i 
Bu 
Beas 
bi 
if 
iii 
| 

i 

] 

: 

0 

1 

VILLIAM CHARLES 
H HITECTS 

UNIVERSITY 
OF 
CALIFORYY 

= { 
- x ~~ x 4 
Seal =r 

D Sel = (= L 
bY) TT ARN oT eh 

nT —— IE 
mr =r ! ¥ Lem 1 J& 

IRS, = s YU | J 
i Ea 
Ali 

NTN —e gr LY 

yi Wg 

b 
3 } A : Ne . ar t 
yr NH NG 4 Ga rT ies —— = Jl | No 3 S So Bh. = Se 3 % i Se = TH = CE 
N = IA = a . 
z : NF ee 

EE | 

am 

et 
£ = 

_ 1 S tds 3 . 2 
~~ ll (3 fd | Zh it = (© Ae es ee 
1 2 ou ) XZ Ze = SEN Hn 
Ee ? Oi = . 4 Bf 2 TINE Rs EE B Ih) i | 
7 ND Pr pro oN me—— 2, = i Al To Rha = Ea SENT 7 4 Z 
L Sad) : 4 I TN. : i LL CF ED 

On stone by €.L. Bateman. 

90 Feet 

APEL WINDSOR 

THE-FIGURESSEr ANCIENT STAINED GLASS RESTORED ‘WITH CANOPIES BASES DIAPERED CROUND, ARMORIAL DEVICES & BY TWILLEMENT FSA. 

| 

GEORGES CF 

T 

WiaT WINDOW OF oS 

LONDON, 6 JOHN WEALE, 53 HIGH HOLBORN, 1846 

R H.Essex 1844. 

i 

ATA ARE RT Pn ts 

ERR RO 

TINE ANON, A) 

a 

oe rn te 

yess 

ar ee 

i 
i 
o 

tho. Liondon 

F. Bedford, 1 

delt 

rcke 

Ma 

arn 

V; 

Emille 

NDOM! 

LO 
ed 

) 

« 

¢ 

Y 
93 

BY JOUH WER 

didge £0 

tan 

S$ 

y 

Printed & 

DIVERS WORUKS 

OF 

"EARLY MASTERS 

IN 

CHRISTIAN DECORATION: 

WITH AN INTRODUCTION 

CONTAINING THE BIOGRAPHY, JOURNAL OF TRAVEL, CONTEMPORANEOUS ASSOCIATION IN ART, 
AND A CRITICAL ACCOUNT OF THE WORKS OF 

ALBERT DURER; 

NOTICES OF HIS MASTER WOHLGEMUTH AND HIS FRIEND PIRCKHEYMER; 
ADAM KRAFFT, AND HIS SACRAMENT-HOUSE AT NUREMBURG. 

WITH EXAMPLES 

OF 

Ancient Painted and Stained Blass, 

FROM YORK, WEST WICKHAM, KENT, AND ST. GEORGE’S CHAPEL, WINDSOR; 

THE ANCIENT CHURCH AND SACRAMENT-HOUSE AT LIMBOURG; 

THE WORKS OF DIRK AND WOUTER CRABETH, &c.: 

ALSO A SUCCINCT ACCOUNT, WITH ILLUSTRATIONS, OF 

PAINTED. AND STAINED GLASS AT GOUDA, IN HOLLAND, 

AND 

THE CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES AT LILGE. 

IN TWO VOLUMES 

YOoL. 1. 

EDITED BY JOHN WEALE 

LONDON: M.DCCC.XLVI. 

OY MX 

ARCH. 
LIBRARY 

NM CENES 2 WYK ong tet 
CRC SOON 9 WA eremyl ied 0 esis 0 
TAN \( ~ SN | HX Fh ofl 63 3 is oweso, 

J 
JE) ith ie design of tendering some aid fo the adpancement 
22 )0f the erst Taste fot the stud of Scclesiastical'ee 

AN 

>=coration fhepublication, of these o(lemes conprehendin 
2&9) Bo ed cramps of LhristioanLmbellish mat QD 
NN dome aro in foreign tranel hasbeen deteunined.on 
S\N, Jf fois manifestation of the production of objects 50 

NH desirable is sanctioned, the end Has been aftained:=- 
(ie Sir aegidoed ih: 

Dam ARvafft of Mnicembery and 
¢ Frabeths of “NY onda were 
renowned asmasters of their Neto 

=28 ECORATIVE ART is of early origin, coeval indeed with the oldest buildings, the remains of 
Yl which still exist in various parts of the globe; and few studies would present more objects 
of interest, than the tracing of its progress from the earliest periods to a more recent date. It 
is not however the intention of this Work to attempt any such extended inquiry; and its scope 

will be limited to the treatment of the Art of Adornment of which these Volumes are illustrative, 
applied as it has principally been to the sacred services of Religion. 

The various styles, to which the names of Byzantine, Lombardic, Gothic, &c., have been given, have distinctive 
peculiarities, and are suitable modes of displaying the splendour of the Ancient Catholic Church. In some instances 
the Art has been applied to the decoration of Modern Architecture, the rich tracery and foliage of the early masters 
having furnished the purest models for the enrichment of the interior of many splendid mansions which afford conclusive 
evidence of the taste and refinement of the present age. 

The Art, to a great extent, is indebted to the Ancient Designers and Painters and Stainers on Glass, whose productions 
present every variety and richness of colour in diaper patterns, and the mode of producing powerful effects by means 
of leading in the relief of folds and shades of drapery. The harmony, arrangement, and brilliancy of colours, united 
with the soul-stirring feeling of Divine Revelation, its mystic language of hope and fear, have thus accomplished much 
that was desired for holy purposes, and may yet have a present influence by keeping pace with the increasing wealth 
of the Christian world. : 

For secular uses also, by the aid of living Artists, the adaptation of much of ecclesiastical ornament might be 
contributed under very particular circumstances; and a vast field is now open for mental acquirement in the wide 

range of the Art. 

It is to be regretted that even the names of the Artists of many fine examples of early decorative painting should 
remain unknown; but the researches of Archaeologists of the present day will doubtless bring to light many objects of 
interest, as well as the knowledge of men whose acquirements we all venerate. Mr. John Whichcord, jun., of Maidstone, 
in his Polychromatic Essay,* has made a considerable advance on the subject; and any account of men so distinguished 

in ornamental painting and decoration is of importance to the rising generation of Artists. 

A selection of the lives, therefore, of a few of the most eminent, will, it is anticipated, form the basis for a study from 
which so much is to be expected; and among these, no one seems so fit for our Painters as ALBert Durer, whose 
pencil stands eminently in the foreground of his art, and whose premature decease must have been deplored by those 
of his own school, as well as in Italy, where he was so highly appreciated even by the great Raffaelle himself, and 

whose admiration for his German contemporary should in itself be sufficient to fix our attention on his works with more 

* «History and Antiquities of the Collegiate Church of All Saints, Maidstone; with Observations on the Polychromatic Decoration of the Middle Ages:’ by John 
Whichcord, jun., Architect. 4to, 1845. 

A 

2 | ALBERT DURER. 

than an ordinary degree of earnestness. Some account of this distinguished man and his works is here given, 
derived from various sources; but previously it may not be uninteresting to commence by a short account of his father, - 

taken from a work of considerable research in respect to the lives of Artists born at Nuremburg.* 

Avert Durer the elder, a Goldsmith, was born at Eytas, an Hungarian village near Gyula in Gross-Waradein, 
A.D. 1427. He began life by applying himself to the goldsmiths’ trade, which his father, Antonius Durer, carried on in 
that place, and in a very short time found himself master of considerable wealth, as he had by this time made great 
progress in his art. In order to add still more to his knowledge upon the subject, he proceeded first to Germany, and 
thence to the Netherlands, gaining free access at the same time to the society of many eminent artists, and at length 
improved himself to such a degree that he acquired the reputation of being a skilful master of his profession. In the year 
1455 he went to Nuremburg, settled there, and married in 1464. Kighteen children were the fruit of this marriage, 
namely,” eleven sons and seven daughters, the majority of whom died young: three sons only remained—Albert Durer, 
the great Artist, John Durer, who finally became Court Painter to the King of Poland, and Andrew Durer, a 
distinguished amateur, who inherited the works of art of his brother Albert. After having applied himself to his 
profession for about forty years with unwearied diligence, the elder Durer died at Nuremburg, September 9th, 1502. 

Albechien MY. — Ansar Durer 

may be regarded as the great luminary of 
Art in Germany at that memorable epoch 
when Painting and the other Arts of design, 
which had been gradually dawning upon 
Europe, burst forth nearly all at once into 
meridian splendour. He was one of the 
master-minds of his age—an age irradiated 
by the genius of Da Vinci, of Raffaelle, and 
Michelagnolo,—arch-angelic in power of 
pencil as well as in name. He was born 
at Nuremburg on the 20th of May, in the 
year 1471; in early life was carefully in- 
structed by his father in drawing and in the 
goldsmiths’ art, with the intention of making 

him proficient in that profession, which was 

= 

so far successful, that in his sixteenth year, 

MO 

to the great joy of his father, he produced 
a beautiful work embossed in silver, repre- 
senting the Seven Falls of Christ. In this 

early production it was shewn that he pos- 

0777757507700 
LHI hm 

Zz 
a 7 

sessed an imagination that could grasp life 

: ER) ’ 

\ in its most delicate shades,—an exquisite 

\ 

sense of dignity and sublimity, no less than 

of agreeable simplicity and grace,—and a 

ALBERTUS DURERUS, NORE BERGEN. 
Vir cwsute gravis , tumgue arte migra Sale tir 

depth and earnestness which combined 

Zeutontce gents glivia hd fine with his assiduity in the severest appli- 
Contulst bc C wear migra Nobititatic = cation to study. He nevertheless preferred 
Twmtres bono artes \famay we lante id 2) learning the Art of Painting, for which he 

had always felt the greatest inclination. 
His father at length yielding to his wishes, 

Engraved by Charles Rosenberg in facsimile of an original engraving by Hendrick 
Hondius, who was born at Duffel in Brabant, in 1573, and celebrated for his faithful 
and elaborately worked portraits : he died in 1610. : old friend Martin Schon, a celebrated 

gave him letters of recommendation to his 

Painter at Colmar. It was in 1486, when 
Albert intended to set out on his journey thither, that he received the unexpected intelligence that this excellent artist 
was dead: he was consequently obliged to seek instruction from some one else, and by his father’s advice was taught 
painting by Huspe Martin, and also became a pupil of Michael Wohlgemuth, at that time the great artists of 
Nuremburg, and the latter particularly known as the engraver of the much celebrated folio work, the ¢ Chronicles of 

e . e ~ 
* ¢ Historische Nachricht von den Nurnbergischen Mathematicis und Kunstlern:> Von J. G. Doppelmayer. Folio, Nurnberg, 1730. 

ALBERT DURER. | 3 

Nuremburg,” published in 1493 by Schedel, and containing very numerous wood engravings, many of which were 
probably the earlier productions of Albert Durer; for before the year of his pupilage had expired he had made 
considerable progress in the knowledge of drawing and painting, and applied himself to the task with extraordinary 
industry for three years, as he found himself peculiarly and eminently qualified by nature for practising the art, so that 
he soon excelled many who were engaged in the same occupation. A celebrated example of the skill of Albert Durer 
in goldsmiths’ work was the Maximilian Cross, so named from being made by order of Maximilian, Archduke of Austria, 
who intended it to ornament the Church of St. Peter at Rome, of which Julius II. had then laid the foundation. The 
death of the Pontiff having changed the Archduke’s intention, the cross remained in the oratory of his daughter, the 
Archduchess Margaret, from which it passed about 1530 to Antwerp. This master-piece of minute delicacy of 
workmanship, perhaps unique in its kind, is a Latin Cross about 18 inches high, representing all the actions in the life 
of our Lord Jesus Christ, in fifty-two compartments, with the subjects in relief, and which exhibit upwards of 1200 
figures.* To improve himself still further, he went abroad in 1490, travelled through many parts of Germany and 
the Netherlands, and finally proceeded to Venice, at that time the emporium of commerce and the arts, where he 
displayed much skill in the several departments of his profession. In 1492 he was at Colmar, and was well received 
by Gaspar and Paul, goldsmiths, and by Lewis the painter: these three artists were brothers of Martin Schon. At 
length, after an absence of four years, he returned to his native city, and soon made it apparent to what an extent the 
world would be indebted to him in after-times on account of his most exquisite and original taste as an artist. 
This promise he fully realized, inasmuch as he has, more than many of his ‘contemporaries, contributed to the 
advancement of the Fine Arts, and carefully perfected his own works. 

In 1494, on his return home, Albert Durer (then twenty-three years old) married Agnes, daughter of James Frey, 
a celebrated mechanic of Nuremburg : she was exceedingly handsome, and a portrait of her is still in preservation. 

Drawing, Painting, and other Arts dependent upon these, he raised to a high pitch with the aid of Geometry, which he 
had studied from his most youthful days, and thus opened to his successors a way to those subjects which their 
predecessors had never been able to traverse. His system was the more excellent, as he observed in all his figures 
the greatest accuracy with regard to true and natural proportion, which is the soul of such works of art. To gratify 
his friends, he published so profound a work upon the true proportions of all the external parts of the human frame, 
that, according to the testimony of Daniel Barbaro, a celebrated Italian, he excelled Vitruvius in the minutest details, 
as well as other writers, in the exact representation of such proportions. In this particular, Durer was so eminently 
skilful, that a distinguished painter having one day shewn him the size of a limb for a crucifix, which the former was to 
carve in wood, but the latter to paint in its proper size from the same; when the two pieces were brought into contact, 
Durer’s work was found to correspond exactly with the other. ar i, oF : | : 

He was, moreover, the first in Germany who advanced the science of perspective, and by means of certain. instruments, 
of which he was the inventor, practised it advantageously on mathematical principles, to the still further promotion of the 
Art of Drawing and Painting. These instruments were found to be of great service, especially by the Italian artists 

Daniel Barbaro and Ignatius Dantes : others were constructed of a similar kind, but inferior to those of Durer. + 

* Journ. de Empire. Juin, 1812. 
1 Several publications of the works of Albert Durer, previous and subsequent to his death, are as follows : 

1. Arc Triomphale de 'Empereur Maximilien 1¢*. Germ. in folio. 11. Etliche Underricht. On Fortification, in German; Nur. 1527; Paris, 1535. 

Engraved on wood from his designs and under his direction, and composed of 
92 plates or blocks of different sizes, to be joined together, forming an engraving 
or picture 104 feet high and 9 wide: engraved in 1513 and following years. 

2. Ehrenpforte. Arc Triomphale, et cet.: 3rd edition of the preceding work, pub- 

lished by M. Bartsch. In this many of the original blocks have been replaced by 
others re-engraved. 

3. Le Triumph-wagen, or Char Triomphale de Maximilien 1¢*., consists of 8 large 
blocks joined, 1522; regarded as the chef-d’ceuvre of wood engraving. 

4. A collection of 440 pieces of A. Durer; 93 engraved on copper, 6 on iron or 
steel, 3 on pewter, 186 on wood, and the rest of pieces engraved after his designs : 
copies sold for 3112 francs in 1807. 

5. Passio Domini nostri Jesu, 1510; 12 engravings on wood, with Latin text. 
The earlier impressions have no text. 

6. Passio Christi, et cet., 1509 and 1510; 37 pieces, wood-cuts. The copy 
in the British Museum dates 1511, same as the edition at Venice in 1612. 

There is another Passion, engraved by Durer himself, 1508-1513, on 16 copper- 
plates ; it is much more precious than the wood series. 

7. Apocalypsis cum figuris, 1598 ; 16 engravings on wood, after A. Durer. 

8. Epitome in Dive Parthenices Marie historiam; in folio. Nur., 1511; 20 
plates. 

9. Anno Christiano millesimo quingentesimo undecimo; 20 engravings on wood ; 
the first edition without a title. 

10. Underweysung, or Traité Geometrique, 1525, Nur., small folio. Latin 
translation, Paris, 1532-1535. 

A copy in Brit. Mus. ¢De Architecturd Militari,” Germ. folio, Nur., 1527. Another 
copy, ‘De Urbabus Arcibus castellisque condendis ac muniendis,” Paris, 1535. 

12. Vier Beucher von Menschlicher, &c.; 4 books of the Proportions of the 
Human Body, Nur., folio, 1528. The third edition is the most valuable, as the 
wood engravings are finely executed. 

13. De Symmetria Partium, etc.; 2 books, translated by J. Camerario, Nur., 
1532-1534. This was also translated into French by L. Meigret, in 1557. 

14. His Treatise on the Proportions of the Human Body was first published in . 
German in 1525, (or according to Brunet’s catalogue, in 1528,) and a Latin transla- 
tion was printed in 1532; a French translation by L. Meigret, in 1557, Paris, and 
at’ Arnheim, 1613. 

15. Undoubtedly the best edition of all his works, published posthumously, 
in folio, 1538, at Nuremburg, in German, on Descriptive Geometry, Instruments 
for Drawing, the Construction of Gothic and German Alphabets, and on Drawing 
the Human Figure; comprising very numerous wood engravings. Nuremburg, 
H. Formschneyder. 

16. Icones sacree in historiam salutis humans per Redemptorem nostrum Jesum 
Christum Dei et Marie filium restauratee ; 4to, 1604. 34 wood-cuts by Altdorfer, 
from Durer’s designs. (Altdorfer was said to be his pupil.) 

17. Pittore Geometra chiarissimo della simmetria dei corpi humani; folio, 
Venice, 1591. Another edition, 1557. 

18. Durer’s Life of the Virgin; 21 wood-cuts. : 

19. Albert Durer’s Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, edited by Henry Cole; an 
exquisite little volume, which does infinite credit to Mr. Cole’s judgment. 1844. 

Vasari, Sandrart, and other writers on Painting, give criticisms on his works. Ottley’s ¢ History of Wood Engraving,” and more particularly ‘le Peintre Graveur,’ par Bartsch, 
septiéme et quartorziéme vols., (Vienna, 1806 and 1813,) unquestionably give the most accurate list of his published wood and copper engravings extant. 

4 ALBERT DURER. 

In 1506, our artist made a journey to Venice, and painted several pictures, for which he was handsomely remunerated : 
he remained there till September of that year. From Venice he went to Bologna, and soon after returned home. 

In 1520, having previously visited Italy, he made a journey beyond Frankfort and Cologne to the other seat of the 
celebrated artists, the Netherlands. In his diary * he states, anno 1520,— 

On Whitsunday, have I, Albert Durer, at my own cost and responsibility, with my wife, departed from Nuremburg for the Netherlands ; 
and having travelled that day, lodged at night at Baiersdorf. 

Thence we went on Friday to Forchhaim. Thence went I to Bamberg, and presented the Bishop with a painting of the Virgin, our 
Blessed Lady, an Apocalypse, and a copper-plate. He invited me to dinner, and gave me an exemption from customs, and three other 
letters, and provided for my lodging. | | 

Item, I paid the driver 6 florins in gold, who took me from Bamberg to Frankfort. 

Item, Master Laurence Benedict and his Painter took me to wine with them. 

So I set out from Bamberg to Eltman, and shewed my customs-letter, by which I was allowed to pass toll-free. 

Thence came I to Hassfurth, and shewed my customs-letter, so that I was allowed to pass toll-free. 

I have given one florin to the Chancery of the Bishop of Bamberg. 

Thence came I to Theres, to the Convent, and shewed my customs-letter, and was allowed to pass toll-free. Thence came we to 
Schweinfurth, where Doctor Rebart rec’. me, and gave us wine in our boat. Thence went we to Volkach, and shewed my customs-letter, 
and went away, and came to Schwarzach ; also went I in the early boat from Frankfort on Sunday to Mentz, and came half-way to Hochst, 
‘where I shewed my customs-letter, and they allowed me to pass; also I paid 8 Frankfort pence. Thence we went to Mentz, where I 
paid one white-penny to the porters to unload. Moreover, 14 Frankfort hellers to the cabin boy. Moreover, 18 pence for a girth. 
~ Moreover, I engaged with the Cologne boat for 3 florins, with my luggage. Also have I spent at Mentz 17 white-pence. Item, Peter 
Goldtschmiedt, the host, gave me two bottles of wine; so did Veith Farnpuhler invite me, and his landlord we. take no reckoning 
from him, but be my host himself; and they rec’. me with much honor: also I departed from Mentz, where the Main flows into the 
Rhine, and it was the Monday after St. Mary Magdalen. 

Thence came we to Poppart, and shewed my customs - letter at the Treves customs - house, where they let me pass; only I had 
to declare, under my signet, that I had no merchants’ goods, and they let me willingly pass. Thence came we to Lonstein, and shewed 
my customs-letter ; the customs-officer also let me pass free there, but he bade that 1 sho’. speak with His Grace of Mentz, and 
presented me with wines, as he knew my wife well, and was glad to see her. Thence came we to Engers, and shewed my customs-letter 
that belongs to Treves, and they let me pass free. I said I wo". praise My Lord of Bamberg for this. Thence came we to Andernach, and 
shewed my customs-letter, and they allowed me to pass free. Also I went in the morning to St. Jacobi, from Andernach. Thence 
went we to Bonn, to the customs-house, but they let me pass free. Thence came we to Cologne, and they allowed us to pass free. 

Thence went we to Antwerp, where I came to the inn to Jobst Planckfelt, and that same evening the Fuggers’ + factor, of the 
name of Bernard Stecher, rec’. me, and ‘gave us a costly repast, but my wife ate in the inn; and I gave the carrier for the conveyance 
of our three persons, three florins in gold. 

On Sunday, which was also St. Oswald’s day, the painters received me in their chamber, with my wife and maid, and served us 
with silver ware, and other costly preparations, and a particularly costly banquet. Their wives also were there; and while I was at 
table, the people stood on each side as if they were treating a great Lord. There were also among them some persons of importance, 
who received me with very deep and reverential salutations, and they said they would do all they could, which might be agreeable 
to me: there came a messenger from the Lords of Antwerp with two servants, and presented me from the Lords of Antwerp 
with four cans of wine, and sent me word, “I should be honored by them in this, and have their good will.” Then said 
I, that I thanked them humbly, and sont my humble service. Thereafter came Master Peter, the city carpenter, and presented 
me with two cans of wine, with the expression of his willing service. So were we long merry together, and late in the night, when 
they conducted us with lanthorns worshipfully home, and undertake to do what I will, that they will render me every service in 
their power. Also I thank them, and lay me to sleep: also I went to Master Quintin’s home.{ I went to their three great archery 
places, and ate a costly repast. Another time with the’ Factor of Portugal,§ whom I sketched in charcoal, as also my host. Also 
Jobst Planckfelt, who presented me with some white coral. 

Also my host took me to the painter’s working-place in Antwerp, in the Armoury, where they were preparing the Triumph with 
which King Charles | is to be received. That work is in length 400 arches (pégen), and each forty feet long, and placed on both 
sides of the street, beautifully arranged, and it cost altogether, for carpentry and painting, 4000 florins ; and this thing is made costly 
all over. Item, did I eat another time with the Portingal, and I ate once with Alexander in the Court. Item, Sebald Fischer bought of 
me at Antwerp 16 small Passions for 4 florins. Further, 32 great books for 8 florins. Further, 6 Passions for 3 florins. Fufther, 20 half 
quires of all kinds has he taken for 3 florins. Item, hence I sold to my host for a piece of cloth, a painting of the Blessed Virgin, 
and 2 florins Rhenish. Item, for another time I sketched Felix Lautenschlager. Item, I have once eaten with Alexander Goldtschmiedt : 
further, once with Felix. Once has Master Joachim 9 eaten with me; also his man once. I began a painting in half-colour. I 
have presented the four new small pieces [paintings] to Peter Wolffgzang. I have presented Master Joachim with one florin, because 

he has lent me his colours and his man; and I made a present also to his man. Item, I sent the four new paintings to Alexander 

* Translated from Von Murr’s Journal, where it is given in Durer’s peculiar orthography. The style is of the homeliest, and is given as a faithful transcript. With its 
trivial details and inklings of domestic manners, it gives a truthful insight into Durer’s character and social position. : 

+ The Fuggers were the Rothschilds of that time. 1 Quintin Messis or Matsys, the famous blacksmith painter, born 1450, at Antwerp, died 1529. 

§ The head of the Portuguese Factory at Antwerp. | King Charles V., the Emperor. 4 Joachim Patenier, of Dinant in Liége, the landscape painter. 

ALBERT DURER. 5 

Goldtschmiedt. I sketched in with charcoal the Genoese, named Tomasino Floriano, and his two brethren, named Vicenzio and 
Gerhard, all three Pumbellij. Twelve times have I dined with Tomasino. 

Further, Master Erasmus [the great Erasmus] presented me with a Spanish mantle. Further, Tomasino’s brother has presented 
me with a pair of gloves. But once have I sketched Vicenzio, Tomasino’s brother: also have I presented Master Augustin Lumbarth with 
the two parts of the ‘Tmagines Coeli.” Also have I sketched the Elector with the aquiline nose, namea Opitius. Item, my wife and 
little maid have dined one day at Master Tomasino’s house. Item, Our Lady Church at Antwerp is too large; also people have 
much trouble in singing there at first without making a fault; and they have an altar and costly foundation, where are appointed 
the best musicians that can be had. The church has many devout services and stonework, and particularly a pretty tower. Also 
have I been in the rich abbey of St. Michael, which has of stone (masswerck) the costly seat in its choir. And at Antwerp they 
spare no cost for such things, as there is money enough there. I have sketched Master Nicholas, an astronomer, who dwells with 
the King of England, who has been of furtherance and use to me in many things: he is a German, born at Munich. Further have 
I sketched Tomasino’s daughter, named Jungfrau Suten. Item, Hans Pfaffroth gave me a Philip’s guilder, because I had sketched 
him with charcoal. Further have I dined with Tomasino once; and my host’s father-in-law received me, also my wife. Further have 
I changed two bad (light) guilders and 24 stivers for living. Further have I given one stiver for drink-money, because I was allowed to see 
a Table (a picture). Item, I have seen on Sunday after Our Lady’s Ascension, the grand procession of Our Lady Church at Antwerp, 
when the whole place was assembled, of all handicrafts and conditions, each clad costly according to his condition. Each condition 
and trade had its token by which it might be known; and there were also among them great costly banners carried; and their old 
French long trumpets of silver. There were also of Germans many fifers and drummers, who made much noise. Also saw I in 
the way, in regular order, going along the procession, the goldsmiths, painters, masons, silk embroiderers, carvers, cabinet-makers, 
carpenters, sailors, fishermen, butchers, curriers, weavers, bakers, tailors, shoemakers, and other handicrafts, and many handworkers 
and dealers, in worshipful array. So too were the shopkeepers, merchants, and all kinds of assistants. After came the musketeers, 
archers, and arquebusiers, as well horse as foot. Then came the guards of the bailwick. Then came a whole body of very brave 
folks, genteelly and richly clad; but before them went all orders, and each arranged according to the several differences very properly. 
There was also in this procession a great body of widows, who live by their own handywork, and hold a particular rule,* and all 
with white linen tuckers, reaching from the head to the ground, very orderly to see: thereamong saw I many brave persons, and the 
prebends of Our Lady Church, with all the priesthood, scholars, and church officers going behind, where 20 persons bore the Virgin Mary 
with the Lord Jesus, most richly clothed, to the honor of the Lord God. In this circuit were very many pleasant things done, and 
very richly arranged. Then there were brought along many carriages, models of ships, and other pageants. Thereamong were the 
Prophets, then the New Testament, then the Angelic Cross, the Three Holy Kings on great camels, and riding in other scarce wonders, 
very artfully arranged: also how Our Lady fled in Egypt, very devoutly, and many other things, which for shortness I pass by. At 
the last came a great dragon, which bore St. Margaret with her ladies, on a girdle, which was very pretty : there followed after, St. George 
with his attendants, a pretty sketch. Also there rode in this company very bravely and richly clad young men and maidens, in 
various dresses, and representing different saints. This procession,} from the beginning to the end, before it passed our house, lasted 
more than two hours ;. also were the things so many, that I co. not write them even in a book, and therefore let them alone. Item, 
I have been at Antwerp in the Fuggers’ Factor-House, which has been built newly and richly, with a special tower, wide and 
great, with a fine garden, and saw his beautiful stallion. Item, Tomasino presented my wife with 14 ells of good thick damask, 
and two and a half ells of half atlas, as a lining. Item, the Factor of Portugal has presented me with wine at the inn, Portuguese 
and French. Item, Senhor Roderigo, of Portugal, presented me with a basket of well made sugar, of all sorts, wherein was a 
sugar-candy box, two great dishes of sugar penet, marchpain, and all other sweets, and sugar-cane as it grows. Thereon I gave 
his man one florin for drink. Further have I for board changed a light guilder and 12 stivers. Item, the columns in St. Michael’s, 
in the convent, in the parish church at Antwerp, are all made of black beautiful gold-stone. I have from Antwerp sent out and 
presented, through Master Gillgen, King Charles’s door-keeper, the good sculptor named Master Conrad, the like of whom I have not 
seen (he served the Emperor Maximilian’s daughter, Lady Margaret), St. Jerome, Melancholy, the three new Maries, the Anthony 
and the Veronica;} and I presented Master Gillgen with a Eustachius and a Nemesis. Item, I was indebted to my host 7 florins 
20 stivers, the Sunday before St. Bartholomew’s. Item, for fire and chamber and bedding shall I give him 11 florins monthly. 
I have been with my host 27 days in August, on Monday before St. Bartholomew, that I dine with him, and give for each meal 
two pence, and the drink without reckoning; but my wife and maid must hereafter cook and eat. I have presented the Portuguese 
Factor with a small carved child. Further have I presented him with an Adam and Eve, Jerome, the Hercules, the Eustachius, the 
Melancholy, the Nemesis. Thereafter, on half-sheets, three new Virgins, the Veronica, the St. Anthony, Christmas, and the Cross. 
Thereafter, the best out of the quarter-sheets, which are eight small pieces. Thereafter, the three books of Our Lady’s Life, the 
Apocalypse, and the Great Passion, after the Little Passion, and the Passion in copper, which is all worth 5 florins. Even as much 
have I presented to Senhor Roderigo, the other Portingal. This Roderigo presented my wife with a small green popinjay. Item, on 
Sunday after St. Bartholomew (the 2nd Sept.) I went from Antwerp with Master Tomasino to Mechlin, where we lay one night; 
and I met Master Conrad, and a painter with him, at supper; and this Master Conrad is the good carver whom the Lady Margaret 
has. From Mechlin we went through the small town of Wilsswort (Vilvorde), and came to Brussels on Monday (3d Sept.) at 
mid-day. I have dined with my gentlemen at Brussels, and once dined with Master Bonisius, and presented him with a Passion 
in copper. Item, I have given to the Markgrave John, at Brussels, my letter of introduction, which my Lord of Bamberg 

wrote, and I have presented him with a Passion engraved in copper, as a remembrance of me. Further have I once eaten with 

* Beguines. 1 The celebrated procession of the Ommeganck. These are believed to be engravings by Albert Durer. 
B 

0 ALBERT DURER. 

my gentlemen of Nuremburg. 1 have seen at Brussels, in the council-house, in the golden chamber, the four painted pieces 
which the great master Rudiger has made.* 1 have seen in the King’s house at Brussels, within and without, the fountains, 
labyrinth, and menagerie, which is a pleasant thing; surely more like a paradise I have seen nothing. Item, the dwarf who 
presented my supplications to the Lord Jacob Bonisius is named Erasmus. Item, at Brussels is a very rich and great council- 
house, built of fine masonry, with a remarkably good tower. I have drawn Master Conrad at Brussels, by candle-light at night, 
who has been my host at Brussels. Also have I Doctor Lambarten’s son drawn at the same time with charcoal, and the hostess. 
Also have I seen the thing which was brought to the King from the new golden land, a sun completely of gold, a whole fathom 
broad. Also a silver moon as great, and two large rooms full of rich furniture, with numercus weapons, harness, and remark- 
able artillery, and rare clothing, bedding, and all kinds of things for people’s use, which are much more beautiful than wonderful.— 
These things are all of a costly nature, so that they are valued at a hundred thousand guilders; and I have in all my lifetime seen 
nothing which gave my heart so much pleasure as these things. Then did I see there wonderfully clever things, and I wondered 
at the subtile genius of men in strange lands, and the things I do not know how to express, that I saw there. I have besides seen 
many fine things at Brussels, and particularly a great fish-bone, that had the bits been put together it wo". have been a fathom and 
a half long, and weighed near 15 hundred weight, and it stands on the fish in the back of his head. I have also been at Nassau House, 
which is richly built and finely furnished. Also have I twice dined with my Lords. Item, Madonna Margareta} received me at 
Brussels, and promised me she wo’. be my introductress to King Charles, and shewed a special kindness towards me. I presented 
my engraved Passion, also a similar one to the Mint-Master, named Jan Marini, and I sketched him also in charcoal. Also I gave 
two stivers to have the picture of St. Luke exhibited. Item, I went to Nassau House, § where I saw that good painting in the chapel 
which Master Hugh || made; and I saw the two handsome large halls, and all the rarities in the house: also the great bed, in 
which 50 men can lie: also the great stone which fell from the sky in the field near my Lord of Nassau. This house runs up high, 
so that there is a fine look-out, which is marvellous, and I believe that there is none like it in all Germany. Item, Master Bernard, 9 
the painter, received me, and gave me a sumptuous dinner, which I think co. not have been paid with 10 florins. He also introduced 
me into good company, the Lady Margaret’s Master of the Treasury, and the King’s Master of the Household (Hoffmaister), named 
Meteni, and the City Treasurer, named Pusfladis, to whom I presented a Passion engraved in copper; and he again presented me 
with a black Spanish pouch, worth 3 florins; and to Erasmus of Rotterdam I presented a Passion engraved in copper. Item, to 
Erasmus I presented a portrait engraved in copper, which is of the Secretary Bonisius. The man at Antwerp, who presented the 
little child’s head, is named Lawrence Sterck. Item, I sketched Master Bernard, the Lady Margaret’s painter, in charcoal. I sketched 
Erasmus of Rotterdam again. 1 presented Lawrence Sterck with the sitting St. Jerome, and the Melancholy. I sketched my 
hostess’s godmother. Item, 6 persons have given me nothing, whom I sketched at Antwerp. I gave 3 stivers for two powder-horns, 
and one stiver for two Eulenspiegel. ** Also I went on Sunday after St. Giles’s day with Master Tomasino to Mechlin, and was 
received by Master Hans Ebner, who wo?. take nothing for my reception, so long as I was with him, 7 days. I supped with the 
Lady of Neukircher, and went early from Mechlin to Antwerp on Monday, and breakfasted with the Portingal, who gave me three 
pieces of porcelain, and Roderigo presented me with some fine Calcutta silk things. Now on Monday after St. Giles, I was again 
received by Jobst Planckfelt. Item, the two Lords of Rogendorff received me, and I dined once with them, and sketched their 
arms large on wood, so that they might be carved. I dined once at the Fuggers’ Factor-House, with young Job Peklinger, but 
I only dined once with him in all. I presented William Hauenhut, servant of my Lord Duke the Palsgrave Frederick, with an 
engraved St. Jerome, and the two new half-sheets, the Holy Mary and St. Anthony. Item, I presented Master Jacob Bonisius with a 
good painted (qy. coloured engraving) Veronica likeness, a St. Eustace, a Melancholy, and a St. Jerome, sitting, St. Anthony, the two 
new Blessed Virgins, and the new Peasants; so I gave his clerk, Erasmus, who presented my memorial, a sitting St. Jerome, the 
Melancholy, the St. Anthony, and the two Blessed Virgins, and all that I presented to them was worth 7 florins. I gave Master Marx 
Goldtschmiedt a Passion engraved in copper, and he gave me 3 florins as ransom. Further I spent for art 3 florins. I dined thrice 
with the Lord Bonisius. I dined ten times with the gentlemen of Nuremburg. Item, Master Dierrich (Dietrich), the glass painter, 
presented me with the red colour, which at Antwerp is found in the new brick. Item, I sketched Master Jacob Von Lubeck, who 
presented my wife with a Philip’s guilder ; I have, however, changed a Philip’s guilder for lodging. I presented the Lady Margaret with 
a St. Jerome, sitting, engraved on copper. I sold a Passion in wood for twelve stivers; further, 4 stivers for Adam and Eve. Item, 
Felix Hauptmann Lautenschlager bought of me a whole copper-plate set, and a Passion in wood: further, a Passion on copper, 2 half- 
sheets and 2 quarter-sheets, for 8 gold guilders. So have I presented him with a whole copper-plate set. I sketched My Lord Bonisius 
in charcoal. Item, Roderigo has again given me a popinjay, and I gave his boy two stivers for drink. I presented John Van der Winckel, 
trumpeter, with a small wooden Passion, a St. Jerome, and a Melancholy. I gave 6 stivers for a pair of shoes. I gave 5 pence 
for a sea cap; and George Schlautersbach presented me with such a one, worth 6 stivers. I have dined once with Wolff Haller, 
the Factor’s servant, where I met the Nuremburg gentlemen. Item, I sketched with charcoal Master Jacob,i{ the painter of the 
Roggendorffs. Item, I sketched for Von Roggendorff his arms in wood, for which he presented me with 7 ells of velvet. 

I sketched Master Jararott Bruck, with charcoal, who gave me one florin. I presented 2 florins in gold, in a letter on Augsburg, 

to John Swart,{} for my likeness at the Fugger Factor’s at Antwerp. I gave two stivers for the colour which is made out of brick. I 

* Roger Van der Weyde, born at Brussels, died in 1527. These four pictures relate to Justice. The one most esteemed represents an old man dying in his bed, 
who embraces his son, convicted of a crime, and at the same time kills him to punish him. + Mexico. 

} The Governess of the Low Countries, sister of the Emperor, King Charles V. § The palace of the Prince of Orange. 

| Hugh Van der Goes, pupil of John Van Eyck, a native of Bruges, painted in oil. There are productions of his before and after 1480. 

