WHEN we ascend the broad stairway of the fine old Liechtenstein palace in Vienna, leading to the salons where the paintings are hung, we note a number of large, decorative canvases by late Italian artists and a fine Flemish tapestry which decorate the walls of the entrance halls.
A Madonna seated on the rocks, between St. Joseph and St. Jerome, with angels above playing on musical instruments, is by Giovenone Vercelli. Sebastiano Ricci, a history and portrait painter of the beginning of the 18th century, was employed by the then King of Rome to decorate the sum-mer palace at Schönbrunn, near Vienna, at which time he also made a mythological composition for the Liechtenstein palace, then being built. Another Italian artist of that time, the Bolognese Antonio Franceschini, also has a mythological scene.
Of greater interest is a landscape by Jacques d’Artois, a very prolific painter of Flanders, and a friend of van Dyck and of the younger Teniers, who sometimes introduced figures into his landscapes. This picture is painted with great freedom and has fine colouring. The trees are covered with moss and climbing plants, a conceit much favoured by this artist.
The arazzo, referred to, is one of the series of tapestries made after, the designs by Rubens to illustrate the story of the Roman Consul Decius Mus. It shows ” The Consul’s Consecration to Death.” Three other tapestries of this cycle” Decius Mus speaks to his Soldiers,” ” He sends the Lictors Home,” ” He dies in Battle as Victor ” form the chief wall-decoration of the First Salon. We all see the designs for these tapes-tries later on. ,
This First. Salon is devoted principally to plastic art. Antiques, terracottas and majolicas are displayed in rich profusion. We note among these some fine examples of the Della Robbias, a terra-cotta bust by Antonello Rosselino, profile portraits in marble by Mino da Fiesole, and bronze statuettes by Bertoldo di Giovanni.
The Second Salon is hung with examples of Italian art of the 15th and 16th centuries. We are at once attracted to a full-face bust portrait of a Young Man (Plate XXXI), by Sandro Botticelli. It is a characteristic work in which his sense for line is fully demonstrated. This was Sandro’s strongest passion, to translate into a lineal symphony whatever he saw, sacrificing everything; for his work is never pretty, scarcely ever charming, or even attractive, rarely correct in drawing, and seldom satisfactory in colour, which he only used to accentuate the line.
It is curious to learn from Vasari that Botticelli delighted in jesting, and was a confirmed practical joker, for a vein of deep melancholy runs through his works, which is especially noticeable in his Madonnas, where its presence is in harmony with the subject before him. Thus the ” Madonna and Child,” which hangs here, has a sad touch in the woman’s downcast eyes, and even the Child’s look presages sorrow.
Two small pictures, depicting the story of Esther and of Mordecai (on the left wall), thoroughly in Botticelli’s spirit, are ascribed by Berenson and Richter to an unknown artist who is styled by these critics Amico di Sandro. These pictures indicate the close relationship of style, but also some distinctive, individual traits which differentiate between the known and the unknown painter. A tondo, with Mary, the Child, angels, and John, is by the pupil and assistant of Ghirlandajo, Sebastiano Mainardi.
A painting hanging on the rear-wall attracts now our attention. It is the bust portrait of a young woman, backed by the verdure of a heavy pine-tree, with a charming landscape in the distance. Only five known pictures in the world are assigned without dissent to Leonardo da Vinci, and this portrait is one of the paintings attributed to him, around which a controversy of authenticity wages, as around the Belle Ferronière, the Virgin of the Rocks, the Portrait of an Unknown Princess, in the Ambrosian Library, and others. Eminent critics Morelli, Berenson, Frimmel, Lübke, Brun, Mintz, Frizzoni, Armstrong, Woltmann and Woermann, Crowe and Cavalcaselle, Bode, Burckhardt are arrayed as stout partisans on one side or the other concerning this picture.
As to the painting we observe that the general impression favours Leonardo’s own hand. We find here that same enigmatic, almost sphynxlike expression of countenance, although the lips are slightly tighter-drawn than in any other female head that is authenticated. This gives a vaguely drooping cast over the features which, together with a somewhat indefinite gaze of the eyes with their weary eyelids, suggests that the thoughts behind the blond ringlets are not quite happy. This perplexing, puzzling indefiniteness, that hidden psychological mystery, is a strong point in favour of Leonardo’s hand, for almost every one of his female heads is a riddle. It possesses also that celebrated sfumato of Leonardo the blending of colours and dissolving of outlines in a vapourous light.
A number of Florentines must have come directly under Leonardo’s influence, for all Lombardy was overshadowed by him. Thus the potency of his spell is readily perceived in the ” Cross-bearing Christ,” by Andrea Solario, even though he was by training as much a Venetian as a Leonardesque Milanese. He has a porcelain finish, and on occasion too much prettiness, and a too long sustained smile; still he is neither lifeless nor stereo-typed.
We can never separate from the great Milanese his follower, Andrea del Sarto, who as a youth assiduously copied Leonardo’s celebrated cartoons which hung in the Pope’s Hall. The half-figure of ” John the Baptist ” is a fine picture of the young St. John, clad in a skin robe, whose features distinctly recall the beautiful face of Lucrezia del Fede ; and we may well believe that she was her husband’s model here, as her lineaments are in so many of his compositions. This painting may be compared favourably with the famous St. John in the Pitti Palace.
Andrea’s pupil, and afterwards his partner, Franciabigio, has a sombre male portrait of little attractiveness. His ” Madonna with Jesus and John ” is of more interest. His special idiosyncracy, which he derived from Andrea, is the over-loading of his figures with draperies, so that their dramatic action is hampered and tripped up by this voluminous swathing.
The eccentric Pietro di Cosimo, whose works are exceedingly rare, shows in a small panel, with a Madonna resting under a wilted tree, a highly original and somewhat humourously fantastic treat-ment, with fine drawing, and brilliant and trans-parent colouring.
The Florentine school produced an excellent portrait painter also in Angiolo Allori, called il Bronzino, by whom we find, on the wall to the right, a portrait of a young nobleman with a deer. Bronzino’s religious compositions were not so good, and decidedly mannered.
The Roman school is ushered in by an old re-plica of Raphael’s ” St. John,” of the Tribuna in Florence. Raphael’s favourite pupil, Polidoro Caldara da Caravaggio, who was intrusted with painting the friezes in the chambers in the Vatican which Raphael himself was decorating, is seen here in two fine compositions. They represent allegories of music, with Apollo and the Muses. These are noteworthy for elegance of drawing and fine colouring. Also the Bolognese Girolamo Marchesi di Cotignola bears the Raphael signet, as seen in a tondo of the Holy Family.
