Palming, the art of representing objects by means of light and shade or color upon a smooth surface. Whatever importance such objects possess for the purposes of science, to the painter they present five qualities or elements, as follows: shape (or form), size (or quantity), light and shadow (or gradation), local color (or hue), and texture. No object in nature is without these distinctive characteristics, and no object in nature has other than these for pictorial treatment. Hence a painting is meritorious in the degree that it exhibits these traits with accuracy. Of the various theories respecting the origin of the art, that seems the most natural which makes it coeval with the invention of writing. Goguet in his Origine des loix notices the fact that the earliest people made their first essays in writing by representing to the eye the objects they wished to impress upon the mind; and so far as observation has demonstrated, this remark holds good of all primitive races. No date can be assigned to the commencement of this practice, and, as Haydon has remarked, "in what country painting first originated is nearly as difficult to discover, as it is to find a country where it never existed at all." Dismissing for want of authentic materials any inquiry into the progress of the art among the Chinese, the Hindoos, the Persians, the Assyrians, the Phoenicians, and their cognate races, by whom it was probably never developed beyond the rudest stages, we may begin the history of painting with Egypt, where it can be traced to a very remote antiquity.

The earliest remains are probably not less than 4,000 years old, and exhibit no inconsiderable mastery of form and expression. Egyptian paintings are comprised in three classes, those on the walls of tombs and temples, those on the cases and cloths of mummies, and those on papyrus rolls. The first are the most numerous and meritorious, although none of them can be properly considered works of art, but rather the symbolic writings which record the social, religious, and political life of the people. Sculpture and painting were originally practised in conjunction, the latter being the subordinate art, and the earliest employment of the painter was to color statues, bass reliefs, and intaglios or sunk reliefs. To this succeeded the execution, under a strict code of conventional rules prescribed by the priesthood, of those elaborate works which afford such vivid illustrations of the manners and customs of the ancient Egyptians. According to Pliny, painters and sculptors were forbidden to introduce any change or innovation into the practice of their respective aits, or in any way to add to them; and hence the monotonous character of Egyptian art, the perpetual recurrence through thousands of years of similar types of form, and the absence of any progressive development such as may be witnessed in the productions of the Greeks and other races.

It was doubtless owing to this dependence upon established canons that the artists were enabled to impart to their works that character of stability and unity of purpose which so impresses the modern traveller on the banks of the Nile. Their technical merits are slight. The imitation of nature was never carried beyond an outlined diagram arbitrarily colored; of ideal beauty they are utterly destitute; and perspective, chiaroscuro, and the science of composition seem to have been unknown. Men and women were generally painted red, animals brown, birds blue and yellow, and other objects according to similar arbitrary rules, in utter disregard of their natural appearance. Sometimes a varnish of glue or resin was applied to the finished picture, which may account for the freshness which the colors still retain. The most flourishing period of Egyptian art was that from about 1400 13. 0. to the Persian conquest in 525, after which a slow but gradual decline is observable, until in the early part of the Christian era the art of the Greeks becomes predominant. - In common with other arts, painting appears to have been established in Greece mainly through communication with Egypt and Asia, and previous to the commencement of the 5th century B. C. it was chiefly ornamental or representative, its application being limited to the decoration of temples, the coloring or imitation of bass reliefs, and similar purposes.

With the struggle against the Persians, the great promoter of intellectual activity among the Hellenic races, it began to assume its peculiar Greek character and to be practised as an independent art; and from that era until after the death of Alexander it received its most perfect development. The whole period preceding the Persian invasion may be said to constitute the mythic age of Greek art, during which a slow but gradual approximation toward excellence was observable, the motive for which must be traced to the character of the people and of their religion. Love of beauty was with the Greeks a religious principle; their deities were models of physical excellence, and their own habits tended to bring the human form to a high degree of perfection. Hence, when painting and sculpture were made to suhserve the cause of religion by representing to the eye the material forms of Greek mythology, the artist strove to clothe these with the attributes of majesty, loveliness, or grace; and this effort, continued through successive ages among a people of remarkable acuteness and intelligence, developed art from its original Egyptian rudeness and arbitrary conventionalism into life, motion, and liberty.

The Egyptian artist reproduced for ages a fixed archaic type of the human figure, while his Greek successor aimed at an ideal perfection, which made him the supreme master of expression and form. With the arrival of Polygnotus of Thasos in Athens, about 463 B. C, begins the authentic history of Greek art, and the supremacy of Athens as the capital of the arts, although few of the great painters of Greece were natives of that city. Aristotle calls him, the painter of character, and he is mentioned by other Greek writers as one of the most distinguished painters of antiquity in the essentials of form, expression, and color. He was employed to decorate various public buildings in Athens, and also executed three famous pictures illustrating Homeric episodes for the Lesche, a public hall near the temple of Apollo at Delphi, which 600 years later excited the wonder and admiration of Pausanias. These works, however, can scarcely be called historical in the modern ac-ceptation of the word, as the events and objects were indicated rather than represented, and no attempt was made at dramatic development in composition or local truth and circumstantial detail of execution.

Other celebrated painters of the Athenian school, of which Polygnotus is considered the founder, and contemporary with him, were Dionysius of Colophon, an excellent portrait painter, of whom Aristotle says "he painted men as they are;" Micon, distinguished for his horses; Panaenus of Athens, and Onatas of Aegina. Somewhat later flourished Apollodorus, who about 404 B. C. developed the principles of light and shade. According to Pliny, he was the inventor of tone. Painting, which had hitherto been sculpturesque, now took a more dramatic range, and to the school of Athens succeeded that called the Asiatic or Ionic, of which Zeuxis, Par-rhasius, and Timanthes were the chief masters. It constitutes what may be called the second period of Greek painting, the school of Polygnotus forming the first, and was characterized by greater unity of sentiment and action, and a close imitation of the local and accidental appearances of objects. Zeuxis and Parrhasius excelled in the representation of sensuous beauty, and, if inferior in simplicity and expression to Polygnotus, greatly surpassed him in technical details. The "Helen" of Zeuxis was one of the wonders of ancient art, and the numerous pictures by Parrhasius of deities and heroes attained a high importance.

Eupompus of Sicyon, the last very distinguished painter of this period, founded about the time of Philip of Macedon the Sicyonian school of painting, characterized by scientific cultivation, artistic knowledge, and great ease and accuracy in drawing, which constituted the third and last phase of Greek painting, or, as it has been called, the epoch of refinement. The form now became paramount over the essence, and technical excellence reached its limit. The chief painters of this time were Pamphilus, chiefly distinguished as a teacher of the theory of his art; his pupils, Apelles, Melanthius, and Pau-sias, the first preeminent not less for grace or beauty of form than for his power in sublime subjects, the last named one of the first to practise encaustic painting; Protogenes of Rhodes, a rival of Apelles; Nicias, who excelled in light and shade; Euphranor, excellent in many departments; Nicomachus and Aristides of Thebes, the former remarkable for boldness of execution, and the latter, according to Pliny, the greatest master of expression in all Greece; Theon of Samos, and Athenion of Maronea, besides many others, extending over more than a century.

