File:A history of painting (1911) (14597070157).jpg

Identifier: historyofpaintin01macf (find matches)
Title: A history of painting
Year: 1911 (1910s)
Authors: Macfall, Haldane, 1860-1928
Subjects: Painting Painters
Publisher: London and Edinburgh : T.C. and E.C. Jack
Contributing Library: University of California Libraries
Digitizing Sponsor: Internet Archive

View Book Page: Book Viewer
About This Book: Catalog Entry
View All Images: All Images From Book
Click here to view book online to see this illustration in context in a browseable online version of this book.

Text Appearing Before Image:
n of theRocks in general arrangement are so slight as to prove thatone is at least an intended replica of the other ; but in spiteof the fact that the Louvre painting, if by Leonardo, isobviously earlier and less mature than the London Virgin ofthe Rocks, considerable doubt must hang about the greaterclaim to authentic certainty as regards the Louvre picture.We have seen that Ambrogio da Predis was partner inLeonardos appeal concerning the payment for it, the whichestablishes da Prediss handiwork upon the Louvre picturefor a certainty. It may be that both paintings were wroughtby the two painters. But not a doubt can remain in the148 XX LEONARDO DA VINCI1452 1519 FLORENTINE SCHOOL MONA LISA(La Joconde) (Louvre) The portrait of Lisa di Anton Maria di Noldo Gherardini, third wifeof Francesco di Bartolommeo de Zenobi del Giocondo. This picture isworld-renowned for the sphinx-like smile of Mima Lisa. Painted in tempera on panel, and restored in oil. 2 ft. 6£ in. x 1 ft. 9 in.(0-79x0-53).
Text Appearing After Image:
OF PAINTING mind of such as have a real sense of art, that the Virgin of WHEREINthe Rocks is by far the more profound work of genius. And WE MEET if Ambrogio da Predis only worked upon it under THE GIANT • • ■ OF THF Leonardos guidance, then Ambrogio da Predis must be acclaimed the greater artist. There can be no shadow of TIMF audoubt that the Virgin of the Rocks is in greater and most t^hF npimportant part the work of Leonardo da Vinci; and, not NAISSANCEonly so, but it is about his supreme achievement in paintingthat has come down to us. The dozen years or so ofdifference in the time of the creation of the two master-pieces would account for the enormous increase of powerrevealed in the Virgin of the Rocks—if Leonardo chieflypainted it. There are unimportant details in the picturewhich, by their comparative weakness of handling, mayadmit of Ambrogio da Prediss workmanship, though eventhese are open to grave question. That the gilt halos, thecross of the little Baptist, and

Note About Images