Almost archaic in his precise hardness was the early Ferrarese Cosimo Tura, the man from whom were to descend both Raphael and Correggio. Yet nothing could be more opposed to Raphael’s noble grace, or the ecstatic sensuousness of Correggio than the style of their forerunner. His figures are of flint, as haughty and immobile as Pharaos, or as convulsed with suppressed energy as the gnarled knots in the olive-tree. Their faces are seldom lit up with tenderness, and their smiles are apt to turn into grimaces, their hands are claw-like. Still we find a sculpturesque solidity in the half-length of St. Clara, in the habit of a Franciscan nun.
Marco Zoppo, who followed his steps, was the last of the old Bolognese painters. His style, how-ever, is considerably toned down from Tura’s grotesques, as is to be noted in his ” Ecce Homo,” a little panel allied to Primitif tradition. Zoppo’s works are very rare.
Benvenuto Tisi de Gara falo was far more prolific. He was a characteristic Ferrarese, especially in colour and in general delicacy of execution. A ” St. Christopher,” in a beautiful landscape, is a representative example.
To Piero della Francesca, the master of Pietro Perugino and Lucca Signorelli, may be ascribed two single figures on gold background, which must have been wings of an altarpiece. They represent saints in the usual habits of a monk and a nun. The technical excellences of good drawing, solid model-ling, and the broad massing of the shadows are characteristic of Piero’s painting. Marco Palmezzano, a pupil of Melozzo da Forli, painted ” Sts. Jerome and Francis,” with all the ruggedness of his style, even to the dry, rocky landscape back-ground.
Francesco Francia may be called the founder of the renascent Bolognese school, for he endeavoured to reconcile the pious traditions of the middle-ages with the advance that had been made in the domain of the purely picturesque. His style is midway between the perfect simplicity and fervour which permeate the works of Giotto’s followers and that pagan elegance which later became the principal means of expression. He combined the technical perfection of a later age with the Christian motives which had so largely influenced the first efforts of Italian art.
An excellent example of his portrait work is found here in the bust portrait of a clean-shaven man, with a red cap. A picturesque landscape with valley, stream and buildings is seen through the window behind him. The portrait is admirable, even impressive in its simplicity and directness, the closeness of the modelling, and its excellent colouring.
The Venetian school commenced its colourful course with the introduction of oil painting into Italy; and that member of the south Italian family of artists, the Antoni, who was called Antonello da Messina, gave the impetus by introducing the new process. The strong influence of van Eyck, with whom he studied, is easily detected in Antonello’s finely pencilled miniature likeness of a man and his wife. It is brightly coloured and delicately drawn.
A pupil of Giovanni Bellini, Giovanni Mansuetti, painted a scene depicting the attack of the heathen at Alexandria upon St. Marc. The details of costume, and the sensuous, pictorial effects for which the school became famous are prominent here; but the colours are somewhat too loud and variegated to give unalloyed pleasure.
A much weaker follower of Bellini was Antonio Tisoio, whose ” Madonna with Saints ” shows an unsuccessful effort to imitate the master.
An early work by Titian, of the time of the Gypsy Madonna, which we saw in the Imperial Museum, is a presentation of the Madonna and Child, with John the Baptist and St. Catharine holding the martyr’s palm. The composition is not cohesive, since the picture is divided. in half by a straight hanging curtain before which the Madonna is seated holding the Child, while John and the charmingly painted Catharine, seen in profile, have the sky for background. The picture glows with colour, and the Madonna group is one of the finest and most naturalistic of Titian’s brush.
Paris Bordone, influenced by Giorgione, is represented by an excellent portrait of a full-bearded man, dressed in a black gown bordered with fur. The flesh colour is rosy, and Bordone’s peculiar small and broken folds of the dress are characteristic.
The provincialism of Bernardino Licinio, called il Pordenone, is seen in the portrait of a man in bright, but somewhat flat colours. This Friuli painter had great talent, which was developed by his later residence in Venice; but he never attained to significant force, and always showed the want of taste, which is the indelible stamp of provincialism.
Another provincial who sought salvation in Venice was Alessandro Bonvicino, called Moretto, of Brescia. Two paintings here indicate his style. The better of the two is the St. Jerome doing penance in the desert, here shown by a highly idealistic landscape, full of poetic conception. The other picture presents the Madonna, offering the Child to be worshipped by the aged St. Jerome. Both paintings have a soft, silvery, shimmering tone, as of a twilight grey, simplicity of expression and largeness of design.
Moretto’s pupil, Giambattista Moroni of Ber-gamo, must be judged as a portrait painter pure and simple, and as such must be ranked among the highest. His bust portrait of an ecclesiastic is of a man interestingly himself.
Giovanni Girolamo Savoldo, called Bresciano, is here better represented than in the Imperial Museum. He kept Giorgione and Titian for his models, both in colour and chiaroscuro. A ” St. George ” is the figure of a young man, seated, leaning against a wall. The light-reflections from his steel harness play harmoniously with the colour scheme of his reddish jacket and olive green mantle. A beautiful landscape in evening glow stretches in the distance.
Above the door hangs a sacred composition by Savoldo. Against a background of heavy, woolly clouds we-see the figure of the God-father, holding the body of the Son over the grave. It is an impressive scene full of grandeur and pathos.
Two later men, really belonging in the next Salon, are Joseph Ribera and Guercino da Cento. Joseph Ribera, called lo Spagnoletto (the little Spaniard), had come from Valencia to Naples, and studied the works of Raphael and Annibale Carracci, and those of Correggio at Parma. When he returned to Naples he became greatly impressed with the exaggerated style of Caravaggio. A ” St. Jerome ” indicates this later influence.
A large painting by Guercino hangs at the window wall in a very bad light. It represents ” The Offering of Isaac,” and is in the manner of the Carracci, rich in colour with strong shadows, which style places the work in his first period, for later he partook more of Guido Renì’s silvery manner. The picture has the characteristic, by which Guercino may be readily recognised, of the figures being lighted from the top.
The Third Salon contains the later Italians. Domenico Tintoretto is signed to the portrait of a man of thirty-four, with his son. Some hold this to be a self-portrait of the artist. It merely recalls the facture of the greater Tintoretto, Jacopo.
