Mediaeval

Miniaturists.

Charlemagne.

Ivan the Terrible.

We have followed Messrs. Woltmann and Woermann closely in their account of the decadence of art from the greatest days of Greek sculpture and painting to the end of the Christian period; but as our object is avowedly only to deal with the best art - that which is good for all time - and to see how far that is naturalistic or otherwise, we shall speak but briefly of (the main points connected with) mediaeval art, which has but little interest for us until we come to Niccola Pisano, and Griotto. During the early years of what are called the Middle Ages, miniaturists were evolving monstrosities from their own inner consciousness, but with Charlemagne, who said, "We neither destroy pictures nor pray to them," the standard adopted was again classical antiquity. So art continuously declined until it became a slave to the Church, and the worst phase of this slavery was to be seen in the East, under Ivan the Terrible, for we read that "artists were under the strictest tutelage to the clergy, who chose the subjects to be painted, prescribed the manner of the treatment, watched over the morality of the painters, and had it in their power to give and refuse commissions. Bishops alone could promote a pupil to be a master, and it was their duty to see that the work was done according to ancient models." Here was indeed a pretty state of things, a painter to be watched by a priest; to have his subjects selected for him! One cannot imagine anything more certain to degrade art. Religion has ever been on the side of mental retrogression, has ever been the first and most pertinacious foe to intellectual progress, but perhaps to nothing has she been so harmful as to art, unless it has been to science.

During the period of this slavery, the Church used art as a tool, as a disseminator of her tenets, as a means of imparting religious knowledge. Very clever of her, but very disastrous for poor art.

Glass Paintings

How conventional art was during the Romanesque period can be seen in the glass paintings that decorate many of the old churches, to admire which crowds go to Italy and waste their short time in the unhealthy interiors of churches, instead of spending it at Sorrento or Capri. These go back to their own country, oppressed with dim recollections of blue and red dresses, crude green landscapes, and with parrot-like talks of "subdued lights," "rich tones mellowed by time," and such cant.

Gothic. The Guilds

The Romanesque style of architecture was superseded in the fourteenth century by the Gothic. A transformation took place in art and France now took the lead. The painters of this period emancipated themselves from the direction of the priesthood - a great step indeed. The masters of this age were specialists; the guilds now ruled supreme in art matters. We read that "now popular sentiment began to acknowledge that the artist's own mode of conceiving a subject had a certain claim, side by side with tradition and sacerdotal prescription. . . . They took their impressions direct from nature," but their insight into nature was scanty. As Messrs. Wolt-mann and Woermann very truly remark, "If for the purpose of depicting human beings, either separately or in determined groups and scenes, the artist wishes to develop a language for the expression of emotion, there is only one means open to him - a closer grasp and observation of nature. In the age which we are now approaching, the painter's knowledge of nature remains but scanty. He does not succeed in fathoming and mastering her aspects; but his eyes are open to them so far as is demanded by the expressional phenomena which it is his great motive to represent; since it is not yet for their own sakes, but only for the sake of giving expression to a particular range of sentiments that he seeks to imitate the realities of the world."

There was a struggle at this period for the study of nature, and the tyranny of the Church was being thrown off; there was then hope that art would at last advance, and advance it did. What was wanting was a deeper insight into nature, for nature is not a book to be read at a glance, she requires constant study, and will not reveal all her beauties without much wooing. And though we read of a sketch-book of this time, the thirteenth century, in which appears a sketch of a lion, which "looks extremely heraldic," and to which the artist has appended the remark, " N.B. - Drawn from life," this in no way surprises us, for have we not been seriously told in this nineteenth century by the painters of catchy, meretricious water-colours, with reds, blues and greens such as would delight a child, that they had painted them from nature; pictures in which no two tones were correct, in which detail, called by the ignorant, finish, had been painfully elaborated, whilst the broad facts of nature had been ignored. Such work is generally painted from memory or photographs. Happily work of this kind will never live, however much the gullible public may buy it. Next we read that "the germs of realism already existing in art by degrees unfold themselves further, and artists venture upon a closer grip of nature." Here, then, were the signs of coming success, and the great effect of these gradual changes was first manifested in the work of Niccola Pisano, who "made a sudden and powerful return to the example of the antique," All honour to this man, who was an epoch-maker, who based his conception "upon a sudden and powerful return to the example of the antique, of the Roman relief." His work is by no means naturalistic or perfect, but it was enough lor one man to do such a herculean task as to ignore his own times and rise superior to them. Painting, however, took no such quick turn, but Cimabue was the first of those who were to bring it into the right way. The principal works ascribed to him, however, are not authenticated.

Thirteenth century sketchbook.

Niccola Pisano.

Cimabue.

Giotto.