T':' tfe’--,*'. ^'t-v -. i' ;'-1^V S'.#? ‘*1 '• vs -*r’.i^ r'?'#’v'*’ tP, i?*. STd ^ *Y-’ •rv«5?2 s^;v kti 5 '*j>''L 7, ’■'’>r*'V': V-' - :-/ mxmm n. ■ .*»!i MB'/' 5(^tv ^“•' .' -• Xm - "-■' - ■ ■ J.. ^■eS; '■rfl;../, '-'C'-' “ :V".' ', J>i '•'^- ■^'‘') . ' '■' - -a'.-- ■?.< |Si::.;f;; 1 :-F 'K?i “ if -Is :.j^ : -«.. .- I-^*'. - -M^' h I' I ‘ ■-- » >,. «* ■ B ? 5 t-‘\ v;-? f? '■•:'■■ •,?#'i"f;j'8tf 7w,.' li..'->iM >?/ e o,'^' f l!?*‘ V r t -y *' 'J^' mt'-rk%*m*4m ti- iVi;: >f • , r fc .-■ 7 ; } .5. ■' i'‘ s il|;i • :- '•■; :;.: . • S' •',-i' 'v.'* “ ■ • ~ ' “'^" ' ■»,•>>. .i. ^ V'- .X*- «•■' ■; -■ . !>•* i>. 'n v : - Mmt ||:|^ y ’>77 •''l,/. 'ja' -VL i •WK •*. -*--■• , .-A r?' > .- . a’»» a M ‘ -f^ ' - --• t felts. >v 4-'? "!^^ I •, -j' - iS j-'v '1 f f Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2016 https://archive.org/details/franciscodezurba00casc_0 FRANCISCO DE ZURBARAN FRANCISCO DE ZURBARAN HIS EPOCH, HIS LIFE AND HIS WORKS BY JOSE CASCALES Y MUNOZ TRANSLATED FROM THE SPANISH BY NELLIE SEELYE EVANS NEW YORK PRIVATELY PRINTED MCMXVIII Copyright, 1918, by Frederic Fairchild Sherman the J PAUl C'TTY A,’>'JSWM LIukARY ^' 1 ' L Portrait of a Dominican Monk Hispanio Museum, NewYork TO THE MEMORY OF MY FATHER HENRY EDWARD SEELYE ■V. ■< 7 ^ CONTENTS List of Illustrations PAGE vii Report of the Royal Academy of Arts of San Fer- nando: Spanish Editor’s Preface xi Facsimile of Certificate of Baptism of Zurbaran . . xiv Translation of Certificate of Baptism xv Sketch of the Author’s Life xvii Author’s Preface xix Editor’s Note xxiii Legends l The Epoch of Zurbaran 7 The Life of the Artist 11 The Paintings of Zurbaran 40 The Paintings of Zurbaran in the Light of Criticism . 62 The Painter in the Light of His Works 116 Appendix No. 1. Contract of Apprenticeship of Fran- cisco De Zurbaran 134 Appendix No. 2. Memo, of the Moving to Seville of THE Residence of Zurbaran 137 Appendix No. 3. Letter of D. Elias Tormo y Monzo . 140 Appendix No. 4. Letter from Zurbaran to the Mar- quis DE LAS Torres 147 Appendix No. Valuation by Zurbaran and Francisco DE Rici, IN 1654, OF Pictures Mentioned in the Will of Francisco Jacinto de Salcedo .... 149 Notes 154 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Portrait of a Dominican Monk Frontispiece Hispanic Museum, New York. FACING PAOB Portrait of Zurbaran i Museum of Brunswick, Germany. The Child Virgin (Conception) 2 Property of the Heirs of D. Jose Maria Lopez de Cepero, Seville. The Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas 4 Provincial Museum of Seville. The Infant Jesus Asleep on the Cross 6 Museum of the Prado, Madrid. The Virgin of the Caves 8 Provincial Museum of Cadiz. St. Hugo in the Refectory 10 Provincial Museum of Seville. The Meeting of St. Bruno with Pope Urban II . . . . 12 Provincial Museum of Seville. The Child Jesus Injured by the Thorns 14 Collection of D. Cayetano Sanchez Pineda, Seville. St. Buenaventura Visited by St. Thomas 14 Kaiser-Frederick Museum, Berlin. The Holy Face 16 Collection of D. Mariano Pacheco, Madrid. Adoration of the Shepherds 18 National Gallery, London. Adoration of the Shepherds 20 Collection of the Countess of Paris, Chateau of Randan, Auvergne. The Virgin of the Rosary 22 Hospital of the Blood, Seville. Jesus Blessing the World 24 Iturbe Collection, Madrid. FACING PAGB Father Gonzalo Illescas 26 Monastery of Guadalupe. The Celestial Chastisement of St. Jerome 28 Monastery of Guadalupe. Jesus Rewarding the Holy Zeal of Father Salmeron ... 30 Monastery of Guadalupe. St. Jerome in Glory 30 Monastery of Guadalupe. The Crucifixion 32 Property of the Heirs of the Marquis of Villafuerte, Seville. St. Buenaventura Presiding Over a Chapter of the Lesser Friars 34 I.ouvre, Paris. Funeral of a Saint 36 Louvre, Paris. Virgin with Two Saints 38 National Gallery, Edinburgh, Scotland. Child Virgin at Prayer 40 Property of D. Aureliano de Beruete, Madrid. St. Francis of Assisi 4^ Provincial Museum of Seville. St. Buenaventura Visited by an Angel 44 Museum of Dresden. Master Friar Francisco Zumel 48 Royal Academy of San Fernando, Madrid. St. Carmel, Bishop of Teruel 50 Provincial Museum of Seville. Master Friar Peter Machado 52 Royal Academy of San Fernando, Madrid. Prince Baltasar 54 Kaiser Frederick Museum, Berlin. St. Catherine of Sienna ^6 Owned by Infanta Dona Isabella of Bourbon, Madrid. The Immaculate Conception 58 Collection of the Marquis of Cerralvo, Madrid. Christ Crowning Joseph 60 The Louvre. The Blessed Alonzo Rodriguez 62 Royal Academy of San Fernando, Madrid. FACING PAGE St. Lawrence 62 The Hermitage, Petrograd. Santa Ruffina 64 Property of Mr. Archer M. Huntington, New York. St. Lucia 66 The Ehrich Galleries, New York. St. Inez 68 Hospital of the Blood, Seville. St. Margaret 70 Hospital of the Blood, Seville. The Annunciation 72 Collection of the Countess of Paris, Chateau of Randan, Auvergne. The Circumcision 74 Collection of the Countess of Paris, Chateau of Randan, Auvergne. St. Margaret 76 National Gallery, London. St. Ignatius Loyola 78 The Ehrich Galleries, New York. St. Louis Beltran . . . . 78 Provincial Museum of Seville. Student of the University of Salamanca 80 Collection of Mrs. John Lowell Gardner, Boston. A Holy Carthusian Martyr 82 Provincial Museum of Cadiz. Master Friar Jeronimo Perez 84 Royal Academy of San Fernando, Madrid. The Daughters of Juan de Roelas 86 The Ehrich Galleries, New York. St. Casilda 88 Museum of the Prado, Madrid. Hercules Killing the Cretan Bull 90 Museum of the Prado, Madrid. Hercules Killing the Hydra of Lerna 92 Museum of the Prado, Madrid. St. Casilda 94 Collection of the late Sir William Van Horne, Montreal, Canada. VACIKO PAOB St. John the Baptist in the Desert 94 Provincial Museum of Cadiz. St. Francis of Paula 96 Collection of Mr. D. J. Macdougall, Seville. The Blessed Enrique Suzon 98 Provincial Museum of Seville. The Jubilee of St. Francis lOO Provincial Museum of Cadiz. St. Francis of Assisi 102 Collection of D. Aureliano de Beruete, Madrid. St. Mathew 104 Provincial Museum of Cadiz. Virgin of the Mercy 108 Collection of the Countess of Paris, Auvergne. The Immaculate Conception 112 Museum of Buda-Pest. Christ Replacing His Vesture After Flagellation . . . .116 Church of St. John the Baptist, Jadraque. The Sacristry and Chapel of Guadalupe 118 REPORT OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS OF SAN FERNANDO Spanish Editor’s Preface I WISHED to offer to my constant patrons a new book upon the subject of Art, but not having con- fidence in my own judgment to fully appreciate what Senor Cascales y Munoz had offered me, I desired the advice of the authorities in the matter, and the fol- lowing is the reply of the Royal Academy of San Fer- nando upon the subject of this work, devoted to the study of Zurbaran : t “In the presence of an artist of such distinction toward whom no criticism, until recently, has especially been di- rected, who has only been judged superficially, and con- cerning whose life no documental proofs in the number that were to be desired have been forthcoming, Senor Cascales y Munoz who, like Zurbaran, is a native of Ex- tremadura, has felt the noble desire to render to this artist a tribute of admiration, reuniting and collecting dates, notices, documents and antecedent facts, and sep- arate critical comments, to form of these a book, and as he modestly says in the brief introduction, ho contribute his grain of sand’ to the legitimate glory of the artist. “In respect to the life of Zurbaran, he affirms that the artist was not in Seville during childhood, but when there was a well grown youth; neither did he study un- xi der the direction of de Roelas, as has been asserted from the time of Palomino till now by all his biographers. Neither could he have been influenced by the work of Caravaggio, to which his own bears no similitude; and adds the curious information discovered by Sr. Rodri- guez Marin in the Archives of the Registry in Seville, that the first master of Zurbaran was Pedro Diaz de Villanueva, a painter of images. “There follows with much minuteness and copies of data, the life of the painter in Llerena (not in Puente de Cantos, as was supposed) , and in Seville, where he was warmly appreciated, and afterwards in Madrid. The author was greatly helped in these investigations by the notes collected and published by Sr. Gestoso in his ‘Dic- tionary of Sevillian Artists’ under the title of ‘History and Present Location of the Works of Zurbaran.’ Sr. Cascales y Munoz has made a very complete catalogue of his works, indicating the places where they may be found, whether in churches and convents for which they were painted, or public and private collections, both national and foreign. “The chapter which treats of ‘The Pictures of Zur- baran in the Light of Criticism’ is as its name indicates, a resume of the opinions of ancient and modern critics, as well as a few articles from the artists of to-day. Among these is that of our friend, D. Jose Villegas, which, as usual, is very original and was written expressly for this volume. “Finally, under the heading of ‘The Painter as Re- vealed in his Works,’ Sr. Cascales y Munoz presents an exhaustive study of the artist’s personality and his pro- ductions which shine with a powerful light in the natu- xii ralistic trend that is characteristic of Spanish painting. “Such is the work of our author, which reveals his constancy in pursuing his task to the end, and, among other things already indicated, he excels in having writ- ten the first book dedicated to Zurbaran.” The foregoing was written January 26, 1911. Since then the work has been enriched by Sr. Cascales y Munoz with other notes based upon recent discoveries, and considerably enlarged by new chapters. Finally, those interested in Art can read and judge of the merits of the book, and if it pleases them the editor will be satisfied. Editor of the Spanish Edition Published in Madrid K 2 . 99 e, 50 Q^ 'CCrrv-L -h ^ ^ — ■ r ^ ^ ^“ 7 ^^ \^liy J^U ^MT c/ jenoC^iAyj^ yriA'UxytMj \lCi M- i ■■ ^ axaw^^^i^i*^ Xnaxc^y/) oJyf> q^(A<^ •J'eX^y^gT^ /Cb 7n.ia,ucu Jol?U?' 'A^/ ^ •'/l/tA^ A/ ‘7-C^ Certificate of Baptism of Zurbaran. A. 2996509. Doctor don Cruz Rubiales Aguilar, being priest in charge of the parochial church of Our Lady of Granada, only church in this city. Certifies that in book No. 3, in the Registry of Baptism which is kept in the Archives of the parish, page 170, there is the following statement: In the town of Fuente de Cantos on the seventh day of the month of November of fifteen hundred and ninety- eight, Sr. Diego Martinez Montes, priest in said town, baptised a son of Louis de Zurbaran and of his wife Isa- bel Marquez. His godfather was Pedro Garcia del Corro, priest, and the midwife was Maria Dominguez; both knowing their duties and obligations gave him the name of Francisco, and Diego Martinez Montes, thus witnessed.” The present statement is a copy of the original, in proof of which, I give the present certificate which I sign and seal in Fuente de Cantos, on the seventh of April of nine- teen hundred and five. Dr. Cruz Rubiales Aguilar. (Attested.) XV SKETCH OF THE AUTHOR’S LIFE Senor Don Jose Cascales-y-Munoz, the distinguished author of “Francisco de Zurbaran,” was born of a fine old Spanish family in Villa-Franca (Bajadoz) February 28th, 1865, his parents being D. G. Cascales Lopez and E, Munoz Garcia. He passed brilliantly through college, having received degrees from four separate in- stitutions in Seville when still quite young. As early as 1883 he began writing for the press, and his enthusiasm embraced all subjects, art, politics, archaeology, history, architecture, etc. He is still an honored correspondent of many important periodicals in Spain and other Eu- ropean countries. Later in life desiring to study law he went to Madrid and graduated in 1898 with special honors. Senor Munoz’ intense patriotism has been shown in various ways as orator, editor and sociologist. In 1889 he began those serious studies of political and social questions that form the chief subject of his later works. He was the founder of the Society of Research of Seville, and a few years ago endowed a Chair of Sociology in the Central University, Madrid, this be- ing the first time such a chair had been founded in any University in the world. Senor Munoz belongs to many foreign scientific societies, and is also a corresponding member of the Hispanic Museum, New York. Of his personal character his intimate friend the novelist Senor D. J. O. Mufiilla says: “He has a noble heart, loyal in xvii friendship and full of delicate and generous feeling>. His indomitable will never shrinks before the most labor- ious tasks, and he is constantly seeking subjects that will be of interest to the public. No sooner has he finished one theme than he is eager to begin another. “Senor Munoz’ chief claim to fame is that of a publicist, and to appreciate the great value of his works one must remember that they are not the fruit of imagination, but the result of close study, deep erudition, and great breadth of view, gained by wide reading and reflection, as well as direct observation.” His book on Francisco de Zurbaran has plainly been a labor of love, and no one was better fitted to appreciate the great artist’s noble but rugged personality. In his relations with the translator Senor Munoz has exquisitely sustained all the best traditions of Spanish courtesy. N. S. E. xviii AUTHOR’S PREFACE T here are few painters whose lives have re- mained in obscurity for so long a time as Fran- cisco de Zurbaran’s, the eminent painter of the “Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas T and about whose importance, in the golden age of Art, so much has been imagined upon so slight a foundation. He has been represented as being unknown by his contemporaries (a thing absurd in the light of the culture of the time) , and forced to work for a salary, when we know that he was pressed for time to execute the many orders which soon came to him from all directions. On the other hand, the ignorance of his early biog- raphers has given rise to his title of the Spanish Cara- vaggio, labelling him as an imitator of the Italian artist (though he learned nothing from the latter and did not even have the opportunity of knowing him) . In the fifth year of the twentieth century Zurbaran’s ^ time came, in one of those series of national manifesta- tions which, like centennials and expositions of art, oc- curring many years after the death of the respective artist, represent in the profane world what a canoniza- tion does in the religious one. It is the consecration of superior men recognized and confirmed by posterity. In 1905" such an exposition of Zurbaran’s works was held in Madrid. This celebration ^ was necessary in order that the xix learned world should realize that a large part of the ex- istence of the painter yet remains unknown, and that they should feel the incentive to search in archives, libraries and museums for the data that is missing to complete, and one might even say, to write for the first time his interesting biography. What was the real life of Zurbaran^ What his social position as a man, and what his significance and impor- tance as an artist Something may be said in reply to these questions, thanks to the investigations lately carried on by modern critics and historians; but up to the present time there has been very little known about him, and that little errone- ous and confused. In order to contribute my “grain of sand” and failing to find any new material (that which I have looked for I have not had the good fortune to find) , I have consulted Diaz del Valle, Palomino, Cean Bermudez, Lafond, Madrazo, Araujo, Blanc, Cossio, Sentenach, Manjarres, Gestoso, Rodriguez, Marin, Symond, Mier, Lefort, Palomo Anaya, F. N. L. Tormo, Rodriguez Cordola, Justi, Romero de Torres, Melida, Villejas, Alcantara and many other biographers and critics of Art who I knew had written about this illustrious Extremadurian. In none of these have I found a complete biography, such as this painter merits. Through the certificate of baptism all know when and where he was baptised (not the day of his birth, for by a careless omission the priest forgot to note the date in the corresponding entry) , but none knew when or where he died, and certain periods of his life appear equally obscure. Nevertheless, by reading all the authorities, by a sys- XX tematic arrangement of facts, and by force of personal observation, we may reconstruct the life of Zurbaran, re- count the progress of his growth and the influences he received and recorded. It will be necessary also to ex- amine the political, religious and social state of the times in which he was born and developed, the artistic culture of his epoch, and his most notable canvases. The basis of my task is to set forth the judgment of his contemporaries, what he merits at our hand, the errors which his many biographers have committed and his sig- nificance in the history of Art, and this I propose to carry out in the most concise manner possible. Jose Cascales y Munoz. XXI A EDITOR’S NOTE Photographs of many of the paintings reproduced herein have been supplied by the Ehrich Galleries of New York and it is a pleasure to acknowledge their help in this and in other ways in the preparation of this book. The measurements of the paintings in the text are given in millimetres unless otherwise indicated. The small numerals in the text refer to the Notes on pages 154-158, at the end of the volume. xxiii I h i fe- “■ 1 I'(JR I RM r ()!• Zl’RI’.ARAX Museum of firunswirk, fjcrmaiiy. FRANCISCO DE ZURBARAN LEGENDS A lthough the biographers of Zurbaran have limited themselves to copying and commenting upon the few facts stated by Palomino and Cean Bermudez, popular imagination has created a series of legends, each more absurd and improbable than the other. In the village of Fuente de Cantos, his native place, it is still told that he was a poor shepherd boy with such a decided gift for drawing that, while his flock was graz- ing, he drew upon the trunks of trees everything he could see about him, until one day some gentlemen who were passing through the country admired his ability and took him with them to Seville. He was then twelve years old and had received some lessons in drawing paid for by the priest of the village. Before leaving Fuente de Cantos, says another story, he had painted the caricature of a young aristocrat named Silverio de Luarca who, offended by this work, revenged himself upon the artist by killing the elder Zurbaran, then flying to Madrid. One night after many years the artist recognized him there and killed him in a duel. Let us see how D. Juan Jose Lopez Serrano, in No. 14, 1 November, 1899, of the literary review “Notes and Sketches” elaborates this fable : “Spring came with all its attractions. The fields wore an enchanting aspect; the melancholy foliage of winter had changed to freshness and gaiety, helping to harmon- ize the various tints which carelessly mingling appeared as the capricious mixture of colors on a painter’s palette. Many streams born of the melting snow of the mountains rushed through the thickets of the woods, kissing with liquid lips the roots of the walnut-trees which shaded them. “On such a Spring day, in the flowering season of the year 1606, a young shepherd called Francisco de Zur- baran was guarding his sheep in a field near Fuente de Cantos (province of Extremadura) . A boy of 7, he was seated in the shade of a chestnut-tree, occupying his lei- sure by copying the landscape with a bit of charcoal on an old piece of paper. Completely absorbed in his work he did not notice the arrival of Silverio de Luarca, son of a rich man of Fuente de Cantos, who with his friends was hunting in the vicinity. Luarca, who was somewhat satirical and lacking in sympathy, brusquely asked the little shepherd : “ ‘What are you painting, boy^’ “ ‘I, sir?’ replied the boy; ‘a picture of the pasture and my sheep.’ “ ‘Ha, ha, why! The heads are larger than the bodies — what trees! Go on painting and you will become a great artist !’ “Zurbaran lowered his head, his eyes closed as if he feared to look at the author of so cruel a joke; he felt a shudder go through him and two tears escaping from his 2 THK CMlI.l) \ IK(;iX (( ■( ).\( I'.I’TK »X ) I’roiHity of tin- Ili'irs of ll. Josi- Maria I.oiu-z --u' I / 1 plicity. The second picture shows St. Hugo in the re- fectory where the monks are eating meat; and the third is Our Lady standing with various Carthusians beneath her mantle. In the prior’s cell is a Holy Family and in a room next to the high oratory, a child Jesus pressing the blood from his finger which he pierced while making a crown of thorns. IN CORDOVA In the convent of St. Paul. — Various saints in full length near the principal stairway and in other places. In the Mercy. — Others in the stairway, almost faded out. IN JEREZ OF THE FRONTERA In the Capuchin church. — ^The Franciscan Jubilee and various holy martyrs, in seven pictures divided between the church and the choir. In the Carthusian. — The Incarnation, the Birth, the Circumcision, and the Epiphany of Our Lord; the four Evangelists and other Saints on the reredos of the high altar. Angels with incense holders on the side doors, and various monks in the corridor which leads to the sanctuary. St. Christopher and St. Bruno in the sac- risty; two pictures in the reredos of the choir and two others on the walls, representing the Virgin with the Child, and some monks kneeling; and finally Our Lady helping the inhabitants of Jerez in a battle, with other pictures in the refectory. IN GUADALUPE (eXTREMADURA) In the monastery of the Jeronimites. — St. Ildefonso and St. Nicholas of Bari in two altars, which are at the 43 entrance of the choir; eight large canvases which portray the life of St. Jerome, and are of the best by his hand, for the good effect of claro-obscuro, in the sacristy; and two equally good in another room, and in the further room the holy Doctor in glory. IN MADRID In the New palace. — A lovely St. Margaret, which Bartolome Velasquez engraved called the Shepherdess, as she is in this costume with wallets on her arm. In the palace of Buen Retiro. — The Saviour with a Cross on his shoulders, of middle size, in the chapel of St. Theresa; another in the sacristy signed in 1661, and they attribute to him the canvas which is in the end of the reredos of the altar of St. Bruno. IN PENARANDA In the paroquial church of the town. — ^An Incarna- tion in the sacristy. IN CASTELLON In the convent of the Capuchins. — Various saints and founders of religions in the church outside the cloister. <4 It is difficult to precisely fix the present location of these, and the other numerous paintings which the Ex- tremadurian executed, and however much is investi- gated, some will always remain undiscovered even to the most fortunate researcher. For this reason, I do not expect to find the location of 44 ST. m'EX.WEXTI'R.V MSTTEI) \\\ ,\X .\XGEE Museum of T)resden. I I all, but only of the most important ones, preserved in foreign countries and which are the following: In the Kaiser-Friedrich Museum of Berlin, the portrait of a young prince who is supposed to be the son of Philip IV, Don Baltasar Carlos. The prince is standing and slightly inclining to the left, with looks directed to the spectator. He has heavy locks of hair and wears over the cuirass a red sash, brown trousers and white stockings with black shoes complete the costume. In his right hand he holds a short staff of command, and touches with his left the pommel of his sword. I owe to our great artist D. Ignacio Zuloaga the photograph of this painting which he secured from Mr. Alfred Morrison of London. The painting is on a canvas measuring 1.85 x 1.03. In the same Museum is preserved St. Bonaventura vis- ited by St. Thomas to whom he shows the Crucifix, the origin of his faith (signed in 1629) ; in the Dresden Museum, there is St. Bonaventura visited by an angel who reveals to him the Cardinal that should be elected Pope. In that of Brunswick, a portrait of himself (formerly at- tributed to Ribera) and in Breslau, Jesus Christ after the flagellation^ size 1.79 x 1.23. In the Museum of Buda- pest, there is a Sacred Family (signed 1659) and a Con- ception (signed 1661). In the Hermitage of St. Peters- burg, a jS/. Lawrence (signed 1636) ; and in the National Gallery, London, an Adoration of the Shepherds and a Monk at Prayer. In Edinburgh, a Virgm in Glory dressed in pale lilac and obscure blue, and surrounded by clouds and heads of cherubim, resting her feet upon these latter and a half moon. Underneath on the ground is a woman saint on the right, and a man saint on the left, and a golden landscape in the background; it measures 0.98 x 45 0.68. In the Louvre, SL Bonavenfure presiding over a chapter of the lesser Brothers — and the Funeral of the Faint. In Grenoble (France), the Adoration of the Shepherds and the Adoration of the Kings. In Lyons, a St. Francis of Assisi standing with face lifted, and eyes fixed on the sky, measuring 1.97 x 1.06. In Italy, there are in the gallery of the Bianco palace of Genoa three can- vases: The Viaticum to the Sick., a magnificent work measuring 2.90 x 3.07; a St. Ursula of 1.66 x 1.03 and a St.Fuphemiaoi 1.66 x 1.03. ^ ^ ^ Among private collections outside of Spain, Count Charles Dunin possesses in his home in Germany a St. Theresa of Jesus, and the Countess of Paris holds in her chateau of Randan (Auvergne) part of the collection which belonged to the Carthusians of Jerez, other can- vases of which are admired in the Museum of Cadiz. Among those belonging to the Countess are: the Anuncia- tion, the Circumcision, the Adoration of the Kings, and the famous Adoration of the Shepherds which Zurbaran signed 1638 as painter to the King; the four measure 2.61 X i.iy. Lord Barrymore has in his magnificent col- lection in London a St. Elizabeth of Hungary whose dress shows the incontestable proofs of Zurbaran’s brush; and in St. Petersburgh, the Grandduke Constantine has a Christ Crucified which he acquired as a Velasquez. <4 V <4 In the official museums, churches and public edifices of Spain, there still remain his most valuable works. In the national Museum of the Prado one admires the following pictures : 46 The Vision of St. Peter Nolasco. Kneeling asleep be- fore a table is the Saint, founder of the Order, looking at a young angel who appears to him in his sleep, and who with the right hand uplifted shows him the heavenly Jerusalem, which is seen in an opening in the sky sur- rounded by luminous clouds. Figures of natural size, measurements 1.79 x 2.23. The Apparitio?i of St. Peter the Apostle to St. Peter Nolasco. Kneeling, with open arms, the Saint of the Mercy sees in an ecstasy his patron St. Peter the Apostle, among resplendent clouds of celestial glory, crucified with the head downwards, as he was martyred. Figures of nat- ural size, measuring 1.79 x 2.23, signed. St. Francis Dead. The Saint is on the ground, his head resting upon a tile, the hands crossed upon the breast. In the foreground is a jar with a hissop brush, and at the left a skull with two candelabra with lighted candles. The whole figure and of life-size, measurements, 0.80 x 1.90. St. Casilda standing, represented in the act of turning into roses the bread which she carries in her skirt to succor the captive Christians. When surprised by her father the Moorish king, she was exercising this charity for which God liberated her from death. Figure full length and life-size, O.80 x 1.90. The Infant Jesus sleepmg on the Cross with the Crown of Thorns by his side, 0.75 x 1. Hercules separating the two Mountains., Calpe and Abyla, 1.35 x 1.53. Hercules vanquishing the Giants., 1.36 x 1.67. Hercules vanquishing the Lion in the Numean Swamps., 1.51 X 1.66. 