Labelled as by Correggio, but already by Waagen ascribed to Giulio Cesare Procaccini, is an excellent painting of Venus, guarding the sleeping Cupid, and attended by two putti. There is an attempt here to combine the vigour of Tintoretto with the grace of Correggio.
One of the most widely known productions of Michelangelo da Caravaggio, the ” Zither Player,” is found here. Its greatest claim for attention is its uniqueness among the works of Caravaggio.
There is charm and grace and harmonious colour in this yellow-gowned girl, seated on a red pillowed settee, before a table on which her violin and music sheets are scattered. It must be an early work for it is painted still with Raphaelesque idealism by a man who was the first to upset the traditions of grace by an almost brutal assault of naturalism. He preached a return to nature, but chose in his later years, with evident gusto, violent episodes of life, murders, quarrels, tavern scenes, adventures of gypsies and vagabonds, types of the street and of the prison. The artificial light seen in his later pictures is the result of his habit of painting in a dark studio, lighted by a trap-door in the roof, by which he obtained striking effects of colour and relief.
A few further works by Guercino lead us to a fellow-follower of the school of the Carracci, Domenichino. His half-figure of a woman is in the academic-eclectic style of the Bolognese school, then prevalent. There are also several works by the prolific decorator-artist Guido Reni. Of Sasso-ferrato, the best painter of the 17th century Roman school, we find a ” Mater Dolorosa.” Its palpable imitation of Raphael’s Florentine manner, over-sweetened to insipidity, points the direction in which even the best was tending.
When Italian art had deeply fallen into decadence, the golden age of art burst forth in the north. Its brilliancy makes the Fourth Salon significant after the mannerism of the late Italians.
The famous Decius Mus cycle, by Rubens, is found here. In 1617 some Genoese merchants ordered from the great Flemish master designs for six scenes from the life of the Roman Consul, to be woven on the Brussels looms. In these scenes Rubens followed the story of the war with the Samnites as told by Livius.
The Consul Decius Mus tells his centurions of a dream which announced to him that the army whose leader should fall in battle would be victorious. The priests discover in their divinations of the entrails of sacrificial animals that Decius should be the victim. With his toga covering his head the Consul consecrates himself to his fate. Before the battle he sends the Lictors home, and they depart with many lamentations. The Consul turns his wavering columns from apparent defeat to victory, but himself sinks, pierced by a lance, from his rearing horse. After a long search among the heaps of slain his body is at last found, and receives mortuary honours on the battlefield. The last scene shows the Second Consul as he holds the funeral oration, and points to the hero’s re-mains on the purple-covered bier.
The whole series is a superb example of the 222 master’s marvellous talent to depict imposing groups, rich garments, noble personages, brilliant lights, and iridescent colours in regal magnificence. Although these designs were admittedly executed by the master’s pupils notably did van Dyck work on several the entire conception and composition are the master’s own invention.
Several large mythological scenes by Frances-chini, and a copy of van Dyck’s ” Venus and Vulcan,” of the Imperial Museum, complete the wall decoration of this magnificent apartment.
The Fifth Salon is almost exclusively devoted to works by Anton van Dyck, with one notable exception a work by one far greater than he.
Van Dyck is represented here in every manner of his productive power, as fully as we saw it in the Imperial Museum. Foremost stands that magnificent ” Portrait of Maria Luisa van Tassis” (Plate XXXII), one of the finest female portraits we have by van Dyck. It was manifestly painted in his Antwerp period, after 1625, when he re-turned from his four years’ stay in Italy, and before he left for England in 1632. This was decidedly the best period in the artist’s career, when he had reaped the full fruits of his study of the Italian masters, and before his excessive facility and his desire to please the Court at Whitehall made him lose the little sincerity he ever possessed.
Maria Luisa van Tassis, the daughter of a patrician Antwerp family, is here clothed in a magnificent costume of black velvet, filmy cambric, and precious point-lace, and carries a huge fan of ostrich feathers. A heavy string of bright pearls circles her throat and hangs over her bosom. All this, and perhaps with still greater art of delicate skill, we see in the later portraits of his English period. But what is lacking there we find here more character in pose and features. Scarcely ever do we see in van Dyck’s portraits such an animated, roguish look in the eyes and playing around the mouth. The golden tone points also to this middle period.
Another portrait has become famous as of Wallenstein when thirty-two years old. He is dressed in a dark velvet costume, with a collaret of delicate lace setting off the strong features. The wrist of the hand rests upon the hilt of a rapier. These hands, like the one visible in the Tassis portrait, are as delicate and beautifully modelled as in the portraits of his English period. The old explanation of the care van Dyck gave to these hands, because they paid the price, may have been only a rival’s quip.
The portraits of a man, and of his wife, have the aristocratic touch of his later years; while the portraits of an elderly couple are of his earlier Rubens period. A young couple, elaborately dressed, before a red drapery, are again of the middle period, as is the knee-piece of a lady. Of the same years came a fine portrait of a cleric, attached to the Tassis family ; and also an old man, seated in an arm-chair.
Van Dyck’s ” St. Jerome,” found here, has variants in Dresden, Stockholm,.. and Madrid. It is not a pleasing composition, although the master’s touch is manifest. A ” Madonna” is an old copy after an original by van Dyck, now in Dulwich House, in England. Another copy, hanging near, is one of those which Rubens made while in Italy. It is after the ” Burial of Christ,” by Caravaggio, which is now in the Vatican. A large ” Lamentation of Christ,” bearing van Dyck’s name, is not by his own hand, but manifestly a studio work by his pupils..
But the painting which imperiously arrests the attention of the spectator, and which proves the greater master, is the magnificent full-length ” Portrait of Willem van Huythuysen,” patrician of Haarlem, by Frans Hals (Plate XXXIII). This proud and lifelike figure stands before us in an embroidered black silk costume. His broad-brimmed hat sets well back from the forehead, leaving the strong features clear and unshaded. His left hand rests on his hip, his right, over which his cloak is thrown, rests on a long sword. The background is a rich red curtain, and in the distance we have a glimpse of the park adjoining the noble mansion. Roses lie scattered on the floor. The face expresses manly vigour and dignified self-consciousness. The whole effect of this wonderful composition with its rich but delicate colouring, light-grey in tone, is thoroughly artistic. There are so many fine points about this portrait that it is hard to leave it. Its tremendous spirit of vivacity, its ease, dash, fluency, bravura, its wonderful freedom and looseness of touch, make it one of the artist’s greatest masterpieces. There is no portrait painter who has surpassed Frans Hals, and only one who has equalled him Velasquez; these two, so different in technique, so alike in masterful dominion over the brush.
