WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

, an artist of much reputation and amiable character, was born at Shafhausen, in Switzerland, in 1705. When young, he visited a distant Canton, where he met with one of his townsmen, and being inclined to travel, was soon persuaded to make a tour to England, and followed the profession of a chaser in gold, in which art he was always considered as holding the first rank. But his skill was not confined to this alone; he possessed an universal knowledge in all branches of painting and sculpture, which perfectly qualified him for the place of Keeper, to which he was appointed when the Royal Academy was first instituted in 1768, the business of which principally consists in superintending and instructing the students, who draw or model from the antique figures. He may be truly said to have been the father of the present race of artists; for long before the royal academy was established, he presided over the little societies which met. first in Salisbury court, and afterwards in St. Martin’s-lane, where they drew from living models. Perhaps nothing that can be said will more strongly imply his amiable disposition, than that all the different societies with which he was connected, always turned their eyes upon him for their treasurer and chief manager; when, perhaps, they would not have contentedly submitted to any other authority. His early society was composed of men whose names are well known in the world; such as Hogarth, Rysbrach, Roubiliac, Wills, Ellis, Vanderbank, &c.; and though he outlived all the companions of his youth, he might to the last have boasted of a succession equally numerous; for all that knew him were his friends.

As an artist, his abilities were not confined merely to chasing; he might also be considered as one of our best medallists, and painted in enamel with great beauty and accuracy, and many of his productions, particularly some watch-cases, were most elegant and classical in their enrichments. He was aLo well skilled in the construction of the human figure.

This transaction having by some means come to the knowledge of his Catholic majesty, who was passionately fond of all mechanical productions, and particularly of watches, that monarch immediately employed his agents in England to engage Mr. Mudge to work for him; and such was his approbation of his new artist’s performances, that he honoured him with an unlimited commission to make for him at his own price, whatever he might judge most worthy of attention. Accordingly, among the several productions of Mr. Madge’s genius which thus became the property of the king of Spain, was an equation watch, which not only shewed the sun’s time, and mean time, but was also a striking watch and a repeater; and what was very singular, and had hitherto been unattempted, it struck and repeated by solar, or apparent time. As a repeater, moreover, it struck the hours, quarters, and minutes. From a whim of the king’s this watch was made in the crutch end of a cane, in the sides of which were glasses covered with sliders, on the removal of which the work might be seen at any time; and his majesty being very fond of observing the motion of the wheels at the time the watch struck, it was his practice as he walked, to stop for that purpose. Those who have seen him on these occasions, observed that he ever showed signs of the most lively satisfaction. The price of this watch was 480 guineas, which, from the expensive materials and nature of the work, afforded Mr. Mudge but a moderate profit for his ingenuity; and he was strongly urged by several of his friends to charge 500 guineas for it, which the king would have readily paid. To this Mr. Mudge answered, that, “as 480 guineas gave him the profit to which he was fairly entitled, as an honest man, he could riot think of increasing it, and he saw no reason why a king should be charged more than a private gentleman.” Indeed the king of Spain had such a high opinion of his integrity, that he not only used to speak of him as by far the most ingenious watchmaker he had ever employed, but excelling also in his sense of honour and justice. Mr. Townsend, then secretary to the embassy at Madrid, once told Mr. Mudge that his Catholic majesty had often expressed to him his great admiration of his character, and would frequently ask his assistance to enable him to express the name of Mudge.

Two anecdotes deserve to be recorded, as striking proofs of Mr. Mudge’s great mental powers: count Bruhl, when he first came to England in his diplomatic capacity, brought an ingenious watch from Paris, made by the celebrated Bertoud, intending it as a present to his majesty. This watch, however, not performing its offices, was sent back to the inventor, in or$|er to be rectified. After its return, it still continued imperfect; and, on further applications to M. Bertoud, that artist acknowledged, with great candour, that, although he thought the principles on which his watch was constructed were good, he was himself unable to carry them into effect. The count then applied to Mr. Mudge, requesting him to undertake the task but, deeming it an indelicate circumstance to interfere with the inventions of another artist, Mr. Mudge expressed the greatest reluctance on the occasion. The importunity of the 'count, however, added to the gratitude which he feit for the distinguishing marks of esteem he had already received, induced Mr. Mudge, at last, to wave his objections; and he had the satisfaction to be completely successful. The other anecdote relates to a large and complicated watch belonging to his majesty, which had long gone so ill that it had been repeatedly put into the hands of the most distinguished watchmakers, to be repaired; all of whom, though confident in their abilities to give it the requisite perfection, had been obliged to abandon the watch as incapable of amendment. It was then put into the hands of Mr. Mudge, who happily succeeded. This circumstance gave his majesty a very high opinion of his superiority over every other watch maker. In 1777, he appointed him his watchmaker, and often honoured him with conferences on mechanical subjects. Her majesty likewise expressed a great esteem, not only for his talents as an artist, but for his character as a man. At one time, she presented him with fifty guineas for only cleaning a watch; and it was through her recommendation to the lord chancellor, that his second son obtained the living of Bramford Speke, as he did afterward that of Lustleigh through count BruhPs interest with the hon. Percy Charles Wyndham, brother to the earl of Egremont.

We shall close these memoirs in the words of his excellency the count de Bruhl: Mr. Mudge “was a man whose superior genius as an artist, united with the liberality of a mind replete with candour, simplicity, modesty, and integrity, deserve the highest admiration and respect; whose name will he handed down to the remotest posterity, with the same veneration which attends the names of his predecessors in the same line, Tompion, Graham, and Harrison, who, while living, were admired by their contemporaries, and whose fame adds to the splendour and glory of this great nation.”

, one of the most pleasing painters Spain ever produced, was born at Pilas, near Seville, in 1613, and be.came a disciple of Juan del Castillo, whose favourite subjects were fairs and markets; of which Murillo painted many pictures before he left him to go to Madrid. There he studied and copied the works of Titian, Rubens, and Vandyke, in the royal palaces, and the houses of the nobility; and having very much advanced himself in the knowledge and practice of his art, returned to Seville, where he was employed to paint for most of the principal churches there, as well as at Granada, Cadiz, and Cordova. The style of Murillio is his own. He copied his objects from nature, but combined them ideally; that is, his back-grounds are generally confused and indistinct, and the parts very much blended together, with a loose pencil and indeterminate execution; but most of them have a very pleasing effect, and perhaps the principal objects acquire a degree of finish and beauty from this very circumstance. An instance may be recollected in his very pleasing picture of the good shepherd, an excellent copy of which is at the marquis of Stafford’s gallery. But it was in small pictures of familiar life that this artist most completely succeeded, for in his large pictures, skilfully wrought as they are, he does not appear to have penetrated the arcana of grandeur or style; but in the amiable and tender sentiments which are expressed by the silent actions of the human features, he was eminently successful. He died in 1685.

Carlo Dati, in the life of Zeuxis, speaking of our engraver’s works, says, “These words of Apollonius remind us to contemplate the astonishing art of the prints of the modern gravers in France, where every thing is represented so naturally, the quality of the drapery, the colour of the flesh, the beard, the hair with the powder upon it, and, what is most important, the age, the air, and the lively resemblance of a person, though nothing is made use of besides the black of the ink and the white of the paper; which not only make the light and the shade, but do the office of all the colours. Ail this is seen and admired above all others, in the excellent portraits of the illustrious Nantueil.” This artist was a man of pleasing manners and address, had some share of learning and wit, and his conversation recommended him much to people of fashion. He was well respected at court; and Mazarine, then prime minister, retained him as his designer and engraver, and honoured him with the title of Monsieur. But he never was an œconomist; and of upwards of 500,000 crowns which he had gained, he left only 20,000 to his heirs. The portraits by this excellent artist are well known, and although Strutt has given a short list of the bejt,he allows that it is not easy to say with any degree of precision, among so many beautiful ones, which are the best.

, a landscape painter, was born at Amsterdam in 1619, and is well known to the connoisseurs in painting, by a peculiarity of style, and also by the handling and transparence of his landscapes. His subjects are views of villages, or the huts of fishermen, oiv the banks of rivers and canals, by moon -light, generally finished 2 with a remarkable neatness of pencilling. His touch rsextremely light, free, and clean, and his imitation of nature true; particularly in the lustre of his skies about the moon, and the reflection of the beams of that luminary on the surface of the waller. His figures are usually well designed, and their actions and attitudes are well adapted to their employments and occupations. In all parts of Europe his pictures are still in good esteem, but are seldom found uninjured, owing to the simplicity of his manner, and his painting very thin. This artist died in 1683, leaving a son, Eglon Hendrick Vender Neer, who was born at Amsterdam in 1643. He was at first a pupil to his father, and afterwards of Jacob Vanloo. He had an extensive talent, and executed subjects drawn from various branches of the art, with an equal degree of merit. His portraits, in large and small, are well coloured, and touched with spirit and delicacy; in history he designed with correctness, and composed with ingenuity; his conversations have the manner, the breadth, and the finish, of Terburg; his landscape is varied and well chosen, but too much loaded, and too anxiously discriminated in the fore-grounds. The portrait of this artist, painted by himself, and inscribed “Eglon Hendric Vander Neer f. 1696,” has a place in the gallery of Florence. He died in 1703, aged sixty.

, an eminent painter, was born in 1639, at Prague in Bohemia. His father dying in the Polish service, in which he was an engineer, his mother was constrained, on account of the catholic religion, which she professed, to depart suddenly from Prague with her three sons, of whom Gaspard was the youngest* At some leagues from the town she stopped at a castle, which wafc afterwards besieged; and Gaspard’s two brothers were famished to death. The mother, apprehensive of the same fate, found means to escape in the night-time out of the castle, and with her son in her amis reached Arnheim, ifo Guelderland, where she met with some relief to support herself and breed op her son. A physician, named Tutkens, a man of wealth and humanity, became the patron of Netscher, and put him to school, with the view of educating him to his own profession; but Netscher’s decided turn for the art he afterwards practised, induced his patron to place him with a glazier to learn to draw, this being the only person at Arnheim who could give him any instructions. As soon as tie had iearned all this man could teach, he went to Deventer, to a painter, whose name was Gerhard Terburg, an able artist, and burgomaster of the town, under whom he acquired a great command of his pencil and, going to Holland, worked there a long time for the picture-merchants, who, abusing his easiness, paid him very little for his pieces, which they sold at a good price.

, an artist of Antwerp, came and settled in England when young, and studied under Tillemans, and afterwards copied Watteau, and Panini; conversations, landscapes, and children’s amusements, were his chief works. Lord Cobham, at Stowe, and the earl of Tilney, employed him at their mansions. He died Jan. 21, 1748, leaving a son, who has long enjoyed the well-earned reputation of an admirable statuary.

In 1542 he published a treatise on the twilight, which he dedicated to John III. king of Portugal; to which he added what Alhazen, an Arabian author, has composed on the same subject. In this work he describes the method or instrument erroneously called, from him, a Nonius. He corrected several mathematical mistakes of Orontius Finasus. But the most celebrated of all his works, or that at least he appeared most to value, was his “Treatise of Algebra,” which he had composed in Portuguese, but translated it into the Castilian tongue when he resolved upon making it public, which he thought would render his book more useful, as this language was more generally known than the Portuguese. The dedication to his former pupil, prince Henry, was dated from Lisbon, Dec. 1, 1564. This work contains 341 pages in the Antwerp edition of 1567, in 8vo. The catalogue of his works, chiefly in Latin, is as follows: 1. “De Arte Navigandi, libri duo,” 1530. 2. “De Crepusculis,” 1542. 3. “Annotationes in Aristotelem.” 4. “Problema Mechanicum de Motu Navigii ex Remis.” 5. “Annotationes in Planetarum Theorias Georgii Purbachii,” &c. 6. “Libro de Algebra en Arithmetica y Geometra,” 1564. We have said that his name was erroneously given to the method of graduation now generally used in the division of the scales of various instruments; for Vernier was the real inventor The method of Nonius, described in his treatise “De Crepusculis,” consists in describing within the same quadrant, 45 concentric circles, dividing the outermost into 90 equal parts, the next within into 89, the next into 88, and so on, till the innermost was divided into 46 only. By this means, in most observations, the plumb-line or index must cross one or other of those circles in or very near a point of division: whence by calculation the degrees and minutes of the arch might easily be obtained. This method is also described by him in his treatise “De Arte Navigandi,” where he imagines it was not unknown to Ptolomy. But as the degrees are thus divided unequally, and it is very difficult to attain exactness in the division, especially when the numbers, into which the arches are to be divided, are incomposite, of which there are no less than uine, the method of diagonals, first published by Thomas Digges, esq. in his treatise “Alae seu Scaloe Mathematicae,” printed at Lond. in 1573, and said to be invented by one Richard Chanseler, a very skilful artist, was substituted in its stead. However, Nonius’s method was improved at different times; but the admirable division now so much in use, is the most considerable improvement of it.

, an ingenious artist, was the son of Robert Norgate, D. D. master of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, and in his youth shewed a great inclination to heraldry and limning, in both of which he became very eminent, but his talent in illuminating the initial letters of patents, was chiefly admired. His judgment in paintings also was considered very great, for which reason he was employed by the earl of Arundel, that celebrated collector of antiquities, to purchase pictures for him in Italy. Returning by Marseilles, and by some accident being disappointed of the remittances he expected, and totally unknown there, he was observed by a French gentleman, who, after inquiring into his circumstances, furnished him with the means of returning to his own country on foot. He was afterwards one of the clerks of the signet to ’Charles I. and as such attended his majesty to the North in 1640. He was also made Windsor herald for his great skill in heraldry, in which office he died, at the heralds’ college, Dec. 23, 1650, and was buried at St. Bennet’s, Paul’s Wharf, leaving the character of an honest, amiable, and accomplished man. Lloyd tells us that he left manuscripts to several of his friends to be published, but his intention in that point has not been executed. His letters, giving an account of the expedition against the Scotch in 1639, are among Dr. Birch’s “Historical Letters,” 3 vols. ms. in the British Museum, Ayscough’s catalogue. As an illuminator, the evidence of his abilities is a curious patent discovered some years ago. The late earl of Stirling received from a relation an old box of neglected writings, among which he found the original commission of Charles J. appointing his lordship’s predecessor, Alexander earl of Stirling, the celebrated poet, commander in chief of Nova Scotia, with the confirmation of the grant of that province made by James I. In the initial letter are the portraits of the king sitting on the throne, delivering the patent to the earl, and round the border representations in miniature of the customs, huntings, fishings, and productions, of the country, all in the highest preservation, and so admirably executed, that it was believed of the pencil of Vanclyck. But Mr. Walpole ascribes it to Norgate, who was allowed the best illuminator of that age.

, a very excellent artist and professor of painting in the Royal Academy, was born in May 1761, at St. Agnes in Cornwall, a village about seven miles distant from the town of Truro. In his earliest years he was remarkable for the strength of his understanding, and the rapidity with which he acquired all the learning that a village-school could afford him. When ten years old, he was not only able to solve several difficult problems in Euclid, but was thought capable of instructing others: and when he had scarcely reached his twelfth year, he established an evening school at St. Agnes, and taught writing and arithmetic. His father, a carpenter, was desirous to bring him up in his own business; but this was by no means suitable to one whose mind had attained some glimpses of science, and still more of art. He was formed a painter by nature; and had not this been the case, he would probably have excelled in some branch of science or literature: with much comprehension and acuteness, his thirst of information was insatiable, and his ambition to excel, unbounded. But painting was his destination, and after many early and rude efforts, he had hung his father’s house with portraits of his family and friends in an improved style, when he became acquainted with Dr. John Wolcot, then residing at Truro, and since so well known by the name of Peter Pindar: who, having himself a taste for drawing, and a strong perception of character, saw the worth of our artist, and was well qualified to afford him instruction in many requisite points. He also recommended him so effectually that he commenced professed portrait" painter, and went about to the neighbouring towns with letters of introduction to the principal families resident in them, and henceforward entirely supported himself by his own exertions.

Of Opie’s style, the more engaging characteristics are breadth, simplicity, and force; its defects are want of grace and variety of invention; and of elegance and refinement in expression aud execution. The objects of his choice were among the striking and terrible, rather than the agreeable and beautiful; and the materials he introduced were more accordant to his ideas of the picturesque than the proper. He frequently violated costume, not for want of knowledge, so much as from an insatiable desire of contrast; and sometimes from conveniency. His taste lay in the representation of natural objects with strong effect: he therefore made use of armour, or of draperies which he had in his study, and, like Rembrandt, adopted them as his antiques, and used them according as he felt they would best promote his immediate end. These defects are redeemed, to the well-informed eye, by the absolute truth of imitation in which they are wrought, by the expression of his heads, particularly of old men, or of strongly-marked characters, which are exceedingly impressive, by the energetic actions of his principal figures, by the broad and daring execution of his pencil, and by the magic force of his chiaro-scuro. In the latter point no artist ever excelled him. His figures project from the canvas in some of his best works and if seen under favourable circumstances, would be absolutely illusive . When the tide of historic commissions subsided, employed himself in representing scenes of common life, as well as in portraits. Cottage visits, an old soldier at an. ale-house door, fortune-tellers, and that class of materials which the Dutch and Flemish masters have recommended by high finish and convenient neatness of size, he painted upon a large scale. The reputation so justly due to his talents had now become steadily attached to him, and he had no longer to complain "of the unfeeling caprice of fashion, for he enjoyed an uninterrupted source of employment, in portraiture at least, till his death, and generally disposed of the fancy pictures with which he chose to intersperse his labours. These were very numerous, for he was exceedingly industrious, and his principal delight was in the practice of his profession.

, a most celebrated Flemishpainter, was born at Lubeck in 1610, and was a disciple of Frank Hals, in company with Brouwer, with whom he contracted a close intimacy. In his choice of subjects he followed Teniers, and, as Fuseli says, may, more properly than any other Dutch, Flemish, or German artist, be said to have raised flowers from a dunghill. He has contented himself to trace the line which just discriminates the animal from the brute, and stamps his actors with instinct rather than with passions. He has personified the dregs of vulgarity without recommending them by the most evanescent feature of taste, and yet decoys our curiosity to dive with bim into the habitation of filth, beguiles our eye to dwell on the loathsome inmates and contents, and surprises our judgment into implicit admiration, by a truth of character, an energy of effect, a breadth and geniality of touch and finish, which leave no room for censure- If he is less silvery, less airy than Teniers, he is far more vigorous and gleaming; if his forms be more squat and brutal, they are less fantastic and more natural; if he group with less amenity, he far excels the Fleming in depth and real composition. His pictures, it is true, are not always of low subjects, but he seldom rises to any thing like gentility in character, and very seldom attempted it. His works are not numerous, and therefore very high-priced. He is also to be ranked among engravers; and Strutt enumerates fiftytwo etchings of various sizes, all from his own designs, and the greater part are justly held in estimation. He died in 1685, at the age of seventy-five. His younger brother, Isaac Van Ostade, was taught by him the art of painting, and imitated the style and taste of his instructor but he died young, and never arrived at any degree of skill in the art comparable to that of his brother. As, however, he wrought in the same manner, and upon the same kind of subjects, some of his original productions, and many of his copies from Adrian, are palmed upon amateurs as the works of the elder Ostade. But the disparity is easily discernible by the judicious, the touch is not so free, the colouring not so transparent; nor have they an equal warmth or force of effect, in comparison with each other.

, a Spanish artist, supposed to have been born in 1571, at Seville, is said by Mr. Fuseli, to owe his reputation more to theory, writing, and the celebrity of his scholars Cano and Velazquez, than to the superiority of his works. He was a pupil of Luis Feniandez, but, though partial to the great style, does not appear to have studied it in Italy. With sufficient correctness of outline, judgment in composition, dignity of characters, propriety of costume, observance of chiaroscuro and perspective, Pacheco displeases by want of colour, timidity of execution, and dryness of style. Seville possesses the best of his historic performances; of his numerous portraits, those of his wife and Miguel de Cervantes were the most praised. He possesses considerable erudition, and there is much wit and humour in his epigrams. He died in 1654. Of his works we know only one, entitled “Arte de la Pintura, su antiguedad y grandezas,” Seville, 1649, 4to.

, an ingenious artist, was born at Agen in France, about 1524. He was brought up as a common labourer, and was also employed in surveying. Though destitute of education, he was a very accurate observer of nature; and in the course of his surveys, he conceived the notion that France had been formerly covered by the sea, and propagated his opinion at Paris, against a host of opponents, with the greatest boldness. It was considered as a species of heresy. For several years after, he employed himself in trying different experiments, in order to discover the method of painting in enamel. But some person presenting him with a beautiful cup of that kind of stone-ware called by the French faience, because it was first manufactured in a city of Italy called Faenza, the sight of this cup inflamed him with an insurmountable desire to discover the method of applying enamel to stoneware. At this time he was ignorant of even the first rudiments of the art of pottery, nor was there any person within, his reach from whom he could procure information. His experiments were, therefore, unsuccessful, and he wasted his whole fortune, and even injured his health, without gaining his object. Still he gave it up only for a time, and when a few years of industry and frugality had put it in his power, he returned to his project with more ardour than ever. The same fatigues, the same sacrifices, the same expences Were incurred a second time, but the result was different. He discovered, one after another, the whole series of operations, and ascertained the method of applying enamel to stone-ware, and of making earthenware superior to the best of the Italian manufacture. He was now treated with respect, and considered as a man of genius. The court of France took him under its protection, and enabled him to establish a manufactory, where the manufacture of the species of stone-ware which he had invented was brought to a state of perfection. The only improvement which was made upon it afterwards in France, was the application of different colours upon the enamel, and imitating the paintings which had been executed long before on porcelain vessels. This improvement scarcely dates farther back than thirty or forty years. It was first put in practice by Joseph Hanon, a native of Strasbourg, and was suggested by a German, who sold to Hanon the method of composing the colours applied upon the porcelain of Saxony. These vessels were soon after superseded by the Queen’s ware of the celebrated Wedgewood, which both in cheapness, beauty, and elegance of form, far surpassed any thing of the kind that had appeared in Europe.

, an eminent artist, born at Serinalto, in the territory of Bergamo, about the middle of the sixteenth century, was a disciple of Titian. He emulated his master’s manner, but, according to Fuseli, was more anxious to attain the colour and breadth of Giorgioni. This appears chiefly in his “St. Barbara.” His colouring had extraordinary strength and brightness, and his pictures are wrought to great perfection, yet with freedom, and without the appearance of labour. Vasari describes, with great fervour, a composition of the elder Palma, at Venice, representing the ship in whicii the body of St. Mark was brought from Alexandria to Venice. “In that grand design,” he says, “the vessel was struggling against the fury or an impetuous tempest, and is expressed with the utmost judgment; the distress of the mariners, the violent bursting of the waves against the sides of the ship, the horrid gloom, only enlivened with flashes of lightning, and every part of the scene filled with images of terror, are so strong, so lively, and naturally represented, that it seems impossible for the power of colour or pencil to rise to a higher pitch of truth and perfection; and that performance very deservedly gained him the highest applause.” Notwithstanding this deserved praise, his pictures in general are not correct in design, and his latter works did not maintain his early reputation. He died, according to Vasari, at the age of forty-eight, but in what year is not absolutely known, although some fix it in 1588.

, whose family name was Francis Mazzuoli, is more generally called Parmigiano, from Parma, where he was born in 1503. He studied under two uncles, Michele and Philip, but the chief modelof his imitation was Correggio, from whose works, compared with those of Michael Angelo, Raphael, and Julio, he formed that peculiar style for which he is celebrated. He displayed his natural genius for painting so very early, that at sixteen he is said to have produced designs which would have done honour to an experienced painter. His first public work, the St. Eustachius, in the church of St. Petronius, in Bologna, was done when he was a boy. In 1527, when Rome was sacked by the emperor Charles V. Parmigiano was found, like Protogenes at Rhodes, so intent upon his work as not to notice the confusion of the day. The event is variously related; some say that he escaped, like the ancient artist, from all violence, by the admiration of the soldiers; others, that he was plundered by them of his pictures, though his person was safe the first party who came taking only a few, while those who followed swept away the rest. His turn for music, and particularly his talent for playing on the lute, in some degree seduced him from his principal pursuit; and Vasari says he was much diverted from his art by the quackery of the alchymists; but this fact has by some writers been questioned. He died of a violent fever, in 1540, at the early age of 36.

Parmigiano had a cousin and pupil, G. Mazzuoli, who is little known beyond Parma and its districts, though for “impasto,” and the whole mystery of colour, he has few equals. There is reason to believe that several pictures ascribed to Francis, especially those of a stronger and gayer tone, have been painted by this artist. He was more attached to the style of Correggio than Francis, and seized its character with great felicity in the Nuptials of St. Catherine, in the church del Carmine. He excelled in perspective, and in the Last Supper, in the refectory of S. Giovanni, placed and painted a colonnade with all the illusion of Pozzo. To the most harmonious chiaro-scuro, he added grandeur, variety, vivacity, in fresco. None of his fellow artists equalled him in copiousness, fertility, and execution; and to these perhaps we may ascribe the inequality perceptible in his works. He flourished about 1580, and had a son Alexander, who painted in the dome of Parma, in 1571. He was a feeble imitator of the family style.

