Painting among the Greeks. The Greeks had a pretty legend about the beginning of drawing and painting in their country. A girl whose lover was going away, and who was broken-hearted at losing him, saw his shadow cast upon a wall and drew a line about it, that she might have the semblance of him with her always. Painting never grew to the importance in Greece that sculpture attained, but it assumed two characteristic forms, besides the painting of pictures. These were the decoration of vases and the coloring of statues. Great numbers of vases have been found, mostly in tombs, and these give us a very clear idea of what the vase painting was. Some of the figures on the earliest, crudest vases are simply outlines of men and of animals roughly drawn, showing little lifelikeness. Later the art grew, and some of the vases which are decorated with pictures representing stories from mythology are really exquisite. It is only comparatively recently that it has been known that the Greeks used to color their statues. From most of the recovered sculpture the coloring has worn off, and thus the finders have always taken it for granted that white was the original color. It was not the common practice, apparently, to use a flesh color on the statues, though rare examples of that have been found; but the hair and lips and eyes and clothing were painted. Care was not always taken to make the colors lifelike; horses were sometimes made blue, and lions red. We possess almost no fragments of Greek pictures, but ancient writers have left assurance that the Greek painters were masters of form, composition, color, light and shade, and perspective. An old story, which is interesting even if not true, is told of a contest between Zeuxis and Parrhasius. The one who painted the most lifelike picture was to have a prize. When the judges had gathered, Zeuxis presented his painting--a beautiful bunch of grapes. So lifelike were they that the birds came and tried to eat them, and the judges exclaimed "Zeuxis has won! He has deceived the birds." But Parrhasius advanced to show his picture, which was apparently covered by a curtain. "Withdraw the veil," said Zeuxis, "that we may see the picture." But when he reached out to touch it, he found that the curtain was the picture, and the judges awarded the prize to Parrhasius, who had deceived even his competitor. Roman Painting. The Romans really had no art of painting that amounted to anything. They copied Greek works and produced some feeble ones of their own, vivid in color, but with small artistic value. When the buried city of Pompeii was excavated many of these wall paintings were found, but they changed in no way the estimate already placed on Roman art. Beginnings of Painting in Italy. But if Italy had nothing artistic whereof to boast in Roman times, she had later more than any other country. The first Italian painter who really developed an individuality and who made even a distinct attempt to make his figures lifelike was Cimabue, who lived in the thirteenth century. The story goes that once as he was walking in the mountains, he saw sitting on the ground while his sheep rested around him a shepherd boy. The boy had in his hand a piece of slate, upon which he was scratching with a lump of coal. Cimabue, always interested in anything relating to drawing, approached and examined what the boy was doing, and found that he had drawn a lamb, very like those which lay about him. Much impressed, Cimabue begged for and obtained permission to take the boy to his studio and train him as his pupil. This shepherd boy was Giotto, the first great modern painter. He understood by no means all which painters who followed him regarded as the great principles of art; for instance, he knew little about perspective. But the people he painted looked like real people, with feelings and intelligence, and in that way he was far ahead of anyone who had preceded him. Filippo Lippi. It seems that each great painter added something which brought the art of painting nearer and nearer perfection. Thus Fra Filippo Lippi, though he by no means equaled some of his predecessors in composition, excelled in the treatment of single figures and in costumes. Whether he was painting saints or madonnas he used as his models just the people he passed on the street every day, making no changes even in their costumes. His people are human and strong, and when a picture is supposed to look like a loving mother it looks like one. Filippo Lippi was an interesting character. Left an orphan, he was taken to a convent and brought up there, and in 1421, when he was twenty-one years old, he became a monk. He was never, however, a monk in anything but outward forms. Browning has a very dramatic poem on this old Italian painter. Botticelli. Filippo Lippi's most famous pupil was Botticelli, who possessed much of his master's vigor, with a tenderness and a daintiness that the older painter had not had. All of his pictures