But as the Indian character was differ from that of the Spaniard, so long before Spa had deserted her ancient Gothic traditions am pletely, the Mexican artists had become rase. for ((the gentleness of their art.' More the: half a century before Murillo produced his hot work, which marks the middle and last perio'..s in his progressive development, the old Mea can master, Beltasar de Echave, had pink characteristically native pictures which fous4 their way to the foremost shrines of the car try and to many of the Spanish colonies : America where, not infrequently, they vot represented to be the work of noted Sparvu artists. His reputation extended even to Spa: where he was praised by the foremost pawn of the day, a great distinction for a colour artist, in an age when Spain was very Oak: of all honors given outside her own pematur domain. But greater honors have come tr Mexican artists since Echave's day; for do works of her masters have been gathered from all over the land and taken to Earn; where they have been passed off as orikra works of Spanish masters of the 16th, 17th a" 18th centuries. Thus Mexico has lost con less treasures of native art. Every revolur has helped to deplete her works of her est artists. The sacking of cities, the plonk ing of churches, convents and private hove the rapacity of native owners of art mar and foreign speculators and often the Cr ignorance of the revolutionary leaders conspired to deprive her of the living of her prominence in art over all the oar nations of the American continent. Some the revolutionary leaders have been accused cutting from their gilded frames the o.1 canvases of the churches and •convents turning them with the paint side upward serve as tents or shelters from the tropical for themselves and their brother olicr Valuable pictures of native and foreign art'' Were not unfrequently slashed with knives or otherwise mutilated or destt'' But the greatest injury done to native an AG the result of the ignorance of the treas possessed by the nation and the neglect to care for it. Ancient picture' merit were replaced by others of or historical interest by some local vogue at the time and the dispossessed pig"' were relegated to the garret where they left to moulder in the damp and darkness as to become worm-eaten. Guardians of the treasures of the church, tempted by cupidity, often sold their finest pictures, which not in frequently passed to foreign lands there to cease to be Mexican in name at least.
And yet no other country on the American continent continues to possess anything like the amount of really artistic pictures of its ancient artists as that still retained by Mexico. Lovers of art in Mexico have begun to recognize the high standard of excellence attained by their best masters of the 17th and 18th centuries; and the market value of these pictures has risen rapidly during the present century. But this is an added danger to the retention of the native art at home.
The School of Behave.— The founder of the first Mexican school was Beltisar de Echave, the elder, whose first existing picture dates back to 1601. He had already become a famous artist by 1609, years before Velazquez and Murillo flourished in Spain. His draw ing and conceptions are very much better than anything produced by his contemporaries; his forms and faces are true to nature and his style is devoid of affectations and conceits. Other Mexican painters have surpassed Echave in execution, in perfection of style, in the observation of the technical laws of art, but none have approached him in fertility of in vention and depth of thought. In fact, he was
philologist, critic and writer as well as artist. His wife, La Sumaya, who was also an artist of no mean merit, is said to have been his teacher in the art of painting; and a meritori ous picture of San Sebastian in the cathedral is said to be from her brush. Echave and his wife both belonged to the Spanish school of Joannes, the best artist of his day and, superior to all who preceded him in Spain. The work of Echave is unequal, but the best of it shows a genius superior even, to that of his master, whose praise all Spain sang in his day. Though his style was finished and somewhat labored, like that of the artists of his epoch, yet his industry and application were so great that he left very many pictures varying from huge canvases to small tablets, which, before the amortization of church property, were to be found in many of the churches of the capi tal and in many of those in the interior. Among his existing pictures are
Luis Juarez, a contemporary of Echave, shows, in all his works, strong individuality. His figures are excellent, his exposition strong and true, but his execution is frequently un equal. .Many of the heads of his figures, to which he paid much attention, are as fine as anything produced by the Spanish masters of his day. Juarez' style is free and less labored than that of his master, Echave, to whom he is but slightly inferior. He was very prolific and this, coupled with his popularity, made his execution, like that of Echave, very unequal.
However, his conception is always bold and his coloring good. His work is more realistic than that of Echave. Most of his known pictures are in the Mexican National Academy.
Jose Juarez, who was active from 1642 to 1698, followed the traditions of Echave and came the nearest of all the Mexican painters to attaining to the excellencies of his master, to whom he was but slightly inferior in ex pression and the depicting of religious feeling. He had exceptional talent but, owing to the speed with which he was forced to do the vast amount of work that came to him, he often be came careless. Rafael Lucio, an excellent critic, says of Juarez: °I have seen angels of his that seemed to belong to the very best pe riod of Italian art.° His style is elevated and even more realistic than that of Luis Juarez; his drawing and execution are good, and in his grave and harmonious coloring there is a noble severity. His figures are free and flexible and show strong individuality, while his canvases are generally lit with the animation of life, partially due to his masterly grouping of fig ures, his excellent coloring and his decided tendency toward that softness and simplicity which distinguishes the school of Echave. There is a noted depth and contrast in his cpl oring. A number of his best pictures are in the Mexican National Academy.