yCrNRLF 
 
 8 3 ma ^55 
 
 »mm 
 
 mttiS\Uiiy. 
 
eg*' 
 
 LIB R ARY 
 
 OF THE 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 GIFT OK , 
 
 Received 6cU. 3| ,iSg^. 
 
 A ccessions No. l^QQ^. 5' Shelf No.^- 
 
 <3a 
 
 ♦30 
 
 i^l 
 
 
>9-30,„.j..70(N,„'*^ 
 
 \Ji:^^ 
 
 \,^* 
 
 k«ur 
 
 m. 
 
 'i^ 
 
 'f,^x\ 
 
 ^ 
 
 fe 
 
^ESTHETICS 
 
 ITS PROBLEMS AND LITERATURE 
 
 BY 
 
 FRED N. SCOTT, PH. D. 
 
 Assistant- Prolessor ot Rhetoric in the Universitu ol Wlicnigan 
 
 
 '^im-s: 
 
 ANN AKBOK 
 
 Zbc f^Ian^ prc6» 
 
THE REGISTER PUBLISHING COMPANY: 
 ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN. 
 
INTRODUCTORY. 
 
 It must be regarded as unfortunate that the 
 study of works of art and the study of the 
 theory of art have somehow come to be looked 
 upon as two altogether distinct lines of research, 
 for each of these two important branches of 
 knowledge, when rightly considered, is seen to 
 be essential to the well-being of the other. 
 Esthetics, unless it rests on a concrete basis of 
 actual art products, unless, even, it is prepared 
 to reckon with the latest attenuation of ' real- 
 ism ' and the most recent discoveries in 
 archaeology, is in no small danger of becoming 
 abstract or fantastic. And with not less reason 
 it may be maintained that the study of art, 
 when it rejects the help of sound constructive 
 principles, either lapses into what may be called 
 archaeological book-keeping, or, worse still, 
 passes over into mere sentimentality and windy 
 suspiration. The breach Ijetween the two 
 has been widened, perhaps, by the conven- 
 
IV 
 
 tional interpretations often laid upon that long- 
 suffering term, art. To study art, in the popular 
 rendering of the phrase, is to study painting 
 and sculpture, sometimes, in addition, architect- 
 ure. Too often, it means little more than learn- 
 ing the names and dates of famous sculptors and 
 painters, together with a few facts about their 
 works and formulae for distinguishing the school 
 to which each artist is assumed to belong. This 
 is, of course, an interesting, and, on the whole, 
 a profitable branch of study, one, at any rate, 
 that will never lack for students — /xavddvsiv o>> 
 
 ixuvov roic ifiKoao(poic rjucffrov a/./.a xai roii^ aA.A.ot~, 
 
 —but it is probably not one-half as interesting, 
 and certainly not one tithe as profitable and 
 stimulating as it would be if the two or three 
 kinds of art, thus singled out and isolated, were 
 understood in their true kinship to each other 
 and to their sister arts. And if this be so, we 
 may go still further and confidently assert that 
 such study has infinitely to gain in real value 
 and attractiveness by seeking for the relation of 
 its subject-matter to human experience in 
 general. 
 
 This is not, perhaps, the common view, but it 
 is one that the present writer is prepared stoutly 
 to defend. It would not be hard to show that 
 
a'sthetic theory of some sort, and of some de- 
 gree, is required in all art study, even, for 
 example, in the identification of a bron/o toe 
 from Mt. Ptous. The relations of art to nature, 
 the true inwardness of realism and idealism, 
 the stages of growth in art evolution — all these 
 weighty problems might pirouette, not vainly, 
 upon that single toe! As a matter of fact, such 
 questions do arise at every turn in the most 
 tentative or the most technical study of art, to 
 be settled foolishly or wisely, according to the 
 enlightenment of the student. Take one exam- 
 ple: the so-called realistic novel. It is not too 
 much to say that nine-tenths of all that has 
 appeared in books and magazines of late, bear- 
 ing upon this particular subject, has been 
 simply so much beating of the air. Most of the 
 discussions resemble the mock-serious encoun- 
 ters of the modern French duel, in which, 
 notwithstanding the great show of activity sur 
 If terrain, the fine display of bandages and 
 surgical instruments, the much longeing and 
 l)arrying and riposteing, no one, except by pure 
 accident, ever suffers the slightest injury. 
 When, however, - -but this happens only at long 
 intervals — some trained thinker has deemed it 
 wortli his while to ply the rapier for a moment. 
 
VI 
 
 how different the outcome! * Then there has 
 been bloodshed, and some swaggering fallacy 
 has been left lying face downward on the sands. 
 In plain words, one writer has understood 
 what he is talking about, the other has not. 
 One has had for his weapon of analysis a con- 
 sistent aesthetic theory, the other only a few 
 stock literary conventions. 
 
 Surely, then, on this one point, a clear knowl- 
 edge of aesthetics does not come amiss. And, 
 in general, if a little knowledge of aesthetics is 
 a dangerous thing, does not the way of salvation 
 lie in the direction of more aesthetics, not of 
 less? If it is a good thing, for example, when 
 one is studying Browning, to know a little 
 about lyric poetry, is it not a better thing to 
 know the relations of lyric to other types of 
 literary expression? And if so, may it not be 
 a further advantage to be able to carry the whole 
 discussion back to the principles of artistic 
 expression in general? 
 
 If it be true, then, that the connection between 
 art and the theory of art is a thing to be de- 
 sired, and if, as is probably the case, the study 
 
 * It would be perilous to cite examples here, but perhaps 
 the article of Prof. T. H. Green, An Estimate of the Value 
 and Influence of Works of Fiction in Modern Times (Works, 
 Vol. 3), may he referred to without offense. 
 
VII 
 
 of particular works of art is iu no danger of 
 neglect, it may not be out of place to call at- 
 tention more especially to the theoretical side 
 of art-study, pointing out some of the more 
 important problems of aesthetics, and indicating 
 the sources in which the solution of them may 
 be found. 
 
A 
 
J? THB 
 
 USI7BRSIT7] 
 
 PROBLEMS IN AESTHETICS. 
 
 The following list of problems is intended to 
 be suggestive merely. Each might be divided 
 and subdivided ad indefmihim. 
 
 i. Phijsiolotjical. 
 
 The general problem of physiological aesthet- 
 ics may be stated in this way: What is the 
 origin, nature, and physical explanation of the 
 aesthetic thrill? As the inquiry usually pro- 
 ceeds upon the assumption that «?sthetic feeling 
 is a species of pleasurable feeling, the line of 
 research is in the direction of differentiating 
 this kind of sensuous pleasure from sensuous 
 pleasure in general. Thus the following series 
 of subsidiary problems arises: — 
 
 (1.) What changes in the nervous system, 
 resulting from the application of stimuli, pro- 
 duce the sensation of pleasure? 
 
 (2.) (a) What classes of objects supply 
 these stimuli? (b) What are the attributes of 
 these objects? (c) Do dissimilar qualities fur- 
 nish the same result, or is there some one quali- 
 
ty, existing in different forms, in all objects that 
 occasion pleasure? 
 
 ( 3. ) Is the relation between the stimulus and 
 the pleasurable feeling necessary and invari- 
 able, or accidental and mutable? 
 
 (4.) How are pleasurable feelings related to 
 the vital functions? 
 
 (5.) (a) What quality in the stimulus, or 
 (b) what modification of the neural process, 
 occasions the aesthetic quality of the feeling? 
 
 (6.) What are the pre-eminently sesthetic 
 senses? 
 
 Assuming that hearing and seeing are the 
 only, or the pre-eminently, aesthetic senses, the 
 physiologist may inquire: — 
 
 ( 7. ) What in the nervous structure and func- 
 tion of the ear corresponds to the relations of 
 tones constituting the musical scale? to the rela- 
 tions of tones constituting harmony or discord? 
 
 (8.) What are the exact mathematical rela- 
 tions of such tones? 
 
 (9.) What are the neural equivalents of 
 rhythm and melody? 
 
 (10.) What colors and combinations of 
 colors are pleasing to the eye? 
 
 ( 11. ) What forms and proportions of objects 
 are pleasing? 
 
3 
 
 (12.) What movements of the eye and modi- 
 fications of its neural processes correspond to 
 pleasing forms and colors of objects? 
 
 ii. Psychological. 
 
 Esthetics as psychology is most obviously 
 concerned with the nature of {esthetic feeling, 
 although it is bound to take into account all facts 
 of consciousness involved in the production of 
 such feeling. Calling, for convenience, all 
 objects that can arouse aesthetic feeling cnsthetic 
 objects, the psychologist may inquire: — 
 
 (1.) Does the perception of the j«sthetic 
 object differ from that of other objects? And 
 if so, how? 
 
 This problem resolves itself into two subordi- 
 nate problems: — 
 
 (a) What sensations do the peculiar physi- 
 cal marks of the {esthetic object, as e. g., color, 
 symmetry, etc., produce? 
 
 (b) How is this raw material of sensation 
 worked up into consciousness through percep- 
 tion? 
 
 (2.) What is the nature and function of 
 imagination in so far as it has to do with the 
 {esthetic object? 
 
4 
 
 (3.) Characteristics of the different kinds 
 of aBsthetic imagination? 
 
 (4.) Are all aesthetic objects (e. g., natural 
 objects) products of the aesthetic imagination? 
 
 ( 5. ) Can the aesthetic imagination do anything 
 more than combine what has been given it in 
 experience? 
 
 (6.) Why does the mind take an interest in 
 the aesthetic object? 
 
 (7.) Characteristics of aesthetic feeling? 
 How related to sensation? 
 
 (8.) Kinds of aesthetic feeling? 
 
 (9.) Kelations between aesthetic feeling and 
 other kinds of feeling? 
 
 (10.) Esthetic function of the will? 
 
 iii. Speculaiive. 
 
 The problem of aesthetics as philosophy may 
 be stated, in a general way, to be the relation of 
 the subject-matter (whatever that may be deter- 
 mined to be) to human experience. As sug- 
 gested by the parenthesis, the nature of the 
 subject-matter is itself a part of the problem. 
 Retaining the convenient term aesthetic object, 
 we may inquire: — 
 
 (1. ) What is it about things that makes them 
 aesthetic objects? 
 
5 
 
 This not very sensible question always elicits 
 the equally wise answer, Beauiy. If it is nec- 
 essary to posit some particular thing as the 
 essence of the aesthetic object, it would perhaps 
 be better to substitute for the ambiguous terra 
 beauty the term a'sthcfic value, which has the 
 advantage, at least, of suggesting its (^uestion- 
 begging character. 
 
 ( 2. ) Is aesthetic value subjective, or objective, 
 or both? 
 
 (3.) Kinds of {esthetic value, and relation of 
 one kind to another? 
 
 As examples of the different kinds may be 
 mentioned, the Beautiful, the Sublime, the Lu- 
 dicrous, the Pathetic, the Tragic, the Grotesque, 
 etc. 
 
 (4.) Relation of the work of art to nature? 
 
 This question may take on a great diversity 
 of forms, as, for example: — 
 
 (a) Is art an imitation of nature, and if so, 
 is that all that art is? 
 
 (b) In what respect does the aesthetic value 
 of art differ from that of nature? 
 
 (c) Is there a higher and a lower aesthotic 
 value, and if so, which is higher, that of nature 
 or that of art? 
 
(d) Does nature, when it takes on aesthetic 
 value, become art? 
 
 (5.) Character of the work of art? 
 
