^
— The
Adoration by the Magi (1619, 203x125cm) _ Velázquez was a student in
Pacheco's workshop when he embarked upon this his first large work. In his
early works Velázquez was still strongly influenced by his master; these
pictures also reveal a marked striving for plasticity in the figures and
balance between the different elements of the composition. He painted The
Adoration of the Magi in heavy, dark colors and his lack of experience is
evident in the representation of the faces. And yet, the painting is more
than a mere exercise by an industrious and talented student. It is true
that he has not conveyed the quality of the textiles in his arrangement
of the folds of the garments; the composition is somewhat uncertain and
the spatial relations are by no means perfect: yet the picture reveals Velázquez's
genius as a portraitiSaint The Madonna is depicted as a beautiful Andalusian
peasant girl, her face glowing with maternal pride, the Infant is well observed,
charming with no hint of idealization, and the features of Baltasar are
exceptionally lifelike and worthy of note.
— Christ
in the House of Mary and Martha (1620, 60x104cm) _ In this early work,
Velázquez refers to the gospel according to Saint Luke, which tells of a
visit by Christ to the house of Martha and Mary. While Mary sat at his feet
to listen to his words, Martha busied her~elf with work in the kitchen;
eventually, she came to him and said: "Lord, dost thou not care that my
sister has left me to serve alone? Bid her therefore that she help me."
To which Christ replied, "Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled
about many things; but one thing is needful: and Mary has chosen that good
part, which shall not be taken away from her." (Saint Luke 10:40-42). The
composition of the painting, with a kitchen scene in the tradition of the
"bodegones" taking up the foreground, while the scene involving Christ is
presented as a view or a mirror image, is clearly influenced by the art
of the Netherlands. Even the plump, ruddycheeked figure of Martha and the
still-life arrangement of fish, garlic, eggs and paprika, recall examples
of Northern European art. Moreover, this picture is charged with a strange
sense of tension and restlessness. The events reflected in the mirror, bathed
in a mild light and exuding an atmosphere peace and calm, are contrasted
with the foreground image of loud and busy work. Through highlighting and
formal diversity, the artist sets a scene that is clearly unsatisfactory
to Martha. She is not concentrating on her work, but gazes full of yearning,
on the verge of tears, and slightly angrily, as though she already realized
that Mary had chosen the better part.
— Abbess
Jerónima de la Fuente (1620, 160x110cm) _ According to the long
inscription on the lower part, Mother Jerónima de la Fuente, Franciscan
nun, is depicted on the eve of her departure to the Philippines, where she
founded the convent of Santa Clara in Manila. The realistic style of the
painting reflects the influence of Francisco Herrera the Elder and Francisco
Pacheco.
— The
Supper at Emmaus (1620, 123x133cm) _ This painting is from the early
Caravaggesque period of Velázquez.
— Philip
IV (1627, 210x102cm) _ One of the first portraits of the King painted
by Velázquez, when he became official portraitist to the royal family in
1623.
— Doña
Maria de Austria, Queen of Hungary (1630, 58x44cm) _ Maria Anne of Austria
was the sister of Philip IV. The painting was made in 1630 in Naples on
the occasion of the marriage of Maria Anne and Ferdinand III. — Maria
Anna (Habsburg) of Austria/Hungary, Infanta of Spain (1606 - 1646), daughter
of Philip III and Queen Margaret; sister of Philip IV, she married the King
of Hungary, later Emperor Ferdinand III. Their daughter, Mariana (1634-
1696) married her uncle, King Philip IV of Spain, in 1649, and became the
queen of Spain; she strongly resembled her cousin Maria Theresa.
— The
Drinkers (The Rule of Bacchus) (1628, 165x225cm; 787x1089pix, 148kb)
_ Reunión
De Bebedores (lithograph after V., 25x36cm; 4/5 size) _ Velázquez
painted this picture of Bacchus surrounded by eight drinkers for Philip
IV who hung it in his summer bedroom. The painting is not only unique in
his oeuvre, but is very rare indeed in Spanish painting as a whole, which
does not generally have the drinking scenes so familiar in Flemish and Netherlandish
painting. Drunkenness was regarded in Spain as a contemptible vice and "borracho"
was the most scathing of insults. At the royal court, it seems to have been
considered highly entertaining to invite low-lifers from the comedy theaters
and inebriate them for the amusement of the ladies. But what kind of a Wine
God is this we see, crowning his followers with ivy, said to cool the heat
of wine, and consorting with peasants who grin out of the painting and clearly
find the spectator, that is to say the king, a very funny sight indeed?
