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 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.

NOTE XXVII. VERSE 223. Judgement will so the several groups unile, 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 of St.

Paul; and Parmigianino often showed only the head and shoulders above the base of the picture. However, the more modern Painters, notwithstanding such authorities, cannot be accused of having fallen into this error.

But, suppose we carry the reformation still farther, and that we do not suffer the sides of the picture to cut off any part of the figures, the composition would certainly be more round and compact within itself. All subjects, it is true, will not admit of this: however we may safely recommend it, unless the circumstances are very particular, and such as are certain to produce some striking effect by the breach of so just a rule.

NOTE XXVIII. VERSE 243.

R.

Nor yet to Nature such strict homage pay,
As not to quit when Genius leads the way;
Nor yet, though Genius all his succour sends,
Her mimick powers though ready Memory lends,
Presume from Nature wholly to depart;
For Nature is the Arbitress of Art.

Nothing in the art requires more attention and judgement, or more of that power of dis

crimination which may not improperly be called Genius, than the steering between general ideas and individuality: for though the body of the work must certainly be composed by the first, in order to communicate a character of grandeur to the whole, yet a dash of the latter is sometimes necessary to give an interest. An individual model, copied with scrupulous exactness, makes a mean style, like the Dutch: and the neglect of an actual model, and the method of proceeding solely from idea, has a tendency to make the Painter degenerate into a mannerist.

In order to keep the mind in repair, it is necessary to replace and refreshen those impressions of nature which are continually wearing away.

A circumstance mentioned in the life of Guido is well worth the attention of Artists. He was asked from whence he borrowed his idea of beauty, which is acknowledged superior to that of any other Painter; he said he would show all the models he used, and ordered a common porter to sit before him, from whom he drew a beautiful countenance.

This was undoubtedly an exaggeration of his conduct; but his intention was to show that he thought it necessary for painters to have some model of nature before them, however they might deviate from it, and correct it from the idea of perfect beauty which they have formed in their minds.

In Painting it is far better to have a model even to depart from, than to have nothing fixed and certain to determine the idea. When there is a model, there is something to proceed on, something to be corrected; so that even supposing no part is adopted, the model has still been not without use.

Such habits of intercourse with nature will at least create that variety which will prevent any one from prognosticating, on being informed of the subject, what manner of work the painter is likely to produce; which is the most disagreeable character an Artist can have.

R.