Of these the most famous was Apelles, whose celebrated contest of drawing with Protogenes (each in turn dividing the other's line longitudinally by a thinner line) is frequently cited by ancient critics as an illustration of the degree of technical skill acquired by each artist. From the time of Alexander art rapidly deteriorated, and subsequent to the middle of the 3d century B. C. scarcely another name of note occurs. In the place of mythological or epic stories, the artists painted caricatures, low or domestic subjects of the class called genre, and obscene pictures, or contented themselves with reproducing feeble copies of the works of their predecessors. At the period of the Roman conquest painting exhibited little vitality, and the spoliation of public buildings and galleries to adorn the porticoes and temples of Rome tended to crush the art everywhere in Greece. Greek paintings were executed in distemper, with glue, milk, or white of egg, and in encaustic, upon wood, clay, plaster, stone, parchment, and during the latest period upon canvas. Wooden panels with a ground of plaster were most commonly employed, and in the late stages of the art fresco painting attained some perfection.

Various species of varnish appear to have been known, and Pliny says that Apelles was indebted for his brilliant coloring to a liquid which he calls atramentum, with which he covered his pictures; whence Sir Joshua Reynolds has concluded that he was a master of the art of glazing. Down to the time of Apelles four principal colors were used, white, red, yellow, and black, from which all the necessary hues and tints were composed. The "Aldobrandini Marriage," now in the Vatican, supposed to resemble a picture by Echion of the Sicyonian school, the "Achilles discovered by Ulysses" and "Achilles surrendering Briseis," both found at Pompeii, and a few others, although probably feeble imitations of older works, sufficiently attest the high character of Greek art in its prime. The mosaic of the casa del Fauno at Pompeii, representing the "Battle of Issus," now in the museo nazio-nale (formerly borionico) in Naples, is the finest ancient picture extant, with respect to composition, foreshortening, and perspective.- - Of Etruscan painting, as exemplified by specimens found in sepulchral chambers at Tarquinii, Caere, and elsewhere, little need be said.

It is essentially Greek in its style and characteristics, and to a limited extent shows similar stages of development and decay. - The Romans received their art directly from Greece, and, though eager and intelligent collectors of the works of the early masters of that country, had no independent school of painting. There does not seem to have been a single Roman painter of eminence; but inferior Greek artists abounded in the Italian peninsula, and particularly in the capital, and the best Roman paintings were probably executed by them in the degenerate style which marked the decline of the art in Greece. These consisted chiefly of portraits, ornamental or decorative work (under which head may be included landscapes), and copies of the masterpieces of antiquity. The Romans were the first to cultivate portrait painting as a distinct branch of the art. To such a depth of degradation did painting finally descend among them, that it was practised chiefly by slaves, and the painter was estimated by the quantity of work he could do in a day.

But the treasures of art accumulated in Rome by successive generals and emperors, from the time of Marcellus downward, made the city, as Cassiodorus has expressed it, " one vast wonder." Most of these were in turn transferred to Constantinople by Constantine and his successors, and the remainder disappeared in conflagrations or in the disorders which marked the period of the exarchate. Not one authenticated painting by any of the great masters of antiquity is now known to be in existence. In one respect the practice of painting in Italy differed from that in Greece. In the latter country the art was essentially religious, and was mainly confined to temples find public buildings; but the Romans early familiarized it with the household, and no dwelling, wheth-er palatial or strictly domestic, was considered complete unless every apartment or portion had its painted decorations signifying the use for which it was designed. - While art in its ancient seats was thus passing through the last phases of what has been called its "age of decrepitude," Christianity had taken root in many parts of the world; and although the new religion, unlike the old, needed no direct alliance with art. and its followers, in their detestation of paganism, denounced the carvers of graven images as servants and emissaries of Satan, the influence of so many previous ages of refinement could not be at once effaced, and the early Christians before the time of Constantino attempted the visible representation of sacred personages and actions, by means of symbols and mystic emblems.

Thus the lamb typified Christ'; the vine and its branches, Christ and his disciples; the fish, baptism; the ship, the church; and the cross, redemption. But the art even to this limited extent was practised not for the pleasure it would excite, but as a means of inculcating religious principles; and when, as Christianity gained converts, it became safe to venture beyond the limits of mere symbol, and to depict Christ as the Good Shepherd, care was taken to eschew the beauty of features and body lavished by pagan artists upon the representations of their deities. Indeed, while Jewish converts preponderated in the early church, the Saviour was represented, on the authority of certain passages in the Old Testament, as devoid of all beauty, "not like the gods of the Pantheon catching the eve by outward attractions, but conquering the heart by the power of his word." lt was not until the close of the 8th century that Adrian I. decreed, in a papal bull, that Christ should be represented with all the attributes of divine beauty which art could lend him. Nearly a century previous, in 692, the council of Constantinople had authorized the direct human representation of the Saviour in place of the symbolical.

The most interesting monuments of Christian art during the first three centuries are to be found on the walls or ceilings of the catacombs of Rome. In the catacomb of St. Calixtus were discovered many representations of Scriptural stories, parables, and symbols, intermingled occasionally with some of the more innocent pagan allegories, and also a portrait of Christ as the Good Shepherd, the earliest known to have been painted, and which probably formed the type for others. Kugler ascribes to these works "much grandeur of arrangement" and "a peculiar solemnity and dignity of style." As distinguished from pagan work of the same or an earlier period, they may be said to exhibit more spirituality in the conception of the human form, holiness of expression and strength of character being preferred to beauty of features or body, and a strong predilection for natural objects, as animals, leaves, or flowers. When the establishment of Christianity by Constantine enabled the pious decorators of the early church to emerge from the gloom of the catacombs, they transferred their labors to the numerous edifices dedicated to the new religion.

But before Christian art had time to attain a healthy expansion or assume a distinctive form, civil commotions and barbaric invasions checked its development in Italy, and in the 6th century Constantinople became its principal seat. Mural painting in fresco or distemper now gave way to mosaic work, and for four or five centuries the most interesting remains of pictorial art are the mosaics in the churches and the miniature illuminations of Bibles and other sacred books. (See Mosaic, and Miniature Painting.) During the 8th and 9th centuries the iconoclasts of the eastern church pursued a systematic destruction of works of art; but notwithstanding the disfavor into which Greek artists and their works thereby fell, Constantinople remained from the 7th to the 13th century the great capital of the arts, and during that period the Byzantine style was predominant in every branch of them. Byzantine painting was practised almost exclusively for religious purposes, and about the commencement of the 9th century assumed a hierarchical stiffness of type which has descended unaltered to the present day, although genuine Byzantine pictures are now produced only in a few places in Russia and Greece. The characteristics of the school are length and meagreness of limbs, stiffness of figure, features almost void of expression, long and narrow eyes, a disagreeable blackish green coloring of the flesh, various conventional attitudes and accessories having no foundation in nature, and a profusion of gilding.

