whole together, which is often more captivating than mere regular beauty.

Rubens appears to have had that confidence in himself, which it is necessary for every artist to assume, when he has finished his studies, and may venture in some measure to throw aside the fetters of authority; to consider the rules as subject to his control, and not himself subject to the rules; to risk and to dare extraordinary attempts without a guide, abandoning himself to his own sensations, and depending upon them. To this confidence must be imputed that originality of manner by which he may be truly said to have extended the limits of the art. After Rubens had made up his manner, he never looked out of himself for assistance: there is consequently very little in his works, that appears to be taken from other masters. If he has borrowed any thing, he has had the address to change and adapt it so well to the rest of his work, that the theft is not discoverable.

Beside the excellency of Rubens in these general powers, he possessed the true art of imitating. He saw the objects of nature with a painter's eye; he saw at once the predominant feature by which every object is known and distinguished: and as soon as seen, it was executed with a facility that is astonishing; and, let me add, this facility is to a painter, when he closely examines a picture, a source of great pleasure. How far this excellence may be perceived or felt by those who are not painters, I know not: to them certainly it is not enough that objects be truly represented; they must likewise be represented with grace; which means here, that the work is done with facility and without effort. Rubens was, perhaps, the greatest master in the mechanical part of the art, the best workman with his tools, that ever exercised a pencil.

This part of the art, though it does not hold a rank with the powers of invention, of giving character and expression, has yet in it what may be called genius. It is certainly something that cannot be taught by words, though it may be learned by a frequent examination of those pictures which possess this excellence. It is felt by very few Painters; and it is as rare at this time among the living Painters as any of the higher excellencies of the art.

This power, which Rubens possessed in the highest degree, enabled him to represent whatever he undertook better than any other painter. His animals, particularly lions and horses, are so admirable, that it may be said they were never properly represented but by him. His portraits rank with the best works of the Painters who have made that branch of the art the sole business of their lives; and of those he has left a great variety of specimens. The same may be said of his landscapes: and though Claude Lorrain finished more minutely, as becomes a Professor in any particular branch, yet there is such an airiness and facility in the landscapes of Rubens, that a painter would as soon wish to be the author of them, as those of Claude, or any other artist whatever.

The pictures of Rubens have this effect on the spectator, that he feels himself in no wise disposed to pick out and dwell on his defects. The criticisms which are made on him are indeed often unreasonable. His style ought no more to be blamed for not having the sublimity of Michel Angelo, than Ovid should be censured because he is not like Virgil.

However, it must be acknowledged that he wanted many excellencies, which would have perfectly united with his style. Among those we may reckon beauty in his female characters: sometimes indeed they make

approaches to it; they are healthy and comely women, but seldom, if ever, possess any degree of excellence : the same may be said of his young men and children : his old men have that sort of dignity which a bushy beard will confer; but he never possessed a poetical conception of character. In his representations of the highest characters in the christian or the fabulous world, instead of something above humanity, which might fill the idea which is conceived of such beings, the spectator finds little more than mere mortals, such as he meets with every day.

The incorrectness of Rubens in regard to his outline oftener proceeds from haste and carelessness, than from inability: there are in his great works, to which he seems to have paid more particular attention, naked figures as eminent for their drawing as for their colouring. He appears to have entertained a great abhorrence of the meagre dry manner of his predecessors, the old German and Flemish Painters: to avoid which, he kept his outline large and flowing: this, carried to an extreme, produced that heaviness which is so frequently found in his figures. Another defect of this great painter is his inattention to the foldings of his drapery, especially that of his women: it is scarcely ever cast with any choice or skill,

Carlo Maratti and Rubens are in this respect in opposite extremes; one discovers too much art in the disposition of drapery, and the other too little. Rubens's drapery, besides, is not properly historical; the quality of the stuff of which it is composed, is too accurately distinguished; resembling the manner of Paul Veronese. This drapery is less offensive in Rubens than it would be in many other painters, as it partly contributes to that richness which is the peculiar cha

racter of his style, which we do not pretend to set forth as of the most simple and sublime kind.

The difference of the manner of Rubens, from that of any other painter before him, is in nothing more distinguishable, than in his colouring, which is totally different from that of Titian, Correggio, or any of the great colourists. The effect of his pictures may be not improperly compared to clusters of flowers; all his colours appear as clear and as beautiful; at the same time he has avoided that tawdry effect which one would expect such gay colours to produce: in this respect resembling Barocci more than any other painter. What was said of an ancient painter, may be applied to those two artists,—that their figures look as if they fed upon roses.

It would be a curious and a profitable study for a painter to examine the difference and the cause of that difference of effect in the works of Correggio and Rubens, both excellent in different ways. The preference probably would be given according to the different habits of the connoisseur; those who had received their first impressions from the works of Rubens would censure Correggio as heavy; and the admirers of Correggio would say Rubens wanted solidity of effect. There is lightness, airiness, and facility in Rubens, his advocates will urge, and comparatively a laborious heaviness in Correggio: whose admirers will complain of Rubens's manner being careless and unfinished, whilst the works of Correggio are wrought to the highest degree of delicacy and what may be advanced in favour of Correggio's breadth of light will by his censurers be called affected and pedantic. It must be observed that we are speaking solely of the manner, the effect of the picture; and we may conclude, according to the custom in pastoral

236 A JOURNEY TO FLANDERS AND HOLLAND.

poetry, by bestowing on each of these illustrious painters a garland, without attributing superiority to either.

To conclude: I will venture to repeat in favour of Rubens, what I have before said in regard to the Dutch School,-that those who cannot see the extraordinary merit of this great painter, either have a narrow conception of the variety of art, or are led away by the affectation of approving nothing but what comes from the Italian school.