47 Hercules fighting the ^rymanthean Boar, 1.32 x 1.53. Hercules subduing the Cretan Bull which Neptune sent against Minos, 1.32 x 1.52. Hercules fighting with Anteas, 1.36 x 1.53. Hercules fighting Cerberus and taking Alcestes from the infernal regions, 1.32 x 1.51. Hercules stopping the course of the river Alpheus, 1.33x1.53. Hercules killing the Hydra in the Swamps of Lerna, 1.33 X 1.67. Hercules tormented by the burning Tunic of the Cen- taur Nestor, 1.36 X 1.67. In the Academy of San Fernando, the portraits on can- vas of: The Master Brother Pedro Machado, 2.94 x 1.22; the Master Brother Francisco Zumel, 2.04 x 1.22; the Master Brother Jeronimo Perez, 2.04x1.22; the Master Brother Hernando de Santiago, 2.04 x 1.22; a Friar of the Order, 2.04 x 1.22; and the Blessed Alonso Rodriguez, 2.66 x 1.67. In the Municipality of Barcelona there are : a Monk in Ecstasy, 1.90 x 1.20; and a St. Francis of Assisi, 1.67 x 1 -05- In the Provincial Museum of Seville are the following works which I copy from the catalogue of 1897, together with the descriptions of the same, although some have al- ready been described in former paragraphs : SALON OF MURILLO 121. The Virgin of the Caves. Standing — her head encircled with an imperial crown, dressed in a red tunic — the Virgin shelters under her blue mantle, which two small angels hold up, a community of Carthusians are 48 MASTER I RE\K 1-RAX(TS('() /AMI E Royal Academy of San ^'c^lan(lo, ^Eidriil. v' ' :9 (Z kneeling before her in reverent attitude. Background of luminous clouds, and the Holy Spirit. On the ground, many flowers are scattered. Figures somewhat larger than life-size, 2.67 x 3.25 — canvas. 122. SL Carmelo, Bishop of T cruel. In the habit of the Order of the Mercy, mitred, standing, his left arm holding an open book against his waist, and in his right, a pen. His gaze is directed heavenward. In the back- ground, the Virgin, appears to him. Figure life-size, 1 .88 X 1 .08 — canvas. 123. Tht Child Jesus. He is seated and has wounded his hand while weaving a Crown of thorns; in the lumi- nous background are seraphim and upon a pedestal a vase with flowers. Figure of conventional size, 0.70 x 0.42, on wood. 124. Jesus dying on the Cross. Background very obscure. At the foot of the Cross, a view of the city of Jerusalem. Figure of life-size, 2.32x1.67 — canvas. 125. Jesus crowning St. Joseph. Our Lord, standing, sustaining the Cross on his left arm, extends the right hand with a crown of thorns in the attitude of placing it upon the head of St. Joseph, who kneels before him. Background resplendent in which may be seen the Eternal Father, the Holy Spirit and various seraphim. Figures life-size, 2.^0 x 1.66 — canvas. 126. The Blessed Domif^ic Henry Suzon. Standing, bareheaded, with eyes lifted toward the sky, his right hand holding the folds of his robe and exposing part of his breast upon which he engraves with a bistoury in let- ters of blood, on his skin, the initials I. H. S. A figure of admirable mysticism. In the background a landscape 49 with a group of small figures of Dominicans, houses and a young angel. Figure life-size, 2.09 x 1.54 — canvas. 127. The Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas and Foundation of the Greater College of St. Thomas of Seville. Figures larger than life-size, 4.80 x 4.00 — qq canvas. 128. St. Louis Tehran. Standing, holding a cup or vase of embossed silver out of which there arises a small fantastic animal, which marvellously tells him that the liquid contained in the vase is poison. Background of landscape in which two miracles of the Saint are repre- sented with very small figures. Figure of natural size, 2.09 X 1 .45 — canvas. 129. A Crucifixion. In the act of dying. Background very obscure. Figure of life-size, 2.55x1.72 — canvas (Zurbaran^?) 130. St. Dominic. Standing and directing his gaze to the sky, with his clasped hands grasps a branch of lilies. Figure of half the natural size, 2.00 x 1.25 — canvas. 131. St. Jerome. He is standing in cardinal’s dress and holds an open book against his body. Background plain and very dark. Figure of natural size, 2.00 x 1.25 — canvas. 132. St. Gregory. Standing, pontifically dressed, and reading a volume which he holds in his hands. Back- ground plain and very dark. Figure life-size, 2.00 x 1 .25 — canvas. 133. The Saviour nailed to the Cross and Dead. Background obscure, figure of natural size, 1.95 x 0.88 — canvas. 134. A Holy Bishop. Standing, pontifically dressed with a book under his left arm, and in the right hand a ST. r.\RMI-,L, lilSIK )1> ( )|- Ti:Kri,I, Provincial iMu.scum of Seville, / I ■ ? staff. Background obscure, figure of natural size, i .95 x 0.88 — canvas. 135. The Conference of St. Bruno with Pope Urban II. He is shown on the left,^^ seated in a chair under a can- opy; the Saint on a bench. The background is architec- tural, and adorned in the Renaissance style, with two windows and a door, in which we see the figure of a young attendant, and another person whose head appears in the second foreground. Figures more than life-size, 2.72 x 3.07 — canvas. 136. A Holy Bishop Martyr of the Order of the Mercy. He is standing in the attitude of writing, with a knife sticking in his neck, while an angel places on his head the crown of martyrdom. On the left, upon a table covered with a green cloth, is a mitre and an inkstand. Figure of natural size, .1.94 x 1.08 — canvas. 137. The Eternal Father. Seated on a throne of clouds, surrounded with a choir of seraphim with a sceptre in the left hand, the right extended over the world. Figure of colossal size, 2.60 x 2.67 — canvas. 138. St. Francis of Assisi. He is standing, contemp- lating a crucifix which he holds in his right hand. Back- ground of landscape. Figure of natural size, 1.95 x 0.93 — canvas. 139. St. Hugo with various Carthusian Monks in the Refectory or The Miracle of the Holy Vow. Figures of natural size, 2,62 x 3.18 — canvas. CONFERENCE HALL OF THE ACADEMY 13. St. Francis de Borja. Standing, dressed in the habit of the Order, holding up the Holy Eucharist, at his feet the emblems of his dignity, his crest, some books and 51 a skull, with an imperial crown. Background of land- scape. In the upper left hand corner is seen the mono- gram of the Company, resplendent with light. Figure of natural size, 2.07 x 1.40 — canvas. 14. SL Ignatius Loyola. Standing before a table, upon which is an open book, the Saint interrupts his lec- ture at the contact of Christ’s love, represented by a flam- ing circle in which the initials I. H. S. are seen, and which comes from heaven down to the Saint. In the back- ground a view of a court is visible. Figure of natural size, 2.07 X 1.40 — canvas (Zurbaran^) 15. St. Francis de Borja. Standing, dressed in the habit of the Order, .he looks at a skull with imperial crown, emblem of his conversion, which he holds in his left hand. In the lower left hand corner are three cardi- nal’s hats, and in the upper left hand corner a flaming circle with the monogram I. H. S. Background plain. Figure of natural size, 1.87 x 1.21 — canvas (Zurbaran*?) UPPER HALL OF THE XVII CENTURY 31. The Saviour expiring on the Cross. Figure of con- ventional size, 1.36 X 0.73 — canvas of coarse texture. 32. The same subject as the preceding one. Figure of conventional size, 1.25 x O.80 — canvas. In the Cathedral — ^(In the titular chapel are preserved the famous paintings of the reredos of St. Peter, and in the sacristy of the Older chapel the St. Francis which Cean Bermudez saw over the door of the baptistry) . In 1909, D. Jose Gestoso, D. Gonzalo Bilbao and some of their friends discovered the following paintings by Zur- baran which had been lost : a Virgin of the Mercies with Saints of this Order, in the main sacristy — two pictures M \M i.R !-KlAk !'!■, ! l.k M.\( llAlM > Royal Atadcniy ol S,m iTiiumdo. Ma:c\.v'\'U)S ( ()!lc( tiim ot the M,ii(iuis ol ( r.ilvo, Miidiiil a Sf. Diego, 1.88 x 1.00 and Sf. Barbara, i.io x 0.75, to the Marquis de Viana. John the Baptist, 1.4034x1.02, to D. Rafael Tovar. A Conception, 2.00 x 1.46, to the Marquis de Cerralvo. A Writer of the Order of the Mercy, 1.68 x 1.16, to D. Jose Prado y Palacio. A Group of Angels, 0.44 x 0.55, to the Duke de Val- encia. A Virgin with the Child in her Arms, 1.32 x 0.97, to the Duke de Uceda. At. Francis, 0.90 x 0.70, to D. Segundo Cuesta. A Little Lamb, 0.90 x 0.70, to Mr. Stanislaus O. Rossen. Two Heads, 0.35 x 0.48, to Louis Sainz. St. Francis, 0.90 x 0.70, to D. Luis Page. St. Francis, 1.62 x 1.07, to D. Luis Navas. St. Francis, 1.20 x 1.02, to D. Enrique Mansberger. Ecce Homo, 0.78 x 0.57, to D. Ecequiel Arizmendi. Christ on the Cross, 1.07 x 0.73, to D. Luis Perez Julia. The Embrace of St. Francis and St. Dominic, 0.40 x 0.33, to D. Felix Maria Eguidaga. St. Ignatius de Loyola, 1.90x1.22; a Child Jesus wounding himself while weaving a Crown of Thorns, 0.96x0.78; a St. John the Baptist, 1.79 x 1.17 and a Monk, 0.62 X 0.42, to the Marquis de la Vega Inclan. The Portrait of Father Francisco Valderrama, 0.74 x 0.62, and the Portrait of Father Rivera, 0.74 x 0.62, to the Baron de la Vega de Hoz, Count of Guadiana, and St. Peter weeping for his fault, 1.06 x 0.86, to D. Juan Manuel Garcia Flores. 59 IN BARCELONA A }iead of St. Francis, o.8o x o.6o, belonging to D. Juan Bautista Jimeno. IN CADIZ St. Diego de Alcala, 0.94 x 1.00, to D. Jose Luis de Sola and The Virgin of the Mercy putting a Scapular on a Monk, 2.07 X 1.31, to D. Juan de la C. Lavalle. IN JEREZ DE LA FRONTERA An Immaculate Conception with two members of the lesser clergy, kneeling at her feet, 2.52 x i .68, to D. Pedro Aladro, Prince of Albania. IN SANLUCAR DE BARRAMEDA A St. Francis, medium size, to the heirs of the widow of Sr. Hidalgo. IN ECIJA Martyrdom of the Carthusian Monks, 1.70 x 2.15, be- longing to D. Jose Fernandez Pintado, also a Votive Pic- ture, 1.75 X 2.20. IN SEVILLE A Child Conception (first known work of Zurbaran) 1.95 X i-5'7; the Floly Family, 2.47x2.00; an Incident in the Life of St. Luis Beltran, 0.34 x 1.19, and another Incident in the Life of the same Saint (companion to the former) 0.34 x 1.19, to the heirs of D. Jose Maria Lopez de Cepero. A Carthusian Moiik, 0.62 x 0.42, to D. Gonzalo Bil- bao, St. Francis de Paula, 1.63 x 1.09, to D. Jose Macdou- gall. 60 CUKIS'l' CROWXINC jnSl'.l’H The Louvre. 1 The Child Jesus wounding himself while weaving a Crown of Thorns^ 1.31 x 0.86, to D. Cayetano Sanchez Pineda, resembling that which D. Gustavo Morales owns in Madrid. Anthony^ 1.49 x 1.97, to D. Salvador Cumplido. The portraits of Don Diego Bustos de Lara, 2.00 x 1.04 and Don Gonzalo Bustos de Lara, 2.00 x 1.04, to the Count de Gomara. At. Dominic de Guzman, 2.03 x 1.35', to D. Francisco- Romero Camavachuelo. A Monk, 1.20 X 0.93, to the widow of Sr. Albarracin. The Birth of the Child Jesus, belonging to Moema d’Anter, and Christ expiring on the Cross, to the heirs of Marquis de Villafuerte. This last picture is so sublime, that in the opinion of Sr. Tormo, it is the most finished of Zurbaran’s paintings and according to D. Jose Villegas, director of the Prado- Museum, Velasquez may have been inspired by it to paint his own of the same subject. 61 THE PAINTINGS OF ZURBARAn In the Light of Criticism K nowing the life of the man, the fortunes and present home of his best works, by which the reader may form an idea regarding the judgment which Zurbaran deserves from his principal biographers and critics, I will reproduce in continuation what has been written of him and his canvases by Palomino, Cean Ber- mudez, Madrazo, Araujo, Blanc, Cossio, Sentenach, Man- jarres, Symons, Mier, Lefort, F. N. L. Tormo, Rodriguez Codola, Justi, Romero de Torres, Melida, Villegas and Alcantara. In reference to the paintings of SL Veter Nolasco which are preserved in the second cloister of the Mercy in Seville, Don Antonio Palomino says : “It is a delight to see the habits of the friars which, being all white, are distinguished one from the other ac- cording to the position in which they happen to be, with such admirable proportions in drawing, color and texture, that they deceive Nature herself. The artist was so scrupulous that he painted all draperies on manikins, and the flesh after nature; thus attaining marvelous effects, following in this method the school of Carabacho, whom he so much resembled that those who had seen his (Zur- baran’s) works, not knowing by whom they were painted, did not hesitate to attribute them to Carabacho. 62 nil, iii.i ssi'.i) .'vL(i\/.n K( )i >Ki( ;ri /, Royal Aiadc'iiiy of San IVrnancIo, Madrid. . .7 j I '"ji iH; I >'I\ I.AWRI-,.\( 1, I lu- llrrmitagc, I’rlnigiad, “Of such kind was a painting” (continues Palomino) “called The Bitch which was done so naturally that one feared it might bark at those who looked at it; and there also is a figure of a youth with sleeves of cloth of silver, so natural that anyone would know of what material they are made. An amateur in Seville owns a little lamb painted by this artist, after nature, which he prizes more than a hundred live ones.” In the same sense writes Don Juan Augustin Cean Ber- mudez when saying that as soon as Zubaran began to gain experience “he determined not to paint anything except after nature, nor any drapery not copied from one worn by a manikin, and in this he succeeded in being extremely successful, especially in white, for the tone and softness he produced. He imitated Michael Angelo Caravaggio in his azure tints, and in the force of his claro- obscuro, undoubtedly from having copied many works of that artist which might have been found in Seville, but nothing proves that he himself went to Italy. Drawn with correctness, his compositions are in general simple and of few figures, in attitudes both serious and natural, taking pains in embellishing the foreground with great spaces of light and shade, with which he obtained a mar- velous effect. “His greatest work, the Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas placed Zurbaran on an equality with the most famous painters of the Lombard School.” In his History of the Art of Tainting., whose manu- script still remains unedited in the Archives of the Royal Academy of San Fernando, the same Cean Bermudez, speaking of Zurbaran, says, “he was the honor and glory of the Andalusian School, the Spanish Caravaggio with- 63 out having known the Italian, and without ever leaving Spain ; the original painter who did not imitate in style either his master Roelas or any other Andalusian who had preceded him; being the first to study nature’s effects in the shade, observing the tints of the flesh and the har- monies of color ; whom no one equalled in the draping of cloth, nor the shading and softness of white. He drew with fidelity common things without partiality, but knew how to give character to his figures ; composing with pre- cision and economy, he avoided the overdoing and con- fusion of objects, and the repetition of foreshortenings. He painted with great masses of color, with much force and purity and in effects of claro-obscuro he excelled most of the Spanish painters as well as those of other coun- tries.” Mr. Paul Lafond repeats the words and opinions of Palomino and Cean Bermudez, without adding anything new in his book recently published in Paris.^^ Also D. Pedro Madrazo coincides with the others in supposing that Zurbaran “abandoned himself to the in- fluences of the works of Caravaggio, whose strength of claro-obscuro enchanted him” ; and he goes on in the same article declaring “that his brush was powerful and rich though sombre, and his manner of painting was grand and natural in the draping of cloths, especially those of white wool. . . . Above all, in his canvases he shows a profound study of Nature, and a method entirely per- sonal in procuring effects of claro-obscuro united to the energy of Caravaggio (whom he excels in truth, particu- larly in the elevation and dignity of his moral sentiment) , and to a most unique art in effecting the annihilation of certain tints by great masses of shade, such as a photo- 64 SAX'I'A RUFFIXA Property of Air. Archer AI. Huntington. Xcw York. i i graph gives us. We might almost think that this rare auxiliary of the colorist was familiar to Zurbaran.” D. Ceferino Araujo y Sanchez, speaking of the like- ness that former biographers of Zurbaran had found to Caravaggio, says very definitely: “It will be well to keep in mind that in nothing does he resemble the Italian painter whose works probably were not known to him, or very little. If the sole circumstance of a certain resem- blance in claro-obscuro were sufficient to assign painters to the School of Caravaggio, there would be many Spanish and foreign artists who ought to be counted in that list. “The works of Zurbaran are very numerous, and it would be tedious to name them all. It may be said that they are dedicated exclusively to religious subjects, and that the group of the Labors of Hercules is a veritable exception as much for its mythological idea, as in repre- senting the nude, a thing which (excepting a single figure of Christ painted for the Convent of St. Paul) he seldom did. “He copied heads and hands from life and draperies on manikins. “He is undoubtedly a great painter, but one has to admire in him study and talent more than genius, the reflection more than the sentiment and inspiration, although he occasionally unites these last two qualities. His largest work is that in which the figures are more than life-size : the Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas. “It has always been considered his masterpiece, but it is not; yet this does not diminish its importance. “As well, in the general composition as in the details is the method of procedure of this great artist to be seen; he studied conscientiously each part separately; this is why he lacks unity as much in the lines as in the color, and also lacks true expression. Considered in detail, there is much to praise. “In almost all the pictures preserved in the Museum of Seville, the same manner of making separate studies is seen ; astonishing crudeness in the accentuation of claro- obscuro may be noticed, and the color is sometimes so browned in the flesh, as in Sf‘. Gregory^ that it seems al- most bronze. “In The Child Jesus making a Crown of Thorns, he has achieved true and poetic expression; also in St. Francis of Assisi. “Undoubtedly one of the most complete of Zurbaran’s pictures is that which represents the Vision of St. Peter Nolasco in which the drawing, expression and color are admirable. “A noticeable peculiarity of this master is that, on some occasions, he likes to dress angels or other figures with robes of deep and rigid folds. Excellent in its kind also is the collection of portraits of the friars of the Mercy, seen in the Academy of San Fernando, although the color of the flesh is of the same gold bronze mentioned before in the St. Gregory of Seville. “The famous Monk in Meditation, in the National Gallery of London is also a touching figure. It impresses one and serves to prove to foreigners the correctness of the idea which they have about the sombreness and silence, the mysticism of our painters; nevertheless it is an exception in the work of this artist. “Zurbaran did not delight like Ribera in ghastly scenes of martyrdom; he painted the life of the cloister, which 66 ST. LUCIA The Ehrich Galleries, New ^'oI■k. is quiet and composed; ecstasies and visions of saints in view of celestial apparitions; but he did not seek the dra- matic nor that which held much movement.” Mr. Ch. Blanc observes very opportunely in a History of the Fainters of all Schools that this great painter was not only a proselyte of naturalism in his epoch: “He had a passion for the real and at the same time the aspiration for a catholic ideal, peculiar to a people like the Spaniards, allured by the glitter of material things, and yet leaning to the most austere asceticism. This duality engendered in the mind of Zurbaran those qualities by which he is best known, an expression profoundly mystical and re- ligious, and an almost exalted love of splendid surround- ings, in which he rivals even the Venetian masters, in- cluding the magnificent Paul Veronese. That which is not explicable in his work (except by the misuse of the manikin) is his strained method of pleating delicate stuffs, as gauze and silk, etc., when he paints angels and such ideal figures, whose draperies look like dampened paper. . . . “When he painted the innumerable saints of the leg- ends, he gave them an unexpected sweetness, even when mingled with the indomitable Spanish pride which causes the delicate virgins of the martyrdom to appear like arch- duchesses of Toledo, or Princesses of Asturias. I remem- ber that like a large and imposing procession, there was in the old Spanish Museum of the Louvre a great series of standing figures, with the names of St. Cecilia, St. Cathe- rine, St. I?2ez, St. Lacy, St. Ursula, bringing to life again, with the most brilliant tones, all the types of old Spain. It was a pleasure to see them pass by in the background 67 of their delicate frames, gracious and swarthy, passion- ate and disdainful, at the same time, haughty as the Cas- tilian, and gentle as the Andalusian. ... “The Museum of the Prado contains ^ St. Casilda, clothed in the prevailing fashion of the artist’s day. “Zurbaran drew carefully, composed with nobility and simplicity, painted with force, nevertheless he often sins with hardness, and his shadows are always red and, mo- notonous. “In his compositions the way of procedure is noticeable : the constant careful treatment of separate details. He always has grandeur and nobility, while talent and study compensate for lack of real genius. “It is seldom that his works give a vivid or profound impression, but they always breathe gravity and a re- ligious devotion; yet they do not merit the title of mediocre which is very often given them.” D. Manuel Bartolome Cossio, whose authority is of the highest, has written the following which coincides in many points with the criticism given by Blanc. With great accuracy Blanc says: “There never has been a painter, not excepting Murillo, who has better reflected the two most pronounced tendencies of the Spanish char- acter, namely a passion for reality, and an aspiration for the ideal; a singular characteristic of a people who are seduced by the beautiful appeal of material things, and who, nevertheless, are drawn with ease toward the most exalted and subtle spiritualism. Zurbaran was indeed a painter entirely local, and one in whom we are able to see one of the highest and purest exponents of Spanish painting. He always studied Nature directly, and is quite as robust and masculine as Ribera, whom he re- 68 1 ♦ .1 1 sembled in the claro-obscuro, for which writers have likened him to Caravaggio. “Zurbaran naturally belongs to the Andalusian School of painting, and yet has more resemblance to Velasquez (who passes as the founder of the School of Madrid) than to Murillo, the real representative of the former. Zur- baran and Velazquez are of the same family in point of vigor and energy, and in the virility with which they con- ceived and executed. Without deciding upon the merits, great or small, which they possessed, it is clear that the tone of their spirit and productions is quite other than Murillo’s, and that they are in more accord with each other than with the latter in what they represent. The figures of Zurbaran are very individual, the characters full of life, the drawing vigorous, the light definite and the shadows perfect; and he excites admiration by the way he paints white cloths, although the arrangement of the draperies at times is forced. His greatest picture is the Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas., in the Museum of Seville, a work which can stand beside the best in the world. Of the other paintings in the Museum, the best is St. Bruno before Pope Urban II.” D. Narciso Sentenach,^^ speaking of this artist, says: “There is in Zurbaran much thought, an observing and somewhat analytical mind, which lifts him to the levels of science and philosophy. “Enchanted with the play of light and shade which he continually saw in his artistic pathway, he turned light on objects, and his projections and silhouettes very quickly thrown on the canvas make him noted for this method of procedure — it is the characteristic which most distinguishes him and constitutes his principal charm. 