The colors, though bright, were raw and crude, and commonly painted on a gold background. The painters were monks or persons connected with monasteries, who formed a sort of perpetual craft or guild for the manufacture of pictures; and the subjects were almost as fixed as the style, consisting of the Madonna and child throned, and representations of sacred history or allegory. - The capture of Constantinople by the Venetians in 1204, by promoting a greater intercourse between the Byzantines and Italians, is considered to have given the first impulse toward the revival of the arts in Italy and the West. Many Byzantine painters passed into Italy and Germany, carrying with them their technical methods and their types of form and color, which were followed more or less servilely by the Italians who studied under them; and at Venice, Pisa, and Siena were planted early in the 13th century the germs of what subsequently became the leading schools of Italy. But while in the eastern empire the influence of a slowly expiring faith was still manifest in the manners, the literature, and the art of the people, in Italy, after centuries of turmoil, a new and vigorous civilization, largely impregnated with the Gothic element, but inspired and directed by Christianity alone, had appeared, under which it was impossible that art should not show a new development.

The artist, sharing in the religious fervor with which every occupation was pursued, painted for the glory of Christianity and the good of his fellow men, and, finding the shrunken and withered forms of the Byzantine school insufficient for the purposes of his art, was led to a closer imitation of nature. One by one the familiar conventionalisms, which centuries of use had sanctified, were thrown off by bold innovators, until in the early part of the 16th century the culminating glory of the art was reached. The successive steps were slow, and not until the commencement of the 14th century can painting be said to have freed itself in any considerable degree from its Byzantine trammels. Sculpture, under the lead of Nicolo Pisano, the greatest artist of the 13th century, considerably preceded painting in the order of development. The painters were hampered by a mode of treatment handed down to them for centuries, from which it was difficult at once to emancipate themselves; while the sculptors, ignorant as yet of the marbles of the Greeks, were obliged to employ as models the every-day objects which surrounded them.

Hence of necessity there grew up among the latter a system of observation and study of nature which soon gave an original character to their works. - To Giovanni Cimabue of Florence, who died about 1302, it has been customary to ascribe the revival of painting in Italy. Giunta da Pisa, who preceded him, was a painter of some note in his day, but in no respect a regenerator of art; and Guido da Siena, an artist evincing some independence of feeling, and once supposed to have preceded him, is now believed to have been his contemporary or successor. Tuscany, at any rate, was the seat of this revival, and for upward of two centuries the Tuscan schools maintained their ascendancy in Italy. Neither Cimabue nor Guido advanced much beyond the Byzantine traditions, and the chief merit of the former undoubtedly consists in the fact that he discovered and fostered the genius of Giotto di Bondone, the first great painter of modern times, and the true regenerator of the art. With the commencement of the 14th century, the date of this master's first works of importance, the history of Italian painting properly commences; and in tracing its development each of the principal schools will be noticed in succession.

The subject has already been treated at some length under the head of Fresco Painting, which formed the most important branch of the art in the 14th and loth centuries; and for the characteristics and chief productions of individual painters the reader is referred to their biographies in this work. - The Tuscan schools, comprising the Sienese, Pisan, and Florentine, were in the 15th century merged in the last named, of which Giotto was the founder. Previous to his time the only real advance in painting was the substitution of the human figure for its mere type or symbol. Giotto made the second great step of progress by rejecting the dark coloring which his predecessors had retained from their Byzantine models, and introducing that which was paler and more natural. His compositions also exhibit freer conceptions of grouping, and his figures more action and variety of position, the result doubtless of the new ideas of form suggested by the works of Nicolo Pisano. He painted in the chief cities of Italy from Naples to Milan, and his mature works, such as the frescoes in the chapel of the Arena at Padua and in the Franciscan church at Assisi, retain no traces of the Byzantine style.

His followers and imitators, commonly known as the Giottcs-chi, for the most part confined themselves to the reproduction of the models left by their master, but some pursued the path he had opened to them with results beneficial to the progress of art. Of the latter class were Tommaso di Stefano, called Giottino, Taddeo Gaddi, and Andrea Orcagna, the last of whom has been considered superior in dignity and grandeur to Giotto himself. Contemporary with Giotto, and scarcely less famous, were Simone Memmi of the Sienese school, the characteristics of which seem to have been force of expression and a tendency toward idealism; Pietro and Andrea di Lorenzo, known as the Lorcnzetti, and Buffalmacco, of humorous memory, whose exploits as related by Boccaccio have survived almost every relic of his pencil. Other painters of the period were Angelo Gaddi, the son of Taddeo; Spinello Aretino; Cennino Cenniui, author of the oldest Italian treatise on painting; and Francesco da Volterra. None of these advanced much beyond the point reached by Giotto, and at the close of the 14th century his influence was discernible not in Tuscany alone, but throughout Italy and even beyond the Alps. But painting was still in a very undeveloped state.

Portraiture was rarely practised, landscape painting as a branch of art was un-thought of, and no true standard of form had been established. The purposes to which the art was applied were almost wholly religious, and when subjects from pagan mythology or classic history were introduced, it was to illustrate the truth of Christian revelation or the doctrines of moral theology. Believing that they shared with the clergy the task of instructing the people, the artists aimed at an impressive representation of their subject rather than at technical skill; and on this account their art, imperfect and conventional as it was, exhibits an earnestness and directness of purpose to which the works produced during the splendid era of Raphael can lay no claim. In the loth century painting advanced very considerablv, and toward its close Flor-ence, under the munificent sway of the Medici, became one of the most splendid art capitals of any age. Pietro della Francesca and Paolo Uccello developed the science of perspective, and Masolino da Panicale that of chiaroscuro.

The productions of Lorenzo Ghiberti, the sculptor of the famous gates of San Giovanni in Florence, also gave new vigor to the imitative principles established by Giotto; and to his influence perhaps the peculiar excellence of Florentine art may be traced. But to Ma-saccio, who discarded the conventional types of the human form and made his studies directly from life, is due the credit of establishing the great era of the pictorial art of this century; and until near the time of Raphael his conceptions of form remained the standard. Contemporary with or immediately succeeding him were Fra Angelico da Fiesole, less distinguished for any external quality of art than for the deep religious sentiment of his works; The profligate Filippo Lippi, one of the earliest painters of the naturalistic as distinguished from the mystical school, as that class of masters has been called who made religion the end and object of their art; Benozzo Gozzoli; Filippino Lippi; Antonio Pollajuolo, the first who studied the dead subject for the purposes of design; Domenico Ghirlandaio, the master of Michel Angelo; Cosimo Rosselli, Sandro Botticelli, Luca Signorelli, Andrea Verocchio, and Andrea Castagno, the first Florentine master who practised oil painting after the manner of the Van Eycks. With Leonardo da Vinci, a master accomplished in many arts besides painting, begins another epoch, in which Masaccio's conceptions of form were combined with more forcible and dramatic composition and clearer notions of local color and chiaroscuro, as illustrated in the famous "Last Supper" in the convent of Santa Maria delle Grazie at Milan. The earnest, simple faith and spiritual treatment of the early painters now gave way in a measure to the realistic tendencies of the age.

