truth to the ordinary aspects of the physical world carried no weight, any more than did the greater attainment of those qualities which now we recognize as the most vital to art; i. e., harmony of line and tint, and composition of masses and colors.

their contagion of intellectual sympathy such ideal activity, that it becomes often impossible to distinguish the work of the master from that of the pupil. This is the case in the school of Titian no less than in that of Giotto.

The genius of Giotto is as nobly shown by These qualities were in Giotto the sponta- his Campanile at Florence as by his pictures; neous accompaniments of all his conceptions, but in all his work, and especially in the pure and mark his artistic supremacy more clearly decoration, as in the Arena Chapel, we find than they now would, in a time when their the exquisite feeling for decorative art which value has been recognized as the highest aim makes the Campanile so precious. Nothing of the painter. We have these qualities in in art is beneath his devotion, nothing too many other painters, and in some of them great for his grasp. But the anonymous comto a degree which denotes a refinement of mentator of Dante who records the history of research which Giotto never shows; but in Giotto's beginning has a statement for which them they are the result of comparative study there is no other confirmation, and for which and the accumulation of example and tradi- we must all hope in the love of poetic justice tion. In him art springs to life unheralded that there is no good foundation. The comand unexampled. In some respects his posi- mentary says: "He designed and directed the tion may be compared to that of Shakspere, marble campanile of Santa Riparata [the rising isolated in his excellence above all around Duomo, afterwards called Santa Maria del him-like him also in vivid dramatic instinct Fiore]-a notable campanile and of great cost. and in fervid imagination. His technique is that He there committed two errors-one that it of the school—a school, however, in which he had not proper foundations [ceppo di pie], the was so large and powerful an element that, while other that it was too narrow: he took this so his work is confounded with that of his pupils much to heart that he sickened from it and and his contemporaries, most of the credit died." This commentary, written probably of it must come back to him. "In those days," within a half-century of Giotto's death, may be says Morelli, "originality was differently un- considered the earliest authority we have as derstood." The aim of the artist was to paint in to any facts of his life. Certain it is that the the best manner; not to make a manner of his design of Giotto was not completed, for the own by which, in some petty peculiarity of Campanile lacks the pyramid which was detreatment, the painter should be found. That signed as its termination; and this may be taken Giotto fecundated all the art of his day, not as possible confirmation that the foundation only technically but intellectually, appears from and dimensions of the base were not considthe constant attribution to him of pictures by ered sufficient for the structure he intended to his followers. For instance, in the long and have reared on them, and that the modificaminute description of the pictures of the life tions of the plans so made necessary may have of the Beata Michelina given by Vasari, in produced the effect that the commentator which the dramatic qualities of Giotto are records. Vasari says nothing of it, but Vasari particularly insisted on as making this series was remote from Giotto's epoch and often ill "one of the most beautiful and excellent things informed. If the condemnation of Giotto's which Giotto ever did," and of certain figures plans was the result of a deliberation of the in them as "worthy of infinite praise for being, authorities, they may have studiously supespecially in the manner of the draperies, of a pressed the facts through fear of exciting naturalness of folding which makes us under- popular indignation; but if due to Giotto's stand that Giotto was born to give light to recognition of the mistake supposed to be painting." But these pictures were not by made,- for time has hardly justified the asGiotto, who died in 1336; whereas the Beata sumption of the insufficiency of the foundadied in 1356, and was therefore probably beat- illness, if due to that cause, would ified only about 1400. As, like most of Giotto's pictures, they have been covered with whitewash by the reverent care of ecclesiastical authorities, or "to lighten the church," we cannot say by whom they were painted, though their reputation bears testimony to the vigor of the school of which Giotto was the founder and chief. This was the function and property of all the true schools of art, that they imparted even to their minor members such a perception of the qualities of style, and awakened by

have been of the nature to exalt the popular imagination and would be certain to survive as legend. If we recall the pride in his work and the jealousy of criticism recorded of Cimabue we may the more easily credit the report of the commentator, concluding that Giotto was obliged to abandon the original plan by the official condemnation of his capacity as an architect. But as Giotto died two years and a half after the beginning of the work, there could have been but a small part