are a little sad, as if the artist were unable to associate perfect beauty with radiant happiness. Leonardo da Vinci. One of the most extraordinary men who ever lived was Leonardo da Vinci, who was born in 1452. He was unusually handsome and graceful, strong and active, and so winning in his manner that everybody loved him. He loved all living things, and stories are told of how the birds used to perch on his shoulder without fear. Besides possessing all of these attractive characteristics, he had talents which would have made half a dozen men famous. He was one of the greatest painters that the world has ever seen, he was a sculptor, an engineer, an architect, a scientific investigator, an inventor. One of the things which strikes a person first about his paintings is that they look modern. Filippo Lippi's and Botticelli's pictures, beautiful as they are, look a little strange to our eyes; we need to familiarize ourselves with them before we see their beauties. But Leonardo's have nothing "old-fashioned" about them. His most famous painting, considered by critics one of the twelve greatest paintings of the world, is the "Last Supper." This was painted on the wall of a church at Milan, and as the wall was plastered, and the material used was distemper, the wonderful picture scaled and faded until little of its beauty remained. Just of late, however, some very skilful work has been done toward restoring the picture, and if the scaling and fading can be prevented in the future the people will have a chance to see the masterpiece in something like its original beauty. Leonardo da Vinci spent four years in the production of this painting, and to everyone who knows it it has seemed unnecessary for any other painter, no matter how great, to attempt the same subject. Christ has just said to his disciples, "One of you shall betray me," and they have broken up into excited groups. Another great picture of Leonardo's is the "Mona Lisa." This is a portrait of the wife of a Florentine man named Del Giocondo, and the picture, regarded as the greatest portrait ever painted, is often called "La Gioconda." The hands are very beautiful, and the face, while not beautiful, has a wonderful, inscrutable smile, which makes it always mysterious and interesting. While painting the portrait, on which he worked at intervals for four years, Leonardo had music played, that the rapt expression might not fade from the face of the lady. The "Mona Lisa" was sold to Francis I of France for four thousand gold florins, and was one of the chief glories of the Louvre, but in 1911 it was stolen. Andrea del Sarto. Another interesting Italian artist was Andrea del Sarto, known as the "Faultless Painter." Browning has a wonderful poem, a dramatic monologue supposed to have been spoken by Andrea, in which we see what he himself regarded as the great failing of his art--the lack of soul. Behold Madonna!--I am bold to say I can do with my pencil what I know, What I see, what at bottom of my heart I wish for, if I ever wish so deep-- Do easily, too--when I say, perfectly, I do not boast, perhaps: yourself are judge, Who listened to the Legate's talk last week, And just as much they used to say in France. At any rate 'tis easy, all of it! No sketches first, no studies, that's long past: I do what many dream of all their lives, --Dream? strive to do, and agonize to do, And fail in doing. I could count twenty such On twice your fingers, and not leave this town, Who strive--you don't know how the others strive To paint a little thing like that you smeared Carelessly passing with your robes afloat,-- Yet do much less, so much less, Someone says, (I know his name, no matter)--so much less! Well, less is more, Lucrezia: I am judged. There burns a truer light of God in them, In their vexed beating stuffed and stopped-up brain, Heart, or whate'er else, than goes on to prompt This low-pulsed forthright craftsman's hand of mine. Their works drop groundward, but themselves, I know, Reach many a time a heaven that's shut to me, Enter and take their place there sure enough, Though they come back and cannot tell the world. My works are nearer heaven, but I sit here. The sudden blood of these men! at a word-- Praise them, it boils, or blames them, it boils, too. I, painting from myself and to myself, Know what I do, am unmoved by men's blame Or their praise either. Somebody remarks Morello's outline there is wrongly traced, His hue mistaken; what of that? or else, Rightly traced and well ordered; what of that? Speak as they please, what does the mountain care? Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for? All is silver-gray Placid and perfect with my art: the worse! I know both what I want and what might gain, And yet how profitless to know, to sigh "Had I been two, another and myself, Our head would have o'erlooked the world!" No doubt. Yonder's a work now, of that famous youth The Urbinate who died five years ago. ('Tis copied, George Vasari sent it me.) Well, I can fancy how he did it all, Pouring his soul, with kings and popes to see, Reaching, that heaven might so replenish him, Above and through his art--for it gives way; That arm is wrongly put--and there again-- A fault to pardon in the drawing's lines, Its body, so to speak: its soul is right, He means right--that, a child may understand. Still, what an arm! and I could alter it: But all the play, the insight and the stretch-- Out of me, out of me! And wherefore out? Had you enjoined them on me, given me soul, We might have risen to Rafael, I and you! Nay, Love, you did give all I asked, I think-- More than I merit, yes, by many times. But had you--oh, with the same perfect brow, And perfect eyes, and more than perfect mouth, And the low voice my soul hears, as a bird The fowler's pipe, and follows to the snare-- Had you, with these the same, but brought a mind! Some women do so. Had the mouth there urged "God and the glory! never care for gain. The present by the future, what is that? Live for fame, side by side with Agnolo! Rafael is waiting: up to God, all three!" I might have done it for you. So it seems: Perhaps not. All is as God overrules. Beside, incentives come from the soul's self; The rest avail not. Why do I need you? What wife had Rafael, or has Agnolo? The poem gives us, too, what was probably one great reason for Andrea's weakness--his love for the selfish, wicked woman who was his wife. He used her face as a model in painting his madonnas, but while she was a beautiful women her face had none of the sweetness or tenderness needed for a madonna. Michelangelo. Like Leonardo da Vinci Michelangelo was painter, sculptor, architect. He himself chose sculpture as his profession, and for a long time refused to consider himself a painter at all. But other people had more faith in his powers than he had himself, and Pope Julius II chose him to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican. Michelangelo protested in vain--the pope would have his way. We may imagine the great man shut up in the Chapel with his problem--what theme was wonderful enough to use for such an undertaking? Finally he planned to represent the world from the creation of man to the flood. At first he intended to have other painters work from his designs, but they could not satisfy him, and at length he decided to do all the work himself. The ceiling paintings, of which the "Creation of Man" is regarded as the greatest, occupied him for about four years, and when we consider that in doing this work he was for the most part forced to lie on his back we can see what a tremendous task it was that the pope had set for him. Later, the successor of Julius ordered Michelangelo to paint one more picture for the Sistine Chapel on the end wall by the altar. This picture, which it took the artist almost eight years to complete, was the "Last Judgment," probably the most famous single painting in the world. It contains three hundred fourteen figures, which represent almost every conceivable physical attitude and expression and the various mental and moral states. Correggio. Correggio, if we may believe the reports, was in his way as remarkable as Leonardo or Michelangelo, and for this reason: They received the best of training in their art, and visited all the art centers; Correggio lived and died in a little town near Parma, and there is nothing to show that he ever visited any city but Parma or that he had any efficient teaching. Some authorities say that he probably never saw a great painting besides his own, but there is one interesting story which says that he once, after having long desired it, saw a picture of Raphael's. He studied it carefully, and then exclaimed, not boastingly but with intense conviction, "I too am a painter." There were some things which Correggio seemed to understand better than anyone who preceded or followed him, notably the treatment of light and shade. Some people today criticise Correggio's pictures as being too sweet, and lacking in depth; but his "Night," with the darkness of the manger partly dispelled by the light which comes from the Christ-child, will always remain a favorite. Raphael. Raphael, unlike Leonardo and Michelangelo, was not a sculptor or an architect, but just a painter. But he was perhaps the most versatile painter that ever lived. He could paint a sacred scene for an altar piece of a church, a portrait, a study from classical mythology, or a historical scene all superbly, and yet each in so different a manner that even a critic could scarcely tell that they came from the same hand. Most famous of all his paintings is the "Sistine Madonna," the best known and best loved of all madonnas. The same pope who had engaged Michelangelo to decorate the Sistine Chapel decided to employ Raphael to redecorate a series of rooms in the Vatican. These had already been frescoed by great artists, but the pictures were destroyed and Raphael was given free