Less was left to the imagination and feelings, and in place of sacred history and legends of the church, pagan mythology, which the recent revival of classic literature and art had made familiar to the public mind, began to afford subjects to the painter. As in the corresponding period in the history of Greek art, technical excellence was rapidly approaching its highest point, and increasing wealth and luxury multiplied the production of pictures for private purposes. The painter was no longer a public teacher of religion or morals, as in the days of Giotto or Orcagna; and as his public functions were superseded by his private ones, the art began to decline. Undoubtedly the very perfection attained contributed materially to this result. Contemporary Florentine masters of this period were Fra Bartolommeo di San Marco and Andrea del Sarto, both of the highest excellence; Bernardino Luini, whose works are frequently mistaken for those of Leonardo; Bazzi Vercelli, known as II Soddoma; Lorenzo di Oredi; and Michel Angelo Buona-rotti, preeminent as painter, sculptor, and architect.

This great master neglected illusive effects, despised oil painting, and aimed at the expression of life and power through action and movement; and the almost exclusive attention which he gave to the definition of form, the result doubtless of his cultivation of the three sister arts, made the development of physical qualities thenceforth the chief characteristic of the Florentine school. Of the daring heights to which he attained in his efforts toward grandeur of form and sublimity of expression, the frescoes of the Sistine chapel afford a memorable illustration; although here, side by side with his prophets and sibyls, looking "like beings to whom God has spoken and who have never since ceased meditating on the awful voice," are groups and single figures of such startling novelty of expression and action as to constitute a legacy of questionable value to the student of form. His influence was overwhelming in Florence, and almost every artist who came within its reach lost his individuality, and in attempting to follow him only debased art and proved his own mediocrity.

Yet some were excellent painters, including Daniele di Volterra, celebrated for his "Descent from the Cross;" Vasari, the biographer of Italian artists; Sebastian del Piombo, the Zuccari, and Angelo Bronzino. 1 hiring the first quarter of the 16th century the grand climax of art was reached, and within that period the greatest painters of modern times flourished together, exercising in some sort a reciprocal influence, but each working out his own peculiar aims. Before the middle of the century a steady decline was discernible, not in Florence alone, but all over Italy, Venice perhaps excepted; and as the great masters one by one dropped off, they were succeeded by crowds of servile mannerists, who painted rapidly and carelessly to meet the increasing and not very discriminating demand for pictures, and whose works, even when devoted to sacred subjects, had in them "more of earth than of heaven." " We paint six pictures in a year," says Vasari, " while the earlier masters took six years, to a picture;" a remark which his own practice strikingly illustrated.

The latter part of the century, however, witnessed a fresh development in the Florentine school, and Ludovico Cardi, called Cigoli, introduced a new style, distinguished by careful drawing and brilliant coloring; but few names of note occur among his followers, except that Of Carlo Dolci, a careful painter of female heads. Pietro da Cortona about the middle of the 17th century introduced a florid, ornamental style of fresco painting, the followers of which were called by the Italians the macliinisti. Little can be said of Florentine painting after this. - Painting seems to have made little progress in Venice previous to the time of Giotto, and during the 14th century no works of any considerable importance were produced. Indeed, the Byzantine style, which its painters exclusively practised, continued in favor for upward of a century after the Florentines had renounced it. The little island of Murano may be considered the nursery of Venetian art, and Giovanni and Antonio da Murano, with their pupils Bartolommeo and Luigi Vivarini, its first masters.

Commercial intercourse had familiarized them with the works of German and Flemish painters, the rich and vivid coloring of which was readily adopted by contemporary Venetian artists, although until near the middle of the 15th century they designed with an antique severity borrowed from their neighbors the Paduans. Gentile and Giovanni Bellini, sons of Jacopo Bellini, were the first great artists of the school, as they were among the first in Italy to substitute oil painting for distemper. With a tendency to elaborate finish, and a dry though correct manner, their works are distinguished by sweetness and purity of expression, and afford a foretaste of that rich coloring which subsequently became the chief characteristic of Venetian art, and which reflected the cheerful and festive spirit of the people. With the opening of the 16th century commenced a new epoch in the history of the school, and the genius of two scholars of the Bellinis, Giorgione and Titian, created a style in which a bold and decided handling, and a " golden glow " of color, with great truthfulness of detail in landscape, draperies, and other accessories, were marked features.

The former died early, but Titian, who long survived his great contemporaries of the early part of the century, reached the summit of his art in his-tory, landscape, and portraiture, and stamped the school of Venice as incontestably the first in color. Aside from portraiture, in which he had no rival, he was perhaps greatest in his representations of the nude female form. Among his contemporaries or imitators were Giovanni Antonio da Pordenone, who is thought to have rivalled Titian as a color-ist, Palma Vecchio, Paride Bordone, Andrea Schiavone, and Alessandro Bonvicino, called II Moretto di Brescia. In the latter half of the century flourished three other painters scarcely less illustrious than Titian, viz., Jacopo Ro-busti, called Tintoretto, Paolo Cagliari, called Veronese, and Giacomo da Ponte, called Bas-sano; the first one of the most vigorous and rapid of painters, but unequal in his performances; the second a consummate master of color, delighting in scenes of festive pomp and splendor, with rich costumes and architecture; and the third the earliest and one of the best of the Italian painters of genre.

The true Venetian style of these masters deteriorated in the hands of their successors, and the subsequent history of the school is unmarked by a single great name, though artists of merit were not uncommon. - Intimately connected with the history of the early Venetian school was that of Padua, to which a fresh impulse was given in the first half of the 15th century by Francesco Squarcione, whose collection of drawings and casts from the antique greatly promoted the cultivation of form, and influenced the art throughout northern Italy. Jacopo Bellini of Venice acquired there his peculiar dry manner, and Andrea Mantegna, the greatest painter that had appeared in the north of Italy up to the middle of the 15th century, was its most eminent pupil. The latter, distinguished for his severely classic and statuesque design, founded the Mantuan school, which produced many of the most famous painters of Lombardy. - The Roman school may be said to have sprung directly from the Umbrian, so called from the ancient district of Umbria, within the limits of which its artists practised their vocation. The region was secluded and the inhabitants remarkable for religious enthusiasm; whence perhaps the severe, ascetic style of its early painters.

