Pietro Vannucci, called Perugino

lorence and in Perugia, although possibly the winter saw him in Bologna. In 1497 he was

document quoted by Morelli recording the purchase of certain l

ment where the ring with which the Virgin Mary was espoused is preserved, this master painted an altar-piece representing the Marriage of Our Lady." Mariotti q

496. On these attributions a theory has been built up that Raphael in his "Sposalizio" (painted in 1503 or 1504) took as his motif the picture painted by his master Perugino, and improved considerably on the original conception. Crowe and Cavalcaselle in their inspection of the picture refer to its most s

all, nor to an earlier period than the Raphael "Sposalizio," but to the hand of Lo Spagna, and since 1504. With his opinion, although contrary to the accepted judgment, I am in the fullest accord, and I think that Vasari, going only upon hearsay, and with probably only a casual glance at the picture, if ever he saw it at all, makes a grave mistake when he attributes it to Pietro. Mr. Berenson e

picture, the fourth to the right, a woman wearing a hood, which never once appears in any work of Perugino's, but which does appear, line for line, not only in the Todi "Coronation," but in another of Spagna's pictures. Other points of close resemblance are to be found in the drawing of the ears, which are totally different to those of Pe

hows that Raphael's work is of the Ferrarese school and not of the Umbrian, and that instead of its being a souvenir of the Caen picture, and based upon it and greatly improved, it is, in fact, an original work upon which Lo Spagna based his picture which is now at Caen. When to these arguments are added the want of style and dignity in the Bramantesque temple at Caen, the absence of the colonnade that Perugino favoured, and which he drew from Piero della Francesca, the want of intermediate grouping, the stubborn heaviness of the draperies, so different from Perugino's light, easy folds, the hard, empty

enson, I must now part company with him in referen

ritics more than has the "Apo

en sold to the Louvre in 1883 for 200,000 francs, it was agreed that it shoul

Morelli put it first to Timoteo Vite, but confesses that he did not examine it carefully. In a later work he withdrew this ascription, and says that "it belongs most probably to a master w

ch Perugino's work is identified. Furthermore, there are birds in the sky, and I know of no sky of Perugino's in which they appear. The feet of the two figures are very Peruginesque, the open and upward curling great toe is clearly defined; but the hands have not the awkward tong shape of his earlier work, nor the very thin, boneless appearance o

photo] [Mu

APPEARING T

there is now a copy of it in that place. King Ludwig I. bought it in 1829 from the Capponi family, who held the rights over the Nasi chapel, where it hung, and although it has been cleaned and restored, it remains a beautiful and quite genuine work. It is well to compare the hands and the ears in this picture, with their delicate, sensitive beauty, wit

Bologna picture we see the lovely figure of St. Michael, to which allusion has already been made when reference was made to the Certosa altar-piece, now in the National Gallery. The great archangel is

sty colour the cherub heads which belong to it. The conception is very lovely, the colouring subdued and sunny, and, while the picture recal

nd thoughtful treatment. Perugino has adopted a very fine arrangement. The Virgin is enthroned in the centre, and has the divine Child on her knee. Behind her stands St. Anne in a very motherly attitude, resting her two hands on her daughter's shoulders. On the right of the throne stands St. Mary Salome, holding in her arms St. John the Divine, and by her side is St. Joachim, the husband of St. Anne

oto] [Bolo

IN IN GL

o of light that surrounds each head, and the composition of the group is almost perfect, so well arranged and so well balanced. The colouring is subdued but radiant with sunlight, and few pictures are as typical of the master's hand. All his peculiarities of painting, his unusual draperies, his exaggerated feet, his long slender hands with lumpy knu

be seen. Vasari speaks of the monastery under its old name of the Cestello, and records that a picture of St. Bernard was also painted for the same house, but this has been lost. The great fresco in question was ordered in 1493, for 55 ducats, by Pietro Pucci and his wife Giovanna, and was finished in this eventful year April 20th, 1496. The scene is represented under three arches. In the central one is the

rom the hill of Montefalco or from the monastery of Assisi, and is apparently limitless. There are the long sweeping outlines of the Umbrian Hills, the distant towns with their churches and castles, the pleasant waters winding in and out of the hills and gleaming in the evening light, and the

a. Maria Maddalena

RUCIF

figure, and intense sympathy for the spectators in the drama. There are two studies in existence for this work, one for the Christ on the Cross, on the back of a drawing of Pericles (252, 400) and the other for the standing figure of the Virgin (251, 417). Both are in the Uffizi Gallery. In the central compartment of the fresco will be recognised the prototype of the "Crucifixion" by Raphael now belonging to Mr. Ludwig Mond. There is, however, far

t of it only is still in situ, the central panel of the upper tier. This represents the Eternal Father within a mandorla of cherubs. The remaining f

has been called the monotony of Perugino can be clearly seen at this time. The figure of St. Michael has alre

the figures of the Cambio decoration, in the "Sposalizio," and in the Sistine Chapel fresco.

fact that his altar-pieces more or less closely resembled one another, and the artist's reply that he robbed no one. His figures were admired in one picture, why should they no

out Perugino's conceptions beyond a certain point; but this very monotony is a most useful aid in recognising and scheduling his pictures, while indivi

oto] [National

THREE-FOLD

elay in the completion of the altar-piece he had commissioned, speaking of the large sum he had disbursed, and of his love for the Certosa and desire to

nd Child with Saints," dated 1497, and an "Annunciation," dated 1498; while at Sinigaglia there is a "Madonna and Child with Saints" closely resembling the Fano one, and at Cantiano a "Holy Family" of similar characteristics. In the intervals which enabled the artist to revisit Perugia we h

gain, they should perhaps be given to a later period altogether, say to 1500 or 1501; but we have no evidence whatever connecting Perugino with this remote part of the sea-coast save in 1497 and 1498, and as in style and colouring, even in composition an

oto] [Peru

D CHILD WITH P

inest of this style of miniature-like painting that Perugino ever executed. In the predella scene can be noted Perugino's method of representing the "Sposalizio," and the arcade and temple doorway, the arrangement and grouping of the figures, and the open air effect of the whole, and entire absence of crowding will all be noted as characteristics which the Caen picture does not possess. The lunette of this fine altar-piece

oto] [Peru

OF ST. FRANCIS ON

Eternal Father, within a circular mandorla, is above, and below, flying towards the Madonna, is

," represents the Madonna seated upon a throne or tomb, crowned, and holding the Christ on her knee. Above in the air are two angels kneeling in adoration,

et bearing the I.H.S. surrounded by rays of light which floats in the air close to him. He lived at the convent of San Francesco al Prato, and close to the convent now stands the oratory dedicated in 1461 to his memory, the front of which is decorated with Agostino Ducci's wonderful marble and terra-cotta fa?ade. The confraternity for whom the picture was painted, specially honoured the memory of San Bernardino, and therefore had a peculiar devotion toward his patron saint, St. Francis of

that in that year there was an outbreak of plague in the city which the records inform us suddenly ceased in response to great supplication, and it is possible that this picture was painted for the confrater

to] [Accade

RUCIF

zi "Crucifixion." The Christ is from the same model, but is a larger figure in every way and not quite so carefully drawn as in the Pazzi one. Its increased size and more hurried execution gives it a coarser and harsher effect. The Pazzi "Crucifixion" has but one figure at the foot of the cross. The Accademia necessaril

n towers and spires can be recognised in the scene. The composition is more crowded than in the Pazzi fresco, and this element and the heavier treatment of the crucified Figure somewhat detract from its beauty; but it is probable that the explanation of the whole circumstan