69 “He shows in this mannerism many points of contact with Velasquez, in his first period, for the outlines and masses of light and shade ; he enjoys studying cloth in all its drapings, figures posed near windows, objects placed in the sunshine whenever light is his chief fascination. But this he obtained with the highest skill, for he added to the finest pencilling a clean palette and a vigorous touch; for him, color in reality does not exist; it is light alone which he tries to imprison in the canvas, making his architectural outlines very light if clear, dense if obscure, always with the closest study. “Nevertheless, he is the artist who least forgets the practices of the Academy, and therefore seems sometimes dry and hard in his colors — cold and rigid, also little flex- ible and expressive in the figures, the result of profound study rather than spontaneous grace. Yet, when these qualities are to be applied with real force, as in subjects of importance, concerning men of deep knowledge and high philosophy, all the defects vanish and he appears marvellous and surprising to our eyes.” All critics do not praise Zurbaran, but those who cen- sure him show either ignorance or a lack of diligent study of his works. D. Jose de Manjarres declares that “Zurbaran is in the Sevillian School as a lamp isolated in a vestibule, to lighten the way into the reception room. In his compo- sitions he gave to mysticism the character of a holy phi- losophy, and of a wise meditation exercised in the retire- ment of the cloisters; he scarcely seemed to know per- spective, he saw the effects of light in a manner so par- ticular that it may well be said that his style died with his immediate pupils, the brothers Polanco, whose works 70 ST. M \R( ;.\Ki', r iliispitul (if the 111(1(1(1, S(.'\'illc. could almost be confounded with those of the master. Antonio del Castillo (1603-1667) changed his style by painting studies from nature, and perhaps the realism which he transmitted to his pupil Valdes Leal was so ex- aggerated by the latter that it caused him to even repre- sent things of repugnant aspect.” Arthur Symons has written the following criticism in the Fortnighiiy Review^ reprinted in the United States, about Sevillian Painters: “In the thirty or forty paint- ings by Francisco de Zurbaran, kept in Seville, the artist manifests all the typical characteristics of Spanish paint- ing, without being, in spite of this, a mediocrity in whom we could not discover anything of real personal interest. Zurbaran is realistic and yet does not attain the true re- production of life. “He represents persons copied from nature, in whom emotion is to be reflected, yet he paints them without any. His saints and holy women of the Civic Hospital, with their fantastic dresses and pensive faces resemble gothic statues painted upon canvas. When he wishes to inter- pret emotion, he loses sincerity and makes pictures like the extravagant holy woman who is seen in the main sacristy, in an improbable ecstasy before a book and a skull.’’ With more knowledge of the works of this artist, and showing more artistic culture, as well as acting with more sagacity than Manjarres and Symons, Sr. Eduardo Mier and Paul Lefort have expressed opinions which are a synthesis of the most complete and accurate opinions that, up to this time, have been pronounced about Zur- baran, and coincide in many cases with the authorized judgment of Sr. Cossio. 71 D. Eduardo Mier has written thus: “Francisco de Zurbaran, like other Spanish artists, compared with the most celebrated of Italy, should not be judged by what he did, but rather by what he would have done had he had the advantages they possessed . . . the energy and vigor of his brush, the spontaneity and purity of his artistic conception, the magnificent coloring, correct drawing, simplicity and good taste of his composition, qualify him as one of the painters most worthy of being studied by the modern artists who, in general, endeavor to imitate and sometimes slavishly copy the French masters. . . . “We are led to believe that even before he worked on his own accord, he observed many prudent principles whose effects are noticeable in his pictures, for instance never to paint anything except from nature nor draperies except upon manikins, an art in which he excelled to such an extent that he may well be considered the model of Spanish painters. Whatever the attitude of his model was, the garments are always marked by the grace- ful and natural shape of the folds, by the propriety and good taste of their arrangement, and by the special and judicious study which the artist had made of this most essential part of his profession. . . . “The subjects of his canvases (excepting those painted for our royal palaces) are almost exclusively religious, either on account of the churches or monasteries for which they were destined, or as a consequence of the general spirit of his epoch, which had not yet descended from heaven to earth, or from religion to history; or, finally, perhaps because his strong and sincere faith, and the grandeur and energy of his sublime sentiment gave pow- erful wings to his imagination whereby it soared into the heaven of art. . . . 72 riii. Axxrxri.vi'K >x ( 'olli/ttinn of till- ( 'ountL-ss of I’aris, Chatoau of Randan, Auvrr.unc. “Classical painter in the true sense of the word, on ac- count of his exactness, good taste and simplicity, he al- most always has few figures in his canvases, all in digni- fied and natural attitudes, grouping them with order and wisdom, without falling into an extreme and traditional symmetry, nor into disorder and confusion. Since he drew with correctness and used colors and claro-obscuro with great facility, it is not surprising that his works should have produced such marvellous effects. He us- ually finished the figures of the foreground with great masses of light and shade, decreasing in the background the power and energy of his touch. For that reason he may have been called the Spanish Caravaggio, the result of his broad and particular manner of interpreting art having been attributed to a servile spirit of imitation. Beside the fact that the works of this artist have never been well known in our country, it is right to keep in mind that Zurbaran did not leave Spain, and that the same idea may occur in distinct places and times to two artists, as a consequence of a general cause, rather than individual motives — and that between Zurbaran and Caravaggio there is the same difference which exists between moderation and excess, a medium and an ex- treme. “Zurbaran is at the same time more modest, more judi- cious, and firmer and more sensible in his artistic convic- tions. . . . “Caravaggio is among painters what Proudhon is among politicians. . . . “All extreme is vicious in the world of art, and the conventional style of Zucaro is as ridiculous and con- trary to his as the madness and luxury of freedom which 73 distinguish Caravaggio. We find nothing like this in Zurbaran, so it is not strange that we do not agree in calling him the Spanish Caravaggio. Call Zurbaran himself alone, no more, no less, and it is not necessary to use any metaphors or outside appellations. “The proof of this assertion we find without much trouble by comparing Zurbaran with a French painter whom he so much resembles that the same analogies have been seen in him in regard to Zurbaran as in Zurbaran in regard to Caravaggio. Leopold Robert, who without having ever been in Spain or having studied the works of Zurbaran, and probably without having seen any of them, or possibly heard of them or of their author, appears very much like him in his principles of execution. The out- lines somewhat hard, the pleating of draperies, the dis- tribution of light and shade, the transparencies which are never entirely white, and the shadows which are never quite black, show without any doubt, that there may be between two artists, especially two painters, analogies, resemblances and even absolute identities though each is original. . . .” Being of the same opinion as D. Eduardo Mier, Mr. Paul Lefort says: “In all his works one may ob- serve that costumes, fabrics and inanimate objects are expressed with extreme truth. . . . “Entrusted with the decorations of the high altar of the church of St. Thomas Aquinas, Zurbaran found the op- j)ortunity to execute, if not his best work, at least his largest one. “It represents the Apotheosis of St. Thof/ias Aquinas, now forming a part of the collection in the provincial Museum of Seville. All the figures are larger than life- 74 Tin-: ciKcrMrisK )N rollrction of tlie Countess of I’aiis. ('Iiatrau of Randan, Auvergne. size. The clouds are opened where Christ and the Virgin accompanied by St. Peter and St. Dominic are seen in glory. St. Thomas stands among the four doctors of the Church, and the model for his figure was a canon, friend of Zurbaran. “In the foreground of the lower part of the picture, in a group on the right, Charles V is represented holding the sceptre, covered with the imperial cloak, and kneeling among monks and persons of his suite. At the left is Archbishop Diego Deza, founder of the church, accom- panied by some monks and members of the clergy. “It is clearly seen, in studying this production of Zur- baran, what were the sources and examples that inspired him to compose and execute it. Roelas in his master- piece the Death of St. Isidor, and Herrera the elder in his Triumph of St. Hermenegildo of the Jesuit College, painted in 1624, one year before Zurbaran finished his St. Thomas Aquinas., have each in their own way, influ- enced the early ideas of the artist whom his compatriots have called (no one knows why) the Spanish Caravaggio. Zurbaran never was in Italy; he did not study with Cara- vaggio, who died in 1609, neither did he know his works, except perhaps when he was of mature age, and when his strong personal talent was no more to be modified. But in 1620-25 Zurbaran had opportunity to see in Seville some of Ribera’s paintings, recalling the style of Caravaggio. For the rest, there is no doubt that Zur- baran during his career both admired and assimilated some of the solid manner of the Espaholeto (Ribera) and this without altering in the least his own origin- ality. Studying the five portraits of the dignitaries of the IS Order of the Mercy which are preserved in the Academy of San Fernando, Lefort estimates them thus; “Each countenance was studied and expressed by the artist in its real and particular character. , . . “In regard to the execution of these portraits which stand out from the background in the most vigorous re- lief, it would be difficult to give proofs of more firmness and character — at the same time, one would look in vain to find a rival to their creator for the admirable perfec- tion with which the white habits are painted. “Like Ribera, Zurbaran did not always choose gloomy and sombre subjects realistically expressed. He under- stood how to use more flexible themes, less exclusive and even if necessary full of grace and enchantment when he had to represent the beautiful figure of a martyr or a holy woman. As he liked to paint them with rich or pictur- esque costumes, he found on his palette the most vibrant and florid tones to render silken cloths, and satin em- broidered with gold with which he adorned them. Among these gracious pictures we may cite : St. Casilda of the Museum of Madrid, St. Apolina of the ancient Spanish collection in the Louvre, and all the virgins and martyrs dressed like princesses or peasants which decorate the Hospital of the Blood in Seville, for which they were expressly painted by the artist.” “Zurbaran is in Lefort’s opinion a grand figure and oc- cupied a very distinguished place in the constellation of artists of genius who gave such brilliancy to that period of the Spanish School. With a deeply penetrating re- ligious sentiment, more virile than in Murillo, more ex- pressive, in another way, than Velasquez, his naturalism as robust as Ribera’s is perhaps even more true, more 76 ST. ]\IAKG,\KI.'I' National (iallcry, London. I 1 I 1 1 frank and more spontaneous. His genial simplicity, which his sincere faith explains, is similar to that of primitive people whose simple and candid inspiration, austere and constant dignity, he recalls. “No contemporary painting showed better than that of Zurbaran why naturalism, the dominant characteristic of Spanish art in its apogee, differs from the interpretation of realities as understood and set forth by the great mas- ters of Venice, Flanders and Holland, of the XVIIth century, excepting, of course, some of the sublime works of Rembrandt and the admirable Communioii of St. Francis of Assisi, which for its force of expression is a unique page in the work of Rubens. “If Spanish realism does not possess the brilliancy and sumptuous richness of the former, who painted a subject from the Gospel with the same magnificence of treat- ment and absence of emotion as he did any mythological motive, neither has it anything of the positive method, uninspired and mildly subjective of the Flemish or Dutch contemporaries, who certainly were practical, but, as Fromentin says, could also do without imagination.” In the review Blanco y Negro (Black and White) of May 27, 1905, an article signed with the initials F. N. L,,®^ appeared in regard to the Exposition then in progress, and runs as follows : “Zurbaran so far as he may be judged from what is seen in this Exposition, where such important works as those of Guadalupe and the St. Thomas Aquinas of Seville are missing, is not Velasquez, nor Ribera, nor Murillo, but he has something of all three. In different canvases one sees the great labor, the tenacious force and determination which it cost him to create for himself a 77 robust and frank personality. Here and there are seen heads of Christ and Virgins of the color of dust and browned wood, firmly, proudly moulded like those of Luis de Morales, countryman and perhaps master or in- spirer of Zurbaran. Further on, part of a tunic with ample folds of winey color and a large figure with a pale little head: they tell us of the perplexity of Zurbaran when he saw for the first time the astonishing pictures of Theotocopulos; there a face crudely darkened speaks of the influence which sometimes those extremely severe Sevillians, Herrera the elder and Roelas, had upon the mind of Zurbaran; still further on, we encounter a St. Francis de Faiil which may be attributed to Espanoleto. A little while afterward appears the crafty and pompous figure of a mercenary friar whose frown like a Sevillian bull-fighter’s, and whose mouth like that of a Triana town-crier seem to have been seen and painted by the Velasquez of The Beggars; at the last, not far from this one, the sweetly mystical figure of the Beatified Henry Suz6j2, a most beautiful dreamer who presses to his bosom a bistoury, smiling with happy grief or anguished delight. H is lifted head, wrapped in a soft crepuscular hue, without doubt, might be attributed to Murillo. Then will someone say — Zurbaran had no resolute, clear and artistic personality*? . . . “Indeed, he has; but we must not seek it in the show- iest pictures, nor in the most celebrated ones, nor in the pompous and somewhat oratorical conception of the Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas which we admire in the Museum of Seville. Neither in the Visit of St. Bruno to Pope Urban II in spite of the marvellous fine- ness of both heads. We must not seek it either in the 78 ST. IGNATIUS LOYOL.\ The Ehrich Galleries, New York. S T. I.( )ris RAX I'rovincial Ah'.scum (jf Si \illc. I three pictures of ecstasy which figure in this Exposition, and seem to be painted from one invariable recipe; the Jubilee of St. Francis, St. Bruno at Prayer, and the Blessed Alonso Rodriguez, though this last one is, in places, a work of impetuosity. The celestial clouds of Zurbaran do not convince us ; they are not subtle, vapor- ous and ideal like those of Murillo, nor are they as boldly and proudly extravagant, as superhuman as those of Greco, which they in a manner resemble. “Where Zurbaran’s fine, pure and pronounced person- ality is evident, is not exactly in the great composition, for which he lacked broadness of judgment, but in those pictures of single figures, the best of which are shown in the Museum of the Prado. Let us examine carefully the small pictures of the provincial museum of Cadiz, and above all the Cardinal Nicolaus and the holy Carthusian Martyr who holds his heart in his hand. A critic will say that the painting of these habits of white cloth is incom- parable as to the execution. Those who are not technical critics will declare that there is in these figures a sincerity of sentiment which an artist only can reach when, as some- one said, he paints con amore. Here is neither research nor exaggeration, no violence whatever, nor pretence, and indeed the most profound impression overwhelms us when we see the enchanting figure of the Carthusian who offers his pure heart, bloodless and ardent, without having the whiteness of his habit stained by drops of blood. “But even this is trifling; the best of his works are Zurbaran’s three holy women, evidently painted from the same model, whom the artist must have loved to dis- traction: St. Inez, the handsome virgin who holds in 79 her left hand a tender and innocent lamb, and in the right a beautiful palm branch; SL Casilda, the lovely and noble lady in regal attire, with adorable hands and of ma- jestic attitude; lastly the sorrowful, ecstatic and sup- pliant St. Catherine of Siena., crowned with thorns, marked in the hands like Christ. Her eyes are fixed on the crucifix, the prayer book is open before her, and from its leaves love has issued in words which no longer sound to the ears of the Saint, but which contain sentiments now floating in her cloistered soul, already far from the things of this world. “We see this same sublime sentiment expressed in the St. Francis of Assisi exhibited by Sr. Beruete and in some other pictures, all of mystical subjects, and each of a sin- gle figure. Zurbaran was a monologist. As we under- stand it, this is what makes Zurbaran not only a great painter, but one distinct from all others.” Sr. Elias Tormo y Monzo has said, referring to the pic- tures at Guadalupe, where he studied them directly in the famous monastery : “For the artist, there is nothing of so much interest as the gems of Zurbaran in the sacristy. “The very copious archives of the Sanctuary, carefully kept from of old, gave in the XVIIIth century to those learned writers Ponz and Cean Bermudez all the data they could wish upon the painting and sculp- ture, the iron grill work, and the gold and silver treasures of the Monastery. In the published histories of the same institution it is to be observed, however, that of the artistic collection of the sacristy and the chapel of St. Jerome, and the Zurbaran paintings which enrich them, absolutely nothing was known except what appears on 8o STUDi:.\T OF THF rXI\ERSITV OF SALAMANCA Collection of Mrs. John Lowell Gardner, lioston. % the walls. The signature of Zurbaran is entirely visible on two pictures with the dates, until now unknown, of 1638 and 1639; as well as the Latin inscriptions below them which tell under what Prior these works were begun in 1638, and continued and finished in 1647. I carefully searched in the once rich archives, much mutilated after so many changes of time and place, though in vain. There I saw precious evidences of a hundred different things, but nothing referring to Zurbaran and the sacristy. It is true that upon one of the empty chests, among dozens of them, there were written the follow- ing words and signatures which make us regret the loss of its contents. ‘Box I. Account of Works, Drawings and Expenses. . . .’ “Numbers 1 1 and 20,®® of the reproductions in the cata- logue of the collection clearly indicate the importance of the sacristy and the chapel at the end, which was dedicated to the founder of the Order, St. Jerome. One cannot say that it is a servile imitation of the sacristy of the Escurial, but one may note the fact that the mother monastery was in keen emulation with the daughter con- vent. The greatness of the Community and of the Prior who originated similar work, is shown in the unity of thought that prevails in it; not only the importance of Zurbaran’s paintings, but also the harmony of design, execution, and singleness of style are the cause of the at- traction that charms and penetrates the mind. Here they truly seem fitted to the unchangeable peace of the clois- ters, in the period before the expulsion of the friars of the Order of St. Jerome, today no more. Their patron presides from an altar, represented by a statue which is a reproduction or rather an imitation in wood of the mar- 81 vellous one in terra-cotta done by Pedro Torrigiano, and which the Jeronimites gave to the provincial Museum of Seville in the XIXth century; it is, according to Goya, the finest work of sculpture in Spain. The altar-piece represents the apotheosis of the Saint, a picture called “The Pearl of Zurbaran”; in the pedestal, in the sup- ports, upon the table of the altar are eight small panels of holy men and women of the Order, little paintings in the style of Zurbaran, although perhaps not done by his own hand. Upon each side of this chapel of the Saint, rest two great paintings The Temptations of St. Jerome when praying in the Desert of Syria., and the whip- pings where in the presence of Christ he is subjected, by various angels, to severe punishment for having taken too much pleasure in reading the profane classics of antiquity (‘strong lashings given because he read Cicero’) .” In the centre of this chapel hangs the great lantern of the Turkish admiral’s ship taken at the battle of Lepanto, which D. Juan of Austria offered to the Virgin. The sacristy itself, being by its nature less influenced by the rigors of the canonical law, and the decisions of the Council of the ritual, was conceived by the Prior of the convent as a graphic testimony to the pious legends and glorious actions (not as yet sanctioned by Rome) of the Fathers who ruled or ennobled the house with the aroma and prestige of their virtues. The mural paintings in the segments of the ceiling record the life of St. Jerome. The eight great pictures ” embedded in the walls, in separate frames in the spaces between the windows, on the right side south, represent the life and miracles not of the patron or the saints, 82 A IloI.A' ( AR IHUSl AX AT \K I AK I'l ovinci.'il Museum of Cfadiz. fn or the beatified ones of the Order, but of the an- cient members whose life and miracles had not obtained the sanction of the supreme Church. It might have been the Prior, Father Diego de Mantalvo, who conceived the idea, or perhaps Father Juan de Toledo who wrote all the inscriptions in Latin corresponding to the canvases. These were by a wonderful coincidence, entrusted to the painter of austerity and religious subjects, to whom the eternal feminine never appealed, but who put into the art of the XVIIth century the same feeling with which, two centuries before, the Blessed Angelico of Fiesole enlightened the dawn of the Florentine Renaissance. Zurbaran at that time was finishing the series of his masterly work in the Carthusian Monastery of Jerez, consecrated to the mysteries of the Birth of Jesus, the Annunciation, the Nativity, the Epiphany and the Cir- cumcision, on one of which, filled with gratification, he signed “Francisco de Zurbaran, painter to King Philip, in 1638.” Either alone, or with collaborators, he had also painted the other small pictures of the pedestal or of the plinth; and alone, completely alone, those on wood, representing the angels, censer-bearers and some holy Carthusians in isolated figures, smaller than life-size, which were on the doors and passages leading to the choir of the celebrated Carthusian of Jerez. Those four great paintings, formerly owned by the Duke of Montpensier and now the property of the Countess of Paris, and the smaller ones which are the grace and pride of the Museum of Cadiz, manifest the plenitude and the apogee of Zurbaran’s characteristic technique. It is shown in his singular style of colored shadows, his Christian inspiration and warm, almost childlike enthusiasm for varieties of color; in the strong but extreme softness and delicacy with which he draws and models, giving at times, even to the hands of his subjects, a sentiment and expression of melancholy life, of mystical tenderness, simple, personal, penetrating and touching. “Most happy was the moment when the artistic tem- perament of the painter of cloisters and asceticism coin- cided with the purposes of the Prior of Guadalupe. Zur- baran was charged with a commission suitable, as none other could have been, to his powers, to the elements of his art, and to his inspired predilection; pious legends of the monks of the XVth century, white or grey and black habits (white cloth being his favorite subject), figures exclusively masculine, with an environment of serene contemplation, of penetrating spirituality, of prayer, sometimes rewarded by Heaven with noble gifts of divine recompense. “As to this, neither elsewhere in the work of Zurbaran in that of Murillo, nor even of the divine Fra Angelico, can be found any inspiration so vivid, so sensitive, so firm and so delicate as that which guided the artist to paint the figure of Father Salmeron receiving on his forehead the hand of the Saviour, who appears to him and rewards, by the most loving gesture, his vow to go perpetually on his knees which the young disciple of the Jeronimite rule was fulfilling. In this hand, correctly drawn, simply modeled, laid lightly on the forehead with ex- quisite candor, Zurbaran perhaps arrived at the greatest triumph of his pencil, and the supreme eloquence of his chaste heart, pure and