We have had an opportunity of seeing, in Germany, many singular specimens of such ancient monkish con ceits, which were, no doubt, in these barbarous days, re garded as prodigies of ingenuity. Amongst others, there is an ancient picture of a crucifixion, where the arms of the cross terminate in a multitude of hands ; on one side, tearing asunder and destroying most obscure emblems of the various sins of the human race, and on the other, as sassinating death, and strangling a multitude of little ob jects, meant to represent the powers of darkness, though far more resembling a swarm of rats struggling in a trap. There was at Constance an ancient painting of the concep tion of the Virgin, a subject of all others the least adapted to the painter's art. An old man is represented seated on a cloud, from whom a beam of light issuing, penetrates a dove that flutters in mid air. At the end of the beam ap pears a large transparent egg, in which a fine boy, tied up in swaddling clothes, with a gold fringe of glory around his head, is seen lying. Below is the Virgin, in an arm chair, with her mouth open, ready to swallow the egg. A sublime and dignified idea of Omnipotence ! but such was the barbarous taste of the times.
As the custom. gained ground of filling their churches with pictures and monuments, that class of artists who em ployed their talents in illuminating manuscripts, began to find it more profitable to engage in works of greater size, and yielded readily to the increasing demand for frescos. Although this circumstance greatly augmented the num ber, it was rather detrimental to the merit and style, of the artists ; as they were naturally led to transfer the pinched littleness of their former practice to the greater works on the walls of churches, so totally unfitting to the minute pencilling of the manuscript painter. There is, accord ingly, little merit in any of these early productions ; but we must respect their efforts, when we reflect that these primitive artists were the laborious pioneers who pre pared the way for the revival of the arts in all their splen dour.
It will be necessary, for the sake of perspicuity in run ning over the history of modern art, to adopt the usual di vision of the various schools into which painting naturally divides itself, both in respect of style and locality. A school, when applied to the fine arts, means that distinctive class of artists, who, having followed the same style of painting, partake in any respect of a common character, either as to origin, locality, particular taste, or mode of practice; or, in a narrower point of view, who follow the mode, rules, and principles of art, introduced by a par ticular master. They are often distinguished by the names'of the great masters in whom the style originated ; as the school of Raphael, of Michael Angelo, Titian, Ru bens, or of the Carraches ; but it is more usual to take their denomination from the country where they were first established. It is equally applicable to every branch of the fine arts, as sculpture, architecture, and music. The modern schools of painting are usually distinguished into nine. 1. Florentine ; 2. Roman ; 3. Venetian ; 4. Lom bard ; 5. Flemish ; 6. Dutch ; 7. German ; 8. French ; and 9. English schools. This is no doubt somewhat an arbitrary division, and capable of modification, but we shall, for the sake of conveniency, follow it.
The Greeks adopted a similar.system in distinguishing the different classes of their artists, for which, from the apparent uniformity of style, so far as our information ex tends, there seemed to be less occasion than when the art, upon its revival, took a new and a higher flight. There were but three schools of painting in Greece, the Athenian, Sycionian, and Asiatic ; and although differing very slightly in style, nevertheless contending warmly for pre-eminence in reputation. In fact, this sort of es/irit de
corps, in modern times, not only kept up the distinctive character, but, by the stimulus to emulation, contributed in a remarkable degree to the general improvement of the art. There was not only an ardent competition for excellence among the individual masters, but the fame of the school to which they belonged excited feelings of ri valship, which called forth every exertion to support its reputation. There was a feeling of glory in adding to the credit. and estimation of his alma mater, that made the efforts of each individual more zealous than if striving alone to rear the fabric of his own reputation. This sort of emulation among the different schools tended to coun teract the mean and grovelling sentiments of personal rivalry, and to promote feelings of a more generous cast ; a desire to second the endeavours, instead of to thwart the progress of those who laboured in the same vineyard with themselves.
Florentine School.
We have already anticipated the infant state of the arts at their revival in Florence in the course of the thirteenth century. The various branches of painting were cultiva ted with success, and, meeting with the judicious encou ragement of some enlightened citizens, the Florentine school soon took the lead in that course in which it was _destined to hold so distinguished a part. The particular character of this school, when arrived at maturity, under the genius of Michael Angelo, is accused of a certain dry ness and deficiency in the richness of colouring, a want of ampleness and majesty in the draperies, and of deli cacy of expression : its triumph, on the contrary, is in de sign, truth, historical accuracy, with grandeur and pro found learning in the science of anatomy and the human figure, and skill in that difficult branch of perspective called foreshortening. The style of this school was form ed under the auspices of the family of Medici, who were so instrumental in the revival and encouragement of learn ing as to make Florence the focus from whence the light of literature was again diffused over the world. This fa voured city had to boast at the same epoch of such geniuses as Dante, Boccaccio, Tetrarch, and Machiavel ; and of artists, the not less learned Leonardo da Vinci, Michael Angelo, and Fra Bartolomeo, who lived among them, and took the impression of that great galaxy of taste and talent. The Florentine school was not satisfied with the simple copying of nature as presented to our eyes; these learned artists sought to fix the principles upon which the effects depended, and to demonstrate the precepts to be followed, in order to produce with certainty the excel lencies aimed at. We have a remarkable testimony of the laborious and pi ofound research into the philosophy of the art, with which they accompanied their practice, in the very valuable work of Leonardo da Vinci on painting A certain coldness and exaggerated action was the natural result of this particular bent, in so far as regarded the followers of these scientific luminaries of the Florentine school. They were considered as the sole guides worthy to be followed, from admiration of their genius, and ve neration for their superior learning. For by this means, instead of becoming the allies and expounders of nature, they intervened betwixt nature and her students, and hid from their observation her more delicate beauties. Their followers applied themselves more to obtain a knowledge of their masters than to study nature, the real object of the art.