Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 27, 2025
North American Review, October 1899. It was photographed by Braun with this attribution. Catena has adopted this Giorgionesque conception in his "Judith" in the Querini-Stampalia Gallery in Venice. See Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1897, tom, xviii. p. 279. Crowe and Cavalcaselle, ii. 147. ii. 217. Dr. Gronau points this out in Rep. xviii. 4, p. 284.
"Quilted sleeves" would no doubt be the tailor's term. It is not quite clear whether the single letter is F or T. See Crowe and Cavalcaselle, p. 201. Gronau: Tizian, p. 21. See, however, note on p. 133. La Galleria Crespi. The documents quoted by Signor Venturi show the signature was there in 1640. When in the Martinengo Gallery at Brescia it bore this name.
As to which of these two artists it is, opinions so far as any have been published are divided. Yet Dr. Gronau, who claims it for Titian, admits in the same breath that the hand is the same as that which painted the Cobham Hall picture and the Pitti "Concert," a judgment in which I fully concur. Dr. Bode labels it "Art des Giorgione." Finally, Mr. Berenson, with rare insight proclaimed the conception and the spirit of the picture to be Giorgione's. But he asserts that the execution is not fine enough to be the master's own, and would rank it with the "Judith" at St. Petersburg in the category of contemporary copies after lost originals. This view is apparently based on the dangerous maxim that where the execution of a picture is inferior to the conception, the work is presumably a copy. But two points must be borne in mind, the actual condition of the picture, and the character of the artist who painted it. Mr. Berenson has himself pointed out elsewhere that Giorgione, "while always supreme in his conceptions, did not live long enough to acquire a perfection of draughtsmanship and chiaroscuro equally supreme, and that, consequently, there is not a single universally accepted work of his which is absolutely free from the reproaches of the academic pedant." Secondly, the surface of this portrait has lost its original glow through cleaning, and has suffered other damage, which actually debarred Crowe and Cavalcaselle (who saw the picture in 1877) from pronouncing definitely upon the authorship. The eyes and flesh, they say, were daubed over, the hair was new, the colour modern. A good deal of this "restoration" has since been removed, but the present appearance of the panel bears witness to the harsh treatment suffered years ago. Nevertheless, the original work is before us, and not a copy of a lost original, and Mr. Berenson's enthusiastic praise ought to be lavished on the actual picture as it must have appeared in all its freshness and purity. "Je n'hésiterais pas," he declares, "
To fulfil this engagement, immediately after his return, attended with Paul Jenys, Esq., Speaker of the House of Assembly of South Carolina, and some other gentlemen, he set out on the 15th of March, with Baron Von Reck, the commissary, Mr. Gronau, one of the ministers, Mr.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking