How to Show Pictures to Children/Chapter 9

by Estelle May Hurll

IX

PICTURES OF CHILDREN

A wise mother is glad to have her child enjoy the companionship of other children. It makes for normal development that he should mingle with others of his own age in the home, in the school, and at his play. And it is simply an extension of the same principle that his first books and pictures are about children. Every little boy or girl he meets or hears about is interesting to him, and he welcomes a picture child as a new friend. Among very little ones, pictures of boys or girls are equally enjoyed, but the time soon comes when boys naturally take to their own kind and girls to theirs. We can hardly surfeit them with this class of subjects, and indeed no grown-up with a heart for children ever tires of good art of this sort. The popularity of such subjects is seen in the immense output of advertising material adorned with child pictures. Many of these reproduce photographs of real babies, and are by no means to be despised. Much of the artistic modern photography compares favorably with high art. Nevertheless, our repertory should not be wholly supplied from this source. It is desirable for the child’s all-around education that his art world be peopled with children of many periods and nationalities. In the embarrassment of riches which are available for this purpose the classified descriptive list at the close of this chapter will help mothers and teachers to make wise selections. The pictures referred to have been tested by much practical experience and found attractive and interesting to children.

Technically the picture of a child is a far more difficult achievement than that of an adult. When the Italian primitives were struggling with the problems of the human figure they represented children as miniature grown-ups. The Christ-child in the arms of his mother, as old Cimabue and Giotto painted him, is a good deal like a doll. The real live baby was not born into the world of art till a much later date. Indeed, the very young baby has never been a common art subject, for the painter has naturally preferred the more attractive stages of childhood.

An inexhaustible storehouse of child pictures, as all the world knows, is that vast body of works to which we apply the Italian name “Madonna,” because it was in Italy that the subject had complete historical development. It represents Mary, the mother of Jesus, with the Christ-child in her arms, and was the first artistic effort of the Christian era to portray childhood. The theme makes an instantaneous appeal to children of all ages, and will never outgrow popular favor. In making selections for our children, we do well to avoid the archaic paintings of the early centuries and all the more formal altar pieces, looking first for the elements of human interest and childish affection. The simplest compositions are best. From the great Renaissance Italians the best beloved masters are Andrea del Sarto, Raphael, Correggio, Luini, Bellini, and Titian. The German Holbein’s Meyer Madonna also belongs in this period. From the seventeenth-century names I would add those of Carlo Dolce (with discrimination), Murillo (Spanish), and the two great Flemings, Rubens and Van Dyck. All these men understood well the representation of innocent, happy childhood. There are also many excellent modern Madonna pictures in the art stores by Gabriel Max, Bodenhausen, Dagnan-Bouveret, Sichel, Ferrari, and others.

The children’s special favorites among Raphael’s works are the Madonna of the Chair and the Sistine Madonna. In innumerable schoolrooms all over the land hangs one or the other of these two pictures. Many stories are told by the teachers of the beneficent influence of these noble ideals of motherhood and childhood upon pupils of every race and creed. Such subjects may be considered entirely apart from their original ecclesiastical significance as a universal type of the tenderest of human relations. I heard of a young high-school girl, obliged to give up her course because of tuberculosis, who talked constantly of the beautiful picture which hung in the schoolroom. The mother found upon inquiry that it was the Sistine Madonna, a copy was procured, and the girl’s last days were made happier by the gracious presence in her sick-room.

The two great Raphaels illustrate a contrast in motive which a child is quick to grasp. The child of the Chair Madonna nestles in his mother’s protecting arms, seeking shelter from danger, but the Sistine boy is like a little prince who is thinking of his people, and is setting forth to help the world. In the children’s phrase one is “babyish,” and the other “manly.” I call the Chair Madonna the “Madonna of Love,” and the Sistine, the “Madonna of Service.” The central portion of the Sistine Madonna makes a picture complete in itself. In fact many of the most attractive Madonna subjects are made in this way, by photographing the central detail in a separate print.