hand. Over a window appears the "Deliverance of St. Peter," a painting which in its treatment of light and shade rivals Correggio. But the two greatest paintings which the rooms contain are the "Disputa," which shows the Christian saints fascinated by a glorious vision of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, and the great characters of scripture; and the "School of Athens." This latter painting represents an assembly of the great philosophers, poets and men of science of Greece. The remarkable thing is that Raphael, who was not a philosopher, should have been able to give this brilliant Grecian civilization such exact representation. His great painting of the "Transfiguration," by some critics regarded as the greatest painting in the world, was unfinished at the artist's death. The upper group, Christ, Moses and Elias above the mount, and the middle group, Peter, James and John upon the mount, were completed, but the lower group of the demoniac, his parents and the people was not finished. Raphael's body was laid out in his studio, by the side of this unfinished masterpiece, and all Rome flocked to the place to do honor to the "prince of painters." Picture Study. Picture study serves as a delightful recreation in school, provided the study is so presented that it appeals to the children. To be successful the teacher should heed the following suggestions: 1. Choose simple pictures of subjects which the children can understand and which appeal to their own experiences. 2. Remember that pictures representing action are of greater interest to children than those which represent repose. 3. The picture should be large enough to enable the objects represented to be easily seen. 4. The pictures should possess artistic merit as to both color and form. Cheap colored paintings and pictures poorly drawn should be avoided. 5. If possible, give the children the opportunity to live with the picture several days before beginning the study. 6. When the picture is first placed before the children give a brief description of it. 7. During the study call attention to and ask questions about only those features which the children can understand and enjoy. 8. Do not attempt a complete analysis. 9. Do not moralize. If the picture has a moral the children will find it. 10. Give a brief and interesting sketch of the artist, calling attention to at least one or two of his other works. The "Melon Eaters." This is the picture of some street urchins who lived in the city of Seville, Spain, a long time ago. From their surroundings we should judge they had gone into the country for vegetables, and when returning had loitered by the way. Their clothing indicates that they are from poor families, but the expressions on their faces show them to be contented and happy. Notice the attitude of the boy about to eat the piece of melon. How eagerly his gaze is fixed upon it! The expression of the other boy indicates that he is enjoying the sport as much as his companion. Possibly the first boy is about to attempt to swallow his piece of melon on a wager. At all events, the second boy is so interested in what his companion is doing that he has delayed eating his own share. The dog is likewise interested in the sport. See how eagerly he is watching his master, and his wistful expression indicates that he also would like to share in the feast. Notice the perfect proportions and the natural pose of the figures. The details of the vegetables in the foreground and the shrub at the right combine to preserve the balance of the picture. All these features prove that this picture is the work of a great artist. We cannot study it without seeing in our imagination the young man Murillo wandering about the streets and market places of his native city and making careful study of its child life--life which he portrayed with such vividness and strength. This picture is of interest to children, especially to boys of the age of those of this reproduction. Its reality to life, the action expressed, and the composition all appeal to the child. Moreover, this is a work of the greatest Spanish painter. These conditions make it especially suitable for school use. Questions. How many boys in the picture? Are they brothers? Why do you think so? Which boy owns the dog? Why do you think so? Where do you think these boys have been? Where are they going? What objects in the picture lead you to form this opinion? Where are the boys seated? What are they doing? Are they having a good time? Why do you think so? What is the dog doing? What do you think he wants? What do you like in the picture? Why? Have you seen any other pictures by this artist? Can you name them? The Artist. For a biographical sketch, see Murillo in Volume IV. The following additional facts should be used to lend interest to the study. Others can be added if time and opportunity permit. When a young lad, Murillo was accustomed to decorate with his sketches whatever objects came