Giorgione Part 7

It will be seen that the logic employed is identical with that by which I have tried to establish the ident.i.ty of Signor Crespi's picture. In the present case, I should like to insist on the fourth consideration rather than on the other points, iconographical or chronological, and see how far our portrait bears on its face the impress of Giorgione's own spirit.

The conception, to begin with, is characteristic of him--the pensive charm, the feeling of reserve, the touch of fanciful imagination in the decorative accessories, but, above all, the extreme refinement. All this very naturally fits the portrait of a poet, and at a time when it was customary to label every portrait with a celebrated name, what more appropriate than Ariosto, the court poet of Ferrara? But this dreamy reserve, this intensity of suppressed feeling is characteristic of all Giorgione's male portraits, and is nowhere more splendidly expressed than in this lovely figure. Where can the like be found in Palma, or even t.i.tian? t.i.tian is more virile in his conception, less lyrical, less fanciful, Palma infinitely less subtle in characterisation. Both are below the level of Giorgione in refinement; neither ever made of a portrait such a thing of sheer beauty as this. If this be Palma's work, it stands alone, not only far surpa.s.sing his usual productions in quality, but revealing him in a wholly new phase; it is a difference not of degree, but of kind.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Anderson photo. Querini-Stampalia Collection, Venice_

PORTRAIT OF A MAN (Unfinished)]

Positive proofs of Giorgione's hand are found in the way the hair is rendered--that lovely dark auburn hair so often seen in his work,--in the radiant oval of the face, contrasting so finely with the shadows, which are treated exactly as in the Cobham picture, only that here the chiaroscuro is more masterly, in the delicate modelling of the features, the pose of the head, and in the superb colour of the whole. In short, there is not a stroke that does not reveal the great master, and no other, and it is incredible that modern criticism has not long ago united in recognising Giorgione's handiwork.[10 8]

The date suggested--1500--is also consistent with our own deductions as to Giorgione's rapid development, and the distinguished character of his sitter--if it be Prospero Colonna--is quite in keeping with the vogue the artist was then enjoying, for it was in this very year, it will be remembered, that he painted the Doge Agostino Barberigo.

I therefore consider that Mr. d.i.c.kes' brilliant conjectures have much to support them, and, so far as the authors.h.i.+p is concerned, I unhesitatingly accept the view, which he was the first to express, that Giorgione, and no other, is the painter. Our National Collection therefore boasts, in my opinion, a masterpiece of his portraiture.

If it were not that Morelli, Mr. Berenson and others have recognised in the "Portrait of a Gentleman," in the Querini-Stampalia Gallery in Venice, the same hand as in the National Gallery picture, one might well hesitate to claim it for Giorgione, so repainted is its present condition. I make bold, however, to include it in my list, and the more readily as Signor Venturi definitely a.s.signs it to Giorgione himself, whose name, moreover, it has always borne. This unfinished portrait is, despite its repaint, extraordinarily attractive, the rich browns and reds forming a colour-scheme of great beauty. It cannot compare, however, in quality with our National Gallery highly-finished example, to which it is also inferior in beauty of conception. These two portraits ill.u.s.trate the variableness of the painter; both were probably done about the same time--the one seemingly _con amore_, the other left unfinished, as though the artist or his sitter were dissatisfied.

Certainly the cause could not have been Giorgione's death, for the style is obviously early, probably prior to 1500.

The view expressed by Morelli[109] that this may be a portrait of one of the Querini family, who were Palma's patrons, has nothing tangible to support it, once Palma's authors.h.i.+p is contested. But the unimaginative Palma was surely incapable of such things as this and the National Gallery portrait!

[Ill.u.s.tration: Collection of the Honourable Mrs. Meynell-Ingram, Temple Newsam, Leeds

PORTRAIT OF A MAN]

England boasts, I believe, yet another magnificent original Giorgione portrait, and one that is probably totally unfamiliar to connoisseurs.

This is the "Portrait of an Unknown Man," in the possession of the Hon.

Mrs Meynell-Ingram at Temple Newsam in Yorks.h.i.+re. A small and ill-executed print of it was published in the _Magazine of Art_, April 1893, where it was attributed to t.i.tian. Its Giorgionesque character is apparent at first glance, and I venture to hope that all those who may be fortunate enough to study the original, as I have done, will recognise the touch of the great master himself. Its intense expression, its pathos, the distant look tinged with melancholy, remind us at once of the Buda-Pesth, the Borghese, and the (late) Casa Loschi pictures; its modelling vividly recalls the central figure of the Pitti "Concert,"

the painting of sleeve and gloves is like that in the National Gallery and Querini-Stampalia portraits just discussed. The general pose is most like that of the Borghese "Lady." The parapet, the wavy hair, the high cranium are all so many outward and visible signs of Giorgione's spirit, whilst none but he could have created such magnificent contrasts of colour, such effects of light and shade. This is indeed Giorgione, the great master, the magician who holds us all fascinated by his wondrous spell.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Hanfstangl photo. Vienna Gallery_

PORTRAIT OF A MAN]

Last on the list of portraits which I am claiming as Giorgione's, and probably latest in date of execution, comes the splendid so-called "Physician Parma," in the Vienna Gallery. Crowe and Cavalcaselle thus describe it: "This masterly portrait is one of the n.o.blest creations of its kind, finished with a delicacy quite surprising, and modelled with the finest insight into the modulations of the human flesh....