The Sixth Salon contains a number of important canvases, from among which we will first mark several fine examples of Rubens. ” The Sons of Rubens ” is a famous double portrait. The arrangement is natural and charmingly easy. Albert, the elder boy, stands with his arm resting around the shoulders of Nicholas, who is interested in playing with a captive goldfinch. The bright costume of the younger boy grey breeches, a blue slashed jacket with yellow satin puffs and ribbons comes out harmoniously against the black costume, slashed with white satin, worn by Albert. It is a group painted with animation and love, entirely by the master’s own hand. A replica or studio copy of this group, with some changes in the colours, is found in the Dresden Museum.
Of next importance is the large mythological composition of the ” Finding of the Boy Erechtonyos by the Daughter of Kekrops,” which may be considered a paraphrase on the biblical story of the finding of Moses by Pharaoh’s daughter. It is a magnificent performance in nude painting and dramatic composing, with that long serpentine sweep and those graceful curves by which the master is known. In the same style is a large sketch, apparently for a ceiling painting, of the ” Entrance of Psyche into Olympus,” and her betrothal to Cupid.
A souvenir of the time Rubens spent in Italy is shown by a variation on Titian’s ” Toilet of Venus,” which is now in the Hermitage. There is magnificent morbidezza in the nude figure seated with her back to the spectator. The face is seen in profile, and reflected full-face in a mirror which a cupid holds up before her. The head of a negro serving woman serves to enhance the superb colour contrasts.
The portrait of Jan Vermoelen, the commander of the Spanish fleet in the Netherlands, is a more sober painting than we are accustomed to find from this master with the exuberant fancy. It is, nevertheless, a piece of solid painting of great breadth of treatment, with dignity of pose, and nervous force. A sketchy head of a middle-aged man is thought to be a likeness of Rombouts, a friend of Rubens, and a painter of the second rank. Of great charm is a little child’s head, such as appear so frequently as cupids in his large compositions. It is manifestly a portrait, probably of one of his own children in infancy.
The story of two sketches for allegorical compositions is of interest. After Rubens had completed the Marie de Medicis cycle which now adorns the Louvre, the Queen commissioned Rubens to paint a like series to glorify her husband, Henry IV. Owing to political changes in France this project never came to fruition; but two designs had already been made, which after some vicissitudes found their way to the Liechtenstein Gallery. In one of these paintings we see Henry IV, surrounded by Minerva and allegorical figures; the other one presents him as the hero of the siege of Courtray. If completed, the cycle would undoubtedly have rivalled the one in the Louvre, judging by the fecundity of imagination and wealth of colour of these two sketches.
One of the best paintings of the later years of Rubens is a superb Ascension of Mary.” The composition is not divided to indicate the separation between earthly and heavenly theme, as we see it so often with Titian and others, but is carried gradually upward from the group of apostles and women, kneeling and standing below, through the etherealised figure of the Virgin, supported and surrounded by lovely putti, on to the lighter glow of nimbus and vanishing angelwings. Some of the figures are incontestably among the best that Rubens has ever created. The figure of the Virgin is admirable in its almost dissolving lightness and purity; the characterisation of the figures below is vivid, expressing anguish at parting, marvelling and amazement, and also gratified confidence in a glorification which was anticipated. The colouring is somewhat more restrained and refined than was his wont for which the subject may well be held accountable.
A further number of portraits by van Dyck are also found in this room. The most pompous is a portrait of the Count Johan van Nassau, but the more attractive is the portrait of the widow of the Stadholder, the Infanta Isabella. Of the many replicas in existence, this one seems to be the best — as it is surely by van Dyck’s own hand.
A number of works by pupils and followers of Rubens fill in the spaces between the masterpieces.
Of greatest interest among these is an example of Jacob Jordaens, the man who came nearest to Rubens in colour and technique, but with a tremendous difference in breeding and spirit. Where Rubens with all his voluptuous abandon is still the aristocrat at heart, Jordaens always shows a lower taste, a coarser spirit. The work before us, ” The Glutton” (Plate XXXIV), is most characteristic.
The greatest paintings in this Salon are five portraits by Rembrandt. The superb technique of the master in one canvas his luminous thinness, in others where the loaded brush is used with extraordinary vigour and bravura makes these productions stand decisively apart from the common stream of art. His individuality is so imperious, self-sufficing and all-transforming that even the masterworks of other men must suffer momentary eclipse before this artistic Prometheus who stole the celestial fire.
The ” Self-portrait with the Feather Bonnet” is one of the famous works of his first period, painted in 1635. The frank and generous execution, the soft, warm light, the sober colour, the transparent shadows, are all in exquisite harmony. Greater aggressiveness of personality is found in the two bust portraits of the next year. The one presents a youthful man, dressed as an officer. His keen, piercing eyes look with startling vividness out of a somewhat pale face that is framed with a wealth of curling black hair. The other picture is a por-trait of the officer’s wife, richly dressed in brown, with a gold-embroidered stomacher. On her chestnut hair rests a little circle of pearls to which a long blue feather is attached. Pearls are in her ears and around her neck and wrist.
” Few of Rembrandt’s works,” writes Dr. Bode, ” even those painted during his best period, represent the charm of woman so alluringly as this por-trait of a lady, whose radiantly fair complexion shines out from its framework of luxuriant hair, and is offset by a rich and superbly painted costume. Few of his portraits are so striking in their personality, and are at the same time so essentially feminine. In this picture Rembrandt shows himself the peer of Rubens as a painter of voluptuous beauty.”
Another early work, thinly painted, is the portrait of Rembrandt’s sister, Lysbeth, of 1632. She is a blooming, blonde young girl, without any startling marks of female beauty, but withal attractive by her spontaneous ingenuity. The face is entirely in the light, almost without shadows, but lifelike and fresh in colour, while the rest of the figure is in half-shadow. The whole portrait is finished with extreme care, and without that freedom in the treatment which is seen later; the handling being precise and without that quality of suggestiveness which distinguishes so much of Rembrandt’s work. The same model must have served for ” The Bride Dressing,” painted in 1637. There is more ” kneading of the paint ” here, without destroying the purity and value of tones.
A portrait of the master, painted in 1656, that bears the stamp of stress of circumstances and sadness of heart, was supposed to be painted by him-self, but on Dr. Bode’s suggestion we must rather regard it as a work of Rembrandt’s last pupil, Aert van Gelder. A ” Diana with Endymion ” is also erroneously marked with Rembrandt’s name. It is manifestly the work of Govert Flinck, one of Rembrandt’s pupils whose facile imitation of the master has led to many false attributions.