The most distinguished among these were Pietro Cavallini, Gentile da Fabriano (whose style Michel Angelo declared was like his name, gentile), and Piero della Francesca, after whom came Pietro Perugino, by far the best painter of his school up to his time, and whose style, though wanting in vigor, was distinguished by naivete, grace, and tenderness of expression. His pupils were numerous, including Pinturicchio, Andrea Luigi, called L'ln-gegno, and above all Raphael (Raffaelle San-zio d'Urbino), whose fame has overshadowed the rest. He has been described as "the first of painters, for moral force in allegory and history unrivalled; for fidelity in portrait unsurpassed; who has never been approached in propriety of invention, composition, or expression; who is almost without a rival in design; and in sublimity and grandeur inferior to Michel Angelo alone." In separate qualities he may have been equalled by some contemporary painters, and in color, which he regarded as a means and not an end in painting, he was inferior to the Venetians; but his frescoes in the Vatican, his Madonnas and holy families, his great altarpieces, and his cartoons nevertheless represent the highest efforts of modern art, and have made his style not that of Rome alone, but of the world.

Raphael had numerous pupils, who imitated him, and some of whom assisted him in the execution of his frescoes. But after his death (1520) most of those who had original genius deviated into exaggerations and insipidities, and soon lost all traces of the noble grace and power of their master. The sack of Rome by the constable de Bourbon in 1527 caused the dispersion of his followers then in the city, who carried into all parts of Italy a spurious style, miscalled the "Raphaelesque." His best pupils were Giu-lio Romano, the most distinguished of all for original power, but of a far lower order of mind than his master; Gian Francesco Penni, called II Fattore; Perino del Vaga; Giovanni da Udine; Polidoro da Caravaggio; Pellegrino da Modena; Bartolommeo Ramenghi, called Bagnacavallo; and Benvenuto Tisi, called II Garofalo. Primaticcio, Nicolo dell' Abbate, and Tibaldi also acquired the Roman style of Raphael, which they carried into France and Spain. The execution by Michel Angelo of the "Last Judgment" in the Sistine chapel in 1541 produced a crowd of feeble imitators of his style; after whom came Giuseppe Cesari d'Ar-pino and Michel Angelo Caravaggio, the former representing the machinisti and the latter the tenebrosi or naturalisti whose style, though not deficient in power, was founded on mere natural imitation, and was characterized by coarseness and vulgarity.

These were succeeded by the Carracci and their followers, who flourished during the 17th century; and in the 18th the history of the art closes with Andrea Sacchi, Carlo Maratti, and Raphael Mengs, the first a painter of merit, the last two academic and mannered. - The Bolognese school, though claiming to share with those of Tuscany, Rome, and Venice the honor of bringing about the revival of painting, presents no name of great importance until the close of the 15th century, when Francesco Francia, a painter of genuine religious sentiment, and the friend of Raphael, flourished. His influence was only temporary, and it was not until about 1585 that the school witnessed its most brilliant epoch in the establishment by Ludovico, Agostino, and Annilmle Carracci of their celebrated academy, called, from the principles on which it was conducted, the eclectic school of Bologna, and the fundamental idea of which was to combine the closest study of nature with the imitation of the best qualities of the old masters.

The Carracci and their chief pupils, Domenichino, Guido Reni, Lanfranco, Albani, and Guercino, extended their influence throughout Italy; but their efforts only tended to substitute academic tame-ness for what little originality survived the decline of painting, and their style, though frequently admirable as illustrated by themselves, did not long survive them. Their greatest merit perhaps consisted in the attention they gave to landscape. - Of the schools of northern Italy, in addition to those mentioned, the most noted was that of Parma, the great ornament of which was Antonio Allegri, known as Correggio, who in the early part of the 16th century brought the art of chiaroscuro and relief to perfection. One of his chief characteristics was a winning softness and grace, tending in some instances toward affectation; and the evil consequences of this tendency are visible in the works of Francesco Mazzuola, called II Parmigiano, otherwise an excellent painter, and after Correggio the best artist of the school. - At Milan a flourishing school was established by Leonardo da Vinci, who executed there some of his finest works.

Among the pupils who came under his influence may be mentioned Marco d'Oggione, who painted the copy of Leonardo's "Last Supper," now in the possession of the British royal academy. About the commencement of the 17th century the Procaccinis founded an eclectic school in Milan. - The school of Naples claims an antiquity equal to that of Florence, but no important name occurs until the 17th century, when Giuseppe Ribera, called Lo Spa-gnoletto, and Salvator Rosa, both leading painters of the naturalisti flourished. The latter was one of the earliest and most vigorous of landscape painters, but even in this class of works reflects the coarse feeling of his school. The last Neapolitan painter of eminence was Luca Giordano, called, from his rapidity of execution, Fa Presto. - Although painting in Germany can be traced back to the Carlovin-gian period, little is known of the productions of its artists, the missal illuminators excepted, previous, to the 13th century. During the latter half of the 14th, under Meister Wilhelm, or William of Cologne, who, according to a contemporary chronicler, was " the best painter in all German lands, and painted all sorts of men as if they were alive," the school of Cologne acquired considerable repute.

The pictures in Cologne attributed to this master and to his pupil, Meister Stephan, notwithstanding a Gothic hardness peculiar to all media3val German art, are remarkable for richness of coloring, careful finish, and deep religious sentiment. Contemporary schools flourished in Nuremberg and Swabia. The 10th century witnessed the culmination of German art in the person of Albrecht Dürer, the pupil of Michael Wohlgemuth of Nuremberg, and almost equally distinguished us painter, sculptor, and engraver, though now chiefly known in the last capacity. Another painter who greatly influenced him was Martin Sehön, remarkable for the fantastic spirit often noticeable in his works. Lucas Cranach about the same time headed the contemporary school of Saxony, and enjoyed almost as great a reputation as Dürer himself. Other painters of the period were Albrecht Altdorfer, a pupil of Dürer, Matthias Grüne-wald, Hans Burgkmair, and particularly llans Holbein the younger, in whom the old mediae-val ecclesiastical spirit is relieved by freer conceptions of nature and a purer sense of physical beauty, while the characteristic German style is retained.

From 1527 his history belongs to England. Subsequently the Germans became imitators of the Netherlandish and Italian eclectic schools, and previous to the 19th century few names of note occur among them. In the first decade of the present century a remarkable revival was commenced by a number of young German painters assembled in Rome, the leading motive of which was a protest against the effete academic generalization under which art languished. The result was the formation of a mystical school, which, under the lead of Overbeck, attempted to revive the sentimental, ascetic art of the 14th century; and of another more purely Teutonic, known as the Munich school, whose leaders, Cornelius, Schadow, Veit, Kaulbach, Hess, and Schnorr, have affected monumental works and idealized history with considerable success. By pushing this tendency to somewhat unreasonable limits they incited a realistic reaction under Lessing, Bendemann, and others, who formed a separate school, the chief seat of which is Düsseldorf. It has produced some clever genre painters. Within a few years a more broadly realistic school has been established in Munich under the lead of Karl Piloty, a coarse but vigorous painter.