artistically unpolluted. El Greco 84 ■MAsri-.K I'KIAR JI-.RoMMn ri-.RI.Z Royal Academy of San Fernando, Madrid himself was not a greater extremist in drawing hands, or transforming and attenuating the heads of his subjects, which he intentionally rendered cadaverous or pallid. The hands and the heads of El Greco are the ne plus ultra of morbid asceticism in the history of mystical Christian art. “Merely to see the picture of Father Sahneron and to feel the gesture of the hand that caresses him, artists ought to undertake the voyage to Guadalupe, and pious people should make a pilgrimage to the chapel of the Virgin. “Before the picture of Father S aimer 6 ?i, as to inspira- tion, all other paintings of Zurbaran fade. Superior to it, in grace and beauty of composition and drawing, is the Apotheosis of St. Jerome., where the angels of the background seem the model, the highest impulse of the art of Murillo (at that time in the twenties). Superior also, as an example of solid painting, realism and exactr ness, is the portrait of some prior of the epoch who served as model for the head of the famous Father Illescas, con- fessor of John II, co-regent or co-governor of Castile, Bishop of Cordova, who is pictured seated, writing at a table covered with books and papers among which, as in a letter, we see the signature of Zurbaran, and the date 1639. This painting is worthy of such a name, for the supreme verity of art which created it. Great truth and veritable art is no less shown in another picture at Guad- alupe, in which the drops of blood are seen falling into the chalice, from the paten raised with the Eucharistic Host above the altar. This miracle happened to Father Cabanuelas when this most devoted monk was seized with the doubt whether the bread and the wine, after 85 consecration, really became the flesh and blood of our Saviour Jesus Christ. The picture of the acolyte, un- conscious of the scene, is another portrait of genuine truth, and it would be sufficient, if the head of the cele- brant were not superior still, to give to the Mass of Father Cabanuelas^ signed by Zurbaran in 1638, a rank of honor in the history of eucharistic art, between the fresco of the Mass of Bolsena by Raphael, and the paint- ing of the Holy Body by Claudio Coello. “Including the picture of the high altar called ‘The Pearl,’ we have mentioned the three principal works of Zurbaran, held by the monks of Guadalupe. These three pictures. Father Salmeron, Father Illescas and Father Cabanuelas are placed together on a well lighted wall in the centre of the light in this sacristy which has been able to keep to the present day all the works made for it and thus enjoys a good fortune that was denied to the Capuchin Convent of Seville, once richly adorned with the paintings of Murillo which now decorate the Sevillian Museum of Art. “How greatly these pictures gain by being preserved where their artistic creator wished to place them! The selection and relation of light, shadows and colors, is re- markable not only in one painting at Guadalupe, but in the entire collection. These three signed pictures are in full light, on the north wall. This plenitude of painted light, although subdued, and the most characteristic of Zurbaran’s light, contrasts with the paintings that are between the windows. In the latter the artist might have had the boldness to display a greater illumination by his pencil, but working with more prudence and security, he decided that they should be his darkest canvases. In 86 1 III-. i)Ar(;irn:Rs ni' jr.w dk kokf.as 'I'lic I'Aiiidi ( la lli rics. Xcw ^'o^k. them with attention and effort, we scarcely see above the white spots, truly Zurbaranesque, of the monastic habits, the holy figures of the charitable Father Martin de Viscaya who, as customary, gave bread to the poor; Father Carrion who, notified of his immediate death, awaits it upon his knees in the dark choir, tranquil in his emotion, surrounded by the other friars of whom he has just taken leave; Father Pedro de Salamanca — the last — accompanied by another monk stands before a raging fire which he succeeds in stopping by his heartfelt appeals and eloquent prayers. “Does the kind reader remember the benevolent out- lines of Father Yanez de Figueroa, the founder of the community of St. Jerome of Guadalupe; the very severe exacting prior who contributed by his own manual labor and that of his monks, to the great works of the cloister and church; the energetic reformer of usages; the devout priest who rivalled the Virgin as to who would tire first, she in bringing riches to the sanctuary, or he in making an immediate and pious use of them*? Zurbaran has skill- fully conceived it in the painting in which Father Yanez de Figueroa figures, although seemingly submitting yet refusing the episcopal mitre which the king of Castile is placing upon his head. A knight of Santiago accompa- nies the king and I would take this picture to be a portrait of Zurbaran, perhaps prematurely grey, about forty years of age, if I did not fear to be too rash, as the lineaments of the master are completely unknown to us. The per- sonal pride of Rembrandt, his character of concentrated dignity, led him to repeat innumerable times his own features, often dressed in varied and even grotesque garb, luxurious attire or fantastic trappings, such as turbans. 87 plumes, etc. The Extremadurian painter was all modest humility. We have just learned that the canvas in the ducal Museum of Brunswick, always considered a work of Espanoleto (1639), is his own portrait. There may be some who will see in those two works the same head, at a different age, and decidedly distinct from that which the drawing in red pencil by Standish shows us, and which is also very much younger. Without en- larging this argument, it seems quite possible that in a series of works such as those at Guadalupe, for which so many friars of the convent became living models for monks of other ages there represented, the pious, the admired and cherished master might have yielded to the natural wish of the Fathers to leave upon one of his paint- ings, with his signature ( 1639) , his own portrait. “I will not add a word as to the custom, general among artists, seldom to put in their pictures anyone facing the spectator, except themselves when painting their own portrait, and this as a consequence of the fact that they work by means of a mirror; as might have been done in the case of the supposed knight of Santiago, in the picture of Father Yahez. “This picture, as well as another one, inferior and least in merit among all the eight monastic legends — that which represents the demon taking the form of a boar, a lion or a young girl to disturb the prayers of Father Orgaz — either because one is first, and the other last on the wall, and consequently both in the corners, above the five others which appear on the well lighted wall, or in order to enhance the perfection and greater importance of the three which they enclose, have been painted in most obscure tones. This is particularly true of that of 88 ST. CWSILDA Aluseum of the Prado, Afadrid. i V 'I 1 Father Orgaz, which being in the entrance, immediately by the door, was not intended to arrest the attention of the observer or the curious visitor, who might not have noticed the canvases one by one, nor read their respective inscriptions. This picture is so obscure, that if it were not for the typical white of the habits, all might be convinced it was the work of some unknown collabo- rator of Zurbaran, instead of being the real work of his hand. “To this supposed collaborator, faithful to the teach- ings of the master, but not in that which is most subtle (the secrets of light and shade in the distinct colors of the palette, the art of shadows of color) might be attributed the large canvas of the T emptations of St. Jerome., and all the small pictures on the pedestal of the founder’s altar. The picture of the Temptations is also very dark. At this, one need not be surprised, because it is in the light, below the window of the south wall of the chapel. In front of it, in full light is the picture of The Whipping and in it, true to himself, Zurbaran excelled in the clarification and multiplication of tones which make the canvas, with regard to its technique, the most characteristic of his palette, and unsurpassed among those he gave to Guadalupe. The Whipping is precisely the picture which the guide-books of the XIXth century attributed to Ribera! This ridiculous blunder shows the limited knowledge of artistic things which inspired the writers (not small in number) who wrote about Guada- lupe. In the room there is, indeed, a picture which, al- though being by no means by Ribera, is painted in the art of claro-obscuro in bronzed tones, characteristic of the best known Ribera style and that of his disciples or imi- 89 tators. It is the picture called the Temptations^ a mix- ture of Zurbaranesque and Riberesque technique, the lat- ter predominating. For my part, despite the opinion of other authors, I would say that the drawing of that pic- ture, as well as the design, may be by the hand of Zur- baran, but not a single brush-stroke nor the coloring is his. In my estimation, Zurbaran either could not have finished the series of eleven great paintings (and eight small ones) of the sacristy and its chapel, or had taken a collaborator of a different artistic training although in- fluenced by him to a certain degree. “It is true that in the series of the pictures of Cadiz, and those of Jerez, almost contemporaneous with the works in Guadalupe, some paintings exist, as those of the pedestal (St. Lawrence, the Baptist and the four Evan- gelists), whose arrangement of shadows is so obscure, darkened, or blackened, that one might come to the con- clusion that Zurbaran at one time painted in his own extremely characteristic manner and, at others, in the darkened, or the black manner (charbonnee) , if the phrase be permitted. Such inconstancy does not quite agree with the extreme seriousness which is noticed throughout the work of Zurbaran, and this is the reason — a reason of psychological order and moral probability — which leads me to suppose that Zurbaran had in Guadalupe a collab- orator, at times a zealous imitator, in the task entrusted principally or exclusively to himself. “I repeat, that in the year 1638 in which he signed his l)est works, those of the Carthusian monastery of Cadiz, the foundations of the sacristy and chapel of Guadalupe were begun, and that in this year he signed, in the Extre- madurian monastery, one of his great canvases, the Mass 90 HERCULES KILLTXG THE CRETAX DUET, Aluseum of the Erado, Madrid. of Father Cabanuelas^ a fact which shows that the prior, at the same time that he commenced the foundations, conceived the idea of the decorations with their legendary themes, and that he chose and sent for the most celebrated Andalusian artist of the epoch. To 1639 belongs the splendid picture of Father Calmer on; to 1639, the re- markable portrait of Father Illescas; to 1639 also, the no less remarkable picture of Father Y dhez in which I sup- pose his own portrait to be seen; to 1639 also belong the picture of the Death of Father Carrion and four other paintings of greatest beauty, all signed in the same year, that is, the second of the ten years consumed in the work. After this we find no dates, nor do we see any signatures. Without signatures (or with signatures that are now invisible) are three other pictures, certainly of less importance, of the eight Gaudalupean legends. The “Pearl” and the Whipping are also without signa- ture; and the little paintings of the pedestal, as well as the large one of the Temptations^ I dare to attribute to a friendly hand, well disciplined by the lessons of Zur- baran. “These dates thus analyzed may suggest another ver- sion: that perhaps Zurbaran helped the prior quite at the beginning of the work; that he probably gave the idea and the design of the archionic and decorative arrange- ment, which may also be a plausible hypothesis. “And after all is said, there are letters preserved from Zurbaran to the architect Crescenci, one of October 8th, 1639, signed in Seville, where his wife died the 28th of May, so we have many reasons to conclude that he did not finish in Guadalupe, nor for Guadalupe, the collection of paintings which he began with such extreme ardor and 91 success in the latter months of 1638 and early in 1639. His collaborator and successor, I repeat my conjecture, educated in another technique, although influenced by that of Zurbaran, may have completed them or done some minor works, and perhaps painted with more orig- inality the Ribera-like canvas of the Temptations of St. Jerome. “And who then is the author of the picture of St. Nich- olas., who the author of the St. Ildefonso on the altars of the upper choir, supposed to be by Zurbaran, as is the opinion of Ponz and Cean, although this belief is not so alive in the traditions of the place today as formerly. “The second supposition I ignore completely and pro- foundly; but I would be convicted of incapacity, as a critic, if it could be proved that one or the other were really by Zurbaran: they are neither by him, nor in his style, nor of his school. From the hand of another artist, or perhaps that of the Temptations., is the St. Ildefonso; by a painter entirely free from any intention to imitate either the technique, or the manner, or the drawing and coloring of Zurbaran. He appears to me as a distant dis- ciple, an unknown artist of the Italian traditions of Card- ucho and Caxes, of those painters of Philip Ill’s time, but a follower inclined to a saner realism. I think that the St. Nicholas is by Antonio Pereda. Can it be that the St. Ildefonso is by the same^? or by Felix Gastello, or bet- ter still by Bartolome Roman, of whom so little is known (though his modest life was not short) The latter we judge collaborated with Zurbaran, to whose generation he precisely belongs, in the paintings that decorate the chapel of San Diego de Alcala, of Henares (now in San 92 KIU,iX(; THl' m’DRA OF U-.RXA Alus'-um of the Ri-adn. AladrirF I 1 Francisco the Grand). Difficult would be the proof of an hypothesis so intricate.” D. M. Rodriguez Codola, quoted in eulogy by Sr. Tormo,^® has written the following lines about Zur- baran, in a fortnightly review called “The Architecture, Engineering and Construction of Barcelona.” : “I will limit my study to three points : the technique of the artist, his conception of monastic life and mystical fervors, and the place he occupied among the masters in the golden age of our painting. • •••••••» “One of the questions that emerge when we wish to speak of the mechanism of the celebrated artist, is the re- semblance between the first works of Velasquez and his own. It is interesting to keep in mind the coincidence of manner in which the two painters began to form their style, and from which we gain valuable information- Both had masters who held distinct conceptions of art, Pacheco and Roelas,‘^“ who bear no analogy to each other, nor to Herrera the elder, the irascible artist with whom Velasquez studied for some months, — both Zurbaran and Velasquez, I repeat, were subject to equal discipline. Each one, from the beginning, confided in nature, and in the conscientious study of the same built the foundation upon which all their subsequent work was to be erected. But if the point of departure is identical to the extent that some of their early productions have caused doubts as to whom they might be attributed, the road followed aft- erwards is not the same. Velasquez arrived at the un- folding of his artistic personality through the progress of his technique which, as is well known, makes him, jointly 93 with El Greco, the precursor of impressionism. The analytical manner of his first period is changed into an admirable synthesis, the logical consequence of the way he had adopted from the first. Furthermore, as he was progressing, our painter to Philip IV was also refining his vision and keeping the rich tones of his palette within sombre harmonies. “Zurbaran began likewise to analyze, being exacting with himself, and the habit of reasoning about what he painted remained, throughout his life, so strongly in him, that it has to account for the fact that he very seldom suc- ceeded in embracing the totality of his compositions, in which we see fragmentary construction rather than the aim of giving an impression of unity; despite the opinion of others, we know that the Extremadurian artist was not a colorist. The Sf. Inez attributed to him is an exquisite work of harmony, but I cannot believe it to be from his hand. It does not correspond to any of his other paint- ings, not even to those of similar subjects, as the St. Casilda of the Prado Museum, the St. Barbara., St. Inez., St. Catherine and St. Engracia of the Hospital of the Blood of Seville. “It is easy to understand that Zurbaran neither felt nor gave great importance to color. As proofs, there are the Glorification of St. Thomas Aquinas., the Conference of St. Bruno with Pope Urban //, the Blessed Alonso Rodri- guez and the Jubilee. Dry and hard, with an execution preoccupied in faithfully reproducing the material look of things, and of giving intense emotion to the expression of the figures when the psychological moment in which they appear in the picture requires it, the painter does not succeed in rendering an aerial perspective. The colors 94 ST. CASITDA Collection of the late Sir William \’an .Horne, IMontreal, Canada. ST. JOHX THE It.M’TTST IN 'FHE DESERT Provincial Museum of Cadiz. sing on occasions with great perfection, but singly, with- out reflecting in themselves the surroundings and without the atmosphere creating a general tone of harmonious unity. “This gives bitterness to many of his canvases and de- prives the eye from taking pleasure in looking at them. Neither the blues, nor the reds, nor the earthy yellows, almost orange, that he sometimes uses are from a palette which could realize the vision of chromatic subtlety. On the other hand, in the whites, the artist frequently ob- tains singular delicacies, without reaching however the variety of those of Domenico Theotocopuli and Velas- quez. Zurbaran’s whites are discernible at a glance, they are either bluish or yellowish, and within these two tints is included his entire knowledge of white. In the first instance, such as the Virgin of the Caves, they are crude in the light and monotonous in the shadows. In the other case, the mercenary friars, of the Royal Acad- emy of San Fernando and the Apparition of St. Peter Apostle to St. Peter Nolasco, pictures that are surely the most harmonious of the Extremadurian’s works, the whites have a singular delicacy, to which there is some- times united a great flexibility in the cloth of the habits which seem to move with the action of the figures or the vibration of the air. Such is the effect he obtains in these paintings. “There are, notwithstanding, others where the habits of the monks and the draperies of celestial figures have the stiffness of cardboard. From this, I wish to prove that Zurbaran never arrived either in technique, or in color, at the power and perfection attained by the native masters who lived in his epoch. Fie never freed himself 95 ' entirely from the style of his beginnings and shows it throughout the generality of his productions. We have to observe, however, that in various works executed in the last years of his life,®^ he arrived at a delicacy of touch that contrasts with the somewhat hard and firm manner visible in the early ones, which are also poor in coloring. I think of particular merit the picture seen in the church at Jadraque, which, so far as the attitude is concerned, bears a certain resemblance to a canvas by Alonso Cano, owned by the Royal Academy of San Fer- nando, although the latter figure is facing the spectator and the former is taken in profile. “Zurburan’s palette does not show important modifica- tions. The earthy and warm colors he uses for the flesh are most natural, and the hands and heads of his worldly figures are generally swarthy or even bronzed. He sel- dom renders the true relation of values. He who was so careful in rendering the bodily form of the subjects he painted, did not consider light as an important factor in establishing planes and distances: he only uses it, when he thinks it convenient, as an element of expression. I also wish to note the difference of coloring existing be- tween Ribera and Zurbaran, although some critics, on the contrary, find points of contact in their execution. Both take interest in the plasticity of figures, and both study nature with the tenacity of the artist who endeavors to give to all things their proper atmosphere; but the son of Fuente de Cantos does not produce the effect in relief, sometimes wonderful, which is one of Espanoleto' s tri- umphs. Forms do not appear in his canvases in the sculptural manner, and with the perfect knowledge of anatomy and muscular development revealed in the cap- o6 ST. FR.\XCIS OF PAULA Collection of Air D. J. Alacdougall, Seville. i I ;i< 1 tivating works of the painter of D. Pedro Giron, duke of Osuna, and of the Count of Monterey, viceroy of Naples. This is true so far as it refers to the vision of human form. In regard to the method of the painter to fix upon the canvas the image of the real, his ability to realize it is very inconsiderable. Ribera, in most instances, treats all equally, often detrimental to quality, and conse- quently to the nature of things, whether the living body or the inanimate, his pencilling being ample, broad, powerful and never careless. Never does the elan, the dash of execution suffer a moment of doubt or hesitation. There is a warmth, an impulse and such har- mony of mechanism, that if I may be permitted, I would say that the pictures of the son of Jatiba sprang from an imperative command of a state of the soul, which kept the artist at a high tension during the time he was work- ing. We do not see this in Zurbaran. Besides the posi- tive difference which exists between his various works, there is in quite a number of them, separately treated, such a lack of balance, and lack of resemblance, that it is disconcerting. Next to details constructed with remark- able truth and exactness, we find others which seem to come from a hand less firm and a vision almost infantile. This contradictory dualism harms him extremely. Where he generally maintains his excellence is in the rendering of draperies or cloths. In these the touch is mostly firm and the folds are arranged with precision, em- phasized especially in the shadows. The pleating is logical and very natural, yet not always convincing. Underneath the habits, human life rarely pulsates. We do not feel it hidden under the cloth, nor do we realize that a human form is concealed within. These works are 97 a study of draperies of great value, if we consider them separately, as an admirable and picturesque reproduction, but the painter did not put into them — on account of having used the manikin excessively — anything but the wish to copy things minutely. The real essence, the life, the true spirit, was reserved by him for the expression in the eyes of saints, of ascetics and devotees in ecstasy, and of monks lost in profound meditations. “For those who lived in the cloister with an unquiet soul; for those who gave themselves up to ineffable dreams ; for those who hoped for the great beyond prom- ised to the good; for the mystic whose exaltation leads him to a sacred sacrifice; for the ascetics who annihilate in ecstasies their earthly passions; for the monks, writers, philosophers, theologians who worked for culture, Zur- baran kept the power of his expressive pencil. In their faces, as the noblest of human features, he concentrated life — contemplative, intellectual life — the emotion which overwhelms, or the creative force which culminates in a state of mingled joy and sweet pain, resulting from the mental perturbation that causes it. “In this respect, the Extremadurian artist deserved the fame which he enjoyed. We do not know any other who surpassed him, among the painters of our country in the mystical and religious note, for the series of expressive color schemes he succeeded in evolving. Ribalta and Espinosa alone equal him. And it is necessary to dis- tinguish in what this peculiarity of Zurbaran consists. Mystical painters, better say religious ones, have abounded among us. It is sufficient to cast a look over Spain’s history of Art to be convinced of this. But it is not sufficient to inspire oneself by bible scenes and acts q8 iiii-: j!U;:ssi:i) ]:xRi<;)ri-; srz(’)X Provincial iMuscuni of Seville. i \ / \ i of martyrdom to deserve the name of mystical painter. There have been few here or in other countries. Some- thing very fundamental, however, exists in Zurbaran, since his clearly defined personality always remains with an unmistakable seal of distinction. “It is, therefore, important to prove the reason for the artist’s merit, not deducing it from his technique which we have already studied, but seeking it in another quality which can be demonstrated. This statement does not in- tend to deny the existence of other Spanish painters who were interested and inspired by mystical subjects. This would have been impossible, considering the favorable atmosphere which their own country offered them at that time. King Philip III could not understand how any- one could sleep tranquilly after having committed a mor- tal sin. Undeniable proofs of the piety of his ancestors are recorded, and it is unnecessary to cite other worldly circumstances which formed the Spanish soul of the epoch. Either war or the cloister: the passion for adventure dominated them or the renunciation of the world was their goal. They either sought death in daring exploits or awaited it while voluntarily punishing the flesh. Thus it was in those days. “St. Theresa of Jesus said: “ ‘I live without life in my breast, I hope for so high a life, that I am dying because I cannot die.’ “In these lines is crystallized one of the phases of our past peculiarities. The tone of monastic life was what Zurbaran felt. “From this arises the gravity of his figures who seem ready to exclaim : 99 “ ‘Come death, so veiled That I do not feel thee come! Because the pleasure of death Exceeds the joy of life.’ “This accounts for the eyes moistened by inexplicable, subjective sensations, looking vaguely, or boldly piercing into space. Then, as has been said, Zurbaran did not put into one single expressive formula the intensity of the mystic ardors which devour the saints and holy ones he painted, but thus he conceived them, humble, simple, in no showy attitude, avoiding all false ostentation, as those who put sincerity before affectation. Delivered from all worldly attractions, these beings pray or meditate heed- less of the spectator. Free from the materiality of the earth, they live within themselves, to attend only to the salvation of their souls. “Thus are the saints and ascetics of Zurbaran. Look at Sf. Peter Nolasco before St. Peter Apostle appearing to him., and you will join him in a feeling of admiration and respect; see St. Francis in adoration before a crude cross, his looks directed to heaven, holding a bare skull in his left hand and placing the right on his breast (a book of prayer is on the rock against which he leans) and notice the piercing look which the pupil of his lighted eye directs toward immensity; see the ineffable emotion which over- whelms him. See St. Bruno and you will understand the saint who is seeking in the infinite a felicity for which he is making penance on earth; look at the Blessed Suzon and observe the suffering on his pallid countenance which is not derived from the pain caused by the incision of the bistoury in his breast; his grief is of another sort, it is due to considering how small his suffering is compared to that 100 1111. jrr.11,1-,1-, ( )!• ST. 1- K,\.\( i.s I’rovincinl Museum nf ( urli/. m’* . .'i; . V '• borne by his Redeemer. Look at the Blessed Alonso Rodriguez^ the Jesuit ascetic, who in an edifying adora- tion, and almost fainting feels the light that reaches him from the heart of Jesus and Mary. Look at St. Francis in the picture of the Jubilee and fix your attention on the seraphic monk who appears kneeling, arms extended, his head raised, tears in his eyes, his mouth half-open, — and notice the melancholy countenance, the forehead corru- gated by the amazement of the wonderful event, and you will understand the shock to the saint, surprised by the heavenly apparition and the miracle of the thorns, with which he tore his skin, changed into roses — hoping by this to merit the grace of the Jubilee. Finally see the Monk at Prayer^ in the London Gallery, and marvel at the un- equalled conception of that work in which all the senti- ment of prayer is reflected in the darkened eyes, and in the hands which closely hold a skull. If you analyze with care this figure animated by great disquiet but also indomitable faith, opposing to tortures the firmness of the convictions which inspire him, you will recognize the monk in flight from carnal perils, trying to escape the lurking sin; the monk in constant penitence, stringing one after another incessant prayers so as not to give a second to wandering thoughts, subjecting his strong imagination to the severe discipline of prayer. It is the grave devotee of voluntary tenacity who places his ideals in God and death, in death to reach God, and in God to obtain the strength which he needs on earth. It is the creature who believes in a God of implacable justice, and for this he lives doing penance, in fear, ... It is the highest point of expression which the artist reached. “Within the richness and expressive color of his inter- 101 pretations of mystic life, we do not find those hair-raising scenes of martyrdom such as were rendered with implac- able realism by the Espanoleto. He has not the point of ferocity noted there, and if the sombre is sometimes ap- parent, it comes much more from the spirit that animates the body submitted to voluntary rigors, than from the actual nature of the subjects painted. “Yet Zurburan is not necessarily reduced to being a painter of saints and friars, trying to isolate himself from all that is earthly and material; he was also a painter of holy women and martyrs, as well as of the monks who represented wisdom and intellectuality in the great monastic centres. “A very singular conception is that of the holy women he pictured, attired in a magnificence quite archaic. Of demure carriage, strong and youthful, beautiful and haughty, none would say they are the virgins of the legends, but rather titled ladies, contemporaries of the artist. If they had not the attributes of the saints, you might think, when seeing the pearls and jewels they dis- play, that they belonged to the Court of Philip III, and that far from being images of women who were canonized for their virtues, they are portraits of worldly realities, of wealthy dames looking fixedly at us in an imposing air of nobility and attractiveness. “Concerning his intellectual monks, there are here as prototypes of them, a series of luminaries of the Order who are called: Father Pedro Machado^ Father Fran- cisco Vjiimel., Father J eronimo Perez, and Father Her- nando de Santmgo. He represents them in full mental labor, endeavoring to formulate with their profound in- siglit ideas which are in nebulous form only in their 102 ST. I'K.WCIS OF ,\SSIS1 Collection of I). cle licruetc, Mailrid. i minds; or meditating upon some dogmatic point which obliges them to lift the pen in reflection before recording in script its definite formula. In the faces of these men, in their hands, there is extraordinary life. In their fore- heads and eyes appear an uncommon intellectual vigor. Their hands will again move the pen quickly, by an im- pulse to fix the ideas which are taking form as these clever humanists ripen them in their minds. “Having shown that Zurbaran was a mystical painter, and this in the highest degree, I shall discuss what is the difference which separates him from the others who were also mystic painters. I refer to Morales and El Greco. “Morales felt the piety which is born of meditation upon the sorrows of divine personalities. The Ecce Homo of compassionate looks, pardons the crimes of which he has been the victim, suffering silently in his body, the muscles vibrant and tortured by physical pain. The Dolorosa^ her eyes filled with bitter tears, shows an expression of imposing grief. Zurbaran felt the mysti- cism which enkindles the souls of those who give them- selves up to contemplative life, of those who, sheltered in a cell or in the open air, surrounded by rocky landscape where some shrub lifts its foliage, keep their eyes upon the sky or upon celestial spheres peopled by angels. It is singular that the disciple of the religious Roelas knew how to depict the psychological moment when the human spirit rises above the earthly plane, and yet did not suc- ceed in expressing the divine. Impregnated with the pervading naturalism which persisted in him, he never could, owing to this motive, elevate himself to greater heights, but sometimes, freed from his naturalism, he succeeded in expressing the ecstasy of the soul which in 103 supernatural vision rejoices in tormenting itself. On the contrary, El Greco gave to posterity the type of the secular devotee and mystic; those Spanish gentlemen of the period of Philip II, — beings of mysterious looks, of austere body, of bloodless lips, of bilious complexion, in whom we find examples of the visionary generation which began the decay of our country. How powerful must have been the influence of such surroundings, that it dried out and killed on the palette of Theotocopuli all its Venetian pomposity!” Mr. Carlos Justi, author of the well known work Diego Velasquez and his Epoch, treats of the Extremadurian artist in one of its chapters entitled The Comrades and studies him with much acumen, showing the slight influ- ence the supposed lessons from Roelas had upon him. He says: “In the period when the old disappears and new germs come to light, the influence of comrades or in- timate friends is sometimes more important than that of masters. The coincidence of dates indicates that Velas- quez was acquainted with many men, afterwards famous, who made up the artistic circles of the epoch. Indeed, by a great number of facts it is almost proved that Alonso Cano and Zurbaran were his friends. They must have known each other’s relatives and visited them. This friendship did not cease even after the former had left the country. Later, Velasquez remembered the friend- ships of his youth and continued them at Court. “The works of this trio show a relationship similar to that existing, a century before, between Giorgio, Palma and Titian. A community of sentiment in youth whose spirit was manifested in very distinct forms, but whose mutual influence is difficult to determine. 104 ST. ]\iA'riii:w I’ruviiuial Museum of ( adiz. r - M " i iS-t I r<%j. '•3 I “No one more marked or more homogeneous repre- sented the tendencies of Spanish naturalism of this time with such brilliancy as Francisco de Zurbaran, scarcely a year younger than our painter. . . . “He owed little to his masters. He probably had been a pupil of the religious Roelas. Nevertheless there is only one of his works we know of that could have made an impression upon the future painter of clerics and monks. His manner certainly is not that of Roelas. “From the first, he showed that he was of another time, of another kind than the complicated and flexible priest. As in all those of the new generation, and perhaps with more force than in any other, there was in Zurbaran an impress of unity. His works reached greatness through their individuality. “The painters of the XVIth century were men of encyclopedic, literary and technical knowledge ; they knew the history of their art and of the Catholic religion ; they were scholars, devotees and poets. Those who were of the stuff of Zurbaran, were nothing but painters who did not leave the studio, who did not deal with living or dead comrades, and in general, all the immense realm of art did not interest them, except the region they had selected. . . . “The talent of Zurbaran matured early and at the age of twenty he already enjoyed such a reputation that the Marquis of Malagon entrusted him with the ornamenta- tion of the great high altar of the chapel of St. Peter in the cathedral, finished and signed in 162^. “To this same period is assigned his principal work, the 10 ^ Apotheosis of St. Thomas Aquinas, for the college of this name. “His style, which we know, is here completely formed. Upon a clear background the figures stand out for the greater part in fluid colors of discrete blending, record- ing in their tones the influence of the work-room. His shadows, extinguished by reflected light well distributed, lack vigor; and on the contrary, the illuminated spaces are spangled with brilliant points and spots of sparkling white. His architecture is spacious, with the serious sobriety of the renaissance, with perspectives of sunny landscapes, streets and courts; the vistas are ample, with distant points of view, small hills and arid deserts. “The high altar of the chapel of St. Peter, painted per- haps under the eyes of Velasquez, was arranged accord- ing to the models of the Middle Ages. In the centre, the Prince of the Apostles is represented, of colossal size, as on a throne and with the tiara. In the space between the arches, he is kneeling in the point of the angle which the ' Apostles form, as in some of Raphael’s works, but the figures are dry and trivial. It is remarkable how the artist dealt with ideal figures. His Mary is an amiable and timid young girl, the most beautiful of the valley, the Queen of May elected in sacrifice as the Holy Virgin and displaying above her seductive golden hair the crown of Heaven. His Creator is a ponderous old man, with upraised face, wavy white hair and beard, who throws his sombre look upon the world. Thus the Genius of the Mountains is often represented, buried under the per- petual snows of the Alps! In contrast to the strong and solitary autocrat of Mosaism or Islamism, the Spaniards paint the Creator more as a Saturn, on whose ill-humored 106 and aged face we see reflected the constant solicitude which the mad world corrupted by the devil causes him, as well as the government of the celestial Court with its numerous and pressing supplications. “At this time Zurbaran and Velasquez resembled each other in their style, more than afterwards. The Extre- madurian was particularly gifted as to individuality, and not inferior to him in this respect was the Sevillian. “The history of Sf. Bonaventura alone, and in particu- lar the two canvases of the Louvre, contain a sufficient number of important heads to fill half the lifetime of a portrait painter. Besides these heads all the rest seems vague and conventional. The contempt for fantasy was in him even more marked than in Velasquez, the subjec- tion to the model, his honorable and vigorous realism. He knew how to portray each countenance, line by line ; each figure held its proper place and each garment hung carefully upon the body. There was no heaviness, but a rule perfectly individual. Moreover, he was an artist who carved the whole wood, who drew and modelled in grand style. “But he did not paint any scene of common life, and scarcely left a portrait. Things of the world tired him, and, like his saints, he lived in a holy seclusion. On the contrary, Velasquez was much more familiar with the psychology of his creations, so that he seemed to give them life. It is very certain that he handled the paint- ing of his models according to their special and personal significance, and not as representatives of the ecclesias- tical humbug. “Thus these two artists soon took two very distinct paths. 107 “The Sevillian burned with the desire to abandon the obscurity of churches and convents, and to go out into the dazzling light of the Court. To Zurbaran, Seville ap- peared too lively. He enjoyed taking his easel to the monasteries, such as Guadalupe, the rocky nest of Ex- tremadura, where he found himself in his element. “Consequently, Velasquez quickly changed his style, while Zurbaran kept his first manner almost to the end.®^ “He was of a more unyielding quality than all the others, and possessed the rigid fanaticism of principles common to Romanists.” After the opinions quoted, there are two others which also are worthy to be mentioned here. First we have that of D. Henry Romero de Torres about the paintings of the Museum of Cadiz, then the article written by D. Joseph Ramon Melida who studied on the spot, as did Sr. Tormo, the pictures of the Guada- lupe Monastery. Sr. Romero de Torres says that “the eighteen pictures which are preserved in this gallery mark two epochs in the artist’s life and should be divided into two groups. Corresponding to the first one are the works entitled St. Luke, St. John the Lvangelist, St. John Baptist, St. Law- rence, St. Mark, and St. Matthew, designated by the numbers 8o, 77, 66, 67, 79 and 78 of the catalogue. “These pictures are inferior to the other paintings; there are some indecisions, a carelessness of drawing, a lack of harmony and brilliancy of shading in some of them; and in comparing them with their companions, one miglit doubt they were by Zurbaran. “In my opinion, they belong to his first period, when he 108 « 1 began to be known in Seville and his style was not com- pletely formed. ... “The second group is composed of the twelve following pictures: SL Bruno at Prayer^ the Jubilee^ the Pente- cost^ St. Ugon Bishop of Lincoln^ a Carthusian Cardinal.. St. Thelmo, St. Ugon Bishop of Grenoble^ a Holy Car- thusian., a Holy Martyr of the Order., the Cardinal Nich- olas, an Angel with a Censer and another like it. “All these artistic gems correspond to the period of the artist’s greatest flowering, very especially the last nine, painted upon wood. The figures are of conventional size. It can be said that these are perhaps the best that the fecund pencil of Zurbaran has produced. “In looking at them, one admires the great originality of the painter most typically Spanish of his age: sober, austere, vigorous, influenced by an imperative natural- ism which he unites to an expression profoundly religious and spiritual. Marvelous at the same time is his synthet- ical and personal manner of perceiving the effects of claro-obscuro in great masses, and his splendid and bril- liant coloring which rivals that of the great Venetian masters.” The illustrious Melida expresses himself in these terms in his article called “Art. The Monastery of Guada- lupe” which appeared in the Courrier of Madrid {PI Correo) the nth of March, 1908: “There are eight of his best works in the sacristy of Guadalupe, where perhaps the great and powerful genius of the sovereign contemporary of Velasquez most bril- liantly shines. We will not stop to describe his can- vases which represent, not passages from the life of St. 109 Jerome, as they were wrongly called, but subjects much more familiar to the monks of Guadalupe, that is, inci- dents and miracles ascribed to the venerable members of the Order. These topics were certainly very appropriate to the artistic temperament of Zurbaran, who, as Justi says, distinguished himself by the merit of treating with a realism we might call photographic, peculiar indeed to Spanish art, subjects which would have exhausted the imagination of other painters. “Besides, the figures in them are monks and it was Zur- baran’s specialty to depict them. With such appropri- ate material this artist, in Guadalupe, realized in each canvas a marvellous creation. These admirable figures fascinate by the truth, the character and the life the painter put into them, concentrated in the faces. The cloths of the habits were treated with even more realism. The backgrounds, quiet and harmonious, olfer some effect of light, a glimpse of landscape or some accessories that bring out the energy of the silhouettes of those classic Spanish friars. One of them. Father Illescas, looks at us with a severe and penetrating glance. “But the merit of these canvases is not alone in the de- tails which the painter may have elaborated to satisfy his realistic tendency; it is in the fact that with the few ele- ments and scarce resources these subjects, in their ideal aspect, lent him, the artist knew how to master with se- renity and exactness the art of great painting, treating reality in a broad and sober manner; this merit, also, lies in the powerful, easy and pure technique, transparent at times as an aquarelle, with clear and silvery tones, lumi- nous in the fragments of the background, ardent in the heads and other details. 1 10 “In fact, these canvases which connect the glorious traditions of the Italian school with the decided realistic tendencies of Spanish art, constitute an element most in- dispensable for appreciating that evolution, and the con- siderable contribution of Zurbaran to it. In the present chapel, at the back of the sacristy, in the golden reredos, are also paintings by him; some precious small figures of monks, on the pedestal, and in the upper part a painting representing St. Jerome among angels, in a sky suffused with transparent light. In the same chapel, there are two other large pictures reproducing incidents of the Saint’s life. That which represents the T efnptations in Syria reveals the hand of Zurbaran; the other one, in which the angels whip him, I hold to be by Ribera.” The irrefutable competence of our distinguished di- rector of the National Museum of Painting and Sculp- ture, D. Jose Villegas y Cordero, being well known, as a critic of art, I ventured to ask his opinion in regard to Zurbaran, and he had the goodness to send me the follow- ing lines: “Zurbaran is the greatest portrait painter, and the most faithful interpreter of the spirit and life of those soldiers of the Church who highly distinguished themselves in his epoch. His monks are not the obscure sectaries of the growing Church who hid themselves in caves and came out (often, as confessors of the new faith) to stain with their blood the arena of the Circus Maximus. “H is monks of strong features, whose blood seems to have ceased to flow in their arteries, show an unalterable calm: they certainly never laughed nor cried, nor had the temperament of Pope Julius II, or Cardinal Vitel- eschi. “When looking at the figures in the picture of SL Bruno before Urban //, one observes that their characters do not exactly reveal obedience. Their expression shows the energy of those who are used to command, and in their looks one does not discover the spiritual and doleful reflection which humility gives to the dreamers of the Re- demption. They are men who could breathe the free and balmy air of the cloister, but not the confined atmos- phere of the catacombs. . . . “One of the characteristics which most distinguishes him is the austere ascetism of his monks, whose portraits im- press us so profoundly that they convey the sensation the artist must have felt when painting them. As a tech- nician, Zurbaran shows a vivid personality; his drawing and color are of perfect correctness. On the other hand, there is nothing genial in him, but his work is much more the result of a constant study and a great spirit of ob- servation. Contrary to what some critics have said, Zur- baran’s palette has no resemblance whatever to that of Caravaggio. If there appears to be any point of contact in the obscure tones with those of the Italian painter, it is to be attributed to the changes or alterations of the col- ors, rather than to original likeness. It is sufficient to look at some paintings in which the colors have been preserved to notice that these are more diaphanous and the darker ones less heavy than in his other productions.” As a finish to the opinions just given, and as the best sketch made of Zurbaran, it is interesting to know the one that D, Francisco Alcantara published in an article in the El hnparcial, of May I2, 1905, the year of the Exposi- tion : “Neither the searchers for dates who perform useful 1 12 IMMACULATK ('( )XCK1'TK )X Aluseum of liuda-Pest. '"'I and meritorious work, nor the critics who with too much frequency do no more than circle round about true facts, have yet explained to us the personality of the Extre- madurian painter. “Where are the authentic documents capable of ex- plaining it“? They are in his country, in Extremadura. As the flavor of fruits of the same class differs from an- other on account of the soil which may produce it, so is man, of his soil, and above all, in epochs like that of Zur- baran. The robust strength of the Spanish nation was the fruit of a magic tree ; and if to this we add the definite personality and the temperament particular to each re- gion of the peninsula, then we will understand why it is that in Extremadura, where Zurbaran was born and brought up, we must seek the fount of his temperament. In the Extremadura of the XIVth and XVth centuries are those causes to be found ! “With their minds enchained by religious sentiment, their intelligence identified with unchangeable dogma- tism, the Extremadurians, more than any other natives of Spain, were at that time a tremendous force for action. In no country is one more attached to the soil than in Extremadura, taking part in an intimate manner in the fresh vigor of the earth, where all that is produced, even woman, is masculine, — excuse the phrase for its grace of brevity. Not even in Aragon do they reach the limit seen in Extremadura. This virile sap which is guarded from generation to generation, awaiting something that will stir it, was then running impetuously through the channels of history, and Zurbaran is a Pizarro or a Cortez to whom it cost much more work and fatigue to conquer his America than for them to conquer theirs. 113 “Zurbaran, coarse, rude, intrepid, a strong youth greatly influenced by the ascetism of Gothic art (and above all by Morales) , with heart as solid as a stone, and warmed by the mystical fervors of his birth-place (so much more difficult to express, as the Extremadurian temperament is incapable of romantic feeling, of Muril- lian idealism) , found in Roelas all the resources of the great art of Italy, already Spanicized in Seville, the en- chantment and glory of the world, fountain of poetry, school of the Castilian tongue and cradle of Spanish art. “Born, I believe, seventeen or eighteen years after the death of the mystic and bewitching St. Theresa, who in a certain way gave a definite national character to Spanish religion, Zurburan, a fellow-countryman of San Pedro de Alcantara, saw in his youth the closing of the Council of Trent. An artist born in a country of fervent devotees, as a result of the intensity of his mystic ardors, he was so coarse and severe that he never knew the touch of delicate tenderness. Spaniard, artist, ascetic, Extre- madurian, he was dogmatic and expressed the sombre and terrible beauty of voluntary martyrdom of the flesh, in the most powerful manner. This was the kingdom con- quered by the painter ; but his conquest was the work of an entire life, and if he had not reached the age in which he painted the Jubilee of the Cadiz Museum, the Blessed Rodriguez of the Academy of San Fernando, the Blessed Suzon of Seville, the St. Francis of Assisi, owned by Sr. Beruete, the Pentecost of the Cadiz Museum, the St. An- thony of the Marquis de Casa Torres, and above all the Carthusians, superior to all praise, of the Cadiz Museum, this conqueror would not have fulfilled his task. “In the Carthusians, when he arrived at old age, when 114 he was a child again, when the first impressions became freshened in his memory, the remembrance of the divine Morales reappeared, and with it, the distant influences of the North, preserved with such true love in the most profound regions of his soul, and the Italian reminis- cences vanished. . . . “This is the Zurbaran whom I wish to be known. Velasquez, the great painter, the god of painters, did not climb so high in churchly ideals. Murillo is a dwarf. Oh, severe, coarse, ardent and fierce painter! Through thee we know the height, unapproachable by the vulgar, where Spaniards arrived in their mad desire for the ideal . . . !” In regard to the epoch, the ideas and tastes which it represents, the significance of his personality may be summed up in the words of D. Francisco Alcantara: “Zurbaran is the painter of the Council of Trent.” 