of it above ground when the fatal disease began, which was after his return from Milan in 1336; and any condemnation of the foundations could have had no justification in signs of failure of the substructure, which is sound to this day. If the statement of the commentator is correct, Giotto died of unmerited humiliation-the incompetence of his judges. He was succeeded as architect by Andrea Pisano, who was dismissed, his work being disapproved for reasons now unknown. The part which Giotto saw built is the basement, and Andrea's part is the story in which are statues. The inconsistency noted in the decoration of this part with that of the basement and the upper part as far as the cornice, which is common to both church and campanile, probably shows the reason why Andrea was dismissed, as the work above the cornice again

resumes the character of that below, and there-
fore accords with the design of Giotto.
Of the works ascribed to Giotto now in ex-
istence, in all probability a large proportion are
only of his school; but the authentic record of
his accomplished work shows a facility and
rapidity of execution unrivaled in the history
of art. He is to be studied in Assisi as well
as in Florence and Padua. The frescos in the
Incoronata of Naples are certainly not his, and
the famous portrait of Dante in the Bargello
can no longer be held as the tribute of the
friendship which existed between the painter
and the poet. To my mind there is no ques-
tion but this is the copy of a portrait by Giotto
which has perished, and that it is due to one
of his pupils. Of the personal history of the
great artist we know almost as little as of Cima-
bue and Memmi.
W. J. Stillman.

PAD

NOTES BY TIMOTHY COLE, ENGRAVER.

)ADUA, August 3, 1886.—I am here in the Arena Chapel, and am at last confronted by Giotto. How brilliant, light, and rich the coloring is! It quite fulfills all that I had read or thought of Giotto. I am conveniently located and the light is good, but it is hard to keep to work with so many fine things above one's head. I can scarcely escape the feeling that the heavens are open above me, and yet I must keep my head bent downward to the earth. Surely no one ever had a more inspiring workshop.

CHRIST BEFORE CAIAPHAS.

Christ over his emotions at a moment of surprise. There is a benign sweetness in the countenance. But to appreciate this fully one must see the original, in which not only is there the added charm of color,- for there is a delicate blush suffusing the face, but the contrast of the surrounding faces, brutal with hate and anger, serves to throw into greater relief the peculiar strength and sweetness of this face of Christ. The glory around the head is gilded, and in rather high relief from the picture. The hair is of a soft brown color; the beard of the same color, but a little lighter; the overrobe of a light fresh blue; and the underrobe of a soft dull red.

THE VISITATION OF MARY TO ELISABETH.

THE fresco by Giotto of “The Visitation of Mary to Elisabeth" is No. 15 of the series at the Arena Chapel, Padua, and is one of the most beautiful of the thirty

THE "Christ before Caiaphas ' is in the Arena Chapel of Padua. The history of the Madonna and of Christ is here rendered in a series of thirty-eight frescos. Photographs of these are on sale in the chapel, and each one is numbered. The "Christ before Caiaphas is No. 31. It represents that portion of the twenty-sixth chapter of Matthew from the sixty-eight that adorn its walls. The deep feeling exhibited fifth to the sixty-eighth verse: "Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; . . . behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye? . . . And others smote him with the palms of their hands, saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?"

Christ stands bound before Caiaphas, who, seated, is tearing his garment open from his breast, throwing himself somewhat back in rage, while his colleague seated by his side, with outstretched hand and body bent slightly forward in solemn and impressive attitude, pronounces the words, " Behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye?" Christ has just been smitten by the leader of the angry crowd behind, who has his arm raised for another blow: his hand is open, showing that he smote with the palm. What could be finer than the action of Christ, full of gentleness, as with calm and unshaken dignity he turns to look upon his smiter? The attention centers in this supremely fine face, one of Giotto's masterpieces of subtile expression. He shows the perfect mastery of

in the remarkable face of the old Elisabeth takes one captive instantly. It seems to me finely descriptive of the text: "And Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost,. . . and said, Blessed art thou among women," etc. (Luke i. 41, 42.)

The composition is no less remarkable for strength and simplicity. The text says that Mary "entered into the house of Zacharias, and saluted Elisabeth" (verse 40). Giotto, on the contrary, makes Elisabeth come out of her house to receive Mary upon the threshold. Here is a poetic license and a happy device, one in which he has been followed by all artists among the Italians who have treated this subject successfully; and I doubt not that it allows of greater simplicity of treatment and greater directness in telling the story. In the present instance we see at a glance, with Elisabeth by her threshold, that Mary is the visitant. Then, by placing the scene in the open air, there is the advantage of greater breadth and largeness in the distribution. Here we have the portico, the open doorway, and the figure of the maid-servant on one side of