9 Bernard Van Orley, a pupil of Raffaelle, named also Barent of Brussels. He painted on a large scale, and was well received by Charles V. 

*% Of Luke Van Leyden, now so rare. +1 James Cornelisz, master of John Schoreel, born at Qost Sanen: he had considerable reputation. 

11 John Swart, born at Groningen, painted history and landscape, travelled in Italy, and lived long at Venice. In 1522 he lived at Tergoude. 

ALBERT DURER. 5 

sketched a Spaniard in charcoal. 1 gave 3 stivers for two bowls, such as Felix presented to my wife; and a similar bowl (schelein) 
Master Jacob, the painter of Lubeck, presented to my wife. Dined once with the Roggendorffs. Item, gave a stiver for the printed 
entry into Antwerp how the King was received with a costly pageant, when the gates were decorated costly, with chamber plays, great 
magnificence, and beautiful damsels’ portraits, the like of which I had rarely seen. I saw at Antwerp the great rib bone: the thigh 
bone is five and a half ells long, and very heavy and thick. Also the shoulder blade is broader than any strong man, and other bones 
of him, and the man was 18 ells high, lived at Antwerp, and did great wonders, which the Lords of the city have written much of 
him in an old book. Item, Raffaelle of Urbino’s things were all sold after his death, but his pupil, of the name of Thomas the 
Polander, a good painter, whom I was desirous to see, came to see me, and presented me with a gold antique ring with a good 
engraved stone, of 5 florins value, but I was offered twice that money for it. 

(The remainder of the Journal is shorter, but enough has been given to shew Albert Durer’s numerous 

associates.) 

Presented Lady Margaret, Charles V.’s sister, with a copy of all my copper-plates and wood engravings; gave her two drawings 
on parchment, and to her surgeon a sketch for his house. Master Adrian’s portrait with charcoal, and with red sketched Lord Wolf Von 
Roggendorff. 

On Monday after St. Michaels, 1520. 

Gave Thomas the Polander all my works, which were sent to Rome, to get Raffaellish things. The Polander had my likeness 
to take to Rome with him. 

On Monday after St. Michael’s I. went to Aix-la-Chapelle, and saw all that was remarkable there, and made a portrait of Master 
Hans Ebner twice, and George Schlautersbach, and also young Christopher Groland, and the host, Peter Von Enden. Played with 
Master Hans Ebner, and took 7 stivers. Drew in my own painting book Paul Topler and Martin Pfinzing. I drew twice with 
charcoal and black chalk the sister of the Kopfinger. 

On the 23rd Oct. I saw the crowning of King Charles [as Emperor]. On Friday before St. Simon and St. Jude, I left Aix-la-Chapelle, 
and came to Louvain; on Sunday after to Cologne, where I bought a treatise of Dom Martin Luther’s for five white - pence, also 
I gave one white-penny for the Condemnation of Luther, the pious man. At Brussels, Aix-la-Chapelle, and Cologne, I had free 
quarters and table with the three Nuremburg ambassadors, Leonard Groland, Hans Ebner, and Nicholas Haller. 

At Cologne I saw on the Sunday after All Saints’ Day, the Emperor Charles’s Princely Dance * and Banquet; sketched Nicholas 
Haller’s and Furwerger’s portraits with charcoal. On the Monday after Martinmass I rec’. from King Charles the appointment of 
Court Painter. ‘Wednesday thereafter I went on the Rhine from Cologne to Neyss, &c., and lastly to Nimeguen, where I stopped 
Sunday. Came to Boisleduc, where Master Arnold t held me free, and the goldsmith received me with much honor. 

On Thursday after the Blessed Virgin’s Ascension I came back to Antwerp, and lodged again with Jobst Planckfelt. The seven 
weeks that I was away, my wife and her maid lodged at the Seven Gold Crowns. The former had her purse cut on St. Martin’s 
Day, in the Church of the Blessed Virgin, and lost two guilders. 

On St. Barbara’s Eve, rode out to Berghem. John de Has,{ his wife, and his two daughters, I sketched with charcoal, and 
drew the maid and the old woman in my sketch-book. | 

On Our Lady’s Eve, journeyed to Zealand. Sebastian Imhoff lent me 5 guilders. We were obliged to come to anchor the first 
night. On Saturday I sketched a girl with her load. Came to Middleburg. Saw in the Abbey John de Mabuse’s§ large picture. 
It is better painted than drawn. 

At Armuyd, where I wished to disembark, with George Kotzler, two old women, the skipper, and a young lad, the sail split, and 
a strong storm wind drove the ship back to sea, but at last people helped us to land. : 

Came on Friday after St. Lucia back to Antwerp, to Jobst Planckfelt. Master Lazarus Von Ravenspurg presented me with 
natural curiosities. Bought a little sea cat (a monkey with a cat’s tail) for 4 gold guilders. Sketched the servant of the Factor of 

Portugal with charcoal, and gave it to him as a new year’s gift. 

Anno 1521. 

I have drawn the likeness of Gerard Pombelin, and the grand-daughter of the Procurator Sebastian. 

I have presented Master Dietrich, the glazier, with an Apocalypse. 

Painted a good Veronica likeness with oil colours, and presented it to the little Factor of Portugal. Senhor Francisco Roderigo, 
Scribano of Portugal, presented me with fine things. 

On Shrove Tuesday Eve, early, the Goldsmiths rec’. me with my wife at supper, and did me great honor. In the night, the 
old Baillie of the city rec’. me, and treated me richly: there were many rare masks there. 

Sketched with charcoal the portrait of Florez, organist of the Lady Margaret. 

On Monday night, taken to a grand banquet, which lasted two hours. I won two guilders at play of Bernhard Von Castell, whose 
likeness I drew in charcoal, and presented to him. There were costly masks there. 

Drew John, the good sculptor, born at Metz, and who learned in Italy, and Christopher Kolern, with black chalk. Gave 
John Dirk (Dietrich),| for Italian articles of art, three guilders, and for an ounce of fine ultra-marine, 12 ducats’ worth of works 

of art. Delivered of small Passions in wood, three guilders, and four quires of wood-cuts for 3 florins. 

* Durer made a drawing of this, engraved in wood. 
+ Arnold de Beer, a good painter of his time, received into the Academy at Antwerp in 1529. 1 A sculptor born at Metz. 
§ John de Mabuse, born at Maubeuge, contemporary of Lucas Von Leyden. He died in 1562. | The glass-painter. 

8 ALBERT DURER. 

Dined with Master Peter, Secretary, where Erasmus of Rotterdam dined too. Changed two angels (Rose nobles) for board. 

Presented Master Laurence Sterken, the Rent-master, with all my prints; also to Master Adrian, the Orator or Syndic of the 
City of Antwerp. 

Item, Saturday before, Judica Roderigo presented me with six cocoa nuts and two Portugal gold pieces, weighing each ten ducats. 
Gave 15 stivers for drink-money. 

Made for Tomasino a drawing for the painting of his house. Painted a St. Jerome for Roderigo, who gave a ducat to Susan the 
maid for drink-money. 

Drew a portrait with ruddle of the City Secretary of Antwerp. Bought 6 gold laces or fringes, and four pair of gloves, as a present for 
Caspar Nutzlein, Hannsinn Imhoff. Further, for the Pirkheimer, a great biret, and other fine things; so also for Caspar Nutzel, 
Jacob Nuiffel, Hanns Imhoff, and Jerome Holzschuher. 

The City Secretary of Antwerp, Adrian, presented me with a small picture, Lot and his two Daughters, by Master Joachim. * 

Sketched Factor Brandon’s clerk, with charcoal ; also his negress, and Luke of Dantzick. 

On Saturday, after Easter, went with Hanns Lieber of Ulm, and John Plos, a good painter, (born at Bruges,) to Bruges. These 
lodged me, and treated me sumptuously at night, when many persons were invited. Even so Marx Goldtschmiedt did another day. 
Saw in the Emperor’s "House, the Chapel painted by Rudiger, and paintings of a great old master. In St. James’s, costly paintings 
of Rudiger + and Hugh. Saw also good paintings of John,§ and others, in the churches, and in the Painters’ Chapel. (The painters) 
gave me a grand banquet in their study| at night, and made me gifts. James and Peter Mostaert, the gent". of the Council, 
presented me with twelve cans of wine, and the whole society of 60 persons conducted me home with lanthorns. 

Came to Ghent. The Deacon of the Painters and Chiefs received me bravely, and ate with me at night. On Wednesday, early, 
they carried me to the high St. John’s Tower. Saw the picture of St. John. It is exceeding rich, most understandingly painted, 
and particularly the Eve, Virgin, and God the Father, are very good. 

The Painters with their Deacon did not leave me, and dined with me, morning and night paying every thing. 

Went on Tuesday back again to Antwerp. 

In the third week from Easter, got an intermittent fever, with great swooning, want of appetite, and headache. And when I 
was formerly in Zealand, a wonderful sickness came over me, of which I never heard from any ome, and this sickness I have still. 
Gave from time to time to the doctor in all 3 guilders, and 20 stivers to the apothecary. Roderigo sent me many prepared sweetmeats 
in my sickness. 

Drew Master Joachim, the good landscape painter. 

Sent a bale of my things to Nuremburg, to Master John Imhoff the elder, through the carrier, John Staber. Paid from Antwerp 
to Nuremburg, per cwt., 1 florin 1 farthing. 

Presented Master Jacob the Surgeon with four florins, in works of art. Drew Thomas the Polander of Rome, with charcoal. 

Master Joachim invited me to his wedding on Sunday before Holy Cross week. He rec’. me with all honor. 

On Sunday after the Ascension, Master Dietrich, the glass painter, rec’. me at dinner, and many others, as Alexander Goldschmiedt, 
a very rich man. It was a costly repast. Drew Master Marx Goldschmiedt, of Bruges, portrait, with charcoal ; and Ambrose Hochstatter, 
with whom I dined. A Duke; then Jobst, my host; also the Rent-master, Laurence Sterken, painted assiduously in oil colours. He 
presented me with 20 florins, and Susan with 1 florin for drink-money. 

Item, on Friday after Pentecost, in 1521, came a tale to Antwerp that they had captured Martin Luther so traitorously, that 
the Emperor Charles’s Herald was given to him with an imperial safe-conduct, to which he had trusted ; but when the Herald brought 
him to Eisenach, in an unfriendly place, he said he dare be no more, and rode from him. Then there were 10 horse there, who 
carried away traitorously the pious man, enlightened with the Holy Ghost, who was a follower of the true Christian belief, and whether 
he still lives, or whether they have murdered him, I wit not: thus has he been treated for writing Christian truth, and because he 
punished the unchristian popedom, which strives so against Christ’s Redemption with his great trouble of human law, and also because 
that we are robbed of our blood and sweat, and the same are so scandalously treated by idling men; and to me it seems particulaily 
hard that they will let our God remain, probably under their false blind learning, which the men, whom they call the Fathers, have 
written and composed, whereby the rich Word is twisted to many ends falsely, or even held for nought. 

Had at Whitsuntide, Master Conrad, the Sculptor of Mechlin, to dinner. | 

I sketched for Tomasino three poniard handles. Sketched an English nobleman. Item, Master Yerhard, the Illuminator, has 
a daughter about 18 years old, named Susan, who has illuminated a leaf, a Saviour, for which I gave 1 florin. It is a great wonder 
that a woman’s painting sho”. make so much. 

Lost six stivers at play. Sketched John Goldschmiedt of Brussels, and his wife, with charcoal. Gave him the Veronica, which I 
painted in oil, and Adam and Eve, which Uranz made. He gave thereon a hyacinth and an agate, in which a Lucretia was engraved. 

I sketched young Jacob Rehlinger at Antwerp, with charcoal. 

Item, a week after Corpus Christi, I went to Mechlin with my wife to visit the Lady Margaret. I went to the inn of the Golden Head, 
by Master Henry the Painter.** The painters and sculptors treated me at my inn, and did me great honor by their company. 

I went to the house of Popenreuter, the gun-founder, where I saw many wonderful things. 

* Joachim Patenier. 1 Roger of Bruges, pupil of John Van Eyck, one of the first who painted in oil after Van Eyck. 

t Hugh Van der Goes, a pupil of Van Eyck. This painting was daubed over with the Ten Commandments in the time of the Civil War, but afterwards restored. 

§ John Van Eyck. : * || The Academy of Painting at Bruges. 

€ One of the chief works of John and Hubert Van Eyck, painted for Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy. There are three hundred and thirty heads in it, not two of 
which are alike. Here are portraits of Hubert and John Van Eyck, on the wings. . ** Supposed to be Henry de Bles, called by the Italians Civetta. 

ALBERT DURER. 9 

Was with the Lady Margaret, and saw my Emperor, and wished to pay my respects to him; it was not, however, done then. On 
Friday they shewed me all their fine things, among which I saw 40 small pictures in oil colours, so pretty, that I never saw the 
like of them. I saw also good things of John James Walch.* Asked Lady Margaret about Master Jacob’s sketch-book. She had, 
however, given it to her painter. Saw also a fine library. 

Master Hans Popenreuter invited me to dinner. I had Master Conrad twice and his wife once to dinner, and paid 27 stivers. Also 
1 sketched Stoffen Kemmerling and Master Conrad the Sculptor, and on Saturday went back from Mechlin to Antwerp. 

Master James (Cornelisz) presented me with his likeness sketched in charcoal. Dined twice with the Augustines. 

Master Lucas, who engraves in copper, invited me to dinner. He is a little man, and born at Leyden in Holland, but was at Antwerp. 

Sketched Bernard Stecher and his wife, and also Master Lucas Von Leyden. 

Sketched with black chalk Aert Braun { and his wife on two royal sheets, also Anthony Hannolt. 

I presented Master Aert, the Glass-painter, with a Life of Our Lady, and presented a whole print to Master John Francois, the 
Sculptor, and he gave my wife 6 glasses of rose-water, very richly made. 

Cornelius, Secretary of the Liége people, presented me the Babylonian Captivity, and thereupon I presented him with my three great 
books. Item, I presented two of my great books to Kcenig, the Glass-painter. Item, I gave for all Lucas’s prints, my works for 8 florins. 
| Item, for a half-dozen of Netherlands maps, I gave 7 stivers. 

I had the disadvantage in all my earnings, lodging, sales, and other transactions in the Netherlands, in all my things with high 
and low ; and particularly the Lady Margaret, for what I presented her and did for her, gave me nothing. 

A carrier engaged to take me to Cologne for 13 light guilders. 

Exchanged my Emperor for a white English cloth. 

Alexander Imhoff lent me 100 golden guilders on Our Lady’s Eve, for which I gave him my written obligation to pay him at Nuremburg. 

I gave Tomasino’s relation a Philip’s florin, and to his daughter a gold florin on leaving. Tomasino gave me a box full of the 
best tiriace. 

On Our Lady’s Day, when I wished to leave Antwerp, the King of Denmark§ sent to me that I sho’. come quickly to him, and 
take his likeness, which I did with charcoal. And I sketched also his servant Anthony, and I was invited to dine with the King, 
who placed me graciously opposite to him. 

On the day after Our Lady’s, travelled to Brussels in the vessel of the King of Denmark, to whom I presented the best pieces 
among my prints. : 

Item, I saw that the people at Antwerp wondered the King was such a manly fine fellow. I saw also how the Emperor met him 
at Brussels, and rec’. him honorably with great pomp. Thereupon I saw the fine costly banquet given to him the next day by the 
Emperor and the Lady Margaret. : : | 

Item, on the Sunday before St. Margaret’s, the King of Denmark gave a grand banquet to the Emperor, Lady Margaret, and 
Queen of Spain, and invited me, and I dined there too. I gave 12 stivers to the King’s footman, and I sketched the King in oil 

colours, who gave me 30 florins. On Friday, early in the morning, I started from Brussels. 

=i URER having travelled for a year, returned to Nuremburg, and applied himself, as before, 

assiduously to his art. This very curious Journal, at the risk of being considered tedious, is 

given to shew the extraordinary activity of his genius: it embraces an important period in 
Literature, Religion, and Art, contemporaneous with the Emperor Charles V. of Germany, and 
the Princes of the House of Spain, the then rulers in the Netherlands; and it further presents 
to our notice many eminent Artists of the time, together with the names and connections of 
Painters on Glass, of whom little is known in this country. 

The Editor has in his possession a fine copy of the posthumous folio volume of Albert Durer’s work, amended by 
himself, on Drawing and Painting (see Note, p. 3), and published subsequent to his death by his friend “ Bilibaldus 
Pirckeymherus, amicus integerrimus,” in which are given rudiments for the construction of Gothic and German 
alphabets, or black-letter characters, equally ingenious and simple. He shews them to be composed entirely of small 
squares, variously arranged and combined; and takes the letter / as the simple and fundamental form—inasmuch as 
it consists of only a single stem or stroke—out of which all the rest arise. Yet even this leading form is in itself a 

compound, it being, when reduced to its first elements, found to consist of five squares; viz., three placed one over 

the other for the body or stem, and two others turned diagonally, thus 

SE [=[-R 

; which when filled up show thus | 

This accounts at once for the great breadth of the letters, and their peculiar sharp angularity or diagonalism at the 
termination of the stems both above and below; and the 7 gives the proportions of all the other short-stemmed letters, that 
is, those which do not rise above the general line or descend below it with tails. n, u, v, m, w, vary hardly at all from the 

i, except in three of them having two stems, and the others three stems each, while the two single-stemmed letters, 

* Died about 1500, at Nuremburg. + James Cornelisz. : it The Glass-painter. ; '§ Arestian II. 

10 iy CE ALBERT DURER. 

r and ¢, are distinguished from the i; the former by an additional square ‘adjoining the top one, and placed like that, 

GO 
diagonally — thus, 

els FR 

1 ‘the other by the two upper squares being both pe donally 

The tard letters are formed merely by an additional number of squares, some of them occasionally overflapping 

others, and with triangles or half-squares to fill up intervals. Thus o is composed of two stems of four squares each, 

connected by two others turned diagonally, with finishing triangles 

Those who have little knowledge of the numerous works of this extraordinary artist, or who are not conversant 
with them, will have a difficulty in separating the genuine works from the numerous forgeries which were practised, 
even by eminent artists, on the great reputation of Albert Durer: wood and copper engravings have appeared with the 
monogram of fp\ which have no connection with the artist's hand and mind; and it is only those who have 
applied themselves to the study of the Master who are capable of detecting the imposition. Many compiled works 
have given lists, mixing the forgeries with the genuine subjects. 45 

Albert Durer was to the Germans what Leonardo da Vinci was to the Italians; dey both excelled, and Witradued 
~ perspective and breadth of light and shade, with the advantage on the side of Albert in the colouring of his pictures. 
The late Thomas Stothard, Ey 5» R.A, hasin a valuable MS. bequeathed to his son, written a note, which from such 
an artist has its value.* 

Contemporaneous with Raffaelle, Michael Angelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Adam Kraft, Lucas Van Leyden, Quintin 
Matsys, Erasmus, Luther, Melancthon, &ec., Durer employed himself as an artist generally: many of the copper or 
“iron plates, or wood, were not absolutely cut or engraved by his own hand, but executed after his designs and under 
his direction by the several artists living in Nuremburg, and which nevertheless bear the stamp of the master hand. 
Designs were made for wrought iron-work, with which that city abounded ; he also designed and was the founder 
of an improved school in the more correct perspective and architecture for sacred subjects, particularly for painted and 
stained glass. Germany and the Netherlands have abounded with his school. It may not be uninteresting, or venturing 
beyond truth, to refer to the existing examples of the eastern windows of the church of St. Jacques in Liége, facsimiles 
of which will be found in this work; the admirable painted windows also in the north aisle of the nave of the Cathedral 
of Cologne; and others which test the genius of an age of glass-painting decoration, coeval with Dietrich, Braun, 
Koenig, &e., and followed by the brothers Crabeth, and Van Linge, Dutchmen, who not only distinguished themselves in 
their own country but in this. 

Lord Arundel’s collection of manuscripts and drawings, bequeathed to the British Mision; contains an elaborate 
collection of Albert Durer’s original sketches and drawings of a more finished kind in pen and ink, in pencil, in chalk 
and crayon, and in colours, of a miscellaneous size and kind, which test the ramification of his employment. These 
drawings are presumed to have formed a part of the collection of Bilibald Pirkheymer, the friend of Albert. 

~ The late Richard Payne Knight, Esq., purchased at Brussels for a large sum, an admirable and extraordinary 
performance of art by Albert Durer, of the date of 1510, seven inches and a half in height by five inches and a half 
in width, sculptured i in high relief of stone. It represents a woman (St. Elizabeth) lying in bed, eight figures, some 
“furniture, and a dog. The subject is intended to illustrate the naming of St. John. The artist has also represented 
_ himself: in the figure of a young man. This treasure was also presented to the British Museum. 

The paintings of Albert Durer exist to some extent on the Continent, of which we shall hereafter treat; but in 
this country, Mrs. Jameson, a good authority, has written an account of an altar- -piece in three parts, in the Queen's 
Gallery at Buckingham Palace, which formerly belonged to Charles the First, and which is described in James the 
Second’s Catalogue as “Our Lady with Christ in her lap, with a coronet in her hand ; two Friars by them, and two 
i doors.” Mrs. J ameson also describes a portrait of a youth by him, a St. Jerome, said to be after Durer, at Hampton 

Court Palace. In the Duke of Sutherland’s s Gallery i is a small painting, on copper, of the Death of the Virgin. 

Some portion of the following notices have been derived from the useful work of Dr. Franz Kigler.+ 

# « Albert Durer’s works are well known by being multiplied by engraving from his own hand, and so multiplied more than by his paintings, though of the latter he produced 
many highly finished: amongst. the best of these, is the Adoration of the Magi, the Virgin Crowned with Roses by Angels, and Adam and Eve, as large as life, which are 
preserved in the cabinet of the Emperor of Prague. At Munich is a picture by Albert, representing the Battle of Alexander with Darius: the arrangements on the armour, the 
hair on the men’s heads, and their beards, most elaborately finished. At Venice is an Ecce Homo in the Grand Apartments, and the same subject is to be seen in the Grand 
Duke’s Palace at Florence, and an Adam and Eve, of superior colouring, as is also a St. Philip and a St. James, and his own portrait, an admirable performance, and finished 
in the most elaborate manner common to the Arts preceding and contemporary with the time, and out of which he emerged. Albert discovered and applied the new 
Art of Perspective, in the representation of his buildings, in his back- grounds, and by this means adding to his figures a greater air of freedom. As he advanced, he improved 
his composition by the addition of anatomical knowledge in his figures, and in the construction of the folds in his draperies; but neither his figures nor his draperies are well 
~ composed to give grace; they are representations too much of individuality, and ill chosen: his figures are too mean and ill chosen to be graceful. Albert had not been 
accustomed to view the sculpture of the Greeks, nor seen any examples of aerial perspective—an art which may be said to separate the old school from the modern :—yet with 
these defects, his compositions appear animated with an air of grandeur, elevation of thought, and sound judgment. His designs were held in esteem by the Italians. Raffaelle 
.is said to have admired his talents, and received instruction from viewing his prints. Vasari affirms that if Albert had been early acquainted with the Antique, then dispersed 
throughout all Italy, he would have surpassed the Italian artists, as he has done those of Germany.” 
+ ¢ Handbuch der Geschichte der Mahlerei in Deutschland, den Niederlander, Spanien, Frankreich, und England.’—Berlin, 1837. 

ALBERT DURER. 11 

aa MONG those who would criticise the works of Durer, it would be admitted, that an excessive 
tendency to the ideal, of which he could never divest himself, cramped the natural development 
of his artistic powers. This tendency, it is true, enabled him to achieve creations of singular and 
unexampled beauty, and to produce some works (which might better be termed poems) whose 
mysterious character has a strikingly fascinating charm. Nevertheless, if we consider the highest 
aim of art to be the representation of beauty, in which the hidden becomes transparent, and form 
and idea arin such works can rarely give full satisfaction. Durer’s drawing is full of life and character, but one 
is often struck by a certain singularity in the attitudes, especially in the naked figures, and the drapery is frequently 
of an extraordinary shape, according perhaps to some peculiar fashion of the period, but not adapted to display to 
advantage the human form. His fanciful drapery, which he, for the most part, arranges in large and handsome masses, 
exhibits still in the folds and angles the same singular character which distracts the eye, and mars the effect of the 
figures.* His colouring in his pictures has a peculiar splendour, and a beauty that eclipses other paintings: it is not 
an imitation of the broad and strong colours of nature, but a fanciful brilliancy which possesses indeed a charm that 
pleases the eye, though in some respects it detracts from the actual beauty of the human figure. 

The same effect is produced in another manner by the management of light and shade (as in Rembrandt’s pictures), 
and is only the more striking in Durer from the almost total absence of chiaro obscuro. There is a certain peculiarity 
also in the expression and form of his faces which does not represent any abstract model of beauty, nor always a faithful 
adherence to the forms of real life (which was the manner of his predecessors), and can only be accounted for by his 
tendency to singularity. That, notwithstanding these circumstances, the majority of his works produce a most favourable 
impression both upon the eye and the mind, is only a proof of the greatness of his talents as an artist. 

The examination of Durer’s works, which we shall now give nearly in chronological order in the arrangement of 
them, will afford some interesting insight into the artist's progress. It is however principally confined to his paintings, 
as far at least as they can be at present known, since it is only from them that the extent and durability of his artistic 
powers can be learned; although likewise from the vast number of his engravings, both in wood and copper, 
especially with reference to their dates, important information may be gathered. 

The collection of Herr Campe, at Nuremburg, possesses a Crucifixion containing several figures which has Durer’ 8 
signature, and which, if its genuineness could be otherwise established, would have to be considered one of the earliest of 
the artist's works. In every essential respect it is, however, in the style of the masters who flourished during the latter 
half of the fifteenth century, and exhibits, in the figures, the over-wrought fancy which characterises so many of the 
productions of the mystical school. No indication however is preserved in this picture of Durer’s later manner, nor even 
any resemblance to Wohlgemuth’s school : the drawing is feeble, with a thick body of paint. In the countenances of the 
majestic heads a certain type is recognised, met with in several other paintings of the same period, though the works of 
any master of note cannot be specified.} Durer’s monogram, as is plainly discernible, is painted over an older mark. We 
may therefore dismiss this dubious work without further notice. 

Another painting ascribed to Durer is found in the gallery degli Uffizj, at Florence. It is a portrait head of an old 
man, which is said to represent the artist’s father, and to bear his signature of the date 1490.§ It is an admirable head, 
full of life and character, but the picture is hung up so high, “that I could neither judge its artistic merits, nor plainly 
distinguish the date it bore. I cannot speak positively therefore as to its genuineness, and more especially as to the 
accuracy of the date assigned.” | ne | 

The oldest undoubted painting of Durer which is known is his own portrait of the year 1498, whith exists in the 
Collection of Portraits of Artists by themselves, in the gallery at Florence, already mentioned. The arrangement of the 
picture is well known. It is a half-length figure, standing at a window, with the hands resting on the balcony. The artist 
appears in a rich fancy dress—a broadly slashed tunic with elegant folds, a white jacket 
ornamented with black stripes, a pointed cap cf a similar colour, and a brown mantle 
thrown over the left shoulder; his hair descends in ringlets carefully curled. The drawing 

ie 

is somewhat hard, but the painting has a peculiar breadth and softness, especially in the 
lights (which seldom occurs later), and the flesh-tints are lightly shaded with a sort of 

bronze colour. The expression of the artist’s countenance is honest and open, not without 

a species of naive complacency with his personal appearance. The same vanity is rather 
unreservedly expressed in the letters which Durer wrote to Pirckheymer eight years later.q 

* See Note, p. 10. + Handbuch, von Dr. F. Kiigler. 

1 In Heller's work, (‘ Das Leben und die Werke Albrecht Diirer’s,’) a resemblance is pointed out in this picture to the style of Israel of Mechlin, which there is certainly, 
but in an inferior degree. An outline of it is contained in the ¢Aufsess’ Anzeiger fiir Kiinde des Deutschen Mittealters,” 1832. 

§ Heller. | Handbuch, von Dr. F. Kiigler. 

«| This portrait of Durer is most probably the same which was presented to the King of England by the city of Nuremburg, and which adorned the Royal Gallery of 
Charles I. (‘Passavant Kiinstreise,” 263.) A portrait of the artist’s father formed the companion subject to this painting. Could this have been the portrait head above 
described as now existing in the Uffizj at Florence? There appears strong reason to suppose that it is, reduced in size, and the date consequently either cut away or effaced.— 
Handbuch, von Dr. F. Kiigler. 

12 "ALBERT DURER. 

In the same year (1498) appeared his wood engravings on the subject of the Revelations, which we may perhaps 
regard (as is the case with other similar works) as results of his labours during the years immediately preceding. In 
these compositions the artist manifests already powers of a high and peculiar excellence, and the subject affords proper 
scope for the exercise of his imagination, which grasps, with a truly poetical energy, the mystical themes that are 
represented, and embodies, in living forms, that speak, ‘vast and wonderful ideas. Each exhibits a strength in the 
delineation, and a magnificence of conception, which are the more interesting, because the shapeless and teeming visions 
‘of the Sacred Writing might so easily have confused the artist’s ideas, as indeed has frequently happened to those who 
have tried their hand upon the same subject. What power is shewn, for instance, in the second engraving, where the 
Ancient of Days, with fire-darting eyes, holding in his right hand the seven stars, and in his mouth a two-edged sword, is 
seated on his throne amidst the seven mysterious candlesticks, and before him St. John, prostrate in adoration. And how, 
in the fourth of the series, the very rush is felt of those four terrific riders down upon the earth, with the bow, the sword, 
the scales, and the weapons of death! How vivid is the representation, in the eighth print, of the four angels of the 
Euphrates hewing down with their swords the mighty and proud ones of the earth, and of the troop of horsemen upon 
lion-headed coursers, with fire issuing from their mouths! But it would lead one too far from the subject to go into each 

of the details of these remarkable compositions.* 

peep yg HE first and most important of Durer’s works which belong to the ‘year 1500 is the artist’s own 

portrait in the gallery at Munich, a full-face figure, with the hand placed upon the fur border 
round his dress. There is a great difference between this and the portrait in the Florence 
gallery, although Durer was only two years older when it was painted; which leads us to conclude 
that the interval was marked by an important crisis in the artist’s intellectual development. In 
the earlier portrait he appears a good-natured youth, free from care; but in the other he has 
suddenly ripened into manhood. His features have become marked with an expression of character that is completely 
formed: the forehead and eye indicate a grave and deep-thinking mind. Here also is perceived already that peculiar 
manner which contributes so much to form the characteristic of Durer’s later works, in particular the clear azure tints in 
the flesh shadows, which give a kind of glassy transparency to this picture. The design is excellent, though somewhat 
severe. The hair falling in rich profusion upon the shoulders is finely painted; the hand placed upon the breast, and 
holding the fur border of the dress, is drawn with stiffness, and, compared with the face, appears to have too thick 
a body of colour. | 

During a recent visit to the Low Countries, the Editor accidentally met with a fine impression of an original 
engraving by Hendrick Hondius, a celebrated artist, who probably took his subject from the picture just mentioned, 
but it is of a maturer age than the painting: a facsimile is given as a vignette in the second page. 

A second painting, belonging to the same year, is found in the gallery at Schleissheim. It is the portrait of a young 
man with a decided expression, and capitally painted. It is the same which is termed, though incorrectly, the portrait of 
Durer’s brother John, and came originally from the cabinet of Praun, at Nuremburg. 

A third painting, in the same gallery, is of less importance. It is an altar-piece representing a dead Christ with 
mourners around. The picture is well grouped, but vulgar in character, and the body is drily painted. The only pleasing 
figure is that of the Blessed Virgin, which has a certain maternal dignity in its expression. 

In the Belvedere Gallery, at Vienna, there is a ¢ Madonna suckling the infant Jesus,” of the year 1503. Scarcely more 
than the heads of the two figures are contained in it. It is delicately painted, and with much elegance, but without any 
thing interesting in the expression : it is merely the portrait of a city dame. 

The copper engraving of the same year’s date, representing a coat of arms and Death’s head, is a far more interesting 
work. The two shield-bearers—the laughing female, with her hair twisted into a knot, and waving a crown, and the 
savage, who has his arm round her, and is turning towards her, for the purpose, as it would seem, of embracing—are 
charming, like the creations of fiction. 

The copper engraving also of 1504, representing Adam and Eve, is to be remembered among Durer’s best 
productions. 

The same date is assigned to a series of drawings representing the ¢ Passion,” which exists in the collection of the 
Archduke Charles of Austria, and of which lithograph copies have been published. They are very spirited designs, and 
shew great fertility in the artist, who applied them variously in later works. One of them, ‘the Taking Down from 
the Cross,’ is both so magnificent in design and admirable in arrangement, that few artists could have treated the same 
subject better. The date of the drawing is not very distinct, and possibly 1524 should be read instead of 1504. 

In 1506, when Durer visited the north of Italy, he wrote several letters to his friend Bilibald Pirckheymer, which 
afford some interesting details. It was there that he executed for the German Society a painting which acquired for 

* Dr. Kigler. 

oy 

ALBERT DURER. | 13 

him a high reputation, and which, by the splendour of its colouring, silenced the remarks of his jealous competitors, who 
allowed his skill as an engraver, but asserted that he could not handle a brush. The subject of this painting was, 
according to the usually received opinion, the ¢ Martyrdom of St. Bartholomew,” and is said to have adorned the rich 
gallery of the Emperor Rudolph II. at the commencement of the seventeenth century, but has now been lost sight 
of. This opinion, however, appears to be unfounded, and the painting in question is probably the same as the one 
bearing the date of 1506 (which is now in the Convent of the Premonstratenses of Strahow), representing the 
Madonna crowned by Angels, and surrounded by the Emperor, the Pope, and several ecclesiastical and secular 
princes. * 

The picture now in the Barberini Palace, painted also undoubtedly at Venice, and in the same year (1506), 
representing Christ and the Scribes or Doctors of the Law, is another proof of his readiness as an artist. According to 
an inscription in his own hand-writing it was finished in five days. Whatever, nevertheless, may be its value as a 
specimen of rapid painting, it is deficient in the higher qualities of art.$ The heads have not much character, are 
fancifully imagined, and sombre in colour. For the rest, the influence of Venetian art is not particularly to be traced in 
Albert Durer’s works. | 

There is a painting of his, bearing the date of 1507, in the gallery of the Belvedere at Vienna. It is the portrait 
of a remarkably handsome young man; florid in complexion, true to nature, and delicately painted. It ranks 
amongst the best esteemed of Albert Durer’s portraits: unfortunately, it has not been so well preserved as could be 
desired. 

This series of paintings is closed by another finished in the same year by Albert Durer, and which subsequently passed 

~ from the possession of the Town Council of Nuremburg to the Emperor Rudolph’s gallery. It represents Adam and Eve 

in Paradise. An old epigram says of these figures— 

e When the angel beheld them, wond’ring cried he from Eden— 

Had T so beautiful seen you, never had ye been banish’d.” 

This picture has also disappeared. 
The picture of a similar subject, in the Provincial Gallery at Mayence, is a later and retouched copy.} 

With these works commenced Albert Durer’s golden period, in which he produced a number of remarkable works in 
rapid succession. The first of these of which we shall speak is a picture in the Belvedere Gallery, dated 1508: it was 
painted for Duke Frederic of Saxony, and subsequently adorned the gallery of the Emperor ‘Rudolph II. It represents 
the ¢ Martyrdom of the Ten Thousand.” Albert Durer and his friend Pirckheymer stand, clothed in dark drapery, 
contemplating the scene, in the centre of the picture. Durer has his cloak thrown over his shoulder after the Italian 
fashion, and stands in a fixed attitude. His hands are folded, and he holds a small flag, upon which are the words— 
‘Iste faciebat anno domini 1508, Albertus Durer Alemanus.” There are several separate groups of figures, exhibiting 
various kinds of torture, but something is yet wanting to the unity of effect of the whole. The back-ground, representing | 

the naked Christians dragged up the rocks, from whence they are to be hurled, is admirable. The painting is throughout 

delicate and miniature-like, the colouring brilliant, and an extraordinary finish is apparent in the accessories. The 
drawing of the detail is also very good; the conception, however, is destitute of any peculiar dignity, power, or individual 
character. The agony of the tortured is only occasionally successfully pourtrayed; as, for example, in the last but one of 
the naked figures who are dragged up the mountain, and who is tottering half-dead, fatigued and exhausted from a deep 
wound in his head. A landscape, admirably imagined, of wood and rock forms the back-ground.§ 

A repetition of this picture is to be found in the Schleissheim Gallery; undoubtedly an old copy. 

Durer painted in the following year the celebrated ¢ Assumption of the Virgin, for Jacob Heller at Frankfort. He 
applied himself to this work with the most unremitting diligence, finishing the centre portion without any assistance : 
here he also represented himself leaning on a tablet, inscribed with his name and the date of the year. There are 
numerous testimonies of old date to prove the excellence of this work. It was brought to Munich in the commencement 
of the seventeenth century, and there destroyed at the conflagration of the Castle. | 

* «1 am indebted to the valuable communication of Lieutenant Becker, of Munster, who afforded me the following information on this subject, enabling me to correct the 
usually received but erroneous opinion. Hirt had already pointed out, in his Review of Albert Durer’s Life, contained in the Jahrbuch fiir wissenschaftliche Kritik,’ 1829, 
571, that the above picture was undoubtedly painted for the Church of St. Bartholomew at Venice, but instead of representing the Martyrdom of this Saint, its subject consisted - 
of a Madonna crowned by Angels, as it is described by several Italian writers on Art. Van Mander, i. 59 (Augs. 1764), also mentions a Madonna. 