Accounts of these movements and of their instigators will be found among the biographical articles of this work. - The Flemish school dates from the commencement of the loth century, when Hubert and Jan van Eyck established themselves at Bruges, and drew around them pupils from all parts of northern Europe. Dignity and strength, combined with a close imitation of external nature, were the characteristics of their style, as illustrated in the celebrated polyptych painted by them for the church of St. Bavon in Ghent. This work presents also some of the first successful attempts at landscape painting. To Hubert van Eyck is due the discovery, not of oil painting, which was practised for two or three centuries before his time, but of a drying varnish, which was at the same time more suitable for mixing with pigments than any vehicle previously known. The new method was adopted by northern artists generally in the first half of the 15th century, and about 1450 was carried into Italy by Antonello da Messina. Among the pupils and successors of the Van Eycks were Roger van der Weyden, also called Roger of Bruges, Hans Mending or Hemling, perhaps the best painter of the school, and Jan van Mabuse, the first Flemish painter who felt the influence of the Italian renaissance.

A contemporary school flourished at Antwerp, which previous to the middle of the 16th century produced at least two first rate artists, Quentin Matsys or Messys and Lucas van Leyden; to these succeeded a crowd of imitators of the Italians, whose efforts in design were worthless, and who fell far short of the solemn, religious feeling of their Flemish predecessors. With the 17th century commenced the most brilliant epoch of the Flemish school, during which the genius of Peter Paul Rubens, whom Haydon characterizes as "a giant of execution and brute violence of brush, and brilliant color and daring composition," revived the old glories of Florence and Venice. Physical energy and life were his characteristics, and these were reflected with somewhat exaggerated coarseness in the works of Jordaens, Gaspar de Cra-yer, and others of his followers, who form what is known as the school of Brabant. Anthony Vandyke, his most illustrious pupil, however, painted with more elegance than his master, and brought portraiture to the highest excellence. Painting languished in Flanders and Brabant after the latter part of the 17th century, but, as in other parts of Europe, has within the present century experienced a revival, which will be productive of good results.

The art has been pursued with success by Baron Leys, Wappers, De Kaiser, Gallait, Verboeckhoven, Alfred and Joseph Stevens, Willems, Alma Ta-déma, and other Belgian artists. Gallait especially ranks among the first of living historical painters, and Alma Tadéma, for several years a resident of London, excels in dramatic representations of ancient history and manners. - The Dutch school seems to have been identical with the Flemish until the early part of the 17th century, when a peculiar reaction from the mannered style of the masters of the preceding century manifested itself in Holland. This movement was headed by Paul Rembrandt van Ryn, a man of singular genius, who took up a hostile position against the study of the ideal, and deliberately attempted the imitation of vulgar nature. The ugliness of his models, selected apparently to show what obstacles he could overcome, is more than redeemed by surpassing effects of light and shade, and his mean and coarse design but thinly veils the individuality of a gloomy and original mind.

His style, called by Kugler the "phantasmagoric," was the very opposite of that of Rubens, and in landscape and history completely severed the Dutch school from that of Brabant. Among his eminent pupils were N. van Bergen, Eeck-hout, P. de Koninck, F. Bol, and Nicholas Maas. Contemporary with Rembrandt was a class of painters of remarkable merit as color-ists, and well versed in the technics of their art, who cultivated genre (a term applied to all kinds of real or imaginary scenes from common life). Their pictures are generally small and exact representations of familiar and often vulgar subjects. Among the most eminent of these were Peter Breughel and his sons Hell Breughel, so called from the diabolical character of his subjects, and Velvet Breughel, famous for his soft handling; David Teniers, the elder and the younger, the latter a distinguished painter of low life; Adrian van Ostade, Adrian Brauwer, Frans Hals, and Jan Steen, equally celebrated in the same department; Gerard Terburg, Gerard Douw, Gabriel Metzu, and Franciscus Mieris, eminent painters of genteel life. Several of these, as for example Te-niers, father and son, belong properly to the Flemish school; but as they followed the Dutch style, they have been classed among the Dutch painters.

About the same time landscape painting became developed among the Dutch with wonderful rapidity, and generally with a purer taste than genre. Paul Bril caught the Italian spirit from painting in Italy, and Jan and Andreas Both, Pynacker, Albert Cuyp, Nicholas Berghem, Jan Miel, Karel Dujardin, and Adrian van der Velde cultivated an ideal or pastoral style with eminent success. Jacob Ruysdael, Minderhout, Hobbema, and Antony Waterloo excelled in vivid and natural imitations of native scenery, without aiming at ideal beauty; Willem van der Velde the younger and L. Backhuysen in marine views; Philip Wouverman in hunting parties; and Paul Potter in landscapes with cattle and figures. Snyders, the friend of Rubens, and a famous animal painter, may be mentioned here; also Hondekoeter, a painter of poultry; and De Heem, Rachel Ruysch, and Van Huysum. celebrated for their fruit and flower pieces. A few of these lived into the 18th century, but before that time the art had lost most of its vitality. Of late years it has been practised with success by Israels, Van Sehendeh and the Koekkoek family, the Last named eminent in landscape. - The Spanish school stands almost alone in the history of European art in the severely religious and ascetic character of its productions.

A rigid code of rules, established by ecclesiastical authority, prescribed the method of treatment when sacred subjects were selected, and the strong devotional feeling of the artists led them to give an almost exclusive attention to this class of subjects. Painting can scarcely be said to have had an existence in the Spanish peninsula previous to the middle of the 15th century, and it was not until the 17th that the school had any other than a local reputation. The visit of some Flemish artists in the loth century, and somewhat later of Titian and other Italian masters, gave the native painters their first practical ideas of color and design. In the 16th century schools were already established in Castile, Valencia, Seville, and elsewhere, that of Seville being perhaps the most distinguished. Among the eminent painters connected with them were Antonio del Rincon. Luis de Vargas, Luis de Morales, Vicente Jua-nes, sometimes called the Spanish Raphael, Pablo de Cespedes, Francisco Kibalta, and Juan de las Roelas, most of whom studied in Italy, and flourished in the 16th century; Francisco Pacheco; Alonso Cano, eminent as sculptor, painter, and architect; Francisco Zurbaran, a distinguished painter of the naturalistic school of Oaravaggio; and Diego Rodriguez de Silva y Velazquez and Bartolomé Estéban Murillo, Who share the honor of making Spanish art known and admired in all parts of the civilized world.

