 
 worked suit of an Italian Duke. Smeary-red cheeks and goggly eyes 
 delighted him, as they would have done a South Sea Islander. In one 
 ambitions group he clubbed together, in slashed Elizabethan dresses, the like- 
 nesses of some twenty men who had formed his retinue as Herefordshire sheriff, 
 much to the astonishment and disgust of some prosaic judge of that day, who 
 thought Greenwich fair had come to meet him, and felt almost afraid he was 
 being laughed at. Still, with all his hypothesis and crotchets. Sir Samuel was 
 a true antiquary, and turned armour into a real science, being far beyond the 
 age that ridiculed him. His discovery of the true date of ring mail and its 
 shape he believed had immortalized him. He turned his bran new Edward-the- 
 Second castle into a marine-store shop, and, in his enthusiasm for his art, 
 allowed himself scarcely room to move. Well — ^peace to his ashes — here is his 
 life’s work, — pot helmet, black mail, cable-ringed and twisted, such as Eichard 
 wore at Ascalon, and scymetar broke on ; fluted breastplate, with roundels, 
 lance-rest, and all fitments ; square shoe, pointed toe, and all the plates and 
 vam-braces that brave men once used to keep death out, washed in blood often 
 enough, we dare say ; beaten with rougher hammers than the armourer’s, sliced 
 with knives, of which the autograph scratches remain ; dinted with bullets and 
 pounded with maces. This short suit of armour, striped and blazoned with 
 gilded thistles and initial letters, belonged to that fair hope of Christendom, 
 Prince Henry, the stammering pedant’s son, who lamented Ealeigh, and sighed 
 for some kingly rival to cross a sword with. It is made for a strong stripling, 
 and is of rare and costly workmanship, fit for a king’s son. That half breast- 
 plate is put on as an extra guard for tilting. That black and gold suit covered 
 with E. E’s Mr. Planche supposes to have belonged to Essex — either the broken- 
 hearted quieter of Ireland, or his hot-headed and ill-fated son. Its long-pointed 
 breastplate, made to receive the peculiar doublet, marks tha period to within 
 twenty years. Of another suit, extraordinary to say, part was found at Good- 
 rich and part at AVindsor. We observe in this department a complete history 
 of spurs, from the simple steel goad of the Crusader to the big wheel-spurs of 
 the Eoses, and the modifications of the Stuarts. The fire-arms are, also, a com- 
 plete chronology, from the early complications of wheels and hammers to the 
 finest work preceding our own times. Years of labour have been lavished on 
 these death-bringers, which look delicate as lady’s toys. They are inlaid with 
 brass, and silver, and steel, and red enamel, and sometimes even chased with 
 low relief round the butt and stock. The biting, viscious-looking triggersare of 
 a thousand forms. Some have six barrels, strong and thick, but small in the 
 bore as pea-shooters. Of partizans, there is a great store ; the blades of the 
 most varied shapes, growing out into all varieties of spoke and edge ; often 
 pierced with exquisite tracery, pleasant to the eye ; and making death by them, 
 we should almost think, quite an amusement. The handles are frequently 
 banded with steel, making them indestructible to the enraged sword sweep, 
 
57 
 
 Frequently they are studded with gilt nails like coffin-rims ; generally they are 
 tufted and hung with bunchy crimson tassels, now dusty and faded. Among them , 
 we observe a few sergeant’s halberds with snake mouths, such as Marlborough’s 
 men used to insert the cannon-match into. The rapiers are such a collection as 
 a Charles-the-Second duellist might have had, — the blades long, narrow, trian- 
 gular, and grooved, inflicting almost incurable wounds ; the handles a lace-work 
 of steel and silver, and in some cases ornamented with enamels and inserted in 
 white or velvet sheaths. Amongst the miscellanea are some carved dagger- 
 sheaths, some old powder-flasks and touch-boxes ; a German saddle inlaid with 
 white, green, aad black ivory, in figures and legends ; Highland targets studded 
 with silver nails, some pigeon-breasted cuirasses, a good row of maces and steel 
 life-preservers, a huge painted paviss and some elaborate shields — one painted 
 with an angel’s head. And when we have seen it all, and begin to wonder if we 
 have done wisely in coming, like snails, out of our shells to bide the pelt and 
 hail of fire and shot, remembering that red broad-cloth is but paper and linen to 
 the Chinese sword or the Affghan’s bullet, we bethink us of the old story of the 
 Life Guardsman, who was brought to George the Fourth fresh from Waterloo 
 to give his opinion as to the question of increasing the defensive armour of the 
 Englishman. ‘ Now,’ said the King, ‘ if there was another scrimmage like 
 Waterloo, and you had your own choice, how should you dress for it?’ — ‘Well, 
 an please your Majesty,’ said the London Mars, ‘I should like to take off my 
 coat and tuck up my sleeves.’ So much for a practical man’s opinion of defen- 
 sive armour, which, at the boom of the first cannon, dropped off the European, 
 who henceforward prepared to meet death bare-breasted and open-eyed.” 
 