A subject closely akin to the Madonna and Child is Charity, a symbolic expression of that all-embracing spirit of love which gathers the children of the world in its care. A noble group by Andrea del Sarto treats this subject as a motherly woman seated, with a child at her breast, another on her knee, and another at her feet. Burne-Jones made a tall, narrow panel of Charity standing with a baby on each arm and four children at her feet. Abbot Thayer’s painting in the Boston Art Museum is a third well-known example. Here Charity extends both arms as if to shelter all children beneath them, and two little ones stand at her feet nestling against her sides. Such pictures are admirably adapted to the nursery and the lower grade schoolroom. And perhaps here, better than anywhere else, should be mentioned that beautiful picture of kindred theme, Murillo’s Guardian Angel.

The Holy Family is an enlargement of the Madonna subject by the introduction of other figures. A pleasant fancy of the old masters was to represent

JESUS AND JOHN — “THE CHILDREN OF THE SHELL”
The Prado Gallery, Madrid

the little St. John Baptist, cousin of Jesus, as a playmate of the holy child. Here are endless possibilities of story interest for a child’s delight. An effective contrast is made between the swarthy, skin-clad Baptist and the fair-haired Christ-child. The sturdy St. John is the most affectionate slave of his cousin, bringing offerings of fruit and flowers or kneeling in adoration. Raphael was particularly felicitous in this subject, and examples are numerous also among his contemporaries. Single ideal portraits of either of the two boys are not very common, but are treasures worth picking up when they are to be found. Andrea del Sarto’s St. John Baptist, the boy, is an exceptional picture, and a great favorite. Murillo’s so-called Children of the Shell is a delicately conceived subject of the relation between the two cousins. They have been playing together with the lamb, when St. John becomes thirsty, and the Christ-child offers him to drink from a shell.

The several striking incidents of the infancy of Jesus have all been very often illustrated, and form a series of delightful pictures of child life. The birth in the Bethlehem manger, the visit of the shepherds to the newborn babe, the coming of the wise men with their Oriental gifts, the presentation of the babe in the Temple, the flight into Egypt, and the visit of the twelve-year-old boy in the Temple, have been made vivid by the art of many centuries. In choosing such pictures we must be careful to see that artistic beauty is united with good illustrative quality. It must be understood that none of the great painters of the past made any attempt to represent Bible scenes with historical accuracy. They knew and cared nothing about the customs and topography of Palestine in the first century. Happily, however, our children have no archeological prejudices. Their interest centers upon the babe, who lies serenely on his bed of straw in the company of the ox and the ass, who receives his first gifts with eager delight, who is borne in his mother’s arms on their long donkey ride into a far country, and who later discusses gravely with the gray-beards of the Temple the great volume of the Scriptures.

Another class of attractive child pictures emanating from the old masters is the joyous company of angels who figure so conspicuously in religious compositions. They fill the heavenly spaces with their choirs and make music before the Madonna’s throne. They sport playfully in the clouds or make themselves useful on the earth, companions and playmates of the Christ-child, or attendants upon sacred personages. And always, whether praying, adoring, singing, serving, they are the perfect embodiment of the eternal child spirit. Correggio is easily first in this peculiar field, as the creator of the most fascinating elflike sprites, bubbling over with mischief. The same elfin creature is by turns angel or cupid, playing with the helmet and sword of St. George, or sharpening an arrow by the couch of Danaë.

The child angel as a musician belongs especially to the Venetian art, placed at the bottom of a formal altar piece. Some of the best-loved figures of painting are these artless little creatures, bending over lute or violin with complete absorption. Bellini, Palma, and Carpaccio contributed some winsome examples. A few of the Florentines—notably Raphael and Bartolommeo—and the Bolognese Francia adopted the Venetian idea with characteristic variations. Other baby figures, or “putti,” for all sorts of decorative purposes, are scattered freely through Italian Renaissance painting, carrying banderoles or cartouches, supporting pedestals or medallions. In the limited repertory of subjects in this period. these child ideals formed a sort of outlet for the artist’s playful fancy.