115 THE PAINTER IN THE LIGHT OF HIS WORKS I F it is always difficult to follow an artist step by step, through the periods of his evolution; in the case of Zurbaran it is almost impossible. From the Immaculate Child ^ belonging to Cepero, done in 1616, and the Child Virgin in Prayer, of Beruete, somewhat earlier, to the grand composition of the reredos of the St. Peter chapel in the Sevillian cathedral, finished in 1625, there is an abyss without any transition. After this last year the young Extremadurian is already a most accomplished painter. The timid drawing and lack of power in the colors, and the candor of the composition of his first known canvas, as well as the simple and yet sublime expression of the second, is succeeded in those of the reredos, which seem to follow them, by a strength of touch and a complete mastery of the problems of color. His manner of composition so well thought out, and at the same time so natural leads us to presume that be- tween these two periods the artist must have painted many canvases, either in the studio of Villanueva, or of some other Sevillian teacher, until in the pictures of the life of St. Peter he showed a style completely formed.. To the fame of these works may be ascribed the many commissions which from that time he executed for nearly all the churches and monasteries of that city. The reader already knows the study which Sr. Tormo has made of the Immaculate of Cepero. The Child Vir- ( iiKis i Ki-.i’LAcixi; ms \ i,s irKi, .\i- ri-K i- i.ac.i.u.a i mx ( lmr( h of St, John llic Uaptist. Jailrai|nr. \ k- y V lei f y Sv ‘r: --r- / I t- I gin in Prayer is a more perfect work. There is not that indecision which characterises the other. The colors are more studied and the draperies reveal some of the perfec- tion which Zurbaran was to attain later in his art. The curtains that form the canopy over the head of the Virgin, her skirt and waist, and the linen cloth which is seen in the sewing basket are as well done as those of his best period. Apparently the Virgin is seven or eight years old. She faces the spectator seated upon a cushion or low taboret which is not visible, and holds in her lap a small sewing cushion upon which is placed her work and a ribbon marker. The divine Child has interrupted her task and, hands clasped, keeps an attitude of prayer di- recting her beautiful eyes heavenward. The nimbus is enclosed within a circle of angels’ heads. To the right of the spectator, one sees in the background a pot of lilies, and in the foreground a willow basket. At the left is a small table upon which rest a little book and a pair of scissors; and before the table, on the floor, there is a small white porcelain jar. After the paintings of the reredos of St. Peter, Zurbaran executed, among other works finished in 1629, the following pictures: The Virgin of the Caves ^ St. Hugo in the Refectory., the Vision of St. Peter Nolasco, the Apparition of St. Peter the Apostle to St. Peter Nolasco, the Conference of St. Bruno with Pope Urban II, St. Bonaventure vis- ited by an Angel who designates hi?n the Cardinal to be elected Pope, St. Bonaventura visited by St. Thomas to whom he shows the Crucified as the Origin of his Knowl- edge, and the Child.. Jesus wounding his Ringer while weaving a Crown of Thorns. We shall have to study each of these in succession. 117 without being influenced by the opinions of the many critics who have analyzed them. The Virgin of the Caves protecting under her Mantle a Band of Monks is the weakest of them all, both in grouping and in the expression of the figures. Although the robes are well executed we cannot say as much for the countenance of Our Lady (whose mantle is held up by two angels and assumes the form of a tent) ; we do not see in her that expression of sweetness and piety which should suffuse her countenance, and the groups of six Carthusians kneeling on either side of the Mother of God appear so unmoved that far from seeming to be in the presence of a miracle they look like simple models for a painter, and gaze at the Virgin with the calmness they would show toward any mortal. St. Hugo in the Refectory and the Miracle of the Holy Vow is a composition marked by realism in the execution. Everyone of the figures represented shows the attitude and expression appropriate to it. The faces and habits of the friars, the dishes and jars which are scattered over the table are all minutely studied, but the technique leaves much to be desired. The Vision of St. Peter Nolasco is one of Zurbaran’s most complete works, and as Sr. Araujo says, “the ex- pression and color are admirable.” Meanwhile the Saint kneeling sleeps, the left elbow on the table, the right hand touching an open book; an angel appears to him and shows him in a dream the celestial city of Jeru- salem, which is visible through a beautiful opening of the sky, in the upper corner on the right of the canvas, llie physiognomy of the sleeping Saint is a study of the first order. The angel is a little rascal of the sacristy, a 118 rHE SACRISTR^' AND CHARKL OF GUADALUPE t \ robust acolyte who no doubt served as a model to the artist, who painted him without modifying in the least the roguish face of the youth. The Apparition of St. Peter the Apostle to St. Peter Nolasco (signed 1629) offers an interesting example of the study of the nude, as well as of drapery whose inter- pretation has been recognized as one of Zurbaran’s great- est merits, in the opinion of his critics. St. Peter the Apostle nailed to the inverted cross ap- pears before St. Peter Nolasco, who, kneeling before him, is absorbed in contemplation. The folds of his robe fall in a very natural way without complications or conven- tions of any kind : the cloth is cloth and could not be any- thing else. The body of the Apostle shows that the painter had an extraordinary knowledge of anatomy. The composition of this work is simple and yet the two figures that are represented in it could not have been better arranged. Even superior to the expression in this picture is that of the Conference of St. Bruno with Pope Urban II. The attitude of the two principal personages seated face to face is exactly appropriate to the scene they repre- sent, and the relation of one to the other is just what they would assume in reality. In their faces there is none of the immobility which characterizes those of the monks in the Virgin of the Caves. While the Pontiff shows an arrogant and majestic mien, St. Bruno appears humble, his calm look directed to the ground, but with dignity. Of the habits one can only say that they even surpass those of the St. Hugo in the Refectory and those of St. Peter Nolasco. St. Bonaventura visited by an Angel is another of the 119 great works of the master; of a Riberescan style it is su- perior to the best of Ribera. The Saint kneeling before a table upon the centre of which is a papal tiara, looks sweetly at a young angel who speaks to him (from a corner of the sky which opens in the upper right part of the canvas) telling him what Cardinal ought to be elected Pope. Back of St. Bonaventura and near an enormous door are two groups of Cardinals. Three of them are kneeling and looking at the scene, and the other six are talking beyond the doorway, bathed in the full light of the courtyard of the cloister. Of a more complicated composition though most natu- ral is the SL Bonaventura visited by St. Thomas to whom he shows the Crucified as the Origin of his knowledge. St. Thomas and the four monks who accompany him have scarcely entered the cell when St. Bonaventura draws aside the curtains which hide the image of the Crucified, and the Holy Doctor stands in admiration before it, showing in his attitude and the position of his hands the surprise which overwhelms him. The two Saints, the monks grouped near the door, the books and the skull placed upon a shelf in the background, the table, the chair, all the figures and all the details are perfect; and this is, in my opinion, one of the most complete pictures of the artist, one in which he shows a talent for composition and a technique equal to that which characterizes the St. Bonaventura presiding over a Chapter of the lesser Friars and its companion the Funeral of a Saint. In the Child Jesus wounding his Finger while weaving a Crown of Thorns, owned by D. Cayetano Sanchez Pin- eda, of Seville, Zurbaran arrived at the culmination of realism in the arrangement of the figure, expression of 120 countenance and mien. The Son of God seated on a rough bench, and with the crown upon his knees is pinch- ing with the right hand the forefinger of the left, from which comes a drop of blood. It is a most finished study and really enchanting. It is not easy to state which of the works just enumer- ated were made before the others; and further, judging by the merits of each one, they would have been painted in the order in which they are mentioned; thus Zurba- ran’s progress is clearly seen, as his touch is each time more firm and assured. Of 1630 is the Blessed Alonso Rodriguez in the Acad- emy of San Fernando. This work has many admirers. The figures could not be better executed, but the com- position of the Glory is not so successful ; there is nothing remarkable in it except the tunic of the angel who ap- pears in the foreground which is splendidly done. The Blessed Rodriguez and the angel who accompanies him are two figures of the first order. On the other hand, neither Mary nor Jesus showing their hearts (which they hold in their hands in the manner of carnival toys), nor the group of angels in the opposite angle, nor the heads of the seraphim who gather at the Redeemer’s feet nor that of his divine Mother seem appropriate to me. In 1631 the Extremadurian master signed the canvas of the Holy Face (owned by D. Mariano Pacheco, of Madrid, and very interesting) and the famous great pic- ture of the Apotheosis of St. Thomas A..quinas already described by Sentenach and Lefort, a truly grand paint- ing and the most intimate and best interpreted that can be imagined. The four Doctors of the Church who sur- round St. Thomas are rendered in minute detail, and the 121 Saint, the figures of Christ and his Mother, those of St. Paul and St. Dominic, and the background of celestial glory show a profound study and great depth of reflec- tion. The figures kneeling in the lower third of the canvas reveal a superb series of personal portraits. Finally, as Araujo and Sanchez say: “as well in the whole of the composition as in the details, the method of Zur- baran’s work is shown, each part being conscientiously studied by itself.” The SL Lawrence of the Hermitage of St. Petersburg, signed 1636, is one of the most sublime I have seen. In a beautiful landscape extending both in the background and foreground, the Saint appears standing, with an enormous gridiron in his left hand, the right resting open upon his breast. He is dressed in all the sacred habili- ments as if he were about to celebrate the mass, with his countenance raised and his looks directed heavenward. The embroideries on the chasuble are painted with scrup- ulous minuteness and the face is filled with an expression of ineffable happiness. The white draperies are worthy of the brush that painted them. The reader already knows the different opinions that have been expressed about the Hercules of the Prado. Among them, there are that of Hercules killing the Hy- dra in the Swamps of Lerna which is considered authentic and the Hercules subduing the Bull which Neptune sent against Minos which is thought doubtful. I do not find the difference of style which Lefort, first, and then other critics have discovered. The anatomical study of the nudes is the same, the colors employed are identical and the drawing characteristic of Zurbaran, although they may not be his; but if it was not Zurbaran, who painted 122 them — with the same light, the same model and almost in the same state of mind — what painter so exactly re- peats any subject with the faithfulness of a photographic camera ? The Adoration of the Shepherds- may be by Velasquez, as was formerly believed, but the manner of painting the cloths, the light and the drawing are Zurbaranesque. The Annunciation of the Carthusian of Jerez, like its companions the Adoration of the Shepherds, the Adora- tion of the Kings and the Circumcision would honor the greatest of masters. They are perfectly executed. In the Annunciation, the Virgin is praying before a low desk on which rests an open book, when the archangel appears behind her and causes her to turn her head to- ward the open door. Between the two figures is a jar of lilies, and beyond them a great door through which a landscape is seen and the facade of a building (castle or palace), and in the upper part of the picture, amidst luminous clouds, the Holy Spirit presides over choirs of lovely angels. The Adoration of the Shepherds in the collection of the Carthusians of Jerez, signed 1638, differs in compo- sition from the one in the National Gallery, although the figure of the Virgin is made from the same model. She raises with both hands, the coverings from the nude In- fant Jesus, looking lovingly at him, as does St. Joseph, who is at her side. A youthful angel sings back of Mary, another young seraph plays the harp in the sky, and eight young cherubs contemplate the scene in adoration. There are other figures, such as the woman offering a basket of eggs and an old man praying which are emi- nently naturalistic. 123 The Adoration of the Magi is a gem of unmatched painting. Here the Child is dressed, and upon the knees of His divine Mother, behind whom is St. Joseph. One of the kings is adoring the Son of God, the others gaze at Him waiting for Him to rise when they will kneel them- selves. In the centre of the picture is a gentleman richly attired in the warlike fashion of the artist’s day. The Circumcision does not discredit the three former canvases, in composition or drawing, nor in the expres- sion of the figures which are completely Velasquean. It is another beautiful page in the artist’s work and the young man in the foreground is surpassingly realistic. The Saviour Blessing the Worlds owned by Senora Iturbe, signed in 1638, the same year as the Adoration of the Shepherds of Jerez, is in a style quite distinct from that work. The tunic is masterly and done in a manner appropriate to Zurbaran, in that of his best epoch, but the head shows Italian influence and the hand placed upon the globe seems more in the style of Greco. Zurbaran was not monotonous nor always alike in his work, as has been commonly believed. He often changed his manner, even within a single year, and this explains why the pictures which lacked his signature or were not like the others, frequently aroused doubt as to their authenticity. Quite different from his magnificent canvas, the Sav- iour, is the Mass of Father Cabahuelas, in the Monastery of Guadalupe, signed 1638. It was inspired by a miracle which happened to this Saint when celebrating the mass. He saw the paten rise with the Host, and from it some drops of blood were issuing and falling into the cup. The expression of the venerable officiant is a mixture of devotion and fear, which contrasts with the serenity of the countenance of the assistant, who is not aware of what is occurring. The perspective of the court which is seen in the background, the embroideries on the chasuble, the draperies, the drawing, the position of the hands of the two figures and the sure grouping of the whole make this great work truly admirable, and the head of the transfigured Saint is beyond all praise. The canvas of Our Saviour rewarding the Penance of Father Salmeron who kept a vow to go perpetually on his knees, signed 1639, is another of the most beau- tiful works of Zurbaran. The figure of Father Salmeron receiving upon his brow the hand of Jesus is as correct in drawing, truth, color and simplicity of feeling and atti- tude, as that of the Saviour who stands before hirn bare- foot on the ground; the pitying look of the Son of God makes an harmonious contrast with the humble and pious countenance of the monk. Of the same year, 1639, is the painting of Father Yatiez de Figueroa, “who, as Sr. Tormo says, although seeming to accept the tiara offered by Henry the Sad, is really re- fusing it.” If it were not for the signature who would say that this work is Zurbaran’s? It does not resemble any other by the master, although its artistic value is by no means inferior to the others. But where are the Zur- baranesque brush strokes? And yet, it is undoubtedly very beautiful. It is rightly stated that the best works of the artist are those kept in the Monastery of Guadalupe. Here Zur- baran was confronted with the real friar whom he chose as a model tor his work Father Gonzalo Illescas. As well as the canvases of Father Salmeron and Father Yatiez de Figueroa^ this painting bears the date 1639 and repre- sents the confessor of John II writing on a table covered with papers and books, among which stand a sand-clock and a skull. Very admirable is the perspective of the facade of the convent in the background, at the upper left side of the spectators seen between two columns, through which the light enters into the cell. At the door of the holy house a friar is giving alms to the poor. In spite of the richness and splendid interpretation of the accessories, the figure of Father Illescas attracts all the attention, for it does not appear like a portrait but a liv- ing person who is going to speak, and about to rise and greet someone who approaches. His expressive and penetrating gaze united with the gesture of the right hand, which is raised, holding the pen between its fingers, as if he had stopped writing for the moment to note the presence of a visitor, produces the impression that here is the living man, flesh and bone, — that he breathes, ques- tions, and is about to reprimand the intruder who has come to interrupt him in his work. As to the iS'/. Jerome scourged by Angels of the same chapel in Guadalupe, which a keen critic says is not by Zurbaran, I not only think it is by him, but that it is one of his best and most characteristic creations. Who but Zurbaran could have painted the figure of Jesus presid- ing over the celestial chastisement, and the draperies of the youthful angels, and also the nude torse of the pun- ished Saint^ The Pearl of Ziurbardn or At. Jerome ascending to Heaven among charming groups of cherubs, offered to the painter who always preferred single figures the oc- casion to display all his finest artistic qualities. The 126 drawing and color are as truthful as the most vivid re- ality. The hands and head of the Saint constitute a beautiful manifestation of expression, and the composi- tion as well as the background has not been surpassed even by Murillo. In the SL Francis, of Assisi signed 1659, and owned by D. Aureliano de Beruete, he nearly approached the sub- lime works at Guadalupe. The Saint kneeling before a large rock which serves as table, lifts his right hand to his breast and with his left holds a skull, while looking heavenward in a supplicating attitude. The Sf. Francis Assisi, of the Museum of Seville, prays, standing, with a crucifix held up in his right hand, showing the palm of his left with its miraculous marks. The Saint gazes toward heaven, as in Sr. Beruete’s pic- ture, and is equally inspired. The Jubilee also merits praise, not only for the Glory, the figures of Jesus, his divine Mother and the angels, but also for that of the seraphic monk who, already de- scribed by Codola, is on his knees, his head raised, with tears in his eyes, the mouth partly open, his arms ex- tended, the face drawn and forehead corrugated, sur- prised by the supernatural vision of the roses scattered on the floor of his cell in place of the thorny shrubs upon which he was torturing himself to bring from heaven the merits of the Jubilee. The St. Francis de Paul owned by Sr. Macdougall in Seville, the St. John the Baptist in the Desert, the St. Matthew, the Holy Carthusian Martyr, the St. Bruno at Prayer of the Cadiz Museum, and the St. Jacob the Grand are six figures of the greatest force, each one worthy to sustain the fame of a prodigious master. 127 The Blessed Henry Suzon in the Seville Museum and the St. Catherine owned by the Infanta Isabella are in execution equal to their companions at Guadalupe. The Blessed Suzon is a triumph of interpretation. He wounds his breast by cutting upon it with a bistoury the initials I. H. S., reflecting in his countenance and in his beautiful eyes a sublime mixture of joy and suffering which converts him into the ideal mystic, for his suffer- ing is not caused, as Codola says, by the wound in his breast, but by the thought that his torture is so much less than that endured by the Redeemer. The St. Catherine is on her knees before a crucifix, her elbow resting on a prie-dieu on which is an open book. She clasps her hands in an attitude of prayer. The crown of thorns which she wears alters the calmness of her features which appear strained and suffering, and there is a marked expression of physical pain on her con- tracted forehead. The St. Casilda of the Prado, like the St. Marina and the St. Inez of the Hospital of the Blood in Seville, is worthy of study and corresponds to Zurbaran’s series of pictures where expressive realism oversteps the bounds of convention. Instead of holy women, such as we imagine them, they are ladies of the period, richly dressed, artistically coiffed and with a look more worldly than spiritual, showing in their attitude all the distinc- tion of elegant women. The Virgin with the sleeping Child in her Arms, signed and dated 1659, and property of the Marquis Unza del Valle, was considered by the critics of the Zurbaran Pixhibition of 1909, as a work very far from being by him. Sr. Tormo believed it to be by an imitator of Murillo and Sr. Viniegra said, “Were it not for the signature which appears authentic nothing about it shows the pic- ture to be by Zurbaran.” There is no doubt that the same model which served for this picture was also used by the master for the SL Inez and the Virgin of the Rosary, in the Hospital of the Blood in Seville. It is sufficient to scrutinize them to be convinced of this fact. The same face is seen in all three, but with the difference that in St. Inez the eyelids are lowered, as in the one owned by Unza del Valle. The Child is also the same in this canvas as in the Rosary and both works are superior to the Virgin of the Mercy now the property of the Countess of Paris. The Virgin of the Mercy shows the same style as Zurbaran’s early period both in drawing and composition. There are here mannerisms and a certain hardness very char- acteristic of Zurbaran. The Virgin with the Child asleep and that of the Rosary on the contrary reveal a complete freedom of composition, much sweetness in the outlines and a method like Murillo. They are works very dis- tinct from the usual style of Zurbaran’s paintings. In the Virgin of the Rosary Zurbaran’s own brush work is clearly seen. In the Child Asleep these strokes are ab- sent, hence the doubts of the critics, because it has been the victim of restoration. The picture was bought in the Market, in Madrid, by the father of the present Marquis Unza del Valle. It had some defects, and before placing it in his home, he had it restored by Sr. Madrazo who evidently exceeded his commission, and the result is a picture in style and drawing very different from the original one. The same thing happened to Jesus hearing the Cross, owned by the 129 heirs of General Gamir, which has the same model as the Saviour blessing the World of Senora Iturbe, which also was restored by D. Alejo Vera, who should have been more careful in his retouching. Although he excelled in pictures of religious subjects, where we constantly admire Zurbaran is in the portraits; and one of these, very little known to Spaniards, is in the Museum of Berlin. It is believed to be the Infante Don Baltasar Carlos, dressed in half armour, as was then the fashion, with short slashed breeches and an iron cuirass across whose front the ribbon and cross of Calatrava are visible. Every detail of heraldry is carefully studied, and the face is of an enchanting realism. With his heavy locks falling upon his shoulders, full lips, broad nose, large eyes and high forehead, the young Prince appears here as he undoubtedly was in reality, and if the drawing is firm and vigorous, the color does not lag behind it. The portrait of D. Diego Bustos de Lara, owned by the Count of Gomar, wearing also half armour, a casque on head and a war mace in the right hand, in the attitude of walking; and that of D. Gonzalo (owned by the same gentleman), fully dressed in a tunic with fur collar, we have two canvases so splendid that they would be gems for even the best of museums, and which proclaim their author the king of portrait painters. There have already been mentioned many portraits of famous ecclesiastics; we may thus place beside the very best those which the Academy of San Fernando owns. There are few artists who could have painted the habits, the hands and heads of Lather Pedro Machado, Father Francisco Zumel, Father Jeronimo Perez, Father Her- nando de Sa?itiago and the Mercenary Friar with equal 130 art and truth as shown by the artist in the portrait of Father lllescas, portraits in all respects comparable to the S>t. Carmelo