, an artist of Bologna, was one of the pupils and assistants of Zuccari, and the first of Bolognese painters who introduced naked torsoes in sacred subjects. The most eminent of his altar-pieces are the Decollation of St. Paul alle Tre Fontane, at Rome, and at S. Giacomo, of Bologna, our Lady with various Saints, painted in competition with the Caracci, and honoured by their praise. His Tityus, when exhibited to the public at Bologna, was by the Dilettanti mistaken for a work of Michael Angelo. But he did not always husband his powers with equal diligence and refinement, hurried away by that frankness and facility of execution which debauched Cesari, whom he however excelled in correctness of design. In portrait, for character, dignity, and propriety of composition, he approached Titian himself, in the opinion of Guido. His power of drawing with the pen attracted Agostino Caracci to his school, who made it the guide of his line in engraving. He composed a book on symmetry and anatomy, which may be considered as a commentary on his works. He had three sons of considerable merit as artists. A sparrow, often introduced in the works of Bartholomew, is an allusion to his name. He died in 1595.

, a Parisian architect of the seventeenth century, and one of a family of artists, excelled in the ornaments and decorations of buildings, and wa& architect to Louis XIV. and monsieur his only brother. He planned the cascades, which are so justly admired, at the castle of St. Cloud, and built the church of the nuns of Port-royal, at Paris, in 1625. Le Pautre was received into the royal academy of sculpture, December 1, 1671, and died some years after. His “CEuvres d' Architecture” are engraved in one vol. folio, sometimes bound up in five. John le Pautre, his relation, born in 1617, at Paris, was placed with a joiner, who taught him the first rudiments of drawing; but he soon surpassed his master, and became an excellent designer, and skilful engraver. He perfectly understood all the ornamental parts of architecture, and the embellishments of country houses, such as fountains, grottos, jets-d‘eau, and every other decoration of the garden. John le Pautre was admitted a member of the royal aca<iemy of painting and sculpture April 11, 1677, and died February 2, 1682, aged sixty-five. His *’ GEuvres d' Architecture," Paris, 1751, 3 vols. fol. contains above 782 plates, which were much valued by the chevalier Bernin. Peter le Pautre, related to the two preceding, was born at Pans, March 4, 1659, and excelled so much in statuary as to be appointed sculptor to his majesty. He executed at Rome, in 1691, the beautiful gronp of <flneas and Anchises, which is in the grand walk at theThuilleries; and completed, in 1716, that of Arria and Paetus (or rather of Lucretia stabbing herself in presence of Collatinus) which Theodon had begun at Rome. Several of his other works embellish Marly. This ingenious artist was professor and perpetual director of St. Luke’s academy, and died at Paris, January 22, 1744, aged eighty-four.

, a learned divine, was born, according to Fuller, in Sussex, but more probably at Egerton, in Kent, in 1591, and was educated at Magdalen college, Oxford, on one of the exhibitions of John Baker, of Mayfield, in Sussex, esq. Wood informs us that having completed his degree of bachelor by determination, in 1613, he removed to Magdalen-hall, where he became a noted reader and tutor, took the degree of M. A. entered into orders, was made divinity reader of that house, became a famous preacher, a well-studied artist, a skilful linguist, a good orator, an expert mathematician, and an ornament to the society. “All which accomplishments,” he adds, “were knit together in a body of about thirtytwo years of age, which had it lived to the age of man, might have proved a prodigy of learning.” As he was a zealous Calvinist, he may be ranked among the puritans, but he was not a nonconformist. He died while on a visit to his tutor, Richard Capel, who was at this time minister of Eastington, in Gloucestershire, in the thirty-second year of his age, April 14, 1623. His works, all of which were separately printed after his death, were collected in 1 vol. fol. in 1635, and reprinted four or five times; but this volume does not include his Latin works, “De formarum origine;” “De Sensibus internis,” and “Enchiridion Oratorium,” Bishop Wilkins includes Pemble’s Sermons in the list of the best of his age.

, a French artist of merit, born at Magon in 1590, was a goldsmith’s son; but contracting dissipated habits, ran away from his parents, and is said to have literally begged his way to Rome, in partnership with a blind man. At Rome, after suffering much for want of resources, he had recourse to his pencil, and was soon enabled to maintain himself. Having become acquainted with Lanfranco, he endeavoured to follow his manner, and was not unsuccessful. This giving him a confidence in his powers, he resolved to return to France; and stopping at Lyons, he painted the Carthusians cloister there. From Lyons he proceeded to Paris; and having worked some time for Vouet, who engrossed all the great works, he took a second journey to Italy, where he stayed ten years, and returned to Paris in 1645. About this time he painted the gallery of the Hotel de la Villiere, and drew several easelpieces for private persons. He died professor of the academy, in 1655. He etched several things with a great deal of spirit, and, among others, the finest basso-relievos that are in Rome, a hundred of the most celebrated antiquities, and some of Raphael’s works. He also engraved, in the chiaro oscuro, some antiquities, after a manner, of which, it was said, he was the first inventor; but Parmegiano used it a long time before him. It consists, of two copper-plates, whose impression is made on paper faintly stained the one plate is engraved after the usual way, and that prints the black and the other, which is the secret, prints the white .

, the most celebrated sculptor of antiquity, was an Athenian, and a contemporary of the celebrated Pericles, who flourished in the 83d olympiad, or B.C. 440 to 450. This wonderful artist was not only consummate in the use of his tools, but accomplished in those sciences and branches of knowledge which belong to his profession; as history, poetry, fable, geometry, optics, &c. He first taught the Greeks to imitate nature perfectly in this way; and all his works, distinguished for their grandeur and sublimity, were received with admiration. They were also incredibly numerous; for he united the greatest facility with the greatest perfection. His Nemesis was ranked among his first works: and is said to have been carved out of a block of marble which was found in the camp of the Persians, after they were defeated in the plains of Marathon. He made an excellent statue of Minerva for the Plateaus; but the statue of this goddess, in her magnificent temple at Athens, of which there are still some ruined remains, was a more astonishing production of human art. Pericles, who had the care of this pompous edifice, gave orders to Phidias, whose talents he well knew, to make a statue of the goddess; and Phidias formed a figure of ivory and gold, thirty-nine feet high. Writers never speak of this illustrious monument of skill without raptures; yet what has rendered the name of the artist immortal, proved at that time his ruin. He had carved upon the shield of the goddess his own portrait and that of Pericles, which the envious censured as a crime. He was also charged with embezzling part of the materials which were designed for the statue. Upon this he withdrew to Elis, and took a most honourable revenge over the ungrateful Athenians, by making for that place the Olympic Jupiter, which was afterwards ranked among the most wonderful pieces of art in the world. It was executed with astonishing sublimity of conception; its dimensions being sixty feet high, and every way proportioned. * c The majesty of the work equalled the majesty of the God,“says Quintilian;” and its beauty seems to have added lustre to the religion of the country." Phidias concluded his labours witu this master-piece; and the Eleans, to do honour to his memory, appropriated to his descendants an office, which consisted in preserving from injury this magnificent image.

, an artist who flourished from 1524 to 1545, was of Lodi, and imitated the style of Titian, and sometimes of Giorgione, with distinguished and often unrivalled success. Such is the surprising beauty of some heads painted by him in one of the chapels of the Incoronata at Lodi, that a tradition prevailed of their having been painted by Titian himself, on his passage through that place. His picture of the Madonna with some saints, at S. Francesco in Brescia, reminds us of Giorgione. To the memory of this great man, Ridolfi has done little justice, by praising him only for his colour in fresco and distemper, without noticing the grandeur of his design, and the elegance of his forms. He likewise mistakes the name of his native place for his surname, and calls him a Brescian, in defiance of the inscriptions at the Incoronata, and elsewhere, of Callixtus de Platea, and Callixtus Laudensis.

, a modern artist, was born at Venice in 1683. He was the son of a statuary in wood, who probably gave him what foundation he had in design. He exchanged the gay and open manner in which he painted at first, for the dark and murky one that ever after characterised his works, from the contemplation of Spagnoletto’s and Guercino’s styles. He attempted to surprise by cutting contrasts of light and shade, and succeeded; such decision of chiaroscuro gave value to his drawings, and was eagerly imitated in prints; but his method of colouring destroyed its effect in a great measure on the canvas; increased and altered shades, faded lights, dingy yellows, produced dissonance and spots. When this is not the case, and in better-preserved pictures, the effect is novel, and strikes at first sight, especially in subjects that border on horror, such as the decollation of St. John in a dark prison, at Padua; a work painted in competition with the best painters of the state, and preferred. Piazzetta had no great vigour of mind for copious composition; he consumed several years in finishing a Rape of the Sabines, for a Venetian nobleman; and in the expressions of his altar-pieces he had certainly more devotion than dignity. His chief strength lay in busts and heads for cabinets. In caricatures he was perhaps unparalleled. He died in 1754, aged seventy-one.

, a famous engraver, was son of Stephen Picart, a good engraver also, and born at Paris in 1673. * He learned the principles of design, and the elements of his art, from his father, and studied architecture and perspective under Sebastian le Clerc. His uncommon talents in this way soon began to shew themselves and, at ten years of age, he engraved the hermaphrodite of Poussin, which was soon followed by two pieces of cardinal de Richelieu’s tomb. These works laid the foundation of that great reputation which this celebrated artist afterwards acquired. When he was grown up, he went into Holland, where his parents had settled themselves; and, after two years’ stay, returned to Paris, and married a lady who died soon after. Having embraced the reformed religion, he returned to Holland in 1710, for the sake of that freedom in the exercise of it, which he could not have at Paris; but connoisseurs are of opinion, that in attempting to please the taste of the Dutch, he lost much of the spirited manner in which he executed his works while in France, and on which they tell us his reputation was more firmly founded. Others inform us, that he was not so fond of engraving as of drawing, that he took up the graver with reluctance, and consequently many of his prints are better drawn than engraved. The greater part of his life was certainly spent in making compositions and drawings, which are said to have been very highly finished; and they are sufficient testimonies of the fertility of his genius, and the excellency of his judgment. He understood the human figure extremely well, and drew it with a tolerable degree of correctness, especially in small subjects. He worked much for the booksellers, and book-plates are by far the best part of his works. The multitude of these which he engraved, chiefly from his own compositions, is astonishing. One estimate makes them amount to 1300 pieces. The most capital of his separate plates is the “Massacre of the Innocents,” a small plate lengthways. After his death, which happened April 27, 1733, his friends published a small folio volume, called the “Innocent Impostures;” a set of prints from the designs of the great masters, in which he has attempted to imitate the styles of the old engravers. Strutt, who has, with apparent justice, censured this production, in the essay prefixed to his second volume, laments that Picart’s friends shouldhave been so injudicious as to publish what must diminish our respect for this artist.

, a celebrated artist, was born at Perugia in 1454, and was a disciple of Pietro Perugino, who often employed him as his assistant. He painted history; but in portraits was in so much esteem, that he was employed to paint those of pope Pius II. and of Innocent VIII; of Giulia Farnese, Caesar Borgia, and queen Isabella of Spain. His style, nevertheless, was extremely dry and Gothic, as he introduced gilding in the architectural and other parts of his pictures, blended with ornaments in relievo, and other artifices quite unsuitable to the genius of the art. The most memorable performance of Pinturicchio is the History of Pius II. painted in ten compartments, in the library at Sienna, in which he is said to have been assisted by Raphael, then a very young man, and pupil of Perugino, who made some cartoons of the most material incidents, and sketched many parts of the compositions.

, a very celebrated architect and engraver, was a native of Venice, but resident for the greater part of his life at Rome. The time of his hirth is not known here, but it must have been about1711. He was remarkable for a bold and free style of etching; which, in general, he drew upon the plate at once, without any, or with very little previous sketch. He worked with such rapidity and diligence, that the magnitude and number of his plates almost exceed belief; and they are executed with a spirit and genius which are altogether peculiar to hi Ib. The earliest of his works appear to have been published in 1743, and consist of designs invented by himself, in a very grand style; with views of ruins, chiefly the work of imagination, and strongly characterizing the magnificence of his ideas. These are sometimes found in a volume, collected by Bourchard, in 1750: with views of Roman antiquities, not in Rome, among which are several of Pola, in Istria. The dedication to these views is dated 1748. Considering these as forming his first work, we may enumerate the rest from a catalogue print, published by himself many years after. 2. “Antichita Romane,” or Roman Antiquities, comprised in 218 plates of atlas paper, commencing by a topographical view of ancient Rome, made out from the fragments of a most curious antique plan of that city, found in the pavement of the temple of Romulus, and now preserved in the Museum at the Capitol. These, with the descriptions in Italian, form four volumes in folio. 3. “Fasti consulares triumphalesque Romanorum, ab urbe condita, usque ad Tiherium Csesarem.” 4. “Del Castello dell' acqua Giulia, e della maniera in cui anticamente si concedevano e distribuivano le acque,” 21 folio plates. 5. “Antichita d'Albano, e di Castel Gandolfo,” 55 plates. 6. “Campus Martins Antique urbis,” with descriptions in Italian and Latin, 54 plates. 7. “Arcbi trionfali antichi, Tempi, ed Anfiteatri, esistenti in Roma, ed in altre parti d'ltalia,” 31. plates. 8. “Tro.fei d'Ottaviano Augusto,” &c. 10 plates. 0. “Delia Magnificenza ed Architettura de' Romani,” 44 plates, with above 200 pages of letter- press, in Italian and Latin. This great work appears to have been occasioned, in great measure, by some dialogues published in London in 1755, but now forgotten here, and entitled, “The Investigator.” These, containing many foolish calumnies against the ancient Romans, had been interpreted to Piranesi, and inflamed his ardent spirit to this mode of vindication. 10. “Architetture diverse,” 27 plates. 11.“Carceri d'inventione,” 16 plates, full of the most wild, but picturesque conceptions. 12. About 130 separate views of Rome, in its present state; in the grandest style of design, and the boldest manner of etching. Besides these, there is also extant, in very few hands (as it was not published, but only given to particular friends), a small work of this author, containing letters of justification to lord Charlemont; in which he assigns the reasons why he did not dedicate his Roman antiquities to that nobleman, as had been intended. Piranesi here appears extremely irritated against his lordship, and his agents, for neglect and ill-treatment; but the most curious part of the work is, that he has taken the pains to etch, in a small quarto size, and with the utmost neatness, yet with all his accustomed freedom, exact copies of the four original frontispieces, in which the name of his intended patron was to hare been immortalized: with views of the inscriptions reengraved as they now stand; as if the first inscriptions had been cut out of the stones, and the new ones inserted on small pieces let into them, as the ancients sometimes practised. In this form they still remain in his frontispieces; a peculiarity which would not be understood without this key. There are also head-pieces and tail-pieces, all full of imagination, and alluding to the matters and persons involved in the dispute. This work is dated in 1757. Piranesi was well known to most of the English artists who Studied at Rome; among others, to Mr. Mylne, the architect of Blackfriars-bridge, with whom he corresponded for several years, and for whom he engraved a fine view of that structure, in its unfinished state; representing, with precision, the parts subservient to its construction; such as the centres of the arches, &c. for the sake of preserving a memorial of them. Some of his works are dedicated to another British architect, Robert Adam; and as Piranesi was an honorary member of the Society of Antiquaries in, London, he always carefully subjoined that title to his name. He was also a member of the academy of the Arcadi, by the name of Salcindio Tiseio. as he has given it in one of his frontispieces, according to the fantastic custom of that society, of giving new names to the persons admitted. All who knew him agree that he was of a fiery and impetuous temper, but full of genius. He left a son, who has been employed in a diplomatic line. The exact time of his death we have not been able to learn; but it is supposed to have happened in or near the year 1780. Pijanesi has been accused, and not without reason, of suffering his imagination to embellish even the designs that were given as real views. He was employed, as an architect, to ornament a part of the priory of Malta, in Rome; in which place his son has erected a statue of him. It is thus mentioned by baron Stolberg, in his Travels: “Here is a fine statue of the architect Piranesi, as large as life, placed there by his son. It is the work of the living artist Angolini; and though it certainly cannot be compared with the best antiques, it still possesses real merit.” His portrait, engraved by Polanzani, in 1750, is in the style of a mutilated statue, and is very spirited. It is prefixed to some of his works.

, a man of taste in various pursuits, but chiefly known as an engraver, was the son of Mr. Rowland Place, of Dinsdale, in the county of Durham. He was at first intended for the law, and was placed as a clerk to an attorney in London, with whom he resided until 1665, when a house he had taken being shut up on account of the plague, he left London and quitted his profession at the same time. He now turned projector, and expended considerable sums of money in attempting to make porcelaine, which he put in practice at the manor-­house of York. In this it is probable he had not due perseverance; for one Clifton, of Pontefract, took the hint from him, and realized a fortune. Who was his teacher as an artist is not known, and his works are very rare, for he painted, drew, etched, and engraved, merely for his own amusement; and as his productions prove him a man of great abilities, it is to be lamented that he had not equal application, and left many valuable designs unfinished. In the reign of Charles II. it is said he was offered a pension of 500l. to draw the royal navy, but he refused this sum, large as it then was, from a dislike of confinement and dependence. He died in 1728, and his widow, on quitting the manor-house at York, disposed of his paintings; among which was an admired picture of fowls, others of fishes and flowers unfinished, together with his own portrait by himself. He left behind him a daughter, who was married to Wadham Wyndham, esq. This lady was living in 1764.

His etchings, particularly of landscapes and birds, from Griffier, are admirable. The free style in which he treated the foliage of his trees, proves his judgment and good taste; and his portraits in mezzotinto are excellent. Among the latter, Strutt mentions bishop Crew, archbishop Sterne, Dr. Comber, dean of Durham, Henry Gyles, the artist, and general Lambert. In Thoresby’s Topography of Leeds are some churches drawn by Place; the plates for Godartius’s book of Insects are by him; and he also executed many views in Yorkshire.

, a famous sculptor of antiquity, was a native of Sicyon, and flourished about the year 430 B. C. We know nothing of his history but from incidental notice of him in Pliny. His Doryphorus, one of his figures, for his excellence lay in single figures, was esteemed a canon of proportion; we read also of the statue of a boy, which was estimated at a hundred talents, or perhaps nearly 20,000l. according to our mode of reckoning. The emperor Titus had two naked boys playing at a game, by his hand, which was considered as a perfect performance. Lysippus the painter formed his manner on the study of the Doryphorus of this artist.

, an eminent Florentine artist, whose surname is not known, was called Baccio dellaPorta, from a study which he kept when a youth, near a gate of the city; and this name was afterwards changed to the more celebrated one of Fra Bartolommeo di S. Marco, when he entered the order of that Dominican convent. Sometimes he is only called “il Frate.” He was born in 1469, and studied under Cosimo Roselli but soon grew enamoured of the grand chiaro-scuro of Lionardo da Vinci, and strove to emulate it. His progress was rapid, and he became the instructor of Raphael in colour, who gave him lessons in perspective, and taught him to unite gracefulness with grandeur of form. The composition of his sacred subjects, and he painted little else, is that which adhered to Raphael himself, and was not dismissed by the Florentine school before the epoch of Pontormo; but he disguised its formality by the introduction of architecture and majestic scenery. To repel the invidious charge of incapacity for large proportions, he produced the sublime figure of St. Marc, which alone fills an ample pannel, and is, or was lately, among the spoils of the Louvre. His St. Sebastian, for skill in the naked, and energy of colour, obtained every suffrage of artists and of critics, but being considered as indecent, the monks thought proper to sell and send it to France. In drapery he may be considered as an inventor; no artist of his school formed it with equal breadth or dignity, or so natural and expressive of the limits; and if he were the instructor, he was certainly not the slave, of the layman. One work of his, of prodigious grandeur and beauty, is unnoticed by Mr. Fuseli, whose account we have nearly followed hitherto, viz. the Assumption of the Virgin, at Lucca. Its situation being retired, this picture is little known to travellers, though it is one of the most sublime productions of the pencil. Mr. West, the president of the Royal Academy, has in his possession a considerable part of the Studies mentioned by Vasari as having been left to his scholar, a nun of St. Catharine at Florence; and among them several drawings for this picture and its various parts. They are accompanied by about two hundred drawings of figures, draperies, and limbs, studied from nature with great care and taste; and exhibit the industry and uncommon zeal with which he laid the basis of his justly-acquired fame. He died in 1517.

, an excellent landscape painter, was born at Enkhuysen, in 1625, and learned the principles of painting from his father, Peter Potter, who was but a moderate artist; yet, by the power of an enlarged genius and uncommon capacity, which he discovered even in his infancy, his improvement was so extraordinary, that he was considered as a prodigy, and appeared an expert master in his profession at the age of fifteen.

The paintings of Potter are exceedingly coveted, and bear a high price; because, beside their intrinsic merit, the artist having died young, in his twenty-ninth year, in 1654, and not painted a great number of pictures, they are now scarcely to be procured at any rate. One landscape, which originally he painted for the countess of Solms, was afterwards sold (as Houbraken affirms) to Jacob Van Hoeck, for 2000 florins. Lord Grosvenor has in his collection a small work of Potter’s, for which his lordship gave 900 guineas.

, an eminent artist, was the son of Ercole Procaccini of Bologna, a painter of considerable note. He was born in 1548, a-nd was at first educated as a sculptor, which he relinquished, and frequented the academy of the Caracci, but the principal object of his studies were the works of Corregio, and in the opinion of many, none ever approached nearer the grandeur of that style, particularly in easel pictures, and works of confined composition, though his grace be often meretricious, and his colour less vigorous. A Madonna of his at St. Luigi de Fraiicesi, has been engraved as the work of Allegri and some still better imitations may be seen in the palace of St. Vitali at Parma, in that of Caregaat Genoa, and elsewhere. Of his various altar-pieces, the most resembling the manner of Corregio is perhaps that of St. Afra in Brescia: it represents Maria with the infant, amid an ogling and smiling group of angels and saints, where dignity seems as much sacrificed to grace, as in the mutual smile of the Virgin and the angel in his Nunziata, at St. Antonio of Milan; grimaces both, unworthy of the moment and of the mystery.

, an eminent painter, was born at Antwerp in 1607. He studied the belles-lettres and philosophy for some time; but his taste and inclination for painting forced him at length to change his pursuits. He learned his art of Rubens, and became a very good painter. History, landscape, and some architecture, were the principal objects of his application, and his learning frequently appeared in his productions. He painted several grand pictures in Antwerp, and the places thereabouts, for churches and palaces; and though he aimed at nothing more than the pleasure he took in the exercise of painting, yet when he died he left behind him a very great character for skill and merit in his art. He died in 1678, aged seventy-one. He left a son, John Erasmus Quellinus, called young Quellinus a painter whose works were esteemed, and may be seen in different parts of Flanders and a nephew, Artus Quellinus, who was an excellent artist in sculpture, and who executed the fine pieces of carved work in the town-hall at Amsterdam, engraved first by Hubert Quellinus. Young Quellinus was born in 1630, and died in 1715 and having studied at Rome, is generally thought to have surpassed his father.

, or Raffaello, whose family name was Sanzio, was born in the city of Urbino, March 28, 1483. He was the only child of John Sanzio, a painter, who, though of no great professional celebrity, encouraged his son’s inclination for the art, and after having taught him what he could, had the good sense and diffidence in his own talents, to place him under the care of Peter Perugino, when in his thirteenth year. Perugino, who, from his style of design, pronounced that he would be a great man, regarded him with peculiar affection, and Raphael, during the three years that he remained with this artist, so perfectly adopted his manner, that his works were not to be distinguished from those of his master; which was so far from creating any jealousy in the mind of the latter, that on the return of Raphael to Perugia, after his visit to Florence, he was the first to admire his works and proclaim his improvement.