Among several other portraits by painters of the second rank we must single out an excellent knee-piece of a young man by Thomas de Keyzer, who holds the peculiar position of first having aroused Rembrandt to the possibilities of portraiture, and who afterwards himself adopted several of the great master’s characteristics. His warm colouring and truthful characterisation developed gradually, his colour at the last approaching Rembrandt’s. A portrait of Gerard Dou is by Dou’s talented pupil Godfried Schalcken, best known for his compositions with candle and lamp-light.
In the Seventh Salon we find a few more of the Dutch portrait painters. An early master was Dirk Barendszen, who had profited much by the study of Titian. At first he devoted himself to sacred art, but he attained greater renown as a portrait painter, being considered one of the best of his time. A vivid likeness of the stern features of Holland’s great Pensionary, Johan van Oldenbarnevelt, is found here. There is also a charming girl’s profile by Jan Lievens who, although a pupil of Rembrandt, fell soon under van Dyck’s influence when he visited England.
The first great portrait painter of Holland was Antonis Mor, who formed himself in his native Utrecht under Jan van Scorel, and afterwards visited Italy and Spain. Although much impressed with Titian’s work he developed an individual style in portraiture. While in his early work there is to be seen the dry, angular method of his Utrecht teacher, he emancipated himself completely, and his later portraits excel in warm colour and roundness of form, as we have already remarked in his ex-ample in the Academy. Here we find it equally noticeable in a ” Portrait of a Man,” with a blond beard.
But the majority of the paintings in this Salon are again of the Flemish school. Two large organ-wings show on the outside grisaille paintings of musical angels, with single figures on the inside. These, for no reason whatever, have been ascribed to Hanneman, but, according to Bode, must be considered as indubitable early works of Rubens, painted immediately after his first return from Italy.
A large composition, ” Ajax and Cassandra in the Temple,” is of the great Fleming’s invention, but executed by van Dyck and other pupils, possibly with some finishing touches by the master him-self. A portrait of Gaspar de Crayer, the painter, is by van Dyck, but not one of his best works. Portraits of a man and of a woman are excellent examples of the Fleming Pourbus, Frans the Elder; while a portrait by Erasmus Quellinus shows the influence of his master Rubens in the ruddy tones. We note further a ” Raising of Lazarus,” by Marten de Vos; a ” Denial by Peter,” by Theodoor Rombouts, who graphically portrays the soldiers’ guardroom where the serving-maid lays her charge against the apostle; and works by Berchem, Sandrart, Seybold, and Lebrun.
By a circular stairway we ascend now to the upper floor, where a series of nine rooms contain the larger number of the paintings of the Liechtenstein collection, but generally of smaller size. Several masterpieces will greet us. There is no orderly classification, and we are compelled to follow the walls to prevent the confused wandering that would result if we should attempt to search for examples of various schools.
The First Room contains several beautiful tapes-tries, as well as a number of paintings. A small, but very characteristic Guercino has a ” St. Jerome,” struck to earth by the sound of Gabriel’s trumpet. A large ” Burial of Christ ” is ascribed to Battista Farinato, called Zelotti, who worked with Paolo Veronese, but did not display his teacher’s grandeur of conception. An excellent little panel of the
Appearance of the Angel to Abraham” is not, as labelled, by Domenico Tiepolo, but by his more renowned father, Giovanni Battista, the last great name in the illustrious roll of Venetian painting. A “Christ on the Mount of Olives” is by a weak follower of Tiepolo. ” Apollo and the Muses ” is the work of Frans Francken, the Younger, who was a member of a large Flemish family of artists of the 17th century, and who copied the great Venetian painters with utmost dexterity.
The Second Room contains a magnificent collection of Oriental porcelains. On the walls we find several Venetian canal scenes, by Antonio Canale, and two landscapes by Bernardo Belotto, called Canaletto, painted by this artist while on his visit to Saxony. They are views of König-stein and Pirna. Some Venetian scenes that go here under Canaletto’s name are from the freer brush of Guardi.
Surrounded by these Venetians is an interesting “Holy Family on the Flight to Egypt,” by Nicolas Poussin, the one French old master who was pervaded by the classic spirit. Despite his early training under transalpine influences he was the first to drop Italian leadingstrings, and his work commenced to present very thoroughly French qualities in which the artistic dominates the poetic, and individual style quite outshines idealistic suggestiveness.
The Third Room is filled with a diversity of works of various schools. That painter of original force and flavour who appeared in the midst of the mignardise of Louis Quinze painting was Jean Battiste Chardin, whose cooks and chambermaids are as natural as those a Dutchman would have painted. Four examples of this master, who visualised the philosophy of Diderot and his doctrines of humanity by becoming the graphic historian of the petite bourgeoisie, are found as we enter the room. ” The Cook ” (Plate XXXV), as well as ” The Breakfast,” excel in that aesthetic quality which is combined with the genuineness and the accent of the artist’s preoccupation with his subject.
These four Chardins surround a magnificent southern landscape by the 17th century J. F. Millet.
It is in the sumptuous style of that early landscape school founded by Poussin and Claude, and before it had succumbed to the heaviness of the later Roman and Naples painters. A second landscape with ruins, also by Millet, has more of the dark accents of Salvator Rosa.
We may be surprised to find here two English portraits. One is a bust portrait of a young man, by Thomas Gainsborough, in which the delicate lineaments of the face are given with his wonted artistic finesse. As a pendant hangs a woman’s portrait by the American-born John Singleton Copley, who spent many of his working years in London, and painted thoroughly in the matter-of-fact manner of his period.
After glancing at a characteristic cavalry combat by Jacques Courtois Bourguignon, we come to a number of Dutch landscapes. The first in order is one by Herman Saftleven, a scholar of van Goyen’s studio, who painted agreeable little river views with a fine brush in a golden brown tone. His art, though conventional, is delightful in its way. Jan Vermeer van Haarlem was partial to sea pieces, but is here represented by a large river view, with a good sky, and clear, transparent water. Aert van der Neer, without recognition during his life and dying very poor, was a meritorious artist with an individual style, easily recognised. In his village views by moonlight, of which we find here an excellent example, he depicted the silvery reflections with the same facility shown in the ruddy glow of his conflagrations by night.