The characteristics of their styles are described in the biographical notices of them. Since the commencement of the 18th century Spain has produced few painters of eminence. - Painting was practised in France as early as the time of Charlemagne, and during the 14th and loth centuries French illuminators did much excellent work; but nothing like a national school can be said to have had an existence until after the visit of Primaticcio and other Italian artists, at the invitation of Francis I. The only painter of independent or national feeling who preceded them was Jean Cousin, noted for an elaborate representation of the last judgment. Simon Vouet, who flourished in the earlier half of the 17th century, received an Italian education, and is considered the master and model of the succeeding generation of French painters. Contemporary with him were Nicolas Poussin, eminent for the classic spirit of his compositions and his landscapes; Gaspar Poussin, also eminent in landscapes; Claude Gelée, known as Claude Lorraine, a master of aërial perspective, as of nearly every other branch of landscape painting; and Se-bastien Bourdon. All of these, though French by birth, practised their art and passed most of their lives in Italy. Eustache Lesueur and Charles Le Brun were the most eminent of Vouet's pupils; the latter, an artist of merit despite his affectation of manner and violations of taste, being the painter of many of the immense pictures at Versailles which testify to the vanity and extravagance of Louis XIV. In the succeeding reign Antoine Watteau painted fetes galantes with grace and effect; Francois Boucher, an artist of considerable natural force and ability, gained an unenviable reputation by producing works conceived in the worst taste, and which violated all notions of truth or decency; Joseph Vernet was noted as a marine painter; and somewhat later Jean Baptiste Greuze obtained a unique reputation for his female heads and charming representations of domestic life.

Painting steadily deteriorated during the latter half of the 18th century, until restored to a temporary vitality about the time of the French revolution by Jacques Louis David, whose style, known as the "classic," though dry, pedantic, and deficient in true expression, showed considerable mastery of form, and was followed by Gué-rin, Drouais, and a numerous band of pupils. Gros first broke away from this "morbid imitation of the antique," as it has been called, and with Géricault and others inaugurated the system of painting from nature whence originated the modern French realistic school. Contemporary with Géricault was Eugene Delacroix, a vigorous colorist, who founded a romantic school, the followers of which seem to have drawn their inspiration from the writings of Goethe, Byron, and Scott. Among the painters who flourished during the first quarter of the present century were Ingres, a pupil of David, and a refined classicist; Isabey, noted for his miniatures; Prud'hon, Robert Fleury, and Léopold Robert. Horace Vernet, who died in 1863, was a facile painter, of fine invention and unrivalled in battle pieces; his son-in-law, Paul Delaroche, became one of the chief masters of history of the century; and Ary Scheffer stood almost alone as an idealist of singular purity and severity of conception.

The French school of the present day, if less aspiring than that of David and less broadly realistic than that founded by Gros and Géricault, is distinguished by correct drawing and composition, and generally by elaborate finish, although in the latter particular the practice of its members is by no means uniform. The prevailing style is genre, and subjects are often trivial, but dramatic power is by no means wanting. In respect to the technical qualities of the art, painting is now practised in France with more success than ever before, and in this regard the French school is perhaps the best extant. Among the principal masters in genre and history may be mentioned Meisso-nier, whose pictures, small and simple in detail, are admirable for character and execution; Gérôme, noted for dramatic expression and elaborate finish; Edouard Frere; Jules Breton; Couture; Zamacois and Millet, both lately deceased, and both of high excellence; Ha-mon, Cabanel, Hippolyte Flandrin, Decamp, Bouguereau, Hebert, Bonnat, Fromentin, Pils, Yvon, and Fortuny, a Spaniard by birth, whose recent death is a severe loss to modern art.

Gustave Doré has exhibited considerable talent in grotesque or fantastic subjects, but is considered to have failed in his more ambitious undertakings, such as the illustration of the Bible and Dante. Gustave Courbet is a realist of singular power, and Rosa Bonheur occupies an important position as an animal painter. In the department of landscape a high place must be assigned to Troyon. Other artists famous in that department are Rousseau, Corot (died in 1875), Daubigny, Diaz, and Lambinet. - Of painting in England little can be said previous to the 18th century. Jan Mabuse, Holbein, Sir Anthony More, Rubens, Vandyke, Lely, Kneller, and other continental painters, had during the two previous centuries successively practised their art there, principally in the department of portraiture; but their influence was unavailing to form a national school. The few native artists of note who flourished within this period, including Milliard, Isaac and Peter Oliver, miniature painters, and Dobson, Nicholas Stone, and Jameson, called the " Scottish Vandyke," were portrait painters, and that branch of painting alone received encouragement.

The first important historical works by an English artist were the frescoes executed by Sir James Thornliill in the interior of the dome of St. Paul's, London; but his illustrious son-in-law, William Hogarth, the great satirical painter of his time, and one of the most original artists of any age, is the first name of note in the history of British art. He had however but little direct influence upon the painters of his time, and the honor of founding the modern English school belongs to Sir Joshua Reynolds, excellent in portraiture and history, and preeminent as a colorist. His contemporary and rival, Thomas Gainsborough, often equalled him in portraits, but is better known as the first of the line of landscape painters whose works would adorn the art of any epoch. Among other painters who flourished during the latter half of the last century were Richard Wilson, eminent in landscape; Barry, Romney, Mortimer, Opie, Northcote, Fuseli, Angelica Kaufmann, Copley, and West, historical and portrait painters, the last two being natives of America. William Blake occupies a unique position as a mystical painter of remarkable but unequal power.

The influence of Reynolds upon the succeeding generation of painters is shown in the strong bias for color which now forms one of the chief characteristics of the English school. In the first quarter of the present century flourished Sir Thomas Lawrence, Hoppner, Raeburn, and Jackson, portrait painters; Wilkie, next to Hogarth the best painter of low life England has produced; Haydon, a historical painter of genius, in spite of his mannerism and egotism; Etty, once esteemed as a colorist; Turner, the most original and imaginative, perhaps, of landscape painters; Constable, Callcott, W. Collins, Morland, Nasmyth, Bonington, eminent in the same department; and John Martin, whose architectural extravagances and exaggerated effects of light and shade had a brief popularity. During the same period history and genre were cultivated by Bird, Smirke, Stothard, and others; and they have been continued to the present day by Newton, Leslie, Cooper, Mul-ready, Maclise, Eastlake, Redgrave, E. M. Ward, Webster, Hamilton, Cope, Dyce, C. Landseer, J. R. Herbert, Horsley, W. J. Muller, Frith, Faed, and others, many of whom have also painted landscapes and portraits with success.

Among prominent landscape painters of the present period have been Creswick, Stanfield, D. Roberts, James Ward, the Linnels, father and sons, and F. Lee; and the English school of landscape still occupies a high place in contemporary art. Sir Edwin Landseer (died in 1873) held a peculiar and prominent position as a painter of dogs and animals of the chase. The British school of water-color painting, founded by Paul Sandby in the middle of the last century, is perhaps the best in the world, and in the department of landscape has produced works scarcely inferior to those of the oil painters. Among its chief artists are Turner, Prout, Copley Fielding, Roberts, W. Hunt, Lewis, Cattermole, Cox, Absolon, Corbould, Nash, and Stanfield. At the beginning of the century a tendency toward imaginative painting on a large and elaborate scale, otherwise known as "high art," was a marked characteristic of the English school. Domestic genre gradually took the place of this, and has been the prevailing style to the present day.