Raphael, though possessing pre-eminent powers as a painter, had not suffered that profession alone to absorb his mind; he had studied architecture under Bramante, and in chastity of design was not inferior to that distinguished artist, who in full confidence of his abilities, recommended him as his successor, to conduct the great work of St. Peter’s, to which recommendation his holiness paid due attention. According to the pope’s brief on this occasion, dated August 1515, his salary was fixed at three hundred golden crowns, or 150l. per annum. For so important an undertaking this sum would seem to be a very inadequate remuneration but, as his biographer observes, in our own country, one hundred and sixty years subsequent to this period, sir Christopher Wren did not receive more than 200l. per annum, for the building of St. Paul’s, which included draughts, models, making estimates and contracts, examining and adjusting all bills and accounts, with constant personal superintendance, and giving instructions to the artificers in every department. St. Peter’s, which cost more than a century to complete, underwent so many changes by the various architects employed, that it would be now extremely difficult to particularize with any degree of certainty the different parts of it which were executed by Raphael. It appears, however, that it is to him we are indebted for the general plan of the church as it now exists. In 1515, Raphael went with the pope to Florence, and made a design for the facade of the church of St. Lorenzo: and, according to Vasari, he was also the architect of a magnificent house for the bishop of Troja, which still exists in the street of St. Gallo in that city; but of the different buildings designed or executed by Raphael, that on which his reputation as an artist is thought principally to rest, is the Caffarelli palace at Rome. The other buildings of Raphael still existing are, a palace for M. Giovanni Baptista dell' Aquila, opposite to the church of S. Maria della Vallicella, in Rome; a villa for cardinal Julius de Medici, afterwards pope Clement VII.; and for the prince Ghigi he built a set of stables in the Longara, and a chapel in the church of S. Maria del Popolo. This prince was a distinguished patron of Raphael, and much employed him. For him he painted in fresco, in one of the rooms of his Casino in the Longara, now called the Farnesina, a picture of Galatea drawn by dolphins, and surrounded with tritons, &c. which would appear to have been much admired and praised by his friend count Castiglione, from a letter still existing by Raphael to that nobleman, which the reader may see in our principal authority. For prince Ghigi he painted in fresco, on the spandrels of an arch in front of the Ghigi chapel in the church of S. Maria della Pace, a large allegorical subject of Sibyls delivering their prophecies for the confirmation of the revealed religion. This work was highly esteemed when finished; but is now unfortunately much injured, and parts are entirely effaced. For his Casino in the Longara, Raphael made a series of designs from Apuleius’s history of Cupid and Psyche, which were painted by himself and his scholars on a ceiling of a spacious hall. What part was painted by himself it would not be easy at this time to ascertain, as the work has suffered much by being originally exposed to the open air, as the loggia of the Vatican is at present, and by being repainted and repaired.

In his will, after leaving to his mistress a sufficiency to live independent, he bequeathed the rest of his property to a relation at Urbino, and to two of his scholars, Julio Romano, and Francesco Penni; appointing an intimate friend Turini da Pescia his executor. His body lay in state in the tall of his own house, and the celebrated picture of the Transfiguration, which he had just finished, was placed at the head of the room. His remains were afterwards removed with great funeral pomp to the Pantheon, where the last ceremonies were performed, and at the request of Leo X. cardinal Bembo wrote an inscription, to honour his memory, and mark the place of his interment. These particulars we have selected from the best life of this great artist that has appeared in this country, written by R. Duppa, esq. and prefixed to his splendid publication of “Heads from the Fresco pictures of Raffaello in the Vatican,” 1802, as a companion to his “Heads of Michael Angela*” Mr. Duppa concludes with a critical essay on the merits of Raphael, too long for our limits, and too valuable to be injured by abridgment. In Sir Joshua Reynolds’ lectures are many interesting and important observations on the same subject, which in truth must enter deeply into every discussion on the art. We might refer likewise to Opie’s lectures, Barry’s works, and other authors who have professedly or incidentally treated of Raphael. The present professor of painting has a note on the subject which may not form an improper conclusion to our article, as he appears to have on this occasion exerted his highest powers of discriminative criticism.

“The general opinion,” says Mr. Fuseli, " has placed Raphael at the head of his art, not because he possessed a decided superiority over every other painter in every branch, but because no other artist ever arrived at uniting with his own peculiar excellence all the other parts of the art in an equal degree with him. The drama, or in other words the representation of character in conflict with passion, was his sphere; to represent this, his invention in the choice of the moment, his composition in the arrangement of his actors, and his expression in the delineation of their emotions, were, and are, and perhaps will be unrivalled. And to this he added a style of design dictated by the subject itself, a colour suited to the subject, all the grace which propriety permitted, or sentiment suggested, and as much chiaroscuro as was compatible with his supreme desire of perspicuity and evidence. It is therefore only when he forsook the drama, to make excursions into the pure epic or sublime, that his forms become inadequate, and were inferior to those of M. Angelo: it is only in subjects where colour from a vehicle becomes the ruling principle, that be is excelled by Titian; he yields to Correggio only in that grace and that chiaroscuro which is less the minister of propriety and sentiment, than its charming abuse or voluptuous excess; and sacrifices to the eye what was claimed in vain by the mind.

In point of bodily constitution, few men have been more indebted to nature than Dr. Reid. His form was vigorous and athletic; and his muscular force (though he was somewhat under the middle size) uncommonly great; advantages to which his habits of temperance and exercise, and the unclouded serenity of his temper, did ample justice. His countenance was strongly expressive of deep and collected thought; but when brightened up by the face of a friend, what chiefly caught the attention was a look of good will and of kindness. A picture of him, for which he consented, at the particular request of Dr. Gregory, to sit to Mr. Raeburn during his last visit to Edinburgh, is generally and justly ranked among the happiest performances of that excellent artist.

There is perhaps no branch of collectorship that exhibits more caprice than that of prints in general, or of Rembrandt’s prints in particular, which appears by the different estimation in which the same subject is held, merely on account of a slight alteration in some unimportant part. Mr. Daulby instances this in the Juno without the crown, the Coppenol with the white back-ground, the Joseph with the face unshaded, and the good Samaritan with the horse’s tail white, which are regarded as inestimable; whilst the same subjects, without these distinctions, are considered as of little comparative value. Strutt mentions that, in consequence of a commission from an eminent coin lector, he gave forty-six guineas for the Coppenol with the white back-ground, i. e. before it was finished; when, the same evening, at the same sale, he bought a most beautiful impression of the same print finished, distinguished by having a black back-ground, &c. which had an address to Rembrandt at the bottom, written by Coppenol himself (for he was a writing-master of Amsterdam, and this print is his portrait), for fourteen guineas and a half. In the second instance, he adds, that he exceeded his commission by the half guinea; but in the first did not reach it by nearly twenty guineas. Mr. Daulby seems to be of opinion that Rembrandt, who loved money, availed himself of this humour in collectors. The facility with which he could change the effect of his etchings, by altering, obliterating, or working on them again, enabled him to provide sufficient amusement for his admirers; and hence varieties frequently occur which are not easily explicable. He is even said to have frequently suffered himself to be solicited before he would consent to dispose of them; and it is a well-attested fact, that the print of “Christ healing the sick,” usually denominated the “Hundred Guelder,” was so called because he refused to sell an impression of it under that price. Of this print we may remark that it is generally esteemed the chef d'aeuvre of Rembrandt, being highly finished, the characters full of expression, and the effect of the chiaroscuro very fine. Gilpin mentions twenty guineas, as the price of a good impression of this print; Mr. Daulby thirty, to which twenty more, we are assured, must now be added. Captain Baillie purchased the plate in Holland, and retouched it for publication, in 1776, at four guineas to subscribers, and five to non-subscribers. It has since been cut up, but there are impressions of the two groups from the left extremity, one above the other. Rembrandt’s rarest and most expensive portraits are those of Wtenbogardus, called in Holland, “the Goldweigher,” and in France “the Banker;” Van Tol, the advocate, sold as high as fifty-guineas; and the burgomaster Six, of equal value. This burgomaster was Rembrandt’s particular friend and patron, and had the largest collection of his prints that ever was formed in his life-time. Strutt gives 340 as the number of Rembrandt’s prints; but the largest collection known, that of M. De Burgy, at the Hague, collected between the years 1728 and 1755, consisted in the whole, including the varieties, of 655 prints. This great artist died at Amsterdam in 1688, or, according to some, in 1674. The little known of his personal character is not favourable. He was extremely fond of money, and not very scrupulous in his mode of procuring it. He is also represented as being fond of low company; a degrading taste, which seldom fails to affect a man’s profession, whatever it may be.

In 1746, by the friendship of captain (afterwards lord) Keppel, he had an opportunity to visit the shores of the Mediterranean, and to pass some time at Rome. The sketch he wrote of his feelings when he first contemplated the works of Raphael in the Vatican, so honourable to his modesty and candour, has been presented to the public by Mr. Malone, and is a present on which every artist must set a high value. He returned to London in 1752, and soon rose to the head of his profession; an honour which did not depend so much on those he eclipsed, as on his retaining that situation for the whole of a long life, by powers unrivalled in his own or any other country. Soon, after his return from Italy, his acquaintance with Dr. Johnson commenced. Mr. Boswell has furnished us with abundant proofs of their mutual esteem and congenial spirit, and Mr. Malone has added the more deliberate opinion of sir Joshua respecting Dr. Johnson, which may be introduced here without impropriety. It reflects indeed as much honour on the writer as on the subject, and was to have formed part of a discourse to the academy, which, from the specimen Mr. Malone has given, it is much to be regretted he did not live to finish.

Speaking of his own discourses, our great artist says, “Whatever merit they have, must be imputed, in a great measure, to the education which I may be said to have had under Dr. Johnson. I do not mean to say, though it certainly would be to the credit of these discourses if I could say it with truth, that he contributed even a single sentiment to them but he qualified my mind to think justly. No man had, like him, the faculty of teaching inferior minds the art of thinking. Perhaps other men might havg equal knowledge, but few were so communicative. His great pleasure was to talk to those who looked up to him. It was here he exhibited his wonderful powers. In mixed company, and frequently in company that ought to have looked up to him, many, thinking they had a character for learning to support, considered it as beneath them to enlist in the train of his auditors and to such persons he certainly did not appear to advantage, being often i tuous and overbearing. The desire of shining in conversation was in him indeed a predominant passion; and if it must be attributed to vanity, let it at the same time be recollected, that it produced that loquaciousness from which his more intimate friends derived considerable advantage. The observations which he made on poetry, on life, and on every thing about us, I applied to our art, with what success others must judge.” This short extract is not unconnected with a conjecture which many entertained, that sir Joshua did not compose his lectures himself. In addition to his own declaration here, as far as respects Dr. Johnson, who was chiefly suspected as having a hand in these lectures, Mr. Northcote, who lived some years in his house, says, in his memoirs, “At the period when it was expected he should have composed them, I have heard him walking at intervals in his room till one or two o'clock in the mjorning, and I have on the following day, at an early hour, seen the papers on the subject of his art which had been written the preceding night. I have had the rude manuscript from himself, in his own hand-writing, in order to make a fair copy from it for him to read in public: I have seen the manuscript also after it had been revised by Dr. Johnson, who has’ sometimes altered it to a wrong meaning, from his total ignorance of the subject and of art; but never, to my knowledge, saw the marks of Burke’s pen in any of the manuscripts. The bishop of Rochester, also, who examined the writings of Mr. Burke since his death, and lately edited a part of them, informed a friend that he could discover no reason to think that Mr. Burke had the least hand in the discourses of Reynolds.” And Burke himself, in a letter to Mr. Malone, after the publication of sir Joshua’s life and works, Says, “I have read over some part of the discourses with an unusual sort of pleasure, partly because being faded a little in my memory, they have a sort of appearance of novelty; partly by reviving recollections mixed with melancholy and satisfaction. The Flemish journal I had never seen before. You trace in that, every where, the spirit of the discourses, supported by new examples. He is always the same man; the same philosophical, the same artist-like critic, the same sagacious observer, with the same minuteness, without the smallest degree of trifling.” We may safely say, this is dot the language of one who had himself contributed much to those discourses. And if neither Johnson nor Burke wrote for Reynolds, to whom else among his contemporaries shall the praise due to those invaluable compositions be given, if Reynolds is to be deprived of it!

It is much to be lamented, that the world was deprived of this great artist before he had put into execution a plan which his biographer, Mr. Malone says, appears, from some loose papers, to have been revolved in his mind. “I have found,” says that author, “among sir Joshua’s papers, some detached and unconnected thoughts, written occasionally, as hints for a discourse, on a new and singular plan, which he seems to have intended as a history of his mind, so far as concerned his art; and of his progress, studies, and practice; together with a view of the advantages he had enjoyed, and the disadvantages he had laboured under, in the course that he had run: a scheme, from which, however liable it might be to the ridicule of wits and scoffers (of which, he says, he was perfectly aware), he conceived the students might derive some useful documents for the regulation of their own conduct and practice.” Such a composition, from such a man, written after he had spent a long life in successful practice, with none to guide him who had chosen a line of art for himself, stamped with originality; and in which he had to unfold principles, and elucidate them by practice and competent as he was to explain the operations of his own mind could not fail of being interesting and useful in the highest degree.

, an artist of temporary fame, was born at Belluno, near Trevisano, in 1659; and having discovered an early genius for painting, was conducted by his father to Venice, and placed as a disciple with Fred. Cervelli, a Milanese artist of good reputation, with whom he studied for nine years. He afterwards improved his practice at Bologna, &c. by copying, and obtained the favour and patronage of Rannuccio, the second duke of Parma. By the liberality of that prince, he was honourably maintained at Rome, studying the productions of the best ancient and modern masters; and there he formed that manner which distinguishes his productions, and for a while raised him into the highest esteem. Having quitted Rome, he returned to Venice, where he was so eagerly solicited for his paintings, that he had scarcely time to take even necessary refreshment. His fame spread through Europe, and he received an invitation to the court of the emperor at Vienna, to adorn the magnificent palace of Schoenbrun. From thence he was encouraged to visit London, where he was immediately and incessantly employed by the court, the nobility, and persons of fortune. Here he remained ten years, with his nephew and coadjutor, IVfarco Ricci, who painted skilfully scenes of architecture and landscape at Burlington house and Bulstrode. He acquired great wealth by the immense occupation he found; and then returned to Venice, where he remained until his death, in 1734, in the seventy-fifth year of his. age.

, an English artist of very considerable merit, was born at London, in 1646, and, instructed in the art of painting by Fuller and Zoust. Lord Orford asserts, that he was one of the best native painters that had flourished in England; and that there are draperies and hands painted by him that would do honour either to Lely or Kneller; the portrait of the lord-keeper North, at Wroxton, being in every respect a capital performance. After the death of sir Peter Lely, he advanced in the esteem of the public, and had the honour to paint the portraits of king Charles II. king James and his queen, and was appointed state painter. He made nature his principal study, without adopting the manner of any master, and as far as he thought it prudent he improved or embellished it in his pictures; and, like many other men of parts, he seems to be more respected by posterity, than by the age in which he flourished. He was, in truth, humble, modest, and of an amiable character. He had the greatest diffidence of himself, and was easily disgusted with his own works, the source probably, says lord Orford, of the objections made to him. With a quarter of Kneller’s vanity, he might have persuaded the world he was as great a master. The gout put an end to his progress, for he died in 1691, at the age of forty-five, and was buried in Bishopsgate church, in which parish he was born. One Thomas Riley was an actor, and has a copy of verses in Randolph’s Poems. This, lord Orford thinks, might be the painter’s father. In the same place are some Latin verses by Riley, whom the same biographer takes to be our painter himself. Richardson married a near relation of Riley, and inherited about SOOl. in pictures, drawings, and effects.

There was a more recent artist of this name, but nowise related to the preceding, Charles Reuben Riley, who died in 1798, about forty-six years of age. He was placed under Mortimer, and in 1778 obtained the gold medal at the Royal Academy, for the best painting in oil, the subject, the Sacrifice of Iphigenia. He was employed in the decorations of some noblemen’s and gentlemen’s houses, but chiefly in making drawings and designs for the booksellers.

, an excellent Swiss artist, wa born at Zuric, January 27th, 1575, but of his master, his travels, or the progress of his younger years, his biographer has not informed us. He must have enjoyed some celebrity, as he was chosen by the magistracy of Berne to decorate with paintings of large dimensions the senate-house and minster of that metropolis, and had the freedom of their city conferred on him. These pictures, which represented facts relative to the foundations of Berne, or allegories alluding to the peculiarities of its situation and customs, were equally distinguished by picturesque con* ception, boldness of style, and correct execution. In the senate-house especially, the third picture, whose subject was the building of the town, shewed great intelligence of foreshortening, and of what is by the Italians termed “di sotto in su.” For the public library of Zuric he painted the arms of the state and of its dependencies, supported by Religion and Liberty; Death lies at the feet of Religion, but to the usual allegoric implements in her hands he added a bridle, to distinguish her from Fanaticism and Superstition.

, an eminent modern artist, was born at Dalton, in Lancashire, Dec. 26, 1734, where his father was a merchant, builder, and farmer, but derived from none of his occupations more than what yielded a bare maintenance to his numerous family. In his twelfth year, George was taken from the village school, and engaged to superintend his father’s workmen; his leisure hours he employed in carving; and being fond of music, made a violin for himself, which be preserved till his death. He was first tempted to draw, from seeing some ordinary prints in a magazine, which he imitated with considerable success: and his first attempt at portrait was from memory, when endeavouring to describe the features of a stranger whom he had seen at church. After some attempts by his father to place him in trade, he consented to let him become a painter, and his first master was an artist of the name of Steele, who taught him, to a certain extent, the knowledge and use of the materials of the art. Leaving this master, he began to practise portrait-painting in the country, and being ambitious to try his fate in the metropolis, as soon as he had acquired nearly an hundred guineas, he took thirty for his travelling expences, and leaving the remainder with his wife, set out for, and arrived in London in 1762.

Of Romney, as an artist, it is by no means easy to appreciate the just character. That he possessed genius and talents in an eminent degree, no one can deny. Fuseli, in his edition of Pilkington’s Dictionary, has said, “that he was made for the times, and the times for him.” It had perhaps, says the critic in the Cyclopædia, been more just to have observed that Homney was made for better times than those in which he lived. His perception of art was far purer than most of his contemporaries, at least in this country, were capable of enjoying; and it must be remembered, that no one ever set forth in the career of an artist under greater disadvantages than he did. The taste he imbibed for simplicity and grandeur, on seeing, at an advanced period of his life, the works of the ancient artists, prove what might have been fairly expected of him, had he been sooner initiated in the mysteries of his art. Without this aid, Romney had to separate for himself the partial, from the general effects of nature; and the inequality with which he, in this point, met the rivalry of more fortunate artists, is too evident in most of his productions. Frequently, his chiaroscuro is ill conducted, and his harmony of forms and colours imperfect, even in pictures produced when enjoying the height of his intellectual power, and at the happiest period of his executive skill: at the same time they exhibit great fertility of invention, with sweetness and delicacy of sentiment.

He was in general fortunate in the choice of his historical subjects; and certainly, in this respect, had far the advantage of his great rival, sir Joshua Reynolds; and no less so in the power of expression, which he scarcely ever failed to obtain; whilst the latter, in his historical pictures, has rarely been so happy. Reynolds gave beauty and grace to his figures: Romney imparted soul. The former delights the eye with the harmony and richness of colour, and beauty of effect; the latter thrills and gratifies the heart with truth and force of expression, in action and countenance; wrought with more simplicity, but with less art. His picture of Ophelia seated upon a branch of a tree, the breaking of which threatens her destruction in the stream below, whilst the melancholy distraction visible in her lovely face accounts for her apparent insensibility to danger, is a sufficient proof of this assertion. His composition also of “Titania and her Indian Votaress,” in the possession of Mr. Beckford; “Titania, Puck, and the Changeling,” at sir John Leicester’s, and others of his works of the like playful and interesting kind, might be brought forward to support it. In portraiture, however, the justly exalted president of the royal academy stood alone, and Romney was not able to cope with him. In the composition of his figures, our artist exhibited the taste he had acquired by the study of the antique; and he admirably varied the characters of his heads. The arrangement of drapery which he adopted, partook largely of the same style; and being well understood, was painted with great dexterity; though it must be confessed, that in form, it was not unfrequently better adapted to sculpture than to painting. His style of colouring was simple and broad. In that of his flesh he was very successful; exhibiting a great variety of complexion, with much warmth and richness. It was not always, however, that his pictures were complete in the general tone; but crude discordant colours were sometimes introduced in the back-grounds, which not being blended or broken into unison with the hue of the principal figures, interrupted the harmony of the whole. The executive part of his works was free, learned, and precise, without being trifling or minute, possessing great simplicity, and exhibiting a purity of feeling consonant with the style of his compositions. He aimed at the best of all principles in the imitation of nature, viz. to generalize its effects; he even carried it so far as to subject himself to the charge of negligence in the completion of his forms: but the truth of his imitation is sufficiently perfect to satisfy the minds of those who regard nature systematically, and hot individually, or too minutely. In a word, adds the critic whom we have principally followed in this character, every lover of art who knows how to appreciate truly what is most valuable in painting, will hold the name of llomney in increasing estimation, the more frequently and impartially he examines his productions.

, a very eminent sculptor, was a native of Lyons in France; but of his early history no memoirs have been discovered. He appears to have come to England, about the time that Rysbrach’s fame was at its height, and became a very formidable rival to that excellent artist, who had at the same time to contend with the growing merit of Scheemaker. Roubiliac is said, however, to have had little business until sir HJdward Walpole recommended him to execute half the busts at Trinity-college, Dublin; and, by the same patron’s interest, he was employed on the fine monument of the general John duke of Argyle, in Westminster-abbey, on which the statue of eloquence is particularly graceful and masterly; but it has been thought that his fame was most completely fixed by his statue of Handel in Vauxhallgardens. Two of his principal works are the monuments of the duke and duchess of Montague in Northamptonshire, well performed and magnificent, although perhapg wanting in simplicity. His statue of George J. in the Senate-bouse at Cambridge, is well executed; as is that of their chancellor, Charles duke of Somerset, except that it is in a Vandyke-dress, which might not be the fault of the sculptor. His statue of sir Isaac Newton, in the chapei of Trinity-college, has always been greatly admired; but lord Orford objects, that the air is a little too pert for so grave a man. This able artist died Jan. 11, 1762, and was buried in the parish of St. Martin’s in the Fields, where he had lived.

, an illustrious artist, was of a distinguished family at Antwerp, where some say he was born in 1577; but according to others he was barn at Cologne, to which place his father had retired for security, to avoid the calamities of civil war. On his return to Antwerp, our artist was educated with the greatest care, and as he had shown some turn for design, was placed for instruction under Tobias Verhaecht, a landscape painter of some note, but soon exchanged this master in order to study historical painting under Adam Van Oort. But as the surly temper of this artist was incompatible with the more amiable disposition of Rubens, he soon left him also, and attached himself to Otho Venius, whom he found a man of learning, candour, and congeniality of taste; and although he rose infinitely above this preceptor, he ever preserved the highest esteem for him. From Venius, Rubens probably acquired his taste for allegory, one of his least merits, it is true, but one to which he was indebted for a considerable share of popularity, in an age when allegory was in fashion.

On his return to Mantua, he painted three magnificent pictures for the church of the Jesuits, which, in point of execution and freedom of force in effect, rank nearly among his best productions. His patron, wishing to have copies of some of the most celebrated pictures at Rome, sent Rubens thither for that purpose, which while he performed with great skill, he employed no less diligence in studying the originals. In 1605, he was honoured with one of those mixed commissions, of statesman and artist, with which he was frequently entrusted, and which place the various powers of Rubens in a very singular light. This was no less than an embassy from Mantua to the court of Spain. Carrying with him some magnificent presents for the duke of Lerma, the favourite minister of Philip III. he painted at the same time the picture of this monarch, and received from him such flattering marks of distinction, as probably facilitated the political purpose of his errand. Soon after his return to Mantua, he again visited Rome, and there and at Genoa painted some pictures for the churches, which greatly advanced his reputation. On the death of his mother, whom he appears to have deeply regretted, he formed the design of settling in Italy, bnt by the persuasion of the archduke Albert and the Infanta Isabella, was induced to take up his residence at Antwerp. Here he married his first wife, Elizabeth Brants, and built a magnificent house, which he enriched with the choicest specimens of the antique, and with valuable pictures.

His amazing success very naturally created enemies, and among others Abraham Janssens defied him to a trial of strength. Rubens answered, that he would contend with him when he had shewn himself to be a competitor worthy of him. Others more secretly endeavoured to injure him by attributing the best parts of his pictures to his pupils, and Schut and Rombouts abused him for lack of invention; this he answered by relieving their necessities and procuring them employment, while by engaging in those varieties of art, landscapes, lion and crocodile-hunting, and other miscellaneous subjects, he decidedly established his claim to the title of an universal painter, and covered his calumniators with shame and confusion. Amidst so much hostility, from the envy of contemporaries, one friendly offer must not be forgot. A visionary chemist, who had been labouring to produce the philosopher’s stone, offered our artist a share of the laboratory and its advantages. Rubens took him to his painting-room, and told him that twenty years before he had discovered the art of making gold by his palette and pencils.

