In Holland, Michael Mirevelt (b. 1567, d. 1641) and Frauz Hals (b. 1584, d. 1666) painted history and portraits, especially the latter, with great success. Barthel. van der Heist (b. 1613, d. 1670) approached very closely to Vandyck in colour. llis finest work, the Festival given by the Burgher-guard of Amsterdam on the conclusion of the Treaty of Westphalia,' is in the museum of that city. Another excellent picture of smaller dimensions is in the Louvre.
The great master of the Dutch school, however, was Paul Rembrandt van ltyn (b. 1608, d. 1674). In his portraits and ideal heads we find the moat wonderful truth and dignity ; but his peculiar power con sisted in a mastery of light and shade, which rendered the lowest subjects vehicles for high and poetical feeling. The depth and bril liancy thus produced seem hardly attainable by mere colour on a flat opaque surface ; and when we look at his numerous etchings, we marvel still more how his needle on the copper has almost surpassed his pencil on the canvas. Conscious of his power to attain sublimity by light and shade alone, he seems often to have rejoiced in showing how that one charm could make us heedless of coarseness of con ception and meanness of form. Otemanexne, in Moo. Du.] Rem brandt'a principal pupils and imitators were Gerbrand van den Eeckhout (b. 1621,d. 1674), Fcrd. Bel (b. 1611, d. 1681), who excelled in portrait, Nicholas Maas (b. 1632, d. 1693), and Salomon Koning (b. 1609, d. about 1674), who in all his best qualities approached nearest to his master. Of another pupil, Gerard Dow, We shall speak immediately.
' It is necessary just to mention Gerard Honda:est, called by the Italians Gherardo della Notti (b. 1592, d. 1662), who imitated Cara vaggio and the Italian "Naturalisti." His effects of torch and candle light are much celebrated. Gerard Lairessc (b. 1640, d. 1711) is best described as a Flemish imitator of Nicolas Pousain. Adrian van der Werff (b. 1659, d. 1722) has little to recommend him besides a finish and smoothness of surface, to which higher qualities are sacrificed : his human figures present the texture of ivory rather than of flesh, with much affectation and little genuine expression of passion or character.
We must now turn to those masters who aro most distinguished in what is called "genre," a word for which it is difficult to find a substi tute, and still more difficult to furnish a definition. The subject may be real or fictitious; but if the picture is on a small scale, and the object of the artist has been the expnssion of humour, or the pretti. nese of colour, or of light and shatio,-if those qualities which an accessories in great works have Leen to hate tuds.-then it. seems to come within the negative class, designated by the French word used above. It is the popular side, the everyday life of art, as contrasted with the epie grandeur of historical or the outhuslasin of devotional eerie.
Peter Brengliel the video (b. 1510, d.1570) was called lloor-Iireughel,
from the subject. of many of his pkturee, as his son, Peter Breughel the younger, obtained the name of Hell.Breughel, from the fantastic scenes which he pourtrayed ; while a younger brother, Jan lireughel (la 1563, d. 162.5).L known as l'elvetellreughel, from the softness and delicacy of hie handling : he painted animals and flowers even better than genre. The elder rimier. (b. 1582, sl. 1619) delighted in subjects similar to the elder Brougher.; but as a painter be by no means equalled his sun and pupil David (b. 1610, d. 1690) in those scenes of merry-making and peasant life for which he Is so celebrated. Nothing can surpass the reality of the vulgar comfort with which the single figures sit and smoke, or the drunken gaiety of the larger moon. blies, in the pictures of the younger Teuiere. ills colour Is cool and his touch firm and vigyroua. Stnnetimes he amused himself with imitating the works of masters of a different enst. In Adrian van Ostade (b. 1610, d. 168'5) we have the name subjects treated in a warmer and more mellow tone, but perhaps with leas Individual truth and character, though with greater attention to general effect, than by Tenierd. Isaac van Oitade painted fewer interiors, and followed his brother's style with ler success. The humour of Adrian Brouwer (b. 1603, d. 1640), who is reported to have mixed deeply in the scenes which be painted, L of a broader cast. In Jan Steen (b. 1636, d. 1689) there are satirical touches and a genuine condo unity which remind one of Bogard], though there 1411 little of the Englishman's stem moral purpose. There le another department of genre, which bears the same relation to the drinking-bout. of Teniers or Brouwer that genteel comedy does to broad Lure. In this Gerard Terburg and Gerard Dow stand pre-emi nent. The former (b. 1608, d. 1631) threw into the scenes which he represented a delicacy of feeling and a sort of decorum which add greatly to the value of his execution and high finish. Of this kind are the celebrated Satin Gown, engraved by Wille; the Trumpeter at )punch; and the Cavalier and Lady in the Louvre. Gerard Dow (b. 1613, d. 1630) was the pupil of Rembrandt, from whom he gained a thorough knowledge of light and shade, and a feeling for general effect which preserved his elaborate execution from tediousness, while he secured by it a wonderful reality in the household scenes which he delighted to paint. In sonic of his pictures, as in that of the Dropeical Lady, there is even pathos. Gabriel Metzu (b. 1615, d. 1658) was the best inuitator of Terburg. Franz Mieris, a scholar of Gerard Dow (b. 1635, d 1631), equalled loin master in fineness of finish, but not in genuine feeling. Caspar Netscher (b. 1639, d. 1634) and E?lon van der Neer (b. 1613, d. 1703) painted in the same style. The interiors of Peter van Hough° (b. 1659, d. 1722) are remarkable for magical effects of light.