 In dealing with the work of art, we may 
 regard it as complete in itself and inquire 
 (a) What is its essential principle; or, taking 
 into account the conditions of its production, 
 may ask (b) Why works of art should be 
 produced at all, or, (c)' What were the aims and 
 motives of the producer of a particular work; 
 or, (d) By what processes and in obedience to 
 what laws he gave embodiment to his idea; or, 
 (e) In what material he embodied it; or, (f) 
 What are the laAvs of the development of art in 
 general? The answer to the first question will 
 bring before us the theory of art; to the second, 
 the genesis of art, or the art-impulse; to the 
 third, the relations of art and the artist; to the 
 fourth, the technique of art; to the fifth, the 
 classification of the arts; and to the sixth, the 
 evolution of art as a historical growth. 
 
 Finally, we may consider works of art as po- 
 tent factors in social and moral development, 
 demand to know whether their influence is 
 moral or immoral, and inquire what ends of 
 education or enlightenment, if any, are sub- 
 served by their existence. 
 
bNIVBHSITY] 
 
 LITERATURE OF AESTHETICS * 
 
 t 
 
 There are two classes of students whose needs 
 must be taken into account: first, those who 
 wish to get merely general notions from trust- 
 worthy authorities without being put to the ex- 
 pense of time and trouble necessary to form an 
 independent judgment; second, those who wish 
 to go to the bottom of the matter. The two 
 classes will of necessity pursue their studies in 
 a somewhat different order and according to 
 different methods. 
 
 I. 
 
 It will be of advantage for the student to 
 learn, at the outset, the limits of the subject he 
 is to study, the most important problems that 
 are likely to arise, and the names, and at least a 
 primitive notion of the views, of the recognized 
 authorities. Tliese facts may be gleaned from 
 
 •For a general bIblloKraphy of the subject, the student may 
 be referred to A Guide to the Literature of .^Isthotlcs. by C. M. 
 Gayley and F. N. t^cott (Berkeley: 18110. Univ. of Cal. Library 
 Bulletins, No. U). In wliat follows, the numbers In parentheses 
 refer to pages of the 'Guide.' When the work Is one not men- 
 
8 
 
 the articles on ' Art,' ' Fine Art,' and ' Esthetics/ 
 in the 9th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britan- 
 nica. Some acquaintance with the psychology 
 of the subject may next be sought in Dewey's 
 Psychology (42), chaps. 7 and 9, Sully's Out- 
 lines (43), p. 316-329, 531-552, and the article 
 Art and Psychology, in Mind, 1:479. The 
 opening chapter of Everett's Poetry, Comedy, 
 and Duty (17) is an easy and delightful intro- 
 duction to the psychology of the imagination. 
 For the philosophical treatment of the subject 
 the chapters in Everett's Science of Thought 
 ( 17 ) on Beauty and ^Esthetics are well adapted 
 to the needs of beginners, while the lecture of 
 Prof. G. S. Morris in Jl. Spec. Philos. 10: 1, 
 and Ker's Essay on Art, in Seth and Haldane's 
 Essays (24), may be recommended as at once 
 lucid and profound. Begg's Development of 
 Taste (16) is excellent in spirit and, generally, 
 in method. Kedney's Exposition of Hegel (27), 
 in spite of numerous defects, is about the best 
 handbook of aesthetics now in the market. Bos- 
 anquet's translation of Hegel's Introduction 
 
 tioned in the 'Guide.' the bibliographical data are given with 
 sufficient fulness to identify it. A careful bibliography of 
 about one hundred and forty titles, arranged according to date^ 
 of publication, will be found in Notes and Queries. 6th. Ser.. 
 VIII. 183. 243. 302. 382. 
 
9 
 (26) should bo in the hands of every student. 
 The writings that fill an important place in 
 the history of aesthetics can be properly under- 
 stood, in most cases, only with reference to the 
 philosophical systems of which they form com- 
 ponent parts. A few, however, are of a semi- 
 popular character. In Goethe's Conversations 
 ( 25 )almost all the main questions of art-theory are 
 touched upon and rendered luminous. Schiller's 
 .Esthetic Letters (31 ) are delightful reading, and 
 thus easily carry the student along into philosoph- 
 ic depths that he would not otherwise venture to 
 explore. The same is true of the aesthetic doc- 
 trines of Schopenhauer (32), one of the most 
 readable and entertaining of modern writers on 
 lesthetics, whose value, however, lies rather in 
 his remarks by the way than in his main con- 
 clusions. Cousin's lectures on the True, the 
 Beautiful, and the Good (3G ), which at one time 
 enjoyed some popularity as a text book, are 
 written in popular form, but cannot be recom- 
 mended as an adequate presentation of {esthetic 
 theory. Ruskin (20) should be read by every- 
 one, but rather for his descrij)tions of art and 
 nature than for his philosophy. Though a pow- 
 erful stimulus to the sense for beauty, he is not 
 the best propaedeutic in the world to the science 
 
lO 
 
 of art. As a corrective, may be read Miss 
 Paget' s article on Ruskinism, in Belcaro (32), 
 which, in seeking to rectify Ruskin's moral bias, 
 goes almost too far in the opposite direction. 
 A careful criticism of the third volume of Mod- 
 ern Painters will befoand in an article by Prof. 
 Everett in No. Am. 84: 379. 
 
 Though the number of those who write on 
 aesthetics in a popular way is very great, only a 
 few can be referred to here. Miss Paget (Ver- 
 non Lee) writes with a capricious self-assurance 
 that makes her occasional essays charming lit- 
 erature. They are interesting, however, rather 
 as recording the shifting moods of a sensitive 
 personality in the presence of art, than as con- 
 stituting careful and connected thinking about 
 art. Belcaro, a collection of articles originally 
 printed in the magazines, is full of fresh and 
 striking observations upon sculpture, music,and 
 poetry. Juvenilia (Lond: 1887) is of the same 
 character. Miss Paget's most ambitious flight 
 •is an article on Comparative ^Esthetics, in Con- 
 temp. 38:300, a not altogether successful at- 
 tempt to weld Hegel and Taine. The essay on 
 the Value of the Ideal, in Baldwin (Lond:1886), 
 defines pretty clearly her philosophical position, 
 in so far as she can be said to have one. Walter 
 
II 
 
 Pater's delicacy of iutuition leads him to safe 
 conclusions even where his writings seem mere 
 transcripts of impression. The introduction and 
 conclusion of his Studies in the History of the Re- 
 naissance (83), and the essay on Wincklemann, in 
 the same volume, are well worth reading. The 
 fundamental principle of his aesthetic is per- 
 haps most clearly set for th in his essay on Style, 
 in Appreciations (Lond: 1889). The critical 
 writings of J. A. Symouds are underlaid by a 
 consistent and easily comprehensible theory of 
 art which the author has once or twice set forth 
 with some explicitnees; for example, in the Re- 
 naissance in Italy, the Catholic Reaction, Pt. 2, 
 p. 396-402 (113), and Essays, Speculative and 
 Suggestive (Lond: 1890). Upon the last-named 
 work, see the criticism in Nation 51:173. The 
 younger Symonds should not be confused with 
 J. A. Symouds, M. D., author of Principles of 
 Beauty (Lond: 1857). Gurney's magazine arti- 
 cles have been collected in the Power of Sound 
 (70) and Tertium Quid (2v. Lond: 1887). The 
 third chapter of the Power of Sound is an ex- 
 position of the author's a3sthetic8. Sully is 
 hardly to be mentioned in the category of the 
 merely popular, though the clearness and sim- 
 plicity of his treatment of difficult matters 
 
 "^7e:. "4 
 
12 
 
 adapt his writings to the needs of the beginner. 
 His Sensation and Intuition (22) presents the 
 scientific aspect of many important questions. 
 Prof. Seeley's article on Elementary Principles 
 in Art,Macm 16: 1, is a good introduction to th& 
 subject. 
 
 Inquiries are often made by students for 
 some popular compend which shall embrace 
 within its covers all the information about art 
 that they need to acquire. It is hardly neces- 
 sary to say that all hopes of this character 
 are indulged in vain; no such book exists. 
 Nevertheless, as popular compends have their 
 value, some of the most notable will be briefly 
 indicated. Day's Science of ^Esthetics (New 
 Haven: 1872) is designed for a text-book, and 
 hence deals mainly in formal definitions and 
 classifications. Samson's Elements of Art 
 Criticism (52), which aims at great comprehen- 
 siveness, does little more than bring into 
 juxtaposition unrelated details. Harris's Theory 
 of the Arts (18) is largely composed of com- 
 monplaces grouped about a theory of no great 
 worth or co-ordinating power. McDermot's 
 Critical Dissertation (19) is clear enough, but 
 antiquated. The popularity enjoyed by Bas- 
 com's Esthetics (16) has been deserved by the 
 
13 
 
 lucidity and roadablonoss of the text. The 
 prominence givou to the author's ethical and 
 theological views may seem to some a trifle 
 obtrusive. Van Dyke's Principles of Art (22) 
 covers much ground, but is restricted by its 
 small compass to a brief treatment of the sepa- 
 rate toi)ics. A useful primer of art is Lucy 
 Crane's Lectures on Art and the Formation of 
 Taste (22 ) ailopted as a text-book by the mana- 
 gers of the Chautauqua Reading Circle. 
 
 Gauckler's Le Beau (44) is perhaps the sim- 
 plest and handiest of the French compends. 
 Veron aims to cover the whole field of specula- 
 tion, but is exceedingly unsystematic. A good 
 I translation (38) is available. 
 
 In the German language, Lemcke'sPopuliire 
 Aesthetik (29) is simple in style, and although 
 condemned by Schasler as trivial and conven- 
 tional, about the best thing of the kin<l to be 
 obtained. Other German compends are Stock- 
 el's Allg. Lehrlmch d. Ae.sthetik (3. aufl. 
 Meinz: 1889) and PrOlss's Katechismus d. ^s- 
 thetik (2 aufl. Leipz.: 1889). 
 
 XL 
 
 For the second class of students, those who 
 desire to make themselves thoroughly at home 
 
\, 
 
 in the subject, the historical method is here, as 
 in most branches, by far the best. A general 
 notion of the scope of the science may be secured 
 in the way suggested above, after which Greek 
 aBsthetics should be resolutely attacked. The 
 theories of Socrates may be gathered from 
 Xenophon's Memorabilia and Banquet. Of 
 Plato's dialogues, the Ion, Phaedo, Symposium, 
 Gorgias, and Philebus should be read entire, 
 and at least books 2, 3, 7-10 of the Republic. 
 Jowett's translation (13) is, of course,unrivalled, 
 except in the case of the Republic, where it 
 shares honors with that of Davies and Vaughan 
 (14). Aristotle's Poetics should be studied, if 
 possible, in the original. Of the translations, 
 /Wharton's(ll) is the only one that can be recom- 
 mended. The passages of the Rhetoric, Meta- 
 physics, and Psychology (11) that throw light 
 on Aristotle's theory of art, should not escape 
 attention. The writings of Plotinus (14) and 
 Longinus (13) are important for the history of 
 aesthetics, but may be left for later investiga- 
 tion. 
 