The duke de Olivares had just completed the foundation t?f a convent of Carmelites, at the small town of Loeches, near Madrid, and the king, as a mark of his favour to the minister, commissioned liubens to paint four pictures for their church, which he executed in his grandest style, and the richest glow of his colouring. He also painted eight grand pictures for the great saloon of the palace at Madrid, which are regarded among the most brilliant of his productions. Their subjects were, the Rape of the Sabines the battle between the Romans and Sabines the Bath of Diana; Perseus and Andromeda; the Rape of Helen the Judgment of Paris; Juno, Minerva, and Venus; and the Triumph of Bacchus. He also painted a large portrait of the king on horseback, with other figures; and a picture of the martyrdom of the apostle St. Andrew, which was in the church dedicated to that saint. For these extraordinary productions he was richly rewarded* received the honour of knighthood, and was presented with the golden, key as gentleman of the chamber to the king. In 1629 he returned to Flanders, and thus, in the short space of little more than nine months, he designed and executed so extensive a series of pictures; a labour which, to any other artist not possessed of his extraordinary powers, must have required the exertion of many years. When he had rendered the account of his mission to the Infanta, she dispatched him to England, to sound the disposition of the government on the subject of a peace. There for a time he concealed the powers granted to him to negociate upon the subject, which he afterwards produced with success. In the mean time, as Lord Orford observes, neither Charles I. nor Rubens overlooked in the ambassador the talents of the painter. The king engaged him to paint the ceiling of the Banquetting-house, the design the apotheosis of king James I. The original sketch for the middle compartment was long preserved at Houghton. Rubens received 3000l. for this work. During his residence here he painted for the king the St. George, four feet high and seven feet wide. His majesty was represented in the Saint, the queen in Cleodelinde: each figure one foot and a half high: at a distance a view of Richmond and the Thames. In England are still several capital works of Rubens, at Blenheim, Wilton, Easton, &c. He was knighted during his residence here, which Lord Orford supposes did not exceed a year. The French, in their late barbarous irruptions into the Netherlands, robbed Flanders of fifty -two of Rubens’s best pictures, which however have probably since found their way to their former destination.

Lord Orford has observed that “one cannot write the life of Rubens, without transcribing twenty authors;” and certainly twice twenty critics may be quoted who have dilated on his merits as an artist, with more or less discrimination. In concluding his article, however, we shall confine ourselves to the opinion of sir Joshua Reynolds, from its acknowledged superiority.

“The elevated situation,” says our great artist, " or> which Rubens stands in the esteem of the world, is alone a sufficient reason for some examination of his pretensions. His tame is extended over a great part of the Continent, without a rival; and it may be justly said, that he has enriched his country, not in a figurative sense only, by the great examples of art which he left, but by what some would think a more solid advantage, the wealth arising from the concourse of strangers whom his works continually invite to Antwerp, which would otherwise have little to reward the visit of a connoisseur. To the city of Dueseldorp he has been an equal benefactor. The gallery of that city is considered as containing one of the greatest collections of pictures in the world; but if the works of Rubens were taken from it, I will venture to assert, that this great repository would be reduced to at least half its value. To extend his glory still farther, he gives to Paris one of its most striking features, the Luxembourg gallery; and if to these we add the many towns, churches, and private cabinets, where a single picture of Rubens confers eminence, we cannot hesitate to place him in the first rank of illustrious painters.

*' 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 controul, 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.

"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.

, a Scotch painter, was born at Edinburgh in 1736, where his father, who was an architect, probably taught him some of the principles of his art. Mr. Fuseli says he served an apprenticeship to a coachpainter, and “acquired a practice of brush, a facility of penciling, and much mechanic knowledge of colour, be^ fore he had attained any correct notions of design.” The Scotch account, on the other hand, says he was placed as an apprentice to John and Robert Norries, the former of whom was a celebrated landscape painter (no-where upon record, however,) and under his instructions Runciman made rapid improvement in the art. From 1755 he painted landscapes on his own account, and in 1760 attempted historical works. About 1766 he accompanied or soon followed his younger brother John, who had excited much livelier expectations of his abilities as an artist, to Rome; where John, who was of a delicate and consumptive habit, soon fell a victim to the climate, and his obstinate exertions in art. Alexander continued his studies under the patronage and with the support of sir James Clerk, a Scottish baronet, and gave a specimen of his abilities before his departure, in a picture of considerable size, representing Ulysses surprising Nausica at play with her maids: it exhibited, with the defects and manner of Giulio Romano in style, design, and expression, a tone, a juice, and breadth of colour, resembling Tintoretto. At his return to Scotland in 1771, Runciman was employed by his patron to decorate the hall at Pennecuik, with a series of subjects from Ossian; in the course of some years he was made master of a public institution for promoting design, and died Oct. 21, 1785. Jacob More, the landscape-painter, who died at Rome, was his pupil; and John Brown, celebrated for design, his friend. One of his capital pictures is the Ascension, an altar-piece in the episcopal chapel, Edinburgh; another a Lear, which, with his Andromeda and “Agrippina landing with the ashes of Germanicus,” are highly praised by his countrymen. Edwards mentions having seen two etchings by this artist, the one “Sigismunda weeping over the heart of Tancred;” the other riew of Edinburgh, which is executed with great spirit and taste.

, a celebrated landscape-painter of Holland, was born at Haerlem in 1636; and, though it is not known by what artist he was instructed, yet it is affirmed that some of his productions, when he was only twelve years of age, surprised the best painters. Nature was his principal instructor as well as his guide; for he studied her incessantly. The trees, skies, waters, and grounds, of which his subjects were composed, were all sketched upon the spot, just as they allured his eye, or delighted his imagination. His general subjects were, views of the banks of rivers hilly ground, with natural cascades; a country, interspersed with cottages and huts solemn scenes of woods and groves, with roads through them windmills and watermills but he rarely painted any subject without a river, brook, or pool of water, which he expressed with all possible truth and transparency. He likewise particularly excelled in representing torrents, and impetuous falls of water; in which subjects the foam on one part, and the pellucid appearance of the water in another, were described with wonderful force and grandeur. Sir Joshua Reynolds says there is a clearness in his landscapes scarce seen in those of any other painter. Most of the collections in England are adorned with some of the works of this master. He died in 1681, aged forty-five.

His subsequent engravings, in the chalk manner, are chiefly after Angelica Kauffman, and consist of four halfsheet circles, of which the subjects are, “Juno obtaining the Cestus of Venus,” “A Sacrifice to Pan,” “Cupid bound,” and “Cupid asleep;” “Queen Eleanor sucking the poison from the wounded Edward I.” (an excellent engraving of the kind); “Lady Elizabeth Grey soliciting the restoration of her Lands;” “Maria,” from Sterne’s Sentimental Journey, and “Patience,” both upright ovals; also “King John ratifying Magna Charta.” The last plate being left, by Ryland’s unfortunate death, in an unfinished state, was afterwards completed by Bartolozzi. This artist also engraved in lines, “Antiochus and Stratonice,” from, Pietro de Cortona, and “The first Interview between Edgar and Elfrida,” from Angelica Kauffman, both large plates.

, known likewise by the name of Andrea da Salerno, is the first artist that deserves notice, of the Neapolitan school. He is supposed to have been born about 1480. Enamoured of the style of Pietro Perugino, who had painted an Assumption of the Virgin in the dome of Naples, he set out for Perugia to become his pupil; but hearing at an inn on the road some painters extol the works of Raphael in the Vatican, he altered his mine!, went to Rome, and entered that master’s school. His stay there was short, for the death of his father obliged him to return home against his will in 1513; he returned, however, a new man. It is said that he painted with Raphael at the Pace, and in the Vatican, and that he copied Jiis pictures well: he certainly emulated his manner with success. Compared with his fellow-scholars, if he falls short of Julio, he soars above Raphael del Colle and the rest of that sphere. He had correctness and selection of attitude and features, depth of shade, perhaps too much sharpness in the marking of the muscles, a broad style of folding in his draperies, and a colour which even now maintains its freshness. Of his numerous works at Naples mentioned in the catalogue of his pictures, the altarpieces at S. Maria delle Grazie deserve perhaps preference; for his fn scoes there and elsewhere, extolled by the writers as miracles of art, are now, the greater part, destroyed. He painted likewise at Salerno, Gaeta, and other places of the kingdom, for churches and private collections, where his Madonnas often rival those of Raphael. This distinguished artist died in 1545.

, an ingenious artist, descended from a branch of the family of Saunby, of Babworth in Nottinghamshire, was born at Nottingham in 1732. In 1746 he came to London, and having an early predilection for the arts, procured admission to the drawing room in the Tower, where he first studied. In 1748, William duke of Cumberland, wishing to have a survey of the Highlands of Scotland, which was the scene of his memorable campaign in 1745-6, Mr. Sandby was appointed draughtsman, under the inspection of general David Watson, with whom he travelled through the North and Western parts of that most romantic country, and made many sketches. During his stay at Edinburgh he made a number of small etchings from these designs; which on his return to London were published in a folio volume. But drawing of plans abounding in straight lines being neither congenial to his taste nor worthy of his talents, he in 1752 quitted the service of the survey, and resided with his brother, Mr. Thomas Sandby, at Windsor, and during his continuance there took more than seventy views of Windsor and Eton. The accuracy, taste, and spirit with which they were in an eminent degree marked, so forcibly struck sir Joseph Banks, that he purchased them all, and at a very liberal price. Mr. Sandby had soon afterwards the honour of being one of this gentleman’s party in a tour through North and South Walesj and made a great number of sketches from remarkable scenes, castles, seats, &c. Under the patronage of the late sir Watkin Williams Wynne, he afterwards took many more views from scenes in the same country, which with those before mentioned he transferred to copper-plates, and made several sets of prints in imitation of drawings, in bister or Indian ink. The first hint of the process by which this effect is given to an engraving, Mr. Sandby is said to have received from the hon. Charles Greville, a gentleman of acknowledged taste and judgment in every branch of polite art. Profiting by this hint, Mr. Sandby so far improved upon it as to bring the captivating art of Aquatinta to a degree of perfection never before known in this country.

Sandys distinguished himself also as a poet; and his productions in that way were greatly admired in the times they were written. In 1632 he published “Ovid’s Metamorphoses Englished, mythologized, and represented in figures,” Oxford, in folio. Francis Cleyn was the inventor of the figures, and Solomon Savary the engraver. He had before published part of this translation; and, in the preface to this second edition, he tells us, that he has attempted to collect out of sundry authors the philosophical sense of the fables of Ovid. To this work, which is dedicated to Charles I. is subjoined “An Essay to the translation of the jEneis.” It was reprinted in 1640. In 1636, he published, in 8vo, “A Paraphrase on the Psalms of David, and upon the Hymns dispersed throughout the Old and New Testament,” 1636, 8vo, reprinted in 1638, folio; with a title somewhat varied, This was a book which, Wood tells us, Charles I. delighted to read, when a prisoner in Carisbrooke castle. There was an edition of J 640, with the Psalms set to music, by Lawes. In this last year he published, in 12rno, a sacred drama, written originally by Grotius, under the title of “Christus Patiens,” and which Mr. Sandys, in his translation, has called “Christ’s Passion,” on which, and “Adamus Exul,” and Masenius, is founded Lauder’s impudent charge of plagiarism against Milton. This translation was reprinted, with cuts, in 1688, $vo. The subject of it was treated before in Greek by Apollinarius bishop of Hierapolis, and after him by Gregory Nazianzen; but, according to Sandys, Grotius excelled all others. Langbaine tells us, with regard to Sandys’ translation, that “he will be allowed an excellent artist in it by learned judges; and he has followed Horace’s advice of avoiding a servile translation, * nee verbum verbo curabis reddere fidus interpres’ so he comes so near the sense of his author, that nothing is lost; no spirits evaporate in the decanting of it into English; and, if there be any sediment, it is left behind.” He published also a metrical paraphrase of “The Song of Solomon,” London, 1641, 4to, dedicated to the King, and reprinted in 1648 with his “Psalms.” There are but few incidents known concerning our author. All who mention him agree in bestowing on him the character, not only of a man of genius, but of singular worth and piety. For the most part of his latter days he lived with sir Francis Wenman, of Caswell, near Witney in Oxfordshire, to whom his sister was married; probably chusing that situation in some measure on account of its proximity to Burford, the retirement of his intimate acquaintance and valuable friend Lucius lord viscount Falkland, who addressed some elegant poems to him, preserved in Nichols’s “Select Collection,” with several by Mr. Sandys, who diejl at the house of his nephew, sir Francis Wyat, at Boxley in Kent, in 1643; and was interred in the* chancel of that parish-church, without any inscription but in the parish register is this entry “Georgius Sandys poetarum Anglorum sui sseculi facile princeps, sepultus fuit Martii 7, Stilo Angliae, ann. Dom. 164$.” His memory has also been handed down by various writers, with the respect thought due to his great worth and abilities. Mr. Dryden pronounced him the best versifier of the age, but objects to his “Ovid,” as too close and literal; and Mr. Pope declared, in his notes to the Iliad, that English poetry owed much of its present beauty to his translations. Dr. Warton thinks that Sandys did more to polish and tune the English versification than Den ham or Waller, who are usually applauded on this subject; yet his poems are not now much read. The late biographer of his father observes, that “the expressive energy of his prose will entitle him to a place among English classics, when his verses, some of which arebeautiful, shall be forgotten. Of the excellence of his style, the dedication of his travels to prince Henry, will afford a short and very conspicuous example.”

, named Medula, an eminent artist, was born in 1522, at Sebenico, in Dalimtia. His parents, who were poor, placed him with a house-painter at Venice, where, at his leisure hours, he acquired a superior taste, by studying the etchings and compositions of Parmigiano and the works of Giorgione and Titian in the public buildings of the city. At length, Titian, being informed of his unfortunate situation and promising talents, took him under his care, and soon afterwards employed him in the library of St. Marco, where Schiavoni is said to have painted three entire cielings. Feeling. his strength, he ventured to paint, in competition with Tintoretto, a picture for the church of the Santa Croce, representing the visitation of the Virgin to Elizabeth; and though he did not equal his antagonist, yet he received a considerable share of applause. Schiavoni was accounted one of the finest colourists of the Venetian school, and to colouring sacrificed almost every other attribute of the art; yet his compositions are managed with great dexterity, and executed with astonishing freedom. Two of his most admired works are in the church of the Padri Teatini at Rimini, representing the Nativity and the Assumption of the Virgin, and his “Perseus and Andromeda,” and the “Apostles at the Sepulchre,” are in the royal collection at Windsor. He died at Venice in 1582, at the age of sixty.

, a very ingenious artist, was born at Bassano, in the Venetian territory, April 1, 1765. His father was a stationer, who was enabled to give him a useful, but limited education. From his infancy he had a peculiar taste for drawing; and attained such proficiency, that an able painter, Julius Golini, to whom some of his productions were shewn, undertook to instruct him in that art. At the age of thirteen Lewis was put under his care, and the high opinion he had formed of the hoy’s genius was confirmed by the rapid progress he made, while his amiahle disposition endeared him so much, that he loved him as his own son* After three years of useful instruction, he had the misfortune to lose this master, who expired in his arms. Left to pursue his own course, he turned his views to Count Remaudini, whose extensive typographical and chalcographical concern is rendered more famous by the giving employment to Bartolozzi and Volpato; and the works of those artists gave fresh impulse to the youth’s ardour for improvement. About this time he became acquainted with one Lorio, an indifferent engraver, with whom he worked about twelve months, when, finding he bad exhausted his fund of instructions, he resolved to alter his situation. A copy of a holy family in the line manner, from Bartolozzi, after Carlo Maratta, gained him immediate employment from Count Remaudini, and attracted the notice of Mr. Suntach, an engraver and printseller in opposition to Remaudini. About this time came to Bassano a wretched engraver of architecture, but a man of consummate craft ancf address. He became acquainted with Schiavonetti at Mr. Sumach’s, and was ultimately the means of bringing him to England, where he became acquainted with Bartolozzi, and lived in his house until he established himself on his own foundation; after which Schiavonetti cultivated his genius with a success; that answered the expectations which vtere first formed' of it, and conducted all his affairs with an uprightness and integrity that will cause his memory to be equally revered as a gentleman and an artist. He died at Bromptoiv June 7, 1810, in the forty-fourth year of his age; and on the -14-th was buried in Paddington church-yard, with a solemnity worthy of his talents and character.

, or rather Schedone (Bartolomeo), was born at Modena in 1560. He is said to have acquired the principles of the art of painting in the school of the Caracci, but must have remained there a very short time, as it is difficult to meet with any traces of their style in his works. He afterwards studied, and with the greatest success, the works and manner of Corregio. When his early works came to be admired, Ranuccio, duke of Parma, took him into his service, and for this patron he painted several pictures, which were among the principal ornaments of the collection of the king of Naples, who was heir to the Farnese family. Sir Robert Strange counted in that palace and the city of Naples near fourscore pictures by this artist. There are but few in the other collections. In the cathedral of Modena there is an admirable picture of his, of S. Geminiano restoring a dead child to life; there are also a few at Parma, but in general they are seldom to be met with to purchase. In all he is the imitator of Corregio, and between their works some connoisseurs have found it difficult to distinguish, nor has any artist so successfully imitated him, either in the harmony of his colouring, his knowledge of light and shadow, or the graces he has diffused throughout many of his compositions. Schidoni is said to have been addicted to gaming, which wasted his substance, and disturbed his mind; and at last to have fallen a sacrifice to it, not being able to overcome the mortification of having one night lost more than he was able to pay. He died at the age of fifty-six, in 1616.

Mr. Short was accustomed to visit the place of his nativity once every two or three years during his residence in London, and in the year 1766 he paid his last visit to Scotland. He died at Newington Butts, near London, in June 1768, after a very short illness, in the fifty-eighth year of his age. Mr. Short was a very good general scholar, besides well skilled in optics and mathematics. He was a very useful member of the Royal Society, and wrote a great many excellent papers in the Philosophical Transactions, from 1736 to the time of his death. His eminence as an artist is universally admitted, and he is spoken of by those who knew him from his youth upwards, as a man of virtue and very amiable manners.

, a Florentine artist, born at Corfcona in 1439, was the scholar of Piero della Francesca. He was an artist of spirit and expression, and one of the first in Tuscany, who designed the naked with anatomical intelligence, though still with some dry ness of manner, and too much adherence to the model: the chief evidence of this is in the Duomo of Orvieto, where in the mixed imagery of final dissolution and infernal punishment, he has scattered original ideas of conception, character, and attitude, in copious variety, though not without remnants of gothic alloy. The angels, who announce the impending doom or scatter plagues, exhibit, with awful simplicity, bold fore-shortenings; whilst the St. Michael presents only the tame heraldic figure of a knight all cased in armour. In the expression of the condemned groups and daemons, he chiefly dwells on the supposed perpetual renewal of the pangs attending on the last struggles of life with death, contrasted with the inexorable scowl or malignant grin of fiends methodizing torture; a horrid feature, reserved by Dante for the last pit of his Inferno. It has been first said by Vasari, who exulted in his relation to Luca, that Michael Angelo, in certain parts of his Last Judgment, adopted something of the conduct and the ideas of his predecessor. This is true, because Michael Angelo could not divest himself of every impression from a work he had so often seen: his originality consisted in giving consequence to the materials of Luca, not in changing them; both drew from the same sources, with the same predilections and prejudices, and differed less in the mode than the extent of their conception.

Of this artist, who died in 1521, aged eighty- two, a story is told as a proof of what an absolute command he had over his passions, or rather, it might have been said, over natural affection. He had a son extremely handsome, and a youth of great hopes, who was unfortunately killed at. Cortona. When this son, greatly beloved by him, was brought home, he ordered his corpse to be carried into his painting-room and, having stripped him, immediately drew his picture, without shedding a tear.

, a celebrated French engraver, was born August 15, 1621, at Nanci, of a good family, originally Scotch. After his father’s decease, he went to Paris, where Israel Henriet, his mother’s brother, a skilful engraver, gladly received him, and educated him as his own son. He drew ajl the views of Paris and its environs, engraved them with great success, and went twice afterwards to Rome, whence he brought the great number of fine Italian views which he has left us. Louis XIV. being at length informed of this artist’s great genius, employed him to engrave all the royal palaces, conquered places, &c, and appointed him drawing master to the dauphin, allowing him a considerable pension besides, with apartments in the Louvre. Silvestre married Henrietta Selincart, a lady celebrated both for her wit and beauty, who dying in September 1680, he erected a superb monument to her memory in the church of St. Germain l'Auxerrois. He died October 11, 1691, aged seventy.

, a Dutch artist, eminent as a painter of portraits and conversations, was born at Leyden in 1640, and died in 1691. He was a disciple, and zealous imitator of Gerard Douw, whom he is thought in some respects to surpass. The exquisite neatness of his manner compelled him to work very slowly, and he is said to have employed three years in painting a family picture for Mr. Meermans. He imitated nature with exactness, but without taste or selection, yet he is esteemed one of the best of the Flemish painters.

, of Ch'uhester, the second, but most known, of three brothers, all distinguished as painters, was born in 1714. George is celebrated as a painter of landscape, but it was expected by the connoisseurs of the time, that his younger brother John would have surpassed him in that syle of painting. In the contests for prizes, at the society for the encouragement of arts, John’s landscapes were frequently preferred to those of George; but he died at an earlier period, and all memory of his works, as well as of the artist himself, has been nearly obliterated. William, the eldest brother, was a painter of portraits, but produced also some good landscapes. He is said, however, by some who remember him, to have been more remarkable for painting fruit and flowers, than for the other branches of his art. William was deformed, and his countenance was thought by many to resemble that of the celebrated John Locke. John died July 29, 1764, at the age of forty- seven, William on the 27th of the ensuing September, at the age of fifty -seven. George survived till Sept. 7, 1776, when he died, at the age of sixty-two. Their remains are deposited in the church-yard of St. Paneras at Chichester, and distinguished only by a plain stone, containing their names and the profession of each, with the dates above recited. Mr. W. Pether, an ingenious painter and engraver in mezzotinto, who was intimate with these brothers, published several years ago an admirable print, with fine likenesses of the three, represented in a groupe; the eldest is reading a lecture upon landscape to the two younger, who are listening with great attention.

, called L‘Abate Ciccio, from his mode of dressing like an abbot, an illustrious Italian painter, was descended of a good family, and born at Nocera de’ Pagani near Naples in 1657. His father Angelo, who had been a scholar of Massimo, and was a good painter and a man of learning, discerned an uncommon genius in his son; who is said to have spent whole nights in the studies of poetry and philosophy. He designed also so judiciously in chiaro obscure, tiiat his performances surprised all who saw them. Angelo intended him for the Jaw, and did not alter his purpose, though he was informed of his other extraordinary talents, till cardinal Orsini advised him. This cardinal, afterwards Benedict Xiji. at a visit happened to examine the youth in philosophy, and, although satisfied with his answers, observed, that he would do better, if he did not waste so much of his time in drawing; but when these drawings were produced, he was so surprised, that he told the father how unjust he would be both to his son and to the art, if he attempted to check a genius so manifestly displayed. Ou this, Solimene had full liberty given him to follow his inclination. Two years passed on, while he studied under his lather, after which, in 1674, he went to Naples, and put himself under the direction of Francesco di Maria. Thinking, however, that this artist laid too great a stress on design, he soon left him, and guided himself by the works of Lanfranc and Calabrese in composition and chiaro obscuro, while those of Pietro Cortona and Luca Jordano were his standards for colouring, and Guido and Carlo Maratti for drapery. By an accurate and well-managed study of these masters, he formed to himself an excellent style, and soon distinguished himself as a painter. Hearing that the Jesuits intended to paint the chapel of St. Anne in the church Jesu Nuovo, he sent them a sketch by an architecture painter; not daring to carry it himself, lest a prejudice against his youth might exclude him. His design was nevertheless accepted, and, while he was employed on this chapel, the best painters of Naples visited him, astonished to h'nd themselves surpassed by a mere boy. This was his first moment of distinction, and his reputation increased so fast, that great works were offered him from every quarter. His fame extending to other countries, the kings of France and Spain made him very advantageous proposals to engage him in their service, all which he declined. Philip V. arriving at Naples, commanded him to paint his portrait, and allowed him to sit in his presence: and the emperor Charles VI. knighted him on account of a picture he sent him. In 1701, he resided at Rome during the holy year: when the pope and cardinals took great notice of him. This painter is also known by his sonnets, which have been often printed in collections of poetry; and, at eighty years of age, he could repeat from memory the most beautiful passages of the poets, in the application of which he was very happy. He died in 1747, at almost ninety. He painted entirely after nature; being fearful, as he said, that too servile an attachment to the antique might damp the fire of his imagination. He was a man of a good temper, who neither criticised the works of others out of envy, nor was blind to his own defects. He told the Italian author of his life, that he had advanced many falsities in extolling the character of his works: which had procured him a great deal of money, but yet were very far short of perfection. The grand duke of Tuscany with difficulty prevailed on Solimene’s modesty to send him his picture, which he wanted to place in his gallery among other painters.