 CHINA, PORCELAIN, GLASS, &c. 
 
 The Exhibition is rich under this head, thanks to the purchasers of the 
 Soulages Collection, and others. We need hardly do more than draw the visitor’s 
 attention, however, to the various wares, and their whereabouts. This ceramic 
 work, ranged upon shelves, or cast into pyramids, has a fine effect, and makes 
 an interesting study. We are reminded that “ here we see works of men of 
 many countries and ages, ignorant often of each others works, yet reaching 
 the same goal, and submitting to the same dfestiny, — limitation, the capability 
 of the materials.” It is said, too, to learn that “ great men worked (at this 
 art) for centuries to reach a perfection which has since again been lost.” Let 
 us point the visitor’s attention to the various kinds of ceramic manufactures. 
 Chinese and J apanese porcelain may be seen on the south side of the Nave, in 
 Case D, while near at hand, in Case C, are samples ofDresden, Sevres, Copen- 
 hagen, Italian, Spanish, and Berlin porcelain ; as also of Bow, Chelsea, Derby, 
 and Worcester china. The Queen’s Majolica Plate is in Case Q ; and the 
 Kaffaelle and Palissy wares will be found on the northern side of the Nave, 
 in Cases R, P, and 0. Case E, on the south side, also contains some Palissy 
 ware. The glass and enamels are very fine. In Case A is an Arabian glass 
 lamp, the oldest in the mediaeval collection,^ ^ The Soulages Collection has 
 
 F 
 
58 
 
 furnished some valuable samples to this collection, especially in Venetian glass, 
 in Case M, north side of Nave. Remark, also, Case T, north side ; Wall 
 Case C, south side. The following is instructive gossip on this department : — 
 
 ‘‘ The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries left us these heirlooms. These 
 glistening iridescent vases and salvers have been saved from oblivion, and have 
 survived the potter, who, himself made of clay, fell to dust, and went again 
 into Nature’s great kiln, the grave, two hundred years ago. In these cases, look 
 you, are very choice things. Let us point out that Majolica dish with St. John 
 presiding in the centre, — in another is a Cupid or a Diana, — in another, Daniel, 
 — in a third, the arms of the great Colonna, the prop of Italy. Moses, and Leda, 
 Abraham, and Brutus, figure alternately in these orange and green plates, rayed 
 with white, patterned with arabesques. This four-handed brown ware vessel 
 is Calabrian ware and modern, but this with the rayed and escalloped borders is 
 of the sixteenth century. Blues, browns, and whites, amorini and saints, hearts 
 pierced with love arrows, portraits of uncomely women, adorn this pottery of 
 George of Gubbio. The later work is smaller, dryer, and more pinched, the 
 colours duller and less pure, — the earlier has a pearly lustre, and is of a grander, 
 and simpler, and more flowing type. The ugly, rough old delft ware besides 
 the rainbow Majolica is like Caliban beside Miranda. It is all so stocky, potty, 
 and punchy, and yet is honest, sturdy work, and did not crack with all the 
 thunder of Alva’s guns. It floated when the dykes broke, and frightened Louis 
 of the fourteen feet wig, and will last some centuries yet, even though it get dry 
 for want of a red draught. The most curious things here, besides the plain jug 
 stone ware flagons with the metal lids, are these green and white pitchers, 
 stamped with shields and figures. This square bottle with metal top is of James 
 the First’s reign, — this tankard, of the famous Botcher ware, its lid is brass, its 
 ornament gilt. These sucking-pig and trussed goose dishes are German 
 dullnesses, meant for jokes in clay. This lobster is a Dresden folly. Observe 
 the fine tazzaby Assineau, with dragons for handles, a la Palissy. The Jacobus 
 Kanetje, and the brown mugs with ringed necks and stamped handles, are worth 
 a look or two. The bottles and ewers have also all an historical interest. 
 