Notwithstanding, the touch and the treatment are utterly unlike t.i.tian's, having none of his well-known freedom and none of his technical peculiarities. Yet if asked to name the artist capable of painting such a likeness, one is still at a loss. It is considered to be identical with the portrait mentioned by Ridolfi as that of 'Parma' in the collection of B. della Nave (Merav., i. 220); but this is not proved, nor is there any direct testimony to show that it is by t.i.tian at all."[110]

Herr Wickhoff[111] goes a step further. He says: "Un autre portrait qui porte le nom de t.i.tien est egalement l'une des oeuvres les plus remarquables du Musee. On pretend qu'il represente le 'Medecin du t.i.tien, Parma'; mais c'est la une pure invention, imaginee par un ancien directeur du Musee, M. Rosa, et admise de confiance par ses successeurs.

M. Rosa avait ete amene a la concevoir par la lecture d'un pa.s.sage de Ridolfi. Le costume suffirait a lui seul, pourtant, pour la dementir: c'est le costume officiel d'un senateur venitien, et qui par suite ne saurait avoir ete porte par un medecin. Le tableau est incontestablement de la meme main que les deux 'Concerts' du Palais Pitti et du Louvre, qui portent tous deux le nom de Giorgione. Si l'on attribue ces deux tableaux au Giorgione, c'est a lui aussi qu'il faut attribuer le portrait de Vienne; si, comme feu Morelli, on attribue le tableau du Palais Pitti au t.i.tien, il faut approuver l'attribution actuelle de notre portrait au meme maitre." I am glad that Herr Wickhoff recognises the same hand in all three works. I am sorry that in his opinion this should be Domenico Campagnola's. I have already referred to this opinion when discussing the Louvre "Concert," and must again emphatically dissent from this view. Campagnola, as I know him in his pictures and frescoes at Padua,--the only authenticated examples by which to judge him,[112]--was utterly inadequate to such tasks. The grandeur and dignity of the Vienna portrait is worthy of t.i.tian, whose virility Giorgione more nearly approaches here than anywhere else. But I agree with the verdict of Crowe and Cavalcaselle that his is not the hand that painted it, and believe that the author of the Temple Newsam "Man" also produced this portrait, probably a few years later, at the close of his career.

NOTES:

[85] Or "points" (_punte_). The translation is that used by Blashfield and Hopkins, vol. iv. 260.

[86] a.s.suming he was born in 1477, which is by no means certain.

[87] Dr. Richter in the _Art Journal_, 1895, p. 90. Mr. Claude Phillips, in his _Earlier Work of t.i.tian_, p. 58, note, objects that Vasari's "giubone di raso inargentato" is not the superbly luminous steel-grey sleeve of this "Ariosto," but surely a vest of satin embroidered with silver. I think we need not examine Vasari's casual descriptions quite so closely; "a doublet of silvered satin wherein the st.i.tches could be counted" is fairly accurate. "Quilted sleeves" would no doubt be the tailor's term.

[88] It is not quite clear whether the single letter is F or T.

[89] A curious fact, which corroborates my view, is that the four old copies which exist are all ascribed to Giorgione (at Vicenza, Brescia, and two lately in English collections). See Crowe and Cavalcaselle, p.

201.

[90] Gronau: _Tizian_, p. 21.

[91] See, however, note on p. 133.

[92] _La Galleria Crespi_.

[93] The doc.u.ments quoted by Signor Venturi show the signature was there in 1640.

[94] When in the Martinengo Gallery at Brescia (1640) it bore this name.

See Venturi, _op. cit_., and Crowe and Cavalcaselle, _t.i.tian_, ii. 58.

[95] From _Das Museum_, No. 79. "_Unbekannter Meister um_ 1500. _Bildnis der Caterina Cornaro_." I am informed the original is now in the possession of the German Amba.s.sador at The Hague, and that a plaster cast is at Berlin.

[96] Dr. Bode _(Jahrbuch_, 1883, p. 144) says that Count Pourtales acquired this bust at Asolo.

[97] _Gazette des Beaux Arts_, 1897, pp. 278-9. Since (1901) republished in his _Study and Criticism of Italian Art_, vol. i. p. 85.

[98] t.i.tian's posthumous portrait of Caterina is lost. The best known copy is in the Uffizi. Crowe and Cavalcaselle long ago pointed out the absurdity of regarding this fancy portrait as a true likeness of the long deceased queen. It bears no resemblance whatever to the Buda-Pesth portrait, which is the latest of the group.

[99] _Cicerone_, sixth edition.

[100] _Gazette des Beaux Arts_, 1897, pp. 278-9.

[101] _Venetian Painting at the New Gallery_, 1895, p. 41.

[102] _t.i.tian_, ii. 58.

[103] _Gazette des Beaux Arts, loc cit_.

[104] _Life of Giorgione_. The letters T.V. either were added after 1544, or Vasari did not interpret them as t.i.tian's signature.

[105] _La Galleria Crespi, op. cit_.

[106] The importance of this portrait in the history of the Renaissance is discussed, _postea_, p. 113.

[107] ii. 19.

[108] This picture was transferred in 1857 from panel to canvas, but is otherwise in fine condition.

[109] Morelli, ii. 19, note.

[110] Crowe and Cavalcaselle: _t.i.tian_, p. 425.

[111] _Gazette des Beaux Arts_, 1893, p. 135.

[112] It is customary to cite the Prague picture of 1525 as his work.

The clumsy signature CAM was probably intended for Campi, the real author, and its genuineness is not above suspicion. It is a curious _quid pro quo_.