Turning from these ideal child subjects of past centuries to the field of portrait painting, we find that real portraits of real children constitute a very interesting and attractive class of pictures for the little ones in our schools and homes. They make the home life of historic periods more vivid to us, they teach us how the boys and girls of olden times dressed, and, most of all, they show us that child nature is the same in all ages. With what wonder and curiosity do we gaze upon the monstrous skirts, the long, stiff corsets, and the elaborate finery which burdened little royalty of long ago. But that babies of four hundred years back played with rattles as they do now, and that children frolicked with pet dogs and clung to their mothers’ knees, unites the past and the present very closely. Sometimes we come unexpectedly upon a style of dress which seems quite familiar—a plumed hat, a jaunty cap, a broad lace collar, a “Dutch cut” of hair, a “Russian blouse.” The picture of a child elicits the prompt demand for information about the original—where does he live, what is his name, etc. We must take pains to answer such questions intelligently and consistently. If we cannot learn much of the pictured child’s real story, we may at least place definitely the nationality, the period, and the social class, so to speak, while the face tells us something of the particular temperament. A little experience makes us adept in the art of inference and teaches us to note every detail which may give the clue to the child’s character. When a historical personage is represented, we have plenty of interesting material to connect with the portrait.

Child portraits were rare articles in the Italian Renaissance, but of course we all know that there is no rule without exception. Now and again some painter—Ghirlandajo, Botticelli, Pinturicchio—pleased himself by turning off the portrait of a boy or girl whose face had caught his fancy. Occasionally a fond parent, like the great Duchess Isabella d’Este or a Medici prince, gave an order for the likeness of a beloved child. We can count these exceptional pictures on the fingers, but they are precious enough to cherish both for their artistic and historic value.

With the great portrait schools of the seventeenth century the child came into his rightful art place. From this time forward children’s pictures occupy their proper proportion in the total product of any period and school of art. But with all this abundance of material one can never choose a child’s picture at random. It is not given to all in equal measure to understand the heart of a child. There is a certain touchstone of sympathetic imagination by which we must test the essential quality of the pictures. To begin with, let us look for something better than mere doll-like superficial prettiness. The child need not be pretty to be interesting or attractive. Just a plain little everyday kind of girl who looks like a nice playmate, or a jolly good-natured sort of boy who is ready for any fun, makes the most delightful picture. A self-conscious, artificial child is as undesirable in a picture as in real life, and that artist is most successful whose work is most simple and natural. This is why Velasquez is so great, and Greuze often so weak, and Van Dyck so uneven. Where in the world of art can you match the simple babyish gravity of the infant Baltasar (Boston Art Museum), the pathetic timidity of Maria Theresa, or the sweet shyness of the Princess Margaret? Velasquez was free from the common fault of overmodeling the child’s face, painting only what he saw. Never straining after effects, his perfect self-restraint was an element of his success. All their absurd and gorgeous court costumes cannot hide the true child nature of the little Spanish royalties.

Now the young girls of Greuze, with all their prettiness, are not really natural. They are consciously posing for your admiration. And as you come to look at them the second time, you see that they are not so young as they seem to be. Some of them are only make-believe little girls, with arch smiles. Even the charming maiden of the Broken Pitcher, so carefully made up with a rose in her hair and a nosegay in her corsage, is not quite convincing. While the picture has some fine qualitics, the motive lacks sincerity and spontaneity, and I for one would give a good deal more for the wistful child with the apple in the London Gallery. Associated in our thoughts with the name of Greuze is that of Madame Le Brun, who began her art career by copying Greuze’s heads. She was, however, more sincere, if less gifted, than he, and she added something to the treasures of child portraiture in the charming pictures of her little daughter. The Mother and Daughter in the Louvre is a fine and deservedly popular work.