 “ The Limoges enamels are a splendid sequence, fine as miniatures, and im- 
 perishable as jewels, — the drawing, of course, often hard and grotesque, but 
 sometimes exquisitely delicate, and true to a hair line. This reliquary, and 
 book-cover, and crucifix are twelfth century work. These round jplaques are 
 all seventeenth. Mater Dei is by Jean Landin. These tazze in grisaille 
 
 by Pierre Raymond and Jourtois. Besides ‘ The Last Supper,’ ‘ Christ shown 
 to the Jews,’ &c., some of the specimens are portraits, some are medallions; 
 used in one instance to decorate both sides of a purse, aud often for stands and 
 ornaments, or to hang up as pictures. The purply greys, the unequal yet rich 
 surface, give a peculiar character to these Francis the First works. 
 
 ‘‘ The chocolate-coloured Wedgwoods we may class in the same way with the 
 miscellaneous china. Agate ware, Peruvian pottery, brown Tygs tazzas, snuff- 
 boxes, crowd upon the eye with a conflicting richness of colours, — leaf-shaped 
 dishes, nautilus-shaped tureens, terra cotta vases, gold reflex water bottles, help 
 
59 
 
 to fill one case, and make a rich show, that Palissy would have crawled to 
 Cologne on hands and knees to see.” 
 
 While the visitor remains in the Nave, before he braves the heat of the 
 Engraving and Miniature Glallery, to the south west, let us point out a few 
 curiosities, not hitherto noticed. Cardinal Wolsey’s hat is upon a table, on the 
 south side,— and in Wall Case A, on the same side, are the shirt, watch, and 
 snuff-box of Charles Stuart (the latter found under the royal oak), — to say 
 nothing of the dagger with which Felton stabbed the Duke of Buckingham. 
 We can understand the feeling of ungovernable envy with which a Tussaud 
 Vfould contemplate the latter relic. It is a formidable instrument. 
 
 The visitor will not fail to notice the collection of drawings, miniatures, 
 cameos, and other works of art, collected by John Mather, Esq., relative to the 
 Bonaparte family, and important personages connected with them during the 
 Republic and Empire of France. The case containing these relics will be found 
 the third from the North Transept going east under the Gallery. A Miniature 
 (1) of Charles Bonaparte, the Father of Napoleon the Great,” interesting as being 
 the only likeness known to be in existence of the grandfather of the present 
 Emperor, and strangely enough was at one time in his possession. “A Minia- 
 ture (3) of Napoleon when Military Student at Brienne two “ Miniatures (land 
 6) of Josephine, Wife of Napoleon, andher Daughter Hortense Beauharnais, Wife 
 of the King of Holland, and Mother of the present Emperor.” “A Miniature 
 (20), enamelled after the celebrated painter Isabey, of Josephine,” of whom an 
 interesting story is told by the painter relative to her being divorced from Napo- 
 leon, and his intended marriage with Maria Louisa. When asked by Isabey what 
 jewels she would be painted in, she answered him in emeralds, as she had heard 
 that in England the women wear green to denote to their friends they are for- 
 saken, but as the emeralds represented the freshness of her grief, she wished them 
 to be surrounded by diamonds to pourtray the purity of her love. Though 
 Unintelligible to Isabey at the time, it was soon explained by the rumour of 
 Napoleon having asked from the Emperor of Austria the hand of Maria Louisa. 
 (23) “ A Miniature of the young King of Rome.” (26) “ A Miniature of Napo- 
 leon when at Elba,” painted by Isabey. (28) “ Murat, in the Dress he wore when 
 Shot at Pizzoin, in Calabria.” (33) “Bernadotte, King of Sweden.” (41) “Large 
 Miniature of Ney, in Marshal’s Uniform,” the sabre cut on his nose strongly 
 marked. (46) “ A Snuff-box” lined with gold, with portrait of Josephine in an 
 oval, and left by her to Madame Ney, bearing an inscription of her death inside 
 the lid. ( 52) “ Miniature Enamel of Louis Philippe.” (54) “ A Miniature of the 
 Unfortunate Princess Elizabeth, Sister of Louis the Sixteenth,” with inscription 
 on the back. (62, 63) Cameos, in sardonix, of “ Napoleon, Maria Louisa, and the 
 young King of Rome.” (66, 69) Four allegorical classic drawings, by Lafitte, 
 emblematic of “ The Union of France and Austria, in the persons of The Emperor 
 and Maria Louisa.” (66) “ The Arrival of Maria Louisa in Paris.” (67) 
 “The Union.” (68) “ The Triumph of Napoleon and Maria Louisa on their 
 re-union;” and (69) “ The Prosperity of the Empire of France.” (70) A large 
 Qvahshaped sardonix representing “Napoleon as a Warrior,” cut byPertrucci,by 
 