The marine painter Simon de Vlieger, whom we have met in the Academy, has here an unusual wood-interior, in rich brown tones. A landscape, with oaks near a quiet pond, by Meindert Hobbema, is not as impressive as we generally find the work of this great master. A few Flemish landscapes, the best of which are by Jan Wildens, show how far superior the Dutch landscape painters were to their Southern brethren.
A little gem that sparkles in this room is a ” Seamstress,” by Nicolaas Mats. It is of his middle period, before he became Frenchified, and is painted in the time of his famous old women at the spinning-wheel, of the Ryksmuseum. In the work of this period he unites subtlety of chiaroscuro, vigorous colour, and great mastery in handling, with that true finish which never becomes trivial. Still another little panel of the Dutch genre painters must not be passed by. It is by Quiryn Brekelenkam, and shows us a little shop where an old woman is selling vegetables to a young housewife whose child holds tightly to its mother’s apron. Although this artist can by no means be ranked with his master van Ostade, he had still a fair eye for the visible world, and a significant manner of portraying what he saw.
The Fourth Room is given entirely to the 17th century Dutchmen, with a few Flemings added. The first striking work is the portrait of a black-gowned, aristocratic looking lady, seated in an arm-chair, which is by Hendrik Gerritsz. Pot, who in his single figures affected Rembrandt’s manner, while his small group paintings are more after Hals, in their diffused light and tonal colours.
Gerard Dou’s most gifted pupil was Frans van Mieris, whose small-sized panels have a distinct note of refinement. His example of a ” Lady playing the Harp displays that vivacity of colour and exquisite technical quality which made him one of the most popular of his contemporaneous brethren of the brush. His characteristic attention to the drawing and expression of the hands may be studied here.
Two examples are to be noted by that inimitable farcical philosopher Jan Steen. In the one he holds up to ridicule a scene which might be taken from one of Molière’s comedies. An old duenna hands a love-letter to a young ‘woman from her elderly swain. The expressions of the faces are comical in their lucidity of purpose. The other picture is one of his chapters dedicated to Bacchus the interior of a tavern where men are drinking and carousing. Jan Steen was Holland’s realistic poet-painter of boisterous comedy and satirical farce. He must not, of course, be measured by the standards that prevail to-day, but in an age and among people the reverse of prudish, he held the mirror up to nature; and, far from extolling the human weaknesses he loved to depict, his scenes have always at bottom a moral significance.
Among the gay crowd that gathered in the Haarlem studio of the jolly Frans Hals was Jan Miense Molenaer, of whom we find here a Twelfth Night festivity. It is a droll frolic, exuberantly animated, somewhat reminiscent of a like scene, depicted by Jordaens, which we saw in the Imperial Museum. In the same spirit of gay abandon is the concert by three peasants, from the brush of the younger Teniers.
The wall before which we stand has also a few landscapes. An Italian scene, in which a strong-hold built on the border of a lake forms the key-note, is by Jan Asselyn, better known for his fine portraits of the denizens of the farm yard, fowls and poultry. These rare landscapes are the product of his sojourn in the south-land. A typical cabinet piece is by Cornelis van Poelenburgh, who depicts a satyr and a nymph, in an Elsheimer landscape-setting. It is dainty, beautiful in line, clear and tender in light-effect. More spirited is the ” Cavalry Attack,” by Philip Wouwerman, in which the landscape forms a striking part in the composition. The foliage is verdant and clear, and the light-effect peculiarly charming. Since Wouwerman spent all his life in his native Haarlem we may presume that his landscape setting, often so foreign to the Dutch flats, was copied from the work of artists who had travelled farther afield.
A winter landscape is from the brush of Raphael Camphuyzen, who generally painted moonlight subjects in the style of van der Neer. His pictures are exceedingly rare, not a single one being found in any of the Netherland galleries. A typical Dutch landscape, with meadows and canals, is by Salomo van Ruysdael, Jacob’s uncle. It is a middle-period picture, for it indicates greater firmness of hand and strength in colour than when he was still under the influence of his master Esaias van de Velde. He evidently tried to emulate his renowned nephew, in which he became quite successful.
The glowing painter of Dutch landscapes was the sunny-hearted Aelbert Cuyp. His talent was many-sided. The cattle he placed on the sward raised him to foremost rank among animal painters. The still-lives which he produced in early years show a refinement, a feeling for texture and colour, which places him above any of the artists who devoted themselves exclusively to such themes. But he excelled in landscape, with such simplicity, such lack of pretention or effort, such happy, unstudied combinations of arrangement, that he may well be called one of the greatest landscape painters of the golden age. His forte was his feeling for sun-light, which does not play hide-and-seek in light and shade, but fairly bathes his scenes in golden, glow. The example before us shows a stream, with sailboats, with an atmospheric effect of a hazy morning and a summer sky reflecting in the expanse of water.
We find still another example of the younger Teniers in the corner. This is one of his famous ” Temptations of St. Anthony,” a favourite subject with the artist, and one which he treated with intense humour. Turning the corner we find on the rear-wall of this chamber a few more examples of Teniers’ spirited brush the interior of a peasant-inn, a couple of way-side travellers, and a harvest scene. The qualities which most attract us in these works are his picturesque arrangement, delicately balanced, the exquisite harmony of his colouring, and that light and sparkling touch in which the separate strokes of the brush are left unbroken.
By Adriaen Brouwer we find two little oval panels with his favourite types, of a drinker and of a smoker.
His northern confrère, and fellow-pupil in the studio of Hals, Adriaen van Ostade, was a superior artist. Especially do his two examples before us, both tavern interiors, declare a more learned talent. The humourous mise-en-scène is a natural, artless portrayal of life with no overstrained action. We see how cleverly he used to juggle his paint in melting colours. The deft application of light-effect points to the period after van Ostade had come under Rembrandt’s influence, when also the cool tone changed to a deeper, golden brown.
A follower of Brouwer was Joost van Craesbeeck, whose work is exceedingly rare. His capital humour borders somewhat on the burlesque in the two ex-amples before us.
It seems rather incongruous to see among these scenes of slightly coarse conception and broad intent the over-refined work of Schalcken and of Eglon van der Neer. Two portraits by Godfried Schalcken show how much less successful he was in these than in his candle-light genre. Although well-drawn, the smooth, polished surface is un-pleasant, and the labour bestowed upon these works too obvious. Eglon Hendrik van der Neer, the son of the landscape painter Aert, tried to imitate Gerard Terborch, in which he failed ignominiously. The lady at breakfast, dressed in reddish white silk, is typical of his misdirected efforts. A silvery moon-light landscape by his father, which hangs next, has poetic flavour and sincere workmanship.