The child portraiture of Van Dyck is always sincere and serious, but the posing and grouping are not uniformly natural. The oft-repeated children of Charles I stand in rather stiff and uncompromising rows, but any such faults are forgotten for the splendid artistic qualities of the work. The heads are beautifully done and make complete separate pictures, particularly Prince Charles, and the inimitable “Baby James,” the Duke of York, in his little bonnet. Princess Mary is a bit too prim to be really childlike. My own favorites among Van Dyck’s child figures belong to the earlier periods when his inspiration had not lost its freshness, like the White Boy of the Durazzo Palace in Genoa, souvenir of his youthful Italian journey, and Richardot and his son,^[1] from the Flemish groups. The child portraits of Cornelis de Vos should

Painted by Van Dyck. John Andrew & Son, Sc.

CHARLES, PRINCE OF WALES
Royal Gallery, Turin

be classed with those of Van Dyck, whose contemporary he was, and whose skill he closely rivaled. They represent his own engaging little daughters. The Dutch schools of the same day furnish us many valuable examples of the subtle art of child portraiture. It was a fashion there for well-to-do merchants to have group pictures painted of the entire family. From this custom we see in the galleries a wonderful array of these pictures showing well the solidarity of the Dutch home life. It goes without saying that Dutch children are always chubby and rosy, and the soberness of their costume gives them an air of quaint gravity. Besides the more common or typical works, we have a few priceless gems which every child-lover values.

It was the glory of the English eighteenth-century art to develop the beauty of womanhood and childhood, and from this school came forth a host of picture children to delight the world. A characteristic quality is their animation. Contrasted with the staid and quiet figures of the little Italians, Spaniards, and Flemings of the previous centuries these English young folk are sparkling with life and gayety. In altitude, gesture, and expression we get the whole story of the child’s individual temperament. Sir Joshua Reynolds was the head of the School. He was one of those rare spirits who win the complete confidence of a child. He was their boon companion, and while he romped with them as a playmate, his keen artist’s eye noted their qualities as models. Delightful stories are told of that great octagonal room in Leicester Square from which proceeded such shouts of laughter that none could have dreamed it was a painter’s studio. From this enchanted castle were sent many masterpieces which have made the youthful originals household names, like Penelope Boothby and Miss Bowles. Not content with filling a multitude of orders, the painter seized every opportunity to make ideal or “fancy” subjects of children for his own amusement, using his little niece and grandniece as models. It is thus that we have the Strawberry Girl, the Age of Innocence, Simplicity, and Little Samuel. Gainsborough, like Van Dyck, inclined to the more poetic and serious aspects of child life, and therefore does not so readily win a child’s attention, But the Blue Boy should be introduced to all our children as a notable work of art, and no one can fail to respond to the intimate charm of his expression. The works of the lesser painters of the English school, Romney, Opie, Hoppner, and Sir Thomas Lawrence, have not been widely enough reproduced to become familiar to the general public. But little by little, as they find their way to large collections, we may hope to add to our knowledge of this marvelous setting-forth of child life in its happiest and most wholesome vein.

When we come down to our own period in our art study, our troubles increase, as we try to collect reproductions of some modern masterpieces of child portraiture. Costly copyrighted photographs we cannot all possess, but we derive such satisfaction as we may from poring over chance cuts in magazines and expensive illustrated books. Through these sources we learn how many children’s pictures were made by the French Bouguereau and Boutet de Monvel, the English Sir John Millais and Burne-Jones. A few good contemporary pictures, like Shannon’s Miss Kitty and Mr. Chase’s Alice, are scattered through our American public collections, and are rapidly becoming known through the efforts of art dealers.

And now for our lists:—

 

List of Pictures of Children

 

Madonna subjects.

Raphael. Madonna of the Diadem. Louvre, Paris. (Baby asleep.)

Granduca Madonna. Pitti Gallery, Florence.

Tempi Madonna. Munich.

Chair Madonna. Pitti Gallery, Florence.

Sistine Madonna, Dresden Gallery.

Correggio. Madonna with Angels. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

Kneeling Madonna. Uffizi Gallery, Florence.

Andrea del Sarto. Madonna of the Harpies. (So called from decoration of pedestal.) Uffizi Gallery, Florence. (Detail of mother and child.)

Botticelli. Madonna. Louvre, Paris.