The authority of the god whose presence delights them lends them a sense
of majesty as well. And in view of the delightful travesty of royal honors
in which Bacchus is indulging, they too have turned the tables and are laughing
in the faces of those who would laugh at them. Is this Bacchus merely a
myth born of wine, an embodiment of those lowly joys which the nobleman
snubs? Or is the god a courtier having precisely the kind of fun at which
the ladies liked to laugh? As only Caravaggio before him, Velázquez has
portrayed Bacchus (or rather Dionysos) as the God of the mask, the theater
and disguise.
— Joseph's
Bloody Coat Brought to Jacob (1630, 223x250cm) _ The court appointment
of Velázquez gave him few opportunities for religious painting, and only
occasionally did he execute subject pictures, except during his Italian
journeys. He was little influenced by other artists, though he profited
from the Titians in the Spanish Royal Collection, and the visit of Rubens
in 1628, which was his first contact with a great living painter, who was
also a court painter. Whether or not it was Rubens who inspired him to visit
Italy, it was due to Rubens's influence that he obtained permission to go.
He left in August 1629, visited Genoa, Venice, Rome and Naples (where he
met Ribera) and returned to Madrid in 1631.
— The
Forge of Vulcan (1630, 223x290cm) _ This and the preceding painting,
both made during the artist's stay in Italy, show his preoccupation with
the male nude. The main effect of his Italian journey was to increase his
breadth of vision, but without affecting its fundamentally realistic basis.
— Sibyl
(1632, 62x50cm) _ It is assumed that Velázquez painted his wife Juana Pacheco
on this painting.
— Christ
on the Cross (1632, 248x169cm) _ This Crucifixion of unparalleled serenity
and simplicity was completed when the artist returned from his journey to
Italy.
— The
Count-Duke of Olivares on Horseback (1634, 313x239cm) _ Philip IV succeeded
his father, Philip III of Spain, in 1621, and, for the first 22 years of
his reign, Philip's valido, or chief minister, was the Conde-Duque de Olivares,
who took the spread of the Thirty Years' War as an opportunity not only
for resuming hostilities against the Dutch at the end of the Twelve Years'
Truce of 1609 (1621) but also for an ambitious attempt to restore Spanish
hegemony in Europe, in close alliance with the imperial branch of the Habsburg
dynasty. — Count-Duke of Olivares, Caspar de Guzmán (1587-1645)
Spanish nobleman and politician, Duke of San Lücar. He was born in
Rome where his father was an ambassador. He was the favorite of Philip IV
of Spain, and his prime minister for 22 years. He wrung money from the country
to carry on foreign wars. His attempts to rob people of their privileges
provoked insurrections and roused the Portuguese to shake off the Spanish
yoke in 1640, and the king was obliged to dismiss and exile him in 1643.
— Juan
Martínez Montáñez (1635, 109x107cm) _ Montáñez
was the greatest Spanish sculptor of the 17th century, known as 'el dios
de la madera' (the god of wood) on account of his mastery as a carver. He
worked for most of his long and productive career in Seville. Velázquez
painted this portrait in Madrid when the sculptor made a portrait head of
King Philip IV.
— Buffoon
Barbarroja (1636, 198x121cm) _ The buffoon Barbarroja (Don Cristóbal
de Castañeda y Pernia) is represented in Turkish attire with arms. The ambitious
buffoon aspired to military roles and he even acted as toreador in the arena
although he was ill-fitted for doing it.
— The
Dwarf Don Juan Calabazas, called Calabacillas (1639, 106x83cm) _ Dwarfs,
fools and jesters were present in large numbers at the Court of Philip IV.
They were maintained by the King according to a tradition extending back
well into the Middle Ages. The tradition was motivated by charity, but many
'fools' came to be appreciated for their wit, arousing great affection and
sometimes achieving great fame. Because they were not taken seriously, they
were licensed to parody or flout the etiquette with which courtiers and
royalty had to conform, which seems to have been especially appreciated
at the rigid Court of Philip IV. Velázquez has used a variety of subtle
devices in portraying them: particularly interesting is the way the light
flickers uncertainly over Calabacillas' grimace, suggesting his poor vision.
Here Velázquez anticipates, or may have influenced, Goya's technique of
160 years later.
— The
Dwarf Francisco Lezcano, Called "El Niño de Vallecas" (1645,
107x83cm) _ El
Niño de Vallecas (lithograph after V., 33x26cm; full size)
_ During the 1630s and 1640s Velázquez painted a series of portraits of
the count dwarfs, playmates of the royal children, for they interested him
as character studies. _ El enano se llamaba Francisco Lezcano (o Lazcano)
y solía apodarse "el Vizcaíno", por ser natural u oriundo de Vizcaya. Aparece
documentado en palacio desde 1634, como enano del príncipe Baltasar Carlos.