 In taking up the German authorities, while 
 it is desirable that some acquaintance should first 
 be formed with the theories and results of 
 Baumgarten (Aesthetica, Frankfurt a. d. Oder: 
 
15 
 
 1750-58, Winckleraanu (49). Lessing (29. 30): 
 and Goetho (25, 26), the reading of these 
 authors may, if time presses, be deferred until 
 the more systematic treatises have been dealt 
 with. Beginning with Kant, the principles of 
 the Kritik der Aesthetischen Urtheilskraft 
 should be thoroughly mastered, either by a read- 
 ing of the text, or by a careful study of Caird's 
 1 Critical Philosophy of Kant (28) v. 2, p. 420- 
 476. Unfortunately, no English translation of 
 the Critique of Judgment is in existence, 
 though passages have been translated by Wat- 
 son (28). Barni's free rendering (2v. Paris: 
 1846) is not generally available. The obscurity 
 of the original has been much over-rated, in 
 particular by Prof. Eaton in New Eng. 49:246. 
 Schiller may be read in Weiss's translation 
 (31). Especial attention should be directed to 
 Schiller's indebtedness to Kant and to his ad- 
 vance upon the latter. Schelling's Philosophic 
 der Kunst (31) must be read in the original if 
 read at all. It is of considerable importance in 
 the historical sequence. With Hegel's Vor- 
 lesungen liber die Aesthstik the student should 
 make himself thoroughly at home. Bosanquot's 
 admirable translation (26) of the Einleituug 
 and Eiutheilung furnishes the key to the whole 
 
i6 
 
 work. Hastie (27) has translated p. 1-30 of the 
 Einleitung and p. 105-114 of the Eintheilung 
 (Bosanquet, p. vi., wrongly assumes p. 34-36 of 
 Hastie's work to be an analysis), but his trans- 
 lation, while readable and fairly representative 
 of Hegel's thought, falls far below Bosanquet's 
 in point of critical value. The motto which 
 Hastie has placed opposite his title-page is a 
 curious example of the danger of fragmentary 
 quotation.* Kedney's work (27)has value as be- 
 ing the only detailed exposition in English of the 
 whole Aesthetik. Unhappily, the author has fol- 
 lowed the plan of substituting his own theories for 
 those of Hegel at every point wherein he differs 
 with the latter, and the reader, though warned 
 of the interpolated matter by the insertion of 
 brackets, cannot be sure whether the impres- 
 sions that he carries away from the work are 
 those of the expositor or the expounded. The 
 author's criticism, p. 16, of Hegel's position 
 with regard to the beauty of nature is clearly 
 based on a misreading of the Aesthetik. (See 
 the Einleitung, p. 57-58). The same is proba- 
 bly true of the bracketed paragraph on p. 187- 
 
 *i. e.,.a view of art which Hegel ascribes to common opin- 
 ion, is set down as Hegel's own view. The same error is com- 
 mitted by the author (G. H. Lewes?) of the article in Brit, and 
 For. Rev. 13: 1 (p. 22). 
 
17 
 
 188. Much translation, incliuliiig B^nard's ex- 
 position, will be found iu the Jl. Spec. Philos. 
 (27 ). The reading of the entire Aesthetik is 
 no very formidable task for those who are 
 familiar with the Hegelian terminology, and 
 that it will amply repay the labor, is a point 
 that need not be arguetl. Schopenhauer (32) 
 and Lotze (30) may be read in translation. 
 Other German writers who may be consulted at 
 discretion, are Huge (Neue Vorschule d. Aosth. 
 Halle: 1837),Schleiermacher ( Vorles. ub. Aesth. 
 Berlin: 1842), Solger (32), Txichter (31),Weisse 
 ( System d. Aesth. als "Weissensch. v. d. Idee d. 
 SchOnen, Leipz.: 1830), Vischer (32) whose 
 monster treatise is a complete encyclopaedia of 
 aesthetic theory, Krause (Yorlesuugen ttber 
 Aesth. (1828-29, and Abriss d. Aesthet. 1837), 
 Zimmermann ( 33 ), Carriere (25 ), Schasler (31), 
 Koestlin ( 29 i, Von Kirchmaun (Aesth. auf real- 
 istischer (Irundl., Berlin: 18G9), Horwicz 
 (Grundl. e. Systems d. Aesthetik, Leipz: 1860), 
 and Siebeck (32). Trahudortf (Aesthetik, 2v. 
 Berlin: 1830) has been revived by von Hart- 
 mann (Philos. Monatshefte 22: o9 ), but hardly 
 seems entitled to the space allotted him by the 
 latter in his Jiisthotik (1. 129-156). Herbart's 
 wide-reaching influence in psychology makes it 
 
iS 
 
 desirable to know something of his aesthetics, in 
 which he includes his ethical theory. Zeising's 
 name (33) is so identified with the 'golden sec- 
 tion ' that his other theories are generally neg- 
 lected. Though his standpoint is Hegelian, his 
 aesthetic is influenced by Herbart. The psycho- 
 physicist, Fechner, who has verified by elaborate 
 experiment the discovery of Zeising, represents 
 a revolt against the method of speculative 
 aesthetics. The investigations of Helmholtz 
 with reference to the physiology of sound (71) 
 and of light (Optique Physiologique, Paris: 
 1867) are indispensible to the specialist. 
 Wherever he has expanded his theories in sys- 
 tematic form, Helmholtz has followed the lines 
 laid down by Kant in his Critique of Judgment. 
 The most formidable, and at the same time one 
 of the ablest, of late contributions to aesthetics 
 is the systematic treatise of Von Hartmann 
 (26). It is defective in that it gives little or no 
 space to the historical aspect of art. 
 
 Among the French writers, P. Andre (Traits 
 sur le beau, in Oeuvres Philos., Paris: 1843), 
 Buffier ( Sur la Nature du Gout, in Cours g6n- 
 6ral et particulier des Sciences, Paris: 1732), 
 Batteux (108), and Diderot (36), in the last 
 century, and Cousin (36), Jouffroy (37) Pictet 
 
(Du Beau dans la Nature, Paris: 185ft), L6v6que 
 (37), Chaignet (Principes de la Science du 
 Beau, Paris: 1860), Prudhommc (37), Taine 
 (38), and Veron (38), in the present century, 
 have the strongest claim to attention. Of the 
 whole number the treatise of Lev6que is the 
 most systematic. Chai^aiet is most interested in 
 the psychology of esthetics. The brilliancy of 
 Taine's stvle and the glib simplicity of his sys- y 
 tern have made his theories better known mthis 
 country than those of any other foreign writer 
 His cavacUre essentid should be compared 
 with Herder's Bedeidsame, Hirt's Charakteris- 
 iische, and Goethe's Bedeidendv.^ (See Schas- 
 ler's Gesch. d. ^sth. v. 1. p. 498-499, Hegel s 
 .i:sth. I. 23-20, Bosauquet's trans., p. 31-37). 
 
 Of late writers who have discussed special 
 topics with ability, should be mentioned B^nard, 
 Milsand, Guyau, Seailles, Lechalas, Souriau, 
 Charles Henry, Arr6at, Paulhan, and Sorel. 
 AH have boon freciueut contributors to the 
 
 . A curious anti.ap.ti.... ..f Taine's formula ..f the race, the 
 
 ,„oment. and the eaviroiunent occurs In lleRels .l-.sth.. L p. 20. 
 Sodann phort J.dos KunstwerU seln.-r /.elt, somen. VolWe. 
 seiner uU.bun« an. BrnnetK-n. who adds t^t^e three cond. 
 tlons specltted by Taine the elen.ent of .nd.vlduality (L E^ o u 
 Z dos Genres dans nUsU.lre do la Litt., I. p. •^.. se,.ns also 
 . ,..v.. h..en anticipated by He.el. .«sth.. I. p. 4.5: IH-nn das 
 
20 
 
 Rev. d. D. Mondes or the Rev. Philosophique. 
 B^nard represents the Hegelian influence. 
 Henry inclines to the mathematical interpre- 
 tation of sesthetic facts. Sorel is a follower 
 of Fechner. See the interesting article by 
 the latter in Rev. Philos. 29:56, 30:22, on 
 Psycho-physical Contributions to the Study of 
 .Esthetics. 
 
 English aesthetics, because the science has not 
 been recognized as a department of philosophy, 
 is for the most part a matter of shreds and 
 patches. The attitude of the British mind, up 
 to a very late period, is perhaps best indicated 
 by the brief note in the eighth edition of the 
 Encyclopaedia Britannica : — 
 
 " ^Esthetics. — A term .... employed by the 
 followers of the German metaphysicians to des- 
 ignate philosophical investigations into the 
 theory of the Beautiful or Philosophy of the 
 Fine Arts, which they are disposed to regard as 
 a distinct science. .... J^^sthetic speculations do 
 not appear to have contributed anything to the 
 
 Kunstwerk, um seiner zusleioh materielleii unci indiv^iduollen 
 Natur willeu, seht wesentlich aus besonderen Bodingungen der 
 manichfachsten Art, wozu vorziiglich Zeit und Ort der Enste- 
 hung, daun die bestiramte Individualitat des Kiinstlers und 
 hauptsaclilich die teohnischo Ausbilduiig der Kunst gehoren. 
 hervor 
 
21 
 
 improvement of the fine art*, or to our real 
 knowledge of mental phenomena." 
 
 Bacon (15), Shaftesbury (21), Hutcheson 
 (18), Reid (20), Hume (18), Stewart (22), Lord 
 Kames (19), Burke (16), Alison (15), Jeffrey 
 ( 19), and Sir Wra. Hamilton (17) are the most 
 important of the earlier writers. Of the modem 
 contributions, Spencer's chapter on the -i^sthetic 
 Emotions in his Psychology (22), an elabora- 
 tion of Schiller's Spielirieb, has had most influ- 
 ence on scientific thought, Ruskins Modern 
 Painters most influence upon the popular con- 
 sciousness. Grant Allen, in his Physiological 
 ^Esthetics (15), has followed up the line of re- 
 search outlined by Spencer's theory, and added 
 much illustrative material. 
 
 It may be useful to those pursuing this line 
 of historical study to mention some of the most 
 important critical helps. Of the general histor- 
 ies of sesthetics, Schasler's Kritische Geschichte 
 (10) should be noted first as at once the clear- 
 est and most comprehensive. Zimmermann's 
 Geschichte (10) is valuable, but not so com- 
 plete. Sully's article in the 9th edition of the 
 Encyclopsedia Britannica, though excellent for 
 reference, does not pretend to be more than a 
 sketch. Sully's evolutionist inclinations lead 
 
22 
 
 him to minimize the results of German specula- 
 tion. Both Ueberweg's and Erdmann's Histor- 
 ies of Philosophy give generous space to aesthet- 
 ics. A short summary of aesthetic theories is 
 given in Bain's Mental Science ( 15 ) and a fuller 
 account in L^veque's Science du Beau (37). 
 Hermann's Die Aesthetik in ihrer Geschichte 
 und als wissenschaftliches System (Leipz,: 1875) 
 has not been consulted. A general history of 
 aesthetics is now in preparation by Mr. Bernard 
 Bosanquet for Muirhead's Library of Philos- 
 ophy. 
 