Filippo Lippi. Madonna. Uffizi. (Mother seated, and angels holding babe.)

Perugino. Kneeling Madonna. National Gallery, London.
(Central panel of triptych.)

Luini. Madonna of the Rose Hedge. Brera, Milan.

Madonna at Lugano. (Lunette. Christ-child playing with lamb, little St. John on other side.)

Bellini. Madonna of Two Trees. Venice Academy.

Madonna and Child. National Gallery.

Titian. Pesaro Madonna. Church of Frari, Venice. (Detail of mother and child.)

Madonna of Rabbit. National Gallery.

Giorgione. Madonna. Castelfranco, near Venice.

Palma. Madonna and Saints. Dresden.

Moretto. Madonna and St. Nicholas. Brescia. (Unique and charming. The old saint introduces two little boys to the Christ-child, two others following him.)

Carlo Dolce. Madonna. Dresden. (Child asleep.)

Madonna. Pitti Gallery, Florence. (Child standing on mother's knee.)

Holbein. Meyer Madonna. Dresden Gallery.

Murillo. Madonna. Pitti Gallery, Florence.

Madonna. Corsini Gallery, Rome.

Van Dyck. Presepio. Corsini, Rome.

 

The Holy Family

Raphael. Cardellino Madonna (Madonna of Goldfinch). Uffizi, Florence. (Mother with two children in landscape; St. John bringing goldfinch.)

Madonna of the Meadow. Vienna. (Mother and the two children in landscape.)

Belle Jardiniere. Louvre. (Mother with two children in landscape.)

Madonna dell' Impannata. Pitti. (Two mothers, Mary and Elizabeth, with the two children.)

Madonna of the Pearl. Madrid. (Four figures as above. Full of joyous domestic feeling.)

Pinturicchio. Holy Family. Siena Gallery. (Landscape. Mary and Joseph seated. The two children running across meadow to draw water from fountain. The children's figures are photographed separately.)

Titian. Madonna of the Cherries. Vienna. (Mother with the two children. St. John bringing fruit.)

Madonna with St. Anthony. Uffizi. (Mother with two children. St. John bringing flowers.)

Luini. Holy Family. Ambrosian Gallery. Milan. (Two mothers, Mary and Elizabeth, with the children.)

Andrea del Sarto. Holy Family. Two pictures in the Pitti, Florence.

Knaus. Holy Family. Metropolitan, New York. (Little angel peeping at babe in mother's lap. Joseph on donkey in rear.)

Rubens. Holy Family. Pitti, Florence.

Van Dyck. Holy Family. Turin. (Two mothers and St. Joseph. Christ-child eagerly springing toward St. John.)

 

Nativity.

Correggio. Holy Night. Dresden.

Luini. Nativity. Louvre.

Nativity. Como Cathedral.

Lorenzo di Credi. Adoration of Shepherds. Uffizi, Florence.

Lorenzo Lotto. Adoration of Shepherds. Brescia.

Murillo. Adoration of Shepherds. Madrid Gallery.

LeRolle. Arrival of Shepherds.

Burne-fones. Nativity. Torquay.

 

Adoration of Kings (or Magi.)

Ghirlandajo. Foundling Hospital, Florence.

Gentile da Fabriano. Florence Academy.

Burne-Jones. Star of Bethlehem. Oxford. England.

 

Flight into Egypt.

Holman Hunt. Triumph of Innocents. (Circle of angels dancing about wayfarers.)

Correggio. Madonna della Scodella. Parma Gallery. (Mother dipping water from pool and St. Joseph plucking dates for Christ-child.)

 

Presentation in Temple.

Bartolommeo. Vienna. (Group of five figures, the aged Simeon holding the Christ-child.)

 

Christ among Doctors.

Holman Hunt. (Interior of Temple with many figures, Mary just discovering the lost child.)

Hoffman. (Group of six figures in three-quarter length. Boy Christ pointing to Scriptures.)

 

Child Angels.

As parts of compositions.