Francisco Lezcano, Lezcanillo o el Vizcaíno fue bufón del príncipe y también
del funcionario palatino Encinillas, el que apuñaló a su esposa por celos
de otro enano, don Diego de Acedo, el Primo. El nombre pudo indicar
que era natural de Lezcano, pueblo de Vizcaya. El mote de Vallecas pueblecillo
cercano a Madrid, hoy absorbido por la capital) se añade medio siglo después
de pintado el retrato. Lezcano aparece vestido de paño verde, color propio
de cacerías, como aparece en Cervantes (en las cazas de los duques, a parte
del Quijote, la duquesa va de verde y a Sancho le regalan un sayo verde,
que desgarra al huir de un jabalí), lo que se aviene con el paisaje natural,
de la sierra de Madrid, que asoma al fondo, y que es el mismo del retrato
de El principe Baltasar Carlos, cazador. La cueva o abrigo donde
se halla el enano es un escenario asimismo propicio para la meditación,
que los anacoretas de Ribera suelen buscar. Por la parte del escote asoma,
arrugada pero limpia, la camisa blanca; de las mangas bobas del tabardo,
salen los brazos, con mangas rosadas. La pierna derecha aparece de frente,
mostrando su deformidad y la suela de su recio zapatón; la izquierda ha
dejado resbalar la calza, que se arruga en el tobillo. El vestido, que no
es en absoluto de mendigo, ofrece un aspecto de desaliño propio de la descuidada
mentalidad del enano, cuya enorme cabeza se inclina ligeramente al sol,
con apacible inexpresividad. Pese a su aspecto monstruoso fue pintada por
Velázquez con la belleza de una fruta madura. Entre las manos, juntas, gordezuelas,
sostiene un objeto que ha sido la peor cuestión interpretativa. Camón piensa
que es "un pincel de mango y brocha cortos y planos, que el pintor le dejaría
para que se entretuviera". Para Madrazo es "un trusco de pan o un casco
de teja". Pantorba apunta que pueda ser un naipe, aunque es "imposible precisar
lo que el Niño tiene entre sus manos". Para Brown se trata de unos naipes,
"mecánica actividad que es todo lo que precisa el pintor para animar la
postura y establecer la atmósfera sicológica del cuadro". Me parece acertada
esta última hipótesis, ya que los cortos dedos del enano parecen dispuestos
a barajar o a hacer un juego de manos. Aunque tampoco es imposible que se
trate de un librito (aunque ¿la baraja no lo es de los jugadores, según
la consabida broma?) que subrayaría el aspecto de paradójico anacoreta de
Lezcano, en la soledad de su cueva y de su estancia. El doctor Moragas diagnostica
que Lezcano "sufre de un cretinismo con oligofrenia y las habituales características
de ánimo chistoso y fidelidad perruna". "En la cara hay una expresión de
satisfacción, favorecida por el entornamiento de los párpados y la boca
entreabierta, que parece acompañarse del inicio de una sonrisa" Murió en
1649 (tres años después de su patrón, fallecido en Zaragoza, en 1646)".
Tenía, según Moragas, un criado a su servicio, lo que era común entre los
bufones reales. De este cuadro sacó Goya un dibujo a sanguina (Kunsthalle
de Hamburgo) y un grabado al aguafuerte y aguatinta, cuyo único ejemplar
conocido se perdió en el incendio del Instituto Jovellanos de Gijón.
— Court
Dwarf Don Antonio El Inglés (1645, 142x107cm) _ It was customary at
the courts of Europe during the seventeenth century for monarchs to keep
dwarfs. Velázquez's sympathy for the fools and dwarfs of the Spanish court
is obvious: in the pathos and humane understanding demonstrated by the single
portraits with which he (and he alone) paid tribute to them.
— The
Dwarf Sebastian de Morra (1645, 106x81cm) _ Velázquez painted the likenesses
of some of the dwarfs of the Spanish court who were, in the words of Carl
Justi, 'loved and treated as dogs'. These unfortunate cripples, sometimes
weak-minded but sometimes wise, often attached themselves to the courts
in the Middle Ages and later; there they found shelter in return for their
services as court jesters, and they had to endure the rude remarks and practical
jokes of the courtiers. Their feelings as human beings were generally ignored,
but the portrait of the dwarf Sebastiano de Morra (it was a form of mockery
to give the dwarfs such grandiose names) is one of the most penetrating
character studies ever made by the master. Although the dwarf Don Sebastián
de Morra is portrayed in full figure, he is not standing in a self-confident
pose or elegantly seated on a chair, but is sitting on the bare earth with
his feet stretched out in front of him. This low position not only shows
up the sumptuous clothing for the clownish apparel it is, but also heightens
the intended effect: the court fool is at the mercy of the spectator. Such
pictorial devices reveal the voyeurism with which the royal rulers made
these people the objects of their shameless whimsy, caprice and power. At
the same time, however, the artist is also making another statement: this
court fool is giving nothing away, neither a smile, nor any buffoonery.