 Of authorities on Greek aesthetics, Ed. Mtil- 
 ler's Geschichte der Theorie der Kunst bei den 
 Alten (Breslau: 1834) has as yet no "rival. Eg- 
 ger's Essai sur I'histoire de la Critique chez les 
 Grecs (9) is admirably clear, but is concerned 
 rather more with rhetoric than with aesthetics 
 proper. The first volume of Chaignet's Histoire 
 de la Psychologie des Grecs (9) systematizes the 
 implied psychology of Socrates and Plato. For 
 his treatment of Aristotle, see his Essai sur la 
 Psychologie d'Aristote (Paris: 1884). Zeller's 
 summaries of Plato (14) and Aristotle (11) are 
 searching, but have a rigidity peculiar to his 
 mode of treatment — everything seems to shrink 
 a little under Zeller's touch. The article by 
 
23 
 
 Nettleship in Abbot's Hellenica (13), though 
 dealing solely with the Republic, contains a 
 fairly adequate exposition of Plato's theory of 
 art. Jowett's introductions to the Dialogues 
 are too well known to require commendation. 
 The exposition of Plato which forms the appen- 
 dix to Veron's ^Esthetics (38) is decidedly super- 
 ficial. Monographs on Aristotle are so numer- 
 ous that no complete list can be attempted here. 
 Doring's Die Kunstlehre des Aristoteles (12) is 
 one of the best. It contains a very complete 
 bibliography. Teichmiiller's Aristotelische For- 
 schungen(12) maybe recommended for care- 
 fulness and minuteness of research. A recent 
 work is B^nard's L'Esth^tique d'Aristote et de 
 ses Successeurs (Paris: 1890) done with the 
 author's customary thoroughness. B^nard is 
 especially severe on those who practice what he 
 calls VArf cVaccoucher les (jrands esprits, i. e., 
 who read into Aristotle the results of later spe- 
 culation.* 
 
 *Of the more important monogrraphs mH iuoliKiud in \he 
 • Guide.' may be mentioned: (1) On Plato: Ed. Miiller, Ueber 
 da-s Nachuliiiiende in (1. Kunst niirli IMato (Uatlljor: 18.'}!), A. 
 Ruge, Die Platonl.-H-he Aesthetik (Halle: ISXJ). Cli. L<5vCque, 
 Piaton. fondateur do TesttK^tlque (Paris: 1857), K. Justl. Die 
 SBsth. Eh-mente In d. Piaton. Philos., (Marburj;: IsCO), Jos. Re- 
 ber, Plato und die Poe.sio (Miinchen: 1864), M. Reniy, Plat. doct. 
 de Artibus llberallbus (Halle: 1R6I), A. H. Raabe. De Puetlca 
 
24 
 
 The standard history of German aesthetics is 
 that of Lotze (11), of which an extended expo- 
 sition may be found in Erdmann's History of 
 Philosoph., Tranfi., III. p. 315-322. The Ger- 
 man writers since Kant are treated with minute- 
 ness by Von Hartmann (10). Neudecker's Stu- 
 dien zur Geschichte der deutschen Aesthetik 
 seit Kant (Wurz: 1878) is vahiable, though 
 much condensed. A brief review of German 
 aesthetics will be found in Von Eye's Das Reich 
 des Schonen (25), p. 38. For the lines of de- 
 velopment leading up to Kant, see Fenner's Die 
 Aesthetik Kauts und seiner Vorganger (28). 
 The value of Caird's exposition of the Critique 
 of Judgment has been already set fortli. The 
 portion of Hegel's Aesthetik in which the author 
 points out the reawakening of the science of art 
 that accompanied the reawakening of German 
 
 Plat. (Rotterdam: 18C6), C. Von .Jan. Die Tonarten bei Plato (in 
 Neue Jahrb. f. Philol. u. Paed., 95:815). (2) On Aristotle: W. 
 Schrader, De artis apud Arist. notiono ac vi (Berlin : 1843, 
 Miinchen: 1881), L. Speiigel. Ueber Kiltharsis ton pathemS,ton 
 bei Arist. (Miinclien: 1859). Martin, Analyse critique de la Po6- 
 tique d' Aristote (Paris: 1836), Von Wartenburg, Die Katharsis 
 des Arist. u. d. Oedipus Colonus d. Sophokles (Berlin: 1866), 
 Stahr, Aristoteles u. d. Wirkung d. Trag. (Berlin: 1859), Rein- 
 kens, Arist. lib. d. Kuust. besonders ub. d. Trag. (Wien: 1870), 
 A. Dehlen, Die Theorie d. Arist. u. d. Tragodie d. Antiken 
 Christl. Naturwissenschaftl. Weltanschauung (Gottingen : 1885), 
 E. Jerusalem, Ueber d. Arist. Einbeiten im Drama (Leipz. : 
 
25 
 
 philosophy in general ( Aesth. I, p. 72-88; Bo- 
 sanquet's translation, p. 107-132), contains crit- 
 iques of great interest on Kant, Schiller, Les- 
 sing, Winckelmaun, Goethe, the Schlegels, 
 Fichte, Solger, and Tieck. Of especial value 
 for students of philosophy, is Mr. Bernard Bo- 
 sanquet's masterly paper on The Part Played 
 by Aesthetic in the Development of Modern 
 Philosophy, published in the Proceedings of the 
 Aristotelian Society, v. 1, No. 2. For a criticism 
 of some of the most recent German (and other) 
 writers, the student may consult Th. Lipps's 
 Aesthetische Litteraturbericht in Philos. Mo- 
 natshefte 26:17, 169,323. 
 
 Of monographs on Schiller, G. Zimmerman's 
 Versuch einer Schillerschen iEsthetik (Berlin: 
 1889) is a careful specimen of research. On 
 Schelling, chap. 7 of Watson's volume in the 
 Griggs Philosophical Classics (31) may be prof- 
 
 1885). The two essays of J. Beriiay.s which hiivt> played st) lin- 
 portant a part in the dlsciis^sion of tlie Aristolollau theory of 
 tragedy. Giuiuiziitfe d. verh)rneii Abliandliini: d. .\rist. iib. die 
 WlrkuiiRd. Tra;:. (Bre-^lau: 1K57>. and Er^iinzunRzu Arlstoteles 
 PoetlW (Kheln. Mu*;. N. F. 8. p. .Vil-.'iOf.>. have been reprinted In 
 one volnniu under the title Zwel .\l)handl. ilb. d. Arlst. Theorle 
 d. Drama (Berlin: 1S.VH. See furtlu-r Bernays's Brief an L 
 SpenKCl Oi). d. traj;. Katliarsls bel Arlst. (Kheln. Mus. N. F, 
 14:387.488) and Zur Arlst. Katharsls-Frage (Rheln. Mus. 1."):(j06) 
 and Spensel's r.ur "iragischen Katharsls" <l. .\rist. (Rheln 
 Mus. l.i:4.'>8i. 
 
26 
 
 itably consulted. The limitations of Kedney's 
 Exposition of Hegel are pointed out above. 
 Some assistance may be derived from Hastie's 
 somewhat over-enthusiastic introduction to his 
 translation of Hegel and Michelet (27), and 
 valuable suggestion's from Ritchie's review of 
 Bosanquet's translation, Mind 12: 597. The 
 leading article in v. 13 of the British and Foreign 
 Review (by G. H. Lewes?) is one of the earliest 
 attempts to introduce Hegel's ^Esthetics to En- 
 glish readers.* Both Michelet (30) and Ulrici 
 (Princip u. Methode d. Hegelschen Philos. 
 Halle; 1841, p. 216-245), have expounded the 
 ^sthetik, but the original will be found in most 
 cases clearer, and ( at any rate in the Einleitung 
 and Eintheilung) briefer, than the exposition. 
 
 Schopenhauer's aesthetic doctrines are briefly 
 touched upon by Helen Zimmern in Arthur 
 Schopenhauer: His Life and Philosophy (32), 
 and by Bowen in his Modern Philosophy (32), 
 and developed at some length by H. Klee 
 
 * The article contains considerable translation, including a 
 passage from Hegel's iEstlietik which has since heen frequently 
 quoted: '"Metre is the first and only condition absolutely 
 demanded by poetry, etc." See the article, " Poetry " by Th. 
 Watts in Encyl. Brit, ilth Ed., and Gummere's Poetics. Intro- 
 duction. That this quotation does not accurately represent 
 Hegel's thought will be apparent from a reading of the Ms- 
 thetik, III. EftOet seq. 
 
27 
 
 (Grunclziige einer ^8th. nach Schopenhauer, 
 Berlin: 1S75), and S. Stransky ( Versuch d. 
 Entw. e. allg. ^sth. auf Schopenhauerischer 
 Grundl. Wien: 1886). E. Reich's Schopen- 
 liauer als Philosoph der Tragodie ( Wien 1888 ) 
 deals with an interesting feature of Schopen- 
 hauer's esthetic. On Lotze see T. Kegel's 
 Lotze's ^sthetik (Gottingen: 188(3), and 
 Ruhr's Kritische Untersuchungen liber Lotze's 
 .^sthetik (Halle- Wittenberg: 1880). A de- 
 tailed exposition of Fechner may be found in 
 Erdmanu s History of Philos., Trans., III., 296- 
 298. ('Gilt edge,' p. 297, line 21, is evidently a 
 slip on the part of the translator. Goldner 
 SchnUl means, of course, in aesthetic terminology, 
 ' golden section '. ) 
 
 In Contemp. 1: 279, Prof. Dowden discusses 
 French ^Esthetics, dealint^ with Cousin, Jouf- 
 froy, Lamennais, and L6v6que. Joutfroy's im- 
 portance is over-emphasi/ed. An interesting 
 article by Prof. Eaton on Modern French .Es- 
 thetics, containing notices of L^vfique, Chaignet 
 and others, appeared in the New Englauder, 49: 
 246. In the same line is an exhaustive review 
 of L^v&que's La Science du Beau, from the pen 
 of E. Saisset in the Rev. d. D. Mondes 15 Nov., 
 1861, reprinted in the latter's L'Ame et la Vie, 
 
28 
 
 p. 91. On Taine see the two essays in vol. 4 of 
 Scherer's Etudes Critiques sur la Litt6rature, 
 p. 253-260, La Methode de M. Taine, p. 261- 
 272, M. Taine etla Pbilosophie de I'artgrec; and 
 Prof. Morris's Philosophy of Art, Jl. Spec. 
 Philos: 10: 1. For the place of the Cartesian 
 philosophy in the history of aesthetics, the 
 reader may consult Schasler's Geschichte, I. 
 280-283 and Krantz's Essai sur I'esth^tique de 
 Descartes (Paris; 1882). 
 
 A few suggestions for help in investigating 
 special problems will perhaps be of service to 
 the student who is specializing in this line of 
 research. 
 
 The Beautiful. As every writer on aesthetics 
 has something to say on this head, no general 
 references need be given. Blackie's On Beauty 
 (Edinb: 1858) is directed against the views of 
 Alison. A great part of the work is taken up 
 by an exposition of the Beautiful according to 
 Plato. Prof. Blackie also contributed an article 
 on the Philosophy of the Beautiful to the Con- 
 temp. 43:814. Die Idee des Schonen in der 
 Platonischen Philosophie is the title of the first 
 volume of StrSter's Studien zur Geschichte der 
 Aesthetik (Bonn: 1861). On the Kantian con- 
 ception of beauty, see Nicolai's 1st der Begriff 
 
29 
 
 des SchOnen bei Kant consequent Entwickelt? 
 (Kiel: 1889), and Blencke's Die Trennuug d. 
 SchOnen vom Angenebmen in Kauts Kr. d. Ur- 
 theilskraft (Leipz: 1888). Byk's Physiologie 
 des ScbOuen (Leipz: 1878) will be found useful 
 to compare with Grant Allen's method of treat- 
 ment of the same subject. Those who are in- 
 terested in this phase of aesthetics sliould not 
 overlook the paragraphs on the Acquisition of 
 Beauty in Darwin's Origin of Species (para- 
 graphs 302-4, 792 I, and on Ideas of Beauty, in 
 Descent of Man (2d. ed., p. 92, 410^14, 540- 
 541, 573-585, 595-596 ). A consideration of the 
 Beautiful from a speculative point of view will 
 be found in Jl. Spec. Philos. 17:94 in an article 
 by W. H. Kimball. Kostlin's Ueber d. Schon- 
 heitsbegriflf will repay perusal. For the psy- 
 chological aspects of the question see Dimetres- 
 co's Der Schouheitsbegriff (42). 
 
 Thp Uglij. Die Aesthetik des Hasslichen by 
 K. Rosenkranz ( Konigsberg: 1853) is the most 
 comprelK'Usive work on thi.s subject. Von Hart- 
 manu reviews recent theories of the Ugly and 
 devotes considerable space to it in his syste- 
 matic testhetics. See indexes to vols. 1 and 2 
 under hcesslichc. A brief account of German 
 theories will be found in Lotze's Geschichte, p. 
 
