and not imitate her at second-hand, as many French Painters do, who appear to take their ideas, not only of grace and dignity, but of emotion and passion, from their theatrical heroes; which is imitating an imitation, and often a false or exaggerated imitation.

NOTE XXIV. VERSE 181.

Fair in the front, in all the blaze of light, The Hero of thy piece should meet the sight.

R.

There can be no doubt that this figure should be laboured in proportion as it claims the attention of the spectator, but there is no necessity that it should be placed in the middle of the picture, or receive the principal light; this conduct, if always observed, would reduce the art of Composition to too great a uniformity.

It is sufficient, if the place he holds, or the attention of the other figures to him, denote him the hero of the piece.

The principal figure may be too principal. The harmony of composition requires that the inferior characters bear some proportion, according to their several stations, to the

This rule, as enforced by Fresnoy, may be said more properly to belong to the art in its infant state, or to be directed to young students as a first precept; but the more advanced know that such an apparent artificial disposition would be in reality for that reason inartificial.

NOTE XXV. VERSE 193.

In every figured group the judging eye
Demands the charms of contrariety.

R.

The rule of contrasting figures, or groups, is not only universally known and adopted, but it is frequently carried to such excess, that our Author might, perhaps, with more propriety have fixed his caution on the other side, and recommended to the artist, not to destroy the grandeur and simplicity of his design by violent and affected con

trasts.

The artless uniformity of the compositions of the old Gothick Painters is far preferable to this false refinement, this ostentatious display of academick art. A greater degree of contrast and variety may be allowed in the picturesque or ornamental style; but we must not forget that they are

the natural enemies of simplicity, and consequently of the grand style, and destroy that solemn majesty, that soft repose, which is produced in a great measure by regularity and uniformity.

An instance occurs to me where those two qualities are separately exhibited by two great Painters, Rubens and Titian. The picture of Rubens is in the church of St. Augustine at Antwerp; the subject (if that may be called a subject where no story is represented) is the Virgin and infant Christ, placed high in the picture on a pedestal, with many saints about them, and as many below them, with others on the steps, to serve as a link to unite the upper and lower part of the picture.

The composition of this picture is perfect in its kind; the artist has shown the greatest skill in disposing and contrasting more than twenty figures without confusion and without crowding; the whole appearing as much animated and in motion as it is possible, where nothing is to be done.

The picture of Titian, which we would oppose to this, is in the church of the Fiari at Venice. The peculiar character of this

piece is Grandeur and Simplicity, which proceed in a great measure from the regularity of the composition, two of the principal figures being represented kneeling directly opposite to each other, and nearly in the same attitude; this is what few Painters would have had the courage to venture: Rubens would certainly have rejected so unpicturesque a mode of composition, had it occurred to him.

Both those pictures are equally excellent in their kind, and may be said to characterise their respective authors. There is a bustle and animation in the work of Rubens; a quiet, solemn majesty in that of Titian. The excellence of Rubens is the picturesque effect which he produces. The superior merit of Titian is in the appearance of being above seeking after any such artificial excellence. *

R.

* See the JOURNEY TO FLANDERS AND HOLLAND, Vol. II. p. 310, where the subject of this note is more fully treated. The fair transcript of that Journey having been written about the same time that these notes were composed, our author took from thence the illustration which he has made use of here. E. M.

NOTE XXVI. VERSE 217.

we still should lose

That solemn majesty, that soft repose,
Dear to the curious eye, and only found
Where few fair objects fill an ample ground.

It is said to have been Annibal Caracci's opinion, that a perfect perfect composition ought not to consist of more than twelve figures, which he thought enough to people three groups, and that more would destroy that majesty and repose so necessary to the grand style of Painting.

R.

Judgement will so the several groups unite, That one compacted whole shall meet the sight. Nothing so much breaks in upon, and destroys this compactness, as that mode of composition which cuts in the middle the figures on the foreground, though it was frequently the practice of the greatest Painters, even of the best age: Michael Angelo has it in the crucifixion of St. Peter; Raffaelle in the Carton of the preaching