of the Seville Museum and the Cardinal Nic- olaus of Cadiz. As I have already stated, Zurbaran showed certain de- ficiencies in some mystical pictures, but in his portraits he invariably remains on the same high plane. There is not one that is not superbly done, and in this kind of painting he was, and I even venture to say, he is inimi- table. He was so in his ideal Virgins in which Murillo did not equal him, although the latter was undoubtedly inspired by Zurbaran’s when he painted his own. The Immaculate Virgins oi Zurbaran are little known. The pictures of this master which are most familiar are chiefly of monks and martyrs, grey and melancholy, and it has been supposed that these were his only subjects. But, in visiting the private and public collections of other countries, one may see many “Conceptions” as sub- lime as can well be imagined. There are in Spain, among others, two which it is much to be regretted are not in some public museum. One is the property of the Prince of Albania, D. Pedro Aladro, and the other of the Marquis of Cerralvo. The drawing and composition of the Inwiaculate Con- ception of D. Pedro Alardo are in the typical manner of Zurbaran who kept for this picture the most beautiful tones of his palette. The angels, the clouds, the celes- tial expression of the Virgin and the pleating of her man- tle and tunic are rendered with genuine love. The two young clerics who are kneeling on each side of Mary are the most realistic possible to be seen in this kind of paint- ing. 131 The Immaculate^ of Marquis of Cerralvo, appears to be a copy of that of Murillo and as it is not of later date, it is easy to deduce which artist copied the other. The position of the hands, the attitude of the head, the man- tle floating in the wind, the angels in the sky, the clouds and even the colors of this picture offer with those of Murillo astonishing points of similarity which are worthy of being considered. But the Queen of Conceptions^ that which towers above all that have been done by the greatest masters in art, is the one in the Museum of Buda-Pest, signed 1661. With open arms, the mantle slightly floating, the tunic with ample sleeves lightly clinging to the body, the Vir- gin’s looks are directed to heaven, and her feet rest upon exquisite cherub heads; it is a picture of superhuman in- spiration. In the same year as the Conception of Buda-Pest ( 1661 ) , Zurbaran signed that of Jesus replacing his Gar- 7 ne 7 ^ts after Flagellation^ preserved at Jadraque, which differs greatly from the former one. This proves how little uniform the artist was in his work, in spite of the common idea that has been formed about him. In this picture, instead of aiming at true characteriza- tion of the personage he represents, he limits himself to a portrait; he did not paint a Jesus^ but simply copied his model. The position of the figure, the muscles, the cinc- ture, the tunic which he lifts up, all is admirably done, but look at the countenance and expression! Is it pos- sible that this can be the face of a man who has just been scourged, who still feels upon his body the stripes of the whip, without showing the least evidence of pain, and seeming so placid^ 132 On the contrary, in the Christ Crucified^ owned by the heirs of the Marquis of Villafuerte (not dated) the ex- pression could not be grander or more touching. Here we see Jesus himself, hanging on the Cross and dying; his face is contracted, also the fingers of his hands, the mus- cles are strained and the expression is superior to that of the celebrated Christ painted by Velasquez, who was in- spired by Zurbaran’s, just as was Murillo when painting his Madonnas, according to the opinion of many critics. . . . In conclusion, he who has seriously studied the paint- ings of Zurbaran in their order, and read the opinions of the majority of the critics, will arrive at the conviction that the artist has never been thoroughly appreciated, and that when he is known, he will be pronounced one of the greatest artists in or out of Spain. ^33 APPENDIX NO. 1 Contract of Apprenticeship of Francisco De Zurbaran Know all persons who see this letter, that I don Pedro Delgueta Rebolledo resident of the city of Seville in the quarter of San Lor- enco, by the name and voice of Luis de Curbaran resident of the town of Fuente de Cantos, and in virtue of the power I hold from him, which was given in this town before Alonso Garcia public scrivener the 19th day of December 1613, that its meaning is as follows : “In the town of Fuente de Cantos the 19th day of December 1613, before me, the public scrivener, appeared in person Luis de Curbaran resident of this town, and gave his full consent to don Pedro Delgueta Rebolledo resident of Seville, especially in order that in his name should be placed and put in the office of the painter his son Francisco de Curbaran, for the time which would be con- venient and settled, obliging him, for the time upon which they agree, to stay with and assist any master of said art, thus in the city of Seville as well as elsewhere and to the effect of having his said son taught, Luis de Curbaran would pay the expenses and other things agreed upon with this master who shall be obliged to teach him said art, for which reason he may make with any masters in his own name any written contract, with the conditions and dues, obligations, penalties and salaries which he would deem right; and said documents being dated and authorized by said don Pedro, and being accepted those which said master or masters may author- ize in his favor, said Luis de Curbaran ratified, approved and signed, and considered firm and sufficient (according to formula), and as such authorize them as witnesses Juan Martin, Agustin Curbaran and Marcos Martin, residents of this town and it is signed and sealed by the undersigned whom I declare known to me. Luis de Curbaran. 134 “And I Alonso Garcia Blanco, scrivener to the King our lord, and to the public in this town where I was present, and in faith of which I sign myself.” “In Testimony of the Truth Alonso Garcia, Scrivener.” And using said power previously mentioned, I agree and know, that I place to learn the art of painting Francisco de Curbaran, son of said Luis de Curbaran, with you Pedro Diaz de Villanueva, painter of images; that he may be absent for the time of three years commencing from today, the date of this letter, and further on, and in order that during this time you will help him well and conscien- tiously in your art and that all you will say and order him shall be honest and leasable, that you will give him in all said time to eat, drink, shelter and a bed, in which he will sleep while well or ill, but all his clothes and shoes which in said time he would need, his father has to furnish him; and that you will teach him your art as you know it, without demanding from him anything that would take him away from work, that you would not cease to teach him, and in order that you should teach him said art with better will, I give you i6 ducats, paid in the following manner: eight ducats which I gave and remitted to you, and the remaining eight ducats which Luis de Curbaran has the obligation to pay, and will pay, in this said city of Seville, without any dispute, within a year from the date of today, according to law. And that you should care for said Francisco de Curbaran, you, said Pedro Diaz de Villanueva, in all the illnesses which during that time he may have, provided that none of them should last over fifteen days, and if it were more, his said father has to care for him at his cost, but that in that time the minor should see and in case of this being a damage to you, you should remove him, and if you could not remove him, you should tell him (Luis de Curbaran) and let him know, in order that he should provide for him; and that the things he would take away, or do, without your consent and from under your roof, said father, cognizant of them, should pay for them in per- son and with his means, as the right demands. And it is a condition that if said Francisco desired, in the said time of three years, to work on holidays; all he should thus gain would be for himself, without you, the master, asking anything whatever of him. 135 This letter dated in Seville the 15th day of the month of Jan- uary 1614, and said partners signed it with their names in the reg- ister, and I, present public scrivener, declare that I know said don Pedro, and said don Pedro Diaz de Villanueva presented as wit- nesses of his knowledge who swore the contents to be in lawful form, whose names are and have been, Gabriel Lopez. , . , Pedro Delgate Rrebolledo — Pedro Diaz de Villanueva, Mor. de Mor- ales, public scrivener of Seville. Pedro del Carpio, pub. scr. Note of the scrivener upon the margin of the document: “Said don Pedro (of San Lorenzo) has agreed with said Pedro de Villanueva (of San Salvador), that within three years Fran- cisco de Curbaran would be taught, and he (his father) would pay him 16 ducats, 8 at once, and 8 after the first year and half; and that his father has to clothe him, and the holidays shall be for his own in which Francisco the apprentice will work.” 136 APPENDIX NO. 2 Memoranda of the Cabildo of Seville OF THE Moving to Seville of the Residence of Zurbaran Sr. Rodrigo Suarez. In the city of Seville on Wednesday, June 27, 1629, in the town hall, an order of the king was seen and read, and presented in writing by Sr. Rodrigo Suarez, Alderman, of the following context — Said Rodrigo Suarez makes known to the city how the convent of the Mercy has brought from the city of Llerena Francisco de Surbaran painter, who is to make the pictures which are to be placed in the new cloister and by those that are completed and by the painting of Christ which is in the sacristy of San Pablo, one can judge that he is a consummate artist. And presupposing that art is not the least ornament of a republic, but rather one of the greatest, as much for temples as for private houses, which are full of such works (those that have been inhabited by the great painters the kingdoms have had) it seems that the city should procure that the said Francisco de Surbaran should come to live here, although without salary or aid for his lodging, for this is not possible considering the conditions in which those in charge of the public works are, at least with complimentary words as to the satisfaction they take in being served by him, and that he should know that this single act without any other thing, seems enough, so that he knows that what has been referred to should take place; and that the city should see and consider it, and examine it as most convenient for her service — Rodrigo Suarez — Further Sr. don Pedro Galindo de Abreu, Alderman and chief prosecutor, said the same, and then said the same don Diego Caballero y Yllesca, and also Antonio de Bobadilla, Alderman. 137 It has been seen by the city and his highness don Diego F. de Mendoca, assistant in charge, that senor Rodrigo Suarez, Aider- man, in the name of the city should say to the said Francisco Sur- baran how much the city would wish, and take pleasure, in having him as a resident in the republic, that he should come to live here for the most part, and for the favorable opinion they had of him, and on the part of the city, asked the assistant to have the goodness to call on him, and ask him to come to her, and that the city would give whatever would please him, and aid him in all things which he might need; and that the city would take special pleasure in as- sisting him and helping him. In the city of Seville on Wednesday 29th day of May, 1630, in the town hall, was seen a petition by Alonso Cano, painter, in which it was said that “it came to his knowledge that Francisco de Zurbaran, painter, presented a petition before the city, which was important, as the reasons of this matter will prove, (sic) and asks that the city should examine Francisco de Zurbaran or give permission in order that her laws should be used as is right concerning said petition — Seen by the city and by his highness Sr. D. Diego Hurtado de Mendoca Viscount de la Corzana, assistant; it has been agreed that this petition be joined to the one it refers to (sic), and that it should be brought forth, as it has been entered in the book of the cabildo to which I am referring. In virtue of this agreement of the city aforesaid, and of the re- quest of Alonso Cano, painter, I had an extract and took a copy of the petition to which said agreement alluded, and whose contents are as follows: Francisco de Zurbaran, painter, says that “I hav- ing come from the city of Llerena to paint the sacristy of the con- vent of San Pablo, and the paintings of the cloister of the convent of our Lady of Mercy in that city, your highness agreed to ask me to come to this city to stay, and doing me the honor to declare in the agreement that they held me as a man ol distinction able to add lustre to the name of the city, and the works of the churches, so that his highness the secretary sent for me and I, gratefully recogniz- ing such a compliment, in spite of all inconveniences brought my house and domicile to this city, doing the works known to 138 your highness and to the master painters who had felt jealousy of the graciousness that your highness was doing me, and wanted to compel me to be examined, and for such came yesterday, Thurs- day 23rd day of May, said masters with a public scrivener, and an officer of the law, that they should examine me within the third day, saying that it was against the law not to be examined, it being true that the intention of your highness in giving your orders was that no ignorant men should paint, and I having your approval, in which I am held for a distinguished man, and having showed it to said master painters, it is not right that they should claim any power to approve or reprove that which your highness does, nor can it be understood that the order was given to examine a man already approved by your highness. In view of whatever acts said master painters may have done against my appeal to your highness, to whom I beg and ask that I be declared free from any further ob- ligation, once being approved by your highness, and that your highness should continue the kindness which has been promised in said agreement, of which I avail myself, I ask justice and costs, and for this the scrivener should come and make the report” — Francisco de Zurbaran Salazar. At the head of said petition is the decree signed and approved by the viscount assistant which says — “The 25th of May, 1630, the scrivener and the masters of the painters should come at once and make their declaration.” “And said decree was notified to me, and to said masters by Chris- tobal de Herrera, scrivener, who remitted me said petition without any other statement, and in consequence of which I went to place my declaration before his highness the viscount assistant, and in order to leave a proof of said request I gave the present writing, the 29th day of May, in Seville, 1630, in faith of which I sign myself as testimony of the truth.” Antonio Martinez de Acosta, scrivener — Witness. 139 APPENDIX NO. 3 Letter of D. Elias Tormo y Monzo upon the Labors of H ercules Zurbaran and the Labors of Hercules in the Palace of Buen Retire. Sr. D. Jose Cascales y Munoz: Although several weeks have passed, I have not wanted to give you the promised notes upon the canvases of the Labors of Her- cules of the Prado, attributed to Zurbaran, without verifying a little the information on this interesting theme. It has been said that I knew that these paintings were done not in 1650 when the well known visit of Zurbaran to Madrid (perhaps the only one) took place, but before 1637, a statement unproved, permit me to assert in the most final manner. The best known of recent biographies of our painter were in error, as I was — as all were. “He must have produced much” says Sr. Viniegra, “in all those years, (he refers to the fourth decade of the 17th century) and per- haps he remained unknown on account of his work until 1650; at this date he reappears in Madrid, called by Velasquez, by order of Philip IV to paint the canvases which adorn the little salon of the palace of Buen Retiro. “These were the Labors of Hercules, a collection of ten works which today form a part of this Museum. “This kind of painting could not have been much to his taste, as, according to Cean, he only painted four, the others being done under his direction. I believe this, and I venture to name those that are by his hand.” I have confessed that I too was in this error, I now ought to give full proof of the established truth. 140 In the first quarterly of the current year 1911 of the Bulletin of the Spanish Society of Research, I have a study entitled: “Velaz- quez, the Salon of the Kings at Buen Retiro, and the Poet of the Palace and of the Painter.” I should have to recur to the con- vincing and detailed facts which I have brought forth in my argu- ment, if the question were here, as it is chiefly there, to prove that the royal equestrian portraits were painted for the mentioned Salon, by Velazquez. As to the ten paintings of the Labors of Hercules, on the contrary, no proof is needed to know those which proceed from this Salon, and which the catalogue of the Museum mentions. I have seen it confirmed with great certainty by the inventories of 1703, 1709 and 1793, apart from what D. Antonio Ponz clearly says in 1775. This opinion is not without proof in the poetic text whereby I have been able to show, in the study spoken of, which were the works of art created for this principal Salon of the Palace of Buen Retiro. A contemporary poet describes the paintings of Velaz- quez, the scenes of glorious battles by the victorious Spanish armies of the day — canvases by V. Carducho, E. Caxes, Jusepe Leonardo, Felix Castelo, Pereda, Father Mayno and Juan de la Corte, and is as follows: “See in the lofty friezes of the balconies How the sovran pencil limns With valiant strokes the celebrated Theban. Be tranquil, O Juno, pursue not Alcides, Whom Art here presents in all his woe With such surpassing magic. And does but add duration to his labor. Here shines resplendent the immortal lo, Here lives the Lion, here Achilles lives Eternal is his task, and here Eternal shall remain the wild beast of Lerna.” Of what date is this poetic text? The book was published in 1637, and in the same year the license was granted by the Intendant, July 15th; the approbation of D. Pedro Calderon de la Barca, Au- gust 7 th, and the Tax, October 16th, 1638. 141 The inauguration of the Palace, or at least of a part of it, and of the park, was in 1632. The work was begun in 1630. The poetical composition appeared then at the latest in the early months of 1637, and the ten pictures of the Labors of Hercules could only be of 1636, at the latest. This correction of dates holds an important place in the biog- raphy of the painter, if the canvases are his, or part of them. At once, one could understand, better than with the explanation judi- ciously given by Sr. Sentenach, that Zurbaran signed as painter to the King one of those splendid paintings of the Carthusian Monas- tery of Jerez, today in Randan (Auvergne). (I believe I have told you of this shameful Odessy, shameful on the part of a good many Spanish governors.®’^ ) Knowing that part of these paintings, the only ones dated are of 1634 (three by Carducho), and that the Count Duke would not admit of delays in the stupendous buildings of this delightful royal retreat, this date, 1634, seems to be indicated as the most probable for all the work of the eight or ten painters who at the time worked for the Salon of honor. If Zurbaran, slightly before or after 1634, went to Madrid and painted the Labors of Hercules it will explain why, on his return to Andalusian soil, he came with the title, for the most part honorary, of painter to the King, and thus signed himself in 1638. It is not necessary to refer to the pictures he made in Seville, in the interior of the ship constructed for the lake of the Retiro, and it also better explains how in 1639 he held the duties not entirely professional, of the Superintendency of the Royal House. The statement of Palomino, mistaken as to time, may be retro- verted 16 years, for he says: “Ultimately he went to Madrid in 1650, called by Velazquez, by order of His Majesty, where he executed the pictures of the Labors of Hercules, which are in the little Salon of the Buen Retiro, upon four great canvases; and it is said that while he was painting there, among the many times that Philip IV passed by to observe them, he one day placed a hand on Zurbaran’s shoulder, exclaiming: “Painter to the King and King of Painters.” 142 Notice here that nothing is said about the signature on these paintings, which positively have none. I have examined them closely. The four positions of painter to the King being filled at that time by Carducho, Caxes, Nardi and Velazquez, the title could only be given as honorary to Zurbaran, and so it was, as facts prove, first verbally, then in writing, as in many other cases it has been done in the history of our art. But if the clearing up of the date of the Hercules explains satis- factorily, and even better than before, the mere biography of the artist, into what great confusion are we thrown to logically explain the technical and aesthetic evolution of the painter’s style! I confess, friend Cascales, I see it, and do not believe it. Among his signed works of 1629, for example, and his greatest ones of 1638 and 1639, those of Jerez and Guadelupe, to which I have dedicated respective studies, the paintings of the Labors of Her- cules form an episode of the imitation of Velazquez, which is not in harmony with the ones produced immediately before, neither with those that followed immediately afterward. Such disagree- ment, such a considerable deviation in the natural trend of his genius, causes me to doubt the text of Palomino, and to question again the attribution to Zurbaran of these paintings. Through an oversight, through forgetting to copy the original inventory of the pictures in the Buen Retiro of 1703, which is the oldest that we are acquainted with, they omitted to state the name of the author of the first of these pictures, and in the second and following ones it is simply said — “by the same artist” — “by the same artist” — “by the same,” placing in doubt to whom the kingly painters Lucas Jordan, Arredondo and Ruiz de la Iglesia would attribute them, — Palomino set aside. (Above all Arredondo who is the one that authorized the inventory of the Retiro). In my study of the Bulletin, all that part of the inventory is copied, and I can only say that equal forgetfulness has damaged it, and this is also shown in another inventory of 1709 which I recently examined in the Archives of the Palace, in order to give you more complete information. The inventory of 1709 is the 143 copy of the one made in 1703, placing under the care of D. An- tonio de Mayens the treasures and furniture of the Buen Retiro. (V. 5, of the Inventories at the death of Charles II, page 671). Still seeking further information, I searched thoroughly all the royal inventories of the Retiro. That of 1772 said nothing, be- cause it described no pictures except the new ones, and in great num- bers they had been brought there after the fire of the old Alcazar in 1734. It follows chronologically the text of Ponz, 1775, which following the text of Palomino says: “Among this collection (the grand battle pictures) are others of lesser size, that are by Francisco de Zurbaran who showed the great desire to put into them his best work. These like his other works manifest strong force of claro-obscuro.” A few years passed, and at the death of Charles III, a general inventory comes to prove to us that it was not settled as a public opinion, nor even by the documents of inventories of the Palac^ and of the royal painters, that to Zubaran belonged all the works that the two former writers attributed to him. It is necessary to know these inventories to understand the value of the estimations, as the greater part of the pictures show up feebly, and since said documents had been the source of information for Palomino, and for Ponz, at that time. Even the errors have, there, a logical explanation when we read consecutively the various inventories. Then, in the general inventory of 1789 of the corresponding part of the Buen Retiro which Maella authorized in 1794, the pic- tures of the Labors of Hercules are described more or less as in the list of 1703; but when describing the first of these works, they for- got the name of the artist, and write: “School of Lanfranco.” Indeed, in these inventories they put upon each of these works the price of a thousand reales, and formerly in the list of 1703, the price was 1500 reales, — and in the same inventory the Surrender of Breda by Velazquez was appraised at 30,000 reales. A very few years pass, and Cean Bermudez in his well known dictionary (1800) quoting Ponz, as he almost always does, but here exceptionally rectifying him in some places, he mentions among the pictures of the Buen Retiro, the Labors of Hercules as works of Zubaran in four canvases, forgetting the six remaining ones, 144 A few years afterward, the Museum of the Prado was formed, and there soon appeared the ten canvases always classified as by Zurbaran.