The earlier specimens of painting in Spain resemble in style the works of the old German painters, who seemed to have disposed of ninny of the pictures in that country, while Spanish art of the 16th c, was modeled on that of Italy, Titian and Raphael being the masters studied; but when works of the Spanish school are spoken of, those executed in the 17th c. are always understood to be referred to, as it was then that Spanish art. became entirely national in feeling and style, and that is the period in which the best works of the school were produced. The two most distinguished Spanish painters are Don Diego Velasquez (q.v.), (1599-1660), and Bartholome Esteban Murillo (q.v.), (1618 82). The portraits of the former are characterized by truthful and dignified expres sion, great breadth and vigorous handling, and rank with the best works of that clasS of any school; while the Scripture subjects of the latter, which are noted for tender expres sion, rich color, and powerful light and shade, may be classed with similar works by Rubens and Van Dyck. Spagnoletto, a Spanish painter, has already been referred to as a leading artist of the school of the naturalist' at Naples. Alonzo Cano (1601-67), Francisco Zurbaran (1598-1662), and Claudio Coello (b. between 1630 and 1640, d. 1693), lave a high reputation. No name of a Spanish painter of eminence occurs after the close of the 17th century.
Very soon after the period when the eclectic and naturalistic schools arose in Italy, a revival of art also occurred in the Netherlands. This was very different in itscffects from the revival in Italy, the only results from which were academical imitation of the older masters, and coarse naturalism, either separately or combined in varied propor tions; while the works of the artists of the Netherlands executed about the same period, though they do not exhibit the high qualities found in the compositions of the Italian masters of the hCst period, possess many new and attractive features—freedom, origi nality of treatment, attention to the peculiar character of individual life, and the daily intercourse of men with each other in all its variety, and the study of nature, brought out with truth and delicacy of execution. Two important schools of art were tstablished by this movement—the Flemish and the Dutch. lie Flemish school flourished in Bra bant, where the Roman Catholic faith—then making strenuous efforts to oppose the reformed religion—still retained and actively employed art in its service. The Dutch school flourished in Protestant and republican Holland, where the artist, having to trust to private encouragement, painted, for the most part, familiar subjects from everyday life; and in place of altar-pieces for churches, and large historical and allegorical pic tures for palaces produced the subjects then in demand—portraits, genre pictures, or works in which life and manners are depicted in various phases—landscapes with and without figures, sea-pieces, battle-pieces, compositions representing hunting, animals, game, etc. The catalogue of the names of the able artists of these two schools is long; in the Flemish school, those who stand highest are Peter Paul Rubens (q.v.), (1577 1640), Anthony Van Dyek (q.v.), (1599-1641), David Teniers (q.v.) the younger (1610 90), P. Snvders (1579-1657). The following are the most eminent in the long list of artists of the Dutch school: Rembrandt (q.v.), (1608-69), Vanderhelst (1613-70), Albert Cnyp (q.v.), (1605-91), Terburgh (1608-81), A. V. Ostade (1610-85), J. Rtiysdael (q.v), (1630 or 1636-81), Hobbima (1629-70), P. Potter (1625-54), K. du Jarden (1635-78), Jan Steen (q.v.), (1636-89), G. Metzu (1615-58), F. Mieris (1635-81), W. Van de Velde (1633 1707). A. Van der Neer (1613-84), P. Wouvermans (q.v.), (1620-68).
I Painting has been practiced for a very long period in France; but there, as in Spain and in Britain, the marked preference shown in early times by the sovereigns of the country- for the works of foreign artists, their undervaluing native talent, and their directing it into a channel supplied from a foreign source, had the effect of neutralizing it as the exponent of national feeling. Francis I. is acknowledged to have been a patron
of art; he had a desire to possess fine works, and he liberally rewarded able artists, but his patronage was almost entirely confined to foreigners. Louis XIV. did what he could to place French art above that of every other nation; but he had no knowledge of it himself ; he did not comprehend its nature and true intention, and imagined that pic tures if painted by Frenchmen must necessarily be national. Nevertheless, his influence was, on the whole, highly beneficial to French national art. He always showed him self desirous to employ native rather than foreign talent, and he encouraged and enlarged the academy of tine arts, which had been founded at the commencement of his reign, under the direction of Lebrun. Although in many respects the principles and the regulations of the academy tended rather to the perpetuation of debased Italian,. than to the development of genuine French art: yet the bringing together of a body of influen tial French artists, was the measure most likely to foster the feeling of nationality and to lead to the foundation of a national school of art.. In the 16th c., Francois Clouet was distinguished as a portrait painter; and Jean Cousin as a painter, sculptor, and architect. In the 17th e.. among many names, those chiefly deserving notice are Simon Vouet, th^ brothers Le Nain, N. Poussin, Claude Lorraine, Mignard, S. Bourdor1, Le Suety., J. Courtois (called Borgognone). and Coypel. Among these, the works of Ole brothers Le Nain alone possess national feeling and character, and they are held in very considerable estimation; those of the others Were executed under the influence of foreign art; and excepting Claude's splendid landscapes, Poussin's learned COMFOSilollS, and sonic of Borgognone's battle-pieces, hold a low position. The works of Anthony Wat teau (1634-1721) are truly national, excellent in execution, a»d very highly valued. This artist may be classed as at the head of the school of the 1801 c.—the in which art in France became really national. Not only did most of the painters of his school—which lasted till the end of the century, when classic art ruled for a time—form their style upon the works of Watteau, but his influence also affected the British school, which arose soon after that of France was developed. Lancret (1690-1742) was the most successful imitator of Watteau; Pater (1696-1736) followed in the same course; Chardin (1699-1779), though influenced by hint, had an original style of his own, and his works now stand high. The pictures of Boucher (1704-70) exhibit the defects of the Freuch school of the 18th c., unredeemed by the delicacy and grace, and high tech nical execution and truth of Watteau, Chardin, and Greuze (1725-180), the last of whom sustained the character of French national art, and carried it into the 19th c., when it was re-established, after the classic school of David, founded at the revolution, and patronized under the empire of tile first Napoleon, had in its turn been laid aside. David (q.v.), (1748-1825), the leader of this school„earried his admiration of classic art to the length of substituting the study of statues, the works by which the art of the ancients is chiefly known, for that of nature. Ile had numerous able pupils, several of whom, tired with this constant repetition of conventional form, recurred to nature; extended their range of subjects, and infused new vigor into the French school. Among many distinguished artists that have maintained the fmne of the French school during the present century the following names may by mentioned: GC:ricault, Prod'h .n, Leopold Robert, Delaroche (q.v.), Horace Vernet (q.v.), Ary Scheffer Eng6te Delacroix (q.v.), and Ingres (q.v). A number of artists, chiefly pupils of the above, now sustain the high position of French art in every department; while in that of landscape illustrative of 'French scenery, a branch of art never much studied in past times, great progress has been made, and the rise of this flourishing branch of French art is nuknowl edged by the French themselves to be due to the works of the English painter Constable, exhibited in Paris in 1824.