in his way. Murillo's parents were poor, but they clearly recognized the artistic talent which their son showed at an early age, and placed him under the care of his uncle, who was a printer and a draughtsman, and under whom he obtained his early training. Murillo early learned to paint pictures of the children frequenting the streets and market places of the city of Seville, showing their many grotesque sports and pranks. The picture used in this study is one of these sketches. When Murillo was twenty-two his uncle removed to Cadiz. Murillo remained in Seville and supported himself for a time by painting inexpensive pictures for the public fairs. Though hastily executed, some of these pictures reveal the strength and skill of the artist to a remarkable degree. Murillo merited and won the love of Seville, and his home became the resort of artists and lovers of art. Murillo's most famous paintings are on religious subjects. One of these, the "Immaculate Conception," was sold in 1852 for over $120,000, the highest price that had been paid for a painting up to that time. Murillo is described as a pious, patient, brave man. He worked incessantly, sold his paintings for a high price and acquired a large fortune. The Gleaners and the Angelus. The two pictures shown here are among the world's famous paintings. The first one, "The Gleaners," shows a part of a harvest field on what is, apparently, a large farm. In the background are farm buildings, haystacks, a wagon, and figures of workers; in the foreground, three peasant women, in simple peasant costume, are bending down to pick something from the ground. What is there is that to make a picture beautiful and famous? That is the very question which some people asked when the artist, Jean Francois Millet, began to produce his pictures of peasant life. Classic pictures of the Greek gods, portraits of highborn gentlemen and ladies in gorgeous raiment, idealized shepherdesses with snowy flocks--these they could understand and appreciate; but there was nothing lovely in peasant life. As Millet continued to produce his paintings, however, the critics began to realize that there was something about them which they had not grasped at first, and that was a perfect sympathy with peasant life, which made the paintings not so much pictures as glimpses of real life. Now how did it happen that a great artist had so perfect a sympathy with the lowest class of the French people? A little study of his life will show us that Millet was himself of peasant family, and spent his boyhood working in his father's fields. Although it is possible that no one noticed the difference, the boy must have been different from the other boys about him; he saw things which they never saw, things which he was afterward able to put on canvas and thereby enable other people to see them. And very early he found that there was something besides working in the fields in which to interest himself. In an old Bible which was almost the only book in the peasant's hut in which they lived there were some old engravings which stirred his ambition, and he began to spend all of his leisure hours--and they were none too many--in drawing. His father, unlike many peasant fathers, did not discourage his son in an attempt to be something which his father had not been, but took some of his drawings to a painter in Cherbourg and asked him to accept the boy as a pupil. The artist at once recognized the boy's talents, and promised to receive him in his studio; but in a very short time the older Millet died, and the oldest son, then twenty-one years of age, returned to the field and took up his father's work. Circumstances afterward became a little better, so that the young man was able to go to Cherbourg, and later to Paris to study. At the very first he did not confine himself to the subjects which later won him fame, but painted "The Golden Age," "Oedipus Unbound," and other classical pictures. Recognition of his great genius was very slow, and he suffered the most extreme poverty; but we are glad to know that before he died he knew that his work was appreciated, and gained by his art enough so that he was no longer really poor. Now we can see why Millet was able to paint with such sympathy and exactness his three gleaners. These women are not workers in the harvest-field; their "gleaning" does not mean helping to get in the bounteous harvest. From the earliest times there has existed in certain countries a sort of an unwritten law which declares that after the harvesters have gathered in the grain the poor peasants may come into the fields and pick up for their own use what is left. The Book of Ruth, in the Bible, is chiefly built around this custom, and we find many references to it throughout history. The lower picture, "The Angelus," may mean even more to us than "The Gleaners." This, too, deals with an old custom, which still prevails in some Catholic countries. At morning, noon and evening the