, an eminent painter, was born at Leyden, in 1636, and was successively the disciple of Knufter, Brower, and Van Goyen, who had such a high opinion of him, that he thought he disposed of his daughter prudently when he gave her in marriage to Jan Steen. Jan Steen, however, was not prudent, for, although he had many opportunities of enriching himself, by other occupations as well as by his profession, he frequently was reduced, by an idle, intemperate, and dissipated course of life, to work for the subsistence of himself and his family. He had a strong manly style of painting, which might become even the design of Raphael, and he showed the greatest skill in composition, and management of light and shadow, as well as great truth in the expression and character of his figures. One of his capital pictures is a mountebank attended by a number of spectators, in which the countenances are wonderfully striking, full of humour, and uncommon variety. Houbraken mentions another remarkable picture painted by this master, representing a wedding, consisting of the old parents, the bride, the bridegroom, and a lawyer or notary. The notary is described as thoroughly engaged in attending to the words which he was to write down; the bridegroom appears in a violent agitation, as if dissatisfied with the match; and the bride seems to be in tears every character evidencing the ready and humorous invention of the artist. Houbraken also mentions a third picture, equally excellent, representing the funeral of a quaker; in which each face is distinguished by a peculiarly humorous cast of features, and the whole has a wonderful air of nature and probability. In designing his figures he preserved a proper distinction of the ranks and conditions of the persons introduced in his subject, by their forms, their attitudes, their air of expression; and in this respect appears worthy of being studied by other painters. His works did not bear an extraordinary price during his life, as he painted only when he was necessitous, and sold his pictures to answer his immediate demands. But after his death they rose amazingly in their value, and are rarely to be purchased, few paintings bearing a higher price, as well on account of their excellence as of their scarcity. He died in 1689, aged fifty-three, but Houbraken fixes his death in 1678, aged forty-two, eleven years earlier than other writers.

, an eminent painter, the son of Francis Stella, a Fleming, was born in 1596 at Lyons, where his father had settled on his return from Italy. Although he was but nine years old at his father’s death, the latter had successfully initiated him in the principles of the art, which he afterwards improved in Italy. At the age of twenty, being at Florence, the great duke Cosmo de Medicis, perceiving him to be a man of genius, assigned him lodgings and a pension equal to that of Callot, who was there at the same time; and here, during a residence of seven years, he exhibited many proofs of his skill in painting, designing, and engraving. Thence he went to Rome, where he spent eleven years, chiefly in studying the antique sculptures, and Raphael’s paintings. Having acquired a good taste, as well as a great reputation, in Rome, he resolved to return to his own country; intending, however, to pass thence into the service of the king of Spain, who had invited him more than once. He took Milan in his way to France; and cardinal Albornos offered him the direction of the academy of painting in that city, which he refused. When he arrived in Paris, and was preparing for Spain, cardinal Richelieu detained him, and presented him to the king, who assigned him a good pension and lodgings in the Louvre. He gave such satisfaction here, that he was honoured with the order of St. Michael, and painted several large pictures for the king, by whose command the greatest part of them were sent to Madrid. Being very laborious, he spent the winter-evenings in designing the histories of the Holy Scriptures, country sports, and children’s plays, which were engraved, and make a large volume. He also drew the designs of the frontispieces to several books of the Louvre impression; and various antique ornaments, together with a frieze of Julio Romano, which he brought out of Italy. He died of a consumption in 1647. This painter had a fine genius, and all his productions were wonderfully easy. His talent was rather gay than terrible: his invention, however, noble, and his design in a good style. His models were evidently Raphael and Poussin. He was upon the whole an excellent painter, although somewhat of a mannerist. Sir Robert Strange has a fine engraving from a “Holy Family” by this artist.

Mr. Strange was originally intended for the law; but that profession ill according with his peculiar turn of mind, he quitted it in a short time, and while yet uncertain whither his genius really pointed, went aboard a man of war bound for the Mediterranean. From this voyage he returned so much disgusted with a sea-life, that he again betook himself to pursuits of law, and might have continued to prosecute them through life, and his talents as an artist been for ever lost to the world, if his brother had not accidentally discovered in his bureau a variety of drawings and unfinished sketches, with which he appears to have amused those hours that his friends supposed devoted to severer labours. These first essays of genius struggling to display its peculiar powers, were shewn to the late Mr. llichard Cooper, at Edinburgh, the only person there who, at that time, had taste in such performances; they were by him very highly approved, and he immediately proposed that the young man should be regularly placed under his tuition. This measure, coinciding perfectly with his own inclinations, was accordingly adopted. The rapid progress which he made under this master’s instructions soon satisfied his friends that in making the arts his study and profession, he had yielded at last to the bent of nature, and was following the course which genius prompted him to pursue.

In the year 1751, he finally removed his family to London; and at this period, when historical engraving had made but little progress in Britain, he began to devote himself to this higher and more difficult species of his art; of which, therefore, in this country, he is justly entitled to be considered as the father. It was about this time that by refusing to engrave a portrait of his present majesty, he incurred the strong displeasure of lord Bute; whose conduct towards him is detailed, with many other interesting circumstances, in a letter to that nobleman, which Mr. Strange published in 1775. It is not easy, or perhaps possible, in this country, for power to depress merit; and so it proved in the case of this artist, who rose in spite of all opposition. With respect to the painting which he thus refused to engrave, it is said that a personage, apparently more concerned in the question than lord Bute, has since commended the spirit of the artist, who scorned to perpetuate so wretched a performance. In 1760 Mr. Strange set out for Italy, which, as the seat of the fine arts, he had long been anxious to visit. The drawings made by him in the course of this tour, several of which he afterwards engraved, are now in the possession of lord Dundas. Every where throughout Italy singular marks of attention and respect accompanied him, not only from illustrious personages, but from the principal academies of the fine arts which he visited in his route. He was made a member of the academies of Rome, Florence, and Bologna, and professor of the royal academy at Parma. Nothing indeed shews more strongly the high estimation in which his talents were held at Rome, than the compliment which was paid him by signer Roifanelli, in painting the ceiling of that room in the Vatican library, where the collection of engravings is preserved. The painting represents the progress of the art of engraving, and, among the portraits of those who were most eminent in it, that of Strange is introduced. He is represented holding under his arm a volume on which his name is inscribed; an honour paid to no British artist but himself. Similar marks of high respect were also bestowed on his talents in France. In particular, he was made a member of the royal academy of painting at Paris, the highest honour ever conferred on any foreigner.

With respect to the works of this artist, he left fifty capital plates, still in good condition, which were engraved from pictures of the most celebrated painters of the Roman, Florentine, Lombard, Venetian, and other schools. Their subjects are historical, both sacred and profane, poetical, and allegorical. From his earliest establishment in life, Mr. Strange selected carefully about eighty copies of the finest and must choice impressions of each plate which he engraved, intending to present them to the public when age should disable him from adding to their number. These he collected into as many volumes, arranged in the order of their publication. To each volume he prefixed two portraits of himself, on the same plate, the one an etching, the other a finished proof, from a drawing by John Bapiiste Greuse. This is the last plate he engraved, and is a proof that neither his eyes nor hand were impaired by years. It shews likewise the use he made both, of aqua fortis and of the graver. Each volume, besides a dedication to the king, contains an introduction, on the progress of engraving; and critical remarks on the pictures from which his plates were taken.

Among these engravings, it will be observed, there is only one from the painting of any native artist of this country; and that is from Mr. West’s apotheosis of the king’s children. This painting he solicited his majesty’s permission to engrave, which was granted with the utmost readiness; and every accommodation which the palace could give was liberally furnished to him, while engaged in the undertaking; in the progress of which he was often visited both by the king and the royal family. Before the work could be completed his avocations called him to Paris, and he expected to have been forced to leave the engraving unfinished till his return; but his majesty, in a manner peculiarly flattering, consented to let him take it with him. In return for so much condescension, when a few copies of this engraving had been struck off, the plate itself was destroyed, by cutting out the principal figure, which, after being gilt, was presented to his majesty.

His remains were interred, in compliance with what had long been known to be his own modest desire, in the most private manner, in Covent-garden churchyard; his ashes being placed immediately adjoining to those of a daughter once tenderly beloved. A simple tablet, with his name inscribed, is all that distinguishes the spot. The works indeed of such an artist form his truest and most appropriate monument. These no time has power to destroy, and, as long as the labours of taste shall be objects of admiration among mankind, these assuredly will perpetuate his reputation; and with it a name not more to be remembered for the genius which gave it lustre, than the virtues by which it was adorned.

, an ingenious artist, and the author of some valuable works on subjects of antiquity, was bora at Springfield, in Essex, Oct. 27, 1749, where his father, a man of some property, was a miller, but died when this son was only a year and a half old. His mother, however, took a tender care of his education, and placed him at Chelmsford school. At the age of fourteen he was apprenticed to the unfortunate William Wynne Ryland (See Ryland), and in 1770 became a student at the royal academy, where he had the gold and silver medals adjudged to him, the former for a painting in oil, his first effort, and the latter for the best academy-figure. The subject of his oil-painting was from the Æneid and it was no small triumph that his competitor was the celebrated Hamilton. After his apprenticeship had expired, he took up his residence in the family of his friend Mr. Thane; and in 1771 was first introduced to the British Museum, where he was employed to make some drawings. The rich stores of science and of art in that valuable repository, gave a new bias to his pursuits, and he now conceived some of those literary labours connected with his profession, which he afterwards executed; and such was his industry, that two years afterwards (1773) he published his first work, “The regal and ecclesiastical Antiquities of England,” 4to, and in June 1774, the first volume of what he then called “Jjopba TCngel-Cynnan -” or, complete views of the manners, customs, arms, habits, &.c. of the inhabitants of England, from the arrival of the Saxons to the time of Henry VIII.“A second volume appeared in 1775, and both were reprinted in 1797. This was a work of great research and labour, both in the preparation of the letter- press, and of the engravings, and he justly derived considerable reputation, on the score of accuracy and judgment. In 1777 and 1778 he published his” Chronicle of England,“in 2 vols. 4to, which he meant to have extended to six, but want of encouragement compelled him to relinquish his design. The work, however, is complete as far as it goes, and contains much valuable information, but is rather heavy, and not what is called a very readable book. In 1785 Mr. Strutt published the first volume of his” Dictionary of Engravers," and the second in 1786. In this he received considerable assistance from the late eminent sculptor, John Bacon, esq. As the first work of the kind executed in this country, it is deserving of high praise, and although far from being free of defects, still remains the only work of the kind on which reliance can be placed. The introductory history of engraving is particularly creditable to his judgment and industry.

In 1790, a severe asthmatic complaint rendered a country residence necessary, and he therefore settled for five years at Bacon’s-farm in Hertfordshire, where he employed some part of his time in engraving a series of plates for the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” which are said to be as fair a specimen of his talents as an artist, as any that can be produced but it is not mentioned for what edition they were engraved, or whether sold separately. Here likewise his benevolent regard for the welfare of the young induced him, at his own expence, to establish a Sunday school at Tewin, not far from his residence, which he superintended with great care, and had the satisfaction to find it attended with the most beneficial consequences to the morals of the villagers. In 1795, he returned to London, and began to collect materials for his work entitled “A complete view of the Dresses and Habits of the People of England, from the establishment of the Saxons in Britain to the present time.” The first volume of this appeared in 1796, and the second in 1799, 4to, illustrated by 143 plates. It was about the same time published in French. In 1801, he published the last work he lived to complete, namely, EligEamena XnjelTpeob; or, The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England,“a performance which, from the novelty of the subject, attracted the notice and admiration of readers of almost every class. In the beginning of October 1802, Mr. Strutt, then residing in Charles-street, Hatton-garden, was confined to his chamber with his last illness, of which he died on the 16th of that month, in the fifty-third year of his age. His biographer sums up his character in these words:” The calamities incident to man were indeed his portion on this earth; and these greatly augmented by unkindnesses where he least deserved to have met with them. He was charitable without ostentation a sincere friend, without intentional guile; a dutiful son a faithful and affectionate husband a good father: a worthy man and, above all, it is humbly hoped, a sincere Christian. His natural talents were great, but little cultivated by early education. The numerous works which he gave to the world as an author, and as an artist, prove that he employed his time to the best advantage.“Mr. Strutt engraved many plates, in dots, in imitation of chalk, a manner which he learned from his master Ryland, and in which softness and harmony are blended. He also left some Mss. in the possession of his son, from which have since been published, 1.” Queen Hoo Hall, a Romance and Ancient Times, a Drama,“4 vols. 12mo. both which have many characteristics of a lively and well-regulated imagination; and, 2.” The Test of Guilt; or Traits of Ancient Superstition, a dramatic tale, &c." in poetry, but not much calculated to raise our ideas of his merit in that branch.

As his years increased, knowledge attended their progress: he acquired a great proficiency in the Greek language; and his unparalleled strength of mind carried him into a familiar association with most of the sciences, and principally that of architecture. His stature was of the middle size, but athletic. He possessed a robust constitution, invincible courage, and inflexible perseverance. Of this the following fact is a proof: a wen, in his forehead, had grown to an inconvenient size; and, one day, being in conversation with a surgeon, he asked him how it could be removed. The surgeon acquainted him with the length of the process; to which Mr. Stuart objected, on account of the interruption of his pursuits, and asked whether he could not cut it out, and then it would be only necessary to heal the part. The surgeon replied in the affirmative, but mentioned the very excruciating pain and danger of such an operation. Mr. Stuart, after a minute’s reflection, threw himself back in his chair, and said, “I will sit stil! do it now.” The operation was performed with success. With such qualifications, although yet almost in penury, he conceived the design of visiting Rome and Athens; but the ties of filial and fraternal affection induced him to postpone his journey, till he could insure a certain provision for his mother, and his brother and second sister. His mother died: he was soon after enabled to place his brother and sister in a situation that was likely to produce them a comfortable support; and then, with a very scanty pittance in his pocket, he set out on foot for Rome; and thus he performed the greatest part of his journey travelling through Holland, France, &c. and stopping through necessity at Paris, and several other places in his way, where, by his ingenuity as an artist, he procured some moderate supplies, towards prosecuting the rest of his journey. When arrived at Rome, he soon formed an intimate acquaintance with Mr. Nicholas Revett, an eminent painter and architect. From this gentleman Mr. Stuart first caught his ideas of that science, in which (quitting the profession of a painter) he afterward made such a conspicuous figure. During his residence at Rome, he studied architecture and fortification; and in 1748 they jointly circulated “Proposals for publishing an authentic description of Athens, &c.” For that purpose, they quitted Rome in March 1750, but did not reach Athens till March 1751, where, in about two months, they were met by Mr. Wood and Mr. Dawkins, whose admiration of his great qualities and wonderful perseverance secured to him their patronage. Dawkins was glad to encourage a brother in scientific investigation, who possessed equal ardour with himself, but very unequal resources for prosecuting those inquiries in which they were both engaged; having at the same time so much similarity of disposition, and ardour of pursuit. During his residence at Athens Mr. Stuart became a master of architecture and fortification; and having no limits to which his mind would be restricted, he engaged in the army of the queen of Hungary, where he served a campaign voluntarily, as chief engineer. On his return to Athens, he applied himself more closely to make drawings, and take the exact measurements of the Athenian architecture. He left Athens in 1755, still accompanied by his friend Revett; and after visiting Thessalonica, Smyrna, and the islands of the Archipelago, arrived in England in the beginning of 1755. The result of their classical labours was the appearance, in 1762, of the first volume in folio of “The Antiquities of Athens measured and delineated, by James Stuart, F. R. S. and S.A. and Nicholas Revett, painters and architects.” This work is a very valuable acquisition to the lovers of antiquities and the fine arts, and is a proper companion to the noble descriptions of Palmyra and Balhec, by Mr. Dawkins and Mr. Wood, by whom the two artists were early encouraged in the prosecution of a design so worthy of the most distinguished patronage. To this work, and the long walk which the author performed to compose it, he has been indebted for the name of the Athenian Stuart, universally decreed to him by the learned of this country.

, a celebrated anatomist and painter of animals, was born at Liverpool in 1724-, and at the age of thirty went to Rome for improvement in his studies, but why is not easily accounted for; London was the best theatre to exercise his talents for the dissection and the portraiture of animals, of horses (which he chiefly excelled in) especially, and in London he fixed his residence. That his skill in comparative anatomy never suggested to him the propriety of style in forms, if it were not eminently proved by his Phaeton with the Horses of the Sun, would be evident from all his other figures, which, when human, are seldom more than the attendants of some animal, whilst the style of the animals themselves depended entirely on the individual before him: his tiger for grandeur has never been equalled; his lions are to those of Rubens what jackals are to lions; but none ever did greater justice to the peculiar structure of that artificial animal, the race courser, and to all the mysteries of turf- tactics, though, unfortunately for the artist, they depend more on the fac-similist’s precision than the painter’s spirit. Stubbs was perhaps the first who painted in enamel on a large scale. He was an associate of the Royal Academy, and died in 1806. He published a work, completed in 1766, under the title of “The Anatomy of the Horse including a particular description of the bones, cartilages, muscles, fascias, ligaments, nerves, arteries, veins, and glands; in eighteen tables from nature:” and before his death three numbers of another work, which was to have consisted of six, entitled “A Comparative Anatomical Exposition of the structure of the Human Body with that of a Tiger and a common Fowl, in thirty tables.”!

, one of the best painters hi his time which the French nation had produced, was born at Paris in 1617, and studied the principles of his art under Simon Vouet, whom he infinitely surpassed; and although he was never out of France, carried the art to a very high degree of perfection. His style was formed upon antiquity, and after the best Italian masters. He invented with ease, and his execution was always worthy of his designs. His attitudes are simple and noble, and his ex r pression well adapted to the subject. His draperies are designed after the manner of Raphael’s last works. Although he knew little of the local colours, or the chiaro scuro, he was so much master of the other parts of painting, that there was a great likelihood of his throwing off Vuuet’s manner entirely, had he lived longer. Immediately aiter Vouet’s death, he perceived that his master had led him out of the way: and by considering the antiques that were in France, and the designs and prints of the best Italian masters, particularly Raphael, he contracted a more refined style and happier manner. Le Brun could not forbear being jealous of Le Sueur, who did not mean, however, to give any man pain; for he had great simplicity of manners, and much candour, and probity. He died at Paris April 30, 1655, at no more than thirty-eight years of age. The life of St. Bruno, in twenty pictures, originally preserved in the Chartreux, and which employed him for three years, have, as Mr. Fuseli informs us, been “lately consigned to the profane clutch of restoration in the attic of the Luxembourg, and are now little more than the faint traces of what they were when issuing from the hand of their master. They have suffered martyrdom more than once.It is well that the nature of the subject permitted little more than fresco in the colouring at first, and that the great merit of their execution consisted in that breadth of vehicle which monastic drapery demands, else we should have lost even the fragments that remain.‘ The old man in the fore-ground, the head of St. Bruno, and some of the disputants in the back-ground of the Predication; the bishop and the condemned defunct in the funeral; the apparition of St. Bruno himself in the camp; the female figure in the eleemosinary scene, and what has suffered least of all, the death of St. Bruno, contain the least disputable marks of the master’s primitive touch. The subject of the whole, abstractly considered, is the personification of sanctity, and it has been represented in the series with a purity which seems to place the artist’s heart on a level with that of his hero. The simplicity which tells that tale of resignation and innocence, despises all contrast of more varied composition, though not always with equal success, St. Bruno on his bed, visited by angels, building or viewing the plan for building his rocky retreat; the hunting-scene, and’ the apotheosis; might probably have admitted happier combinations. As, in the different re* touchings, the faces have suffered most, the expression must be estimated by those that escaped; and from what still remains, we may conclude that it was not inferior to the composition.”

, an ingenious artist, born at Florence in 1213, was the person who introduced into Italy the art of designing in Mosaic, having learned it from some Greek artists, who were employed in the church of S. Mark at Venice. The chief of these artists was a man whose name was Apollonius. With him Taffi became associated, and they worked together at Florence, with great success. The most famous work of Taffi was a dead Christ, in a chapel at Florence; it was seven cubits long, and executed with abundance of care. He died in 1294, at the age of eighty one.

, a very ingenious artist, in the modelling department, was born in the neighbourhood of Glasgow, of obscure parents, and began life as a country stonemason, without the expectation of ever rising higher. Going to Glasgow on a fair-day, to enjoy himself with his companions, at the time when the Foulis’s were attempting to establish an academy for the fine arts in that city, he saw their collection of paintings, and felt an irresistible im^ pulse to become a painter. He accordingly removed to Glasgow; and in the academy acquired a knowledge of drawing, which unfolded and improved his natural taste. He was frugal, industrious, and persevering; but he was poor, and was under the necessity of devoting himself to stone-cutting for his support; not without the hopes that he might one day be a statuary if he could not be a painter. Resorting to Dublin for employment, he became known to Dr. Quin, who was amusing himself in his leisure hours with endeavouring to imitate the precious stones in coloured pastes, and take accurate impressions of the engravings that were on them.

To the ancient engravings he added a numerous collection of the most eminent modern ones; many of which approach in excellence of workmanship, if not in simplicity of design and chastity of expression, to the most celebrated of the ancients. Many years before he died he had a commission from the empress Catherine of Russia, for above 15,000 different engravings, which being executed in the best and most durable manner, were arranged in elegant cabinets, and were placed in the apartments of the palace of Czarsk Zelo. In executing this commission, Mr. Tassie availed himself of all the advantages which the improved state of chemistry, the various ornamental arts, and the knowledge of the age, seemed to afford. The impressions were taken in a beautiful white enamel composition, which is not subject to shrink, or form air-bladders; which emits fire when struck with steel, and takes a fine polishand which shews every stroke and touch of the artist in higher perfection than any other substance. When the colours, mixed colours, and nature of the respective originals, could be ascertained, they were imitated as completely as. art-tan imitate them: insomuch that many of the paste intaglios and cameos in this collection are such faithful imitations, that artists themselves have owned they could hardly be distinguished from the originals. And when the colour and nature of the gems could not be authenticated, the pastes were executed in agreeable, and chit- fly transparent colours: constant attention l>t:ing bestowed to preserve the outlines, extremities, attributes, and inscriptions. It was the learned Mr. Raspe (from whom this account is taki n), who arranged this great collection, and made out the dc srnptsve i at; iogue. (See “A Descriptive Catalogue,” &c. 2 vols. 4-to, 1791.)

, otherwise called Molyn, and Pietro Mulier, another artist of note, was born at Haerlem in 1637, and according to some authors, was the disciple of Snyders, whose manner he at first adopted, and painted huntings of different animals, as large as life, with singular force and success. He afterwards changed both his style and subjects, and delighted to paint tempests, storms at sea, and shipwrecks, which he executed admirably, and therefore got the name, by which he is generally known, of Tempesta. After travelling through Holland he went to Rome, and having changed his religion from protestantism to popery, became greatly caressed as an artist, and received the title of cavaliere. After passing some years at Rome he visited Genoa, where he was likewise highly honoured, and fully employed, but appears to have lost all sense of principle or shame; for, in order to marry a Genoese lady, he caused his wife, whom he had left at Rome, to be murdered. This atrocious affair being discovered, he was sentenced to be hanged, but by the intervention of some of the nobility, who admired his talents, his sentence would probably have been changed to perpetual imprisonment. From this, however, he contrived to escape, after being confined sixteen years, and died in 1701, in the sixty-fourth year of his age. It was from this crime that he obtained the name of Pietro Mu­Lier, or de Mulieribus. His pictures are very rare, and held in great estimation, and those he painted in prison are thought to be of very superior merit. He executed also, by the graver only, several very neat prints, in a style greatly resembling that of Vander Velde. They consist chiefly of candle-light pieces, and dark subjects.

, son of the preceding, was born at Antwerp in 1610, and was nick-named “The Ape of Painting;” for there was no manner of painting that he could not imitate so exactly, as to deceive even the nicest judges. He improved greatly on the talents and merit of his father, and his reputation introduced him to the favour of the great. The archduke Leopold William made him gentleman of his bedchamber; and all the pictures of his gallery were copied by Teniers, and engraved by his direction. Teniers took a voyage to England, to buy several pictures of the great Italian masters for count Fuensaldegna, who, on his return, heaped favours on him. Don John of Austria, and the king of Spain, set so great a value on his pictures, that they built a gallery on purpose for them. Prince William of Orange honoured him with his friendship; Rubens esteemed his works, and assisted him with his advice. In his thirty* fifth year he was in his zenith of perfection. His principal talent was landscape, adorned with small figures. He painted men drinking and smoking, chemists, and their laboratories, country fairs, and the like: his small figures are superior to his large ones. The distinction between the works of the father and the son is, that in the son’s you discover a finer touch and a fresher pencil, and a greater choice of attitudes, and a better disposition of figures. The father retained something of the tone of Italy in his colouring, which was stronger than the son’s, but his pictures have Jess harmony and union; besides, the son used to put at the bottom of his pictures, “David Teniers, junior.” He died at Antwerp in 1694, aged eighty-four. Sir Joshua Reynolds says, that the works of this artist are worthy the closest attention of a painter who desires to excel in the mechanical knowledge of his art. His manner of touching, or what we call handling, has perhaps never been equalled: there is in his pictures that exact mixture of softness and sharpness, which is difficult to execute. His brother Abraham was a good painter; equal, if not superior, to his father and brother in the expression of his characters, and knowledge of the chiaro-scnro, though inferior in the sprightliness of his touch, and the lightness of his pencil.

, an excellent engraver, was born in 1758, at Pattrington, in Holderness, in the East Riding of York, where his father was an innkeeper. At a proper age he was placed as an apprentice to a cooper, at which business, on the expiration of his apprenticeship, he worked some time. During the American war he became a private in ifie Northumberland militia; at the conclusion of which, in 1783, he came to settle at Hull, where he commenced engraver of shop-bills, cards, &c. One of his fust attempts was a card for a tinner and brazier, executed in a very humble style. He engraved and published a plan of Hull, which is dated May 6, 1784, and afterwards solicited subscriptions for two views of the dock at that place, which, it is thought, he shortly after published. He also engraved, while there, a head of Harry Rowe, the famous puppet-showman of York, after a drawing by J. England. Another account says, that an engraving of an old woman’s head, after Gerard Dow, was his first attempt, and appeared so extraordinary, that on the recommendation of the hon. Charles Fox, the duchess of Devonshire, and lady Duncannon, he was appointed historical engraver to the prince of Wales. In 1788, the marquis of Carmarthen, whose patronage he first obtained by constructing a very curious camera obscura, wrote him a recommendatory lelter to Alderman Boy dell, who immediately offered him 300 guineas to engrave a plate from Northcote’s picture of Edward V. taking leave of his brother the duke of York. He afterwards engraved, for Boydell, a number of capital plates from the Shakespeare gallery,and from the paintings by sir Joshua Reynolds, Shee, Westall, Smirke, Fuseli, Northcote, Peters, &c. all which are very extraordinary specimens of graphic excellence, and have been highly and deservedly approved by the connoisseur, and well received by the public. Of Boydell’s Shakspeare, nineteen of the large plates are from his hand. He had received very little instruction, but depended solely on native genius, aided by an intense application, by which \\e suddenly arrived at great excellence in the art. Almost at the outset of his career he became connected with Messrs. Boydell by extensive engagements on their Shakspeare, a work which will long bear ample testimony to his rare merit and talents. The distinguishing characteristics of his practice consisted in most faithfully exhibiting the true spirit and style of each master; a most minute accuracy, a certain polish, and exquisite delicacy of manner; with the appropriate character given to all objects, while a mildness of tone and perfect harmony pervaded the whole piece. The Cardinal Wolsey entering Leicester Abbey, from Westall, is certainly the greatest effort of his skill, and is, by many of the bestinformed connoisseurs and artists, held to be a first-rate specimen in that style of engraving. This ingenious artist died in July 1802, at Stevenage in Hertfordshire.

, otherwise Pellegrino, an eminent artist, was of Milanese extraction, but probably a native of Bo. logna, and from the date of his earliest picture known to us, the Nativity in the palace Borghese at Rome, painted 1549, in his twenty-second year, must have been born in 1527. He entered the school of Bagnacavallo, and endeavoured to improve himself, according to Vasari, by designing from the pictures of that master in the refectory of S. Michele in Bosco; but departed for Rome in 1547, chiefly to study the works of Michael Angelo. There he was patronized by Monsig. afterwards cardinal Poggi, who sent him back to Bologna to complete the fabric of his palace, at present the Academical Institute, decorated by his pictures, and the principal monument of his art in Italy though the Carracci seemed to prefer, as objects of imitation for themselves and their scholars, the painting^ with which he had filled the sides and compartments of that noble chapel constructed by him in S. Giacopo of the Augustine friars.

Peilegrino Tibaldi is more known by his works in fresco, than by his pictures in oil, which are extremely scarce: one of the earliest is the Nativity already mentioned, in the palace Borghese, of which the cartoon still exists in a private collection of drawings. It is painted in a sober unaffected tone; and, considered as the work of an artist zealous of his line, with great mellowness of touch. The figures of this are considerably less than the size of life; but there are pictures of his to be met with of diminutive dimensions, with all the finish of miniatures, though rich in figures, touched with great spirit and equal vivacity of colour they are generally set off by back- grounds drawn from his favourite branch of art, architecture.

That it did for some time, the “Miracle of the Slave,” formerly in the Scuola di S. Marco, and lately at Paris, which he painted at the age of thirty-six, and the “Crucifixion” in the Albergo of the Scuola di S. Rocco, are signal instances. The former unites, with equal ardour and justness of conception, unexampled fierceness and rapidity of execution, correctness and even dignity of forms, powerful masses of light and shade, and a more than Titianesque colour with all the fury of a sketch it has all the roundness and decision of finish; the canvas trembles this is the vivid abstract of that mossa which Agostino Caracci exclusively ascribes to the Venetian school; and here Tintoretto has, as far perhaps as can be shewn, demonstrated what he meant by wishing to embody with the forms and breadth of Michael Angelo the glow and juice of Titian. If this stupendous picture have any flaw, it is perhaps that, in beholding it, the master appears to swim upon his work, and that S. Marc, and the miracle he descends to perform, are eclipsed by the ostentatious power of the artist. This is not what we feel when we contemplate the Capello Sistina, the “Pietro Martire” of Titian, or the “Crucifixion” mentioned before, by Tintoretto himself. The immediate impression which it makes on every one who for the first time casts a glance on its immense scenery, is that of a whole whose numberless parts are connected and subdued by a louring, mournful, minacious tone. All seems to be hushed in silence round the central figure of the Saviour suspended on the cross, with his fainting mother, and a group of male and female mourners at his feet; an assemblage of colours that less imitate than rival nature, a scale of hues for which Titian himself seldom offers a parallel, yet all tinged by grief, all equally overcast by the lut id tone that stains the whole, and like a meteor hangs in the sickly air: whatever inequalities or derelictions of feeling, whatever improprieties of common-place, of modern and antique costume, the master’s rapidity admitted to fill his space (and they are great), all vanish in the power which compresses them into a single point, and we do not detect them till we recover from our terror. With these the “Resurrection” too in the Scuola di S. Rocco may be placed, of which the magic chiaroscuro, the powerful blaze of the vision contrasted with the dewy distant light of dawn, and the transparence of the dark massy foreground, are but secondary beauties. If the “Resurrection” preserved among the arrazzi of Raphael be superior in extent of thought, in the choice of the characters admitted, the figure of Christ himself is greatly surpassed by the ideal forms and the serene dignity united to that resistless velocity which characterise Christ in the work of Tintoretto; whilst the celestial airs and graces of the angels balance by sublimity the dramatic variety displayed by Raphael.

, called IL Garofalo, an Italian artist, was born at Ferrara in 1481. He left his masters at Ferrara and Cremona, to go to Home, where he entered the school of Raphael. He imitated his design, the character of his faces, the expression, and much of his colour, though he added something of a more inflamed and stronger cast derived from the Ferrarese school. His pictures of evangelic subjects abound at Home, Bologna, and other cities of Italy; they are of different merit, and not painted all by him. His large pictures, many of which are in the Chigi gallery, are more genuine and more singular. The visitation of Mary in the palace Doria, is one of the master-pieces in the collection. Tisi used to mark his pictures with a painted violet, which the vulgar in Italy call Garofalo, a flower allusive to his name. It does not appear from Vasari, and others, that Garofalo had any share in the works which were executed by the scholars of Raphael under his direction. He returned to Ferrara, and became the head of that school, and died there in 1559, aged seventy-eight.

In design Titian had a style, and in composition and expression occasionally excelled, though on the whole they were little more for him than vehicles of colour. That he possessed the theory of the human frame, needs not to be proved from the doubtful designs which he is said to hare furnished for the anatomical work of Vesalio; that he had familiarised himself with the line of Michael Angelo, and burned with ambition to emulate it, is less evident from adopting some of his attitudes in the pictures of “Pietro Martire,” and the battle of Ghiaradadda, than from the elemental conceptions, the colossal style, and daring foreshortenings, which astonish on the cieling of the Salute. In general, however, his male forms have less selection than sanguine health; often too fleshy for character, Jess elastic than muscular, and vigorous without grandeur. His females are the fair, dimpled, Venetian race, soft without delicacy, too full for elegance, for action too plump. Titian was abundantly honoured in his life-time. He made three several portraits of the emperor Charles V. who honoured him with knighthood, created him count palatine, made all his descendants gentlemen, and assigned him a considerable pension out of the chamber at Naples. The respect of Charles V. for Titian was as great as that of Francis I. for Leonardo da Vinci; and many particulars of it are recorded. It is said, that the emperor one day took up a pencil, which fell from the hand of this artist, who was then drawing his picture; and that, upon the compliment which Titian made him on this occasion, he replied, “Titian has merited to be served by Caesar.” And when some lords of the emperor’s court, not being able to conceal their jealousy of the preference he gave of Titian’s person and conversation to that of all his other courtiers, the emperor freely told them, “that he could never want courtiers, but could not have Titian always with him.” Accordingly, he heaped riches on him; and whenever he sent him money, which was usually a large sum, it was with the compliment, that “his design was not to pay him the value of his pictures, because they were above any price.” He painted also his son Philip II. Soliman emperor of the Turks, two popes, three kings, two empresses, several queens, and almost all the princes of Italy, together with the famous Ariosto and Peter Aretine, who were, his intimate friends. Nay, so great was the name and reputation of Titian, that there was hardly a person of any eminence then living in Europe, from whom he did not receive some particular mark of esteem: and his house at Venice was the constant rendezvous of all the virtuosi and people of the best quality. That he had his weaknesses, we have already noticed in our account of Tintoretto. He was so happy in the constitution of his body, that he had never been sick till 1576 and then he died of the plague, at the extraordinary age of ninety-nine. It has been remarked that we have many instances of the longevity of painters. Ninety is an extraordinary age for any man, but Spinello lived beyond it. Carlo Cignani died at ninetyone; Titian at the same age; M. Ang. Buonarotti at ninety; Leonardo da Vinci at seventy-five; Calabrese at eighty-six; Claude Lorraine at eighty-two; Carlo Maratti at eighty-eight, and prodigious numbers of eminent painters from sixty upwards.

, an eminent Florentine sculptor, was born about 1472, and was the contemporary of Michael Angelo, in competition with whom he executed some works in the town-hall of Florence. He was an artist of very superior merit, but a proud, inconsiderate, and ungovernable character. It was in one of his passionate fits that he struck Michael Angelo with such force as to flatten his nose. Benvenuto Cellini, in his own life, has recorded this affair, as related to him by Torrigiano himself: “His conversation one day happening to turn upon Michael Angelo Buonarroti, on seeing a drawing of mine made from the celebrated cartoon of the battle of Pisa: ‘ This Buonarroti and I (said Torrigiano), when we were young men, went to study in the church of the Carmelites, in the chapel of Masaccio; and it was customary with Buonarroti to rally those who were learning to draw there. One day, amongst others, a sarcasm of his having stung me to the quick, I was extremely irritated, and, doubling my fist, gave him such a violent blow upon his nose, that I felt the bone and cartilage yield as if they had been made of paste, and the mark I then gave him he will carry to his grave’.”

The ungovernable and restless habits of this artist precipitated him into great difficulties, and the circumstances of his death furnish a melancholy instance of the vicissitude of life, and the baneful effects of inquisitorial jurisprudence. Upon leaving England, he visited Spain, and after distinguishing himself by many excellent works, was employed by a Spanish grandee to sculpture in marble a Madonna and Infant Christ, of the size of nature, with high promises to be rewarded in proportion to its merit; and as the grandee was of the first rank, Torrigiano flattered himself with proportionate expectation. After much study and application he completed his work to his own satisfaction, and the grandee saw the performance with delight and reverence, bestowing on him the highest praise. Impatient to possess his treasure, he immediately sent for it, and that his generosity might be displayed to the greatest advantage he loaded two lacqueys with the money to defray the purchase. The bulk was promising; but when the bags were found to contain nothin^but brass maravedi, which amounted only to the small sum of thirty ducats, vexation and disappointment roused Torrigiano’s resentment, who considered this present rather as an insult than as a reward for his merit, and, on a sudden, snatched up his mallet, and without regard to the perfection of his workmanship, or the sacred character of the image, he broke it in pieces, and dismissed the lacqueys, with their load of farthings, to tell the tale. The grandee, with every passion alive to this merited disgrace, and perhaps impressed with superstitious horror for the sacrilegious nature of the act, presented him before the court of inquisition; and impeach* d him for his conduct as an infidel and heretic. Torrigiano urged the right of an author over his own creation reason pleaded on his side, but all in vain he was condemned to lose his life with torture. The holy office, however, lost its victim, for Torrigiano starved himself to death in prison, in 1522.

, an excellent artist of the English school, and a member of the Royal Academy of London, and of the academies of Rome and Bologna, was a native of Ireland, which country he left at an early age; and having devoted himself to the arts, repaired to Italy, at a time when an acquaintance with the master-pieces of the arts which that country possessed, was considered as an essential requisite for completing the education of a gentleman. The friendships and acquaintance formed by Mr. Tresham while abroad, were not a little conducive to the promotion of his interests on his return to this country; and their advantages were experienced by him to the last moment of his life. As an artist, Mr. Tresham possessed very considerable talents; and, while his health permitted him to exert them, they were honourably directed to the higher departments of his art. A long residence in Italy, together with a diligent study of the antique, had given him a lasting predilection for the Roman school; and his works display many of the powers and peculiarities which distinguish the productions of those great masters whose taste he had adopted. He had much facility of composition, and his fancy was well stored with materials; but his oil pictures are deficient in that richness of colouring and spirit of execution which characterize the Venetian pencil, and which have been displayed, in many instances, with rival excellence in this country. His drawings with pen and ink, and in black chalk, evince uncommon ability; the latter, in particular, are executed with a spirit, boldness, and breadth which are not often to be found in su; a productions. In that which may be termed the erudition of taste, Mr. Tresham was deeply skilled: a long acquaintance with the most eminent masters of the Italian schools made him familiar with their merits and defects; he could discriminate between all their varieties of style and manner; and as to every estimable quality of a picture, he was considered one of the ablest criticks of his day: in the just appreciation, also, of those various remains of antiquity which come under the different classifications of virtu, his opinion was sought, with eagerness, by the connoisseur as well as the artist, and held as an authority, from which few would venture lightly to dissent. This kind of knowledge proved not a little beneficial to him. Some years since, Mr. Thomas Hope, whose choice collections of every kind are well known, had given to one of his servants a number of Etruscan vases, as the refuse of a quantity which he had purchased. Accident made Mr. Tresham acquainted with the circumstance; and the whole lot was bought by him of the new owner for \00l. It was not long before he recefved 800l. from Mr. Samuel Rogers, for one moiety; and the other, increased by subsequent acquisitions, he transferred a few years ago to the earl of Carlisle. That nobleman, with a munificence and liberality which have invariably marked all his transactions, settled on the artist an annuity of 300l. for life, as the price of this collection. With such honour was this engagement fulfilled, that the amount of the last quarter, though due only a few days before Mr. Tresham’s death, was found to have been punctually paid. When Messrs. Longman and Co. commenced their splendid publication of engravings from the works of the ancient masters, in the collections of the British nobility, and others who have distinguished themselves by their patronage of the fine arts, they, with a discernment which does them credit, deputed Mr. Tresham to superintend the undertaking. To the honour of the owners of those master-pieces it must be recorded, that every facility was afforded to this artist, not only in the loan of pictures, but in the communication of such facts relating to the respective works as they were able to furnish. The salary paid him by these spirited publishers, contributed materially to the comfort of his declining years. We should not omit to mention, to the credit of Mr. Tresham, that, regardless as he had been in early life of providing those resourses for old age which prudence would suggest, yet so high were his principles, that the most celebrated dealers in virtu, auctioneers, and others, never hesitated to deliver lots to any amount purchased by him; and we may venture to assert, that he never abused their confidence. But the talents of Tresham were not confined to objects immediately connected with his profession; he had considerable taste for poetry, and his published performances in that art display a lively fancy, and powers of versification, of no ordinary kind. In society, which he loved and enjoyed to the last, he was always considered as an acquisition by his friends; and amongst those friends were included many of the most elevated and estimable characters of the time. In conversation, he was fluent, humourous, and animated, abounding in anecdote, and ready of reply. During the latter years of his life, the contrast exhibited between the playful vivacity of his manners and the occasional exclamations of agony, produced by the spasmodic affections with which he was so long afflicted, gave an interest to his appearance that enhanced the entertainment which his colloquial powers afforded. His existence seemed to hang upon so slight a thread that those who enjoyed his society were commonly under an impression that the pleasure derived from it might not be again renewed, and that a frame so feeble could scarcely survive the exertion which the vigour of his spirit for a moment sustained. The principle of life, however, was in him so strong, as to contradict all ordinary indications; and he lived on, through many years of infirmity, as much to the surprise as the gratification of his friends: his spirits unsubdued by pain, and his mind uninfluenced by the decay of his body. Though partaking, in some degree, of the proverbial irritability of the poet and the painter, no man was more free from envious and malignant feelings, or could be more ready to do justice to the claims of his competitors. So true a relish had he for the sallies of wit -and humour, that he could enjoy them even at his own expense: and he has been frequently known to repeat, with unaffected glee, the jest that has been pointed against himself. By his death, which took place June 17, 1814, the Royal Academy was deprived of one of its most enlightened members, and his profession of a liberal and accomplished artist.

His principal works are, 1. “De vasis linguee salivalibus,” in a letter addressed to Haller, Nuremberg, 1734, 4to. 2. “Dissertauo de differentiis quibusdam inter hominem natum et nascendum intercedentibus,” ibid. 1736, 4to. 3. “Icones posthurnse Gesnerianae,” ibid. 1748, fol. These plates of Gesner came to him by purchase, as we have already noticed in our account of that celebrated botanist. 4. “Selectarum Plantaruin Decades,” Vienna, 1750, fol. 5. “Librorum Botanicorum libri duo, quorum prior recentiores quosdam, posterior plerosque antiques ad annum 1550 usque excuses recenset,” Nuremberg, 1752, fol. 6. “Plantae selectas qnarum imagines ad exemplaria naturalia Londini in hortis curiosorum nutrita, manu artificiosa pinxit Georgius Dionysius Ehret, &c.” 1754, fol. His liberality to Ehret we have already recorded. (See Ehret.) 7. “Cedrorum Libani historia,” Nuremberg, 1757, 4to. In 1750 he engaged an artist to copy Mrs. Blackwell’s plates, and himself supplied several defects in the drawings. He also substituted some entirely new figures in the room of the originals, very considerably reformed and amplified the text, translated it into German and Latin; and planned the addition of a sixth century of plates, but he did not live to finish this. The fifth century was published in 1765, and Dr. Trew dying in 1769, the supplemental volume, exhibiting plants omitted by Mrs. Blackwell, articles newly introduced into practice, and figures of the poisonous species, was conducted by Ludwig, Bose, and Boehmer, and printed in 1773. Thus reformed, Trew’s edition surpasses any other work of the same design.

The learned have looked with wearied expectation, and the friends of Mr. Tweddell with disappointed anxiety, to receive from the press some portion at least of the very large and choice materials which he had prepared for publication, both from his own pen, and from the pencil of an eminent artist, Mons. Preaux, acting under his immediate direction; these, it may be presumed, coming from a traveller so accomplished and so indefatigable, must have shed new and extraordinary light on the antiquities of Greece, and more particularly on those of Athens; whilst the journals of his travels in some of the mountainous districts of Switzerland, rarely, if ever before, visited, and in the Crimea, on the borders of the Euxine, could not have failed to impart much novel information. But notwithstanding the most urgent and diligent endeavours made by Mr. Tweddell’s friends notwithstanding the arrival at Constantinople of his papers and effects from Athens, and the actual delivery of his Swiss journals, with sundry other manuscripts, and above three hundred highlyfinished drawings, into the official custody of the British ambassador at the Othman court, it remains at this time a mystery, what is actually become of all these valuable manuscripts and drawings. Neither have all the investigations set on foot by his friends, nor the more recent representations addressed to the ambassador, obtained any explicit or satisfactory elucidation of the strange and suspicious obscurity which hangs over all the circumstances of this questionable business.

, a learned divine and ingenious artist, was the only child of the rev. Michael Tyson, dean of Stamford, archdeacon of Huntingdon, &c. who died in 1794, aged eighty-four, by his first wife, the sister of Noah Curtis, of Wolsthorp, in Lincolnshire, esq. He was born in the parish of All Saints, in Stamford, Nov. 19, 1740, and received his grammatical education in that country. He was then admitted of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, and passed regularly through his degrees; that of B. A. in 1764, of M. A. in 1767, and of B. D. in 1775; and after taking his bachelor’s degree was elected a fellow of his college. In the autumn of 1766 he attended a young gentleman of his college, Mr. Gough (afterwards the celebrated antiquary) in a tour through the north of England and Scotland, and made an exact journal of his several stages, with pertinent remarks on such places as seemed most interesting. At Glasgow and Inverary he had the freedom of the corporations bestowed upon him. After his return, in the following year he was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries, and in 1769 a fellow of the royal society. In 1770 he was ordained deacon at Whitehall chapel, by Dr. Green, bishop of Lincoln. In 1773, his father being promoted to the archdeaconry of Huntingdon, he gave the officiality of it to his son, which was worth about 50l. per ann. and about the same time, being bursar of the college, he succeeded Mr. Cohnan in the cure of St. Benedict’s church, in Cambridge, as he did also in 1776, in the Whitehall preachership, at the request of the late Dr. Hamilton, sori-in-law of bishop Terrick, who had formerly been of Bene’t college.

, an eminent artist, called Gio. Da Nanni, or Ricamatori, as Vasari promiscuously calls him, was born in 1494, at Udine in the Friul, and passed from the school of Giorgiorie to that of Raphael Sanzio, under whose direction he executed the greater part of the stuccoes and grotesque ornaments in the Logge and various apartments of the Vatican. In this branch of the art he is not only considered as the first, but as an inventor: for though under Alexander VI. Morto da Feltro had begun to paint in grotesque, he was not acquainted with stucco, which was first discovered in the baths of Titus, and successfully imitated by this artist. His bowers, plants, and foliage, his aviaries, mews, birds and fowls of every kind, impose on the eye by a truth of imitation less the result of labour than of sentiment: his touch is all character, and never deviates into the anxious detail of fac-similists. After the saccage of Rome he visited other parts of Italy, and left various specimens of his art at Florence, Genoa, and Udiue. He died in 1564.

Thus far the satirist was well founded party-rage warped his understanding when he censured Vanbrugh’s plays, and left him no more judgment to see their beauties than sir John had when he perceived not that they were the only beauties he was formed to compose.“Walpole, perhaps, was not aware of the handsome apology Dr. Swift and Mr. Pope have made, in the joint preface to their miscellanies” In regard to two persons only we wish our raillery, though ever so tender, or resentment, though ever so just, had not been indulged. We speak of sir John Vanbrugh, who was a man of wit, and of honour; and of Mr. Addison, whose name deserves all the respect from every lover of learning.“And notwithstanding Walpole’s own contribution of wit and flippancy to depreciate the character of Vanbrugh’s Blenheim and Castle-Howard, we are far more inclined to the opinion of our illustrious artist and elegant writer, str Joshua Reynolds, delivered, as it is, with the modesty that distinguishes, however seldom it accompanies, superior genius.” In the buildings of Vanbrugh, who was a poet as well as an architect, there is a greater display of imagination than we shall find, perhaps, in any other; and this is the ground of the effect we feel it) many of his works, notwithstanding the faults with which many of them are charged. For this purpose Vanbrugh appears to have had recourse to some principles of the Gothic architectore, which, thoueh not so ancient as the Grecian, is more so to

our imagination, with which the artist is more concerned than will; absolute truth.“”To speak of Vanbrugh,“adds sir Joshua,” in the language of 'a painter, he had originality of invention; he understood light and shadow, and had great skill in composition. To support his principal object, he produced his second and third groupes or masses. He perfectly understood in his art, what is the most difficult in ours, the conduct of the back-ground, by which the design and invention are set off to the greatest advantage. What the back-ground is in painting, in architecture is the real ground on which the building is erected; and no architect took greater care that his work should not appear crude and hard, that is, that it did not abruptly start out of the ground without expectation or preparation. This is a tribute which a painter owes to an architect who composed like a painter, and was defrauded of the due reward of his merit by the wits of his time, who did not understand the principles of composition in poetry better than he, and who knew little or nothing of what he understood perfectly, the general ruling principles of architecture and painting. Vanbrugh’s fate was that of the great Perrault. Both were the objects of the petulant sarcasms of factious men of letters, and both have left some of the fairest monuments which, to this day, decorate their several countries; the fagade of the Louvre; Blenheim, and Castle Howard."