3o 
 
 333-342. By far the ablest single article on the 
 subject is Mr. Bernard Bosanquet's paper, The 
 Aesthetic Theory of Ugliness, in Proceedings of 
 the Aristotelian Society, No. 3, Part 1. Plo- 
 tinus is generally named as the first to attempt 
 an adequate analysis of the Ugly. Other author- 
 ities who have treated it at length are F. Schle- 
 gel, Solger, Weisse, Ruge, Von Kirchmann, 
 Schasler, and Carriere. 
 
 The Sublime. A short list of those who have 
 written upon the sublime, with a rapid sketch 
 of the opinions of each, will be found in the sup- 
 plement to Kedney's The Beautiful and the Sub- 
 lime (N. Y.: 1880). Arthur Seidl's Zur Ge- 
 schiclite des Erhabenheitsbegriffes seit Kant 
 considers with some fullness Kant and his pre- 
 decessors (p. 1-15), and with exhaustiveness the 
 writers with whom it is especially concerned. 
 The list of books (p. vii-x) that the author has 
 not been able to consult, is rather formidable. 
 A summary of Seidl's conclusions will be found 
 in the article by Prof. Everett in Andover Re- 
 view, August, 1890, on the Philosophy of the 
 Sublime. See also index to vol. 2 of Von Hart- 
 mann's Aesthetik, under Erliabene, and Lotze's 
 Geschichte, p. 324-333. Hegel's chapter Die 
 Symbolik der Erhabenheit (Aesth. I, p. 454) 
 
has been trauslated by Stirling (Macm. 16:44 
 Symbolism of the Sublime). Cf. Hegel's Aesth. 
 I. p. 427 et seq. The Origin of the Sublime is 
 the title of an article by Grant Allen in Miml 
 8:324. See also the treatise by Blencke cited in 
 the references on the Beautiful. 
 
 The Pathefic. The modern pliases of the 
 pathetic have not been fully investigated. Schil- 
 ler's essay on Pathos deals mainly with the 
 Greek conception. Von Hartmaun gives but 
 two pages to Das Patheiische (vol. 2, |). 313- 
 314), but the entire chapter should be read; 
 especially the paragraphs on Das Ruhrcn<le,Das 
 Traurige, DasElegischc oiler Wchmnctliigv, etc. 
 
 The Comic. To the references given on p. 
 
 46 of the 'Guide' may be added the often dis- 
 cussed definition of laughter found in Hobbes's 
 English works (Lond: 1839-45) Vol. 3, p. 45- 
 
 47 ( see also vol. 4, p. 46, 455 ), Spencer's Phys- 
 iology of Laughter, Darwin's Expression of the 
 Emotions (Lond: 1870), Becker's Physiol, u. 
 Ps^'chol. des Lacheus (42), L. Dnraont's Des 
 Causes de Rire (Paris: 1862), and Prof. Butch- 
 er's article on the Evolution of Humor, in 
 Harper 80:8i)8. A recent work is Masci's Psi- 
 cologia del Comico (Naples: 1880). For are- 
 view of German theories see Lotze's Geachichte, 
 
32 
 
 p. 342-352, Von Hartmann's Aesthetik I. index 
 under Anthropologischer. 
 
 A rather full bibliography of the subject will 
 be found in Regnard's Oeuvres Completes 
 (Paris: 1860). 
 
 In conclusion, it may be useful to call atten- 
 tion to the most important sources of informa- 
 tion on the physiological, psycho-physical, and 
 psychological aspects of Aesthetics. 
 
 Physiological and j^sycho-pJiysical. Notable 
 contributions in this field have been made by 
 Burke (16), Spencer (22), Allen (15), Zeising 
 (33), Fechner (25),Helmholtz (71 and Optique 
 Physiologique), Wundt (33), and Ladd (42). 
 An interesting article by Sorel on Psycho- 
 physical contributions to the Study of Aesthet- 
 ics will be found in Rev. Philos. 29:561; 30:22. 
 
 Psychological. In addition to those given in 
 the list on p. 42-43 of the 'Guide,' may be 
 mentioned: Bain (15, 16), Murray, Handbook 
 of Psychology, p. 223-235, 387-390, Lazarus, 
 Das Leben d. Seele (2 v. Berlin: 1875-78), C. 
 Hermann, Aesthet. Farbenlehre (Leipz: 1876). 
 Though the subject of aesthetic is purposely ex- 
 cluded from James's Psychology (N. T: 1890), 
 his chapters on Imagination and Feeling can 
 not fail to be richly suggestive. 
 
<i^ 
 
 ..-"' 
 
 -'Zi 
 
 i 
 
 University of Michigan Syllabus and References 
 
 Extension Teaching 
 
 THE INTERPRETATION OF ART 
 
 With special reference to Leonardo da Vinci and Michael Angelo 
 
 SEMINARY 
 Conducted by Fred N. Scott. Ph. D., Assistant Professor of Rhetoric 
 
 PREFATORY NOTE FOR MEMBERS OF THE CLASS 
 
 The term Seminary implies that the main purpose 
 of the course is original investigation. The lectures 
 are intended merely to furnish the tools; the work, if it 
 is done at all, must be done by the individual student 
 out of his own mental resources. The idea that great 
 erudition is necessary to independent research in art 
 is believed to be erroneous. Kvery student who uses 
 what knowledge he already has, in interpreting the 
 results of his ovn\ observations, is in so far making 
 original research; further, he is making it in the only 
 way in which such research is ever made. The 
 Reports, therefore, for which suggestions are offered, 
 are intended to record the personal observations of" 
 the student (1) upon particular works of art, where 
 these are accessible. (2) upon points made in the 
 lecture, or (3) upon material which he may find in the 
 reference-books. 
 
 The object of the Reports will be defeated unless a 
 spirit of independence, a determination not to accept 
 
conventional opinions simply because they are found 
 in books, is resolutely maintained. In art more almost 
 than in any other subject that can be named, the in- 
 cubus of authority terrorizes genuine appreciation. 
 
 The Keports are of two kinds: (1) a main report, on 
 which work is done at pleasure throughout the con- 
 tinuance of the course and which may take the place 
 of a final examination; (2) weekly reports on some one 
 or more of the suggested questions. Outlines for the 
 final report, and special references, will be furnished 
 on application. 
 
 The References in the Bibliography are given, 
 generally, in the order of their importance. It has 
 been thought best to cite a large number of w^orks 
 under each head in order that all the resources of 
 public and private libraries may be made available to 
 the class: and so to distinguish the merits of each, by 
 brief criticisms, that the student may be able to econ- 
 omize time in the selection of reading-matter. A 
 few references have been made to w^orks in foreign 
 languages. 
 
 The following are recommended for purchase: 
 Knight's Philosophy of the Beautiful (Scribner's 
 Sons, X. Y.: 1891); Bosanquet's translation of Hegel's 
 Introduction to the Philosophy of Fine Art (Kegan 
 Paul, Lond.: 1886); Eichter's Leonardo da Yinci and 
 Clement's Michael Angelo (Great Artists Series); 
 Schaff's Renaissance (Putnam, X. Y.: 1891). 
 
 The lectures Avill be illustrated by stereopticon 
 views, or by miniature photographs distributed among 
 the audience. 
 
 — 2 — 
 
OUTLINE OF LECTURES 
 
 I ruiNciPLEs OF Interpretation 
 
 1 Meaniiiij of aesthetics Scope and nature of the 
 
 science Unsettled problems 
 
 2 IJrief sketch of the development of modern 
 
 aesthetic theory 
 
 3 The nature of art Its function in the life of 
 
 the individual and the state The staudard 
 of aesthetic value 
 
 4 The several arts and the stajxes of their develop- 
 
 ment The art of the l<.»th century 
 
 5 Place of painting among the arts 
 
 6 The interpretation of pictures 
 II Art and the Renaissance 
 
 1 The middle ages Divorce of brain and hand 
 
 The mediaeval hypnotism 
 
 2 The awakening Discovery of man and the 
 
 state Phases of the movement 
 
 3 Reasons for the artistic aspect of the Renais- 
 
 sance The demand for expression 
 
 4 The special function of painting in the Renais- 
 
 sance 
 
 5 Rapid sketch of painting from Cimabue to 
 
 Leonardo 
 
 III Leonardo da Vinci— The first and second 
 
 periods of his life 
 
 1 Early lif(> and training 
 
 2 Inlluences of the time; in society, politics and 
 
 religion 
 
 3 Personal character of the man 
 
 4 Early paintings 
 
 5 The Last Supper 
 
 IV Leonardo da Vinci— Third period of his life 
 1 Events of this period 
 
 —3— 
 
 
2 Paintings and drawings 
 
 3 The Mona Lisa 
 
 4 Leonardo as scientist 
 
 5 His contribution to art 
 
 6 Leonardo's place in the movement of the 
 
 Eenaissance 
 
 y Michael Angelo— Life and minor works 
 
 1 Early life and training 
 
 2 Influences— relations with Lorenzo— with the 
 
 Popes — with Savonarola — with Yittoria 
 Colonna — with Leonardo and Raphael 
 
 3 Michael Angelo as engineer 
 
 4 As sculptor and architect 
 
 5 As poet 
 
 6 As painter — characteristics 
 
 VI The Sistine Frescoes 
 
 1 Plan of the Avhole 
 
 2 Interpretation of the ceiling— the compart- 
 
 ments 
 
 3 The Sibyls 
 
 4 The Prophets 
 
 5 Interpretation of the Last Judgment 
 
 6 What Michael Angelo did for the Eenaissance 
 
 and the 19th century 
 
SUBJECTS FOR THE FINAL REPORT 
 
 A iNTKKl'HKTATIOX OK PlCTinivS 
 
 1 A detailed interpretation of (a) Michael 
 
 Angelo's Creation of ^[an, or (b) of the 
 Delphic, Persian, and Cumaean Sibyls, or 
 (c) any three of tlie Propliets 
 
 2 Detailed description of ceiling of Sistine chapel, 
 
 accounting for the arrangement of all the 
 figures (Duppa's Life of Michael Angelo, 
 Plate 3; Liibke's Mist, of Art, ^"ol. 2, p 304; 
 AV^oltmann and Woerraanu's Hist, of Paint- 
 ing, Vol. 2, page 491) 
 
 3 Comparison of Leonardo's Last Supper with 
 
 representations of the same scene by other 
 Italiin artists (Mrs. .Jameson's Sacred and 
 Legendary Art, and History of our Lord) 
 
 4 Motives of the Sistine frescoes compared with 
 
 those of illustrations in American mag- 
 azines 
 
 5 Kealism and Idealism in Italian Art (For the 
 
 meaning of these terms, see Everett's 
 PoetJ. Comedy, and Duty, p. 88-97; Fort- 
 nightly 48:118; Scribner's Mag. X. S., 2:241) 
 B Theory of Art 
 
 1 Aesthetic ideas of children in the public 
 
 schools (The data to be obtained by obser- 
 vation A list of questions will be fur- 
 nished) 
 
 2 Aesthetic environment of the American citizen, 
 
 from personal observation 
 
 3 The art-instinct in municipal or state politics 
 
 (Data to be gathered from personal obser- 
 vation and from newspapers) 
 
 4 The political " machine " as a work of art 
 
 —5— 
 
5 The art-impulse as manifested in American 
 
 trade, industries, or business 
 
 6 Methods of distribution of American art 
 
 7 Ethical effect of the average aesthetic environ- 
 
 ment in American cities 
 
 8 Influence of the railroad on aesthetic apprecia- 
 
 tion m America 
 
 9 Difference between economic and aesthetic 
 
 value 
 
 10 Difference between fine and useful art, using 
 
 the works of Leonardo or Michael Angelo 
 as examples of the one, and the telephone 
 as an example of the other 
 