Botticelli. In the Incoronata, Uffizi, Florence. (Holding crown of stars over Madonna’s head, and supporting her writing materials for inscribing the Magnificat.)

Filippino Lippi. In Holy Family, Pitti, Florence. (Adoring and scattering rose petals over child who lies on the ground.)

In The Vision of St. Bernard, Church of the Badia, Florence. (Four attendants of Virgin. One with folded hands is photographed separately.)

Leonardo da Vinci. In the Baptism by Verrechio, Florence Academy. (Two kneeling attendants. Photographed separately.)

Titian. In the Assumption, Venice Academy, (Angelic throng upbearing ascending Virgin. Some groups photographed separately.)

Correggio. In frescoes in dome of Church of St. John Evangelist, Parma.

In ceiling decoration in Convent of S. Paolo, Parma. (Bearing implements of chase, to accompany Diana. Each figure in a medallion, photographed as separate picture.)

Murillo. In Immaculate Conception, Louvre, Paris, (Angelic throng upbearing Virgin.)

Van Dyck. Repose in Egypt. Pitti, Florence. (Circle of baby angels dancing to entertain Christ-child.)

Raphael. In Sistine Madonna, Dresden. (Two cherub heads at bottom of picture.)

In Foligno Madonna. Vatican Gallery. (Cherub holding cartouche at bottom of picture.)

In Jurisprudence fresco, Vatican, Rome. (Cherub in right corner.)

In Fresco of Sibyls, S. Maria della Pace, Rome. (Cherub.)

 

As separate pictures.

Rubens. Vienna Gallery. (Angels playing with Christ-child and lamb.)

Munich Gallery. (Angels playing with garland of flowers.)

Rosso Fiorentino. Uffizi, Florence. (Angel with guitar.)

Andrea del Sarto. Florence Academy. (Two angels with scroll.)

Musical child angels in altar pieces, photographed as separate figures.^[2]

Bellini. In Frari Madonna, Venice. (Lute-player. Flute-player.)

Vivarini. In Redentore Madonna, Venice. (Two baby lute-players.)

Carpaccio. In Presentation. Venice Academy. (Lute-player.)

Palma. In Madonna enthroned. Vicenza. (Violinist.)

Raphael. In Baldacchino Madonna, Pitti, Florence. (Two choristers.)

Bartolommeo. In Marriage of St. Catherine. Florence.
(Guitar-player and violinist.)

Francia. In Madonna of S. Giacomo, Bologna. (Two girl musicians.)

 

Child portraits.

Italian Renaissance.

Pinturicchio, Dresden Gallery. (Boy. Bust.)

Ghirlandajo. Louvre. (Old man and little child.)

Francia. Federigo Gonzaga. Bust. Altman Collection, New York. (The hoy was son of Isabella d’ Este and the Duke of Mantua.)

Morone. Bergamo Gallery. (Little girl. Bust.)

Paris Bordonc. Uffizi Gallery. (Bust of bay with plumed hat.)

Baroccio. Prince of Urbino. Pitti, Florence. (Baby in cradle.)

Tiberio Titi. Prince Leopold de’ Medici, Pitti, (A baby.)

Bronzino. Don Garcia. Uffizi. (Fat baby boy withird.)
Princess Mary. Uffizi. (Prim little girl.)

Titian. Lavinia. Berlin Gallery.

 

Flemish, Seventeenth century.

Rubens. Two sons. Vienna Gallery. (Full-length figures in rich costumes.)

Van Dyck. Children of Charles I.
Group of three (full length}. Turin Gallery.
(The group from which the separate heads are taken, Charles, Mary, and Baby James.)

Group of three (fulllength), Dresden Gallery. Group of five. Berlin Gallery. Princess Mary and Prince William (her fiancé). Amsterdam. Prince William of Nassau. St. Petersburg.

Cornelis de Vos. Baby. Antwerp. (In high chair with toys.)
Two little daughters. Berlin Gallery. (Children richly dressed seated en floor. Bewitching.)

 

Dutch, Seventeenth century.

Cuyp. Boy’s head. (Wearing broad-brimmed hat.)