On the next wall we find a few masterpieces among much of far less importance. Roelant Savery, although born in Flanders, spent his best working years in Utrecht, after 1613. He was in-spired by the Tyroler Alps, of which we find here an example, somewhat cold and artificial. Another landscape, by J. B. Breughel, is in the manner of the one we have already seen. This brings us to a curious work of Abraham Teniers, who tried to imitate one of his father’s ape-pictures.
Of supreme importance is a landscape by Esaias van de Velde, the founder of the Haarlem landscape school, who helped to rescue the native school from the exotic, garish Italian influences. This ” Deer-hunt in the Forest ” has a setting of large expression and outdoors feeling. An early work of Jan van Goyen, a winterscape, with skaters enjoying them-selves on the ice, is equally replete with native atmosphere. A magnificent cattlepiece is from the brush of Aelbert Cuyp, where the naturalness of the figures, both of the animals and of the herder’s family, vies with the marvellous luminosity of the sunny clouds to construct a scene of unsurpassed rustic charm.
It is a far cry from these sincere and serious works of the great landscape painters to the work of Adriaen van der Werff, whose artistry at the end of this glorious century spelled the decadence and death of Dutch art. His ” Lamentation of Christ,” with its cold, porcelainlike colour and mechanical finish, is in perfect accord with the smooth, decorative, ” namby-pamby ” art in which he revelled. His style was as vicious and conventional as Carlo Dolci’s was in Italy.
The Fifth Chamber, also, contains a mixture of good, bad and indifferent. The most noteworthy of these paintings shine clearly among the lesser lights. A spirited ” Horsefair,” by the younger Teniers, is characteristic and of his best work. It must have been painted between 1640 and 1644, when he attained that luminous, golden tone, and careful and precise execution which is the most prized of all his work. A large cavalry combat, by Philip Wouwerman, is the very antithesis to this horsefair, and yet the two display the excellence of diverging tendencies. Egbert van der Poel was an imitator of Aert van der Neer’s conflagration scenes, and Hendrik van Balen aped Rubens in a composition depicting a sacrifice to Greek deities, in which many figures are grouped. Two large flowerpieces by Jan van Huysum, with their light backgrounds, have a showy character.
On the long wall of this room we find two beautiful bouquets by Rachel Ruysch, whose tasteful simplicity and harmonious colouring accords her a higher artistic standing, although she was less popular in her day than van Huysum. The best works on this wall are two strong and characteristic products of Allert van Everdingen, and of Meindert Hobbema. The fir forest with cascading rapids is one of those scenes which Allert sketched so assiduously in Norway. The young artist’s passion, as displayed here, is profoundly impressive. Meindert Hobbema’s favourite subject was a wooded dell with a pool of water, such as we see here. The portrayal is simple and yet most poetic, with the casual flicker and flash of a bright sunbeam.
In the next Room is found an interesting early work by Jan van Goyen, still in the tight manner acquired in his schooling with Esaias van de Velde. This has led to the attribution of this painting to Aelbert Cuyp, which is a palpable error. It is a beautiful picture of the estuary of a river, with a castle near the shore.
By Aelbert’s father, Jacob Gerritsz. Cuyp, is a barn interior where soldiers are quartered. The remarkable fidelity and naturalism of the Dutch genre school is eminently displayed. The droll humour of Adriaen van Ostade signalises, a ” Peasant-dance “; while the rare Jan Vermeer van Haarlem is represented by a wide stretch of flat country, domed by a magnificent sky-effect. A deli-cate ” Finding of Moses ” is by Cornelis van Poelenburg, and the half-figure of a girl is by Jacob Toorenvliet, whose devoted study of Raphael is clearly perceptible. Rembrandt’s closest imitator, Gerbrandt van den Eeckhout, has a typical scene of an old king, seated at table, no longer able to enjoy the food which a kneeling servant offers him. In melancholy mood he stares before him, feeling, as it were, the approach of the angel of Death, who appears in the dark shadows behind him. On the rear wall we find a few excellent conversation pieces by Dirk Hals and by Pieter Codde. Two cavaliers and a maiden playing backgammon are pictured by Hals. Codde, with as fine a colour but greater minuteness, has two graceful assemblies. The centre of this wall is occupied by a portrait of Prince Adam Wenzel von Liechtenstein, in magnificent court-costume. It is by the Frenchman Hyacinthe Rigaud, the typical painter of the pompous age of Louis XIV.
The last wall has still other fine examples of the Dutch landscape and marine painters. The many-sided Adriaen van de Velde is here represented by a landscape with deer, in which the artist’s sense of colour and tone, as well as his delicacy of form and outline, are greatly to be admired. He shows a wonderful subtlety in the gradation of almost neutral hues. A landscape, in which the architectural painter Jan van der Heyden placed a castle, is of equal distinction. Jan Hackaert was formed in Germany and Italy, as indicated by a valley view, which breathes a southern atmosphere. Later he was purer in native inspiration.
One of the greatest of the Haarlem school of landscape painters was Jan Wynants, who showed originality in the selection of his subjects. He favoured open scenery, as seen in a large river view here, with a sky of summer blue, broken by illuminated cloud masses.
A magnificent marine, with sailing craft on the choppy waves, cannot with certainty be ascribed to any master. Porcellis, Willem van de Velde, Simon de Vlieger, even Rembrandt, have been suggested. The first named has a signed painting in the Schön-born collection which is very similar in character and it is most plausible to ascribe this unknown work to him. The sky, especially, is of a fine and strong quality. A landscape by Jacob van Ruisdael still makes us pause. It is the only example of this painter in this collection, but a masterpiece. A brook dashes over rocks and stones through the forest, its lonesomeness being relieved by the human element of a woman and child crossing the little bridge in the foreground to meet the woodchopper as he returns homeward.
The following chamber contains earlier work. First we note a number of the old-German artists. An exceedingly rare work by the famous etcher Heinrich Aldegrever is the ” Portrait of a Man ” (Plate XXXVI), the only work by this artist in Vienna. It is a square-blocked composition, with a conventional landscape background. The artist’s monogram is engraved on the leaflet suspended from the branch in the upper-left corner. Somewhat earlier was Bernhard Strigel, by whom we find two bust portraits, pendants. This early master was at his best in portraiture; his figure compositions, of which the Germanic Museum in Nuremberg has several, are somewhat awkward and provincial.