60 
 
 order of George the Fourth. (72) “A Brooch containing a Lock of Hair presented 
 to Captain Boss, hj Napoleon, at St. Helena.” (74) “The Private Seal of Napo- 
 leon,” having the concealed recess alluded to in his life. (77) “ Miniature of the 
 Prince de Condfe.” (104) “Miniature of Madame Sevigne,” by Petitot; and a 
 variety of equally interesting portraits illustrating the period of Henry the 
 Eighth. 
 
 THE MIJSriATUHES AND ENGRAVINGS. 
 
 In the south-west and north-west Transept Galleries are the miniatures, 
 engravings, and lithographs, the two latter being chronologically arranged, to 
 afford the visitor a view of the progress of the art. The miniatures are chiefly 
 English, and contributed by the Dukes of Portland and Buccleuch, &c. They 
 are described at page 207 of the Catalogue. There are no less than 1859 speci- 
 mens of engravings in the Palace, dating from Tomaso Finiguerra, of Florence, 
 who flourished in the early part of the fifteenth century, to living engravers. 
 We are reminded by Mr. Edward Holmes, M.A. (to whom the public is in- 
 debted for the arrangement of this department), that “this is the first time in 
 the history of the art of engraving at which an attempt has been made to show to 
 the public generally, at one view, a complete chronological series of prints from the 
 commencement of the art up to the present time. Fine specimens of various 
 epochs are from time to time shovrn in glazed frames in the French Museum, and 
 the officers in charge of the print departmant at the British Museum have long 
 desired to adopt some such course, but the requisite facilities not being at their 
 disposal, such a display has not as yet been accomplished there. We feel, there- 
 fore, that independently of the excessive rarity and excellence of the engravings 
 themselves, these galleries will be viewed with the utmost interest.” 
 
 The public is also indebted to Mr. William Smith, F.S.A., and Dominic Col- 
 iiaghi. Esq. (of the firm of Colnaghi and Co., London). We must briefly call 
 the attention of the visitor to the numbers, as given in the Official Catalogue, 
 of the more remarkable artists. 
 
 Line Engravings. — Albert Durer’s works run from 110 to 136, Mark Antonio 
 Rainrondi (202-289), Julio Bonasone (335--359), Ludovico Caracci (473, 474), 
 Augustino Caracci (479-483), Annibal Caracci (483-487), W. Fairthorne, temp. 
 1620 (567-578); William Hogarth (642-652); G. B. Piranesi (666, 667); J. G. 
 Wille (671-690) ; Sir Robert Strange (698-707) ; W. Woollett (715-728) ; G. 
 Yertue (742-744); Raphael Morgben (747-764); P. Sandby (779, 780); 
 L. A. B. Desnoyers (822-825) ; F. Girardet (852-855) ; W. Nuller (860-880) ; 
 J. T. Willmore (881-897) ; Robert Graves (910-913) ; J. Cousen (914-916) ; S. 
 Raimback (931-935) ; John Burnet (936-939) ; W. B. Cooke (956-974) ; G. Cooke 
 (975-977) ; E. Goodall (978-984) ; J. H. Robinson (993-1009) ; Mandel (1027- 
 1038) ; Antonio da Correggio (1075) ; Albert Durer (1076-1080) ; F. Parme- 
 giano (1082-1087); J. Tintoretto (1092j; Annibal Caracci (1094); Claude Lor- 
 raine (1097-1110) ; J. Ribera (1112-1115) ; A. Yandyck (1116-1125) ; W. 
 Hollar (1126-1144) ; B. E. Murillo, his only etching, (1147) ; Rembrandt Yan 
 