Rubens, discovering in his pupil an amiable temper joined to the most promising talents, took a pleasure in cultivating both, by not concealing from him any part of that knowledge which he had himself attained by long experience. Vandyck was yet young when he was capable of executing pictures, which astonished, as much from the facility with which they were painted, as the general knowledge which reigned throughout the whole. Rubens, at this time, gave him two pieces of advice; the first was, to devote himself to portraits, in which he foresaw he would excel; and the second to make the tour of Italy, where he would have an opportunity of extending his studies. Vandyck accordingly, after making Rubens presents of two or three historical paintings, and a portrait of that artist’s wife, esteemed one of his best, set out for Italy, and made his first residence at Genoa, where he painted many excellent portraits. From thence he went to Venice, where he so deeply imbibed the tints of Titian, that he is allowed to approach nearer to the carnations of that master than even Rubens. He then went to Rome and lived splendidly, avoiding the low conversation of his countrymen, and was distinguished by the appellation of the Pittore Cavalieresco. Soon after his arrival there, he had an opportunity of exercising his abilities upon the portrait of cardinal Bentivoglio, which is justly esteemed the mostiperfect of the kind that ever came from the pencil of this- artist. While at Rome he received an invitation to Palermo, and there he painted prince Philibert of Savoy, the viceroy, and a paintress Angosciola (see Angosciola, vol. II.) then at the age of ninety-one. But the plague soon drove him from Sicily, and he returned to Genoa, where he had gained the highest reputation, and left many considerable works in the Balbi, Durazzo, and other palaces.

, a man of letters, and one of the first periodical essayists on the continent, was born at Utrecht, April 21, 1684. He was the son of an officer, who had no other fortune than a moderate pension, and as he died before Justus had completed his studies, the latter was left to provide as he could for his mother and a sister. Some friends who took an interest in the family procured him to be appointed tutor to the baron de Welderen’s son, which placed him above want; but as he could not do so much for his family as he wished, he had recourse to his pen for a farther supply. His first publication was “Le Misanthrope,” a periodical paper in imitation of our “Spectator,” which he wrote in French, commencing May 1711, and continuing till December 17 12. In thi he had great, and from what we have seen, deserved success. If he falls short of his model in that delicate humour of Addison, which has never been equalled, he abounds in just remarks on life and manners, evidently derived from extensive observation. Van Effen contrived to conceal himself throughout the whole of this publication, of which a second and improved edition was published at the Hague in 1726, 2 vols. 12mo, to which is added his “Journey to Sweden,” performed in 1719, in the suite of the prince of Hesse PhiJippsthal, who promised to make his fortune, but disappointed him. He consequently returned to the Hague as poor as he left it, and resumed his labours on the “Journal litteraire de la Haye,” in which he had been engaged before his departure. Having got into a literary quarrel with Camusat, who had treated his “Misanthrope” with contempt, he was so much hurt as to be glad to embrace the opportunity of going to Leyden with a young gentleman to whom he was appointed tutor. Here he engaged in some literary schemes by which he got more money than reputation. Count de Welderen, however, having been appointed ambassador to England from the States General, took Van Efien with him as secretary, and on his return procured him the place of inspector of the magazines at Bois-le-Duc, where he died Sept. 18, 1735-. Van Effen’s works were numerous, but being almost all anonymous, it is not easy to ascertain the whole. The following are said to be the principal: 1. “Le Misanthrope,” already noticed. 2. “Journal Litteraire,” 1715 to 1718, many of which volumes are entirely of his editing. 3. “La Bagatelle, ou Discours ironiques, ou Ton prete des sophistries ingenieux au vice et a l'extravagance, pour en mieux faire sentir le ridicule,” Artist. 1718 1719, 3 vols. 8vo, reprinted at Lausanne, 1743, 2 vols. 4. “Le nouveau Spectateur Francais,” of which only twenty-eight numbers appeared; four of them are employed on a critique on the works of Houdard de la Motte, who thanked the author for his impartiality. 5. “The Dutch Spectator,” in Dutch, Amst. 173J 1735, 12 vols. 8vo. 6. “Parallele d'Homere et de Chapelain,” Hague, 1714, 8vo. This has been also printed in the different editions of the “Chef-d‘oeuvre d’un inconnu,” i. e. M. de Themiseuil de St. Hyacinthe. 7. Translations of Robinson Crusoe, Swift’s Tale of a Tub, and some of Mandeville’s writings. 8. “Le Mentor moderne,” a translation of “The Guardian,” except the political papers. 9. “Histoire metallique des dix-sept Provinces de Pays-Bas,” translated from the Dutch of Van Loon, Hague, 1732, 5 vols. Van Effen is said also to have written “Les Petits Maitres,” a comedy; “Essai sur la maniere de trailer la controverse;” and a part of the “Journal historique, politique, et galante.”

, another eminent artist, was born at Meulebeke, a small distance from Courtray, in 1548, and was successively the disciple of Lucas de Heere, at Ghent, and Peter Vlerick, at Courtray; but his principal knowledge in the art of painting was acquired at Rome, where he studied for three years. There he designed after the antiques, and the curious remains of Roman magnificence; the temples, baths, ruinous theatres, sepulchral monuments and their decorations, and, in short, every elegant and noble object that invited his attention. He also studied after nature in the environs of Rome, sketching every scene that pleased his imagination, or could afford him materials for future compositions in the landscape-style; and having practised to paint with equal freedom in fresco and in oil, he executed several historical works as well as landscapes, for the cardinals and nobility of Rome, with extraordinary approbation.

At his return to his own country he was received with unusual respect, and soon after painted the representation of the Terrestrial Paradise, which procured him great honour, and a picture of the Deluge, which was highly applauded for the composition and expression, as it described all the passions of grief, fear, terror, horror, and despair, with a sensible and affecting variety. In general he was esteemed a good painter of landscape; the choice in his trees was judicious, his figures were well designed, his colouring was agreeable, and his composition full of spirit; though, in the advanced part of his life he appeared to have somewhat of the mannerist. This artist distinguished himself not only as a painter, but as a writer. He composed tragedies and comedies, which were acted with applause; and, what is very uncommon, he painted also the decorations of the theatre. At Haerlem he introduced an academy, to diffuse among his countrymen a taste for the Italian masters; and the world is indebted eminently to Van Mander for searching out, and transmitting to posterity, the characters and merits of so many memorable artists as are comprised in his “Lives of the Painters.” He died in 1605, aged fifty-eight.

, an artist, though better known as the biographer of his profession, was born at Arezzo, in 1512, and was taught the rudiments of drawing by his father, and the first principles of painting by William of Marseilles, a Frenchman, and a painter on glass; but being taken to Florence by cardinal da Cortona, he improved himself under Michael Angelo, Andrea del Sarto, and other eminent masters. By the cardinal he was introduced into the Medici family, but in 1527, when they were driven from Florence, he returned to his native city. Finding an epidemic disease prevailing there, he spent his time in the surrounding country, improving himself by painting subjects of devotion for the farmers. His father unfortunately died of the contagion, and left a young family unprovided for. Vasari, to contribute more effectually to their support, quitted the uncertain profession of a painter, and applied himself to the more lucrative trade of a goldsmith. In 1529, the civil war, which then existed at Florence, obliged the goldsmiths’ company to remove to Pisa: and there, receiving commissions to paint some pictures both in oil and in fresco, he was induced to resume his former profession, and afterwards through life met with encouragement, that left him neither motive nor desire to change. The dukes of Florence and other distinguished persons were his liberal patrons, and he was constantly employed in works both profitable and honourable to himself.

In 1544, by the friendship of PaulJovius, he was recommended to make designs and paint a hall for the cardinal Farnese, in Rome. While he was executing this work, he attended the cardinal’s evening parties, which were frequented by men of genius. At one of these parties, Jovius, speaking of his own museum, arranged and embellished with inscriptions and portraits of illustrious men, said, “that it had always been his desire to add to it, and make his book of eulogiums more complete, by a treatise on the celebrated artists, from Cimabue down to his own time;” and enlarged upon the subject with much general information. The cardinal then turned to Vasari, and asked him “if he did not think that subject would make a fine work?” Vasari concurred with his eminence, but added, that “it would require the assistance of an artist to collate the materials, and arrange them in their proper order: for although Jo?ius displayed great knowledge in his observations, yet he had not been equally accurate in the arrangement of his facts.” “You can then,” replied the cardinal, “give him assistance, which will be doing an essential service to the arts.” To pay a proper deference to so flattering an opinion, he collected such materials as he thought necessary to the plan then suggested: and the information he contributed was drawn up so much to Jovius’s satisfaction, that he recommended him to enlarge upon it, and make a more complete work, alleging his own want of leisure and capacity to do justice to such an undertaking. Vasari, with reluctance, consented; and with his own industry, and some assistance from others, he fulfilled his task; and, in 1550, published his work in 2 vols, entitled “Vite de piu eccellenti Pittori, Scultori, e Architetti.” In 1571 he reprinted it in 3 vols. 4to, with portraits cut in wood, and with the addition of his own life to the fifty-fifth year of his age. The subsequent editions are, that of Bottari, Rome, 1759 60, 3 vols. 4to, and those printed at Leghorn, 1767 72, 7 vols. 4to; at Sienna, 1791—98, 11 vols. 8vo. There is likewise one printed at Bologna in 1647, 3 vols. 4to, but not esteemed a good one.

Vasari died in 1574, and in 1588 his nephew published a work to commemorate and honour his uncle’s abilities, entitled, “Ragionamenti del Sig. Cavaliere Georgio Vasari pittore ed architetto sopra le invenzioni de lui depinta in Fiorenza nel palazzo di Loro Altezze Serenissime, &c.” It is not however to painting that Vasari is indebted for his present fame, but to his miscellaneous work; which, though crude and incorrect, affords the most ample source of our information concerning the painters of Italy before his time, or contemporary with himself. As an artist he had little originality, and the extravagances of genius mark the most predominant feature of his style.

He generally marked his prints with the initials A.V., which were sometimes inscribed on a tablet. He imitated the style of his master with great attention, and, as far as regards manual execution, with considerable success: sometimes, indeed, he in this respect excelled Marc Antonio; but in point of taste, and in the purity and correctness of his outline, he fell far short of that distinguished artist. Good impressions of the works of Veneziano are now become extremely scarce, and a complete set is hardly to be obtained; among them will be found a few, wherein he has expressed the flesh entirely by means of stippling, in a manner which, being imitated by Boulanger, grew by degrees into what is now termed the chalk manner of engraving.

After a long and active life, in a manner that did honour to himself and his country, Vernet began to fear that his well-earned pension would be stopped by the troubles arising in France; and as 81 years of age is rather too late a period for a man to take a very active part in national disputes, he meditated a retreat to England, which was put a stop to by his death in 1789. His works will, however, live as long as those of any artist of his day. In a light and airy management of his landscape, in a deep and tender diminution of his perspective, in the clear transparent hue of the sky, liquid appearance of the water, and the buoyant air of the vessels which he depicted on it, he had few superiors. In small figures employed in dragging off a boat, rigging a ship, or carrying goods from the quay to a warehouse, or any other employ which required action, he displayed most uncommon knowledge, and gave them with such spirit (though sometimes a little in the French fluttered style), as has never been equalled by any man except our most excellent Mortimer; and to be the inferior of Mortimer in that line is no dishonour. It has been the lot of every painter who ever lived, and will probably be the lot of all who ever will live. He carried that branch of the art to its highest degree of perfection. As a proof in what estimation Vernet was held, it may be mentioned that two of his pictures, now in the Luxembourg, were purchased by madame du Barry for 50,000 livres. It was said of him, that his genius neither knew infancy nor old age.

He was a man of so excellent a character, that he was chosen to be one of the magistrates of the city he lived in; and he accepted the office, with the condition that he should not be obliged to quit his profession. He was in the full career of fame and esteem both as a man and an artist, when, happening to undertake a small voyage, he was cast away two leagues from Dort, and drowned the 6th of April, 1G90, aged sixty-two.

In 1730 appeared his twelve heads of distinguished poets, one of his capital works, which he meant to have followed with the portraits of other eminent men, arranged in classes, but this scheme was taken out of his hands by the Messrs. Knapton; and there is reason to think that Vertue’s rigid regard for veracity, which made him justly scrupulous of authenticating the likenesses of deceased characters without the clearest proofs, and not the superior taste or discernment of the Knaptons, made them engage the superior talents of Houbraken and Gravelot, to finish a work which our artist had begun, and had himself projected.

In order to acquire a greater knowledge of the principles of architecture, Vignola went to Rome, and at first returned to painting fora maintenance; but not reaping much profit, abandoned that art a second time, and procured employment as a draughtsman from Melighini, of Ferrara, then architect to pope Paul III. and who had established a school of architecture at Rome. Yignola was afterwards employed to make drawings, for the use of this academy, of the ancient edifices of the city, from which he derived great advantage in his studies. While here, about 1537, or J 540, he met with Primaticcio, who was employed by Francis I. king of France, to purchase antiques (See Primaticcio); and Vignola was of so much service in making casts for him, that Primaticcio engaged him to go with him to France. There Vignola assisted that celebrated artist in all his works, and particularly in making the bronze casts which are at Fontainebleau. He also made various architectural designs for the king, who was prevented from having them executed, by the wars in which France was then involved. After a residence of about two years, he was invited to Bologna, to undertake the new church of St. Petronius, and his design was allowed the preference, and highly approved by Julio Romano, the celebrated painter, and Christopher Lombard, the architect. At Minerbio, near Bologna, he built a magnificent palace for count Isolani, and in Bologna the house of Achilles Bocchi. The portico of the exchange in that city is also of his designing, but it was not built until 1562, in the pontificate of Pius IV. His most useful work at Bologna was the canal of Navilio, which he constructed with great skill for the space of a league. But happening to be ill rewarded for this undertaking, he went to Placentia, where he gave a design for the duke of Parma’s palace, which was executed by his son Hyacinth, who was now able to assist him in his various works. He afterwards built several churches and chapels in various parts of Italy, which it is unnecessary to specify. These, it is supposed, he had finished before his return to Rome in 1550, where Vasari presented him to pope Julius III. who appointed him his architect. While at Rome, he was employed in various works, both of grandeur and utility, the last of which, and reckoned his finest work, was the magnificent palace or castle of Caprarola, so well described and illustrated by plates in his works.

Vignola’s fame as an architectural author, is scarcely less than that of a practical artist. He published the “Regola delli cinque ordini d'architettura,” fol. no date, with thirtytwo fine plates, which has often been reprinted with additions and comments. The best is probably that printed at Amst. in 1631, or 1G42, fol. “con la nuova aggiunta de Michael Angelo Buonaroti.” The French have several good editions, with improvements, particularly the “Cours d'architecture qui comprend les ordres de Vignole, avec des cornmentaires, les figures, et descriptions de ses plus beaux batimens, et de ceux de Michel Ange,” by Daviler: the third edition, now before us, is dated 1699, but there are others of 1738 and 1760, large 4to. Jombert published at Paris in 8vo, “Regies des cinq orders d'architecture,” translated from the Italian of Vignola, with remarks, &c.

The third period dates from the return of Lionardo to Florence, after the fall of Francesco Sforza. The thirteen years of his stay there produced some of his best works; the celebrated portrait of Mona Lisa, a labour of four years, though still declared unfinished; the cartoon of St. Anna, prepared for an altar-piece at the church A'Servi, which never was coloured; the other cartoon of the battle of Niccolo Piccinino, in competition with Michael Angelo, and likewise never made use of, because his endeavour to paint it in oil on the wall had failed. He employed perhaps anpther method in a Madonna with the child, at St. Onofrio of Rome, a Raffaelesqne picture, but peeling in many places off the pannel. To this period probably belongs his own portrait in the ducal gallery, in an age which does not disagree with these years, a head whose energy leaves all the rest in that room far behind; and that other, in a different cabinet, which is called the portrait of Raffaello; and that half-figure of a young nun in the palace Niccolini, so much celebrated by Bottari. Christ among the doctors, formerly a picture of the Doria palace; the supposed portrait of queen Gioyanna with architecture; and Vertumnus with Pomona, commonly called vanity and modesty, a work as often copied as inimitable, in the Barberini; seem to coincide with this epoch; and we may count with them the Madonna begging the lily of the infant Christ in the Albani, a picture full of graces, and considered by Mengs as the masterpiece of the collection. It would however be too bold a conjecture to decide the date of every picture painted by an artist whose life was spent in search of new methods, and who too often dropped his work before it had received its finish.

But the king returned him the key and the ribbon. Things assumed a different aspect when he took shelter with the duchess of Saxe Gotha. Maupertuis, as Voltaire himself related, took the advantage of misrepresenting him in his absence; and he was detained by the king’s order, at Francfort on the Maine, till he had given up a volume of“Royal Verses.” Having regained his liberty, be endeavoured to negociate a return to Paris; but this he was not able to accomplish, since one of his poems, the “Pucelle D' Orleans,” which was both impious and obscene, had begun to make a noise. He was resident for about a year at Colwar, whence retiring to Geneva, he purchased a beautiful villa near that city, where he enjoyed the homages of the Genevans, and of occasional travellers; and for a short time was charmed with his agreeable retirement, which the quarrels that agitated the little republic of Geneva compelled him soon to quit. He was accused of privately fomenting the disputes, of leaning towards the prevailing party, and laughing at both. Compelled to abandon Les Delices (which was the name of his countryhouse), he fixed himself in France, within a league of Geneva, in Le Pays de Gex, an almost savage desert, which he had the satisfaction of fertilizing. The village of Ferney, which contained not above 50 inhabitants, became by his means a colony of 1200 persons, successfully employed for themselves and for the state. Numbers of artists, particularly watchmakers, established their manufactures under the auspices of Voltaire, and exported their wares to Russia, Spain, Germany, Holland, and Italy. He rendered his solitude still more illustrious by inviting thither the great niece of the famous Corneille, and by preserving from ignominy and oppression Sirven and the family of Calas, whose memory he caused to be restored. In this retirement Voltaire erected a tribunal, at which he arraigned almost all the human race. Men in power, dreading the force of his pen, endeavoured to secure his esteem. Aretin, in the sixteenth century, received as many insults as rewards. Voltaire, with far more wit and address, obtained implicit homage. This homage, and some generous actions, which he himself occasionally took care to proclaim, either with a view that they should reach posterity, or to please the curious, contributed as much to extend his reputation as the marks of esteem and bounty he had received from sovereign princes. The king of Prussia, with whom he still maintained an uninterrupted correspondence, had his statue made in porcelain, and sent to him, with the word Immortali engraven on its base. The empress of Russia sent him a present of some magnificent furs, and a. box turned by her own hands, and adorned with hi& portrait and 20 diamonds. These distinctions did not prevent his sighs for Paris. Overloaded with glory and wealth, he was not happy, because he never could content himself with what he possessed. At length, in the beginning of 1778, he determined to exchange the tranquillity of Ferney for the incense and bustle of the capital, where he met with the most flattering reception. Such honours were decreed him by the academies as till then had been unknown; he was crowned in a full theatre, and distinguished by the public with the strongest enthusiasm. But the philosopher of fourscore soon fell a victim to thi* indiscreet officiousness: the fatigue of visits and attendance at theatrical representations, the change of regimen and mode of living, inflamed his blood, already too much disordered. On his arrival, he had a violent haemorrhage, which greatly impaired him. Some days before his last illness, the idea of approaching death tormented him. Sitting at table with the marchioness de Villette, at whose house he had taken up his abode, after a solemn reverie, he said, “You are like the kings of Egypt, who, when they were at meat, had a death’s head beTore them.” On his arrival at Paris, he said, “he was come to seek glory and death;” and to an artist, who presented him the picture of his triumph, replied, “A tomb would be fitter for me than a triumph.” At last, not being able to obtain sleep, he took a large dose of opium, which deprived him of his senses. He died May 30, 1778; and was buried at Sellices, a Benedictine abbey between Nogent and Troyes; Many accounts have been published respecting his behaviour when in the nearer view of death. Some of these are so contradictory, that it is difficult to attain the exact truth. His infidel friends, Diderot, D'Alembert, and others, took every pains to represent that he died as he had lived, a hardened infidel, and a blasphemer; but they have not been credited, and it is more generally believed that he was visited on this awful occasion with the remorse of a man, whose whole life had been a continued attempt to erect vice and immorality on the ruins of revealed religion. The mareschal cle Richelieu is said to have fled from the bed-side, declaring it to be a sight too terrible to be sustained; andTronchin, the physician, asserted that the furies of Orestes could give but*a faint idea of those of Voltaire.

, an extraordinary artist, was born at Schafhausen, in May 1650. He travelled and resided long at Rome and Venice. On his return he married Elizabeth Ott, and died in April 1717. This is nearly all the information which the attention and the taste of his country has preserved of a man, who, on the evidence of his few remaining works, commands a place among the best artists of his time. Some anecdotes indeed are told, relative to his circumstances, which were as ludicrously penurious as Brauwer’s. At Berne and Basle, they still shew his Adieu and death of Adonis, and the Adultress in the Temple. Schafhausen possesses the Rape of the Sabines, the judgment of Paris, Scipio and the Celtiberian princess, the death of Cleopatra, and that of Cato; and at Geneva there are yet some subjects painted by him from the Metamorphoses of Ovid. Veyth’s style of design is an imitation of the forms of Michael Angelo, but not a compilation from his figures. His method of drawing is wild and great: seldom he makes use of the pen; dashes of white on stained paper mark the lights, the paper the middle tints, and a little black the shade. In composition he sometimes sacrificed the main subject to the episodic part, if it happened to invite by picturesque allurements. In~ colour, though he followed the Venetian principle, especially Bassan, he had a characteristic and varied tone drawn from the nature of the subjects.

Living, while in London, in the parish of St. Dunstan in the West, of which Dr. John Donne, dean of St. Paul’s, was vicar, he became of course a frequent hearer of that excellent preacher, and at length, as he himself expresses it, his convert. Upon his decease, in 1631, sir H. Wotton requested Walton to collect materials for a life of the doctor, which sir Henry had undertaken to write; but, sir Henry dying before he had completed the life, Walton undertook it himself; and in 1640 finished and published it, with a collection of the doctor’s sermons, in folio. Sir H. Wotton dying in 1639, Walton was importuned by King to undertake the writing of his life also and it was finished about 1644. The precepts of angling, that is, the rules and directions for taking fish with a hook and line, till Walton’s time, having hardly ever been reduced to writing, were propagated from age to age chiefly by tradition; but Walton, whose benevolent and communicative temper appears in almost every line of his writings, unwilling to conceal from the world those assistances which his long practice and experience enabled him, perhaps the best of any man of his time, to give, in 1653 published in a very elegant manner his K Complete Angler, or Contemplative Man’s Recreation,“in small 12mo, adorned with exquisite cuts of most of the fish mentioned in it. The artist who engraved them has been so modest as to conceal his name; but there is great reason to suppose they are the work of Lombart, who is mentioned in the” Sculptura“of Mr. Evelyn; and also that the plates were of steel.” The Complete Angler“came into the world attended with en. comiastic verses by several writers of that day. What reception in general the book met with may be naturally inferred from the dates of the subsequent editions; the second came abroad in 1655; the third in 1664; the fourth in 1668, and the fifth and last in 1676, Sir John Hawkins bad traced the several variations which the author from time to time made in these suhsequent editions, as well by adding new facts and discoveries as by enlarging on the more entertaining parts of the dialogue. The third and fourth editions of his book have several entire new chapters; and the fifth, the last of the editions published in his life-time, contains no less than eight chapters more than the first, and twenty pages more than the fourth. Not having the advantage of a learned education, it may seem unaccountable that Walton so frequently cites authors that have written only in Latin, as Gesner, Cardan, Aldrovandus, Rondeletius, and even Albertus Magnus; but it may be observed, that the voluminous history of animals, of which the first of these was author, is in effect translated into English by Mr. Edward Topsel, a learned divine, chaplain, as it seems, in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, to Dr. Neile, dean of Westminster: the translation was published in 1658, and, containing in it numberless particulars concerning frogs, serpents, caterpillars, and other animals, though not of fish, extracted from the other writers above-named, and others, with their names to the respective facts, it furnished Walton with a great variety of intelligence, of which in the later editions of his book he has carefully availed himself: it was therefore through the medium of this translation alone that he was enabled to cite the other authors mentioned above; vouching the authority of the original writers, as he elsewhere does sir Francis Bacon, whenever occasion occurs to mention his natural history, or any other of his works. Pliny was translated to his hand by Dr. Philemon Holland; as were also Janus Dubravius” de Piscinis & Piscium natura,“and Lebault’s” Maison Rustique,“so often referred to by him in the course of his work. Nor did the reputation of” The Complete Angler“subsist only in the opinions of those for whose use it was more peculiarly calculated; but even the learned, either from the known character of the author, or those internal evidences of judgment and veracity contained in it, considered it as a work of merit, and for various purposes referred to its authority. Dr. Thomas Fuller, in his” Worthies,“whenever he has occasion to speak of fish, uses his very words. Dr. Plot, in his” History ofMaffordshire,“has, on the authority of our author, related two of the instances of the voracity of the pike, and confirmed them by two other signal ones, that had then lately fallen out in that county. These are testimonies in favour of Walton’s authority in matters respecting fish and fishing; and it will hardly be thought a diminution of that of Fuller to say, that he was acquainted with, and a friend of, the person whom he thus implicitly commends. About two years after the restoration, Walton wrote the life of Mr. Richard Hooker, author of the” Ecclesiastical Polity:“he was enjoined to undertake this work by his friend Dr. Gilbert Sheldon, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, who, by the way, was an angler. Bishop King, in a letter to the author, says of this life,” I have often seen Mr. Hooker with my father, who was afterwards bishop of London, from whom, and others at that time, I have heard of the most material passages which you relate in the history of his life.“Sir William Dugdale, speaking of the three posthumous books of the” Ecclesiastical Polity,“refers the reader” to that seasonable historical discourse lately compiled and published, with great judgment- and integrity, by that much-deserving person Mr. Isaac Walton."