“ Hirt supposes he had discovered the said picture in the gallery at Vienna. This, however, appears to be an error: I have more reason to believe that the painting is now 
at Prague, and in the Convent of the Premonstratenses. Although I have never seen the picture, I employed a friend to collect and to transmit to me the following information 
concerning it, which, according to my instructions, he gathered in that city on the spot. Its size is from 6 to 7 feet in breadth, and 4 in height. The Blessed Virgin and Child 
are seated in the centre, crowned by two Angels. In front of them are kneeling the Emperor Maximilian, the Pope, and several ecclesiastical and secular princes, receiving 
crowns of roses from the Virgin, the Infant Saviour, and the choir of Angels. Durer and Pirckheymer are standing in the back-ground to the right. The former holds a tablet 

with the inscription,—Exegit quinquemestri spatio Albertus Durer Germanus MDVI (monogram). An Angel playing a lute is seated at the Virgin's feet. A small engraving 

from this picture, drawn by Friese, and engraved by Battmann, was published at Prague, 1835.” —Handbuch, von Dr. F. Kiigler. 

+ Dr. P. Kiigler. 1 Heller. § Dr. F. Kigler. 
D 

14 ALBERT DURER. 

An ¢ Adoration of the Kings,” inscribed with Durer’s monogram and the date (1509), is in the Tribune of the Uffizj at 
Florence. This picture is also most highly finished, and painted with bright glazed colours. It is not wanting in truthful 
expression, but is rather feeble in conception, and some only of the heads are ideal in character.* 

The conceptions of the prolific mind of our great Artist induced much and various employment for Glass-painters 
and other artists, particularly for religious purposes. A window is about to be restored in the Chapel of St. Peter’s 
College, Cambridge, after an engraving by Albert Durer, (on wood, 1509-10,) representing the Washing of the Disciples’ 
Feet, or rather of St. Peter’s, by our Lord.+ The window will consist, when restored, of three lights, of which two only 
now remain, the central one having been probably destroyed by the Commissioners of the Long Parliament. The 
engraving in question has lately been reproduced and published. From certain points of correspondence there seems 
to be no doubt that the cartoon for the window was designed directly from that engraving, as the manner of treating 
the subject is precisely the same,—the only difference being in the details of architecture, and in the position of 
subordinate figures. One point is very remarkable : in Albert Durer’s engraving, the foot of our Lord, who is represented 
as kneeling before St. Peter, is cut off by the edge of the engraving; and in the surviving part of the window a foot 
appears in the very position it would occupy if intended to complete that figure. The date of the window itself is about 
1632. The draperies are much richer and fuller than in the engraving. It is curious, and confirms the supposition of 
this window having been taken from the engraving, that the east window in the same chapel, which is generally said to be 
after Rubens’ famous picture of the Crucifixion, is, strictly speaking, after that engraving from it which (as Sir J. Reynolds 
mentions in his Tour in Holland) was superintended by Rubens himself, and differed in certain points from the picture,— 
a fact which is ascertained by a comparison. 

Two admirable specimens of wood-cuts (1510) shew proofs of Durer’s powers as an artist: the first representing a 
penitent kneeling before an altar, and inflicting the discipline on his bare shoulders. The second represents an. armed 
warrior struck by death. ; 

Durer executed in 1511 the extensive series of wood engravings of the ¢ Great and Lesser Passion of Christ,” (so 
called from their size,) and the Life of the Virgin.’ According to the dates inscribed under some of the plates, they 
appear to have been executed in 1510 and 1511. These works afford the most perfect specimens of Albert Durer’s 
artistic powers of any which have come down to us: the distinguishing marks of a lively sense of beauty, nobility, and 
simple dignity, prevail throughout; and the elements of a peculiar and fanciful conception are far less apparent. 

Great Passion.—The frontispiece represents the suffering Saviour seated naked upon a stone, bearing the crown of 
thorns: one of the soldiers presents a reed to him. The figure of Christ is highly dignified, and of beautiful roundness 
of form: the soldier wears the costume of the middle ages; his form is also beautifully developed, and his countenance 
expressive of insulting scorn and eagerness. Christ wrings his hands, turning his head, full of majesty and mercy, 
towards the spectator. This frontispiece has also a symbolical signification, referring not so much to that moment of 
ignominious outrage as to the enduring injury inflicted on the Redeemer by the sins of man; for which reason, the 
wounds appear imprinted on the hands and feet in this stage of the Passion. | 

egy HESE compositions represent several of the incidents connected with our Saviour’s Passion. The 

subject of his ¢ Apprehension’ is a composition singular in its treatment, in which the brutality of the 
soldiery is particularly dwelt upon, while the minutie of costume, &c., is a curious medley of that 
of the sixteenth century. The figure of Christ forms the centre of the group, and is being haled 
along by ropes by two grotesque and brutal looking figures in front; behind a soldier is busied 
in binding his hands, whilst by his side is Judas with the wages of his treason in his hand, in the 
act of saluting his Master with a kiss. This point of the story properly belongs to a period somewhat antecedent, but is 
doubtless here introduced to render the illustration more complete, and to distinguish the different characters with 
accuracy. In the fore-ground Peter is in the act of cutting off Malchus’ ear: the latter is prostrate on the ground, 
and endeavouring to defend himself with a club. | 

The next subject in order is the ¢ Flagellation.”—Our Saviour is bound to a column in the midst of a hall, surrounded 
by soldiers and rabble grotesquely habited, and with countenances of savage brutality. These, armed with rods and 
scourges, are offering him every indignity, while the Chief Priests are looking on. One of these, at the right-hand 

corner of the picture, is a portly figure attired in oriental costume, with turban and long beard—an idea, without doubt, 

* «J am not acquainted with any authentic history of this picture. Hirt asserts in his ¢ Observations on Art,” that it is the same painting executed by Durer for Frederic 
the Wise. According to other accounts (such as Heller), it passed from its proper place at Wittenberg to the gallery of the Emperor Rudolph II. at Prague—thence to Vienna, 
where it is not now to be found. Its date is said to have been 1504. The number inscribed on the painting at Florence, if it be the same picture, might, with little alteration, 
be read 1504, the figure 9 resembling a 4.”’—Handbuch, von Dr. F. Kiigler. : 

1 ‘Jesus Washing the Feet of his Disciples.’— He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments ; and took a towel, and girded himself. After that he poureth water into 
a basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.—So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and 
was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you? Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Master, 
have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as I have done to you.” John xiii.—9th Plate in Albert 
Durer’s “ Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ,’ edited by Henry Cole ; an admirable little volume. 

ALBERT DURER. o 2onE Eads 

suggested by the Turks, at that time the terror of Christendom. In a corner of the fore-ground lies the crown of thorns, 
and a dog similar to what we now know as a terrier of the Isle of Skye breed is introduced: this is by no means unusual 
in Durer’s designs, and may be observed in the carving preserved in the British Museum, as well as in the next subject— 

¢ Christ Bearing the Cross’—In this there is more appropriate sentiment—the figure of the Saviour oppressed by 
the weight of the cross is in the centre of the picture, turning towards a female kneeling and holding the kerchief which 
is said to have received the true impression of his visage. A group of figures follow behind, consisting of the Virgin, 
- Mary Magdalene, St. John, soldiers, &ec.: figures on horseback, in the costume of the Turks of the time, are leading the 
procession, whilst a soldier, habited and armed as the Flemish. infantry of the sixteenth century, is holding a rope bound 
about the Saviour. The accessories entirely belong to the country of the Artist, and the back-ground gives the same 
peculiarities. As a composition it exhibits great power, in spite of its eccentricities. The figure of Christ possesses great 
feeling, and it may be interesting to compare it with Raffaelle’s on the same subject. 

¢ Christ’s Descent into Hell, —one of the noblest of his subjects, the relation of which belongs to the apocryphal Gospel 
of Nicodemus. The treatment of the subject is here very curious, and displays the wildest imagination in the delineations 
of the figures of the demons, but at the same time, a noble majesty in the aspect of the Saviour. Christ kneeling on one 
knee, holding in his left hand the crown and banner, bends downwards toward an arched dungeon, out of which he 
is about to lead the imprisoned souls; whilst a head of a serpent is stealthily peeping, with expression of anger: above, 
“from an aperture are seen monstrous forms; one with the head and snout of a boar, and a horn in the middle of his head, 
is threatening with a dart—still higher, a demon of a singularly grotesque combination, somewhat resembling the fabulous 
harpy of the ancients, is blowing a horn. The introduction of a demon with a horn in this subject is a very ancient 
convention, and may be observed for many centuries in the treatment of this story. Behind the figure of Christ are Adam 
and Eve. The former holds the cross in his left hand, and in his right the fatal apple: he is represented as a bearded and 
venerable figure. Eve is immediately behind him, and patriarchs surround them, and children are introduced, probably 
more for the sake of composition than for any ancient convention. The gates of hell lie broken upon the ground. 

¢ The Lamentation over the Dead Body of Christ’ follows, and as a work of art must take the precedence of all the 
other designs of its kind. The composition is exceedingly fine and grand, although in its details the peculiarities of the 
master are apparent. The body of Christ is extended on the ground in a natural posture, his right hand being taken by 
his virgin mother, who on her knees bends over the body with expressive grief. St. Joseph supports the head, whilst 
St. John, the beloved disciple, throws up his hands in an agony of despair. A standing figure of a female with clasped 
hands, perhaps St. Mary Magdalene, forms the centre and apex to the pyramidal arrangement of the composition; and a 
beautiful female figure kneeling on the right completes the subject. In the back-ground is Mount Calvary with the two 
thieves, and still further in the distance the city of Jerusalem. This composition is certainly worthy to be ranked beside 
the best conceived of the great Italian masters. The greatest simplicity and perfection prevail in the grouping of the 
figures, in the varied expression of the separate forms, the high and attractive grace of the lines and attitudes. We easily 
perceive from the study of such works, the reason of the just esteem with which, at a later period, the Italians regarded 
Albert Durer’s compositions, as well as the advantage to be derived by making Italian copies from them. 

‘The Resurrection of Christ’ comes next in order. The Saviour is represented in the conventional manner of the 
church, rising from the tomb, his right hand in attitude of benediction, his left holding the cross and banner; about the 
figure is a mass of drapery composed in a very grand manner. On each side recline the sleeping soldiers, variously and 
grotesquely armed; one with bow and arrows, and coat of mail worn under his vest, resembles the equipment of the 
Sclavonic tribes. It must be observed, that all the soldiers do not sleep; one, indeed, is in the act of waking another, 
being conscious of the miracle taking place. This is quite in accordance with the religious views of the time, and marks 
a sort of epoch in the history of Christian art. Before the thirteenth century the soldiers are always represented sleeping 
profoundly, the faith of the times requiring no witnesses to insist upon their belief. Subsequently, however, it became 
more common to exhibit, as in the design under notice, some of the soldiers at least awake or awaking. The choir of 
Angels above are the singular conventionalities that originated in the declining state of Pointed Architecture, though 
rarely to be met with, and which form so common a feature in the decoration of the revived Italian style, as well as 
in the later paintings of the sixteenth century.* 

Lesser Passion.—Amongst the most beautiful compositions of this series is, the ¢ Parting of Christ from his Mother,’ 
distinguished for its beautiful and imposing drapery. : 

‘The Washing the Feet’—an admirable and simple arrangement of numerous figures within a small space: the 
principal group in the fore-ground is fine and full of feeling. + 

“Christ's Prayer in the Garden’—of the greatest simplicity, united at the same time to the highest dignity of 
expression, beauty, and the profoundest feeling. 

¢ Christ appearing to his Mother after his Resurrection,’ and as ‘the Gardener to Mary Magdalene:’ both these 
compositions, and especially the latter, possess a peculiar grace and tranquil beauty. 

* 1 have the good fortune to possess very fine impressions of the preceding six wood engravings.—Enp. 1 See also page 14, second paragraph. 

16 ALBERT DURER. 

The Life of the Virgin.—If the above described work be distinguished by a grand and tragic character, that of which 
we are now about to speak, displays, on the other hand, the elements of grace and tenderness. The gentle domestic cares 
and amiable intercourse of life are presented to our view, and the master has invested them with an interest to which few 
can offer a parallel. It indeed appears almost superfluous to enter into the detail of subjects so universally known, but 
we may cursorily examine some of the most beautiful of these compositions. , 

‘The Golden Gate’—Joachim: and: Anne embracing after a painful: separation, in, the prospect-of a joyful future. 
Joachim is represented as a mild and: stately old man: Anne, full of feminine grace and. resignation. The servants and 
attendants of Joachim, who are come to welcome their lord, converse, in the back-ground, over the event. 

“The Birth of the Virgin’—a design replete with the most attractive charm. It represents an apartment, such as 
would be used on the occasion, in which are several groups of women and maidens, bearing an interesting similarity to 
Ghirlandajo’s and others’ treatment of this subject according to the Florentine life and manners. 

‘The Circumcision.’—The composition .of this subject, “frequently so’ unpleasing, and treated with even a degree 
of absurdity by first-rate masters, appears here as a most graceful and complete. representation of a national custom. Rich 
as it ds in figures, it is ‘yet not too crowded: each takes an interest in what:is. going on,and the whole is distributed into 
several ‘simple and intelligible groups. 3 yw ee cant Fa 

+ “The Flight into Egypt.’ —This, in contrast with. the a composition, presents a’ space occupied in the most 
skilful manner by a few figures :« thesreposé of «a ‘dark wood richly laden with fruit, through which the. Holy Family are 
journeying, enhances in a peculiar manner the charm of this interesting subject. . : 

“ The-Residence of the Holy Family in Egypt’-—represents a court with a dwdlvg arieid amidst the ruins of a 
decayed:palace. The Blessed Virgin is seated with a :spindle:in her hand at-the side of the cradle: two beautiful adoring 
angels are by her. Joseph is busied at his handicraft, surrounded by a group of child-angels, who joyously assist him 
at his labours. © The most graceful repose and ‘placid.cheerfulness, reign, throughout this.picture, .= 

“ The' Death of the Virgin.’ <-Thé. perfect: beauty ofsthe arrangement and the simple’ distribution of the principal 
groups, the«dignified forms, ‘together ‘withthe. expression ‘of the'mdst profound. feeling inthe. exercise. of a sacred rite, 
assigns to this composition a very: high giade ‘among Albert Durér’s entire works. . This subject has been frequently 
‘painted: by Duret’s-followers:’ there: are’several spictures of the same’ kind in’ various galleries bearing. his name. 

- Other: wood-cuts of Durer’s are also ated; 1511; pany the rons ctipdeen of the sstioly Trinity, and several 
Holy Families. ro Bont 0 pal po 3 | 

The ‘extensive series of small copper prints, forming the third representation of the ‘ Passion,’ also appeared between 
1507+and 1513:« They weré mostly executed«n 1512. #Aniongst these, several of thé most valuable have been preserved ; 
and-they*are the more interesting ‘as specimens: by the master’s ‘own-hand of. hig*delicate: power: of finish and execution. 

* To this«fruitful period belongs” also one: of ‘Durer’s ‘mostreelebratednpictures=—tlieirepreséntation of ‘the Trinity 
surrounded by the Saihtsvand Blessed Spirits’ It-was painted for a churéh.at-Nuremburg, from whence it was afterwards 
temoved, together with several others: of this master’s works, to Prague :«itsis now in-the-Belvedere Gallery at Vienna. 
Above, in the centre of the picture; is seen God the Father, holding in his arms:the Redeemer, and with them the Dove of 
the Holy Sj iit: angels spread out the sacerdotal mantle of God,"and others hover berieath,"holding the instruments of 
Christ's Passion. = Lower-down in the picture to the left, is represented a choir of female saints with the Blessed Virgin at 
their head, and to the right dther saints* with St.-Jolm the: Baptist. - Beyond these is kneeling a heavenly host, of all 
nations ‘and tribes, covering the whole: surface of the painting. “A Beautiful ‘landscaperadorns ‘the lowest portion of the 

picture, and in one corner isthe Artist himself; leasingly attired in an elegant furred «mantle, with a tablet at his feet, on 

which are the words—¢Albertus Diirer- Noricus anno a Virginis partu 1511.” The: execution of this work is masterly, 
of the:most extraordinary delicacy of finish, but exhibiting at the ‘same time the'same azure tints already noticed. The 
drapery is grandly designed ; ‘the’ figures of the Trinity are “dignified, sand even not: devoid of beauty. There is still 
throughout this: picture something wanting to an elevated ‘conception of the subject,-and excepting the head of David, 
few others can be said to be handsome.” A mannerism and type. of common life, bordering ‘on caricature, prevail in the 
greater mumber, even in the: representation of the Saints. It is evident enough, that Durer’s efforts, which were 
consciously and designedly turned to the finish of detail, were ‘not, at thi§ period, directed to elevate human form above 
its defects and casual deformities, but that he atfached importance to individuality, and confined -himself within its narrow 
limits; that he sought by some startling effect (for what else was his phantasmagoric play of colour and’ similar artifices) 
to ennoble it, instead of raising its dignity by instrinsic beauty of form. It can; however; be affirmed with certainty, that 
he himself attached a more particular value to the paintings in which he introduced his own portrait.* 

The gallery of the Belvedere at Vienna also possesses a picture of 1512: its subject is ‘the Virgin holding the Naked 
Infant.” The Virgin wears a veil and a blue robe. The expression of her countenance is the usual one given by Albert 
Durer, but it has also a tender and maidenly character: the child is beautiful, and his countenance particularly fine. 

This picture is most carefully painted, but, unfortunately, with greyish tints in the flesh. 

* Handbuch, von Dr. F. Kiigler. 

ALBERT DURER. 17 

f 

The ¢ Vision of St. Gregory.”—This master-piece of art, executed in 1511, has been generally supposed to be engraved 
on wood; but on a close examination of an impression purchased by the Editor in Germany, it is evidently executed on 
copper. This opinion has been confirmed by Mr. John Le Keux, and a facsimile is here introduced as an Mostration 
of Durer’s powers in design and composition at the period of their maturity. In the expression of devotional sentiment, 
as well as in its broad and simple effect, this specimen stands among the most select of his numerous productions. The 
Monk, known 
afterwards as 
Pope Gregory 
the First, com- 
monly designa- 
ted the Great, 
when perform- 
ing Mass, and" 
while absorbed 
in the fervour 
of devout feel- 
ing, beholds the 
SAVIOUR sur- 
rounded by the 
instruments of 
his sufferings, 
and who bends 
down upon him 
a look of divine 
tenderness ; — 
while in the 
back-ground of 
the scene are 
priests and at- 
tendants bear- 
ing emblems of 
his future ele- 
vation to the 
highest offices 
of the Holy 
Church. The 
figure of the 
“blessed Saviour 
is perhaps un- 
rivalled in its 
expression of 
extreme humi- 
liation and de- 
pression—a re- 
sult to which 
every part of 
the figure is in 
the most har- 
monious com- 
bination. The 
bent neck and 

drooping head, the eyelid falling over the ball of sight, the dropping under lip, as well as the sinking body and tottering 
knees, are altogether in the finest character of ideal art. The colossal proportions of the figure, in regard to the tomb, 
cross, and, in fact, all the rest of the picture, serve to invest it with an air of superhuman grandeur. The group of 
officiating priests is also full of fine expression, to which the disposition of the vestments, from the simple and grand style 

| of their folds, greatly contributes. It would seem that, like our great Poet, with whom he exhibits much of a kindred 

18 ALBERT DURER. 

spirit, Durer makes the presence of his supernatural visitor evident only to the party for whom his communication is 
intended, and to typify the real presence. The other personages, absorbed in their functions, serve the purpose of contrast 
to the excited emotion of the surprised Monk, while the effect is as if a flash of supernatural radiance lighted up the scene. 
No one can contemplate this sublime subject without the highest excitation of feeling. The Angels introduced as 
sympathizing in the scene of suffering and humiliation may, perhaps, be indicative of the two orders— Seraph, who 
‘love most, and Cherub, who are highest in understanding and knowledge. 

This plate also was copied in Italy by Marc Antonio, the friend of Raffaelle; and recently an impression of the copy 
was sold in the effects of the late Duke of ‘Buckingham for several pounds. | : 

“We may now examine the series of Durer’s paintings of which we have no assured dates; the greater number of 
which belong probably to the middle period of the Artist’s life. 

‘The Virgin and Child,” in the gallery of the Uflizj at Florence.—This FAS is certainly very unfavourably placed 
for close inspection ; one may, however, distinguish a sweet, youthful, and maidenly countenance in the Mother of God. 

‘The Virgin, St. Anne, and the Infant,” in the Schleissheim Gallery: the conception not very profound ; the execution, 
however, good. 

¢ Mater Dolorosa,” at the same place: the Virgin stands with folded arms; a beautiful, simple, and dignified figure. 

‘ Ecce Homo,” in St. Maurice’s Chapel at Nuremburg,—a half figure: the hands are wrung in agony on the breast; it 
is throughout feebly designed, the hair carefully and delicately painted. There is no dignity in either the forms of the 
body or head. 

An Altar-Piece with Compartments in the Schleissheim Gallery: it was formerly a Seti made by the Baumgartner 
family to the church of St. Catherine at Nuremburg, and in the commencement of the seventeenth century becoming the 
property of the Elector Maximilian, was brought to Munich. The centre subject represents the Birth of Christ: the 
Infant surrounded by cherubs, with Joseph and Mary kneeling at his side. This design is not without merit, although it 
does not evince a profound and exalted feeling. The side-paintings contain the portraits of the donors under the figures 
of St. George and Eustachius—two knights armed with iron breast-plates and red escutcheons. One of these figures is 
extremely interesting, but somewhat fanciful even in attitude. His countenance is expressive of great character, marked, 
decided, and composed. The spare figure of the man whose horse stands by his side resembles the Knight in the 
engraving of ‘the Knight, Death, and the Devil,” from which source also the valley and the castle in the back-ground are 
copied. The figure on the other compartment is a heavier and less poetical character. They are both lightly painted. 

‘The Body of Christ mourned over by his Disciples,” after its taking down from the cross, in the chapel of St. Maurice 
at Nuremburg.—It was originally placed in the church of St. Sebald at Nuremburg, by the Holzschuher family, whence it 
passed into the possession of the Peller family, and subsequently into the Boisserie Gallery. It is a composition rich in 
figures, and displaying admirable arrangement, especially in the dead figure, which, notwithstanding a certain stiffness, 
has noble proportions. The same peculiar brightness of colour prevails also in this painting, but in several places the 
flesh has been retouched. The heads are still wanting in depth of expression. A rich and hilly landscape forms the 
back- ground. A repetition of the picture, which is in the place the former originally occupied, namely, the church of 
St. Sebald, is undoubtedly an old, but not a bad copy; the colouring, however, especially of the dead figure of Christ, 
is flat. 

The head and bust of the Emperor Charlemagne, as well as that of the Emperor Sigismund, in the Castle of 
Nuremburg, are two striking and dignified portraits; specimens of Albert Durer’s powerful drawing and light touch in 
painting. They have unfortunately sustained great injury, and have been restored in several places. 

¢ Hercules Shooting the Harpies.’ —This figure is admirably, correctly, and powerfully drawn: it is unfortunately only 
painted in distemper, and is much injured. The portrait of a Savant in the Schleissheim Gallery, painted in distemper, 

is excellent. 

gmap [LL EBRATED and more interesting than many of Durer’s paintings are the following engravings. 
| That of ‘the Knight, Death, and the Devil,’ is dated 1513, and it is not an exaggeration to affirm 
that this print is the most remarkable production of the German ideal style. Imagination depicts, 
at the onset, the groundwork of this wonderful poem without further illusion or symbol, but it is 
at the same time subdued and mastered by a superior power—the power of human will, and is 
thus represented in its proper degree of influence. We behold a Knight journeying alone and 
on horseback along a gloomy valley: two demons of the most fearful description which the human breast can imagine, 
embodiments of those conceptions in presence of which the stoutest hearts shudder, rise up before him: Death on 
the pale horse, and the affrighting image of the Devil. But the Knight, looking boldly towards his adversaries, with 
a countenance deeply furrowed by time, and expressive of a decided and unalterable resolution, the fruit of suffering 
and trial, casts his eyes unflinchingly over the path open before him, and suffers the phantoms of diseased imagination 
to sink within their powerless confines. It is possible, (and the S accompanying the date appears to favour this 

ALBERT DURER. 19 

supposition,) that Durer has introduced Francis von Silkengen’s portrait in the person of the Knight; but this 
circumstance does not interfere with the general signification of the subject. It is only an honourable distinction for this 
noble Knight, and not, as it has been asserted, an allusion to the stubbornness in evil with which he was reproached. * 
This plate receives from others the title of the ‘Christian Knight,” but unappropriately, as it contains nothing indicative of 
religious signification. The masterly finish of this plate is, for the rest, well known. 

Albert Durer also executed in 1514 several other excellent engravings. We shall first consider ‘Melancholy,’ a 
purely allegorical representation, displaying, although less forcibly than in the former plate, an imagination which throws 
a charm over the insignificance of the subject. Nothing can more perfectly express the fruitless brooding and ceaseless 
dwelling upon perplexing thought than the powerful female figure seated in the fore-ground, and the numerous articles 
spread around her serve to heighten the impression of an ill-directed energy. 

An engraving of about the same date offers a complete contrast to the previous plate : it represents St. Jerome in his 
study. We observe in an apartment crowded with articles a manly form, also buried in reflection: an exquisite fancy 
reigns throughout the whole arrangement, whilst a flow of cheerfulness and grace chases away the dreams and idle 
creations of imagination ; and we view, under its most interesting aspect, real life in its simplicity and privacy. Gerard 
Dow, who has painted the most pleasing fancy pieces of the Dutch school, has produced nothing so attractive as this plate, 
which displays, even in the most subordinate parts, the qualities of dignity and loveliness. 

From 1514 to 1520, Durer designed several engravings of Madonnas and Apostles, which in the details exhibit a 
dignified and enlarged composition. | 

His most considerable wood engraving is dated 1515,—the Triumphal Arch of the Emperor Maximilian,” a strangely 
heaped work, presenting an endless variety of historical representation, portraits, and ornaments. In a production of 
this character we cannot hope to meet with a proper and artistic unity of effect, and the less so, as the architecture itself, 
which connects the entire subject, and distributes it into certain principal portions, is cramped by the historical subjects 
introduced: it is not, however, deficient in suitable proportion. The architecture consists of quaint and fanciful forms, 
which are combined in a peculiarly ingenious manner. This is especially the case with regard to the two principal 
columns, which, harmonizing with the rest, are yet purposely placed so as not to have to bear the weight of the cornice 
which goes all round, but support in reality only detached niches in the wall, with statues in them. The ornaments are 
finished with great beauty of detail, broadly and spiritedly drawn. The numerous series of figures or busts, representing 
~ the Emperor’s predecessors from Julius Caesar to the Merovingian Clovis, as well as the several members of his family, 
are remarkable on account of the extraordinary variety of characteristic heads which the Artist has drawn from his 
invention, as he could not, of course, have been assisted by existing likenesses. The historical subjects represent the 
glorious epochs of the Emperor’s life; they display in their arrangement rather the skill of the imperial historian than that 
of the artist to whom their execution was confided. The favourable occasions for artistic purposes occur but seldom in 
these representations; nevertheless they appear occasionally, and with most pleasing effect, especially i in the handling of 
few figures. It is certainly a work which evinces in a striking manner the versatility of Durer’s genius. 

Durer also finished in 1515 the celebrated marginal designs for the Emperor Maximilian’s Prayer-book, wiih | 1s now 
in the Court Library at Munich. The imagination of the Artist exhibits the greatest freedom in these spirited pen and 
ink drawings, which are sometimes of a grave and elevated character; at others, gracefully sportive, and again, at others, 
displaying the most varied humour. The object here is not so much to treat a given subject of deep import, but rather to 
fill up with graceful ornament an allotted space; and if the Artist in his arabesques has not always had sufficient regard to 
the significance of his text, the play of his fancy never deviates into the absurd and exaggerated, nor does his pleasantry 
degenerate into coarseness (as it frequently occurs in similar works). The whole produces so agreeable an impression on 
the spectator, that criticism is disarmed. | 

Two paintings of Albert Durer in the gallery degli Uffizj at Florence bear the date 1516. They represent the heads 
of the Apostles Philip and James. They were presented to the Duke of Tuscany by the Emperor Ferdinand III., about 
the middle of the seventeenth century. They are both painted in distemper, powerfully designed, and expressive of 
energy and character. 

The portrait of Durer’s Master, Wohlgemuth, an extremely sharp, bony and severe countenance, is in the Schleissheim 
Gallery, and bears also the same date of 1516.} 

The fanciful composition of a column upon which a Satyr is seated, contained in four wood-cuts, is of 1517. 

The exquisite wood engraving representing the Blessed Virgin as Queen of Heaven, surrounded by numerous Angels, 
is the first that may be mentioned as belonging to 1518. 

A naked figure of Lucretia, size of life, in the Schleissheim Gallery, is spiritless and feeble ; also of 1518. 

The excellent painting in Count Fries’s gallery at Vienna, representing the Death of the Virgin, and containing in the 
Virgin the portrait of Mary of Burgundy, first wife of Maximilian, and in the surrounding figures portraits of the 

* Dr. F. Kugler. 1 See portrait inserted as a vignette in the biographical sketch of Wohlgemuth. 

20 er. 2 ALBERT DURER. 

itipison, his son, and a considerable number of his iitind contemporaries, is much cstedmnd for force of 
~ colouring and beauty of drawing. 

In 1519, Durer executed a portrait (a head and bust) of the Emperor Sninilin, wid in his left hand the 
Emperor's symbol, a. pomegranate. It is now in the Belvedere Gallery at Vienna, but is not remarkable as a work of art. 

There is a remarkable picture by Albert Durer in the same gallery, which differs strikingly in character from his 
other works: it bears an undoubted similarity in the execution and conception to the productions of the contemporary 
Flemish masters (Schorel more especially), and was probably executed during Durer’s journey, and under the 
influence of the novel circumstances surrounding him. The subject of this painting is the Virgin, a half-figure, in a 
fur mantle, holding on her lap the naked Infant, who is ornamented with an amber necklace. A cut lemon is on the 
green table before her. There is an expression of great mildness and sweetness in the Virgin's head, but the child is not 
particularly beautiful. 

Durer executed in 1522 the series of wood engravings representing Maximilian’s Triumphal Car. Their allegory is 
rather of a mediocre character: the rich ornaments also of the car are extremely quaint, and without beauty. 
Nevertheless, some of the allegorical female figures, in spite of the difficulty of the subject and of the ungraceful and 
closely-folded drapery, have a beauty of conception worthy of Raffaclle’s natural grace. This circumstance is deserving of 
notice, as relating to the change in Durer’s ideas in his latter period. 

1523 is the date of the two paintings of the head and bust of Joseph and Joachim —Simon and® Lazarus: they were 
formerly in the Boisserie Gallery, and originally, the side portions of the decorations of an altar, the centre subjects of 
which are now at Cologne. They are beautifully coloured, and dignified in expression, without any essential variation 
from Durer’s earlier works. : 

¢ A Holy Trinity,” * the property of a private individual at Ausburg, has been much extolled for its grand and noble 
treatment, and the excellence of its execution. 

Amongst the paintings of the Bettendorf Collection at Aix-la-Chapelle, Heller notices the representation of ‘Our 
Saviour taking leave of his Mother;’ a picture rich in figures, with the rather dubious date of 1525. ¢ Durer appears 
(such are Heller's words) to have partly used a drawing by Raffaelle, subsequently engraved by Marc Antonio, in the 
composition of this masterly work.” I have not myself seen this picture; but if it be genuine, it is at least an additional 
proof that Durer sought, at a later period, to strike into another path. 

Durer executed in 1520 those celebrated engravings of portraits of his renowned contemporaries, Cardinal Albert 
of Brandenburg, the Elector Frederic the Wise, Pirckheymer, Melancthon, and Erasmus of Rotterdam: they are 
distinguished by a soul and life breathing conception, as well as by the most extraordinary finish of execution. 

= ELIGIOUS dissension had already begun to prevail, and had more particularly discovered itself 
lat Nuremburg, so that in an external point of view, works of art upon religious subjects might 
become objects of indifference; and moreover, the Artist who warmly favoured the new doctrines, 
may have had his attention drawn to objects of real life more than to those which had before 
engaged his pencil. At all events, we are indebted to these circumstances for a series of most 

excellent works of art, which, without a similar inducement, would not, perhaps, have been 
originated. 

In 1526, Durer produced two portraits, painted in oil, of considerable merit. The Belvedere Gallery possesses one 
representing John Kleeberger, an inhabitant of Nuremburg. The character of the head is manly, the countenance pale, 
with large and remarkably beautiful dark eyes, but the nose is rather small. The shadows are unfortunately of a dark 
and grey tone. | 

The other portrait belongs to the Holzschulior family at Nuremburg, and represents one of their ancestors, Jerome 
Holzschuher, painted at the age of 57. The expression of this head is highly dignified and striking, the eyes sparkling; 
the whole character indicating even youthful energy, notwithstanding the grey hairs. This portrait is principally executed 
in Durer’s light transparent manner, but is admirably finished : it displays the most perfect design, united to the lightest 
handling of colour. It is also the most beautiful of all the Artist’s portraits, shewing how well he could catch nature in 
its most pleasing aspect, and how powerfully he could depict it. Durer produced also in this same year (1526) his 
grandest work, now in the Munich Gallery,—the two companion pictures of the full-length figures of the Apostles St. 
John and St. Peter— St. Mark and St. Paul. These were his last paintings of any importance, and they were presented 
(as it is authentically proved) by Durer himself to the Town Council of his native city,—both as a memorial of his 
artistic powers, and as a significant and permanent warning in those troubled times. They became, in the seventeenth 
century, the property of the Elector Maximilian I. of Bavaria, and the original inscriptions annexed to them by Albert 

Durer, and which were calculated to alarm the scruples of a catholic prince, were stripped off, and attached to the copies 

* Heller. : + Dr. FP. Kugler. 

ALBERT DURER. 21 

(said to be excellent) which were to indemnify his native citizens for the loss of the originals. The copies are now in 
the Castle at Nuremburg.* 

These works are the fruits of the profound reflection which at that time engrossed the Artist's mind, and the 
subjects are executed with the most persuasive power and excellence: they are the first consummate works of art 
which Protestantism produced. In the same manner as the inscriptions drawn from the Epistles and Gospels of those 
Apostles contain impressive warnings against a deviation from the Word of God, and a giving ear to false prophets, so 
also do the figures stand forth as the faithful and undaunted defenders of the Holy Scriptures which they hold in their 
hands. 

An old tradition, which dates from Durer’s time, asserts that the Four Temperaments are personified in these 
paintings. This interpretation, which the paintings even confirm, and which at first appears to arise from an arbitrary 
construction, leads to a further carrying out of this idea, and to a more striking individualizing of the figures: it 
exemplifies how necessary it becomes for every species of mind to search the Scriptures. 

In the first of these paintings we observe the inwardly directed activity of the mind—the commencement of the 
guardianship of Scripture—its proper study. St. John, standing in the fore-ground, holds the open book in his hand; 
the impress of deep and inquiring thought is marked on his elevated brow and countenance ;—he represents the 
Melancholy Temperament which plunges into profound inquiry. St. Peter, behind him, bends over the book, earnestly 
intent on its pages,—a grey-headed man, contemplative and serene in expression, and a type of the Phlegmatic 
Temperament which gives shape to thought by consideration. The second painting indicates the direction towards 
external life—the relation which the conviction that has been acquired bears to real life. Mark, in the back-ground, is 
the man of Sanguine Temperament: he looks with an open countenance around, and seems to speak with vivacity and 
vehemence, and to animate his hearers to seek the same profit which he himself has drawn from Holy Writ. Paul, in the 
fore-ground, holds in his hands the sacred volume and a sword —looks over his shoulder with a glance of wrath and 
severity—ready to defend the Divine Word, and to annihilate its profaners and contemners with the sword of God’s 
power. He represents the Choleric Temperament. But in how masterly a manner is the whole achieved! What dignity 
and elevation in the heads, with such various and characteristic expression! What simplicity and majesty in the lines 
of the drapery,—what sublime statue-like composure in the attitudes! No insignificant angular folds in the drapery; no 
capriciously fanciful or arbitrarily imagined feature in the countenance, or affectation even in the disposition of the hair 
falling in ringlets. The colouring too is perfect, life-like, and true to nature. Scarce a trace is discerned of that varied 
glazing, or sharpness of drawing, but the handling has throughout an admirable breadth and freedom. In truth, it was 
only proper that after the completion of this work the Artist should close his labours as well as his life, for he had attained 
the utmost limit of art, and, in this work, stands as an equal by the side of the first artists to whom the world has given 
. birth.} 

It is not certain that Durer produced any work of excellence later than that which has just been mentioned. His 
portrait, engraved on wood, of the year 1527, presents a severe and serious countenance,§ such as his years and the 
burthen of cares were calculated to form ;—no longer adorned with the graceful vanity of his flowing locks, which, as 
may be gathered both from his portraits and the jests current against him, he was wont to place to great account. || y 

It is said, to the discredit of Marc Antonio, ¥ that he pirated, in Venice, Durer’s wood engraving of the Lesser Passion, 
published at Nuremburg in 1510; and that an impression of this plate, executed on copper, having fallen into Durer’s 
hands, he availed himself of his imperial privileges, and caused his name to be erased from Antonio's copy. 

Durer is known to have practised, with great success, the art of modelling, and also to have applied himself to carving, 
and to the execution of figures in wood and stone, in a more masterly style than any of his predecessors; nor did he fail 
to exhibit great skill in cutting iron, which is sufficiently proved by certain medallions containing two portraits of Luther, 
and two similar portraits of his friend and patron, Pirckheymer. 

By his varied and successful practice, Durer acquired such singular reputation, that not only was he considered 
by those conversant in such matters as one of the greatest artists of his age, but even Princes regarded him with especial 
favour,—his personal appearance and natural endowments being at the same time extremely prepossessing. The Emperor 
Maximilian I., in particular, testified his regard for Durer by many tokens of favour, and confided to him the execution of 

various beautiful works of art, for which he always received a princely reward, in addition to his yearly salary. His 

* Neudorffer (Nachrichten von den vornehmsten Kiinstlern Niirnberg’s, Niirnberg’s, 1828.) + Dr. P. Kiigler. 