61 
 
 Rhyn (1149-1221) ; S. Cuyp (1222) ; D. Teniers, jun. (1228) ; S. Y. Ostade (1238^ 
 1267); P. Potter (1283-1286); Graspar Poussin (1289-1291); C. Du Jar din 
 (1292-1299) ; J. Ruisdael (1311-1312) ; N. Burghem (^1318-1323) ; Sir D. Wilkie 
 (1339-1341); Sir E. Landseer (1342-1343); George Cruikshank (1345-1353); 
 the Etching Club (1357) ; Ary Scheffer (1358-1359). 
 
 Mezzotints. — T. C. Furstenberg (1360-62); Prince Rupert (1371-74); 
 Paul Sandby (1391-93); T. Watson (1394-96) ; J. Watson 1397-98) ; R. Earlow 
 (1422-1428) ; George Clint (1476) ; J. M. W. Turner (1477-1525) ; Samuel 
 Cousins (1526-1537) ; H. Cousens (1538). 
 
 Wood Engrayings. — Old woodcuts (old Japanese) supposed to be 
 illustrations of a Poem (1551); from block books (1552-56) ; Campagnola, temp. 
 1507 (1560-61); Ugo da Carpi (1566-73) ; Albert Durer (1577-86) ; H. Holbein 
 (1600-1602) ; woodcuts after Titian (1607-12); Marie de Medici (1617) ; J. B. 
 Jackson, temp. 1726 (1626-30); T. Berwick, temp. 1753 (1634-1806); Luke 
 Clennell (1810-1813) ; Wm. Harvey (1814-1817) ; J. Thompson, native of 
 Manchester (1824-26) ; G. Williams (1829-31); T. Williams (1832); T. Orris 
 Smith (1833-34) ; E. Landells (1836) ; W. J. Linton (1837-38) ; Mason Jack- 
 son (1839-43) ; E. Dalziel (1844). 
 
 Lithographic Engravings. — A collection of the first specimens and 
 attempts at lithography in England (1845) ; T. Bewick, his only attempt, 
 (1846) ; Lassalle (1853) ; Muilleron (1854-56); Weinhold (1859). 
 
 OHIGINAL DRAWINGS AND SKETCHES BY OLD 
 MASTERS. 
 
 As the pattern is to the magnificent brocade or the elaborate tapestry, so is 
 the first rough sketch, or drawing, which is afterwards to form the basis for a 
 finished picture, an object of special interest and curiosity to all who wish to 
 trace art from its cradle, and watch the development of graphic ideas into a 
 glorious culmination. The Manchester Art-Treasures Exhibition is especially 
 rich in original drawings and sketches by the Old Masters, a few of which we 
 have hereinafter mentioned. By Masaccio, whose works in the Old Masters’ 
 Saloon, command, and deserve, the admiration of every visitor to the Exhibi- 
 tion, we have a “ Man seated, Reading” (3), a slight but artistic sketch ; (7), 
 “ Birth of the Yirgin” (Gherlandajo). The finished picture is engraved in the 
 latest edition of “ Kugler’s Handbook of Italian Art.” (16-18) Three Sketches in 
 black chalk, by Michael Angelo Buonarotti; (16) “Study for St. Bartholomew,” 
 particularly worthy of attention ; (19-22 ) four Drawings, by Leonardo da Yinci; 
 observe (22) “ Portrait of a Youth in Black Cap ;” (28) Study, in black chalk, of 
 “ The Infant Saviour,” (Fra Bartolomeo) ; (29 ) “ Head of a Youth,” by Andrea del 
 Sarto, supposed to be a Portrait of himself; (32-35) Studies by Raphael for his 
 second series of Cartoons; (36) “Fragment of a Cartoon,” by Raphael; the 
 upper part of a woman in the picture of the “ Massacre of the Innocents 
 (39) “ Fawn and Bacchantes j” highly-finished pen drawing, by Andrea Man- 
 