 11 Difference between Taine's theory of criticism 
 
 as set forth in his Philosophy of Art, and 
 his practice in the criticism of painting in 
 his Italy, Naples, and Kome, and Italy, 
 Florence, and Venice 
 
 12 Hegel's use of the terms classic and romantic 
 
 art compared with the usage of other 
 authorities (Bosanquet's translation, p 
 148-157; Jl. Spec. Philos., Vols. 12-13; No. 
 Am. Rev. 84:385; Atlan. Mo. 57:309; 
 Schlegel's Hist, of Literature; James's Psy- 
 chology II, p. 468-72) 
 
 13 The art-impulse according to Schiller and Spen- 
 
 cer (See Schiller's Aesthetic Letters, and 
 Spencer's Psychology, chapter on the aes- 
 thetic sentiments) 
 
 C Italian Artists 
 
 1 Eeligious (or irreligious) character of Italian 
 
 painters as exhibited in Vasari's Lives 
 
 2 Comparison of Leonardo and Goethe 
 
 3 Leonardo's theory of painting, as exhibited 
 
 in his Treatise, compared with Ruskin's 
 
 4 Michael Angelo and Savonarola 
 
 5 A study of IMichael Angelo's Sonnets as an 
 
 index of his life and character 
 
 6 Trace the steps by which Michael Angelo 
 
 passed from the conception of the Piet^ 
 (St. Peter's) to the representation of the 
 same personages in the Last Judgment 
 
 —6— 
 
SUGGESTIONS FOR WEEKLY REPORTS 
 
 FiKST "Week 
 
 1 I low have you been accustomed to tell a good 
 
 picture from a bad one ? 
 
 2 Wliat benefit do you get from examining works 
 
 of art V 
 
 3 Do the old masters give you any great satisfac- 
 
 tion V and if so, of what kind? 
 
 4 Do you ever tire of famous paintings or repro- 
 
 ductions of them hung where you can see 
 them daily? What pictures have thus 
 affected you ? 
 
 5 Does the inspection of art make you any better 
 
 natured, more hopeful, more attentive to 
 business, better satisfied with the humdrum 
 of life— or the reverse? 
 
 6 Selecting any one of the pictures by Leonardo 
 
 or Micliael Angelo, tell what you like, or 
 dislike in it, and give your reasons 
 
 7 Selecting one of the pictures that you have 
 
 neither seen, nor read about, describe it 
 minutely and give your own opinion as to 
 its meaning 
 
 8 Selecting any picture by Michael Angelo, point 
 
 out what elements you consider as beautiful 
 and what, though not beautiful, you find 
 attractive and interesting 
 
 9 "What is the most characteristic specimen of 
 
 American art you remember to have seen, 
 and what do you regard as its distinctively 
 American feature ? 
 Second "W'eek 
 
 1 Indicate the main currents in the Renaissance 
 movement 
 
 —7— 
 
2 Who were the prime movers, and what, in brief, 
 
 are they supposed to have contributed to 
 the movement ? 
 
 3 ^YhSLt advance was made in thought— in views 
 
 of man and his relations to society, God 
 and nature— during this period? 
 
 4 What Avas the service of painting to the 
 
 Renaissance ? 
 
 5 "VVhy should painting rather than sculpture, 
 
 architecture, or music be the characteristic 
 art of the Eenaissance ? 
 
 6 What office did painting fulfil that literature 
 
 could not have fulfilled as well 
 
 7 If paintiug did its perfect work at that time, 
 
 of what use are the Old Masters to us of 
 to-day? 
 
 8 Compare two pictures, one from the early and 
 
 one from the late Eenaissance, pointing out 
 the significance of the differences between 
 them 
 
 Third Week 
 
 1 Personal character of Leonardo 
 
 2 His character read from his picture of himself 
 
 3 Influences political, religious, etc., during his 
 
 early life 
 
 4 How do you explain his- indolence and his 
 
 scientific bent ? 
 
 5 Biblical and other authorities for the character- 
 
 ization of the figures in the Last Supper 
 
 6 Does Goethe seem to you to be at fault in any 
 
 particular in his interpretation ? 
 
 7 Original and borrowed ideas in the Last Supper 
 
 8 Are any elements of the picture displeasing to 
 
 you? 
 
 9 What has Leonardo's Last Supper to say to us 
 
 of to-day in this country ? 
 
 Fourth Week 
 
 1 What is the value of Leonardo's contribution 
 to science ? 
 
 —8— 
 
9 
 
 2 What was his contribution to Uw movement of 
 
 intellifjeni-e in the Henaissance V 
 
 3 Common characteristics of Leonardo's various 
 
 paintings and designs 
 
 4 Is your enjoyment of Leonardo's w<.rk alTected 
 
 bv vour study of it? If so, in what way f 
 
 5 Do you'tind the Mona Lisa disappointing? In 
 
 what particulars? 
 rt Describe tlie features of the Mona Lisa in 
 detail, giving the expression of each, and 
 the combined effect 
 
 7 Do you regard anything about the picture as 
 
 " indescribable ? " If you mean that no one 
 will ever be able to describe it, on what 
 grounds do vou assert such impossibility ? 
 
 8 In what way is the world better (or worse) off 
 
 for the existence of this painting? 
 
 Fifth Week 
 
 1 Account for Michael Angelo's preference for 
 
 sculpture 
 
 2 Meaning of his " terribleness " 
 
 3 Point out the "terrible" features in one of 
 
 Michael Angelo's pictures 
 
 4 What political, religious, or philosophical prob- 
 
 lems did Michael Angelo help to solve? 
 
 5 Michael Angelo's relations with Savonarola 
 
 6 Passages from the Sonnets that throw light on 
 
 his character and motives 
 
 7 Can you conceive how the " Moses " wcmld have 
 
 appeared had he been compelled to make a 
 
 painting of it? 
 
 8 Did Michael Angelo express anything in paint- 
 
 ing which he could not have expressed as 
 well in sculpture? 
 
 Sixth Week 
 
 1 Borrowed and original ideas m the ceiling of 
 
 the Sistine 
 
 2 What is the central idea of the whole design? 
 
 — ()— 
 
3 Interpretation of the Creation of the Sun and 
 
 Moon, or of one of the Sibyls or Prophets 
 
 4 Conventional elements in the frescoes 
 
 5 Biblical or other authorities for any one of the 
 
 scenes or figures of the ceiling 
 
 6 Sources for the motives of the Sibyls 
 
 7 Interpretation of the faces and attitudes of 
 
 Christ and the Virgin in the Last Judgment 
 
 8 Identification of the Martyrs, or of the Old and 
 
 New Testament characters ? 
 
 9 Religious belief embodied in the Last Judgment 
 10 Of what value are the frescoes in the Sistine 
 
 chapel to modern citizens of the United 
 States ? 
 
 -10 — 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Ln-KKATiitK OK Akstiiktics.— A r.uide to the 
 Literatuivof Aestlii'tics, a cliissilied biblio^n-a])liy by 
 C. M. (Javlev and V. N. Scott, is obtainable at a nomi- 
 nal prifeliom Librarian Tniv.of California. ]?eikeley. 
 Aeslliftics, its Problems and Literature, by F. N. Scott 
 (Inland I'ress, Ann Arbor), tjives classilication of prob- 
 lems, courses of reading:, and critical comments. The 
 bibliography of Knight's rhilosophy of the lieautiful 
 is extensive. 
 
 (iKXKKAL TiiKOiiY OF AuT.— Knii^ht's lMiilosoi)hy 
 of the Keautiful. though consisting of detached sum- 
 maries in which little attempt is made to show the 
 movement of thought, is the simplest introduction 
 to aesthetic theory. The best single treatise for 
 the serious studeiit is IJosanquet's Translation of 
 Kegel's Introduction to the iniilosophy of Fine Art. 
 Everett's Poetry, Comedy, and Duty, excellent for 
 beginners, treats mainly of poetry; his Science of 
 Thought contains chapters on the general theory. Sul- 
 ly's article • Aesthetics ' in the Kncycl. r>rit., is valuable 
 for its statement of problems (pub. in Humboldt Libr., 
 loc); the articles on 'Art' and 'Fine Art' by Colvin are 
 easv reading, but do not go much below the surface. 
 Van Dvke's Principles of .\rt is a useful little book, but 
 opinionated. .V clear i>resentation of fundamentals 
 will be found in Prof. Seelev's article Klementary 
 Principles of Art. Macmillan's .Mag. 1<>:1, and in Ilam- 
 erton's Portfolio Pai)ers. ji. l«):S-24t) and ]). 24H 2»")7. 
 For those in search of simjile and convenient critical 
 tests, the line of tliougiit devejoix-d by (i. H. Lewes 
 in his Principles of Siu-cess in Literature (Boston: IHIU) 
 will be found especially helpful. 
 
 The references given above are for the general 
 reader. Those who care to go more deeply into the 
 subject should pursue it as a branch of the history of 
 philosoi)hv. For outline of such ii course see Aes- 
 thetics, its Problems and Literature referred to above. 
 The mastery of modern aesthetics lies through a study 
 of two miiin lines of thought: (1) (Jerman speculation, 
 including Winckelmann. Kant. Schiller, (ioethe, and 
 Hegel; Cl) evolutionist si»eculation, rei)resented prin- 
 cipally by Taine, Spencer, Allen, Main and Sully. 
 
 — n — 
 
Much of Hegel's monumental Aesthetik is now avail- 
 able in Ensrlish. Besides Bosanquet's translation, 
 which furnishes the key to the whole work, may be 
 mentioned Kedney's Exposition in Griggs' Philos. 
 Classics (in which Hegel is, liowever, sadljj Kedney- 
 ized), and the translations in the Jl. Spec. Philos., Vols. 
 1-3, 5-7, 11-12. Short papers from the Hegelian point of 
 view, are Ker's Philosophy of Art in Seth and Hal- 
 dane's Philosophical Essays; Morris's Philosophv of 
 Art, Jl. Spec. Philos. 10:1; and W. T. Harris's Art 
 and Eeligion, Jl. Spec. Philos. 10:204. A popular 
 exposition of Hegel's theory of the development of the 
 arts may be found in Vernon Lee's article Compara- 
 tive Aesthetics. Contemp. Rev. 38:300. 
 
 Turning to the other side, Taine's theories are set 
 forth in his Ideal in Art and Philosophy of Art, Spen- 
 cer's in the last chapter of his Psychology. Grant 
 Allen's Physiological Aesthetics is an expansion of 
 Spencer's theory. Sully, in his Sensation and Intuition , 
 Essay 13, sketches the science from the evolutionist 
 point of view. The course of modern aesthetic theory 
 is best outlined in Bosanquet's papers in the Proceed- 
 ings of the Aristotelian Society. These Avill be incor- 
 porated in the author's History of Aesthetic, which 
 promises to be the standard English work on this sub- 
 ject. 
 
 Ruskin deserves a paragraph to himself. His way- 
 ward theorizings on aesthetics become intelligible only 
 when interpreted as part of the whole movement of 
 thought. The general reader, will do well, therefore, to 
 pass them by, accepting gratefully Ruskin's remarkable 
 transcripts bf his own observations in nature and art. 
 