1 Among the drawings in the collection of the Archduke Charles of Austria, is found a study for the drapery of the figure of St. Paul, dated as early as 1523. This, as well 
as three other magnificently draped figures of the same year (also in the collection), is remarkably fine in the execution. We thus perceive that Durer, immediately after his 
Flemish journey, endeavoured to divest himself of his capricious manner in the folds of his drapery, and to acquire a bold, dignified, and more natural style. 

§ Durer’s portrait has been often engraved: those by Hollar and Kilian are the most prized. He also several times engraved his own portrait, the first dated 1509.— 
The one spiritedly engraved by H. Hondius, given in facsimile in page 2, deserves some praise. 

| «It will doubtless occasion surprise that many paintings contained in the galleries enumerated, and which bear Albert Durer’ s name, are omitted. But the names with 
which paintings are thus christened are not always to be admitted. The great picture of the Carrying of the Cross,” for instance, in the Munich Gallery, No. 907, shews 
nothing of Durer’s style either in the execution or expression : it is an insipid modern picture, and one or two folds in the drapery alone bear some resemblance to Durer’s 
manner. The pictures bearing Durer’s name in the Italian galleries are in general doubtful.” —XKiigler. 

q ‘Le Peintre Graveur,” par Bartsch, xiv. p. 401. 

F 

22 MICHAEL WOHLGEMUTH. 

talents were equally appreciated by Maximilian’s successor, Charles V.; by Ferdinand, King of Hungary and Bohemia; by 
King Henry VIII. of England, and by several Electors and Princes in Germany. 

For these reasons, the works of Durer, and especially his paintings and engravings, were held in great estimation, 
which may still be perceived in the extreme care with which they are preserved in the galleries and cabinets of the 
nobility, &c.: his sketches and wood-cuts are always eagerly sought after, and bought at considerable prices, all amateurs 
of art feeling it an honour to possess the works of this incomparable man. : 

The propagation and still further extension of Durer’s art was mainly owing to the fact, that his school afterwards 
produced several eminent Artists,* who diffused the style which he had originated. 

The latter part of Durer’s life was devoted to the production of a comprehensive work to which he particularly applied 
himself; but before he had completed the publication,f he was attacked by a wasting disease, which. was speedily followed 
by his death on the 6th of April, A.D. 1528 ;—a premature death, for he had not quite attained his fifty-seventh year. His 
loss occasioned great grief to his patrons and friends, particularly Bilibaldus Pirckheymer, and to all lovers of art. He 
was buried with great pomp, and a brass plate bearing the following short inscription marks his grave: “ Mem. Alb. 
Dur. Quicquid Alberti Dureri mortale fuit, sub hoc conditur tumulo, emigravit VIII. Id. Aprilis MDXXVIII. |5].” 

Tue names of Wohlgemuth and Pirckheymer are so intimately connected with the subject of the preceding memoir, 
that the Editor is induced to annex brief sketches of their lives, with a correct and striking portrait of each; the former 

having been for some time the master of Albert Durer, and the latter his friend and patron during many years. 

MICHAEL WOHLGEMUTH.—This painter, who was born at Nuremburg in 1434, 
was by his contemporaries esteemed a skilful artist. In consequence of the reputation he 
enjoyed, the elder Durer intrusted to him the education of his son Albert; a circumstance 
which has made Wohlgemuth more extensively known.} 

He was one of the first who laboured to bring wood engraving to perfection in 
Germany; a satisfactory proof of which may be found in the Chronicles of Nuremburg,’ 
already mentioned,§ a work containing several views of towns, and portraits of celebrated 

Cc Michael Wolgemuth. persons. These engravings he is said to have executed in conjunction with another 
bef: die Narnls Rignffeler artist, named William Pleydenwurff, displaying greater skill than any wood-cuts which 
had yet appeared. 

The paintings of Wohlgemuth have become very scarce or entirely lost in the lapse of time; and his portrait only, 
painted by Albert Durer in honour of his master, still preserved in the (Praunisth) Museum at Nuremburg, so celebrated 
for its antiquities, remains a pleasing memorial of this artist. Wohlgemuth died in 1519, in the 85th year of his age. 

BILIBALD PIRCKHEYMER.—This distinguished mathematician and 
scholar was born at Aichstadt, December 5th, 1470. His father was an 
eminent lawyer, and held the office of Councillor to the Bishop of Aichstadt, 
and the Duke of Bavaria. Even in early childhood, Pirckheymer gave promise 
of future eminence, and while yet young was instructed in the Latin language, 
the mathematics, and various other branches of knowledge, in which his progress 
was so rapid as to qualify him in 1488 to enter the University. He therefore 
repaired in that year to Padua, where he applied himself diligently to the study 
of the Greek language under a professor of that University, who was a native of 

Greece. He cultivated, with equal ardour, mathematics, history, &c. His leisure 

hours were devoted to music, for the acquisition of which Italy afforded him 

Bilifnldes 

i or irckhe imeer. great facilities. 

ef: dre Neirnb: Math en . . . . . 

7 goin Having thus successfully completed his course of studies, Pirckheymer 
returned in 1495 to Germany, and repaired to Nuremburg, whither he found his 

* Among his pupils was John Schorel, a Hollander, who afterwards was appointed Painter and Architect to Pope Adrian VI. + See note, page 3, No. 15. 

1 Page 2. § Ibid. 

BILIBALD PIRCKHEYMER. 23 

father had retired. After spending some time in this city, he determined to take his degree as Doctor of Laws, and to 
seek preferment at the Imperial Court. In compliance, however, with his father’s entreaties, he abandoned this design, 
and contracted a matrimonial alliance with Crescentia Rieterin, a lady possessed of many excellent qualities, and took up 
his residence at Nuremburg. 

Pirckheymer’s great learning and talents were now first fully known and appreciated, and caused him to be appointed, 
in 1496, a member of the Council of Nuremburg. Being no less distinguished for eloquence than erudition, he was 
intrusted with several embassies to different Courts. In 1499, the Emperor Maximilian I., being engaged in a war with 
the Swiss, deputed Pirckheymer to conduct the auxiliary troops sent by the Princes of the Empire to the aid of the 
Emperor. Maximilian, witnessing his admirable care and management of his charge, received him most graciously. In 
subsequent commissions undertaken by the command of this Sovereign, Pirckheymer acquitted himself so well as to rise 
still higher in his favour, and was finally rewarded by being called to assist at the Imperial Council, and was admitted to 
the honour of a correspondence on several subsequent occasions with the Emperor. 

His mission being thus happily accomplished, Pirckheymer returned to Nuremburg, to the no small joy of his friends, 
and retired altogether from public affairs into private life. Soon afterwards he requested permission to relinquish his 
dignity of Councillor, and, although with some difficulty, on account of the estimation in which his talents were held, 
succeeded in obtaining his wish in 1501. 

After three years spent in the enjoyment of this retirement, the unexpected death of his beloved wife Crescentia, left 
him in solitude and plunged in grief.* To alleviate his sorrow, he adopted the advice of his friends, and, entering once 
more into public life as Councillor, in 1505, transacted affairs as before. 

His leisure hours he continued nevertheless to devote to study, cultivating assiduously, at the same time, the society of 
the learned men of his day. Amongst the artists who frequented his house was Albert Durer, with whom he contracted a 
most intimate friendship, and to whom, on account of his virtues as well as his great and versatile talents, and for the love 
which Pirckheymer himself bore to art and painting, he was most especially attached. He also carried on an extensive 
correspondence with learned and distinguished friends in Spain, Italy, and other countries. 

This devotion to literature was not peculiar to Pirckheymer, but displayed itself also in the various members of his 
family, who, as well as himself, were skilled in letters. His two sisters, both successively Abbesses of the Convent of 
St. Clara, as well as his daughters, were pupils of the celebrated Conrad Celtes. To these ladies Celtes dedicated a Latin 
poem. Pirckheymer paid them a similar compliment on the publication of some works which he gave to the press; and 
several letters written by two distinguished Councillors of Nuremburg, Oelhafen and Scheurl, were dedicated to 
Pirckheymer’s sisters, the elder of whom was herself the author of various epistles in Latin. 

His assiduous correspondence enabled Pirckheymer to gratify his love of learning, and to obtain from Italy, especially 
from the press of Aldus Manutius, copies, principally in the Greek tongue, of scarce and valuable works: through the 
same means he acquired, by costly purchase, several Latin and Greek manuscripts, either rare or unknown in Germany. 

He was instrumental in presenting to the world the choicest works of the ancient Grecian philosophers and 
historians, as well as portions of the writings of the Greek fathers, which in succession he caused to be printed with 
translations. The Latin works of Saint Fulgentius were also first published through his exertions. 

Pirckheymer was not less eager in the acquisition of mathematical works and manuscripts, with which he enriched his 
collection. Nor was his attention wholly absorbed in editing the works of other authors: he evinced his own erudition 
by various historical, political, and philological publications, and moreover undertook a translation into German of some 
of the Greek authors, in which his efforts appear to have been successful. 

Pirckheymer omitted no occasion of testifying his devotion to the Emperor Maximilian, as he evinced by his description 
of the Triumphal Arch erected at Nuremburg in honour of this Emperor, as well as by his design of a Triumphal Car, 
surrounded by the Virtues personified; which, by gracious permission of the Emperor, was engraved on copper and also 
finely painted by Albert Durer, surrounded with various happily chosen emblems by Pirckheymer, and set up for a 
memorial in the Council Chamber at Nuremburg; and finally, by a prefixed dedication to an historical work of Lucian. 
These proofs of zealous attachment recommended him, upon the death of Maximilian, to the notice of his successor, 
Charles V., who also appointed him a member of his Council. 

Pirckheymer’s prosperous career was not, however, entirely without alloy: his health began to fail in 1520, and he 
suffered so severely from an attack of gout, as to be compelled to ride even the short distance to the Council from his own 
residence. The continuance of his indisposition induced him once more to retire from the Council in 1523; he however 
continued to aid it with his advice given at his own house till his death. 

The leisure which he thus again enjoyed he devoted to mathematics, and published a new version in Latin of the 

* Pirckheymer, wishing to leave a testimony of his attachment to his beloved partner, caused a water-coloured drawing (still preserved at Nuremburg) to be executed by 
Albert Durer, representing Crescentia on her death-bed, attended by her weeping husband and relatives, bewailing her approaching dissolution. Beneath, in gilt letters, was 

placed the following inscription: ‘“Mulieri incomparabili, conjugique carissimse, Crescentiee, meest. Bilibaldus Pirckheimer, maritus, quem nunquam nisi morte sua turbavit, 
Monum. posuit : Migravit ex serumnis in Domino 16. Kal. Junii, Anno salutis nostree MDIIIL.” 

24 ADAM KRAFFT. 

1st Book of Ptolemy's Geography, with notes. Encouraged by the favourable reception of this work, another Geography 
was compiled by him, containing a brief and accurate description of Germany, which was prepared for the press a short 
time previously to his decease. 

He died at Nuremburg in the 60th year of his age, on the 22nd of December, 1530, leaving behind him a reputation 
for virtue, and carrying with him to the grave the deep regret not only of the learned, but of mankind in general, and the 
more as he was the last of his family. An inscription engraved on metal, less a tribute than a debt due to his merit, 
was placed over his remains. 

ADAM KRAFFT was an Architect and Sculptor: among 
the evidences of his great skill is that afforded by the cele- 
brated building adjoining St. Mary’s Church, opposite the 
market-place at Nuremburg, the Frauen-Saal, as it was formerly 
called, which he built about the year 1462, in the style of 
architecture which prevailed at that period; but his skill in 

sculpture, and in forming all kinds of figures out of stone, may 
be more especially observed in the remarkable workmanship 
which he has shewn in what is commonly called a Sacrament- 
house or Tabernacle (to which we have applied the name of 
Theo-theca), belonging to the choir of the Church of St. 
Laurence, and on which he was employed from 1495 to 1500. 
In the portraits are those of himself and two assistants, sup- 
porting the fabric: these, together with the whole subject, as 
well in conception as in elaborate execution, still excite 
universal admiration. A representation is here given, executed 
by England’s best engraver of Gothic Architecture, Mr. John 
Le Keux, who has kindly bestowed his attention to a subject 
which cannot fail to be generally interesting. The entire 
work is 64 feet in height. 

Adam Krafft was practically acquainted with a mode of 

producing extraordinary effects by softening hard stones, and 
casting them in moulds, which were made of lime and pounded 
stones, and then burnt. In this process, in order to give 
durability to his works, he provided all the curves and pro- 
jecting figures with interior bars of iron. 

Other works of art, executed by this great Sculptor, are still 
to be seen in the interior and on the exterior of the Church 
of St. Sebald, behind the altar of which, in the representation 
of the Last Supper, he has most happily introduced, in the 
figures of the Apostles, among others, the portraits of many 
persons who were at that time members of the Council; and 
on the exterior of this church he executed magnificently the 
Burial of Christ. Many specimens of his art are to be found 

in various other churches, and in several private residences. 

He also left a considerable work, which Martin Kitzel, a man 
of high rank, caused to be executed at his own expense: the 

subject, which is the leading away of Christ to be crucified, 

and what must have taken place at that time, namely, the ¢ Seven 
Falls of Christ,” extends from a house which stands inside the 
‘town, adjoining the Park-keeper’s gate, on which a man in 
armour is to be seen, as far as St. John’s churchyard, outside 
the gate. The Seven Falls he has artistically represented in basso-relievo in stone, with inscriptions underneath, and 
arranged them at distances in conformity with those at Jerusalem, between Pilate’s house and Calvary. The Crucifixion 

stands in the above-mentioned churchyard, and the Burial of Christ in the adjoining chapel. 

PAINTED AND STAINED GLASS. 25 

Both tradition and the opinion of able judges further attribute to this Master the Sacramenthaiischen, 50 feet high, in 
the Church of St. Martin at Schwobach,—a work inferior only to the one at Nuremburg. The three following Tabernacles 
of the same kind are also conjectured to have been executed by him; viz., one at Kalchreuth, 30 feet high; a second at 
Katzwang, 21 feet high; and a third at Fiirth. 

At length, on account of his old age, being no longer able to practise his art, Krafft retired to the Hospital at 
Schwobach, two miles from Nuremburg, where he ended his days in 1507. 

Painted aw Stated Slags. 

UMEROUS examples of periods rich in subject, in design, and in colours, displaying objects of 

varied interest, but more especially devoted to ecclesiastical purposes, are given in this work. 
The art of Painting on Glass is known to have been practised in the sixth century, and to have 
been applied in the enrichment of the Basilica of St. Sophia and similar. edifices in Constantinople ; 
and in the reign of Charlemagne some progress was made in enriching and beautifying glass with 

colours. In the tenth century it was much admired and patronized,” and advanced rapidly to 
excellence. Henry the Second of England strongly patronized and encouraged this art, particularly in his religious and 
costly temple of Grammont; and about this period the old form of Saxon and Norman arched and loopholed windows 
gave way to those of a more expanded shape. 3 | 

The original windows of ecclesiastical buildings, as well as military towers, and the residences of the feudal barons, 
were of the genuine Saxon roundheaded form, mixed with the Norman loophole: these evidently shew a struggle between 
the desire for the admission of light and the exclusion of cold. A greater breadth was afterwards introduced ; first, a 
single light, and then expanded into two or more divisions, included in the sweep of one‘common arch. ; Soon after this 
change followed the introduction of coloured glass, then painting on glass; and this suggested. a still further enlargement 
in width and height, both for the full display of the vivid colours employed, and to ‘give sufficient space for historical 
arrangement. eu wl 

The Monks of the Abbey of Rivaulx, in the North of England, were the first in that A of the ni to discover a 
taste for enriching their convent with fine paintings in glass, brought from France about the year 1140. The cathedral of 
Canterbury having suffered by fire about the year 1067,+ it was partially restored by Lanfranc, Abbot of Caen: he was 
appointed Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of England by William the Conqueror. Lanfranc was an architect as 
well as a prelate: he caused the greater part of the building to be taken down, and began-its reconstruction, and “in the 
space of seven years he raised this new church from the very foundations, and rendered it: nearly perfect.” } William of 
Malmsbury observes— Nothing similar was to be found in England equal to the brilliancy of ‘the painted windows, 
the splendour of the marble pavement, or the pictured roof, which attracted the eyes of all beholders.”. 

It was during the twelfth century that the imaginative power of the artist was exerted to the utmost. A species of 
sympathy existed between this divine art and the religion it strove to elevate—that it. venerated, and adored. Hence it 
was that enthusiastic endeavours were made to produce works of the highest order on the leading subjects of the creed of 
the Fathers of the Church. It was now that the thick darkness which had overspread Europe was gradually passing 
away, and the grand movement of the Crusades gave a new impulse to civilization and to the arts.. Painting on glass took 
the lead, and connected as it was with religious worship, it soon gained possession of the minds of men, and attained an 
almost unexampled sway over their affections. Towards the end of this century appears to have been the epoch when the 
art displayed its greatest power, and when it was united to a degree of strength and solidity. § | 

Chartres is very rich in painted glass; it far exceeds many other cathedrals. The colours are deep without losing 
their brilliancy, and the light is stronger than at Rheims, although the. windows of _the aisles, with only one or two 
exceptions, are painted, as well as those of the clerestory. 

Taylor states, in his work on the Fine Arts of Great Britain, that another beautiful feature of the ecclesiastical style 
of architecture began to attract much attention during the latter part of Henry’s reign. Stained glass had been used 
on a very small scale in some of the principal churches about the middle’ of the ninth century; but. its progress was very 
slow in England : the earliest specimens of any note in this art now remaining are in the aisles of the. choir at Eee 
Cathedral. 

In the year 1248 we find a rescript directed to the Sheriff of Southampton, enjoining him, out of he receipts of the 
county, to have painted in the Queen’s Chapel, Winchester, over the great west window, the image of St. Christopher, as 

‘he is elsewhere painted, bearing Christ in his arms; and the figure of St. Edward the King, when he gave his ring to a 

: * ¢Fragments towards the History of Stained Glass ;’ i J Gilbert, 4to. 
+ Rev. R. Willis’s ¢ Canterbury Cathedral,” 8vo, .1845. : 1 Ibid. $ J. Gilbert. 

G 

26 PAINTED AND STAINED GLASS. 

pilgrim, whose figure also was to be painted. Facsimiles of several fine existing examples in this cathedral have been 
published * in a separate volume, edited by Mr. Owen Carter, Architect, of that city. | 

The magnificent restoration of the windows of the Temple Church,t in exact representation of the glass of the 
thirteenth century, affords evidence of the talents of Mr. Willement, and that artists of the present day are equal to ancient 
restoration, aiding it with an improved knowledge of drawing. In the designs of these windows will be recognized the 
circular, elliptical, angular, and lobed medallions, on a rich mosaic ground, which distinguish the work of that period in 
England as well as in other countries. 

York Cathedral contains some fine specimens of the thirteenth century, particularly the lancet window of the Five 
Sisters, and those executed by Thornton about the year 1400. St. Martin’s Church, Acaster Malbis Church, St. John’s 
Church, Mickelgate, St. Mary’s Church, Castlegate, in the city of York, also serve to enrich our work. Sydney 
Smirke, Esq., Architect, has recently been employed in the restoration of the Chapter-house of the Cathedral, the windows 
of which are of an early date, and of a beautiful description. The churches of Ramsay, in Huntingdonshire, and Long 
Melford, in Suffolk, are only to be seen to be equally appreciated. The window of the transept of Lincoln is very fine. 
In France, the cathedrals of Auxerre, Angers, Bourges, Chartres, Chalons, and Tours, contain very fine examples of 
the period before referred to. | 

Ferdinand de Guilhermy, who lately visited the cathedral of Sens, has pointed out to the notice of the Comité 
Historique of France, a valuable window in that building, which contains the Life and Martyrdom of Thomas a Becket, 
finely executed, and dating from the thirteenth century. 

We may also refer to the collegiate chapels and halls of Oxford, and to the matchless chapel of King’s College, 
Cambridge, the glazing of which last was performed in the time of Henry VIII. by glazier artists,] at the total price 
of 1s. 4d. per foot, a pattern sheet or vidimus’ having been previously prepared for all the various parts of the 
work, and submitted to the opinion of the official inspectors of the building. 

A splendid collection of elaborate stained glass, executed by Bernard Dininschoff, 1585, exists at Gilling Castle, 
Yorkshire. An interesting little publication has been lately issued of the different epochs of glass-painting, which may 
serve as a guide to those commencing this study. § 

The art of painting on glass has experienced a remarkable fate. In remote periods, when war and devastation had 
smothered the taste for the arts, it came into existence, and was never more flourishing than in those centuries of 
ignorance. At the period of the regeneration of science and the arts, when good taste, and the love of what is beautiful 
and true to nature had begun to spread through Europe, its splendour seemed on the wane, and in process of time it 
became almost entirely extinct. 

‘What, then, were the causes of so remarkable a decay? In the twelfth century, as already observed, this art, which 
was still in its infancy, was encouraged by the piety of the monks, (among whom alone the wrecks of the sciences 
and of the secret arts were yet to be found,) and seemed to make a vigorous attempt to release itself from the state of 
oppression into which it had fallen. But while the spirit was active and ready to soar, the means were wanting, and 
much time was spent in the choice of the proper mode of carrying it into practice. Many kinds of painting would have to 
be tried; and, at a time when taste had not yet been refined by long practice, and especially by the study of classical 
models, the preference would naturally be given to that kind of painting which was most capable of seducing the eye by 
the brilliancy of its colours. The combination of colours was the sole charm to which painting could lay claim: the merit 
of a beautiful outline, on the contrary, one which exhibited grace, purity, and correctness of form, was utterly neglected. 

Hence the splendour of painted glass, and the almost universal admiration paid to it by those who felt themselves 
compelled to become the guardian genius of the art. 

But in the succeeding centuries taste was cultivated. Art had less of the material, and found other facilities and other 
means of producing effect. She strove after effects of a much higher kind; and as genius endures with impatience the 
bridle of a difficult execution, oil-painting was soon called into existence by Jean de Bruges. This new form of the 
art, the imitation of nature, gained the victory over the one which had preceded it, and painting on glass was driven 
from its throne. 

The consequent decline of the art was not, however, sudden and precipitate. The revolution which in the sixteenth 
century took place in the arts, was also not without its influence upon the progress of painting on glass. Its most 
beautiful works were produced at that time. The most celebrated men did not disdain to support it by their talent; || and 
never at any time was it more deserving of honour. It had, however, attained the summit of its greatness, and was soon 

to become a spectacle of the most complete decay. 

* <The Ancient Painted Glass Windows of Winchester Cathedral,” 4to, 1845. 
+ ¢ Illustrations of the Architectural Ornaments, Embellishments, and Painted Glass of the Temple Church, London,” by Sydney Smirke, Architect, 4to, 1845. 
1 Bernard Flower, glazier, Southwark ; Francis Williamson, of St. Olyff, Southwark ; and Symond Symondes, St. Margaret, Westminster. 
§ ‘Anglican Church Ornaments. Examples of Stained Glass, Sacred Emblems,” &c., by Francis Bedford. 
|| Albert Durer, in designing. 

PAINTED AND STAINED GLASS. fi 27 

Many causes undoubtedly conspired against its further prosperity. To these, among others, belong the religious 
disturbances and the wars which followed the reign of Francis I., and the calamities that were brought on by subsequent 
discords. But, above all, must be taken into consideration the very strong prepossession in favour of oil-painting, 
awakened by the brilliant successes of its productions; and, moreover, the favour with which the art of engraving on 
copper, as well as all those arts which have drawing for their basis, was received. 

The various phases of the art of glass-painting clearly ascertain the mighty influences to which it must have yielded. 
The study of them offers to the inquirer matter for the most serious consideration. In the twelfth and thirteenth 
centuries, in the shadow of barbarism, we see it making considerable progress. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries 
it bears unlimited sway. In the sixteenth century it becomes a rival to oil-painting, and, after an obstinate struggle, 
sinks into oblivion. All the old painted windows have something characteristic of the period to which they belong.* 
The modifications which successively appeared in them, offer to the archaeologist points of the deepest interest for 
observation and comparison, while they are at the same time the seals of their respective eras. These distinctive 
marks exist not merely in the painting, but also in the general conception of the entire work. We have only to cast our 
eyes upon a window of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, and we shall discover, in a truly remarkable manner, the 
whole spirit of the Gothic monuments of that period. This kind of architecture, so rich in its ever-alternating details, yet 
without any confusion, and regular in its monotony, successively presents that remarkable feature which we recognize 
alike in the entire structure and in each of its parts; and the reason of this lies in the fact, that the observer, before he 
can comprehend the numerous details, gradually perceives that they form an essentially harmonious whole. This 
peculiarity prevails in Gothic church windows to an extraordinary degree. When viewed at a certain distance, they 
present a magnificent decoration of the most lively colours, distributed in a manner worthy of the most skilful workers in 
mosaic. f 

In the intervening centuries a transition took place from the one extreme to the other. At first we see the ground 
diversified with a thousand brilliant colours, on which, however, larger figures, drawn with greater skill, and after a 
pattern more or less understood, are occasionally to be met with, and occur as exceptions. In process of time, these 
figures are surrounded with splendid borders or friezes, which are finally obliged to give way to architectural back-grounds, 
and the imitation of the antique. These are the various forms under which the art of painting on glass was cultivated 
during a period of more than 600 years. 

The painter on glass must refrain from attempting to imitate oil-painting. On the contrary, he must acquire the 
conviction, that, although these two arts have unquestionably a point of contact, they, nevertheless, possess sides extremely 
dissimilar. To these belong, in the first place, the proper modes of practising them respectively; lastly, the different 
conditions under which their effects are produced. Thus, for example, painting on glass, on account of the distance at 
which the picture is placed from the spectator, requires to be treated in a perfectly distinct manner. It excludes detail, 
which, on an opaque surface, is susceptible of great effect, but which, through the transparency of the glass, is lost, even 
should not a defect in the burning have done injustice to the talent of the painter. But if, after all, the artist be bent upon 
giving to his performance all the harmony of an oil-painting, he must sacrifice the transparency, and the liveliness of the 
colours, which constitute the most beautiful feature of this kind of painting. Besides, the presence of the leading and the - 
iron bars which unite the various portions of a painted window, and which it is in vain to attempt to conceal entirely in 
the shadows of the picture, must ever prove the stumbling-block on which the claim of the artist to imitate oil-painting 
is sure to founder. | 

The taste for glass-painting has been of late revived under favourable auspices, and the productions of artists § by whom 
it is now practised encourage the expectation that it will be cultivated with a success worthy of the present age. Many 
practical examples of a more recent date are therefore here presented, in the hope of thus contributing toward a still 
further diffusion of the art. | 

Masters Aerl, Braun, Keenig, and Dierrich or Dietrich, celebrated glass-painters of the Netherlands of the time of the 
Emperor Charles V., were the friends of Albert Durer, and probably the artists of the many fine examples of St. Gedule, 
Brussels, St. Jacques and St. Martin, Liége ; but the destruction by fire of the archives of early art in Liége deprives us 
of the means of giving any authentic history of these splendid specimens of glass-painting. 

The church at Fairford, in Gloucestershire, so justly celebrated for the beauty of its painted windows, was rebuilt upon 
its ancient site at the expense of John Tame, a merchant in London, who was probably of Gloucestershire birth or 
descent. The style of the architecture is Gothic, of the close of the fifteenth century, consisting of a lofty nave, two 
aisles, and a central tower: it is 125 feet in length, and 55 feet in breadth, with a clerestory. It is authentically known, 
that about the year 1492, a vessel from the Low Countries, bound to the port of Rome, and laden with painted glass, was 
taken by one of the ships belonging to the said John Tame, and brought to London. Possessing great wealth, he 

* See Mr. Bedford's Chart. 
+ Introductory Essay on the Art of Painting on Glass, by E. O. Fromberg, in ¢ Weale’s Quarterly Papers on Architecture,” vol. iv. 1 Ibid. 
§ See Warrington’s original work on Stained Glass, folio, just published. 

28 : PAINTED AND STAINED GLASS. 

determined on preparing a church at Fairford for its reception: its dedication—to the Virgin—was celebrated in 1493, 
the probable date of its-foundation; but the whole was not completed by its founder, ‘who died in 1500, leaving the 
remainder to be finished by his son, Sir Edward Tame, Knight. The ‘glass consists of a series of Scripture histories, most 
exquisitely pencilled ; and the delicacy and fine drawing, the brilliancy of the colours, called forth at a subsequent period 
the raptures of Sir Anthony Vandyk, the celebrated painter. “There are twenty-eight windows, with four or more 
compartments in each. Of these 3 ni Fa : 

- 
3» 

po Storied windows, richly dight, | 
Casting a dim religious light,” 

a description was engrossed on vellum by order of Sir Edward Tame, which was subsequently lost, but a copy has been 
preserved. The designs are attributed to Albert. Durer; but it is improbable that at the age of twenty years he could 
have attained such proficiency : he ‘was born in 1471, and the glass was taken about the year 1492. The name of the real 
artist is therefore involved in obscurity. Neither Inca Van Leyden nor Goltzius could have been employed, as they both 
flourished after the church was finished. But for this, the extreme resemblance of the style of the well- known etchings of 
these masters would induce us to attribute this beautiful work to them; but we may be allowed to conjecture, that the 
designer was Francesco Francia, who was born at Bologna in 1450.% It is stated, that during the commotion in 1642, 
when the Republican army was on, its march towards Cirencester, William Oldysworth, Esq., the Impropriator, fearing its 
destruction, caused the whole to be taken down and concealed ; and to him the lovers of ancient art are indebted for its 
present existence. Although mutilated in many parts, it is still “unrivalled. In 1725, to prevent further injury, the 
Honourable Eliz. Fermor, daughter of William Lord Dempster, at the expense. of £200, caused each window to be 
secured by a lattice of wire. | 

The chapel belonging to the Society of Lincoln’s Inn, built by Inigo Jones, and finished in 1623, contains six painted 
windows, three on the north, and three on the south side, in which are represented twenty-four full-length scriptural 
portraits, painted by Abraham Van Linge, who was probably the son of Bernard Van Linge. The execution in drawing 
and painting is very good, but has the fault of the period, of giving perspective delineations in the back-grounds, in 
imitation of the art practised by oil-painters: still the effect of the figures is pleasing, and presents useful subjects (apart 
from the accessories) of reference for glass-painting in the present age. Abraham Van Linge must have resided in this 
country a long time; for it is found that he was employed on the windows of Christ Church, Baliol, Queen’s, and 
University Colleges, and those in the Divinity School, Oxford; also at Hatfield, Wroxton, Catledge, &c. He was probably 
born in the Netherlands, and acquired great reputation in England in the time of James I. as a glass-painter. Bernard 
Van Linge painted the east window in Wadham College, Oxford, bearing the date 1622, given by Sir John Strangeways, 
representing the Passion of Our Lord, and said to have cost £1500. Dallaway says, there is no evidence of his having 
ever resided in England, and Fiorello makes the same observation, probably erroneously, having before stated the reverse, 

and called him the ‘father’ of modern glass-painting in this country. 

In the winter of 1843-4, the Editor visited Holland, and discovered, during his sojourn at the Hague, that a 
complete and unique collection of drawings, made from the stained glass in the windows of the Church of St. John 
the Baptist, at Gouda, was in the possession of M. Kram, an Architect, of Utrecht, whom he induced, by the offer 
of a considerable sum, to assign the whole into his hands; and some of these fine specimens of art, engraved and coloured 
in facsimile, are given in this work. A brief account of the collection has been already published; + but as it appeared 
desirable to obtain further information on the subjects of these magnificent windows, M. Kram, who is known to 
have bestowed much time and attention in making the drawings already mentioned, has been further induced to furnish a 
biographical sketch of two of the most celebrated artists employed, which has been translated from the Dutch language 
by W. H. Leeds, Esq., a gentleman eminently known by his writings on the literature of Architecture. 

* Bigland’s © Antiquities of Gloucestershire,” folio, page 369. 1 See ¢ Quarterly Papers on Architecture,” vol. i. 

DIRCcK P C RABETH WOUTER P. CRABETH 

So Rl 
: fi a 

DIEDRICKS uwurgles is werloopen : ~~ Qffirt WOUTER met clas 

: Noch volhars by met S$ Ian Doore zerf sehynt fiecmels veer. 

T Volek tec lecren. en te doopert , Cet by t Paecschlan ret Me f]ias 
Dacr ler granmelt om. den mar , Syn Penceel vol acre en Swier : 

Soc vol yver als Boetvacrdich. : : Dracft te moediger en Jflouter 

Is die helt geen Kunft £Kroore wacrdich: Stel let beelt pt Schilders outer, 
X Bary feuty 1. Enderiburg cc, Gouds Lv Vondel , 

Ir there be any city in Europe that can boast of possessing original master-pieces of glass-painting advanced to the rank 
of pictorial art, it is Gouda in Holland, which may proudly challenge any other to compete with it in that respect, and to 
shew such a Museum of that branch of painting as is the St. Jan’s Kerk, whose windows have always been the admiration 
of both natives and foreigners, and are unanimously allowed by the best judges and ablest connoisseurs to be the perfection 
of that mode of painting, and of unsurpassable beauty in regard to execution and colouring. 

Of the artists who so distinguished themselves, and who so worthily adorned an edifice devoted to religion, and 
therefore open to all alike, it will be supposed that the pride, no less than the gratitude, of their fellow-citizens must have 
preserved some tolerably full account, and many traditional particulars. Nevertheless they have hitherto obtained but 
very scanty biographical notice, on which account it has been a work of some labour and diligence to collect what is to 
be regarded rather as consisting of additional materials towards something more complete of the kind, than as constituting 
of itself a satisfactory historical memoir. 

At the head of those who displayed their mastery in the windows of the church at Gouda, stand the two brothers, 
Dirk and Wouter (i. e. Theodore and Walter) CraBeTH, the supremacy of their talent being incontestable, and their fame 
in the same degree. They were natives of Gouda, where their father was Markt-Vegen, or Market-sweeper, an office then 
frequently held by respectable burghers, who used to employ others to discharge its actual duties. In consequence of 
being lame, the father obtained the name of Pieter Krepel, or Peter the Cripple, whence, in accordance with the fashion of 
that time for Latinizing proper names, Almclooven calls him Claudius or Claudicus. This Peter had a third son, probably 
the eldest, of whom Van Mander, the biographer of the Flemish and Dutch painters, makes mention in his life of Jan 
Swart, by the name of Adriaan Pieterzoon Crabeth, but without taking any notice of Dirk and Wouter, which is the more 
surprising, as Van Mander was a contemporary writer, and resided full twenty years at Haarlem, whence he removed in 
1604 to Amsterdam, where he died in 1606; and Dirk Crabeth was still living at Gouda in the year 1600. Yet such 
omission on the part of Van Mander may, doubtless, be attributed to what he himself complains of, namely, the great 
difficulty he experienced in cellecting information relative even to artists of note, owing to which he was under the 
necessity of passing over in silence some who deserved to be spoken of. Among those thus alluded to were most 
probably Dirk and Wouter Crabeth, who so far from being at all communicative, were exceedingly reserved in all that 
related to their art and their own practice of it,—so much so, indeed, that it is said, whenever one brother inquired of 
the other how he had produced such or such effect, the only answer was, “I found it out by accident, or by trial;” and 
they were so afraid of their secrets in art being divulged, that they would never speak of their works in the presence of a 

third person. 

30 DIRK AND WOUTER CRABETH. 

The Crabeths are reported to have been first of all instructed in the art of glass-painting by monks; and such was the 
opinion of William Tomberg, a son of Daniel Tomberg, who was himself a glass-painter, because a religieux named 
Cornelis is known to have been expert in the practice, and to have executed the windows in the Raad-kamer or Town Hall. 
Whatever uncertainty there may be as to this, there is very little doubt that they studied under Caddesteijn and Ponsen, 
who were then in high repute for their works in glass, and whose ateliers—one opposite the Amsterdamsche Veer, 
or near the Turf-market Bridge,—the other a lofty house at the corner of the ¢Gouwe,’—the Crabeths afterwards 
occupied. 

Dirk is said to have studied painting under the celebrated Cornelis Ketel (a relation of whose Wouter afterwards 
married), who, struck by the diligence and ability of his pupil, once exclaimed, “ This fellow bids fair to become the one 

3 

out of a hundred that reaches perfection:” and Ketel lived to behold his prophecy verified by the masterly productions 
of his pupil, which confer so much honour on his native place. 

There is very good reason for believing that both brothers not only travelled through Brabant from one religious house 
to another, according to the custom of the time, but visited Paris also; and that, in conformity with a not unusual practice 
among travelling artists, they frequently bestowed a specimen of their work on the ‘convents where they had been 
hospitably entertained : it is not, however, to be supposed that on such occasions they could have given more than a single 
compartment in one of the ‘lights’ of a mullioned window, and that consisting only of some ornamental pattern. Whether 
Dirk Crabeth ever visited Italy is doubtful ; and also whether during his stay at Paris he directed his attention principally 
to painted glass, studying the fine specimens of it there by Albert Durer and Jean Cousin, whose manner both of 
execution and design he afterwards followed. That he sometimes imitated Durer very closely, is attested by a large 
window of his, representing the Last Supper, which, with some slight variations, is nearly similar in composition and 
design to a representation of the same subject by Durer, of which there exists both an etching and a wood-cut by that 
master. And if Dirk was ever in Italy, he must there have studied and caught something of Raffaelle’s first manner, and 
that of his master, Perugino. 