62 
 
 tegna ; (46) “ Head of Madonna Looking Down,” Eaphael ; (49) original drawing 
 of “ Madonna and Child,” Eaphael ; a Study in chalk for the picture at Vienna 
 called the “ Madonna in the Green;” (51) the celebrated pen and ink drawing 
 of “The Entombment,” Eaphael, purchased by Mr. Eogers for £120; (56) 
 “Virgin and Child;” “ St. John and St. Elizabeth,” Eaphael; (Ola) the cele- 
 brated pen and ink sketch for the “Massacre of the Innocents,” Eaphael, of 
 which there is an engraving in the Exhibition by Marc Antonio. 
 
 Among the numerous specimens of drawing, and sketches by Titian, the 
 following selection will be found worthy the visitor’s attention : (640) “ A 
 Mother and Boy,” a sketch in black chalk ; (67) “ St. Hubert Kneeling to the 
 Stag;” (70) “ Study of Three Saints,” for the lower part of the painting in the 
 A^atican, and bearing his own signature; (74) “Portrait of Philip II.;” (75) 
 “Abraham’s Sacrifice,” a drawing in black chalk; (102) “Hawking Party,” 
 sketched in pen and ink; (87-92) highly interesting outline Drawings, by Cana- 
 letto, descriptive of Scenes in Venice; (96) “ The whole length of St. Mark’s 
 Palace,” by Canaletto ; (103, 104) “ Boy Scattering Flowers,” and companion Pic- 
 ture, by Correggio ; (106) highly finished Drawing of a Man’s Head, by Parme- 
 giano ; (116) six large Cartoons of Angels, by Correggio, drawn for his Frescoes ; 
 (117a) “Head of a Youth,” in black and red crayon, by Guido Eeni ; (123) 
 “ Head of a Girl, carrying a Basket,” for the Fresco in the Carthusian Convent 
 at Bologna, by Guido; (125) “Group of Trees fractured by a Storm,” by 
 Salvator Eosa, bearing his own inscription (127-131), Murillo ; (128) Sketch for 
 a large Picture of “ St. Joseph Crowned in Paradise by the Infant Jesus ;” (129) 
 
 “ Christ on the Cross,” a coloured and extremely careful chalk drawing ; 
 (133-136) Albert Durer ; (134) a highly finished coloured Drawing of a Eabbit ; 
 (142) “ Victory Crowning an Armed Warrior,” by Eubens, a black chalk 
 drawing ; (149 ) a chalk drawing of the “ Duke of York, afterwards James II., 
 when a Child, ” the finished picture is to be seen in Saloon C. (683) ; 
 (151) “Portrait of Margaret Sernon,” in indian ink (Vandyck) ; (155) “ Euins 
 of the Hotel de Ville, Amsterdam,” by Eembrandt, with memorandum by him 
 that it was taken after the fire in 1652; (160) “ Stern of a Man of War,” an 
 extremely careful pencil drawing, by Van der Velde; (161-167) chalk Draw- 
 ings, by Sir Peter Lely, studies for his oil jiaintings ; (168) “Louis XIV.,” 
 drawing in chalk from the life, taken at Y ersailles, 1684, by Sir Godfrey Knel- 
 ler. The numerous drawings and sketches by Claude prevent us doing more 
 than call the visitor’s attention to some of the more important (173) Pen and 
 ink study of Trees, elaborately finished; (179) “ A Eeposo,” drawn in pastel, 
 with extreme finish; (190) “ Peter, James and John, in a boat. Fishing” (204- 
 219), and (233) “Grand Landscape,” in chalk, bearing his own inscription, 1663. 
 