®® I do not know a critic who would attribute to him the entire collection. They are absolutely unworthy of being called by the name of a great painter, those which represent Calpe and Abyla, the Giants, the Numean Lion, and that of Anteus; that of the Boar is a little better, and also that of the Bull of Crete and the River Alpheus. There may be three which deserve to be classed as the work of a great artist, imitator of Velazquez, the Velazquez of the Coat of Joseph and the Forge, painted in 1630. The Fight with Cerberus, the Shirt of Nessus, and above all the canvas of the Hydra of Lerna continually show that the artist was an excellent imitator of Velaz- quez’s nudes. I can affirm this because in the preparation for the Zurbaran Exposition of 1905, they were seen more clearly and closer. But if there be one, or three, or four, or five, or ten of the paintings which might be attributed to Zurbaran, the problem is the same: they disconcert and transform the logical lines of the historical progress of his art, which was already personal and un- mistakable in 1638 — and nothing personal, but the very opposite, is in the Hercules, if they are his, painted between these two dates. The solution of this problem which my correction of dates sug- gests, will only be found, I think, in documental sources; when these will be discovered, I know not, nor where; perhaps in the Archives of the Palace, in those of Simancas, or in the Historical Archives, or perhaps in the papers of the Council of Aragon, or in those of Portugal. When the long hidden history of the splen- did works of the Retiro will be brought to light, then we shall be able to clear up the biography of Zurbaran, as well as that of Velazquez. Nevertheless, so far I cannot do less than confess to a new sur- prise: that among the eight or ten painters who together and in competition painted the canvases of the Salon of the Kings, we have not even heard the name of the Spanicized Italian, Angelo Nardi,®® who was at the time one of the four painters to the King. May not all, or a good part of the Labors of Hercules be his, those which in 1794 were attributed to the School of Lanfranco? 145 To compensate for the unhappy negative effect of this — not the less interesting for that — I renewed my search and shall give you proof of the existence of two pictures of the first importance by Zurbaran heretofore I believe wholly undiscovered. One was dis- covered by Sr. Gomez Moreno and, authorized by him, I communi- cate it to you. It is a St. Bonaventura at prayer, figure of natural size, a real master-piece which is kept unknown in a convent of Franciscan nuns in Corunna. The authority of the eminent arche- ologist saves us from all doubt about the canvas, which moreover shows great beauty. The other,^*^ I have had the good fortune to see myself in the private apartments of the aged mother of the widow Iturbe, on the occasion of my study of the Spanish primitives which she had just bought. . . . Natural size, three quarter bust, rich in color, it is a Saviour, with a hand placed upon a beautiful blue sphere of the world, a painting just as delightful as the best at Jerez or Guadalupe. Thinking of the publication of your book, I secured permission to take a photograph of it, and you should in- clude it among the engravings, first of all for its beauty, which would be a sufficient reason, but also because it is signed and dated, the date being 1638. It is one of the most glorious of the artistic labors of Zurbaran, and moreover, is one of the paintings that simplify the problem of this letter, leaving to the readers, together with the graphic information of the book, the elements by which they may form an opinion, just as they please, whether Zurbaran was or was not the author of the Labors of Hercules of the Palace of Buen Retiro. Elias Tormo. 146 APPENDIX NO. 4 A Letter from Zurbaran to the Marquis de las Torres This letter is an answer to the Marquis de las Torres at the time when the workmen asked for by him were leaving Seville — it is preserved in the documents of accounts, “The Pardo and its De- pendencies,” in the Archives of the Palace. Written by Zurbaran in a good hand, it shows that the artist was trying to please his patron of the Court with whom he was on cordial terms. The letter is as follows: “As I wish to comply with the orders of your Highness, and serve you in some way and please the Count of Salvatierra who so carefully fulfils his obligations, I say that only eleven workmen are going, for one of them was taken ill at the time of leaving and I could not send another at once, because all were on horseback. Of the money I received which was 1900 silver ducats which reduced to bullion at 40% made 2660 ducats, I gave to the owners of the mules 1400 reales of bullion, and between the gilders I divided the rest, which amounted to 114 each, which makes 1260 ducats, which united with the 1400 to the mule owners makes a total of 2660 ducats. The workmen who go are (so that you may recog- nize them) the following: Pedro Montero, Geronimo de la Fu- ente, Francisco Baretto, Francisco Fonseca, Francisco Leal, Juan Hamariz, Sebastian Rivas, Valeriano, Pedro de Armijo, Manuel de Aguilar y Geronimo Sanchez. “I shall esteem it a favor if your Highness would kindly give me orders about other things that shall please you, to which I will attend with the same obligation I owe to you. — May God give to your Highness long years as we, your servants, pray. Francisco de Zurbaran. Seville 8th of October, 1639. P. S. The said workmen are poor and it will be necessary as 147 soon as they arrive, that your Highness should help them imme- diately, because the money will be sufficient only for the journey.” This from Sr. Sentenach: According to D. Pedro de Mardrazo, in his work already noticed, page 646, the workmen “went from Seville to the Court on the 8th of October 1639, and were nine days in going to that destination and eleven in returning home, after completing their work.” 148 APPENDIX NO. 5 Valuation given in 1654 by Francisco de Zurbaran and Francisco de Rici, of the pictures mentioned in the last WILL OF Francisco Jacinto de Salcedo That indefatigable man of research, member of the Spanish Academy, D. Cristobal Perez Pastor, left among his papers an in- teresting note which deciphered by D. Francisco Rodriguez Marin gave as a result the discovery of a script in the Archives of the Registry of Madrid : BILL OF SALE AND ACCOUNT GIVEN BY D. NICOLAS MARTINEZ SERRANO — Year 1664 — Pages 171 to 174. Will of Francisco Jacinto de Salcedo, his wife being Jeronima de Neira and Francisco Frechel being second husband of Jeronima. VALUATION OF PAINTINGS In the city of Madrid, on the 28th day of February 1664, I in person and undersigned, in compliance with the deed of the 16th day of January of the present year, made known to Francisco de Zurbaran and D. Francisco de Rici, master painters that they had been named by the parties and, accepted said nominations in my presence, and that of the secretary, they made the following val- uation : Paintings of the dining-room — First were estimated two landscapes, with black frame, yard and a quarter broad and a yard high, each one at 40 reales 80 A picture of the Disenchantment and final Judgment, with black frame, two yards high and a yard and a third broad, at three hundred reales 300 Another, the Birth of Our Saviour, with black frame and of the same size, at hundred and thirty reales 130 149 Another, the Conception of Our Lady, of the same measure with black frame, at hundred and ten reales no The picture of a Battle, with black frame at 200 Another, a flower-pot with flowers, with black frame at hundred fifty reales 150 Another of two Landscapes above windows, with black frame at forty reales 40 Another of Magdalen, two yards broad and one yard high, with black frame, at forty reales 40 Pictures of the Oratory — Painting of St. Peter, with black and gold frame 6 A picture of Queen Isabel, of a square yard, at eight reales 8 A print upon paper of Our Lady of the Sanctuary at eight reales 8 Further they valued a picture of St. Francis of Assisi, with black frame, of a yard and a half square, at five hundred and fifty reales 550 Another of Our Lady, the Infant Jesus and St. Joseph, of the same measure, with black frame, at six hundred and sixty reales 660 Another of St. Francis de Paula, of the same size and black frame, at five hundred reales 500 A small picture of the Salutation with little angels at hun- dred reales loo A Christ Crucified, with black frame, at twenty reales. ... 20 Another of Our Saviour in Resurrection appearing to Mag- dalene, a yard and a half square, at eight hundred reales. . . . 800 Another, ot St. Jerome, of same size, at three hundred reales 300 Another of St. John, of same size, at ten reales 10 Four Heads of Apostles, with black frames, of half a yard square, at six hundred and twenty-four reales 624 Two little paintings, one with various figures and a new born baby, of a quarter yard square and black frame, and the other a beggar in a cart, of half a yard, and black frame, at ninety-nine reales 99 150 A picture on wood representing the Temptations of St. Anthony, of three quarter yard square and with an ebony frame, at two hundred and forty reales 240 A Christ Crucified, in ivory, with base of ebony and edges of silver, at 4^*^ A picture of the Infant Jesus, with stones inlaid, black frame, at hundred and ten reales 110 Paintings of the Parlor — Two views, one of the Virgin, of a yard and a half wide and a yard high, at three hundred reales, the other one the Stoning of Christ leaving the Tem- ple, of same size, at three hundred and thirty reales 630 The Adoration of the Kings, of three yards wide and two yards and a half high, with black frame at 1500 Four stained glass windows, one in the parlor, two in the alcove and the other one in the dining-room. Two views, one of which is a Child thrown into the sea, and the other some women — story of Moses — of a square yard, with black frame, at five hundred 500 The miracle of Moses striking the rock, with black frame, three hundred and thirty-two reales 332 The picture of Job, of a square yard and with black frame, at hundred reales loo The Death of Abel, of a yard and a half high, and a yard and a sixth wide, with black frame, at four hundred and forty reales 440 The serpents of Moses, one yard square, with black frame, at three hundred reales. 300 Moses, in the field, gathering manna, half size, at hundred and thirty-two reales 132 Four engravings of equal size, of a yard and a third square with black frame, embossed, — one being the Marriage of Cana — the other the Battle of Santiago, and the others figures unknown, at 40 An engraving which represents the Baptism of Christ and the other the Preaching of St. John in the Desert, at thou- sand and six reales 1600 1^1 Two pictures, one of a chocoiate-pot and the other of some stained glass, at two hundred reales 200 An engraving of the Infant Jesus sleeping, of half a yard square, at four hundred reales 400 A canvas representing Jesus Christ dead in the arms of Our Lady, of half a yard square, at hundred and twenty reales. . . 120 A flower-pot with two artichokes, at fifty reals 50 The Destruction of Troy, with black frame, of two yards wide and two and a quarter high, at two hundred and twenty reales 220 A Child Jesus, with black frame, of about a yard, at hun- dred and fifty reales 150 Our Lady of the Conception — copy of the one owned by the Admiral of three yards high, with black frame, at six hun- dred reales 600 Pictures in the Room where Juan de Salcedo died — Ten small pictures of the Kings, of three quarter yard square, with black and gold frame 120 Another of Magdalen, of a yard and a third, with black frame, at sixty six reales 66 Another of Our Lady of the Miracles, at sixteen 16 Another of Our Lady, the Infant Jesus and St. John, at thirty-three reales 33 Our Saviour Crucified, of a yard square, at twelve reales. . . 12 St. Inez, of same size, at six reales 6 St. Theresa, same size, at six reales 6 A head of a water carrier, at ten reales 10 A small picture of the King our Lord, at eighteen reales. . . 18 Our Lady of the Solitude, at twenty-four reales 24 St. Anthony and the Infant Jesus, at thirty reales 30 St. Jerome, of a yard and a quarter high and a quarter of a yard wide, at fifty reales 50 Six small and old landscapes, all at three 3 Twelve views of Seville, old, at twelve reales 12 These pictures were appraised in the mentioned sums, 152 and the undersigned swore by Our Lord and the sign of the Cross that the valuations were done faithfully, ac- cording to their knowledge and judgment, without any damage to anyone of the parties; and they all signed in true faith — Francisco de Zurbaran — ^Francisco de Rici — Before me — Manuel Gutierrez Martel. 153 NOTES ^ This name is written with an accent on the last syllable by the critics of Art ; but in the regions whence it proceeds, Zurbaran is without any accent. ^ The exposition of Zurbaran’s paintings in one of the Salons of the Prado Museum, 1905. ^ It is proved that he lived in 1664, as further on we shall see. * Appendix No. l. ® In a document relative to the subject discussed by Alonso Cano, in regard to the two names with which Zurbaran signed his pictures, Sr. Jose Gestoso y Perez says that the name of Zurbaran’s mother was Marquez and not Salazar, in a study of the Dictionary of the Arts which flourished in Seville, from the thirteenth to the seventeenth centuries, Seville, 1900. Printed by La Andalucia Moderna, book 2, page 126; and this same peculiarity is found in the document in which Velasquez is named Knight of St. James. ® Eduardo Mier. Art in Spam. Fortnightly review of the art of Draw- ing, Madrid, 1863. Printed by M. Galiano, Vol. II, page 181. ^ Sr. Tormo y Monzo has studied Zurbaran for a long time and has writ- ten about him the following articles and pamphlets which I recommend to my readers; “How Zurbaran Began to Be Noted and how Other Artists of Hts 7 ime Became Known to the Public.” La Epoca, March 31, 1905. “Zurbaran in the Wake of Velasquez, April 14. The Progress of the Intensely Personal Technique of Zurbaran, May 12. The Daring Color of Zurbaran, Repeated Afterwards by Velasquez, May 27. Zurbaran at Court: the Last Years of His Artistic Work, June 6. The Monastery of Guadalupe and Zurbaran s Paintings, Madrid, Blass & Co., 1905. A Painting by Zurbaran, the Christ of Motrico, No. 4 of the review Cultura Espanola, November 1905. The Dispersal of Zurbaran s Paintings in Cadiz, same review, February 13, 1909. Mentioning also the paintings of the Labors of Hercules of Zurbaran, in the article entitled : Velasquez and the Salon of the Kings at Buen Retiro, the Poet of the Palace and of the Painter. Bulletin of the Spanish Society of Research, No. 8 and 2 of the year 1911. ^History of Spanish Literature from Its Origin to the Year igoo. Trans- lated from English by Adolfo Bonilla y San Martin, with a preliminary study of Marcelino Menendez y Pelayo, Madrid. Printed by La Espana Moderna, Idamor Moreno, printer, without date, page 374. ® Parnassus of Spanish Painting, enriched with the Lives of the eminent Painters and Sculptors of Spain who have embellished the Nation with their heroic Works and illustrious Figures, and have come to these Provinces to contribute to their Fame with their glorious Art. Classified according to the 154 period in which each of them flourished to immortalize the memory which those sublime and illustrious geniuses have won from posterity, by D. An- tonio Palomino de Castro y Velasco, Madrid, 1797. Typ. Sanchez, Vol. Ill, chapter VIII, page 52S. Dictionary of the Most Illustrious Masters of Fine Arts in Spain, com- posed by D. Juan Augustin Cean Bermudez, and published by the Royal Academy of San Fernando, Madrid. Print, by the Widow Ibarra, 1800. Vol. 6, page 45. D. Jose Gestoso y Perez, work mentioned, Vol. II, page 126. See Ap- pendix No. 2. ''■^Paintings of Seville — Study of the Sevillian School of Art from Its Ori- gin to the Present Day. Seville, 1885. Typ. Girones y Orduna, page 65. ^^Descriptive and Historical Catalogue of the Prado Museum of Madrid, by D. Pedro de Madrazo. Part I. Italian and Spanish Schools. Madrid, 1872. Print. Rivadeneyra, page 645. Quoted in the Catalogue of Paintings and Sculptures of the Provincial Museum of Seville. Edition E. Rasco, 1897. Pages 57, 58. Sr. Beas does not declare this with complete certainty, as a relatively large period elapsed between the two works (1625-1631) and in it Zurbaran executed many other works. Illustrated Catalogue of the Exposition of Zurbaran' s Paintings. Ma- drid, phototype and printing by J. Lacoste, 1905. Pages 12 and 13. D. Jose y Perez, work mentioned, Vol. II, page 124, i. e. Dictionary of Sevillia. Art. Work mentioned, page 12. In his article on Velasquez, the Salon of the Kings at Buen Retiro and the Poet of the Palace and of the Painter, from which, granting my request, he had the goodness to transcribe all the information concerning the Labors of Hercules by the great Extremadurian, and which I publish in the interest- ing letter given in Appendix No. 4 of this book. Number corresponding to the third quarterly of 1909, in an article en- titled : Francisco de Zurbaran, Painter to the King. See appendix No. 4. Library of Fine Arts. History of Spanish Painting; Madrid, La Espaha Editorial, without date. Printed by the successor of G. Cruzado, Felipe Marques, page 1 53. Corresponding to the l8th of April, 1905, Madrid. Testimony to the Titles of Diego de Silva Velasquez, Gentleman in W aiting to the Palace, and Gentleman of the Bedchamber to His Majesty', Postulate for the Vesture of the Order of Santiago. Found by D. G. Cru- zada Villamil in the Archives of the Order of St. James, which were brought from Ucles to Madrid, while D. Luis Eguilaz was director of the Historical and National Archives, and they were published in the “Re vista de Europe” Vol. II (of the year 1874), pages 39, 80, 105, 275 and 402. The part con- cerning the declaration made by Zurbaran is on pages 106, 107. The only copy that remains today is owned by D. Jacinto Octovio Picon. It is not known where the Academy of St. Fernando’s copy now is. 155 Appendix No. 5. In his quoted Essay upon a Dictionary of Arts, etc., Vol. II, page 126, he reproduces it and says : “On the 28th of May, Dona Beatriz de Morales, wife of Francisco de Zurburan, was buried in the Magdalene church in Se- ville.” Page 102, Vol. II, of the Registry of the Dead, Gomez Aceves. Notes of the parish books. Library of the Society of Economies. D. Jose Gestoso: Essay upon a Dictionary of Arts, etc., Vol. III. Ap- pendix to Vol. I and II (year MCMIX). Print. La Andalucia Moderna. Page 422. These notes are contained in a paper fastened on the back of the picture showing the portrait of a young man, richly dressed, which is pre- served in the office of the Mayor, in the town hall of Seville, and which was one of the canvases given, in October, 1898, by the Infante D. Antonio and his sister the Countess of Paris. We doubt if this is a portrait of the artist painted by himself. Registry of Baptisms of the Sanctuary of said year, page 50. According to this author, pages 47 to 50 of Vol. VI of the mentioned dictionary. Which remain in their former place. Sr. Tormo y Monzo gives a detailed description of the paintings of Zur- baran which are out of Spain, and makes interesting remarks about them in his letter, published in appendix No. 3 of this book. I omit the description made of this picture in the catalogue, because I have already written that of Sr. Sentenach and further on will quote that made by Mr. Lefort. Of the spectator. At the same time as those of different other artists ; this discovery has been described by Sr. Gestoso in a pamphlet of 28 pages, entitled: “A list of pictures in the cathedral of Seville.” Seville. In the office of El Correo de Andalucia, 1909. In the Carthusian Monastery of Jerez. The best of them passed on, at the death of the Dukes, to their daugh- ter, the Countess de Paris. See the review Cultura Espahola, Vol. IV^ pages 1, 137 to 150, of the article by D. Elias Tormo y Monzo on “A Van Dyck, a Zurbaran, a Villa- cis?” and a canvas of the Florentine sixteenth century, unknown and stored up in Spain. 39 Work mentioned. Vol. Ill, Chapter VIII, page 527, i. e.. The Spanish Parnassas, etc., by Palomino. Work mentioned. Vol. VI, page 44. Cean Bermudez’s Historic Dic- tionary. The great Artists, Riberta and Zurbaran. Work mentioned, page 645. Madrazo’s Hist. Catalogue of Museum of Prado. Work mentioned, page 6. That which is preserved in the Prado Museum. *■’ History of Painters of All Schools (Spanish School) by Mr. Charles Blanc, W. Biiger, Paul Mautz, L. \’iardot and Paul Lefort. Paris 1849. V, Jules Renouard, Director, G. Ethion Peron, page i, of the chapter on Zurbaran. ^'’’Illustrated Popular Encyclopedia of Sciences and Arts. Formed by Frederico Gillman, Madrid, 1885. Print. Enrique Rubihos. Vol. IV. Spanish Painting. The Great Masters, etc., page 788. Work quoted, page 63. Fine Arts. History of Architecture, Sculpture and Painting. Barce- lona, 1875. Print. Jepus, page 99. Opinions which the review of Madrid “Nuestro Tiempo” reproduced in its first year. No. 2, February 1901. Vol. I, pages 248 to 250. Work quoted. Vol. II, page 181. “Art in Spain” by E. Wier. Work quoted, page 145. History of the Artists of All Countries, P. Lefort, etc. r>2 “Which according to the manuscript of Loaysa (as Cean Bermudez says in his mentioned Dictionary, Vol. VI, page 40) is the portrait of D. Augustin Abreu de Escobar, who was prebendary of this holy church.” It was not one, but seven years before, since the Apotheosis is signed 1631. Francisco Navarro Ledesma? The Monastery of Guadalupe and Zurbaran s Paintings. Chapter of the Sacristy and the Paintings by Zurbaran, pages 27 to 35. 1 his refers to the series of photographic reproductions of Guadalupe, done by Sr. Moreno. Numbers 11 and 20 correspond to the total photog- raphies of the sacristy and of the chapel of St. Jerome. Measuring in height 12 feet 2 inches and in width 9 feet 2 inches. In his mentioned work: The Guadalupe Monastery and Zurbaran’ s Paintings. Vol. IX, 1905, pages 198 to 20J. “Barcelona Review of Archt. Engi-^ neering.” It was not Roelas but Pedro Diaz de Villanueva, but the case is the same. The St. Francis owned by Beruete and the Christ replacing his garments, of the parochial church of Jadraque ( 1661). ®- No one who examines certain of his paintings could think thus. (Note of the author). In the mentioned volume I, pages 98-99 of the Bulletin of the Provincial Commission of Historical and Artistic Monuments of Cadiz, 1908. Sr. Alcantara was still believing that he was apprenticed to Roelas. ®® On pages 31 to 33. Work mentioned, page 18. “"Referring to his article: The Dispersal of Zurbaran s Paintings in' Cadiz, quoted in the note on page 31. The Labors of Hercules — Ten canvases were in the Museum and no more than ten have been mentioned in the inventories. The number of the great Battle compositions was twelve. As there were five windows at each side of the Salon, and five situated above them at a certain distance, my opinion is that the Labors were placed between, that is having one window above and one below; and that the Battle pictures were put between two Labors and between two windows, besides those which occupied the corners. Thus we can explain the number which is attached to each one of those canvases. The catalogue of the Museum and the inventories do not agree upon two of the subjects (although they do on the eight remaining ones). They mention the Fight of Hercules with Atlantis, the Stables of King Augias, the Separation of the river Calpe and Abyla and the Turning back of the river Alpheus. I cannot find an explanation of this disagreement. (Note of Sr. Tormo.) Although Nardi has been for about thirty years Painter to the King, the art critics do not mention any of his works in the palaces or royal habita- tions. (Note of Sr. Tormo.) Upon the authority of Sr. Gomez Moreno, we may include within the authentical works of Zurbaran a magnificent St. Cecilia, of which he secured me photographs and which belongs to some private collection in Granada. As he was preparing some time ago a study of the works of Spanish Art preserved in foreign countries, he discovered an undisputable work of Zurbaran, a picture of the Holy Family, signed 1659 — perhaps 1639 — preserved in the Buda-Pest Museum bought in 1905, and which is, in the opinion of all, the worthy companion of the wonderful Immaculate also kept there, which is signed by the artist 1661, and which certainly was not acquired by the Museum in the Estarhazy House, in the purchase of the famous Viennese collection, but rather received, later on, through a donation of Prince Nicholas. I cannot guarantee the authenticity of the following pictures which I have noted in the report of my excursion: The Holy Family (No. 245) in the Stuttgart Museum; a St. Francis of Assisi (No. 1291) in the Munich Museum ; a Child Mary at Prayer, in the Petrograd Museum ; the St. Cath- erine of Sienna, at Amiens; the Virgin, at Valenciennes; a Monk, in the Caen Museum; St. Francis of Assisi, in the Museum of Chartres; the Martyrdom of St. John the Evangelist, in the Quimper Museum; the por- trait of a Priest with the Mitre, and the Inebriation of Noah, at Pau ; Solomon surrounded by his Wives, in the Museum of Tarbes ; St. Francis of Assisi, in the Perpignan Museum; another St. Francis in Lyons; St. Agueda and an Archangel Gabriel, in Montpellier; St. Barbara, in the Avignon Museum; another St. Francis at Marseilles, another at Besangon. Nothing is surprising in the fact that so many provincial museums of France should possess works of the style of Zurbaran, since we know the depredations which the generals of Napoleon committed in their wars, and also the little financial value which was, even until the end of the XIX century, attributed to such canvases. Without speaking of the paintings preserved in the Louvre and the Na- tional Gallery in London, I will mention here St. Andrew (No. 15 of the Duke of Sutherland’s Gallery, in Strafford House, and in the same (No. 73) the Virgin Child and St. John Child, signed 1653; Annunciation in Dudley House, a remarkable painting which was perhaps as another famous work by Murillo, in the Northbrook collection, or the Stirling in Keir. (Note of Sr. Tormo.) if8 THREE HUNDRED AND TEN COPIES OF THIS BOOK PRINTED DURING THE MONTH OF JANUARY MCMXVIII GETTY CENTER LIBRARY MAIN NO 813 Z8 C23 BKS c. 1 Cascales y Muenoz. J Francisco de Zurbaran; his epoch, his 11