Another rarely occurring master was Hans Mülich, a Munich artist, who for a time was court-painter to Duke Albert V of Bavaria. His portrait of a man, found here, is in the manner of the Bolognese school. Jan Stephan von Calcar acquired extraordinary facility in imitating Titian and Raphael. His half-figure of a man with a blond beard, wrapped in a fur-lined coat, is excellent.
Dürer’s master, Michael Wolgemut, is represented here with a portrait of an old, clean-shaven man, in a brown dress with a white cap, which has fully his bourgeois style. It lacks all distinction or elegance, but is realistic in its elucidation, even glorification of the commonplace. Nearby hangs a knee-piece of the ” Madonna Enthroned,” with two musical angels, which for its rich renaissance flavour may be ascribed to the Ulm school of the early part of the 16th century.
A few paintings bear the name of Lucas Cranach the Elder, the most interesting of which is ” Abraham’s Sacrifice ” (Plate XXXVII). This panel must have come from his later years, when the influence of Dürer had modified his archaism and perfected his composition and drawing, while he still adhered, in the landscape part, to the so-called Donau-stil, which idealised landscape to a decorative quality. Cranach’s atavism his frequent relapse to archaic drawing, generally noticeable in his single figures is not at all apparent in this excellent work.
Bartholomaeus Zeitblom was the principal master of the Ulm school at the end of the 15th century. A tendency had gradually developed towards greater simplicity, and more restfulness in composition, after an exaggerated striving to represent action and movement. Zeitblom possessed the typical Suabian characteristic of unassuming reserve, which is shown by the portrait of a bishop which we find here. The good man is reading a book, and by no means gives the impression of being an authoritative Italian ecclesiastic, but reminds one rather of Jean Valjean’s bishop, with his gentle simplicity and pious grace. The artist has a fine eye for luxurious colour-effect, produced by the green pallium against a golden curtain.
There is a great difference between these old-German works and an example of the early French school. It is the only example of this school in the Liechtenstein Gallery, but one of its priceless gems, that attracted merited attention when it was shown at the Exhibition of French Primitives in Paris in 1904.
On a small, almost square panel we find the head of a beardless man (Plate XXXVIII), who rests the fingers of his hand on a rail in front. The quaint figures at the sides of the black velvet cap give the date, 1456, when Jean Fouquet painted this remarkably powerful face. Fouquet was the first great artist of France, and flourished during the reigns of Charles VII and Louis XI, establishing the influential school of Tours. The colour is delicate, although it lacks in brilliancy, but the nervous vitality of the homely features in this portrait is astounding.
A number of works by the Flemish Primitives now attract our attention. Among these there are, however, three small panels which evidently came from a northern master, even, according to Bode, from Geertgen van Sint Jans, the earliest Holland painter of whom we have record, who practised in Haarlem in the early part of the 15th century. They represent saints and donors, in miniaturelike execution ; but the panels have been much damaged by careless restoring. Another larger panel, a ” Crucifixion,” bears also northern characteristics, at least it lacks the mystic piety of the early Bruges school to which it is attributed. Its greater realism in the crucified body, and the sterner emotions displayed by Mary and John, make me even point to Cornelis Engelbrechtsen as the possible author of this work.
Of the great Zeeland master, Hugo van der Goes, we find here a small altarpiece showing the ” Adoration of the Magi,” while on the outside of the wings we see an Annunciation, painted in grisaille. Despite the miniaturelike execution there is still a wonderful breadth of treatment, as well as strength of colour.
The most attractive, if not the most original of all the gifted Flemish Primitives was Hans Memlinc, by whom we have a masterpiece in his ” Madonna and Donor” (Plate XXXIX). In this picture we find all the excellences of the work of the van Eycks and of Rogier van der Weyden the Magnificent colour, the painstaking care of execution, the expressiveness of drawing; and added thereto the affecting simplicity of presentation of Memlinc himself. The adoring attitude of the donor establishes a gentle, humble, but still cordial relationship with the thoroughly human appearance of the Virgin and Child. So is the figure of St. Anthony, as designated by the little pig at his side, wonderfully expressive of affectionate interest. Memlinc excelled his forerunners in that he infused in his recital of Christian traditions a purer human-ism than had as yet been attained. His half-figure of the ” Madonna and Child,” before an archi-tectonic background, is more conventional but still opulent in splendour.
Several works are ascribed to Quentin Massys, but only one with undoubted authority. This is a ” Portrait of an Ecclesiastic,” and must be regarded as the master’s principal work in Vienna. The half-figure of the man, standing behind a balustrade, is seen looking straight before him with an animated light in his eyes, as if pausing in expounding a passage from the book which he holds in his left hand. The eyeglasses which he holds in his right touch the book in the most natural manner. His black, fur-bordered coat is almost entirely covered by a white, pleated surplice of lacy lawn, and his strongly modelled head is covered with a stiff beretta. The preacher, for this is undoubtedly his profession, is discoursing in the open, and a beautiful, undulating landscape stretches behind him.
The progress of landscape art is further shown in an excellent, early work by Hendrik met de Bles, signed with his little owl, portraying the holy hermits Paul and Anthony. This work is, without a vestige of reason, ascribed to Lukas van Leyden. Of the later Flemings we find here the two Breughels, Peasant Breughel and Hellish Breughel. The former has a ” Preaching by John the Baptist ” and a ” Triumph of Death “; while the latter is seen in a winter landscape that has much similarity to his small snow scene which we saw in the Imperial Museum. The only known authentic work of Gillis van Coninxloo, a famous landscape painter of his day, hangs here in the Liechtenstein Gallery. He commingled his native landscapes with the flavour of his Italian training. An equally rare work must also be noticed from the Amsterdam painter Jacob Cornelisz. van Oostsanen, who depicts the ” Death of Mary ” with the same infection of Italian tendencies which caused the decadence of the art of his Flemish brethren.
The last two rooms are filled with the works of the still-life painters, with a few landscapes and marines. Of principal worth are the products of the chase, by Jan Fyt, Jan Davidsz. de Heem, and Jan Weenix; still-lives by Willem Claesz. Heda and Frans Snyders; a fine turbulent seapiece by Simon de Vlieger, and an equally strong seacoast in a storm, by the somewhat later Ludolf Bakhuyzen. A rare work is by Leonard Bramer, of whom the Ryksmuseum of Amsterdam possesses the only known example in the Netherlands. This picture represents Lazarus being carried by the angels to Abra-ham’s bosom. It is painted in the Italian style, with a Rembrandtesque modification of its chiaroscuro.