TITIAN AND NICHOLAS POUSSIN.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE SPECTATOR.
Sm-,--Your correspondent "An Amateur" has displayed a singular boldness in questioning the genuineness of the "Bacchus and Ariadne," so long believed to be the work of Titian. I do not intend to dispute this point with him. Sir Joshua Reynolds made that picture the subject of an elaborate criticism, without suggest- ing any doubt of its origin. If his authority is disregarded, of course mine would be quite ineffectual to convince the Amateur of his error. I would only refer such of your readers as may have forgotten it to the President's Eighth Discourse; where they will find some of the same things pointed out as proofs of the skill of the artist which are now selected as being unworthy of him. Still, if the Ama- teur is not satisfied by that authority, and by the general consent of critics which has followed this picture from the Aldobrandini Palace to the National Gallery, he shows a proper independence in stating his doubts. I propose only to give some reasons for the opinion, that even if this were not the work of Titian, (of which I, have not the slightest doubt,) it could not be that of N. Poussin. These are, in brief—that Poussin could not colour an well, and would not draw so badly. As to the colour, your correspondent perceives that if that artist painted the pic- ture he must have done it in emulation of the colouring of Titian. Now, though IF doubt not that the learned 'Frenchman in copying a work of Titian could have imitated his colour very closely, I do not believe that in an original picture, Poussin could have achieved so perfect a resemblance, in this particular, to the great Venetian. This difference between the power of copying and that of origi- nating colour is familiar to all artists. The one may be acquired by education; the other depends upon an origination which education may improve but cannot create. If Poussin could, in an original work, have produced such colour as that of the "Bacchus and Ariadne," he would never have contented himself with the brick-dust hue that pervades all his acknowledged historical pictures. His land- scapes, it is true, are painted with a better feeling in that respect, but not so much so as to convince Inc that he would voluntarily resign the magical wand of Titian. Again, is it possible that the accurate knowledge of Poussin could have Safer deserted-him, while studying the colour of Titian, as to permit him to oom mit the gross faults in drawing with which this picture abounds? We knew that Titian was neither leiiined nor careful in his outline, but that Poussin was a severe and successful student of the antique. The Amateur appeals to the surrounding works of Poussin for confirmation of his conjecture. By that comparison the question may fairly- be tried ; but let no one, without examination, take it for granted that there is any resemblance or even a possibility of a common origin between them and this picture. As to the objection that it has the movement of Poussin and not the repose of Titian, let the Amateur remember the movement of the " Peter Martyr" of Titian and the. repose of the " Arcadia" of Poussin, and he will acknowledge that neither of these great artists can be judged by so narrow a criterion.
I take this opportunity of adding my voice to that of your correspondent, to deprecate the continuance of the scouring process upon these noble works of an almost forgotten art. Let it suffice that there is one less in existence of the works of Rnbens, and one of those of Guido, nuder the auspices of the National Gallery of Great Britain. The " Peace and War" and the " Susannah" are quite sof- ficient proofs how vain are such attempts to improve what the world has admired
as the striking resemblance in attitude between the Lazarus, in the great picture of Sebastian del Piombo, and the figure in " Michael Angelo's Dream; " (No. 8,) ever suggested as one of the proofs that the Florentine assisted Sebastian in his competition with Ralaelle?
Previous page