Dirk Crabeth’s style of execution is particularly remarkable for glass, inasmuch as it possesses not only the vigour and 
firmness, but also all the finish of oil-painting ; in consequence of which he deservedly stands above all other artists of his 
class, his productions displaying such careful keeping as to general effect, and harmony of colouring, as to excite the 
astonishment of all who know how difficult it is to preserve those qualities in glass-painting. Look, for instance, at the 
head of St. Martin and that of the Beggar to whom he is giving alms, in the window (No. 15) representing our Lord's 
‘Baptism,—how admirable they are! and how astonishingly fine this window must have been when perfect in all its parts! 

All accounts agree as to Wouter Crabeth having visited Italy on his quitting Paris, of which fact his works themselves 
afford evidence; more especially his manner of treating his draperies, and high lights, the former of which are broader, 
and the others more boldly touched than those of his brother Dirk ; though, on the other hand, the latter excels him in 
his shadows. His drawing, and the design and pose of his figures, especially in such cartoons of his as are still extant, 
must convince every one who has seen those of Raffaelle at Paris or Hampton Court, that Wouter must have studied 
either the original works of that master, or those of Giulio Romano and Michelagnolo. Modest in his estimate of his 
own performances, he willingly listened to and availed himself of the remarks and advice of those whom he considered 
able judges of art, he being most solicitous to render his works as perfect as possible. It is related of him, that having 
undertaken the large window (No. 5) representing the Queen of Sheba’s Visit to Solomon, he made a small sketch of it, 
which he took to Frans Floris (he who was then called the Flemish Raffaelle) at Antwerp, requesting him to prepare a 
full-sized cartoon from it, as he was in the habit of doing for other glass-painters; when Floris’ reply was: “He who was 
capable of doing this, is fully capable of making a cartoon of the requisite size.” This subject was the first of those which 
Wouter executed for the St. Jan’s Kerk at Gouda, its date being 1561 ; and when his brother heard of his undertaking to 
produce a work of the kind in glass-painting, he is reported to have exclaimed: “O the conceit of these youngsters! they 
From which it would appear that Wouter had not boasted beforehand of the 

| 

fancy themselves equal to any thing 
full extent of his ability. - 

The works of these two great masters exhibit all conceivable excellence in that peculiar species of painting, and shew 
that both the one and the other of them was equally successful in large or small subjects, and in the manipulation of 
colours. Few things are more wonderful in effect than some of their lofty windows, presenting large surfaces glowing 
with the most brilliant hues, arranged with artistic regard to harmony as well as richness of ensemble. By dint of 
unwearied patience and diligence, as well as talent, they attained to extraordinary skill in painting and burning glass— 
the elder brother, more especially; for they spared neither cost nor pains in improving and perfecting all the requisite 
processes. Even sometimes after they had put up some of the glazing into windows, they would, if dissatisfied with it, 
cause it to be taken down again, in order to correct what seemed to them its defects, or else do it over again. Hence 
their labours brought them more renown than wealth ; nor did they enrich themselves by their profession, notwithstanding 
that they were fully employed, and executed a great number of works, not in their own country alone, but for foreign 

ones also. Among these last were—a window representing the subject of the Pentecost, that was sent to France, and 

DIRK AND WOUTER CRABETH. | 31 

another that was executed for the King of England; of both which the drafts or sketches are, or were in 1819, in the 
possession of Heer de Lange van Wijngaarde of Gouda, along with many other drawings by the same artists, which came 
into that family from another Wouter Crabeth, an oil-painter, and the grandson of our Wouter—Dirk’s brother. The 
Crabeths were also employed by the Chapter of St. Salvator, and by William I. of Holland, and his consort Anne of 
Saxony. 

The dates of their works shew how industriously they laboured, since we learn from those in the windows of the 
Jan’s Kerk that six of them were executed by Dirk in about three years; and in point of size they are as large as the three 
which were done by Wouter within the same time. In 1555 he painted the one representing the Baptism in the Jordan; 
in 1556, Jesus Preaching ;—1557, the Consecration of Solomon’s Temple, and the Baptist Preaching; and in 1559, the 
Apostle Philip and the Eunuch. Nor was Wouter less expeditious in working than his brother: the first window done 
by him for the church at Gouda, viz., that representing the Queen of Sheba’s Visit to Solomon, bears the date 1561; of 
that containing Elijah’s Offering, and the Feet-washing, the date is 1562; and that of the Nativity (afterwards restored or 
repaired by Tomberg), 1564. The window which he did two years later, and the subject of which is Heliodorus’ Sacrilege, 
was Wouter’s last work of the kind for the church at Gouda; there being only four windows by him, he having been 
chiefly employed in other buildings. 

With regard to the prices that were then paid for such work, it was computed by admeasurement according to 
superficies or quantity of material; and the Crabeths appear to have been very easily contented or very poorly 
remunerated. For the large window (No. 23), for instance, presented to the church at Gouda by the Duchess of Parma, 
which contains 805 square feet, or 68 square metres, not more than 103 stivers (or 52% cents) per foot was paid, as is 
proved by the original receipts for the money, given by Wouter Crabeth in 1563, and still existing among the accounts 
and papers in the church archive. 

From the dates upon the windows it would appear either that Wouter did not live so long as his brother Dirk, or that 
he sooner gave up undertaking works of such magnitude, and in fact became unequal to the task, it being known that in 
the latter part of his life he had several apoplectic attacks; in consequence of which, or else because he did not live so 
long as his brother, he did not do so much as the latter. 

+] CARCELY any personal particulars relative to the Crabeths have come down to us. They are 

| nominum umbre—names gleaming like lights borne by figures which are themselves rendered 
indistinct by the surrounding gloom. Almost all that is known for certainty of Dirk is, that he was 
never married, and lived to an advanced age, being still alive at the close of the century in the year 
1600. Wouter, on the contrary, became connected by marriage with the ancient and noble family of 
Van Prooijen or Poederoijen, and had a son Pieter, who, in 1604, was made Vroedschap (member of 
the Town Council), in 1606 Schepen, and in 1627 Burgomaster; and who died in 1638, leaving a son Jan or Johan, who 
succeeded him in his offices, and who died in 1652. Ten years afterwards (1662) Renier Crabeth was elected Vroedschap, 
and lived to the year 1676; he was followed in 1703 by Adriaan Crabeth, who died in 1708, and to whom succeeded 
another Renier, his son. In consequence of his attachment to the then Government and order of things, this last- 
mentioned Crabeth was dismissed from his offices in 1747, when the House of Orange obtained the preponderancy 
over the republican party. 

The aforementioned Burgomaster, Pieter Wouterzoon Crabeth, had several children, one of whom, named Wouter, 
studied painting under the celebrated Cornelis Ketel. This grandson of our Wouter Crabeth obtained some repute as 
an oil-painter in France and Italy, where he spent thirteen years, or till 1613, when he returned to his native town; and 
in 1628 he married Adriana Vroesen, who was of an ancient family of Gouda and Rotterdam. This second Wouter 
Pieterzoon Crabeth was a captain of the militia, and his last and finest work, painted by him in 1644, represents a Council 
of War, in which he depicted himself as the principal figure. Another work of his—The Incredulity of St. Thomas, was 
engraved by Persijn and Van Dalen. He is further said to have painted, in 1628, the altar-piece in the church at 
Ruremonde, representing the Assumption of the Virgin, for which he was paid three hundred guilders; but it does not 
appear that he produced any easel pieces, or pictures of small dimensions. 

Adriaan Crabeth, the other son of Pieter Krepel, and brother to Dirk and Wouter, is, as we have already observed, 
mentioned in Van Mander’s Lives of the Painters, where he is said to have been a pupil of Zwart Jan van Groningen, an 
oil-painter, who settled at Gouda in 1525. Though he excelled his master, Adriaan did not live long enough to acquire 
much fame, for he went to France, and died at a very early age at Autun. 

One of the most interesting memorials of the Crabeths that have been preserved to us, is to be found in the Groote 
Kerk-Kamer, or Consistory of the Church at Gouda, which contains two well executed portraits of the brother artists Dirk 
and Wouter, painted upon panel. There they seem to rest from their labours,—near the scene of the triumph, but 
withdrawn from the immediate presence, of their works, as having bidden farewell to all mundane pomps, the ambitious 

aspirations of art itself included. After gazing with delight and wonder on the pictorial splendours of the church 

32 DIRK AND WOUTER CRABETH. 

windows, it is touching to enter the solitude of that plain apartment, and there contemplate the features of the men who 
achieved those prodigies of their glass-painting— works that have obtained for Gouda an illustrious name in the annals of 
art, and which have rendered it an honoured place of pilgrimage for the devotees of art. No wonder therefore that the 
citizens of Gouda should so highly reverence, as they do, the memory of the Crabeths, and look upon the windows of the 
St. Jan’s Kerk as the palladium of the place; or that the gratitude and patriotism of the inhabitants should express 
themselves in the proverbial phrase of “Het is als de Glazen!” or “It is as fine as the Windows ! ”—beyond which 
the emphasis of admiration can no further go. 

The two portraits above mentioned were a bequest from the last of the family, namely, Renier Crabeth, the 
Burgomaster, in 1761. A century before (1660) they were engraved by Renier van Persijn, who married the daughter 
of the celebrated Wouter’s grandson; and they were again engraved by Hendrik Barry, from which last all subsequent 
copies of them have been taken. 

Dirk and Wouter Crabeth had many pupils, some of them youths of good family, but none who equalled them. 
Among the number were Jacob Caan; Adriaan Gerritzoon de Prije, who did much in glass-painting, but was far more 
successful in the mechanical part—in the preparation and application of colours, than in drawing and design; wherefore 
he employed Joachim van Uytewaal to execute the figures in the large window (No. 1), the subject of which is an 
allegorical representation of Liberty of Conscience, or the Triumph over Spanish Tyranny. There is little doubt that the 
architecture also was put in by some other hand, as De Prije himself seldom attempted more than armorial bearings and 
ornaments, which last were then much in fashion, and they accordingly furnished abundant employ to artists in that line. 
Uytewaal’s work is some of the best after that of the Crabeths, and Dirk van Zijl. He had the superintendence of the 
windows at Ysenhout, which he restored; and before his death, which happened in 1643, he became blind. 

Jan Lonk is said to have been a pupil of Dirk Crabeth’s, and to have assisted him in the window representing the 
Sermon on the Mount, in which, according to tradition, he is introduced —viz., the figure with his back to the spectator, 
and attired in a claret-coloured doublet and breeches. We can hardly suppose, however, that Lonk’s share in the work 
was more than a very subordinate one, or that the design of it and the principal parts were by any other than Crabeth 
himself, although Lonk is said to have been one of his best pupils. Greatly, therefore, is it to be regretted that we have 
no work that is known to have been entirely by him. Probably he was again employed by Crabeth as his assistant in the 
‘ Preaching of John the Baptist’ (window 14), and those in the Convent of Regulars, which are either by Dirk Crabeth 
himself or by some of his scholars. To these last belong Gevert Hendrikzoon and Willem Damaszoon —respecting whom, 
~ however, nothing further is known; and lastly, Ysenhout, to whom the care of the windows was confided after the death 
of the Crabeths. : 

It is not mere public pride and vaunting on the part of the citizens of Gouda when they hold Dirk and Wouter Crabeth 
to be the two greatest masters in the art of glass-painting, since they most incontestably surpassed all their predecessors 
in it, and advanced it to perfection as regards both brilliancy and general harmony of colouring, observing the latter most 
“admirably, notwithstanding the prodigious size of the windows. In drawing and composition, indeed, they had many able 
models in the works of both earlier and contemporary artists. The study of the works which they met with at Paris, of 
such eminent painters on glass as Jean Cousin and Albert Durer, in the church of St. Gervais, and those of the Célestins, 
and the Temple, must of course have greatly instructed them, and have incited them to further improvement in that branch 
of art. Yet none of the specimens of it which are now to be met with in that country can compete with the works of the 
Crabeths; for in many of the former the colours are merely painted or etched upon the surface of the glass, and fixed by 
baking, instead of being thoroughly burnt in and incorporated with the material. Besides which, there is generally a great 
want of clearness and firmness in the outlines,—a defect that detracts no little from the merit of many otherwise 
admirable performances, as is the case with Cousin’s; and the difficulty of overcoming this defect is what has deterred 
many artists from exercising glass-painting. Abraham Diepenbeck, for instance, who at one time had begun to practise it 
at Rome, where it is scarcely known at all, gave it up in despair, and applied himself entirely to the usual mode—or 
canvass -painting; for even the most expert glass-painters are often obliged to do part of their work over again, as 
frequently happened to the Crabeths themselves. In their time, glass-painting was in great vogue in, and had acquired 
great fame for, the Netherlands, among other nations, as well as at home. Lodovico Guicciardini (nephew of the 
celebrated historian, and the author of ¢ Commentarii delle Cose di Europa specialmente ne’ Paesi Bassi dal 1529 sino al 
1560”), who visited the Netherlands in 1566, when he beheld the works of the Crabeths in their original splendour, says 
that the art had been brought to the utmost perfection in that country, not only with respect to the extraordinary 
brilliancy of the colours, but their durability also, owing to the superior mode of burning them in, whereby they are 
rendered indestructible, and incapable of being affected by either weather or time. He further observes, that the mode of 
Joining the panes of glass together by lead-work was first practised in the Netherlands; yet that is not exactly correct, 
since such mode of uniting the different pieces forming coloured patterns and ornaments in the glazing of windows, was 
of earlier invention, and much older examples of it are to be seen in Cologne Cathedral, and in the church at Aachen 
(Aix-la-Chapelle). One circumstance deserving notice as belonging to the art of glazing, and for which we have the 

ah 

WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. | 33 

authority of Willem Tomberg (a glass-painter who was born in 1603), is, that for the cutting of glass, which was previously 
performed with a hardened steel instrument (gruisyzer or graver), the diamond began to be made use of in the 17th . 
century, and was first introduced into the Netherlands by one Jan de Diamant— which name he most probably assumed or 
acquired in consequence. Tomberg further informs us that in his time, viz., in 1669, an able sculptor of Nuremburg, who 
had practised his profession for many years at Rome and in other Italian cities, having heard a great deal of the 
magnificence of the windows at Gouda, made a journey to Holland for the express purpose of beholding them; and after a 
very diligent inspection of them, he said to Tomberg: “I have seen many brave and stately edifices in Holland, among 
others the new Stadhuis at Amsterdam — which, though a large and sumptuous pile, is not without defects, and very inferior 
in taste to many of the Roman villas; but the Gouda windows far surpass all the other wonders of art that I have ever 
beheld either in Holland or any where else.” Such testimony may be received as equally valid and impartial, without 
suspicion of the high commendation being prompted by mere wonder, because at that time glass-painting was in itself no 
great rarity, it being very generally practised ; and for its being generally adopted, and for the expertness and ability attained 
in it, it was mainly indebted to the example and the excellence of the Crabeths. 

Rubens also, not only visited the Church at Gouda, but took such interest in the paintings of the windows, that nothing 
less than having a ladder brought in order that he might get up and examine them closely and minutely would satisfy him. 
And that great artist gave it as his opinion, that ¢ Heliodorus’ Sacrilege,” by Wouter Crabeth, bore away the palm of 
excellence from all the other subjects; declaring it to be a work of inestimable value— one for which no money could be a 
fair equivalent. 

If not of equal authority, nearly equally strong in favour of the windows at Gouda, is the subsequent testimony of all 
who have spoken of them; but we need not here bring forward the opinions of later writers or travellers, more especially as 
their admiration may be partly attributed to the extreme rarity now-a-days of such a complete example of pictorial decoration 
in all the windows of a church as is furnished by that at Gouda; which is so exceedingly striking, and of such magical effect 
~ on entering it, as almost to confound the spectator, and prevent him from collecting himself sufficiently to exercise calm and 
deliberate judgment. Whereas the opinions above recorded proceeded from men who were not only well skilled in art 
generally, but well acquainted also with many other fine examples of that particular art, which have since disappeared. 
Their admiration therefore was excited, not so much by the magnificence of ensemble produced by a complete series of richly- 

painted windows, as by the surpassing artistic talent displayed in them by Dirk and Wouter CraBerH. 

DESCRIPTION OF THE WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 

WINDOW 1. 
meg fl [LIS window, next to the north side, was given 
boat] Been 4| Py the noble and mighty Lords, the States of 
z : N . x of i South Holland, in the year 1596. Liberty of 

Conscience,—represented by a Female in a 

Strength and perseverance have ever subdued violence, and therefore 

they are honoured by Victory with Glory. 
Mars. 

Virtue had overcome force. 
Nilus, 1219. 

. Neptune. 

Damuetta. 

chariot, and Tyranny under its wheels. The 

denoting the defence of the faith. At her right hand sits a seeond 
~ female ; and the chariot is drawn by five other women, denoting Charity, 

Justice, Concord, Fidelity, and Constancy. The procession issues from 

former 1s armed with a shield and sword, 

a portal of the Corinthian order, which forms a rich architectural back- 

ground. The arms also are seen of His Highness the Prince of Orange 

and Holland, and those of the cities and towns of South Holland, viz., 
Dordrecht, Haarlem, Delft, Leyden, Amsterdam, Gouda, Rotterdam, 
Gorcum, Schiedam, Schoonhoven, Briel, Woerden, Oudewater, Geer- 
truydenberg, Heusden, Naarden, Weesp, Muyden, Vyanen, Asperen, 
Worcum, Heukelom, Yselsteyn, and Goeree. 

Joachim Uytewaal, at Utrecht, invent.—Adriaan G. de Vrije, fig. et 

pinx., Goudee. 

II. (Haarrem, 1598.)—The Lords Burgomasters of Haarlem gave 
this window, the subject of which is the taking of the city of Damietta 
in Egypt. 

Victory. Glory. 

Strength. Perseverance. 

countries to raise forces. 

Wilhelmus Tibaut, fig. et pinx., Haarlem, 1597. 

A Relation of the Expedition of Damietta represented in this Window. 
—1In the year 1188, the Pope of Rome, Alexander the Third, and the 
Emperor Frederick the First, having appointed a general crusade for the 
retaking of the Holy City, Jerusalem, they sent into Germany and other 
The chief leaders of this expedition were, the 
aforesaid Emperor Frederick ; Philip, King of France; Richard, King of 
England ; the Duke of Bavaria and Saxony; Conrad, Duke of Austria; 
Frederick, Duke of Swabia; Henry, Duke of Lorraine and Brabant; 
Philip, Earl of Flanders; Floris, Earl of Holland; Diederick, Earl of 
Cleveland ; Otho, Earl of Guelderland, and many other Princes and Lords. 
They met first in Calabria, where the Emperor asked the Abbot Joachim, 
who was counted a very learned divine, and esteemed as a prophet, what 
would be the issue of this expedition ; to which the Abbot returned, that 
the above-mentioned Christian Princes were not likely to succeed, since the 
time was not come yet that God would deliver the Promised Land from 
the Infidels, and that the Emperor should be drowned before he returned 

home ; and so it happened. The Emperor having heard this, travelled 

I 

34 WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 

with the said Princes through Bulgaria towards the Holy Land; but 
not being able to take the city of Jerusalem, he besieged Damietta, a 
But this city 

was well fortified with towers, especially at the entrance of the port, 

very strong place in Egypt, situated on the river Nile. 

where the haven was shut by a strong iron chain crossing the water and 
~ reaching from one tower to the other, so that no vessel could enter; and 
thus the city was considered invincible. This gave occasion to William, 
the second son of Count Floris, to enter with those of Haarlem upon 
some new device. For they got a great steel saw made, which was 
fastened to the keel of one of their ships, and having waited for a strong 
gale of wind, they sailed into the haven with such a force, that the chain 
gave way and broke, whereby all the ships of the Christian Princes 
entered, and so they mastered the city of Damietta. The Emperor con- 
sidering that this eminent city was thus overcome by the valour and 
prudence of William, son of Count Floris, gifted and knighted him, and 
ordered that the Princes and Earls of Holland should fight and be under 
the protection of the Emperor’s banner. And to honour the valiants of 
Haarlem, he added to the four stars in their coat of arms, a sword, to 
which the patriarch Joachim joined the cross. These are still the arms of 
Haarlem. It is said also that they brought from the city two bells of 
silver, or of very fine metal, which are hanging still in the steeple of the 
great church, and called the Damietta bells. It is left upon record that 
those of Haarlem anciently had four stars for their arms, yet it is the 
general belief that long before that time their arms were a dry or barren 
tree, as is represented in several places, and also mentioned in the 

Chronicle. 

ITI. (DorprecuT, 1596.)—The Lords Burgomasters of the city of - 

Dordrecht gave the window of the Virgin of Dordrecht; wherein are 
seen also the arms of Naerden, Leerdam, Weesp, Hoorn, Schoonhoven, 
Muyden, Medenblik, Grootenbroek, Monnikendam, Enkhuyzen, Asperen, 
Heusden, Schiedam, Vlaardingen, Geertruydenberg. The senate and 
people of Dordrecht had dedicated this window to the divine friendship 
hitherto religiously kept, and henceforth to be so cultivated, with the 

senate and people of Gouda. 
Adriaan G. de Vrije, fig. et pinx., Goud. 
Here, under a triumphal arch, sits the Virgin of Dordrecht, holding a 

palm-branch in one hand, and the city arms in the other.—May this 
window, as well as the city walls, together with liberty of conscience, 

continue throughout many ages. 

IV. The Lords Privy Councillors of Rhineland. 

Justice. Strength or Valour. 

William, King of the Romans, the eighteenth Earl of Holland. 
The arms of Holland within a hedge; and a single eagle on a field or. 
The Roman King William had privileged the Privy Councillors of 
Rhineland, in the year 1255, at Leyden, the 5th Ides of October. 
The arms of Pieter van der Does, Bailiff and Dykegrave of Rhineland ; 
J. V. Duyvenvoorde en Woude, Lord of Warmond, Admiral of Holland ; 
Gerard van Poelgeest, Lord of Hoogemade; Pieter de Kies, Burgo- 
~ master of Haarlem; Nicolaas Ruyghaver, Bailiff of Haarlem; Andrew 
van - Bronkhorst, Lord of Vliet; Arnold van Duyvenvoorde; Nicolaas 
van Matenes, Lord of Wibisma; Foy van Broukhoven, Rentmaster; 
Dirk van Egmond, Secretary of the Privy Councillorship of Rhineland. 
Given by the Lord Privy Councillors of Rhineland, 1594. 
Adriaan de Vrije, fig. et pinx., Goud. 
There are the arms of the Rhineland Lords, instituted by William to 

be Privy Councillors, and to prevent all mischief or dangers, according 

to the privilege given them the 5th Ides of October, in the year 1255. 

V. This painting was given by the noble lady, Gabriele van Boetzelaar, 
Abbess of the Nunnery, Rynsburg; whose image, placed underneath, is 
accompanied by that of the Angel Gabriel standing behind her as her 
tutelar angel. The main worth of this window is the Queen of Sheba, 
who, coming to see the wisdom of Solomon, presents him with many 
excellent gifts, as may be read in 1 Kings x. B 

The Queen of Sheba comes to see the glory of Solomon. 
The arms -of Boetzelaar, Mol, Van Leedburg, Langerak, Piek, 

Rechteren, Harler, Polane, Appeltern, Arkel, Broekhuyzen, Kuylenburg, 

‘Haften, Lindee, Brederode, Benthem, Varik. 

I trust in God. 
Wouter Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goudee, 1561. 

King Solomon, sitting in his glory, is saluted by the Queen of Sheba, 
whose witty riddles he explained, so that she fell into admiration, and, 
ravished by his wisdom, said, «Blessed are they that stand continually 
before thee.” 

VI. This window was given by the noble Prince John van Baden, 
Duke of Aarschot, Lord of Arenberg, &c., Knight of the Golden Fleece, 
and the noble Princess, Lady Katharine, Countess of Mark, his wife; 
whose images with their patrons, viz., St. John with a lamb, &c., St. 
Katherine with a wheel and sword, are in the lower part of the window, 
beneath the main subject, which is the siege of Bethulia, and the cutting 
off the head of Holofernes. 

The arms of Baden, Begen, Halewyn, Zevenbergen, Brabancon, St. 
Simon, Gistelle, Vianen, Abbeville, Brabant, Latremouelle, Croy, Retel, 
Sarbrugge, Crequi, Eemskerk ;—Mark, Egmont, Monfort, Bergen, 

“ Bochault, Kulenburch, Naaldwyk, Sevenbergen, Vernenburg, Meus, 
~ Rotselaar, St. Simon, Flanders, Ville, Raporst, Vianen. 

Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goud, 1571. 

The valiant Judith delivers here her native country, menaced by 
Holofernes. Whilst he lay drunk and sleeping on his couch, she severed 
his head from his ‘body ; whereby the Assyrian army was dismayed ; for 
all force is in vain, when God protects the land. 

Although not equal to other works by the same artist, in regard to 
invention and composition, this piece possesses great beauty of colouring 
and execution. By one of those glaring anachronisms which partake of 
the ridiculous, cannon are here introduced among the military engines of 
the Assyrians. Yet it is hardly to be supposed that this was a mere 
mistake arising from ignorance on the part of Crabeth. Very great 
license was then allowed in regard to all matters of costume; and in 
this instance perhaps the painter complied with the taste of his princely 

patron. 

VIL. This window was given by Philip the Second, King of Spain, 

~ and Mary, Queen of England, his consort. The upper part contains the 

history of the Consecration of Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem, and his 
sacrifices. The lower subject represents Christ’s Last Supper with his 
Apostles ; and the king and queen kneeling on cushions, with the sceptre, 

sword, and helmet, and their respective arms next to them. 

The inscriptions belonging to the first-mentioned one are, “I have 0 

heard thy prayer; and if thou walkest before me as thy father did, I 
will establish the throne of thy kingdom for ever. Whosoever shall have 
prayed in this place, I have heard him. Praise the Lord, for he is good, 
and his mercy endureth for ever. Lo, here Solomon. See here more 
than Solomon.” 

Those accompanying the other are— Lord, shew us the Father, and 
it sufficeth us. He who seeth me, seeth also the Father. The traitor 
goes out of the court. Truth is the daughter 

I temper times.” 

The Lord is my helper. 
of Time. I command just things. 

In the inscription commemorating the donor of the window, there is 

WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 35 

surely more of fulsome adulation than of truth, clemency being almost 
the last virtue to be claimed for the morose and bigoted Philip. 

“The most illustrious Philip, son of the invincible Emperor Charles 
the Fifth, by the grace of God, King of Spain, England, France, and 
both the Sicilies, Archduke of Austria, Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, 
Guelder, &c., Earl of Flanders, Hainault, Holland, Zealand, &c., Father 
of the Country, the most clement and religious prince, hath given this 
glass to embellish this church—May his throne, like a sun filling the 

whole world, stand for ever—in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ, 1557.” 
Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goudze. 

The invention and composition of the first subject are in the usual 
style of that period, but in the other (The Last Supper) are in the 

manner of, or rather after, Albert Durer. 

VIII. This, which is the finest of all the windows, was given by the 
noble Prince Eric, Duke of Brunswick, whose image stands underneath, 
and behind him St. Laurence, with a gridiron and a seether in his right 
hand. 

The historical subject is the Sacrilege of Heliodorus, who, being sent to 
rob the temple at Jerusalem of its treasures, was punished by an angel, 
but delivered from death by the prayer of the High Priest. 

The Sacrilegious Heliodorus punished by the Angel. 

“The most illustrious Ericus, by the grace of God, Duke of Brunswick 
and Lunenburg, Prince of the Empire, Baron of Lysveld, Lord of 
Woerde, &c., hath for the Catholic religion’s sake given this glass, 1566.” 

The arms of Brunswick, Baden, Brandenburg, Bavaria, Stolburg, 
Schwartzenburg, Mansveld, Saxony. 

Brandenburg, Baden, Saxony, Bohemia, Denmark, Bavaria. 

From the Duke’s Glory. 
Wouter Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goudze. 

This piece is not only Wouter’s chef d’ ceuvre, but is undeniably a most 
masterly work,—one that will bear comparison with Raffaclle’s cele- 
brated painting of the same subject in the Vatican. The figures of the 
horseman and his steed, who are rushing upon Heliodorus, are truly 

admirable. 

IX. This window, on the north side of the choir, represents when the 
priest Zacharias was officiating, how it was shewed him by an angel that 
John should be born. 

It was given by Dirk Cornelisz van Oudewater, the 30th of October, 
1561. 
children, whereof two sons and two daughters were of the clergy, and 

Underneath are his portrait, and those of his wife and fifteen 

are represented in their clerical habits. 

Lamb. van Noord of Amersfort, inv. and fig. 

Dirk van Zijl, pinx., Utrecht. 

Lambert van Noord, or van Oort, for the name is spelt both ways, 
who was born in 1520, was an artist of ability both in painting and 
architecture, and was the great Rubens’ master. The present subject, 
which was executed in glass by Van Zijl, from Van Noord’s cartoons, 
was held by Goltzius, another eminent glass-painter of that time, to be 

next in excellence to the windows by the Crabeths. 

X. The Annunciation of the Virgin Mary by the Angel Gabriel. 

The Lord Theodor Spiering van Wel, Abbot of Bernen, gave this 
window in 1559. The arms of the Lord Falcourt, founder of the 
monastery of Bernen. 

This glass was struck and broke by a tempest, but afterwards, by 

order of the churchwardens, caused to be made anew, and painted by 

Daniel Tomberg (for the sum of 869 guilders), in the year 1655, as may 
be seen by the following lines : 

1559. Me dabat Antistes Bernardi Wellius olim ; 

1655. Aldiles senio jam periisse vetant. 

The arms of Nicolaas van der Graaf, Lord of Hoogeveen, Councillor, 
and formerly Burgomaster; Anthony Vossenburg, Councillor, and for- 
merly Burgomaster, Privy Councillor of Schieland; Albert Houtman, 
Councillor, and formerly Burgomaster; Herman Cinq, Councillor and 
Surveyor of Buildings ; Gerard Terre, Councillor, and formerly Alderman 
or Judge; Dirk Beukel, Councillor and Burgomaster; Hans Felbier, 
Councillor and formerly Alderman; Donatus van Groenendyck, Coun- 
cillor and Alderman; Conradus de Wilde, Treasurer of the Church at 
Gouda. 

As Tomberg must very well have known by whom the original 
window was executed, it is to be regretted that he did not mention the 
name of the first artist, more especially as he is said to have been a 

stranger ; whereas now that window is erroneously attributed to Van 
Noord and Van Zijl. 

XI. The Birth of St. John the Baptist. 

Here the birth of John the Baptist is represented, with the loosening 
of Zacharias’s tongue, who by the power of the Lord sounded forth the 
praises of the Most High. 

Underneath are five portraits of the heirs of Letmatius or Lethmaath, 
with the images of Saint John and Elizabeth. 

In remembrance of Herman Letmatius, of Gouda, Chief Professor of 
the Sorbonne, and Prebendary and Dean of Saint Mary’s Church at 
Utrecht, his heirs have given this window, the last day of May, 1562. 

Lamb. van Noord of Amersfort, inv. and fig. 
Dirk van Zijl, pinx., Utrecht. 

The Herman Lethmaath thus commemorated was a native of Gouda, 
where he was born in 1495, and became distinguished both for his 
learning and his virtues. These procured for him the notice of the 
great Erasmus, through whose recommendation he obtained some situ- 
ation In the court of Charles V., and whose good offices afterwards 
availed him at that of Pope Adrian VI. On the death of that short- 
reigned Pontiff, Herman quitted Rome, to take possession of his office of 
Canon of St. Mary’s at Utrecht, which preferment had been bestowed 
upon him by Adrian. In 1530 he was elected Dean of the same church, 
and, entirely devoted to his studies, continued to reside at Utrecht, where 
he died in 1555. 

XII. The upper part represents the birth of Christ; and in the 
undermost part is the figure of Christ in the centre, and those of all the 
thirteen Canons of St. Salvador at Utrecht, together with their coats of 
arms around. 

The College of Saint Salvador at Utrecht hath given this glass, 1564. 
Wouter Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goudze. 
This subject is greatly admired for the finish of the details and acces- 

sories, as well as for general merit of colouring. 

XIII. Christ sitting among the Doctors: the Hebrew letters signify 
the Law of Moses. 

Virtue is acquired by great trouble. 

This very fine window was given by Peter van Suyren, Abbot of the 
Monastery at Marienwaard : his portrait is to be seen underneath, and 
before him the image of the Virgin Mary with Jesus in her lap; and 
behind him the apostle Peter, with four coats of arms, 1560. 

Lamb. van Noord of Amersfort, inv. and fig. 
Dirk van Zijl, pinx., Utrecht. 
Behold how Jesus, being twelve years of age, and sought by Joseph 

36 WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 

and Mary, was found TH midst of the teachers, who wondered at his 
great knowledge. 

In regard to composition, drawing, and other artistic qualities, this 
piece displays the gusto of the nobler Italian school. The draperies are 
in fine taste ; and both the architecture itself and the perspective of it 

shew Van Noord’s ability in those branches of art. Equal praise belongs 

to Van Zijl for his share in the work, the execution being worthy of the - 

conception. 

XIV. The first Sermon of John the Baptist among the soldiers, to 
whom he said: “Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely, and 
be content with your wages.” 

Above, in a perspective, is represented King David with his army, 
~ sending two men to Nabal’s house for bread.—Given by the noble Lord 
Bishop of Liége, Abbot of Mons. 

The arms of Mons, Boutersem, Saint Simon, Sarburg, Brimeur, 
Rambure, Gridivre, Winexbergen, Croy, Loraine, Luxemburg, Batre, 

Chateaubriant, Fouteville, Meurs. 

Be willing to do what you can. 
Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goud, 1557. 

This work of Dirk Crabeth’s, which 1s the best preserved of all the 

windows, is remarkable for the number and variety of the figures. 

XV. The Baptism of Christ.—This window represents how Christ 
was baptized by John in the Jordan, and the Holy Ghost descending 
upon him in the shape of a dove, darting down from the clouds in a 
bright ray, while the words «This is my beloved Son, in whom I am 
well pleased,” are seen. : : 

Above the figure of the Ioly Ghost standeth Christ teaching his 
seventy-two disciples. 

This window, which is the earliest in date of all, was presented to the 
Church of Gouda by Georgius of Egmond, Bishop of Utrecht, and 
Abbot of St. Amand, between Tournay and Valenciennes. Underneath, 
his image is seen in a kneeling posture, and behind him that of Saint 
Martin giving alms to a leper; at which two hands appear from the 
clouds, full of gold, with these words : 

Open thy hand ; exercise piety. 

* The arms of Egmond, Meurs, Arkel, Cleef, Linningen, Zarwarden, 
Gulik, Berge ;— Werdenberg, Baden, Wirtemberg, Austria, Zimmeren, 
Nassau, Brandenburg, Loraine. 

* Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Gouda, 1555. 

Tts situation renders this window a particular object of observation, it 
being the one at the end of the choir, over the altar; and it well deserves 
to be so placed. In the upper part there was originally a representation 
of the First Person of the Trinity, as shewn in the Plate; but that 
figure was taken out in 1621, and the space filled up with yellow glass : 

the figure itself, however, is still preserved in the sacristy. 

XVI. Christ’s First Sermon on the Mount. 

In the upper compartment of this window, John is seen baptizing in 
the Jordan ; in the other, Christ commanding his disciples to go into all 
the world to preach and baptize. 

It was presented to the.church by Cornelius van Myerop, Provost and 
‘Archdeacon at Utrecht, and Canon of St. Saviour’s Church at Utrecht, 
1556. His portrait stands underneath, and before him Mary with Jesus 
in her lap, a serpent under her seat, and behind him a great fire, with 
the image of Saint Benedict, having in his hand a stick, with a black 
raven on it : it being on record and reported that a raven came every day 
to the said saint to get his food, and also that one Florentius, who could 
not bear the virtue of Saint Benedict, sought to kill him by a poisonous 

loaf, which he sent him as a charity. But this holy man commanded the 

raven to carry the loaf where nobody should be able to find it: which 
being done by the raven, he returned to fetch his usual food. 

The fire had this signification : Saint Benedict saw a temple, wherein 
on the altar stood a devil in the shape of the false God Apollo, to whom 
divine honour was paid. But this so troubled the holy man, that he 
broke the idol, threw down the altar, and set the temple on fire. The 
devil, incensed because of this, appeared in a most terrible shape, casting 
forth fiery flames from his mouth, eyes, and ears. The demon is here 
represented with a lion’s head, although in the cartoon for this window 
he has that of a man, or rather a satyr with pointed ears and sharp 

horns. 
Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goudz, 1556. 

According to tradition, most of the figures are portraits ; and the one 

standing before Christ, attired in a rose-coloured mantle and red cap, 

‘with his back turned to the spectator, is that of Jan Lonk, a pupil of 

Crabeth’s ; and not, as 1s most generally affirmed, that of Dirk Crabeth 

himself. 

XVII. St. John rebuking Herod. 

In the year 1556, the Church at Gouda was enriched by many 
donations of painted windows, and this one was then given to it by 
Walter van Bylaer, Bailiff of Saint Catherine’s Commandery of the 
Knights of Malta at Utrecht. His picture is to be seen underneath, and 
before him St. Elizabeth, with St. John in her lap ; behind him St. John 
with a lamb and Catherine with a sword, and beside it six arms. | 

Moderate things are durable. 
~ John openly rebukes Herod for his shameful deed and foul action, in 
committing adultery with his brother's wife, and thereby incurs his 
resentment ; for Herod, angry because of this, consented to his death. 

This window usually passes for the work of Van Noord and Van Zijl, 
at least of one of them; but is certainly not at all equal to their other 
performances, and is now known to be by some Antwerp artist, whose 
name, however, is not recorded. The story preserved of him is, that 
coming to Gouda to fix up his window, on beholding the two preceding 
ones (15 and 16) by Dirk Crabeth, he exclaimed: ‘No need to send to 
Antwerp for artists, if you possess here at home masters who are capable 
of achieving such brave works as these.” After which, he departed 

without staying to partake of the festive entertainment usually held on 

“such occasions. 