 Painting.— On the relation of the fine arts to one 
 another, nothing in English is so good as the papers in 
 the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society. Treatises 
 on technique are legion. The simplest are W. B. 
 Scott's Half-hour Lectures on the History and Prac- 
 tice of the Fine and Ornamental Arts, Lects. 14-15; 
 Hamerton's Graphic Arts. chap. 20-21; the articles 
 on 'Fresco' and 'Painting' in Encycl. Brit., 9th Ed. 
 On the introduction of oil ])ainting into Italy, see the 
 note. p. 214, in Eastlake's materials for a History of Oil 
 Painting. Van Dyke's How to Judge of a Picture is 
 an excellent brief exposition of such terms as perspec- 
 tive, value, tone, etc. See also Lucy Crane's Art and 
 the Formation of Taste, Lect. 6; and Veron's 
 Aesthetics, chapter on Painting. 
 
 The Renaissance.— Schaff's small volume, though 
 a mere collection of sketches, makes an excellent 
 hand-book. The bibliography is valuable. The best 
 
 -12- 
 
short articlo is Sviiionds' ' Uonaissancc' in the Kiioycl. 
 Ikit. Syinonds'" Ixcnaissaiice in Italy, sev(Mi larpe 
 voluiues'fnll of tloritl rln'toric, is tlio standard l^n^lish 
 work. It is crowdi'd witli information and rcadal)!^ as 
 a novel. A topical arranpcMnent (in wliich art as such 
 linds no idaro) is followed in Hiirckliardt's Civilization 
 of the Renaissance, a tlinroniihly trnstworthy work and 
 one tlisplavinj; immense research. 'I'lie Hevival of 
 J.etters in"the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries is 
 the title of a series of semi-popular papers by Kx.- 
 I'rest. T. 1). Woolsev in Now Kng. 23:f)(il ; 21 ::55, 414, ()05. 
 :Michelet's Ilenaissance, the 7th vol. of his Hist, of 
 France, is brilliant and sii-^'^jestive. For bibliography 
 of si)ecial features see begiimins of SchaH's chapters. 
 
 Hknai.ss.vnck AuT.--Standard works are Lid)ke's 
 History of Art, vol. 2; AVoltmami and Woermann's Ilis- 
 torvof"Paintin<?,V()1.2:Eastlake's(Kugler's) Handbook 
 of VainfiuK', The Italian Schools (oth ed. rev. by Lay- 
 ard); Symonds' Renaissance, The Fine Arts. Middle- 
 ton's article ' Schools of Painting' in ICncycl. Hrit. has 
 an extensive bibliojjraphy. A popular and well illus- 
 trated work is Leader Scott's Renaissance of Art in 
 Italy. Pater's Studies in the History of the Renais- 
 f^ance (reviewed bv Morley, Fortn. lii:4»)'.», by Stillman, 
 Nation 17:243) consists of detached essays in which 
 the • tlavor ' of the period is conveyed by subtle sug- 
 gestion and emotional description. The same method 
 IS emploved in Vernon Lee's Euphorion. A sugges- 
 tive review bv Hamerton of Miintz's Renaissance was 
 published in the Portfolio 21:57. For origimil investi- 
 gators, such works as Vasari's Lives of the Painters; 
 Mrs. Jameson's Memoirs of Early Italian Painters, 
 Legends of the Monastic Orders, Legends of the 
 :Madoinia, Sacred and Legendary Art, and History of 
 our Lord (Compl. bv Ladv Fastlake); Lanzi's History 
 of Painting in Italv; and Crowe and Cavalcaselle's 
 Histories of Painting in Italy and in North Italy; are 
 reservoirs of detailed information. Of a more popular 
 character are Hurckhardt's Cicerone (eminently trust- 
 worthv); Middlemore's The C.reat .Age of Italian Paint- 
 ing; I'ovnter and Head's Italian Painting (in Art 
 Ednca. Ser.). In Italian masters in Oerman (lalleries, 
 Vt. Morelli illustrates the "experimental method" of 
 criticism, identifying each painter by his manner of ex- 
 pressing details of the human form. Readers of Ger- 
 man will lind in Ivumohr's Italienische Forschungeu 
 and Drei Ileiseu the foundation of later research. 
 
 Lkon.vudo.— The best small work is Richter's Leon- 
 ardo in the Great Artists series; the best single article 
 that of Colvin, Encyl. IJrit. (see bibliography at close). 
 
 —13— 
 
Mrs. Sweetser's small volume in Artist Biographies, 
 based on Houssaye's work, has no illustrations. Mrs. 
 Heaton's handsome volume is of value chielly for its 
 photographs, which include many designs as well as 
 the Chief works. Brown's Life of Leonardo, some- 
 what dull, is prefixed to Bigaud's Trans, of Leonar- 
 do's Treatise on Painting. A good short biography is 
 Stillman's article in Century for April, 1891, with Cole's 
 perfect engravings of the Mona Lisa, the Goldsmith, 
 and the Adoration; the criticisms are superficial. See 
 also Century for May, 1890, p. 94, for Cole's engraving 
 of the angels, and comments, p. 99-101. Pater's essay 
 in his Studies in the History of the Benaissance, with 
 its remarkable characterization of the Mona Lisa, has 
 become classic. (See Wilde's curious remark in 19th 
 Century 28:144). 
 
 Vasari's Lives of the Painters is still the great 
 storehouse of biography, though Milanesi and others 
 have shown many of his good stories to be merely hen 
 trovato. Extended notices of Leonardo with estimates 
 of his works, occur in Liibke's Hist, of Art, vol. 2, p. 
 280-290; Woltmann and Woermann'sHist.of Painting, 
 vol. 2, p. 461^75; Lady Eastlake's Five Great Painters, 
 p. 1-97 (reprinted from Edinb. Bev. for Jan., 1875); 
 Eastlake's Handbook of 1 talian Schools, vol. 2, p. 347- 
 370; Morelli's Italian Masters in German Galleries; 
 D'Anvers' Elementary History of Art, p. 35(>-361; 
 Symonds' Benaissance, The Fine Arts, p. 313-327; 
 Yiardot's Illustr. Hist, of Painters, p. 88-94; Lanzi's 
 Hist, of Painting, vol. 1, p. 147-K52; Champlin's Cyclo- 
 paedia of Painters ; Clement's Michael Angelo, Leon- 
 ardo, and Baphael (excellent in arrangement, but crit- 
 ically weak); Clara E. Clement's Handbook of Paint- 
 ers, p. 605-612. For references to Leonardo inTaine's 
 Italy, Florence, and Venice, see index under ' Vinci '. 
 The brief but valuable criticisms and comparisons iu 
 Crowe and Cavalcaselle are indexed under 'Leonardo* 
 (see in particular the description of the angels in 
 Verrocchio's Baptism of Christ, Hist, of Painting in 
 Italy, Vol 2, p. 406-9). 
 
 Those who read German may be referred to the 
 readable life and philosophical criticisms in Carriere's 
 Die Kunst in Zusammenhang d. Culturentwickelung, 
 Bd. 4, p. 120-135, the trustworthy article by Brun 
 in Dohme's Kunst u. Kiinstler, Bd. 3, No. 61, and 
 Bichter's Leonardo-Studien, Zeitsch f. Bild. Kunst, 
 1880-81. Beaders of French will find an entertaining 
 essay by G. Blanche in Bev. d. deux Mondes 1 Sept. 
 1850, and another by Clement (afterwards incorpor- 
 ated in his book) in the same magazine 1 Avril 1860. 
 
 —14— 
 
Articles of a peneral cluvract^r will bo f<'".' n 
 ^rribner 17- :«7; Kd. Hov. 141 ::{'.•; For Q^'Xri. hy.lW; 
 VVes inster r,3 28o; Lond. (Mart. 4r,:323; lackwood 
 44to (a coiHi.arison ut Leonardo and Correggio); 
 
 '^llnKual^S^scientist.see his own Treatise on 
 Painting (transl. in Hohn Library); 1 he ^^^say «m,the 
 Scientitic and Literary works of I^eonardo by ( ^ C. 
 IMaek in Mrs. Ileaton's Leonardo; li|""«tts paper on 
 
 Leonardo as a P.otanist. Natnre 2:-*-: J^V-nrS^I 
 remHrkahle statenuMit n'parding Leonardos know lege 
 
 of anatomy, Art Jonrnal torlho2 p. 4..: ••f/l^"' ^J^'J" 
 eratnre of Europe. Vol. 1. p. 3o:M (espenally the foot- 
 note)' and Kieliter-s Literary Works of Leonardo. 
 
 Kenuirks on Le.-nardo's drawings will be found in 
 ('•irr's 'am"rs,.n Art.p. 4-48, and Wallis's Drawings 
 from the Old Masters, Art J. for 1882. p. 33 (see also 
 34:3b-. for iUnstration). Many reproductions of sketch- 
 es bv Leonardo occur in Munt7. s articles in L Art tor 
 1S87-I pp. <'l. 154, ISO; 1887-11, p. 6o: 188'.>-I, p. 124, 
 1889-11 p. 1. (See also 1882-1 11, p. 1.10). 
 
 TiiF L VST SrrrER.— Besides the descriptions in 
 the treatises already cited, see (Joethe's celebrated in- 
 terpretation, translated in .Tl. >V^<^-}^''lf ,}.-'f If,?,": 
 the (;erman original see Hemp 1 ^^ Vm ^'':r wilt itt ' 
 Cotta Fd Hd 31. p. .',(); Cotta sche IJibl. d. U elt itt., 
 Hd 30 1) 'l5l»- Mrs. .laineson's Sacred and Legendary 
 \rt Vol.'l p.2.>l-277(with picture of Last Suppers by 
 (liotto Leonardo and Paipiiael), and History of Our 
 Tord D l'.t-23- Lloyd's somewhat sentimental paper 
 in Portfolio 2:13; Saunder's Critical Description, in 
 Brown's Life of Leonardo, p. 17'.M9y; the art.de n 
 The Fine \rts 5:20t with reproduction of the N emce 
 studv; the note by the Countess de Kr^ckow in Am. 
 Architect '25:145 on Stang's engraving; and the cnr. 
 
 ^'"^i';,'';,''»■ "^Air,r...o.-Clemenfs Michael AnRelo in 
 the*(ireat Artists Series is a good biography, but senti- 
 mental and exclamatory in its criticisms fhe same 
 remark apidies to his larger w<.rk. Michael Angeb) 
 Leonardo Haphael. The engraymgs in the sma ler 
 book are fairly accurate (but compare tbe character- 
 less face of the Delphic Sibyl, opp. v. 4»), \Mth the 
 photograph or Cole's engraying). Tiie best short arti- 
 des Covin's in the Kncyd. Brit, (b.bh.gr. at close) 
 Stniman's artide in Century for Nov. Wn is too brief 
 to be of much value, and the criticisms are yer> diea 
 goods. Cole's engravings of the Delphic and ( umaean 
 Sibyls are. however, faultless. Mrs. Sweetzer s vo ume 
 in Artist Biographies is short and concise. The stana- 
 
 — I! 
 
arc! work is Grimm's Life in two volumes, available in 
 a poor translation. It is delightful reading and very- 
 comprehensive. (See review in Nation 1:533). The 
 material for AVilson's compendious work is in part 
 taken from the biography by Gotti. Black's ]\[ichael 
 Angelo is valuable chielly for its photographs, lists of 
 works, and inclusive bibiography (at the close). The 
 original Life by Duppa (repr. in Bohn Libr.) contains 
 many engravings (some of them grotesquely unlike 
 the originals), and Michael Angelo's sonnets in the 
 Italian. Harfoi'd's Life (rev. in Ed. Rev. 106:507) 
 contains much translation. 
 