In 1782 he took an active part in the Chattertonian controversy, by publishing “An Enquiry into the authenticity of the Poems attributed to Thomas Rowley.” He had already introduced the question into his history, and now more decidedly gave his opinion that these poems were the fabrication of Chatterton. The same year he published his verses “on sir Joshua Reynolds’s painted window in New college chapel.” This produced a letter to him from sir Joshua, in which, with a pardonable vanity, if it at all deserve that appellation, he expresses a wish that his name had appeared in the verses. In a second edition Warton complied with a wish so flattering to himself, by implying the duration of his poetry, and Reynolds was substituted for the word Artist.

, a royal academician, and a man of *ery considerable talents, was the son of a sculptor, a native of Berne in Switzerland, but was born in London in 1751. Part of his education as an artist he received at Paris, but afterwards entered the Royal Academy of London. He was elected an associate Nov. 5, 1785, and a royal academician in February 1791. In the last voyage which captain Cook made to the South-Seas, Mr. Webber was appointed draughtsman to the expedition, and when the two ships, the Discovery and the Resolution, arrived at St. Peter and St. Paul, Kamtschatka, Webber was obliged to act as interpreter between captain Gower and major Behm, he being the only person on board of ei her ships who understood German. From this voyage he returned in 1780, when he was employed by the lot (is of the admiralty to superintend the engraving of the prints (by Bartolozzi and other eminent artists) executed after the drawings which he had made, representing the different events and scenes that occurred in the voyage, the accuracy of which has been confirmed by subsequent experience. When this work was concluded, he published, on his own account, a set of views of the different places he had visited in the voyage. They were etched and aquatinted by himself, afterwards coloured, and produced a very pleasing effect. This work was in part completed, when his health declined, and, after lingering for some months, he died April 29, 1793, in the forty-second year of his age.

, a late elegant artist, was born in London in 1747; the only regular instruction which he received was at a drawing-school. He acquired his knowledge of painting without a master; but he had the advantage of seeing much of what was then practised in the art, by the friendship and instructions of Mortimer, whom he assisted in painting the ceiling at Brocket Hall, Hertfordshire, the seat of lord Melbourne. He also associated much with young men who were or had been under the tuition of the most eminent artists of that period. His inclination appeared to lead him equally to figures and to landscape; but the profit likely to be derived from the former, caused him to make that his particular pursuit. In the early part of his life, he had considerable employment in painting some whole-length portraits. After practising several years in London, he was induced to remove to Ireland, and was much employed in Dublin, where he painted a large picture representing the Irish House of Commons assembled, in which portraits of many of the most remarkable political characters were introduced. From Dublin he returned to London, where he painted a picture of the riots in 1780, from which Heath engraved a very excellent print for Boydell. This picture was unfortunately burnt in the house of Mr. Heath, who then resided in Lislestreet, Leicester-square, it being too large to be moved. Mr. Wheatley continued to paint portraits, but he was chiefly engaged in painting rural and domestic scenes, for which he appeared to have a peculiar talent, and his works of that kind became very popular, although ia his females he adopted too much of the French costume. At an early period of life, he was attacked by the gout, which gradually deprived him of the use of his limbs, and of which he died, June 28, 1801, at fifty-four years of age.

At about the age of 2 1 his eagerness after new ideas carried him to Dublin, having heard of an ingenious piece of mechanism in that city, being a clock with certain curious appendages, which he was very desirous of seeing, and no less so of conversing with the maker. On his arrival, however, he could neither procure a sight of the former, nor draw the least hint from the latter concerning it. Thus disappointed, he fell upon an expedient for accomplishing his design; and accordingly took up his residence in the house of the mechanic, paying the more liberally for his board, as he had hopes from thence of more readily obtaining the indulgence wished for. He was accommodated with a room directly over that in which the favourite piece was kept carefully locked up; and he had not long to wait for his gratification, for the artist, while one day employed in examining his machine, was suddenly called down stairs; which the young inquirer happening to overhear, softly slipped into the room, inspected the machine, and, presently satisfying himself as to the secret, escaped undiscovered to his own apartment. His end thus compassed, he shortly after hid the artist farewell, and returned to his father in England.

, a very distinguished artist of the last century, was born in 1714, and was the son of the rector of Pineges, in Montgomeryshire, who was afterwards collated to the living of Mould in Flintshire. Edwards says, that “his connections were highly respectable, being maternally related to the late lord chancellor Camden, who was pleased to acknowledge him as his cousin.” His father gave him a good education, and as he early discovered a taste for painting, sent him to London, and placed him under the tuition of one Thomas Wright, a portrait-painter of very slender abilities. Wilson, therefore, began his career as a portrait-painter but with a mediocrity that afforded no luminous hopes of excellence; yet he must have acquired some rank in his profession, for we find, that in 1749, he painted a large picture of his present majesty, and of his brother the late duke of York. After having practised some years at London, he went to Italy, and continued the study of portrait-painting, until a small landscape of his, executed with a considerable share of freedom and spirit, casually meeting the eye of Zuccarelli, so pleased the Italian, that he strenuously advised him to follow that mode of painting, as most congenial to his powers, and therefore most likely to obtain for him fame as well as profit.

This flattering encomium from an artist of Zuccarelli’s knowledge and established reputation, produced such an influence on Wilson, as to determine him at once to turn from portrait to landscape, which he pursued with vigour and success. To this fortunate accident is owing the splendour diffused by his genius over this country, and even over Italy itself, whose scenes have been the frequent subjects of his pencil. His studies, indeed, in this branch of the art, must have been attended with rapid success, for he had some pupils in landscape while at Rome, and his works were so much esteemed thatMengs painted his portrait, for which Wilson, in return, painted a landscape.

, an artist and antiquary of great taste and talents, was born August 21, 1739, at Twickenham, in the house afterwards the residence of Richard Owen Cambridge, esq. He was educated at Eton school, from which he went to Christ’s-college, Cambridge, but took no degree. He returned from an extensive tour through France, Italy, Istria, and Switzerland, in 1769; and soon after married the honourable Charlotte De Grey, sister to the lord Walsingham; by whom he has left no issue. In all which is usually comprehended under the denomination of Belles Lettres, Mr. Windham may claim a place among the most learned men of his time. To an indefatigable diligence in the pursuit of knowledge, he joined a judgment clear, penetrating, and unbiassed, and a memory uncommonly retentive and accurate. An ardent love for truth, a perfect freedom from prejudice, jealousy, and affectation, an entire readiness to impart his various and copious information, united with a singular modesty and simplicity, marked his conversation and manners. Few men had a more critical knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages, or a deeper feeling for the beauties of style and sentiment in the classic writers; but in his minute and comprehensive acquaintance with every thing in them illustrative of human life and manners, especially all that relates to the fine arts, he scarcely had an equal. The history of art in the middle ages, and every circumstance relative to the revival of literature and the arts, from the fourteenth century to the present time, were equally familiar to him; and his acquaintance with the language of modern Italy was surpassed by few. He had very particularly studied the antiquities of his own country, and was eminently skilled in the history of English architecture. His pencil, as a draftsman from nature, was exquisite. His portraits of mere natural scenery were peculiarly spirited and free, and his drawings of architecture and antiquities most faithful and elegant. During his residence at Rome, he studied and measured the remains of ancient architecture there, particularly the baths, with a precision which would have done honour to the most able professional architect. His numerous plans and sections of them he gave to Mr. Cameron, and they are engraved in his great work on the Roman baths. To this work he also furnished a very considerable and valuable part of the letter-press. He also drew up the greater portion of the letter-press of the second volume of the “Ionian Antiquities,” published by the society of Dilettanti; and Mr. Stuart received material assistance from him in the second volume of his Athens. In his own name he published very little. His accuracy of mind rendered it difficult to him to please himself; and, careless of the fame of an author, he was better content that his friends should profit by his labours, than that the public should know the superiority of his own acquirements. He had been long a fellow of the Royal and Antiquarian Societies; and in the latter, was for many years of the council, and one of the committee for the publication of the Cathedrals of England. He more than once declined the honourable office of vice-president. Of the society of Dilettanti he was one of the oldest members; and to his zeal it was principally owing that the publications of that society were continued, after a suspension of many years. Mr. Windham died at Earsham-house, Norfolk, Sept. 21, 181U. In private life, he was the most amiable of men. Benevolent, generous, cheerful, without caprice, above envy, his temper was the unclouded sun-shine of virtue and sense. If his extreme modesty and simplicity of character prevented his striking at the first acquaintance, every hour endeared him to those who had the happiness of his intimacy. In every relation of life he was exemplary. A kind husband, a firm friend, a generous landlord, an indulgent master.

Abbe Winkelman was a middle-sized man; he had a very low forehead, sharp nose, and little black hollow eyes, which gave him an aspect rather gloomy than otherwise. If he had any thing graceful in his physiognomy, it was, his mouth, yet his lips were too prominent; but, when he was animated, and in good humour, his features formed an ensemble that was pleasing. A fiery and impetuous disposition often threw him into extremes. - Naturally enthusiastic, he often indulged an extravagant imagination; but, as he possessed a strong and solid judgment, he knew how to give things a just and intrinsic value. In consequence of this turn of mind, as well as a neglected education, a cautious reserve was a quality he little knew. If hewas bold in his decisions as an author, he was still more so in his conversation, and has often made his friends tremble for his temerity. If ever man knew what friendship was, that man was Mr. Winkelman, who regularly practised all its duties, and for this reason he could boast of having friends among persons of every rank and condition. People of his turn of thinking and acting seldom or ever indulged suspicions: the abbe’s fault was a contrary extreme. The frankness of his temper led him to speak his sentiments on all occasions; but, being too much addicted to that species of study which he so assiduously cultivated, he was not always on his guard to repress the sallies of self-love. His picture was drawn half length, sitting, by a German lady born at Kosinitz, but carried when young into Italy by her father, who was a painter. She etched it in a 4to size, and another artist executed it in mezzotinto. This lady was Angelica Kauffman. The portrait is prefixed to the collection of his letters published at Amsterdam, 1781, 2 vols. 12ino. Among his correspondents were Mr. Heyne, Munchausen, baron Reidesel (whose travels into Sicily, translated into English by Dr. Forster, 1773, 8vo, are addressed to him, and inspired him with an ardent longing to go over that ground), count Bunau, C. Fuesli, Gesner, P. Usteri, Van Mechlen, the duke de Rochfoucault, lord (alias Mr. Wortley) Montague, Mr. Wiell; and there are added extracts from letters to M. Clerisseaux, while he was searching after antiquities in the South of France a list of the principal objects in Rome, 1766, &c. and an abstract of a letter of Fuesli to the German translators of Webb on the “Beauties of Painting.”

, an artist, whom, Fuseli says, situation, temper, and perhaps circumstances, hav:e deprived of the celebrity he deserved, was a native of Zuric, born in 1640, the son of a canon, and professor of divinity in its college, and appears to have had a liberal education. Thoqgb, when a youth, he lost one eye, he was bound to Conrad Meyer, of whom, with the elements of painting, he acquired the mystery of etching. As a painter he devoted himself to portraiture, which he exercised with success, and in a style little inferior and sometimes equal to that of S. Hofmann; but the imitation of dormant or insipid countenances, unable to fill a mind so active and open to impression, in time gave way to composition in art and writing, both indeed devoted to the most bigoted superstition, and theologic rancour, for in his Dialogues ofi the Apocalypsis of S, John, blind zeal, legendary falsehood, and barbarism of style, go hand in hand with shrewdness of observation, controversial acuteness, and blunt naivete a heterogeneous mass, embellished by ah etched series of poetic and historic subjects, in compositions dictated.by the most picturesque fancy, original, magnificent, various, romantic, terrible, and fantastic; though in small, on a scale of arrangement and combinations to fill the pompous scenery of Paolo, or challenge the wildest caprice of Salvator; and in the conception of the Last Judgment, for sublimity far superior to Michael Agnolo. With these prerogatives, and neither insensible to beauty nor form, the artist is often guilty of ludicrous, nay, even premeditated incorrectness, and contortions which defy possibility. His style of etching, free, spirited, and yet regular, resembles that of Wilhelm Baur; and though no vestiges remain of his having seen Italy, it is difficult to conceive by what other means he could acquire that air of Italian scenery, and that minute acquaintance with the architecture, the costume, and ceremonies, of that country, without having visited it himself. His dialogues, above mentioned, were published in 1677, 8vo, entitled “J. Wirzii Romse animale exemplum, &c.” with 42 plates. Wirz resided and died in 1709, at a small villa which he possessed near Zuric.

In 1699 he published, in the Philosophical Transactions, “Some thoughts and experiments concerning Vegetation.” These experiments have acquired great celebrity, and are constantly referred to by all writers on vegetable physiology. They consist in putting sprigs of vegetables into the mouths of phials filled with water, allowing them to vegetate for some time, and then determining the quantity of water which they have imbibed, and the quantity of weight which they have gained. The difference obviously indicates the quantity of moisture exhaled by the plant. About 1693, Dr. Woodward’s attention was directed to an object of a very different kind. He had purchased from the museum of a deceased friend, a small, but very curious icon shield of a round form; on the concave side of which were represented, in the upper part, the ruins of Rome when burnt by the Gauls; and below, the weighing out the gold to purchase their retreat, together with the arrival of Camillus, and flight of the Gauls; and in the centre appeared a grotesque mask with horns very large and prominent; the figures all executed in a spirited and beautiful manner. Mr. Conyers, in whose collection this curiosity was, had purchased it of a brazier, who bought it among some brass and iron fragments which came out of the armoury in the Tower of London, near the end of Charles II.'s reign. As soon as it came into the possession of Dr. Woodward, many inquisitive persons came to see it, and in order to enable others, who had not that opportunity, to form a judgment of it, he not only had several casts made of it, but also, in 1705, had it engravenat Amsterdam, on a copper-plate of the size of the original copies of which were transmitted to many learned foreigners, for their opinion. Antiquaries, however, could not agree as to its age. The professors and other critics in Holland, in general, pronounced it antique; but those in France thought otherwise, and Woodward wrote against their opinion a letter to the abbe Bignon, which is published by Dr. Ward in the appendix to his “'Lives of the Gresham Professors.” Dodwell wrote a “Dissertatio de Parma equestri Woodwardiana,” which was published by Hearne (See Hearne) in 1713. Dodwell supposed this shield came out of some public collection; such as the Shield Walk in Whitehall-­palace, from Henry VIII.'s time to Charles I. Theophilus Downes, fellow of Baliol college, differed from him as to the antiquity of this monument; and after his death were published, in two leaves, 8vo, his “De clypeo Woodwardiano stricturae breves.” Ainsworth abridged Dodwell’s dissertation, and inserted it at the end of the “Museum Woodwardianum,” or catalogue of the doctor’s library and curiosities, sold by auction at Covent-garden in 1728. He afterwards enlarged the piece, considered the objections, and reprinted it with the title, “De Clypeo Camilli antique,” &c. 1734, 8vo. Spanheim and Abr. Seller had both begun to write dissertations on it, but were prevented by death. Ward was the last who made any remarks on it, and those in favour of its antiquity; but Moyle’s objection to its antiquity from the ruins of an amphitheatre has not been removed by Dr. Ward. No ancient artist, Mr. Gough observes, could be so ignorant as to ascribe such buildings to that period. At Dr. Woodward’s sale, this shield was purchased by Col. King, one of his executors, for 100l., and at the sale of the colonel’s effects, in 1768, it was sold to Dr. Wilkinson for forty guineas, along with the letters, &c. relating to it.

, one of the most eminent of modern engravers in England, was born at Maidstone, in Kent, Aug. 27, 1735. Of his early history few particulars have been preserved, and those mostly traditionary. His father was a thread-maker, and long time a foreman to Mr. Robert Pope. The family is said to have come originally from Holland; and there is a tradition that Woollett’s great grandfather escaped from the battle fought by the parliamentary forces against the royalists near Maidstone. Our artist was educated at Maidstone under Mr. Simon Goodwin, who used to notice his graphic talents. Once having taken on a slate the likeness of a schoolfellow named Burtenshaw, who had a prominent nose, his master desired him to finish it on paper, and preserved the drawing. He was also in the habit of drawing the likenesses of his father’s acquaintances. His earliest production on copper was a portrait of a Mr. Scott, of Maidstone, with a pipe in his mouth. These are perhaps trifles, but they compose all that is now remembered of Woollett’s younger days. His first attempts having been seen by Mr. Tinney, an engraver, he took him as an apprentice at the same time with Mr. Anthony Walker and Mr. Brown. His rise in his profession was rapid, and much distinguished, for he brought the art of landscape engraving to great perfection. With respect to the grand and sublime, says Strutt, “if 1 may be allowed the term in landscapes, the whole world cannot produce his equal.” Woollett, however, did not confine himself to landscapes, he engraved historical subjects and portraits with the greatest success. The world has done ample justice to his memory, and the highest prices still continue to be given for good impressions of all his prints, but particularly of his “Niobe” and its companion “Phaeton,? ' his” Celadon and Amelia,“and” Ceyx and Alcyone;“and” The Fishery,“all from Wilson, whose peculiar happiness it was that his best pictures were put into the hands of Woollett, who so perfectly well understood and expressed the very spirit of his ideas upon thecopper. To these we may add the portrait of Rubens, from Vandyke, and, what are in every collection of taste, his justly celebrated prints from the venerable president of the academy,” The Death of General Wolfe,“and The Battle of the Boyne.”

Mr. Woollett died at his house, Upper Charlotte-street, Rathbone-place, May 23, 1785, aged fifty and the record of his death is given in these words “To say he was the first artist in his profession would be giving him his least praise, for he was a good nian. Naturally modest and amiable in his disposition, he never censured the works of others, or omitted pointing out their merits; his patience under the continual torments of a most dreadful disorder upwards of nine months was truly exemplary; and he died as he had lived, at peace with all the world, in vtfhich he never had an enemy. He has left his family inconsolable for his death, and the public to lament the loss of a man whose works (of which his unassuming temper never boasted) are an honour to his country.” An elegant monument was afterwards put up to his memory in the cloisters, Westminster abbey.

, an artist of considerable merit, was a native of England, born in 1700, and for the greater part of his life painted portraits in miniature: he afterwards, with worse success, performed them in oil; but at last acquired reputation and money by etchings, in the manner of Rembrandt, which proved to be a very easy task, by the numbers of men who have counterfeited that master so as to deceive all those who did not know his works. Worlidge’s imitations and his heads in black-lead have grown astonishingly into fashion. His best, piece is the whole-length of sir John Astley, copied from Rembrandt, and his copy of the hundred Guilder print; but his print of the theatre at Oxford and the act there, and his statue of lady Pomfret’s Cicero, are very poor performances. His last work was a book of gems from the antique. He died at Hammersmith, Sept. 23, 1766, aged sixty-six.

, an eminent artist of Holland, was born at Haerlem, in 1620, and was the son of Paul Wouvermans, a tolerable history-painter, of whom, however, he did not learn the principles of his art, but of John Wynants, an excellent painter of Haerlem. It does not appear that he ever was in Italy, or ever quitted the city of Haerlem; though no man deserved more the encouragement a-nd protection of some powerful prince than he did He is one instance, among a thousand, to prove that oftentimes the greatest merit remains without either recompence or honour. His works have all the excellences we can wish; high finishing, correctness, agreeable composition, and a taste for colouring, joined with a force that approaches to the Caracci’s . The pieces he painted in. his latter time have a grey or blueish cast; they are finished with too much labour, and his grounds look too much like velvet: but those he did in his prime are free from these faults, and equal in colouring and correctness to any thing Italy can produce. Wouvermans generally enriched his landscapes with huntings, halts, encampment of armies, and other subjects where horses naturally enter, which he designed better than any painter of his time: there are also some battles and attacks of villages by his hand. These beautiful works, which gained him great reputation, did not make him rich; on the contrary, being charged with a numerous family, and but indifferently paid for his work, he lived very meanly; and, though he painted very quick, and was very laborious, had much ado to maintain himself. The misery of his condition determined him not to bring up any of his children to painting. In his last hours, which happened at Haerlem in 1688, he burnt a box filled with his studies and designs; saying, I have been so ill-paid for my labours, that I would not have those designs engage my son in so miserable a profession." Different authors, however, ascribe the burning of his designs to different motives. Some say it proceeded from his dislike to his brother Peter, being unwilling that he should reap the product of his labours; others allege that he intended to compel his son (if he should follow th'e profession) to seek out the knowledge of nature from his own industry, and not indolently depend on copying those designs; and other writers assign a less honourable motive, which seems to be unworthy of the genius of Wouvermans, and equally unworthy of being perpetuated.

On the death of Dr. Gerard Langbaine, he offered himself as a candidate against Dr. Wallis for the place of custos archivorum to the university, but was unsuccessful. (See Wallis.) On the restoration he was reinstated in his post of judge of the admiralty, and was made one of the commissioners for regulating the university, but did not survive that year, dying at his apartments in Doctors’ Commons, March 1, 1660. He was interred at Fulham church, Middlesex, near the grave of his eldest daughter, sometime the wife of William Powell, alias Huison, esq. Wood says, “He was an exact artist, a subtle logician, expert historian, and for the knowledge in the practice of the civil law, the chief person of his time, as his works, much esteemed beyond, the seas (where several of them are reprinted) partly testify. He was so well versed in the statutes of the university, and controversies between the members thereof and the city, that none after (Bryan) Twine’s death went beyond him. As his birth was noble, so was his behaviour and discourse; and as he was personable and handsome, so he was naturally sweet, pleasing, and affable.”

, a royal academician and an excellent artist, was born at Florence about 1710. In early life he studied as an historical painter, but afierwards confined his practice to the painting of landscape, with small figures, in which he acquired a very beautiful manner, both of composing and executing his pictures. It has been remarked, that among the figures which he introduced in his landscapes, he frequently represented one with a gourd bottle at his waist, as is often seen in Italy. This is said to have been done intentionally, as a sort of pun on his own name, Zucco being the Italian word for a gourd. He is supposed to have come to England about 1752. On his way, the war raging in Europe, he was seized on the territories of one of the belligerent states, as a suspicious person. He told them his name and profession, and offered to confirm the fact by painting a picture, which was agreed to; the materials were procured, the picture painted, and Zuccarelli released.

In England he met with much encourageme/it, and several of his pictures were engraved by Vivares, By the advice of some of his friends, he executed a collection of drawings, which he disposed of by auction. They were well received, and produced a handsome sum. About 1773 he returned to Florence, and for some time relinquished his pencil, and lived upon his fortune but part of that having been lost upon bad security, he again resumed his pencil, and was much employed by the English gentlemen who visited Italy. He died at Florence, at what time is not exactly known, but the event was confirmed to the Royal Academy in 1788. He was one of the original members, and consequently considered as one of the founders of the academy. The pictures of this artist have, in Mr. Edwards’s opinion, infinite merit, particularly those which he painted in the early part of his life, when resident at Venice. They have an evident superiority over those he painted in England. He made several etchings, particularly of figures, from the originals of Andrea del Sarto, which are marked with his name, " Zuccarelli delin. et fecit.