XVIII. Christ's Sermon, and the question of St. John’s disciples: 
¢« Art thou he that should come? or do we look for another?” 

Above, in a perspective, is to be seen the imprisonment of St. John. 

This window was given by Gerard Heye Gerardson, and Margaret 
Hendriks, his wife, and Frederick Arienszoon Gierenberg and his 

daughter. 
Art thou he that should come ? 

Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goud, 1556. 

In the fore-ground of the principal subject are several figures repre- 
senting blind, halt, maimed, and other afflicted persons; among the rest, 
one who is possessed by an evil spirit, which is seen issuing from his 
mouth in the shape of a dragon. This window, which is one of those 
which most attracted the attention of Rubens, is conjectured by some to 
have been the work of Jan Dirkzoon Lonk, one of the best of the 

Crabeths’ scholars. 

XIX. The Beheading of John the Baptist. 

This window was given by Henry van Swol, Commander of the 
Religious order of St. John at Haarlem, in the year 1570. His image 
is seen underneath in a kneeling posture, and behind him that of St. 
John the Baptist as patron. 

| William Tibaut, fig. et pinxit, Haarlem, 1570. 

WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. » 37 

Harsh in its colours, deficient in harmony, and not very correct in 
drawing, this subject does not shew at all to advantage in the company 

of so many others distinguished by real excellence. 

XX. This and the next window were originally executed not for this 
church, but for that of the convent of Brigittines at Gouda, to which 
they had been presented by Dirk Corneliszoon van Reinegom, Treasurer 
for the district of Gouda, Jan Heij Gerritszoon, Burgomaster, and 
Nicolaas Nieuwland, Bishop of Haarlem. On the convent being broken 
up in 1580, the painted glass was removed from its windows, and put 
up here; which accounts for the difference of character between these 
two windows and the rest, they consisting of various subjects upon a 
small scale proportioned to the spaces they were first intended to fill. 
The subjects represented in this window are: Judas’ Treachery; Peter 
striking off Malchus’ ear ; Jesus with a crown of thorns ; the Resurrection ; 
and the Ascension ; which two last are in the lowermost compartments ; 
and beneath them are portraits in half-length figures, one of them being 
that of Willem Jacob, Prior of the convent of monks at Gouda, the other 
of Robert Janszoon, Rector of St. Margarets. | 

These paintings and those in the next window (said to have been 
~ done by pupils of Dirk Crabeth in 1567, and put up here in 1580) do 
not shew to advantage in their present situation, being at too great a 

distance from the eye in proportion to their size. 

XXI. What has just been said regarding the preceding window 
applies also to this; wherefore it is necessary merely to notice the 
subjects of the histories represented in it: viz., an Ecce Homo; Christ 
bearing his cross; and the Pentecost and gift of tongues imparted to 
the Apostles. Beneath this last subject are some coats of arms, and 
portraits of unknown personages ; also the name of the donor of that 
painting—Thomas Hermanszoon, Prior of the convent at Poel. Among 
others who presented some of the glass composing this window was 
Nicolaas Ruisch, Canon of the church of St. Salvator at Utrecht, and 
Nicolaas Nieuwland, alias’ Nova-terra or Nova-terranus, a native of 

Egmond, and Dean of the church of St. Mary at Utrecht. In 1560 he 

was made Bishop of Haarlem by Philip II., which appointment was 

confirmed by Pius IV.; and he had further conferred upon him the 
Abbey of Egmond. He died in 1579. 

XXII. Christ Driving the Buyers and Sellers from out the Temple. 

This window, which in a manner corresponds with the opposite one 
of ¢Heliodorus’ (Window VIIL), shewing, like that, the chastisement 
inflicted on the profanation of the sanctuary, was presented to the 
church in 1567 by William I., Prince of Orange, and was executed by 
Dirk Crabeth, who has here displayed his usual mastery. 

According to tradition, the lower compartment of the window was 
originally occupied by some other history or subject piece, which was 
some years afterwards removed. Nothing of the kind, however, seems 
to have been remembered in 1657, when the lower part of the window, 
which was then blocked up, was cut through, and filled in with the series 
of coats of arms which we now see. These were executed by Willem 
Tomberg, a glass-painter of some note at that time ; and they are the arms 
of the then members of the City Council, viz., Dr. Martin Blonk, Gerard 
Cinq, Albert Houtman, Francis Herberts, Jacob Verboom, Burgomaster, 
and Lord of the Admiralty at Amsterdam ; Anthony Vossenburgh, Bur- 
gomaster, and Privy Councillor of Schieland; Jan van Immerzeel, 
formerly Burgomaster ; Nicolaas van der Graaf, Lord of Hoogeveen, and 
~ formerly Burgomaster; Dirk Beukel, Burgomaster; Florens Cant, 
formerly Burgomaster, and Member of the Council of States ; Daem van 

Abbesteeg, formerly Burgomaster; Isaak v. d. Berg, Hans Felbier, 

Herman Cing, Anthony van der Werf, Adriaan Verryk, Amilius Cole, 
Hieronimus van Beverning, General Treasurer; Gerard C. Cing, Albert 
Sas, Gerard Sterre, Adriaan van Swaanswyk, Govert Suys, Dr. Jan de 
Vrije, Dr. Luke de Veth, Dr. Herbert v.-d. Mey, Dr. Donatus van 
Groenendyk, Dr. Gerard Cing. a 

XXIII. The upper compartment of this window represents the Offering 
and Sacrifice of the prophet Elijah, which was consumed by fire from 
heaven to confound Baal’s priests. The subject of the lower one is Jesus 
washing the Apostles’ feet. 

Margaret of Austria, daughter of the Emperor Charles V., Duchess of 
Parma, Placentia, and Castro, and Regent and Governor of the Low 
Countries for the most potent Catholic King of Spain, Philip, her brother, 
of a Christian piety, and an exact observer of divine worship, gave this 

window for ornament of this church, in the year of our Lord 1562. 

- Underneath is to be seen her portrait, and behind her Saint Margaret, 

her patroness, with a dragon under her feet. 
Wouter Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Gouda, 1562. 

This exceedingly fine window, which is in the south transept, opposite 
the one given to the church by Philip II., and executed by Dirk Crabeth, 
1s a work of rival excellence,—truly admirable for its composition, design, 
and colouring. Both works equally attest the mastery of the brother 
artists, and the perfection to which they had advanced this branch of 

painting. 

XXIV. The first subject is that of the Angel bidding the Apostle - 
Philip to go to Gaza, to instruct and baptize the Ethiopian, who was 
eunuch of the Queen Candace. The other representation 1s that of 
the Apostles Peter and J ohn going to the Temple, and healing the lame 
in the name of Jesus, that asked them alms. 

This window was given by Philip, Earl of Ligne, Wassenaar, &c., 
Knight of the Golden Fleece; who died in 1583. He is pourtrayed in 
the picture itself, kneeling on a velvet cushion, and accoutred in a suit 
of gilt armour with a mantle; and beneath this figure are the arms of 
his father Jacobus, first Earl of Ligne (died 1552), and those of his 
mother. 

Dirk Crabeth, fig. et pinx., Goudze, 1559. 

Philip instructs here the Eunuch concerning the suffering of Christ 
and eternal salvation; who, being ravished by this doctrine, professed 
the Lord Jesus Christ, and said to the apostle, “See, here is water ;” 

which caused Philip to baptize him. 

XXV. The Siege of Leyden. 

This subject is the only one taken from the contemporary history of 
the Netherlands, and commemorates the Raising of the Siege of Leyden, 
October 3rd, 1574, after a most determined and heroic defence against 
the Spaniards under Balbez; during which it sustained all the horrors 
of both famine and pestilence,—horrors which give that city a place in 

the annals of warfare and its merciless havoc by the side of Jerusalem, 

‘Samaria, and Saguntum. To such a pitch had the general suffering 

and mortality reached, that the inhabitants implored the Burgomaster, 
Peter Adriaanszoon van der Werf, to surrender, when he made the 
following reply: “Friends and fellow-citizens, I have vowed a solemn 
vow, and I trust that He who is the giver of all good resolutions and all 
strength will give me the strength to keep it. I know that I must die; 
and as to dying, it matters little whether I perish by the hands of our 
common enemy, or by yours. If therefore my death will profit you and 
this devoted city,—strike! and afterwards hew my body and divide it 
among you as far as it will go. That T offer ye willingly—my vow 1 

K 

38 WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 

keep!”* Awed and shamed by such generous and magnanimous 
patriotism, the citizens retired, and determined to try to hold out still 
longer, although two-thirds of the population within the walls had 
perished. And hold out they did, to the utter astonishment of the 
besiegers, who knew to what utter extremity the city was reduced. Day 
after day did the perishing people invoke the mercy of Heaven; when 
on the 1st of October a violent storm arose, and the sea rushed in and 
overflowed all the surrounding country, so that the besiegers were com- 
pelled to save themselves by flight. Two days afterwards, Admiral 
Boijzot was enabled to advance up to the walls of Leyden with pro- 

visions for the famishing inhabitants. 

The arrival of these earnestly-implored succours is the subject repre- 

sented in the principal compartment of the window. Leyden itself, 
~ however, is shewn only in the distance, while Delft (which with Gouda 
and Rotterdam exerted itself in behalf of the people of Leyden) is seen 
in the fore-ground ; the picture being a bird's-eye’ view, shewing the 
inundated state of the whole country between the two towns; which it 
must be allowed is a most injudicious and unsuitable mode of repre- 
sentation for a subject executed in such materials and placed in such a 
situation. Among the figures here introduced is that of William I. of 
Orange, who was at that time resident at Delft; and among the galleys 
and other vessels here represented is one of very remarkable construction 
(formed out of two vessels united together), that went by the name of 
the Ark of Delft. 

This window was presented to the church, in 1603, by the city of 

Delft, and was designed by Isaak Nicolai Swanenburg, who was Burgo- 

master at Leyden in 1596, and for several years following : he possessed 

considerable ability as an artist, and oil-paintings executed by him are 
But though the 

cartoon was prepared by Swanenburg, the window itself was executed 

still preserved in the Governor's residence at Leyden. 

by Cornelis Cloeck or Klok, a glass-painter of Leyden, and probably 
the same who 1s spoken of in the Lives of Flemish Artists by the name 
of Klaas Klok, as a painter and engraver at Leyden, about the year 
1600; or else a brother of this last-mentioned individual. 
Isaak Nicolai Swanenburg, delineavit. 
Cornelis Klok, pinxit, Lugduni Batavorum, 1603. 

XXVI. Siege of Samaria. 

This window, which was presented to the church in 1601, may be 

considered a companion to the preceding one in point of subject, with 
the difference, that instead of being taken from modern history, the 
event here represented is recorded in holy writ,—namely, the deliverance 
of the city of Samaria when besieged by Ben-hadad, King of Syria, and 
reduced to the most deplorable condition by famine. At the time of the 
utmost extremity, Elisha predicted speedy relief, and it was wrought 
miraculously ; for “the Lord made the host of the Syrians to hear the 
noise of chariots, and a noise of horses, even the noise of a great host,” 
whereupon they fled in dismay, leaving their tents and their stores to 
the inhabitants of the liberated city. A more striking parallel could 
hardly be found than that which is thus drawn between the sufferings of 
the city of Samaria and those endured by that of Leyden, together with 
the apparent interposition of Heaven in behalf of the latter, as o the 
~ former. 
On each side of this subject is an allegorical female figure: the one 
with her head encircled with rays, and holding a sceptre, is intended to 
represent Divine Power, as is expressed by her trampling underfoot 
crowns and swords, the emblems of earthly dominion and might: the 

other figure, with a wreath of laurel on her head and palm-branch in her 

: architect. 

hand, represents Divine or Spiritual Victory, the triumph over the world 
through the aid of the Spirit. 

Though it has suffered greatly by time, this window is still a very fine 
specimen of colouring and execution in regard to the flesh, the draperies, 
and the landscape. The cartoon and the painting are by the same hands 
as the preceding subject of Leyden; and the former attests the ability of 
the Leyden Burgomaster in his capacity of artist. 

_ Isaak Nicolai Swanenburg, delineavit. 
Cornelis Klok, pinxit, Lugd. Batavorum, 1603. 

XXVII. The Pharisee and the Publican in the Temple. 

This window was presented to the church at Gouda, by the city of 
Amsterdam, in 1597 ; and the subject seems to have been chosen for 
the purpose of recommending humility and sincerity in religion as more 
availing ‘than sanctimonious austerity and ostentatious devotion. The 
then Amsterdam Burgomasters were: Cornelis Pieterszoon Hooft, dis- 
tinguished by his public spirit in maintaining the rights of his fellow- 
citizens, and distinguished also as the father of the illustrious Pieter 

Corneliszoon Hooft, one of the classics and luminaries of the literature of 

Holland ; Willem Bardes or Bardesius ; Cornelis Floriszoon van Teylingen; 

and Pieter Boom, one of those who manfully opposed and defeated the 

designs of the ambitious Earl of Leicester, in Holland. 

Hendrik de Keyser, architect to the city of Amsterdam, was com- 
missioned by the burgomasters to prepare the cartoon for this window, 
he being well skilled in design generally, and an able sculptor as well as 
Keyser, who was born at Utrecht in 1565, and died at 

Amsterdam in 1621, was one of lie best architects of Dis time and 

i as was shewn by the buildings he erected at Amsterdam, 

s. the Old Exchange, Haarlem Gate, the South, ‘North, and West 
Clinica also the Town Hall at Delft. Among his works as a sculptor, 
two are of considerable note,—the statue of Erasmus at Rotterdam, and 
the magnificent mausoleum of William I., in the great church at Delft, 
which last is held to be his noblest production. There is a tolerably full 
account of Keyser and. his works (by the author of these descriptions of 
the Gouda windows) in the ¢ Tijdscrift van Geschiedenis, Oudheiden, &c., 
van Utrecht,” for 1836. 

The figures in this window are by Cornelis Ysbrandszoon Kussens or 
Kuffens, who executed the whole of the painting. It is not, however, of 
any great merit,—perhaps not one of his best performances, for Van 
Mander speaks of him in his Lives of the Painters as an excellent glass- 
painter, which praise is certainly not borne out by what he has done 
He died in 1618, in his native town, Haarlem. 

Hendrik de Keyser, invenit, Amstelodami. 

here. 
Cornelis Ysbrandszoon Kuffens, figuravit et pinxit, Haarlemensis, 1597. 

XXVIII. The Woman taken in Adultery. 

This window was given to the church by the magistracy of the city of 
Rotterdam, in 1601. And it is rather curious that such a subject should 
have been made choice of by those whose office it is to enforce the laws, 
and to punish the violators of them. Where there is no doubt of guilt, 
it is not for the magistrate to say— Go, and sin no more;” for that 
would be to promise impunity, and to shew very great laxity in the 
administration of the laws. The lesson afforded by the particular case 
was of a peculiar nature—intended not to sanction a breach of the 
wholesome institutions of society, but to reproach those who would 
maliciously triumph over the fallen and convicted in guilt. 

This window possesses both as to design and colouring less artistic 

merit than is shewn in any of the other subjects; and the perspective is 

* This historical trait forms the subject of a very large modern picture by the late Chevalier van Bree (born 1773, died December, 1839), in the Town Hall of Leyden. 

WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 39 

faulty, owing to the point of distance being very injudiciously chosen. 
In entrusting the work to Klaaszoon Janszoon, the Rotterdam citizens 
seem to have been more anxious to employ a townsman of their own, 
than solicitous about the merit of the work. The consequence is, his 
work—brought as it is into comparison with so many others of real 
excellence—says very little either for his talent or for their judgment. 
The patronage of art should be exercised without favour or affection, 
since however praiseworthy they may be as to feeling, they may be 
exceedingly mischievous nevertheless. 
The arms of Holland, and those of the city of Rotterdam. 

Klaaszoon Janszoon, figuravit et pinxit, 1601, Rotterdamus. 

XXIX. The Christian Knight. 

Such 1s the title generally given to this subject from the figure of a 
knight in full armour, with a drawn sword; which is nevertheless sup- 
posed by some to be intended to represent the Prophet Nathan. The 
other personage is evidently King David, with his harp beside him. On 
a tablet below are the following verses, which sufficiently express the 
intention of the two figures, and justify the name and meaning given 

to the former of them. 

De kroon des levens en vreede zal hy ontfangen, 

Die als David met leedwezen zyn sonden beschreyt heeft ; 
En als den Christelyken Ridder met groot verlangen 

Die wapenen des geloofs altoos ter stryd bereyt heeft. 

The crown of life and peace shall he not fail to win, 
Who, like to David, earnestly repents him of all sin ; 
And in faith’s armour clad, as becomes a Christian Knight, 

Is aye prepared to combat sin with righteousness’s might. 

This window was presented to the church by seven of the principal 
cities of North Holland, in 1596 ; which circumstance has given rise to 
a second and political interpretation of the subject, according to which 
David 1s intended to personify the tyranny of the Spanish Government 
in Holland, and the other figure, or Nathan, to express the Dutch States, 
reproaching Spain for the abuse of its authority, and casting off the yoke 
of that power and boldly claiming religious and spiritual freedom. Over 

each of the two figures is an angel descending with a crown, the one 

intended for Nathan being more richly wrought than the other. In the 
architectural part of the composition are introduced the arms of the 
cities which gave the window to the church; viz., Alkmaer, Hoorn, 
Enkhuijzen, Edam, Monnikkendam, Medenblik, and Purmerend. 

This window is placed on the south side of the tower at the west end 
of the church, so that the North and South States of Holland equally 
contributed to the decoration.of the church, the corresponding window 
on the north side of the tower having been given by the latter; and 

both windows were designed by the same artist, namely, Joachim 
Uytewaal of Utrecht, the difference being that this one was painted by 
de Vrije. 

Joachim Uytewaal, invenit, Ultrajactensis. 

Adriaan Gerritszoon de Vrije, pinxit, Goudz, 1596. 

XXX. Jonah issuing forth from the Whale. 

This window was given to the church some time between the years 
1565-71, by the Fishmongers’ Company at Gouda, which, like other 
guilds and trading corporations of that period, had its patron saint. That 
of the Fishmongers was the Prophet Jonah; and they therefore deter- 
mined that the history represented in their window should record his 
miraculous preservation by means of the ‘great fisz.” For the better 
explanation of the subject, recourse has been had to the somewhat hardy 
experiment of exhibiting different incidents simultaneously. Thus, 
while in the distance is shewn the sea agitated by a tempest, and the 
mariners about to fling Jonah from their vessel into the sea,—he appears 
in the fore-ground just after being vomited forth by the whale three days 
afterwards. By a similar license, Nineveh, the city to which he was 
commanded to proceed, is depicted in the extreme distance. 

This window, which was painted by Dirk Crabeth, must have been 
executed about the time above mentioned, when were also put up the 
thirteen small windows in the clerestory of the choir, representing Christ 
and the Twelve Apostles. 

Dirk Crabeth, figuravit et pinxit, Goudee, 1565-1571. 

XXXI. Balaam and his Ass. 

This window, which is on the south side of the transept, was pre- 
sented by the Butchers’ Company, about the same time as the preceding, 
viz., 1565-71 ; and as in the preceding, the subject is here treated upon 
the principle of pictorial expediency, the miracle being expressed by 
means of a scroll, on which are written the words the animal is supposed 
to be uttering. Again, further on in the back-ground are shewn ¢ the 

2 

high places of Baal,” where, according to the instructions of Balaam, 
Balak erected seven altars, and from which he viewed the tribes of 
Israel encamped on the plains beneath. 

This fine window was executed by either Dirk Crabeth or one of his 
pupils, and, indeed, there can be little doubt that it was by Dirk 
himself, it being not at all likely that the ¢ Butchers’ would have been 
satisfied with having the subject given by them treated by an inferior 

hand to that employed upon the one presented by the ¢ Fishmongers.’ 

Dirk Crabeth, or one of his disciples, invenit et pinxit, Goud, 
1565-1571. 

With regard to the thirteen smaller painted windows in the clerestory of the choir (which have been already mentioned in speaking of 
Window XXX.), they are supposed to have been presented by different persons, and are the work of one of Dirk Crabeth’s scholars. The current 
tradition respecting the artist is more questionable, since it would make us believe that he died of sheer vexation on being told by Dirk that he had 
made all the figures a foot too short. Placed where they are, they certainly do look ¢ dumpish’ in stature, but that is owing not to their being so in 

drawing, but to their appearing so in consequence of the foreshortening occasioned by their being elevated so far above the spectator. 

Another window, viz., in the transept, emblazoned with the arms of the city of Gouda, is by Adriaan de Vrije, and was put up in 1594, when 

it was the first that had been added after an interval of twenty years. 

We have now brought to a conclusion our Descriptive Catalogue of the works which render the St. Jan’s Kerk at Gouda a monument and museum 

of the art of glass-painting as entering into competition with other modes of graphic execution. 

40 

CO CD WV VO WV WY WY DO 0 0 0 0D he ped pd pd ped ped fd pd fd ped 
SBE SS BRR WES oR Es Wo 

2 9 So Stk &£ © 

WINDOWS IN THE CHURCH AT GOUDA. 

SUBTEOT. 
Liberty of Conscience 
Taking of Damietta 
The Virgin of Dordrecht 
The Lords of Rhineland 
The Visit of the Queen of Sheba . 
Judith and Holofernes 
Consecration of Solomon’s Temple 

Heliodorus’ Sacrilege 

Zacharias Officiating . 

The Annunciation 

. Birth of St. John Baptist 

. The Nativity 

. Christ among the Doctors 

. The Preaching of John the Baptist 
. Tho Boptim of the Sevier © 
. The Sermon on the Mount . 

. John Rebuking Herod 

. Christ Preaching 

. Beheading of John the Baptist 

. Various Subjects 

. Treachery of Judas, &e. 

2. The Money-changers driven from the Temple 
: Elijah’s Offering 

. St. Philip Baptizing the Eunuch . 
. Siege of Leyden 

. Relief of Samaria 

. The Pharisee and the Publican 

. The Woman taken in Adultery 

. The Christian Knight 

. Jonah issuing from the Whale 

. Balaam and his Ass 

ARTIST. 
J. Uytewaal 
Wm. Tibaut 
Adr. G. de Vrije 
Ditto 
W. Crabeth 
Dirk Crabeth 
Ditto 
W. Crabeth 

~ L. van Noord and Dirk van Zijl 

Tomberg . 

L. van Noord and Dirk van Zijl 
W. Crabeth 

L. van Noord and Dirk van Zijl . 
Dirk Crabeth 

Ditto 

Ditto 

Unknown . ; 

Dirk Crabeth 

W. Tibaut 

opis of D. Crabeth . 

Dirk Crabeth 

W. Crabeth 

Dirk Crabeth 

Swanenburg and Corn. Klok 
Ditto ditto 

Hend. Keyser and Corn. Kuffens 
Klaaszoon Janszoon 

Joachim Uytewaal and Adr. Vrije 
Dirk Crabeth 

Dirk Crabeth or one of his Pupils 

ARTIST. 
Crabeth, Dirk 
— Wouter . 
Van Noord and Van Zyl 
Klok, Cornelius 
Keyser and Kuffens 

Janszoon 
Tibaut 
Tomberg 
Uytewaal 
Vrije, Adr. de 

WINDOW. 

8,7, 14, 15, 16, 18, 22, 24, 30. 

5, 8, 13, 23. 
9,11, 13. 
25, 26. 

97, 

28. 

2, 19. 

10. 

1, 29. 

3, 4. 

DATE. 

1597 

1594 
1561 
1571 
1557 
1566 
1561 

1655 
1562 

1564 

1557 
1555 
1556 
1556 
1556 
1570 

1567 

1567 
1562 
1559 
1603 
1603 
1597 
1601 
1596 
1565-71 
1565-71 

THE CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 

Bisuor NotTGer, who died the 10th 
of April, 1008, may really be con- 
sidered the founder of Liége, but 
more particularly of the style of its 
ecclesiastical architecture. He was 
interred in the church of St. John 
the Evangelist, situated in the Place 
St. Jean, Liége, and in the chapel of 
St. Remi and Hilaire. The foun- 
dation of this church was laid by 
him in the year 981 according to 
Fiseu, and in 982 according to 
Bouille: the plan is said to have 
been copied from that of Notre- 
Dame d’Aix-la-Chapelle. All his- 
torians agree in stating that Notger 

had a particular predilection for the Collegiate Church of St. John, and even wished to be interred there, and near to which 
he constructed a palace.* He was universally lamented by the clergy and people, of whom he was the instructor and 
father. 

Poy same | OT GER left to his successors a large independent and free state, the result of the able and enlightened 
A £255NL | administration of this holy and pious prelate, who, availing himself of his personal interest and that 
of his friends at the Courts of the western Emperors, obtained from them such important favours and 
donations as to enlarge the boundaries of Liége to such an extent, that henceforth it might be 
reckoned among the most considerable fiefs of the empire. The succession to so prosperous a reign 
was a serious and difficult undertaking, which devolved to the son of Count Louis de Loos and of 
Adelaide of Limbourg, uncle to the Count de Loos, Arnoul II., who was elected by the Chapter of the Cathedral of 
St. Lambert to fill the episcopal chair, ratified by the Emperor Henry II., and who took possession of the bishoprick under 
the name of Baudri or Balderic II. 

HISTORICAL NOTICE OF THE CHURCH. 

THE newly-elected Bishop was scarcely seated in the episcopal chair in 1008, when, vigorously following the political schemes of Notger and 
all the prelates of that epoch, he obtained from the Emperor Henry fresh grants, which again increased the revenues of his church :} the 
same year his territorial influence was further increased by the grant of the Marquisate of Franchimant by Reginar on his leaving for the 
Holy Land ; and again, a few years later, by the addition of the comté de Loos, left by will to him and his successors by his cousin-german, 
Arnoul II., who died without posterity.§ For these territorial acquisitions Balderic rendered faith and submission to the Emperor Henry II. 

* This palace formed the angle of St. John Street and of the Place St. Jean. It was probably rebuilt and restored frequently; but about thirty-seven years since it still 
preserved a remarkably old appearance : it has been divided into two large houses, which are numbered 813 bis.—Bovy, ¢ Promenades Historiques,’ vol. ii. note, p. 27. 

+ The church of St. John was rebuilt from a plan furnished by the Canons in 1757, and under the superintendence of Bartholomew Renoz, Architect, being then only 
twenty-two years old. The only part that has been left standing of the original building is the fower and spire, and we believe the cloisters, though we do not find the latter 
mentioned by any authority: these may be considered as nearly the oldest architectural remains at Liége. Old legends state with some degree of naiveté, that the tower was 
constructed from the ruins of the Chateau de Chevremont, so celebrated in the history of Liége, and which was taken by stratagem and destroyed by Notger in 980. The position 
of this Chateau may be remarked in travelling from Liége to Verviers, being particularly picturesque, immediately over the first tunnel, and about two leagues from Liége. In 
reconstructing the Church of St. John in 1757, Notger’s remains were removed by the Canons to the sacristy, and suspended in a case or box from the ceiling by iron chains, and 
thus remained until 1794. But as Doctor Bovy remarks in his ‘ Promenades Historiques dans le Pays de Liége,’ the vandals of that melancholy epoch sought riches even in the 
ashes of the dead. The remains of Notger were torn from the case which contained them, and trampled underfoot. An ecclesiastic who was attached to this Collegiate Church, 
finding the violators of the tomb departed, replaced the bones in the case, and carried them to the adjoining house belonging to the Baron de Stenbier de Wideux. They there 
remained until the troubles were passed and religion re-established, when they were again taken and placed in a kind of garret in St. John’s, and for a long time exposed to the 
inspection of each curious visitor, many of whom carried off portions. Doctor Bovy adds, that he visited the remains of Notger in July, 1838, and owing to the pious zeal of 
M. Dunivier, the present curé of St. John’s, they are now deposited in a suitable case, and replaced in the sacristy. 

The skull is large and well formed ; the long bones of the extremities and the greater part of the back bones are perfect, and seem to.be those of a person measuring 5 feet 
5 inches.* The teeth, which have all fallen from their sockets, are very white, one only being decayed. Among the bones are to be found pieces of wax mixed with turpentine, 
proving that the body was embalmed without removing the intestines, as these resinous particles have preserved the internal anatomical form of the small intestines. 

This amiable and talented writer seems justly indignant that Bishop Notger, the most illustrious of its princes, to whom Liége*is indebted for its existence, its riches, and 
renown, is still without a monument ;> he whose noble mind was entirely consecrated to the happiness and prosperity of his subjects; of whom it was said: Notgerum Christo, 
Notgero cetera debes | —* Histoire de Liége,’ par De Gerlache, p. 48. Doctor Bovy, ¢ Promenades Historiques dans le Pays de Liége,” p. 27, vol. ii. © Dictionnaire Géographique 
de la Province de Liége,” par Del Vaux de Fouron. 

1 See in reference to this two Charters of the Emperor Henry, quoted by Chapeauville, to the additions of Anselme, t. i. p. 224 of the ¢ Gesta Pontif. Leodiensium.’ 

§ See ¢ Histor. Lossensis Mantelii,” p. 36. 

a We cannot say what this measure may be, whether the Liége foot, which is about 114 inches English, or the French foot, which is about 13 inches English. 
b Ut est apud Sigebertum, Notgerus episcopus, annorum quibus huic ecclesize preefuit spatio, sic etiam magnificis operibus decoravit, ut non immerito ejus quodammodo 
conditor diceretur.—Boxhorn. de Leodiensi Republica, p. 59. 
L 

ag | CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 

In the mean time Lambert-le-Barleu (the bearded), continued to dispute possession of the Basse-Lorraine with Godefroid, and recently 
made a military tour in the province of Liége, the Bishop of which maintained the cause of Godefroid. This aggression determined the 
Emperor, who had come to Liége to celebrate the feast of the Ascension, to besiege Louvain by means of the Duke Godefroid, and thereby 
oblige Lambert to retire within his limits. Shortly after these events, which took place in 1012, fresh disturbances broke out in Italy, 
compelling the Emperor to return to his dominions, and thus leaving the Count de Louvain an opportunity of renewing hostilities. 

The Count being sensibly exasperated against the Bishop of Liége from the unalterable attachment of this Prelate to the Emperor, his 
lord paramount, and from his unshaken fidelity to the Bishop of Cambray, who was chiefly instrumental in the elevation of Godefroid to the 
Duchy of Basse-Lorraine, and of the accession of the comté de Loos to the province of Liége, which large inheritance escaped the ambitious 
views of the Count de Louvain, the Count hereby resolved to direct all his forces against the Bishop Balderic;* and what rendered him the 
more confident in this undertaking was, that the bishoprick seemed to be deprived of all defence. 

With these intentions, he entered into confederacy with the Count de Hainaut, whose resentment against the people of Liége, caused by 
their taking the Castle of Chevremont, one of the principal fortresses of his province, was far from being appeased, and also with Robert, 
Count de Namur, who was led to this step from the joining of the Ales of Florennes to the province of Liége, and which had heretofore 
formed part of his dominion.} 

Bishop Balderic, seeing these military preparations, and in the event of an approaching war, raised some works of defence at Hougarde, 
in order to protect that part of his frontier exposed to the first attack of the enemy. The Count Lambert availed himself of this occasion to 
demand of the Bishop not only the cause of his constructing such works, but also their total destruction. Balderic only replied to these 
insolent claims by prudent expostulations, declaring that these works were only intended for the defence of the country, and in constructing 
them he had not exceeded his right as sovereign prince. The Count Lambert, far from being content with this explanation, seemed, on the 
contrary, dissatisfied, and, without further delay, entered the country at the head of his troops, and abandoned it to all the horrors of pillage. 
The Bishop only repulsed this perfidious attack by pointing out to the Count Lambert the injustice of his aggressions; all of which Lambert 
disregarded. Then it was that Balderic had recourse to the authority of the church, and excommunicated him; on which the Count led him 
to understand that he should defend himself with the same weapons as those with which he was attacked.” But the Bishop seemed to 
forget that if, as temporal Prince, he should hereafter be compelled to draw his sword against the Count Lambert, he should, as Bishop, 
refrain from using those spiritual weapons at his disposal; but, wnfoneids, this was an age in which those separate authorities were 
completely intermingled. ; 

The expostulations and excommunication were alike contemned ; but the latter was so far useful to Balderic, inasmuch as it served to 
restrain other nobles who intended to unite their arms to those of Lambert; and gave time to the Bishop to assemble sufficient troops to 
take the field against the allied Counts, whose armies had joined with those of the Count de Namur.§ 

After imploring the Almighty, Balderic marched on the 10th of October, 1013, at the head of his nobles, his feudatories, and people of 
Liége, to meet the enemy assembled at Hougarde. The two armies made a sudden attack; the people of Liége rushed on those of Louvain 
with such impetuosity that their ranks were broken on all sides: victory seemed certain until Robert, Count de Namur, changed the 
position of affairs. The Count, seeing Lambert's army giving way, attacked the flank of those of Liége with such impetuosity as to oblige them 
to defend themselves in turn, and desist from the pursuit of those in retreat. This gave time to Lambert to rally his troops and return to the 
attack. Notwithstanding the most resolute defence, the people of Liége, being overpowered by numbers, were obliged to give way, leaving 
300 of their companions killed or wounded on the field of battle. The Count Herman de Verdun, brother to the Duke of Lorraine, after 
giving extraordinary proofs of valour, retreated in fighting, with one of his columns, into the church of Hougarde. The Count being here 
overcome, was taken prisoner by the people of Namur.** 

This battle, the first in the annals of the country in which the Bishops took up arms as Sovereign Princes, and in which the Count de 
Louvain wished to avenge the cause of his family, whose ambitious views were so often and for so long a time impeded by the Bishops, may 
be regarded, according to the authority of Pere Marne, 1 as the origin of that hatred which existed for so long a time, and with such 
animosity, between the inhabitants of Brabant and Liége. 

Balderic being naturally exasperated against the Count Robert for the active part he took in the battle which had been so disastrous to 
the people of Liége, marched into the province of Namur, with the Lord of Florennes, there to take formidable vengeance; but the Count of 
Flanders, at the solicitation of Ermengarde, the Count of Namur’s mother, offered his mediation, which was accepted by the warlike parties, 
whereby peace was negociated and concluded.ff Subsequently, the Count of Namur was indebted for his reconciliation with the Emperor to 
the united efforts of the Bishops of Cambray and Liége, whose influence at the Court was overwhelming. The setting at liberty the Count 
Herman of Verdun was received as a proof of the sincerity of the intentions of the Count of Namur. The sentence of excommunication issued 
against Lambert-le-Barleu was annulled, on the condition that he should build an expiatory clizpel at Hougarde, where dolly prayers might 
be offered up for the repose of the unfortunate who were slain in the battle. 

The exercise of sovereign power is necessarily accompanied with consequences for which the Bishop appeared quite unprepared. In 
reality, the Holy Canons would seem to contain no order opposed to the administration of temporal power in time of peace; but the taking up 
arms, and the entering into battles, necessary results of a civil government, and, above all, the massacre of troops to sustain that power, were 

the cause of considerable and painful uneasiness to Balderic, who was inconsolable at the loss of his faithful subjects: his affliction was the 

* See De Marne, Histoire de Namur,’ p. 99. 
+ Some of the chroniclers state, that the Count Lambert assigned as a motive for this war his pretensions to the comté of Brunengerung or Brugeron, situated between 
Louvain and St. Troud, the frontier of which joined his. 

1 Délices du Pays de Liége, vol. i. p. 164. § De Marne, loc. cit. p. 100. 
|| See Butkens, ¢ Trophées du Brabant,’ tom. i. p. 72. Gilles d’Orval, additions of Anselme, Chapeauville, loc. cit. p. 226. 
4 Butkens, loc. cit. ** Butkens, loc. cit. Chapeauville, loc. cit. ++ Loc. cit. p. 100. 

11 Many of the chroniclers of Liége assert, that it was stipulated the Count de Namur should pay 4000 pesants a or for the expenses of the war: what this would make of our 
present money we have been unable to ascertain, 

CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 43 

more increased, as at that time ecclesiastical discipline, so relaxed elsewhere, had preserved at Liége many marks of its original vigour. He 
had ever present to his mind the figure of a Priest, and, above all, a Bishop, clad in armour, at the head of troops, leading them to battle, 
where he was an acting witness of the death of such a number of human beings. Then it was that Balderic, kneeling at the foot of the altar, 
asked pardon of God as being the author of such overwhelming calamities. 

At that time, an Italian Bishop, named John, inhabited Liége, a man of austere habits and remarkable piety; possessing, according to 
Gilles d’Orval, an extensive knowledge of the liberal arts, of sacred and profane literature, and an extraordinary talent for painting.* This 
Bishop, after he had been banished from his See by religious troubles, took refuge at the court of Otton III., who honoured him with his 
friendship, and subsequently recommended him to Notger, who received him among his clergy. 

This Bishop John became the intimate friend of Balderic, who disclosed to him his most secret thoughts: the affair of Hougarde, which so 
sensibly affected the Bishop, was, as may be supposed, a frequent subject of their conversation: John endeavoured to console him, but in one 
of these interviews, in which his friend Balderic dwelt more than usual on this subject, he addressed him and said :{ ‘Superior minds should 
be above the greatest vicissitudes of fortune; it is weakness to give way to affliction. Not that I pretend to excuse your fault; to levy an 
army, to lead it to battle, and thereby shed human blood, can scarcely be tolerated in a secular Prince, and are crimes the more to be blamed 
in a Bishop. Humble yourself, in order to expiate your fault; let sackcloth and ashes be your clothing, a stone your pillow, and, above all, 
build a church, where prayer may be offered for the generous defenders of the country, victims of the battle of Hougarde.” 