Maes. Boy with hawk. Wallace Collection, London.

Frans Hals. Ilpenstein Baby. Berlin Gallery. (Richly dressed baby bubbling over with laughter. In arms of nurse.)

Moreelse. Princess. Amsterdam. (Half-length; dressed in stiff corset.)

Terburg. Helen van Schalke. Amsterdam. (Cabinet picture, Full-length figure. Dressed like a Quaker lady with reticule over arm. Very quaint.)

Ver Meer, Girl's head, Hague. (Wearing turban. Wonderful light on face.)

Lirens. Portrait of Boy. Berlin.

 

Spanish, Seventeenth century.

Velasquez. Princess Margaret. Louvre. (Bust.) Las Meninas. Madrid Gallery. (Interior with little Princess Margaret in center, surrounded by attendants.)

Princess Margaret. Vienna Gallery. (Full-length figure similar to that in Las Meninas.)

Princess Maria Theresa. Madrid Gallery.

Prince Baltasar Carlos on his Pony. Madrid Gallery.

Prince Baltasar Carlos (with hunting dog). Madrid Gallery.

Prince Baltasar Carlos (with dwarf). Boston Art Museum.

Murillo. Boy at window, National Gallery, London.

French.

Greuze. Broken Pitcher. Louvre, Paris.

Child with apple. National Gallery, London.

Girl with lamb. National Gallery, London.

Innocence. Wallace Collection, London. (Girl with lamb.)

Mme. Le Brun. Madame Le Brun and her Daughter. Louvre.

Girl with muff. Louvre.

Head of daughter. Bologna Gallery.

Fragonard. Head of child. Wallace Collection, London.

 

English, Eighteenth century.

Reynolds. Angel heads. National Gallery.

Age of Innocence. National Gallery.

Infant Samuel. National Gallery.

Lady Cockburn and children. National Gallery.

Duchess of Devonshire and baby.

Lady Spencer and son.

Simplicity.

Miss Bowles. Wallace Collection, London.

Strawberry Girl. Wallace Collection, London.

Penelope Boothby.

Gainsborough. Blue Boy. (Two versions. One at Grosvenor House, London. The other in collection of Mr. Hearn, from which reproductions have been made. Full-length figure in landscape. Dressed in blue satin.)

Eliza Linley and brother. Morgan Collection, New York.

Romney. Gower children, (Four little girls dancing in a circle. Tall girl striking tambourine.)

Sir Thomas Lawrence. Calmady children. (Two children’s heads in circular composition, sometimes called “Nature.”)

 

Miscellaneous.

Manet. Boy with sword. Metropolitan Museum. (Full-length.)

Sully, Boy with torn hat. Boston Art Museum. (Bust.)

Whistler. Rose of Lyme. Boston Art Museum. (Half-length of little girl.)

Sargent. Boit children. Boston Art Museum. (Interior with three children.)

Carnation Lily, Lily Rose. (Two little girls in garden lighting Japanese lanterns.)

Burne-Jones, Dorothy Drew. (Full-length figure of little girl seated.)

Shannon. Miss Kitty. Pittsburg. (Full length.)

William M. Chase. Alice. Chicago Art Institute.

Frank Benson. My Daughter. (Bust portrait.)

Bouguereau. Sister and brother.

The Broken Pitcher.

George de Forest Brush, Mother and child. Boston Art Museum.

 

Rererence Books:—

Alice Meynell: Children of the Old Masters: Italian Schools. London, 1903.

A quarto volume with fifty-six beautiful plates. An essay in nine sections, covering about seventy pages and discussing the old Italian interpretation of child life, with some emphasis on the work of the Tuscan sculptors.

Lorinda Munsen Bryant. Famous Pictures of Real Boys and Girls. London, 1912.

Arranged by countries: Italy, Spain, Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, England, and America.

1. An illustration in the volume on Van Dyck in the Riverside Art Series.
2. La Farge’s Suonatore in the Worcester Art Musem is a beautiful picture inspired by the musical angels of the old Italian altar pieces.