 The following are some of the more valuable bio- , 
 graphics and criticisms; Vasari's Lives, Vol. 5 (long and 
 full of anecdote); Liibke's Hist, of Art, Vol 2, p. 301- 
 315; Woltmann and Woermann's Hist, of Painting, 
 Vol. 2. p. 487-500; Symonds' Benaissance, The Fine 
 Arts, p. 384-480; Lady Eastlake's Five Great Painters, 
 p. 101-212 (rep. from "Ed. Bev. for July 1876); Cham- 
 plin's Cyclopaedia of Painters; Clara E. Clement's 
 Handbook of Painters, p. 14C^165; Perkins' Baphael 
 and Michael Angelo (in alternate chapters); Eastlake's 
 Handbook of Painting, Vol. 2, p. 370-389; D'Anvers' 
 Elementary Hist, of Art, p. 362-368; Mrs. Oliphant's 
 Makers of Florence, Chap. 15 (very readable); Viar- 
 dot's niust. Hist, of Painters, p. 105-112. See Cellini's 
 Autobiography (Chap. 3 of the translation) for account 
 of the quarrel with Torrigiano. Following are some 
 of the noteworthy criticisms of a general character. 
 The references to Michael Angelo in Mrs. .Jameson's 
 History of Our Lord, Legends of the Madonna, Sacred 
 and Legendary Art, and Legends of the ISlonastic 
 Orders, may be traced by consulting index under 'An- 
 gelo.' For Taine's always interesting impressions (in 
 which he generally deserts his theories) see his Italy- 
 Naples, and Bome, Bk. Ill, Chap. 9, and Italy, Flor- 
 ence, and Venice, index under 'Michael.' Buskin has 
 frequent references to Michael Angelo in his Modern 
 Painters; see index. Of greater value is his paper on 
 The Belation between Michael Angelo and Tintoret 
 (Orpington: 1880). Further criticisms will be found in 
 Jarves' Art Studies, Chap. 14; Owen's Art Schools of 
 Mediaeval Christendom, Chaps. 13-14; Plielps' essay 
 on Plagiarisms of the Old Masters, Magazine of xlrt, 
 1889, p. 257; and Poynter's Ten Lectures on Art, (dwel- 
 ling esp. on M. A."'s realism). German readers will 
 find able criticism in Carriere's Die Kunst in Zusam- 
 menhang d. Culturentwickelung, Bd. 4, p. 135-152, and 
 Springer's article in Dohme's Kunst u. Kiinstler. An 
 interesting biographical sketch by Blaze de Bury, 
 
 — 16— 
 
dealing with Michael Antrelo'"* political relations, will 
 be fouiul ill llev. d. ck'ux .Xlomlcs I Fevr. 187S. Among 
 almost iiinunuM-ahU' majj:azinc artirlcs. the most valu- 
 able an- (lalaw I'.til'.iS; IWackwoud. lIS:lf.l: I'Mitar. 
 liev. Il:til2; W! li. Scott's j;\iter in rortfulio *\')>i; 
 Trollope's essav in No. Am. l-Jo:!'.)'.*; (^larlo^ly Hev. 
 10:i:KU5; and illackwood 144 rioS (a somewhat bond)astic 
 essav bv W. W. Storv, rei»r. in his Kxcursions in Art 
 and"r.eiters). The paper bv Dr. Harris in .11. Spec. 
 Philos. ll:-2iM. on the Fates, is a model of interiireta- 
 tion. (Tompare, on the Fates, Owen's .Vrt Schools, 
 chap. 14, and Tvrwhitt's Christian Art ami Symbolism, 
 Lect. 4.) 
 
 On Michael Anpelo's poems, see Ed. Kov. tr>S:l,antt 
 the translations in the Live^ by Harford and Dnppa. 
 Translations of the Sonnets wi'll be fonnd in Symonds' 
 edition and in his Renaissance. The Fine Arts, p. 
 527. For the oricrinals see Dnjipa's Life, p. 420, and 
 Jordan's editioji (Leipzig: 1875, with German trans, by 
 Sophie Ilasendever). 
 
 With regard to Michael Angelo's drawings, see 
 Robinson's Critical Account of the drawings in the 
 Oxford (ialleries; the book of Etchings, by .Tos. 
 Fisher, of the same drawings; the illustrated paper by 
 Wallis in Art .T. for 18S2. ]». l.'/2: Fagan's Art of 
 :Michael .\ngelo (on Hrit. Museum Collection); the fine 
 reproductions in Ottley's Italian School of Design; the 
 idiotographsand comments in IJlack's Michael Angelo, 
 and the article by Muntz in L'Art 188S*-I-1 L An almost 
 complete list of" drawings is given in Braun's Cata- 
 logue general des Photographies. 
 
 TnK Ckilino of thk Sistink Ciiatkl.— The best 
 outline map of the ceiling is Plate :i. in Duppa's Life, 
 (Lond.: I8()7). Smaller representations will he found 
 in Lvlbke's Hist, of Art, and Woltmannn and Woer- 
 manns Hist, of Painting. A general view of the 
 chapel follows p. '.»2 of Clement's Michael .\ngelo. 
 forms the frontispiece to Viardot's lllustr. TTist. of 
 Painters, and p. 1U5 of ^[anniTlg■s Italian Pictures. 
 De.scriptionsof the ceiling are singularly fragmentary. 
 The most comprehensive is that of Orimm. \'ol. 1. p. 
 .32'.t-.3tW. Others will i)e found in Dupi)a's life; Perkins' 
 Kapliael and Michael .Vngelo; Lilbke's Hist, of Art. 
 Vol. 2, p. ;^0I-30H: Woltmann and Woermanns Hist, of 
 Painting, Vol. 2. p. 41)(>-4'.«;: Michelet's Uenai.ssance. 
 p. 401-2 fhighlv imaginative); .Symonds' Henais.sance. 
 the Fine Arts", p. 407-412; Fastlake's Handbook of 
 Painting, A'ol. 2. p. H7i"^-:mi, :}H7-:is'». Taine's vivid 
 transcript of his emotions in the presence of the 
 frescoes may be read in his Italy, Naples, and Pome. 
 
 —17— 
 
Bk. Ill, Chap. 9. The references in Mrs. Jameson's, 
 works may be traced in the indexes under 'Sistine.' On 
 the Sibyls and Prophets, see History of Our Lord, Yol. 
 1, p. 248-256. Quotations from Kugler, Mrs. Jameson, 
 and others are given m Hare's Walks in Eome. p. 549* 
 For a singular interpretation of the Creation of Man, 
 see Wallis's article in Art Jl. 1882. (" Adam receives 
 the breath of life from his maker with an attitude of 
 sullen indifference.") Yasari's long description is 
 rather fulsome. For Michael Angelo's methods of 
 painting in fresco, see W. B. Scott's Half-hour Lec- 
 tures, Lect. 14. 
 
 TiiK Last Judgment.— The best detailed inter- 
 pretation is that by Dr. Harris in ,J1. Spec. Philos. 3:73. 
 The description in Grimm's Life covers pp. 206-222, in 
 which see his suggestive comparison of the L. J. and 
 the Pieta. Lady Eastlake's chapter in Mrs. Jameson's 
 Hist, of Our Lord, Yol. 2, p. 392-416, on the L. J. in 
 art. should be read with care, though little is said of 
 Michael Angelo. Wilson's comments in his Michael 
 Angelo, p. 419-435, are stimulating in their frankness, 
 (lie compares the face of Christ to that of Apollo, 
 finds the features " without expression," the whole 
 conception " a misrepresentation." The face of the 
 Yirgin is " without sentiment of any kind.") A briefer 
 description is given in Black's Michael Angelo, accom- 
 panied by a photograph of Yenusti's copy (compare 
 Foster's Etchings of Oxford drawings). Further refer- 
 ences are: Taine's Italy. Xaples, and Rome, Bk. Ill, 
 Chap. 9 (end); Duppa's Life (contains large outline 
 engraving): Haydon's Correspondence and Table Talk, 
 Yol. 2. p. 152; and Delacroix's Le Jugement dernier in 
 Revue d. deux Mondes. 11 Aout, 1837 (also reprinted). 
 The general histories of art should of course be con- 
 sulted. 
 
 POPULAR WORKS 
 
 Leonaedo and Michael Angelo.— Cassels' Lects. 
 on Great Masters, Lect. 1; Spooner's Biogr. Hist, of 
 the Fine Arts: Stories of the Italian Artists (bv the 
 author of Belt and Spur), p. 130-149, 2.58-301; ]\Irs. 
 Bolton's Famous European Artists, p. 66-105. 7-66; 
 The (xallery of Portraits, Yols. 1 and 4; Historical 
 Sketches of Old Painters; Knox's Great Artists, p. 
 133-170. 171-186; Spooner's Anecdotes of Painters, 
 Yol. 1 : Kunsthistorische Bilderbogen.il Theil. plates 
 207-208 (same plates in Prang's History of Art Series). 
 
 Michael Angelo.— Buckley's Dawnings of (ienius, 
 p. 48-66; Foa'sBoy Artists; Lester's Artists, Merchants 
 and Statesmen, p. 26-73; Lord's Beacon Lights of 
 
 — 18— 
 
History, Vol. 3; Uoscoe's Lives of Eminent Persons; 
 Kussel's Extraordinary Men; Princes of Art. 
 
 PHOTOGRAPHS 
 
 Trustworthy photoprajilis can be best obtained by 
 imi)()rting tlieni. 'I'lii- prints inadf in tliis country are 
 sometimes mere caricatures of tlie originals, some- 
 times rei)roductions of etchings or engravings which 
 the dealers take no pains to identify. Standard Euro- 
 
 fean lirms are the Kratelli Alinari, Via Nazionale, 
 'lorcnce; I). Anderson, 85 Piazza di Spagna, liome; 
 C. Naya. Place S. Marc n. 75. A'enice; Sommer A: Figiio, 
 Naples (for views and statuary mainly); Neunlein 
 Fr6res. 52 Avenue de Hreteuil, Paris; Alansell iS: Vo., 
 271 Oxford street, London, \V.; the Autotype Co., 74 
 New Oxford street, London. W. ('.; the Berlin JMioto- 
 grai)li Co., Berlin. The Carbon P]iotograi)lis of Ad, 
 Braun I'v: (.'ie.. 43 Avenue de 1' Oi)t'ra, Paris, are tine, 
 but expensive. Catalogues should be obtained, and 
 studied, before ordering, and the size and price care- 
 fully determined, iiraun's Catalogue general of 42,(K30 
 subjects, may be had for five francs. It is worth the 
 price merely as a list of artists and works. Photos 
 should always be ordered sent by mail unmounted. 
 Any local i)hotographer can mount them. Oood 
 effects may be obtained by mounting on a liglit buff 
 card, with a margin of from two to four inches on each 
 side. 
 
 —19- 
 
ANN ARBOE, MICHIGAN: 
 
 THE EEGISTKR PCBLISHI>G COMPANY. 
 
 "Cbc ■flnlan^ press. 
 
 1892. 
 
 
Cfrm 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED EELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE~OF 25 CENTc; 
 
 W.LU BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO R^uIn 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE xJ^Jl 
 W.LU .NCREASE TO SO cLts ON THE .Ou'^TH 
 
 sCerdT ^" ''-^^ ^^ -^ seven;h°^d\^;; 
 
 ^^^ S4I936 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 JUL 3 . 1939 
 
 JUN 11 1948 
 
 27Apf'49B6 
 
 US7A 
 
 .-^ 
 
 ? 'g end of FALL Quarter 
 .jb'iect to recall after — 
 
 >5 
 
 WBmta FEB 2141.74 -W AM 
 
 1 01S94 
 
 LD 21-50?n-8 -32 
 
 
\^t^ 
 
 V/ 
 
 
 HO? 
 
■■.•ijiv,,.