 It only remains for us to notice and direct the attention of the visitor to the 
 few pencil and chalk drawings exhibited by English artists. (236-237a) Por- 
 tions of a Cartoon for Window, a most careful and studied sketch by Dyce. 
 (241) “ Two Eiver Scenes.” (242) “ Study for the Picture of the Market Cart,’' 
 the original of which is to be seen in the Saloon of Modern Masters. (250) 
 Koad through a Wood,” by Gainsborough. Throe sketches in pen and ink bj" 
 
63 
 
 Hogarth, including the Portrait of Wilkes (253), and a clever but greatly exag- 
 gerated drawing by Fuseli, of “ The Death of Cardinal Beaufort.” 
 
 The visitor has now seen all the more remarkable treasures in the Palace. 
 But, spite of all its wealth, it does not sum up the art-treasures of the United 
 Kingdom, as the following list of galleries not represented here, as set down by 
 a writer in the National Beview^ will testify amply : — 
 
 “For instance, there is no work from either the Grosvenor or Bridgewater 
 Galleries ; nothing from Bath House or the Grange ; nothing from Lansdowne 
 House or Bowood; nothing from Hamilton Palace, Petworth, Chatsworth, 
 Leigh Court, or Blenheim. Here are neither the great Westminster Rubenses, 
 nor the Wolf-Hunt of Legranes. Of the twenty-two or twenty-three pictures in 
 England, which may with some confidence be ascribed to Eaffaelle, here are six 
 ordy; Lord Ellesmere’s Titians, the Duke of Devonshire’s and Mr. Munro’s 
 Tintorets are all absent. There is not a single work ascribed to Giorgione that 
 can confidently be given to the master. Even of the English historical portraits, 
 so numerously represented here, there is not one of the twenty-three Vandycks 
 belonging to Lord Clarendon ; not a single picture from Gorhamhury ; not one 
 from the gallery of Lord Salisbury. These examples, selected at random, from 
 schools and great houses, will sufficiently warn those who are unacquainted with 
 the vast number and value of the pictures scattered through Great Britain, 
 against concluding that Manchester exhibits what is best or best known among 
 them. Dr. Waagen, we have heard, calculates the contents of the Old Trafford 
 Building as one-third of the pictorial treasures of the country ; and this is cer- 
 tainly not an under-estimate.” 
 
 7 
 
APPENDIX. 
 
 EXPLANATORY DEFINITIONS. 
 
 Diptych. — An altar-piece, generally small, made in two leaves to close face to 
 face. 
 
 Teiptych. — An altar-piece, composed of three parts ; the centre generally large 
 and either square or pointed, with a leaf or door at each side, made with 
 hinges to close in front and join in the middle. 
 
 Pkedella. — A name given to a small step or base of the altar-piece, and usually 
 decorated with small pictures in panels or otherwise. The paintings by 
 Perugino and Eaphael, Nos. 70, 72, 133, 138, &c., are examples. 
 
 PiETA. — A name given to representations of the dead Saviour mourned by the 
 Virgin, with or without angels and holy persons. It is to be distinguished 
 from the entombment, where the body is either being carried, or rests 
 supported on the edge of the tomb. 
 
 Sacra Conversazione — An ideal assemblage of saints grouped round the 
 Madonna and Child. 
 
 The Visitation. — The meeting between Mary and Elizabeth. 
 
 The Deposition. — The taking down from the Cross, in which the event is 
 treated historically, and part, at least, of the Cross introduced. 
 
 A SiLENTiUM. — A Holy Family, in which the infant Saviour is asleep, and the 
 Virgin by a finger to the lip imposes silence on the little St. John. 
 
 ‘‘Ecce Homo.”— “ Behold the Man.” The figure of the Saviour crowned with 
 thorns, and holding the reed as he appeared before the multitude. 
 
 Eiposo. — A representation of the Holy Family resting during their Flight into 
 Egypt. 
 
 “ Noli me tangere.” — The Magdalen on her knees in the Garden recognising 
 the Saviour. 
 
 Fresco-Painting. — When the colours are actually laid on the coat of plaster 
 whilst still moist. 
 
 Tempera. — Painting where the colours are mixed with water alone, having a 
 little glue or yolk of egg to fix them, — the same process as modern 
 scene-painters employ. 
 
 A. IRELAN'D and CO., PRINTERS BY STEAM POWER, PALL MALL, MANCHESTER.