So exclusive a devotion to one class of subjects has imparted a monotonous sameness and overstrained sentimentality to the recent productions of the school; but an ideal and more imaginative style has of late been cultivated by Leighton, Holman Hunt, Millais, Watts, Watson, Calderon, Walker, Sant, Whistler (the last named an American by birth, and a remarkable colorist), and some others. Within the past 25 years has arisen a peculiar school, styling itself the "Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood," and represented by Holman Hunt, Millais, Dante Gabriel Rossetti, and some others, who, according to their most earnest advocate, Ruskin, "oppose themselves to the modern system of teaching, and paint nature as it is around them, with the help of modern science, and with the earnestness of the men of the 13th and 14th centuries." - Painting made little progress in the United States previous to the present century. Benjamin West, a native of Pennsylvania, and the second president of the British royal academy, gained all his reputation abroad; and Copley, though he left many admirable portraits in America, settled in England before the revolution, and produced his most important works in history and portraiture in that country.

Charles Wilson Peale and John Trumbull were the first native artists of note who practised their art to any considerable extent at home; and the Trumbull gallery of portraits and pictures illustrating American history, at New-Haven, comprises a valuable contribution to the early art of the nation. In the first part of the present century Malbone, Gilbert Stuart, and Allston vindicated the claim of America to the possession of a high order of artistic ability; the first an excellent miniature painter, the second a rival of Reynolds in portraiture, and the third an imaginative painter of great excellence in all walks of his art. About the same time John W. Jarvis and Thomas Sully occupied a respectable position as portrait painters; Vanderlyn painted history with success; and somewhat later Newton and Leslie, Americans by birth or parentage, settled in England and became celebrated in the modern English school of genre. About 1825 Thomas Cole founded what may be called the American school of landscape painting, a department which has since been cultivated by native artists more universally than any other. The works of Cole, though not remarkable as literal transcripts of individual forms, are characterized by a thoughtful morality and a tendency to allegory.

The series of "The Course of Empire" and "The Voyage of Life" are his most elaborate productions. Contemporary with Cole or immediately succeeding him were Doughty, Durand, lnmian, and Fisher, the two first named eminent in landscape, and the third the first American painter who attempted genre with success; Rembrandt Peale, Weir, Huntington, Rothermel, and Page, painters of history, portraits, landscape, and genre, and the last named distinguished as a colorist; Neagle, Morse, Ingham, Harding, and Fraser, portrait painters. Since the middle of the century American painters have devoted most attention to landscape and genre, and their efforts have in a measure reflected the influence of the French school. French paintings predominate in the private collections of the country, and French types of form, color, and design have been reproduced with such modifications as national tastes and habits of thought have rendered necessary. The influence of other modern schools is so slight as to be almost inappreciable. Landscape has been pursued, as a rule, from a purely realistic point of view, American painters in this department seldom aiming to give more than a literal, if sometimes an exaggerated, transcript of nature.

Prominent among painters of this class have been Church and Bierstadt, both remarkable for the production of grand and elaborate pictures on an extensive scale; Ken-sett, whose peculiar mannerism often carried him within the realm of the ideal; Inness, a follower of the French landscapist Rousseau; James M. and William Hart, Cropsey, Casi-lear, R. S. and S. R. Gilford. G. L. Brown, Bristol, S. Colman, W. T. Richards, Tilton, Tiffany, McEntee, Whittredge, Cranch, La Farge, Griswold, Smillie, Sonntag, Thomas Hill, Mignot, T. Moran, Gay, Gignoux, Wyant, Gerry, Bellows, Shattuck, Bricher, Hubbard, Fitch, and Yowell. Among marine painters may be mentioned E. Moran, De Haas, Dana, Haseltine, Bradford, and Dix. Portraiture has been pursued with success by Elliott, W. M. Hunt, Baker, Healy, Le Clear, W. O. Stone, Hicks, H. P. Gray, Staigg, Ames, Flagg, and others. History and genre are represented by Eastman Johnson, Winslow Homer, Leutze, J. F. AVeir, E. White, Mount, May, Powell, Darley, Guy, Lambdin, Hennessey, G. H. Hall, J. G. Brown, Perry, T. W. Wood, Ved-der, Terry, C. C. Coleman, and Freeman; and J. H. and W. II. Beard, Butler, P. Moran, Hays, Tait, and Hinckley are noted as painters of animals. - The works of Vasari (Florence, 1550 ot seq.; translated into English by William Aglionby, 4to, London, 1719, and by Mrs. Jonathan Foster, 5 vols. 8vo, 1850-'53), Ridolfi (Venice, 1648), Lanzi (Florence, 1792), and other Italian writers are mainly the basis of modern works on the Italian painters and schools.

See Bryan, "Biographical and Critical Dictionary of Painters and Engravers" (2 vols. 4to, London, 1816; revised and enlarged by Stanley, 1849), and Ott-ley's supplement (1866); Kugler, Handbuch der Geschichte der Malerei von Konstantin dem Grossen bis auf die neuere Zeit (2 vols., Berlin, 1837; the portions relating to different schools translated into English by East-lake, Head, and Waagen); Ruskin's " Modern Painters" (5 vols., London, 1843-'50); Lindsay, "Sketches of the History of Christian Art" (3 vols., 1847); Stirling, "Annals of the Artists of Spain" (3 vols., 1848); Charles Blanc, Histoire des peintres de toutes les écoles (1849-'69); Burckhardt, Der Cicerone: An-leitung zum Genuss der Kunstwerlce Italiens (Basel, 1855; revised and enlarged by A. von Zahn and translated into English by Mrs. Clough, 1873); Crowe and Cavalcaselle, "Notices of Early Flemish Painters" (London, 1856), "History of Painting in Italy" (3 vols., 1866), and "History of Painting in North Italy" (2 vols., 1871); Mrs. Jameson's "Memoirs of the Italian Painters" (revised ed., 1859); Lübke, Grundriss der Kunstgeschiclite (Stuttgart, 1861); Waagen, Handbuch der Geschichte der Malerei (1862 et seq.); Wornum, "Epochs of Painting" (London, 1864); Redgrave, "Century of Painters of the English School" (2 vols., 1866), and "Dictionary of Artists of the English School" (1874); Tuckerman, "Book of the Artists" (New York, 1867); Hamerton, "Contemporary French Painters" (London, 1867); and Meyer, Allgemeines Kunstler-Lexicon (Leipsic, 1872 et seq.).