Balderic regarded this advice as a warning from Heaven, which he hastened to adopt with gratitude. After having determined that the 
new monastery should be inhabited by Benedictine monks, he assembled his council to examine and select with them a suitable position for 
the new church :{ at first it was proposed to build it in that part of the town which had since taken the name of Amercceun;§ but this 
project was abandoned in order to adopt that proposed to build it at the extreme southern point of the island. According to Gilles d’Orval, || 
this was a frightful, uncultivated, uninhabited position, covered with wood, and a refuge for wild beasts; nevertheless its selection met with 
universal approbation, more particularly as in that part of the district there were then but two churches, those of St. Paul and St. John. 

Would it not seem a likely conjecture, that the object of Balderic, in choosing such a position, on an alluvial earth formed by the 
overflowing of the river, for so large a building as a church and monastery, was, to check the variable inundations of the Meuse in that part, 
and thereby conferring a double benefit ? 

The situation] and the plan** being chosen, Balderic, who was impatient to see his ideas realized, collected the necessary funds, and 
immediately commenced the work, the first stone of which was placed on the 25th or 26th of April, 1016.11 The work was carried on with 
activity and intelligence, so that the Bishop in person consecrated, on the 6th of September following, the crypt in honour of St. Andrew, 
in presence of his friend the Bishop John. He shortly after deposited in the altar the precious relics of that great apostle, which he 
owed to the munificence of the Emperor Henry,}}{ and invited some monks from the abbey of Gemblours, of the order of St. Benedict, with 
Olbert, their Abbé, a disciple of Harigere de Lobbes and of Fulbert de Chartres. | 

Bishop Balderic had not the satisfaction of seeing the work which he had commenced finished, and which he proposed to dedicate to 
St. Jacques-le-Mineur (St. James Minor),{§ as he died when the edifice was scarcely raised to the level of the lower windows, on the 19th of 
July, 1017 (N. S. 1018). His remains were deposited in the crypt of St. Andrew: on reconstructing the church, in the sixteenth century, 
a monument was erected to him in the middle of the choir. 

The works were continued under Bishop Durand, and finished under the episcopacy of Régnard, who consecrated the new church the 
25th of August, 1030. 

The Abbé Olbert, not alone content to co-operate in finishing the church, turned his attention also to the construction of the cloisters and 
monastery, the building of which, though urged with activity, remained unfinished under his administration, death having surprised him in 
the midst of the work in 1048, after governing the abbey for 28 years. The Bishop John retired, after the death of Balderic, into the abbey 
of St. Jacques, there to lead a monastic life: he died under the rectorship of Olbert,|[| and was interred near his friend in the crypt of 

St. Andrew. 9 

* According to Dom. Ant. Rivet, ¢ Hist. Litt. de la France,’ t. vii., this John may have given an impulse to the study of painting in the Liége school. 

+ This passage is translated from Gilles d’Orval, apud Chapeauville, loc. cit. p. 232, commencing in these words : Deinde, refert grande crimen esse, etc. 

1 See Chapeauville, loc. cit., and ¢ Ampliss. Collectio,” tom. iv. p. 867. 

§ According to some chroniclers, the etymology of this name is dmerine Court, or Court d’ Amerius, being the name of an old proprietor who possessed a large tract of land in 
that neighbourhood. 

| Loc. cit. p. 233. 

€] The historian of the Abbey of St. Laurent, ¢ Ampliss. Coll.” tom. iv., attributes the choice of the situation of St. Jacques to Bishop John, and that also at the same time he 
dissuaded Balderic from his favourable designs towards the Abbey of St. Laurent. 

*%* Some writers pretend that Bishop John was the author of the first plan of St. Jacques, no doubt founding their assertion, that at that epoch painters were in general 
architects : we have in vain searched for any proofs in support of this opinion. Dom. Rivet constantly speaks of him as a painter; and Daniel Ramée, (‘ Manuel de I'Histoire de 
I’ Architecture,” 1843, vol. ii. p. 128,) tells us positively, that when, near the end of the tenth century, Otton III. restored and embellished Notre-Dame d’Aix-la-Chapelle, he 
ornamented it with paintings executed by a certain John, whom he had invited from Italy, and that this artist, who, no doubt, was a priest, ended his days in the convent of 
St. Jacques, at Liége. Ramée quotes as authority Chapeauville, © Gesta Pontif. Leod.’ t. i. p- 230. It is but reasonable to suppose, if John was an architect, those learned authors 
would have so stated in their works. 

11 Ernst. < Hist. des Suffragans de Liége,” p. 283. 11 Chapeauville, loc. cit. p. 233. 

§§ We think it well to observe, that though Balderic wished to dedicate the church to St. Jacques-le-Mineur, we constantly find the pilgrim’s shell of St. J acques-le-Majeur. 

Ill Histoire Littéraire de la France,’ t. vii. p, 20. 

[4 Gilles d’Orval gives his epitaph, which is rather well written for the epoch. His remains were removed, as well as those of Balderic, in rebuilding the church 
in the 16th century, and their position was unknown until 1839, though a full-length recumbent figure of a bishop had frequently been remarked on a sarcophagus of 
sand-stone, occupying the first arch of the north aisle of the choir, which had been for so long a time closed by some worthless paintings, now removed. This figure 
was known to some under the name of Jikan I’ Consiew (John the counsellor, or adviser): guided by this popular tradition, the Dean Monsieur Van Hex, with others 
of the Building Committee, caused the figure to be raised on the 27th of September, 1839, and found underneath a small oaken box or case, about 25% inches long, 
14 inches wide, and 11 inches high, containing the bones of a male skeleton, of ordinary height. These bones were indiscriminately placed in a lozenge-pattern linen napkin, 
and covered with a sheet of lead, 9 inches long and about 13 inch wide, on which was engraved, in abbreviated Gothic characters, the following inscription : 

Hujus. urbis. epi. Johis. ossa. livit. du. magnificet. eccliam. dus. Johus. abbas. xxxviii. ano, xvi®, mil. ccce. atenutus. et. iteru. regdidit. anno. xxiiii®. die vi. mesis. aug. sub. 
De. Cardili. et. epo. Leod°. D°. Erardo. 

The following is a translation of the inscription : 

44 CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 

At the time we speak of, the monastery of St. Jacques must have been of considerable extent,* as we find it was sufficient to lodge 
Godefroid-le-Bassu (the hunchbacked), Duke of Basse-Lorraine, and other Princes, who had come to Liége to assist at the reception of the 
relics which were sent by the Pope to Théoduin, Bishop of Liége. : 

The abbey of St. Jacques continued to flourish and prosper under the first successors of Olbert: polite literature, theology, and the 
sciences, were cultivated with success, and rendered, ere long, the school of St. Jacques one of the most celebrated in Lower Germany. 

A part of the abbey was burned in 1369, under the abbot Helin de Meffe (28th abbot), from the imprudence of a workman leaving a 
chafing-dish of lighted coals in the roof; the refectory, the dormitory, and surrounding buildings of the abbey, became a prey to the flames : 
the historians who state these facts, add, that it was only by extraordinary efforts the church was saved from this general disaster.} Some few 
years later, in 1392, the church was struck by lightning, from which its solidity was considerably endangered.f These calamities were 
succeeded by a pestilence, which decimated the inmates of the monastery, and carried off 12,000 inhabitants of the town, including twelve 
of the monks of St. Jacques, together with the Abbé Bertrand de Vinegius (30th abbot). 

It was under the favourable administration of Renier de Ste. Marguerite that the foundation of the choir as it now exists was laid, assisted 
by the zealous and generous piety of the Sire de Louervaux, Englebert de la Marck,§ brother to the Bishop Adolphe, who gave him a 
thousand crowns in gold, so that he could carry on with activity this bold and expensive undertaking; but, like the founder of the original 
church, death surprised him in 1436, in the midst of this arduous work, when the building was only raised as high as the windows. He was 
interred in the abbey chapel. - 

The disorders which shortly after disturbed the province of Liége, under Louis de Bourbon, seem also to have been an obstacle to its 
continuation : as may well be supposed, the discord and confusion which then prevailed in the town proved unfavourable to the prosecution 
of so extensive a work, which could alone be carried on in profound peace. However, Arnold de Bercht,|| (35th abbot, 1474), endeavoured to 
save the property which had been dissipated by the Burgundian commotions, and to collect the sacred treasures which had escaped the 
rapacity of the soldiers. His example was followed by Gerard de Halin (1483-1500), who succeeded him, and who, according to the 
Brothers Ste. Montre,** was well versed in sacred and profane literature, an accomplished musician, and possessed remarkable talent as 
a preacher. 

Notwithstanding that the abbey of St. Jacques had by degrees resumed its original flourishing position, a dreadful accident which took 
place in 1513 obstructed the continuance of the work in the choir, and urged the necessity of the finishing of the church commenced 
a century before by Renier de Sainte Marguerite. We here give the incident as stated by the chronicler Jean de Loss. 

“The same day, and nearly at the same hour, as I have stated above, that Monseigneur the Bishop hurt himself in falling from the steps 
of the Draper’s Hall, the stone vault of the choir of the monastery of St. Jacques fell from decay, broke the pavement of the choir around 
the high altar, made an opening into the crypt, and passing through, destroyed the tomb of Balderic placed there,—we have also to deplore 
the loss of the marble slab of the high altar, which was invaluable, and was, we may say, reduced to dust. This accident astonished and 
amazed all who saw it: some were grieved at this sudden loss, others rejoiced, as the accident happening about eight o’clock in the morning, 
no person was killed, nor even wounded. 

“But this year (1513), and also the two preceding years, John, the Abbot of St. Jacques, resolutely prepared for extensive works, 
turned his attention to resuming the building of the new choir commenced nearly a century before, but for a long time interrupted, and 
unceasingly evinced a most praiseworthy zeal in urging its completion.” {{ 

‘The immense work undertaken by John de Cromois (38th abbot) could not be terminated under his administration: he died in 1522, 
some time before the finishing of the edifice.§§ This honour was reserved to his successor, Nicolas Balis. Thus the church, actually 
commenced at the beginning of the fifteenth century (1408-1436), relinquished and again resumed in 1513, was finished in 1538, 
as we find by an inscription at the foot of the bracket under the organ at the west end of the church. 

After the completion of the edifice, Balis turned his attention to its internal ornament, and of which, together with its general 
architectural character, we shall hereafter speak. This part of the work, as we find from some of the dates on the ceiling, would appear to 
have been finished about 1535. As a species of fatality, Balis, like his predecessors, did not live to witness the consecration of his work, 
having died in 1551: he is interred in the middle of the baptismal chapel: the bronze ornaments which served to decorate his tomb were 

carried off in the end of the last century. 

« John, 38th abbot,¢ when he embellished this church, disinterred, in the year 1516, the bones of John, bishop of this town,? and again re-interred them the 24th year (1524), 
the 6th day of the month of August,® under Cardinal Erard, Bishop of Liége.” 

A few days after this important discovery, the Building Committee of St. Jacques had a new case made, covered with lead, in which were deposited the precious remains 
of John the Italian, accompanied with two official statements of the opening and closing of the tomb; one of which was engraved on lead and the other written on parchment, 
to which was added the sheet of lead with the original inscription here given. 

* In the °Dédlices du Pays de Liége,’ vol. i. p. 168, it is said that the circumference of the abbey of St. Jacques was about an Italian mile, but as the mile varies in 
the different states of Italy, we cannot exactly determine the measure; but we are led to understand that the abbey occupied the entire of what is now called the Place St. Jacques, 
including the surrounding buildings. 

+ Faullon, ¢ Gallia Christiana,” Bouille, tom. i. p. 408, and MSS. Chronicles. 1 Zantfliet, loc. cit. § This Seigneur de la Marck was interred at St. Jacques. 
| Arnold de Bercht, the prior, the chorister, the sacristan, and five other monks, all died of the plague at the same time, in 1483. 
4 ‘Gallia Christiana,’ loc. cit. p. 985. *% Ibid. p. 986. 1+ Johannes Curvimosanus, John de Cromois. 

11 This passage is extracted from the Chronicle of John de Loss, published for the first time in 1844, by Monsieur Abbé de Ram, in his Repertory entitled ¢ Documens relatifs 
aux Troubles du Pays de Liége, sans les Princes-évéques Louis de Bourbon et Jean de Horne,” 1455-1505, in 4to, p. 130. This Jean de Loss was a monk in the abbey of 
St. Laurent, near Lidge, and was employed by Erard de la Marck to paint the chapel of the Chateau de Huy. 

§§ Jean de Cromois was interred in the choir in a magnificent marble tomb, which was considered a chef-d’ceuvre. It was removed in 1794 or 1795, by the French, 
in order to convey it to Paris. It was said to have fallen into the Meuse, at Dinant, but from recent information we are assured it is to be found at Charleville (France), in 
the garden of M. Lolot. : 

¢ John de Cromois or Curvimosanus. 

d Of this town, means, no doubt, inhabitant of this town, as John the Italian never was Bishop of Liége. 

¢ From the date on this plate, there is an error in the list of the abbots of St. Jacques, given in Gallia Christiana,” and in the ¢Délices du Pays de Liége,” as both give 
as successor to John de Cromois, in 1522, Nicolas Balis, 39th abbot. These two works thus place the death of Cromois three years earlier than the epitaph in Langius, 
as it would appear from the latter that he did not die until 1525. 

. CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 45 

The tomb of Abbé Balis was opened in 1829, in which was only found some bones, pieces of a brown coloured cloth or stuff, the remains 
of a brown coloured mitre with stars embroidered in gold, and a brass spring ring, with the following words in relief: Mater Dei Memanto 
(memento). 

The new church was consecrated the 13th of March, 1552, by Gédéon Van der Gracht or Du Fossé, Bishop of Castorie, Suflragan 
of Liége. 

From that time all the succeeding Abbots, being favoured by peace, and by the wise administration which seemed to be perpetuated in 
the abbey, as well as by the large monasterial funds, competed, if we may so say, in the ornamenting of their magnificent church. Abbé 
Herman Rave, fortieth abbot (1551-1583), added to the ornamenting and painting commenced by Balis, and built, in 1558, from the plan 
which is attributed to Lambard of Liége, the front of the porch in the renaissance style, forming the entrance of the church in the Place St. 
Jacques.* The screen which inclosed the choir was constructed in 1602, under Martin Fanchon, who governed as Abbot from 1594 to 1611: 
according to Langius, this screen represented a number of groups in bass-relief, as well as statues and ornaments, which attracted the attention 
of strangers and amateurs visiting St. Jacques by their remarkable proportions and finish. 

Gilles de Briamont or de Gréen, who succeeded Gilles Dozin in 1647, resumed the ornamenting and embellishing which his two 
predecessors seem to have relinquished. His first care was to furnish the sacristy with the most sumptuous sacerdotal ornaments, which, even 
at the end of the last century, were looked upon as the richest in the town: he also caused the present organ to be built, which, from the 
richness of its ornaments, has at all times attracted the attention of persons of taste: it was constructed by André Severin, who died 
at Liége in 1673, and was interred in St. Jacques, under the organ. 

More fortunate than the cathedral of St. Lambert at Liége, the church of St. Jacques had not so seriously suffered by the Revolution ; 
nevertheless, though it has escaped as if by miracle from the Vandalism of 1793, it nearly fell a victim to the ravages of the times, and to the 
carelessness and want of taste of those who succeeded to its administration in the beginning of the present century. Nothing less could 
preserve from complete ruin one of the finest Gothic churches in Belgium, than the present universal desire for the regeneration of the 
monuments of the middle ages, accompanied, as with respect to St. Jacques it fortunately is, by that enlightened zeal and pure taste 
of the Dean, Monsieur Van Hex, in which he is so benevolently and ably supported by the solicitude of King Léopold.} 

The present church is admitted to be unique in the splendour of its interior, its open, uninterrupted, and noble vista§ from west to east, 
its lofty and magnificent ceiling, | its superb altar, and its beautiful painted windows. These fine specimens of stained glass are scarcely 
to be equalled for brilliancy of colour, delicacy of drawing, and striking effect, especially when viewed from the west; but we will more 

minutely describe them in the original language of a Belgian artist. 

EGLISE DE SAINT JACQUES A LIEGE.—RESTAURATION DES VITRAUX PEINTS. 

“Depuis que on s’est rendu a I’évidence et que 'on a reconnu la nécessité d’allouer des fonds pour arréter les dégradations auxquelles nos anciens 
monuments religieux semblaient étre nagueres livrés sans défense, nous pouvons enregistrer annuellement un progrés de plus dans la restauration de la belle 
église de St. Jacques. Ainsi pendant la bonne saison de ’année 1839, on a reconstruit les trois derniers pilastres qui soutiennent et ornent la chevet de Péglise. 
Ces pilastres sont couronnés par des especes d’obélisques découpés en culs-de-lampe et qui rompent d’une maniere fort heureuse la monotonie du toit. Ces 
ornements, réunis comme en un faisceau a la partie supérieure de I’édifice, produisent le plus bel effet: on dirait autant d’aiguilles s’élevant vers le ciel, ou 
plut6t autant d’échelles mystérieuses destinées a reposer la pensée religieuse montant a Dieu. 

“Ce n’est pas tout.—On sait que les verriéres du porche avaient été remplacées, aux mauvais jours, par une grossicre magonnerie en briques et qu’il restait 
i peine quelques fragments des anciens meneaux. Aussi régnait-il en cet endroit une obscurité assez profonde pour compromettre, en certaines circonstances, 
la sureté et méme la morale publiques. Des pierres, se détachant parfois de cette prétendue réparation en ruines, menacaient les passants dans la rue. Enfin, 
depuis plusieurs années, une enceinte destinée a faciliter Pexécution des travaux obstruait acces et la vue du monument. Aujourd’hui tout ceci se trouve 
changé. La démolition de la palissade d’enceinte laisse apercevoir la reconstruction d’un sous-bassement en pierres granitiques, des meneaux en pierres de 
sable et une verriére en lozange, le tout heureusement restauré dans le style primitif de Peeuvre. Et ce travail contribue en méme temps a embellir la place 
St. Jacques, parce qu’il permet d’examiner les ornements intérieurs du porche qui font de ce morceau un véritable monument a part. 

¢ Mais la restauration des vitraux coloriés forme a elle seule la partie la plus remarquable des réparations de 1839. 

“Les anciennes églises du style Bysantin et Roman n’avaient d’ordinaire que de petites ouvertures. Le génie religieux finit par secouer le joug des 
habitudes qui ne répondaient pas a ses hautes inspirations: il voulut édifier des monuments religieux vraiment dignes de leur destination. C’est alors qu’on le 
vit élever sur le sol et porter jusque dans les nues ces monuments qui ravissent encore notre admiration, aprés avoir entrainé celle des sidcles; c’est alors que 
Pon vit Part chrétien abandonner Parchitrave, la frise et la corniche régulierement ornementées d’aprés certaines regles didactiques, pour se jeter dans les 
mysteres harmonieux du symbolisme. Des lignes verticales, appuyées au sol s’élancérent jusqu’a la volte et les vides des parois furent plus spacieux que les 
pleins. Mais il fallait ménager le jour, bien que la pieuse ignorance des peuples d’alors, s’alimentant sans le secours des livres, n’elit pas besoin de ces flots de 
lumiére que notre science réclame aujourd’hui: on fit colorer et peindre les vitraux; les murs furent tapissés de fresques. Cette révolution, qui elt lieu aux 
12¢, et 13°. siecle, atteignit son apogée vers le 16°. Cimabué, peinte Florentin, né au milieu du 13°. siécle, parait avoir été le premier peintre verrier, du moins 
parmi ceux qui laissérent un nom. 

3 

“Le 16°. siecle a été la belle époque de cet art. Alors brillerent, en Allemagne, Albert Durer ;¥ a Bruxelles, Bernard Van Orlay ; a Liége, Jean Nivar et 

* This porch is in the very worst taste, and quite unsuited to the building : fortunately it is constructed of very bad materials, and fast tumbling to ruins, so that we hope soon 
to see it replaced by one more in character with the architecture of the church. 

+ See Frontispiece to Vol. I. 

1 It was after the King’s visit to St. Jacques, in 1832, that the restorations were seriously undertaken: at that time his Majesty ordered M. Tielemans, Governor of the 
Province, and M. Jamme, Burgomaster, to furnish a circumstantial report of the state of the church. Shortly after, a grant was successively accorded by the Government, the 
corporation of the town, and by the province : the works were commenced in the summer of 1833. The restorations are now carried on with aetivity and perseverance, and give 
us every reason to hope that the church will be completely restored in a few years. ; 

§ See Plate XIV. || See Plates XVII. to XXII. : 

| Southwold Minster, Nottinghamshire, has four fine lancet east-end windows, in which are placed very fine subjects of the School of Albert Durer, presented to the church by 
the late Gally Knight, Esq., consisting of, 1. Baptism of Christ. 2. Raising of Lazarus. 3. Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem. 4. Scoffing of Christ. The third window 
conta‘ns an admirable portrait of Luther.—See Albert Durer’s Journal, in which he speaks of the Great Reformer, page 8. 

M 

IN 

46 CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 

Nicolas Pironnet; en France, Jean Lonsin, Robert Pinaigrier et ses trois fils, Jean, Nicolas et Louis. Les oeuvres de ces grands peintres, convenablement 
appréciées, furent restaurées dans le 17°. siccle et une partie du 18°. Mais la déplorable révolution qui signala la fin de ce dernier siécle et le philosophisme 
matérialiste qui voulut prendre la place de esprit religieux, détruisirent en grande partie les merveilles créés par le talent de ces hommes : la peinture sur verre 
fut méme comprise dans la proscription générale de la societé ancienne et livrée au dédain. Elle tomba avec les églises, frappée du méme coup de hache ou 
renversée par le méme levier. 

“ On sait ce qui advint ensuite: les biens des églises et ceux du clergé furent confisqués. La réparation que le concordat de 1801 établit en fait, fut si peu 
suffisante que les églises qui ne voulurent pas voir éteindre par le vent les cierges de leurs autels ou se morfondre leurs fidéles, aux heures de la priere, sous les 
froides atteintes de la pluie et de la neige, se virent obligées de remplacer la partie perdue de leurs anciens vitraux peints par des verres blancs. De li une 
bigarrure réprouvée par le goiit et qui Otait tout leur prix aux vitraux restés intacts, Aussi finit-on par les vendre. C’est ce qui serait arrivé tout récemment 
encore, a D. ..., sila députation permanente du conseil provincial n’y avait mis opposition. 

“11 est juste de dire néanmoins que P’esprit historique national, qui a fait tant de progres chez nous, depuis que la Belgique a recouvré son indépendance, a 
inspiré des idées meilleures. Partout, dans nos grandes cités, on s’occupe activement de réparer les antiquités religieuses, et les vitraux peints ont eu leur part 
dans cet heureux retour de sollicitude pour des monuments si longtemps négligés. La fabrique de St. Jacques, connaissant tout le prix de ceux quelle posseéde 
encore, malgré ses pertes, les a fait détacher avec soin pour les mettre 4 I’abri des accidents auxquels ils pouvaient étre exposés pendant ’exécution des travaux 
en magonnerie. Mais la ne devait point se borner son zéle pour ces chefs-d’ccuvre de art ancien: il fallait qu'elle s’occupit de les faire restaurer et replacer 
convenablement; c’est ce qu'elle a fait avec succes, grace surtout au talent de l’artiste qu’elle a chargé de ce travail, et nous en félicitons sincérement. Nous 
la félicitons surtout de s’étre occupée le plus tot possible de cet objet, sur lequel les voeux des paroissiens et les exigences de lart appelaient instamment 
son attention. : 

“ Car, suivant la pensée d’un artiste célcbre, I’emploi des verres peints tenait tellement autrefois a la combinaison du plan arrété par Darchitecte, qu’il est 
tout aussi nécessaire, dans un travail de restauration, de les conserver a leur place et en entier, que de relever un mur sur son alignement primitif. © Les 
vitraux peints ou colorés, dit M. Schmit, dans son excellent travail sur les églises Gothiques, sont un des éléments de Parchitecture Gothique et 'une de ses 
gloires. Ils en sont inséparables, comme la fleche, comme la forme ogivale. Les supprimer, les remplacer par des verres blancs, Cest opérer sur edifice 
une véritable mutilation. 

“En suite des rapports de la commission des monuments, et de I’avis du peintre verrier envoyé a Liége par le ministre, la restauration des vitraux 
de St. Jacques a été confiée a M. Capronnier, qui a déja restauré ceux de Ste. Gudule, a Bruxelles. 

“M. Capronnier est une spécialité dans ce genre de travail difficile, qui exige tout-a-la-fois du gofit, de la science et de Part. Le catalogue de la derniére 
exposition de Bruxelles annonce une composition de cet artiste qui lui a mérité les plus grands éloges. C’est la prophétie du vieillard Siméon, tenant 
Penfant Jésus dans ses bras. 

“Le travail qu’il a fait aux vitraux de St. Jacques est d’une réussite parfaite. Il se fait remarquer par une correction scrupuleuse de dessin, par I’éclat et la 
pureté des couleurs et surtout par imitation des teintes antiques, imitation si heureuse que des personnes qui ont eu en mains des panneaux ou des carrés 
eutiers, n’ont pu distinguer la nouvelle peinture de ’ancienne. 

“ Quelques renseignements historiques et descriptifs sur ce vitrail ne peuvent manquer d’intéresser les amis de art. 

“Il date du 16°. siccle et se compose de deux fenétres jumelles réunies sous une grande ogive. 

“ Au centre supérieur se trouvent représentés Dieu le Pere et la Sainte Vierge, entourés d’un arc en ciel formé par un triple rang de tétes d’anges ou de 
séraphins de différentes nuances. 

“La partie de la fenétre droite comprise dans la figure ogivale est divisée en quinze compartiments, dans un desquels se trouve une banderolle ou une 
sorte de ruban portant ces mots: Laudate eum in excelsis. Deux autres présentent, ’'un a gauche la lettre D, autre a droite la lettre H, initiales de Villustre 
nom de la famille De Horne. Les autres divisions représentent des anges portant les attributs de la passion. Le portrait du donateur, le Comte Jacques 
de Horne se trouve aussi sur cette fenétre. On le voit en priére au pied d’un autel ol figure la Sainte Trinité, avec cette inscription: Sancta Trinitas. 
Sainte Jacques, patron du comte, se trouve derriére lui et debout. Ils sont tous deux sous un dais oli on lit: Jacques de Horne, comte. Le tout est placé sous 
un arc de triomphe du style riche et varié de ’époque, au travers duquel on apergoit une chapelle dans le lointain. Ce dernier ornement est couronné par un 
dessin architectural au milieu duquel brille le blason des De Horne avec le collier de la toison d’or et les deux lettres II. Au dessous de la figure du comte, 
deux médaillons portent les lettres E M MI. 

“ La partie supérieure de la fenétre gauche est divisée comme la premiére. On y voit figuré un concert d’anges surmonté d’un croissant. Le compartiment 
du milieu de la ligne inférieure est occupé par une banderolle sur laquelle on lit: Laudate Dominum in excelsis; sur les cotés sont les deux lettres I. C. 

“ La partie principale du tableau que présente cette fenétre offre au regard deux femmes * portant un manteau aux armoiries des De Horne et agenouillées 
devant un autel sur lequel se trouve une Notre Dame de douleurs et au-dessus un dais avec inscription Sicut lilium (inte). Sous un autre dais et derriere ces 
figures sont les patrons et patronnes des personnages qu’elles représentent. Le tout est comme enveloppé d’ornements d’architecture du méme style que ceux 
de la premiére fenétre, et oii on apercoit le cadran d’une horloge. Sous les deux figures sont des armoiries en losange, forme spécialement consacrée autrefois 
aux nobles dames. 

“ Le vitrage entier est encadré dans une garniture d’armoiries qui sont celles de ’ancienne noblesse de la principauté de Liége.t 

“ On peut affirmer que cet ouvrage monumental, d’une beauté remarquable, Pemporte sur tous ceux du méme genre qui existent dans le royaume et par 
Iéclat des couleurs et par le talent que P’artiste a déployé dans la coupe des verres. Les sutures sont si bien placées que les plombs tiennent la place 
de Pombre et dessinent les contours. 

“Il y a une centaine de panneaux, et chacun d’eux contient, suivant le nombre et la forme des figures, de 50 4 100 picces. Ainsi, le vitrail tout entier peut 
se composer, en moyenne, d’environ 7500 piéces. 

“ Nous ne saurions trop engager les amis de l'art et les curieux a aller voir ce travail. La bonne conservation des anciennes couleurs et la fidélité 
avec laquelle on les a imitées dans les piéces nouvellement faites permettent d’admirer, au 19°, siécle, toute la fraicheur primitive du travail, tel qu’il est sorti 
des mains de Partiste au 16°. siécle. 

“ Nous exprimerons encore une fois le veeu que des fonds suffisants soient alloués par la commune et par les autres autorités, pour que la belle restauration 
de Péglise de St. Jacques puisse étre promptement achevée. Indépendamment des motifs d’art qui doivent y déterminer, il en est un autre tout matériel qui 
donne le méme conseil. C’est que les dégradations et par conséquent les dépenses a faire augmenteront toujours en raison directe du retard que on mettra i 

terminer un travail si bien commencé et si heureusement poursuivi.” 

* 11 agit des deux premicres femmes de Jacques de Horne. Il eut trois femmes, mais a cette époque 1525, la seconde n’était pas morte, ou tout au moins il n’était pas 
remarier en 3, noces. : 1 Ce sont les quartiers de Jacques de Horne. 

CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 47 

The glass is now, by the able hand of M. Capronnier, in the most perfect state: its faithful restoration is alike creditable to the 
Dean and to the artist. Desirous of obtaining some information on this point, application was made to M. Capronnier, who has 

most kindly supplied the following particulars. 

L’eglise posséde six verrieres peintes: cinq dans P'abside du cheeur et de méme dimension, et autre plus grande est placée dans la nef du cheeur c6té du nord, nous 
commencerons la description par ce dernier. 

No. 1. Le grand vitrail de la nef du checeur mesure en hauteur neuf metres sur six metres soixante centimetres de largeur ; dans la partie droite est représenté Jacques de Horne, 
et dans la partie gauche ses deux premieres femmes. Je retrouve un feuilleton qu'un journal de Liége (le Courrier de la Meuse) & publié dans son No. 309, de année 1839, je le 
découpe et vous y trouverez des détails qui je crois vous interresseront ; veuillez remarquer que ce n’est uniquement que de ce vitrail que ce journal parle, car a cette époque les cing 
autres n’étaient pas encore restaurés. 

No. 2 ou le No. 1 des verrieres de 'abside (No. 1 en comptant du c6té de I’Evangile) mesure en hauteur onze metres et demi sur un metre quatre-vingts centimetres de largeur. 
Ces mesures sont les mémes pour les quatre autres vitraux qui suivront. Il représente dans la partie inférieure: au milieu le perron de la ville de Liége, et les figures de la 
Ste. Vierge et de St. Lambert, dans le haut est représenté les trente-deux métiers en armoiries parlantes, plus, les blasons des Bourgmestres De Mérode et De Van der Aa, les 
donateurs du vitrail. | 

No. 3 ou No. 2 de I’abside, représente le fils de Jacques de Horne, agenouillé en priéres sous un portique renaissance, dans le haut est représentés les armoiries ou quartiers du 
personnage. 

No. 4 ou No. 3 de I'abside (milieu de I'eglise), représente dans le sujet du haut le Christ en Croix, la Vierge, et St. Jean. Le sujet du bas représente : sur le premier plan le 
Sacrifice d’ Abraham, et dans le lointain Moyse et le Serpent d’Airain. 

No. 5 représente le gendre de Jacques de Horne, un De la Marck d’Arenberg. Dans le haut du vitrail se trouvent les quartiers de ce Comte de la Marck . ...... 

No. 6 et dernier représente Marguerite de Horne, fille de Jacques de Horne, et femme de ce De la Marck d’Arenberg, du vitrail précédent ; la partie supérieure de ce vitrail 
représente comme les précédents, les armoiries respectives des personnages. 

Un de ces vitraux porte la date de 1525, mais aucun nom aucun chiffre . . . ils sont du méme artiste bien certainement ; mais il serait bien difficile de présumer I'auteur de ce 
travail, seulement on y reconnait Iécole Allemande et méme d’une maniére a ne laisser aucuns doutes. Peut-étre Antoine de Worms, peut-étre I'école d’ Albert Durer (bien entendu 
pas ce maitre) mais son école . . . . . Quant a ce sujet nous n’avons pu déterminer méme une supposition admissible . . . . . . . . 

Vous désirez savoir combien ces vitraux ont couté pour les restaurer, terme moyen ils ont revenu a deux mille francs chacun y compris Ientier renouvellement des plombs ; notez 
qu’ils étaient fortement endommagés . . . . . . 

Jaurais désiré pouvoir vous donner des renseignements plus complets et surtout mieux rédiger ; mais c’est tout ce que ma mémoire me permet, et veuillez m’excuser Monsieur 
en faveur de ma bonne volonté . . . . . . 

Jai également remonter et completer les vitraux des eglises d’Hoogstraeten, Ste. Waudru a Mons, la Cathédrale de Tournay,—Ste. Gudule a Bruxelles, et que outre les 
restaurations j'ai composé et éxécuté des vitraux entr’ autres & Ste. Gudule dans la chapelle derriere le cheeur a I’Eglise de Chimay, I'Eglise de Védrin prés Namur, a St. Adalbert a 
Aix-la-Chapelle et diverses autres localités, ete. 

BY IIE church of St. Jacques, at Liége, is an edifice of great magnificence: its erection may be dated from the period 
| when the old church was demolished, with the exception of the west front, which yet remains, somewhat heavy 
and incongruous in its architectural effect, but strongly marked with the Romanesque character of the original 
building. Inside the porched doorway is a square chamber, used as a lumber-room, and as a ringing chamber 

for the peal of bells above. The architecture is of the style designated in modern nomenclature as the third pointed, 

Samat or late perpendicular. The choir is without aisles; the nave has lofty aisles, with two rows of clustered columns, 
sustaining pointed arches, ornamented with trefoiled festoons. The triforium or gallery above the arches of the central nave is composed 
of slender mullions and trefoiled arches, surrounded by a balustrade. The wall which separates the arches of this gallery is covered with 
arabesques, and adorned with medallions containing coloured heads of men. The vaulting of the church, divided into angular compartments, 
is also painted richly in arabesque. Coupled blank festooned arches run along the aisles of the nave, which are without chapels: 
all the windows of the nave, but particularly the two large windows of the transepts, have ornamental flamboyant tracery of rich 
and varied design. M. Simonis, of Brussels, has presented to the church magnificent statues, 7 feet high, of the twelve Apostles.* The 
church is especially remarkable for the beauty and richness of its decoration. It is lighted with lengthened painted glass windows, 
between which are placed statues in niches 
covered with canopies. The Seven Chapels 
at the apsis or extreme eastern end have been 
restored and adorned in the splendour of their 
original state, and demonstrate how admirably 
the carved, gilded, and painted enrichments have 
been considered. 

The annexed wood engraving shews the 
charming simplicity and beautiful proportions of 
the eastern end of this truly magnificent church. 

On the left, looking west from the altar, is 
a double spiral staircase, leading to a tribune, 
which, from its beauty, lightness, and boldness 
of construction, is an example of its kind worthy 
of imitation. Exteriorly, the church is to be 
admired for its elevation and the regularity and 
noble simplicity of its architecture: the balus- 
trade surmounting the walls of the nave is 
similar to the triforium in the interior of the 
church. The present entrance is by a porch in 

the renaissance style before referred to. The 

exterior view of it is omitted in the wood- 

* The same artist executed the magnificent equestrian statue of Godefroy de Bouillon, about to be placed in the Place Royale at Brussels. + See Plate XVI. 

48 CHURCH OF ST. JACQUES, LIEGE. 

engraving at the head of the description, because its removal is contemplated by the authorities of the church as inconsistent in 
style and injurious to the effect of the building. The interior, however, is beautiful of its kind,* and ornamented with columns of three 
orders, between which are niches occupied by statues of Saints. 

The roof of this noble edifice is here subjoined. It is a curious piece of constructive carpentry, simple in design, and free from the 
defect of overloaded material commonly observable in structures of this period. On the occasion of a recent visit the Editor made a close 
inspection of the work, and can vouch for the accuracy of this engraving. It is drawn to a scale of 10 feet to an inch, and will, it is 
presumed, be found to be an example of utility even at the present time. 

ST JACQUES, LIEGE. 
en ROOF 

LONGITUDINAL SECTION 
SECTION 

TRANSVERSE 

Z 
<4 

TN 

- A | 
4 oh 

74 
V0 7 

AN 
WW 

N 
NIN 
NR 
N 

ui 

N E — 
A 
— 

N 
\ 

0 | 1 
i] x 
| : Ty oA = | 
LW Tn. = J Ze Keuzx s¢ : 
* See Plate XV. 
- - 

XT 
Ah 

DESCRIPTION AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE PLATES. 

A ORTRAIT of ALBERT DURER, a facsimile from 
the original by Hendrick Hondius, who was 
born at Duffel in Brabant, in 1573, and died 
in 1610, celebrated for his faithful and elabo- 
rately-worked portraits ; page 2.—2. Portraits 

of BriiBarpus PIRcKHEYMER and ALBERT 
DurEgr, in one small vignette, page 11. 

8. Facsimile of a composition by Albert Durer, of the date of 1511, 
from the original engraving, entitled ‘The Vision of St. Gregory,’ 
page 17. : 

4. Portrait of MicmarL WonrcemuTH, of Nuremburg, 1508, the 
master of Albert Durer, page 22. : 

5. Portrait of Bilibaldus Pirckheymer, of Nuremburg, the intimate 
friend of Albert Durer, page 22. 

6. Theo-theca or Sacrament-house in the church of St. Lawrence 
at Nuremburg, 1500, an engraving by Mr. John Le Keux,—an example 
of his great powers previous to death, page 24. 

7. Portrait of Dirk P. CraBETH, 

8. Portrait of Wouter P. CRABETH, 
Jan’s Kirk tot Gouda, facsimile from the original engraving, page 29. 
9. St. Jacques, Liége: roof, transverse and longitudinal sections, 

page 48. 