church bells are rung to remind people to stop in their work and say a prayer. This prayer is a brief one beginning "The Angel of the Lord," and is called the Angelus, from the Latin word for angel. In the picture, the bell is just sounding from the church spire far in the distance, and the two peasants at work in the field have stopped their work and bowed their heads to pray. A soft, evening light fills the picture, and we can tell from the attitude of the peasants that it is no mere formal prayer which they are repeating. The atmosphere of reverence is over the entire picture. These two paintings of the great peasant artist of France well repay study. Study of "Aurora." The following study of "Aurora," by Guido Reni, can be made to serve two purposes: It may help to instill a love of pictures into the minds of the children, and it may be of great assistance in teaching language or composition work. First, if possible, let each child have a copy of the picture in his own hands that he may study it carefully. Second, let each child tell, as fully as possible, what he sees. Then the following series of questions will help to bring out the points of the picture. Some of the questions the children can answer themselves from their observation, but a number of them the teacher will have to answer for them. 1. What is the name of the picture? "Aurora." 2. Why is it so named? "Aurora" means "Dawn," and this is a picture of the dawn of the morning. 3. Which is Aurora in the picture? The draped figure that is leading. 4. Who was Aurora? The Greeks believed that she was the goddess of the morning, who went ahead of Apollo, the sun god, scattering flowers in his way and opening for him the doors of the morning. 5. Who is riding in the golden chariot? Apollo, god of the sun. 6. How many horses are hitched to the chariot? Four. (If the children cannot discover four horses let them count the noses). 7. Has Apollo any other attendants besides Aurora, in this picture? Yes, there is Lucifer, the torch-bearer, called son of the morning, and the graceful figures of the Hours. 8. Which way is Aurora looking? At Apollo, to see whether he is ready to have her open wide the gates of morning. 9. Are they traveling on the earth? No, on the clouds. You can see the earth below. 10. Are they traveling slowly or rapidly? Why do you think so? (Call attention to the horses' manes, and other signs of action.) 11. Which is the most beautiful face in the picture? Is there anyone in the picture who has nothing to do? 12. By whom was this picture painted? Guido Reni. He was born at Bologna in 1575 and died in 1642. His father, who was himself a musician, hoped that his son would be a musician also, and the boy studied music for some time. He finally made up his mind, however, that he would never be happy unless he became a painter, so his father allowed him to have an artist's training. He painted many other pictures, some of them very beautiful, but this is the best known of all his paintings. 13. Where is the original painting? On the ceiling of a palace at Rome. (Explain that when these beautiful paintings are on the ceiling; looking glasses are placed below them so that people can see them more easily.) 14. Have you any questions that you would like to ask about the picture? Now let each child give a description of the picture, or let the whole class compose the description orally and then allow each child to write it out. Studies similar to this may be made of any picture. Questions What is oil painting? Water color? Fresco? Enamel? How produced? How and on what were the early paintings of the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans executed? How many centuries before Christ was painting practiced in Egypt? Was the art closely related to religion? In what relation was it held to sculpture and architecture? Was any attempt made by the Egyptian artists to imitate nature? Of what great historic value are these early Egyptian paintings? Give three reasons for your answer. By whom were the principal works of Roman art produced? Describe the conditions of Roman painting for the first three centuries after Christ. What were the Catacombs? How were they built? Decorated? Protected? Inhabited? By what art in the Catacombs did the early Christians indicate their religious devotion? What characterized the Umbrian school? What was striking about the Florentine school? When did art in the United States take on an individuality of its own? What are the strikingly distinguishing marks between American art of 1855 and 1900? Name five well-known American painters, with a great painting from each. For what was Whistler noted? What are the twelve greatest paintings in the world, by whom, where found, and when produced? What discovery of the Van Eycks produced a revolution in the art of painting? By what process are mosaics made? What are the only examples of pure Grecian painting? What was the Byzantine influence on painting?