10. St. George’s Chapel, Windsor: West Window. The figures of 

Ancient Stained Glass restored, with canopies, bases, diapered ground, 
and armorial devices. (Zo face the Frontispiece to Vol. 1.) 

“The arched part of this window head has been filled by Royal 
badges on grounds of rich colour, with four large compartments 
in the centre, containing the devices of King Edward III, King 
Edward 1V., King Henry VIL, and Queen Elizabeth ; all of whom 
were particularly connected with the architectural history of the 
Chapel and Castle of Windsor.” * 

This splendid west window of the nave of St. George’s Chapel, 
Windsor, lately restored and re-arranged by Mr. Williment, is an 
example of large dimensions, with great beauty in effect, as well as 
a surpassing accomplishment of this art. Mr. Williment’s own 
words in the description of this window are quoted. «The glass 
occupying the openings was of the time of King Henry VIL, and 
consisted partly of fifty-nine figures of saints, prophets, kings, and 

~ knights, all of which had been removed to this window from various 
parts of the chapel in 1774, by the Rev. Dr. Lockman, Canon, 
who had placed the figures on a ground of clear white glass: the 
remaining openings were filled by reticulated patterns in common 

(The cost of this 
adaptation of the glass to the window was nearly £600.) Still, 

and glaring colours, placed also on clear glass. 

with all its defects, this window, particularly towards the time of 
, sunset, had, from its great dimensions, a very imposing and pleasing 
effect. 
removal of the stone-work, it was thought desirable to make some 
It was found that 

ten more of the ancient figures still remained in the stores of the 

The removal of the glass being necessary previous to the 
considerable alterations in the arrangement. 

Chapter ; with these, and by the addition of six new effigies, the 
glazier’s patterns were excluded, and every opening became then 
occupied by a whole-length figure. The plain ground of white was 
removed, and superseded by ancient diaper patterns in a quiet tone 
of drab; rich canopies, columns, and bases were added to each 
figure, and on a scroll which now runs through the whole of the 

bases of the lowest compartments is inscribed the prayer peculiar to 

| Schilders van de Glasen in St. 

the service in this chapel : “ Gop sAVE oUR GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN, 
AND ALL THE CoMPANIONS OF THE MOST [HONOURABLE AND 
NoBLE ORDER OF THE GARTER. 

11. The Interior West-end of the Church of St. Jacques, at Liége, 
shewing the organ-loft, and the singular style of the niches beneath. 
(Frontispiece, Vol. 1.) 

12. Theo-theca, Monstrance, or Remonstrance, of the Church of St. 
George, at Limbourg, (fo face the Frontispiece of Vol. IL) | 

The situation of Limbourg is very romantic, mountainous, and on the 

borders of Prussia, rising from the village of Dolhain, at which 
place there is a station on the railroad between Verviers and 
Aix-la-Chapelle. © This monument is on the right of the altar 
~ (looking west), and is designed for placing the Monstrancet pre- 
sented to the church in the year 1520, by Pirot Hubert, Mayor of 
Limbourg, de Velkryt, &c. 
Professor of Architecture in the University of Liége: the height of 

The drawing was made by M. Schmit, 

this magnificent monument is thirty feet. During a visit in the 
autumn of 1845, the Editor was much gratified by the kindness 
shewn by the Dean. This monument is in the most perfect 
preservation, and, with the exception of one by Adam Krafft 

at Nuremburg, described in page 24, is one of the finest of the 

few examples existing at this time. 

18. View of the Church of St. George at Limbourg, shewing the 
situation of this edifice, built in the 15th century ; the interior of which 
is of a plain character, although containing the rich relic of which the 
previously described Plate is a faithful portraiture. (Z%his subject is 
given as a Frontispiece to Vol. 11.) | 

The Crurch of St. Jacques, Lir'eE, described in pages 41—48. 

14. The measured ground plan of the Church, shewing its outline, 
also the curious decorated ceiling, (numbered 1 in the commencement of 
the Plates in the body of the work.) 

15. Longitudinal and transverse section of the porch, with dimensions. 

16. Elevation of canopy, from the angle of the choir, east end, with 
plan and details, drawn to a scale of feet. 

17. Enriched ornamental ceiling—agroining over nave—north— 
south, drawn to scale. ’ 

18. Plan of groining at the intersection of the nave and transept, do. 

19. Enriched ceiling, east, west, north, and south, do. | 

20. One compartment of groin from the choir, with medallions and 
bosses delineated : the spandrils of the groining are turned in red, 
7X 6X7, on edge. The floating is composed of a strong hair mortar ; 
the fresco ground averages one-16th of an inch in thickness: the 
subjects are drawn to scale. 

21. A compartment from groin at the intersection of the transepts, 
delineated. 

22. One compartment of groin and bosses from the nave, delineated. 

The splendid Parxtep and StarNep Grass Winpows at the EASTERN 

END of St. Jacques Cuurca, Lir/c. 
. 23—28. Window in two divisions, each of four compartments; six 
Plates, consisting of the magnificently stained glass subjects of the 
Countess and Count de Horn in fervency of prayer before the Virgin— 
the Archbishop of the principality with his cross—the Count in the 
presence of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, surrounded and sur- 
mounted by enriched architectural designs—the Majesty of the World 
—the Virgin Mother and Blessed Son—the Angels in prayer and 
Hallelujah—the Sun and Moon. 

* ¢An Account of the Restorations of the Collegiate Chapel of St. George, Windsor,’ by Thomas Willement, F.S.A., 4to. 1844. 
+ Bor placing (in the belief of the Romanist) the body of Christ or God. 

N 

50 es : DESCRIPTION AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE PLATES. 

This extraordinary collection of emblematical and allegorical com- 
position of the great master of glass-painting has on its lower 
margined compartment heraldic devices of the De Horn family 
and the archbishops and nobles of the province. The window 

is the second from that of the north transept, seen on the left of 

the choir, approaching the steps to the high altar. (See wood-cut 
at the beginning of this article, being the exterior elevation of 
the north side of the church.) 

» 29—32. The window here given, being that to the left of the centre 

looking east, or facing the high altar, was presented to the church 

by the Burgomasters De Merode and Blavier, whose arms, with their 
names inscribed, may be seen, the one above, and the other beneath the 
figure of St. John. It would appear that De Merode and Blavier were 
particularly popular, as from the archives of Liége we find they were 
elected to fill the office of Burgomaster in the years 1520, 1525, and 

1531, leaving the intervening term as required by law between each 

~ succeeding election. In the upper compartment of the window, above 

the springing of the arch, are represented the arms of Liége, and 
beneath, on either side, the arms of the Zhirty-two Trades. These 
societies were established about the year 1297, and are frequently 
spoken of m the History of Liége. 

It may be observed that there are sizfeen compartments, in each of 
which are the arms of #wo of the #rades, the references to which are 

given as numbered. 

1. Smiths. 18. Sawyers. 

2. Wheelwrights. 19. Timber-merchants, or rather, sellers 
3. Ploughmen (conducteurs de charrues). of timber by retail. 

4. Millers. 20. Carpenters. 

5. Bakers. 21. Masons. 

6. Vine-dressers. 22. Slaters. 

7. Colliers. 23. Shoemakers. 

8. Fishermen. 24. Cobblers. 

9. Coopers and Turners. 25. Weavers. 

10. Porters. 26. Bleachers. 

11. Brewers. 27. Fruiterers and Herring Dealers. 
12. Clothiers. 28. Butchers. 

13. Shearers of Cloth. 29. Tanners. 

14. Tailors. 30. Tallow-chandlers and Wick-makers. 
15. Furriers. 31. Mercers or Haberdashers. 

16. Old Clothes-sellers, or Clothesmen. 32, Goldsmiths, 
17. Bargemen. 

The lower division exhibits the Virgin and Child, Bishop Andrew, 
and an Angel on a pedestal, on which is inscribed “ Leodivm,”—the 
whole enriched with architectural design and ornament. 
— 33—36. These are at the eastern end, behind the altar. 
lower, each in three compartments, surmounted by Praise be to God ” 

Upper and 

— Praise to the Living:” left compartment, “The Father’s side, or 
paternal branch :” right compartment, “The Mother’s side, or maternal 
branch ;” with eight compartments on either side of Genealogies of the 
De Horns. In the centre, the splendid figure of St. James, to whom 
the church is dedicated. The lower division exhibits Count de Horn 
in prayer before the Virgin and Child, urged by the Bishop in full 
pontificals. The whole enriched by an architectural combination of 
angelic figures and medallions. 

This window was presented to the church of St. Jacques by John 
Count de Horn or Horne, who is represented in the lower com- 
partment in a kneeling position. This unfortunate Count, together 

with the Count D’Egmont, were taken prisoners on the 9th 
September, 1567, by order of the Duke of Albe or Alva, who 

was Governor of the Low Countries, under Philip IT. Counts de 

Horn and D’Egmont were beheaded in front of the Hotel de Ville, 
Brussels, the 5th of June, 1568. (See History of Belgium or the 
Low Countries.) M. Capronnier, of Brussels, who restored the 
windows of this church in 1843, states the date of the original to 
be 1525. | 
— 87—40. Upper and lower, each in three compartments: the upper, 
Christ on the Cross; on each side, the Virgin and St. John the 
Evangelist—the Angels catching the blood of life everlasting in chalices 
—at the foot of the cross, the mitre, pastoral staff, and shield of arms: 
the lower contains the Emblem of Wisdom ; above it, mitred arms and 
shields, and enriched architectural design. 

41—44. Upper and lower, each in three divisions: upper, St. 
Andrew ; beautiful embroidered tapestry in the back-ground— Heraldic 
arms of municipal authorities, nobles, and eminent Liégeois, with 
Underneath, Count de 

Horn in prayer, wearing over his armour a tabard emblazoned with 

their names written beneath in black letter. 

his arms; before him, on an altar, the representation of the Trinity: 
in another compartment, St. Christopher wading through the watery 
element with the Infant Saviour on his shoulder; with beautiful 
enrichments of devices and architectural details. 

~ 45—48. Upper and lower, each in three divisions : upper, beautiful 
figure of St. John the Evangelist—an Angel holding the armorial 
bearing of De Horn—the several heraldic devices: under, the beautiful 
figure of the Countess de Horn, kneeling before an altar, on which are 
figures of the Virgin and Child; behind her, the figure of St. 
Margaret—magnificent architecture and ornament. 

49. The Resurrection of our Lord ; facsimile of a beautiful miniature 
at the head of a page of a very curious manuscript from a volume of the 
Gregorian Chant of the 14th century : this has been copied and coloured 
after the original, with the ornament around it. 

50. The Legend of St. Augustin, the first Archbishop of Canterbury. 
When Augustin assumed (a. p. 602) the episcopal throne in that Royal 
city, he recovered therein, by the King’s assistance, a church, which, as 
he was told, had been constructed by the original labour of Roman 
believers. This church he consecrated in the name of the Saviour, our 
God and Lord Jesus Christ; and there he established an habitation for 
himself and all his successors.* Nuns in supplication,—* Pray for us, 
pious St. Augustin,” from a curious MS. of the 14th century; with 
Capital Letters and Ornament of the period, and curious as connected 
with English Ecclesiastical History. 

The colours of the robes in this beautiful miniature are worthy of 
comparison with those still held by the English Romanists. } 

Paintep and Stainep Grass Winbows of the CaurcH of Goupa, 

in Horraxp; (for an historical account, see pages 33 to 40.) 

51. Window I.—Liberty of Conscience represented by a female in a 
chariot, and tyranny under its wheels, &c. 

52. Window IL.—The Taking of the city of Damietta, in Egypt. 

53. Window IIL.—Under a triumphal arch sits the Virgin of 
Dordrecht, holding a palm-branch in one hand, and the city arms in the 
other, &c. 

54. Window V.—The Queen of Sheba comes to see the Glory of 

Solomon, &c. 

55. Window VI.—The Siege of Bethulia, and the cutting off the 
head of Holofernes, &ec. 

* Vide Professor Willis’s ¢ Architectural History of Canterbury Cathedral.’ 

+ White, on the Feasts of our Lord, of the Blessed Virgin, and of all the Saints not Martyrs. Red, at Whitsuntide, on the Invention and Exaltation of the Cross, and on the 
Feasts of the Apostles and Martyrs. Purple or violet, the penitential colour, on all the Sundays and Ferize of Advent, the penitential time from Septuagesima till Easter; and on 
Vigils, Ember and Rotation days, when the office is of them. Green, on all Sundays and Feriee from Trinity Sunday to Advent exclusively, and from the Octave of the Epiphany 
to Septuagesima exclusively, whenever the office is of the Sunday ; but in the Paschal time white. Black, on Good Friday, and Masses for the Dead, which may be said on any 
day which is not a Sunday or a double, except from Palm Sunday to Low Sunday, and during the Octaves of the Epiphany, or of Pentecost, and of Corpus Christi. 

DESCRIPTION AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE PLATES. «5 

56. Window VII.—This was given by Mary Queen of England and 
Philip the Second of Spain. 
the Consecration of Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem, and his Sacrifices ; 
the whole of which was destroyed by a thunder-storm, and white glass 
has taken its place. 

The upper part contains the history of 

No example exists except in this work, the drawing 
of which is in the Editor’s possession. The lower subject represents 
Christ’s Last Supper with his Apostles; and the King and Queen 
kneeling on cushions, with the sceptre, sword, and helmet, and their 
respective arms next to them. The whole beautifully conceived and 
executed. 

57. Window X.—The Annunciation of the Virgin Mary by the 
Angel Gabriel, &c. 

58. Window XI.—The Birth of St. John the Baptist is represented, 
with the loosening of Zacharias’s tongue, who, by the power of the 
Lord, sounded forth the praises of the Most High. 

59. Window XXIX.—The Christian Knight. 

60. Window XXX.—The Prophet Jonah issuing from the Whale. 

61. Window XXXI.—Balaam and his Ass. 

PAINTED or StAiNED Grass Winbows in West Wickuam Crurcah, 
KENT. 

62. From the east window of the north aisle, the figure of the Virgin 

crowned. 

63. From the same window, the figure of St. Anne. 

64. From a window on the south side, the figure of St. Christopher. 

65. From the same side, St. Catharine. 

66. From the same side, the Virgin and Child with flowers. 

The church of West Wickham, dedicated to St. John the Baptist, 
consists of a nave, chancel, and north aisle; a low square tower is 
at the west end of the south side. It has recently undergone 
restoration by Mr. Whichcord, Architect, of Maidstone. 

The church is situated in a very rural and prolific part of the county; 
is a rectory, originally rated, in 1287, at twenty-five marks in the 
King’s books, and is mow in the incumbency of Sir Charles 
Farnaby, who inhabits a fine old mansion immediately adjacent. 
The mansion is called West Wickham Court, built in the reign of 
Henry VII, by Sir Henry Heydon; at which time most probably 
the church was only repaired, as portions are evidently earlier than 
the period alluded to: it is small, sufficiently capacious for its 
thinly scattered population. There are three windows north and 

south, with the eastern and western windows; all of which doubt- 

lessly contained stained glass. The remains, small and inconside- 
rable as they are in comparison to a former time, bear evidence of 
the taste and execution of the designer. 

Besides the facsimiles which are now given, there is another of a 
skeleton in a kneeling posture, with a label issuing from his mouth, 
intended for that of Sir Henry Heydon, the founder of the church, 
as appears by the shield of arms at his feet: this is in the east 
window of the north aisle. Also, in a north window of the 
chancel is another small figure of St. Christopher. 

There are some interesting monuments in this church; one of 
Margaret, wife of Thomas Hobbes, 1608; and some brasses, 
probably belonging to the former church, and the mutilated figure 
of a priest, cut in stone, with an inscription in Saxon characters. 
Also, on the floor of the aisle, is a demi-figure of a priest, much 
worn, and the inscription mutilated; enough, however, remains to 
show that the name was Hontingfield, and that the individual 
commemorated was rector of the church. Near it is a large slab, 
formerly inlaid with brass, in the form of a cross fleury: only a 
few letters of the inscription are visible, but it seems to com- 

memorate another of that family, and in all probability Sir Walter, 

who obtained for this place the grant of an annual fair on the eve 
and festival of St. Mary Magdalene. 

The two illustrations, Plates 62 and 66, represent the Virgin 
and Child; in one she has long hair adorned with a chaplet; a 
basket of flowers is in her left hand, her right offering flowers to 
the Child, who stands at her feet: the composition is beautifully 
simple and artless. The other represents the Virgin crowned: in 

her left hand is a sceptre, in her right the infant Saviour, who 

holds a bird in his hand, apparently a canary, from its yellow 
colour. In the paintings of the early Italian masters, the infant 

Christ is very often thus depicted: this, as the other, is chaste in 

design, and very full of feeling. The other illustrations of these 

glass windows are excellent examples of their kind, and class well 

with the several objects in this work. 

Paintep and StaiNED Grass from York. 

67. Angel with Censer. 

This beautiful subject is from the tracery of a three-light decorated 
window in the east end of the south aisle of St. Martin’s Church, 
Micklegate, where it has formed a part of the general design of 
this magnificent window. The lower lights are filled with three 
very rich canopies, the middle one of which is slightly varied in 
colour, and surrounded with a border of lions and fleurs-de-lis, 
with reference to the arms of Edward III. The figures of St. 
Mary and St. John, as usually represented on each side of the rood, 
remain under the side canopies; but unfortunately the centre has 

disappeared, which, without doubt, was the crucifixion. 

The merchant’s mark and the following remains of the inscrip- 
tion, $+ PRICG DUR .... RIARC .... EN... . ERAIRE 
preserve the Christian name, although unfortunately the remainder 
is lost. Yet, with some degree of probability, it may be assigned 
to Nicholas de Langton, who, in the year 1342, was elected Mayor 
of York for the seventeenth time. 

68. St. Anne teaching the Virgin Mary to read. 

69. St. Cristofore carrying our Saviour. 

70. St. John the Baptist. 

These three subjects are all surmounted by three similar canopies, 
and fill the greater part of the east window of All Saints 
Church, North Street, which, from the following inscription, 

te 320 evshs Mhcholer blakebuan, Jumord in the south light, 
and oda water Tote Eboy ef» » n 4 maeele Vr 

wm fi) oh Jae deaXe in the north, is dedicated to the memory 
of Nicholas Blakeburn, his wife, and son. 
former, in a kneeling position, occurs under St. John in the north 
light. He was Lord Mayor in the year 1413, the first, and 1429, 
the second time. 

A representation of the 

A similar representation of his son, under St. 
Cristofore, fills the south light, whilst a representation of the Trinity, 
similar to the one shewn in Plate 74, under St. Anne, completes 
the whole of the lower part of the window, which is in the most 
wretched state imaginable: the upper half of St. Anne, from the 
cross bar, is turned inside out, whilst the lower part has the proper 
side "inwards, but placed as much as possible out of its proper 
position.” The other figures are more or less mutilated or displaced. 

71—73. Specimens of Ornamental Pattern from the west window 

of York Cathedral. 
Every person is acquainted with the elegance of the stone-work of 
this window, but few are aware of the beauty and delicacy of the 

glass. These three Plates will give a slight idea of the manner in 

» w # ” 3 “ 
" Ae 
» ro 4 
52 DESCRIPTION AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE PLATES. 

which the Gothic architects varied their designs. The other five 
designs in the same range are more slightly varied. In this window 
the archbishops and saints, forming the principal part of the de- 
sign, are shaded and finished with the delicacy of an oil-painting, 
whilst the profusion of ornament on the dresses requires the spec- 
tator to be on the same level, and close upon them, to make it out. 
William de Melton is said to have finished the west front of the 
cathedral in 1330, but the introduction of the fleur-de-lis, as shewn 
in Plate 72, and also a border of lions and fleurs-de-lis which 

surrounds a window in the nave, would lead us to place the date - 

of the glass a few years later. 
74. Emblem of the Trinity. 

This curious subject has now found a place in the east window of the: 

north aisle of St. John’s Church, Micklegate. - It was originally 
one piece of glass, but is now in a mutilated state. It is of the 
late perpendicular style, and will be interesting at this period, 
as it is the representation of one of those subjects which caused 
so much animadversion at the Reformation. 

Ornament from the lower part of the east window of Acaster Malbis 

Church, near York. 

This church is a most beautiful and simple specimen of the dicinsiod 

style; it is cruciform, and surmounted by a wood spire at the 

intersection, and has contained three altars. All the windows have 

been filled with stained glass of the same period, which unfor- 
tunately, a few years ago, came under the destroying hands of a 
country glazier, who, annihilating some, confused the rest. The 
subject of this Plate is the only design’ remaining out of seven 
similar, which have occupied the lower part of the east window. 

ki 

© 75..Head of oh Saviour. 

| 

© This is from the window over the north door of St. Mary’s Church, 

Castlegate : it is all that remains of the figure; indeed nearly all 
the painted glass has disappeared out of this church. This will 
give a better idea of the manner in which the greater part of the 
old glass i is drawn than a written description could; but a slight 
account of the manner in lich the glass remaining in York is 
executed may not be ‘uninteresting. The oldest glass is that in the 
clerestory windows of the cathedral, consisting of foliage and 
figures of the Norman era; next the early pointed of the transepts, 
and the decorated glass of the Chapter House, which are all 
drawn with strong and decided lines; and whatever appearances 
of shading exist are executed by hatching and cross hatching. 
The decorated glass of the nave, as well as the perpendicular 
glass, is finished with the greatest delicacy by shading, in some 
instances rivalling the softness of an oil-painting, and in others the 
extreme finish of a miniature. The generality of the faces are left 

white, with golden hair, but many exceptions exist in some of the 

finest specimens. In the magnificent figures of St. Cristofore and 

St. Lawrence, in the south aisle of the nave of the cathedral, the 

faces, hands, and feet are of a light flesh colour, and the hair of a 
light gray: the dresses, covered with a profusion of ornament, 
impossible to be seen from below, at once strike the beholder with 
the high motives which have actuated the designers. In every 
instance the various coloured glass is cut and adapted to the design, 
the meetings and joinings falling as much as possible in the outline, 
and put together with lead, which, in some instances, forms a very 

conspicuous part of the design. 

& % 

Tue compilation of the preceding pages has been accomplished during the very limited intervals of leisure which an almost incessant 

application to business permitted ; and they are consequently submitted to the reader with some degree of humility. Works on the Fine Arts 

have been for the most part written by men of education or fortune, who were enabled to devote much time and attention to the subject ; 
but in this instance the Editor has merely been enabled to collect his information from such broken and rough materials as presented 
themselves to his notice,* verified, however, in several instances by personal inspection, and in others corrected by a reference to authentic 
sources: he may therefore not unreasonably hope that some indulgence will be extended to his labours from the hands of the artistic critic. 

From the work of Dr. F. Kiigler much valuable information respecting the productions of Albert Durer has been derived; and this 
portion has been faithfully translated by Miss Moltino, late of Pall Mall, whose ability and kindness are gratefully acknowledged. 
Mr. W. H. Leeds, the able critic on architecture, has translated into English the biographical sketches of Dirk and Wouter Crabeth, 
“written expressly for this work in the Dutch language by M. Kram, Architect, of Utrecht. : ‘ 

To John T. Flanagan, Esq., the work is indebted for some valuable researches into the early history and antiquities of Liége, and an 
account of the rise of its ancient church. 

The vignettes are facsimiles of the originals, engraved, with one exception, by Mr. Charles Rosenberg and Mr. Hawksworth, who are 
eminently qualified in their profession. Adam Krafft’s Sacrament-house at N uremburg is one of the latest productions of Mr. John Le Keux, 
whose recent death must be deeply regretted by all admirers of the representations of Gothic Architecture. 

The Illustrations which follow have been produced with the strictest regard to accuracy in the drawings, and those in colours are faithful 

representations of the originals, executed under the able superintendence of Mr. John Waller and Mr. Owen Jones. 

Po 

JOON WEALE. 

59, Hica HoLBornN, 
June 1,-1848. - 

* «If we leave Nature, and look into Art, the workman hath in his heart a purpose; he carrieth in mind the whole form which his work should have ; there wanteth not in 
him skill and desire to bring his labour to the best effect, only the matter which he hath to work on is unframable. This necessity excuseth him, so that nothing is derogated from 
his credit, although much of his work’s perfection be found wanting.” —Hooker’s ¢ Ecclesiastical Polity,” Book v. chap. 9. 

"a 

Be 
+3 

® 
; » : 
B : : : , . Llate 7. 
i * . ¥ 
» 
’ ® - 
CENERAL PLAN OF ST JACOVES LIEGE. . 
: 3 . i 
¢ 
- 
® . rd 
» 
- «<< 
& . » 
- >” &¥ 
* % » 
¥- 
. f— . 
a ’ 
. ww! 
wr 
Seo . 
a » ¥ 
: & 
3 ¢ a 
* 9 ; 
. ® 
Jaw 
’ 
i 
& 
N— 
» 
. 
REFERENCES TO PLAN. - 
A.A. A.__NAVE AND AISLES. NOTE .. THE WHOLE ©f THE WESTERN TOWER 
B.B.BE__WEST TOWER %c. INDICATED ‘BY THE LINE, 4S OF AN OLDER 
" SC -TRANSEPTS. DATE, THAN THE CHURCH BEING OF THE 
) PD... CHOIR. 5 NORMAN OR LOMBARD STYLE 
E.EvE. CHAPELS. 
G.GC.._SACRISTY & TREASVRY. 
L.._ ANCIENT BAPTISTERY. 
4 
K.K.__ CHAPELS. a . a 
M__ PORCH. 
SCALE OF Ww, 2 et = oe = = > = == = = = > we ep 0d 5 TL = = ee 
DRAWN % MEASVRED BY F.J.RASTRICK ARCHITECT. ; Eo TEE ENGRAVED BY JOHN LE KEUX 
a. London, John Weale, 59, High Helborn, Jog? 1.1544 ¢ 
» o o . . 
- Ji . 
a 
. "wilh ¥ ® L . 
ii ™ 
# - 
¢ 4 i & 

ST JAQVES LIEGE... LONGITYDINAL & TRANSVERSE SECTION OF PORCH. 

rs 
16 2% 

LOGKING. SOUTH : {og 

A 

| 
| 
| 

DRAWN & MEASURED BY F.J.RASTRICK ARCHT sa ar = = i 3 TR. a Tom a ; Fa. mT : £5 i = : To : : He = TTL ENGRAVED BY JOHN LE KEUX. 
' : 

i 
ne 

$7 

JAQVES 

LEC E. 

Dy —D 
gor 

| 3 

} i 

| |S 7 

| 4 

| An 010d 

) oY 

Be 

i | fa 

| l= pa 

| Hy EE = 

| 

Hii 

| 

al / 

fi \ 

PLAN ON Li NE. 

a 

PLAN ON LENE. 

> 

2 
‘ TE 
RR SK 

aN 
wh 

£5 

: Nk \ 

y NVA 4 5 
7 x L DB 
DN 

PLAN THRO E.E. 

LOOKING DOWN. 

, 
i“ _ 
7 

FULL size 

CROCKET 

| 

| | — Ne wid 
1 4 TN 3-3 A 7 Fr uLL Sze, 
Co ENE IT 
| | = EE Er CANOPY >FROM. ANGLE. OF CHOIR. 
| ( WR | EAST END. 
| = 
| | SRE OF eens reer. 

1 
5 IR 

DRAWN & MEASURED BY F.J.RASTRICK ARCHT 

ENGRAVED BY JOHN LE KEUX. 

London: John Neale, 59, High Holborn, March, 25% 1647 . 

ale 
SNS 

Li 

¥ 

EAST 

DRAWN & MEASURED 

BY 

F 

J. 

RASTRICK 

ARCH 

STJACQOVES UILIGT 

GROINING OVER NAVE. 

NORTH. 

SCALE OF 126 © 1 2 3 4 5 

Lubin) ond ! | I= 

Loudon, John Wale, 9 fry 

le 

Holboru, April 1)" 1 84+ 

PRINTED IN COLORS AT 

9. 

ARGYLL 

PLACE, 

L883 M 

RAE 

eS 

ST JACQVES LIEGE. 

PLAN .OF CROINING AT INTERSECTION OF NAVE & TRANSEPTS . 

H1INOS 

I . 5 ade 
P 

BRAWN & MEASURED BY F. J. RASTRICK, ARC’ 

> A 
PRINTED, IN, COLORS AT 9 ARGYLL PLACE 

SCALE OF “136° 0 1 2 3 4 Ss 8 7 8 9 10 FEET, 
lutibosted 1 I I i L 1 1 { ba 

London, John Weale, 59, High Holborn, April 17° 1844. 

NORTH. 

DRAWN BY F. J. 

RASTRICK 

SCALE OF 

0 

batusbidid 

$4 

1 

SP JACQVES LIEGE 
PLAN OF GROIN. 

WIEST. 

EAST. 

5 10 

J 1 1 1 I 1 1 { 

London, John Weale, 39. High Holborn. October 7778 44. 

PRINTED 

20 FEET 

1 

IN COLORS AT 8S. ARGYLL: PLACE 

"HLiNOS 

we 

ONE 

COMPARTMENT 

OF 

ST JACQUES 

GROIN 

LIECE 

FROM CHOIR WITH MEDALLIONS 'L BOSSES 

N-E-A T 8D, 

ff J. RASTRICK ARCHT 

: I) 
SCALE OF fuses 

6 SS .0 
Laochoaind 

Iz 
SCALE OF ie 

SCALE 

Rind 

NOTE Ro 
THE SPANDRILS QF GROININC 

ARE TURNED-IN RED BRICK TX 6 » 2 
ON EDBCE, THE FLOATING i868 COMPOSED 
OF A. STRONG HAIR MORTAR.THE FRESCO 

CROUND AVERAGES 18 OF AN INCH IN 
THICKNESS 

TO MEDAL.IONS 4 BOSSES 
6 3 0 3 
Lodge dtr ticensenlh . f. FEET 

oo 

PRINTED IN COLORS AT 9 ARGYLE PLAGE 

FEET 

57 FJAGQQUES LIEGE 
CMPARTMENT, FROM GROEN AT INTERSECTION OF TRAN 
BE cod NE Ren oP SED 

ii Hosni 4 £ L i L FEET 

oT LEE TR bE 
-t Pol Re = cp 

ONE COMPARTMENT OF GROIN 4 BOSSES FROM NAVE 
BoE dee eEa FED 

$2 

12 9 6 3 0 
SCALE bdo dod aids nuk 

— 

L reer 

wr BEASURED v RASTRICK ARCHT PRINTED IN .O URR AT 9 a6 

sem 

Fenn sonst N= 

/ X V 

f: SO, 
COS 

lf 

AN ES 

CR WI A SR AT SR RY NS 

\ 
17 

Tan 
re i 

pS 

(3 

3 ? { @ 4 hs ; : Sone ; , r 3 5 ih 2 i § 1 ph 3 } y 4 A ; k i u om A AN Je i r D NY \ ] | 1 i ; : 8 | : | . 2 g x . . 
NN N o 3 Ce | : : 2 p \ i) Ri. x ¥ \ } 2 > : / © >” ; 7 7. < i M ; | 3 / Sp TR ; [ = py > | | : ; ee EA Es 

| 

rT 

e/ 

| 2 

59 High Holborn 184) 

e/ 

7 

eale, 

London, Joh VY 

I 
¥ : 
EE ss aa Ee ea ig / 
| - bomen &. —— 
: 
| i 
| I 

a a TT I ar 

po [3 Gomi ki a 

PS = eh Fe i § >", Be ; S : ’ - ; - : ; ; be / f 
3 ale {1 | > ac 3 nl = ff TE A ee ROSES | 3 ||| ar 2 | ME { “ psa i= Ea SSR 3 i 

J S bp i \ +5] # 
2 i A 
7 { NEN 4d 
4 § y " 3 

Ny or EC LE 

/~ We 

seed wae sE EE) 

Hi [IF 

Hle== 
¢ OS 

A 

NT EE EAN 

RE) 

ol 

posh fciide\ N\a 
L RIHA Nel 

RSA, CI oe SARIN 

Lol ik 
Lalita ae 

74 x i pf a id : RA = 1 RE | 2 iT : —— z Ferg ih = = = BE | i } Ro 2 Sree i 2 : = 1 a ¢ O14: 1 cis ; J = 1: i ee r- TIS ag aN a FRONT << aT A SR ae Sl Nm AT 

m=) i yi 
3 EB ab A } 1 . : 4 1 " Ei 
4 % ( 1 Vas 7 3 Nee | 1) J x PAL 
! = R > } nd 4 3 A g Pp 
3 . 2 

{ ®x 

RN 

TUR neTrd 

700 

3 
i 
ll Ef e/, 

[| ; i ; i fee i % AER . . 4 = fj } | 2 : . - J 
ELE i ee 1 | I) Esl Fl WECHE Sl Ei UE | | | JER eed ie Es liseltde El (EW 

iia SR rE Rn a uP BE So AAS 0 A RO OE A ECA + 
: 
} 

p - 3 BN “F 4 i a : { (0 bh 
Re 3 I 14 4 P 4 To ¥ i a E 1 
+ A 2 i 3 R\ [iE | oer \ y- ¥ 
P bi in 4 ay Nf: | ) \ ] \ | > I ; ok 
fo oe 5 | $ p 2 L hi irre Zr = hn ¥ ] 2 ( 
} x . = {| J " : p a a y A 3 i 
Ar 4 . _— \ : i 4 By A | ¥ i i d CA or y o 
bR Ls. & 1 A AE b - g g { I's f 

oe ey 

a Ty 

a 

ie 
. 
nw. 0 - 
"= by “wr 
kN -» bo 
oN : 
~ . ane 
i . . oh 
¥ i ¥ 
. 
v4 4 5 
» ~ = He 4 
¥ : . . 
» $ « 
- 
”- 
. 
. . 
. 
u * 
’ 
‘ 
A 3 g 
we * 
g 
4 
» # 
oi 
4 ¥ 
. . , =e ' 
A 
- 
: 
th tes i Lion Ren ar i a et 

grr 

Be 
- 

L 

= 
5 

RC Kgs 

RUST 

Err ES Sc oe I SS Coll 

< 

JACOULS LIEGE 

T 

S 

IN CHOIR ON. LEFT HAND LOOKING £AST 

WINDOW 

SCALE 5 REAL SIZE. 

HOLBORN ,L 1845. 

99 HMIGH 

LONDON, JOHN WEALE 

ga 

aE aN NE Sala Na 

0A DL 1 0 

IA 

CIEE) 

- *— 
beter ep ibmemedonee 

min se lad Are 

mdi = 

| 
1 

; N 
: ; NE 
< A i 
NS V q 
J 
L hy 
; Z iid > a 5 A F a 
2 0 + : i * » ] 
5 4 B i [| g ) 
CCN Rt a Pe 7 oe : 
ZL Jn CS 5 Tr f TE 5 

Ld 

- i: — 
a Rc i ” / i \ hy i J wi 
san. » ; : 4 

i 
RRs 

% 0% Sd 4 M ig 
( F & 
: 22 \ 
J 
br 
4 
" oe 
y y 
i Gy 7 
Q » 1? \\g 
hy 
i 
pg ? | 
he . 
< _ i e { - " - wR 
p #0 1 -_ A A 
Bd 3 j - =e 2 
= : \ A i 3 4 Rees, oo] eng 
% BS $ ) Wha 
- a gi AG NT es Te IE Eo ’ a i 
3 - 7 = ” rr a SA a pa re AR ae ¥ or ~ 
a Boadud ER FEET 4 ni 5 % - % a oly 3 ra, mat. v fo 
+ 
Gi ra Reticle edie te bts Mra mist Alot ie eign . . 
\ 
. 
¥ 
| - 
& 
~ 
' 

hd 

ge 
& 

¢ 

410 Br 

Ete BA ge Sn 

a 

of 

\ 
\GA AVAVAYAVAY AV AVAVAVAVAV A 

S 
3 

Ca 
vio Te 
ETT TE 25 a 

ARG 

INL SN LN LN CN LN NN Se) 

{GD LO) 
» 

CTT 
0d 0) 

i 0g 

SHZE. 

UIs. LIIGL. 

REAL 

. leg Holbori [X#5 

UL? Ll gol oll oo 

JACQ 

+ 

3 

| 1 

(XL 

London John V) 

I | Ag SiH hs R os 

4 fy 3 . i A SE 

} 

Nf OD € EO { Re 
y RN 

el rh 
BI l= 1==T1o = TT 

a BEd NR 
ilfe=r | 

OC vem i] | be 6 Q) Yo (cle & > 

i TTT 
Be 

BTS 
% fa) 

EVIVNVVIVYYVNVNNS 

ns : 
5 EEE w 

* 
- - 
' 
' \ 
“* 
; Fo - 
| 
> » 
i ¥ 
’ 

i 

\ : 

s . ay 
ke $ 4 4 
- " - 
5 a & 
a * » . % 
® $ 
fae * 
J 3 
"4 
# * + 
és : ? 
2X 
Ww 5 ! 4 
53 
we » 3 2 ¥ 
A = » ., bo 
. » : » y * i 
k i Ee . 
& ob 0 
d : i 

a 

ET 

Eo 

QUES LIEGE. 

T 

JAC 

= 

2 yi 
eo ) 
" : * 
n. 
+ % 
. i - 
¢ Be 
i . 
, 4 ™ 
r or ; 

~ 
. 
3] 
~ i « 

'AVAVAVAVAVAVAVAVAVAVAVAV A 

LAN BL ENA) ETT TE TR LG FTN 

date] fo 
> = 

ae) 

AA | 
1 

Sa 
- 1 
# 

Aoae/ BA AJ BN OF EA A fo] 

VAVAVAV AV AVAVAVAVAVA 

sae (Ee El (LTE( EIS RACE | = AHO ; )) =) 

| 

or 
SH 

r 

bh [Hollprn 764 

. 
2 

QUES LI 

\ 

~~ 

Not 

A 

A 
olin Weale, 59 £1 

a) 

CY 

-\J 

Zz 
OVE OLL 

J 
AL