Immobile, scrutinizing and impenetrable, his dark eyes are fixed on the
spectator, who somehow feels caught out by such a gaze and turns away. Velázquez's
greatest achievement as a portrait painter was certainly his highly pictorial
portrait of Pope Innocent X, made during his second visit to Rome; but already
in this picture of the dwarf, especially in the expression of the eyes,
there is evidence of the great gifts with which this artist was endowed.
— Diego
de Acedo (El Primo) (1644, 107x82cm; 900x692pix, 99kb) _ Retrato
de un Enano de Felipe (lithograph after V., 33x26cm; full size)
_ It was customary at the courts of Europe during the seventeenth century
for monarchs to keep dwarfs. Velázquez's sympathy for the fools and dwarfs
of the Spanish court is obvious: in the pathos and humane understanding
demonstrated by the single portraits with which he (and he alone) paid tribute
to them. A particularly impressive portrait is Velázquez's painting of the
dwarf Don Diego de Acedo, alias El Primo (The Cousin), probably commissioned
by the court and made at Fraga in about 1644. (The dwarf was called El Primo
because he boasted of being the relative of Velázquez.) Like the midget
Sebastian de Morra, who served in the retinue of the Infante Don Fernando
and Prince Baltasar Carlos, El Primo is shown sitting, and is viewed slightly
from below. The effect of presenting them from this dignified aspect is
to raise their status in the eyes of the spectator. El Primo is portrayed
leafing through the pages of an enormous tome. His small size makes the
books surrounding him appear even more gigantic than they are. His occupation
here is undoubtedly a reference to his administrative duties at the court.
At the same time, it is probably an example of humanist satirical jest,
which would often decry the senseless writing and reading of books as a
contemptible vice. Contemporary spectators would never have accepted that
a dwarf knew how to use the attributes of a scholar; the artist thus seems
to be using an apparently grotesque discrepancy to poke fun at the pseudo-scholars
of his day.
— Aesop
(1640, 179x94cm) _ Esopo.
Retrato de un Viejo Descamisado (lithograph after V., 34x20cm; full size)
_ Aesop is a legendary Greek fabulist, who lived in the 6th century BC.
According to various legends he was a Phrygian slave, who was granted his
freedom, or a confidant of King Croesus of Lydia. The medieval tradition
made him an ugly cripple. The Fables attributed to him are most
probably a compilation of tales from many sources.
— Menippus
(1640, 179x94cm) _ The satirical tradition had spread throughout Europe
via the humanists, and Velázquez's knowledge of it is evident in his use
of ideal types in portraits of the Cynic philosopher Menippus (MOENIPPVS,
c. 1636-40) and the Greek composer of fables Aesop (AESOPVS, c. 1636-40),
possibly painted for the hunting lodge Torre de la Parada, near the Buen
Retiro Palace. It was here, too, that many of his portraits of court fools
and dwarfs were hung. Aesop's face with its flattened nose was probably
not - as is commonly thought - painted after a man of the people (even if
the painting did attempt to show a simple man whose features were marked
by toil, and who therefore represented the Cynic ideal of the modesty and
wisdom of the people). The portrait seems rather more reminiscent of Giovanni
Battista della Porta's physiognomic parallels between various types of human
faces and the heads of animals associated with certain temperaments. Aesop
had, during Classical antiquity, been seen in conjunction with the Seven
Sages; Menippus was known as a castigator of hack philosophers, whom he
satirized in different literary genres. According to Plutarch, Aesop was
a counselor to the Lydian King Croesus (6th century). Velázquez was suggesting
a parallel with the situation at the Spanish court. The two portraits of
philosophers, together with the portraits of fools and dwarfs, were intended
to warn the king not to lose touch with the common people and their wisdom.
_ Mœnipo
(lithograph after V., 34x20cm; full size) _ Menippus was a 3rd century
BC Greek philosopher from Gadara, who followed the cynic philosophy of Diogenes
and who founded a seriocomic literary genre known as Menippean satire. It
was imitated by Greek and Latin writers and influenced the development of
Latin satire. Menippus was allegedly a slave by birth who became rich by
begging or by usury, afterward being made a citizen of Thebes, in Greece.
His criticism was an innovation in the presentation of philosophic ideas
because it was aimed at reaching as wide an audience as possible. It abandoned
the serious form of dialogue or essay and instead conveyed its cynic message
in a satiric style, mocking institutions, ideas, and conventions in a mixture
of prose and verse. Unusual settings, including a descent into Hades, an
auction, and a symposium, were employed with striking effect. The name was
used for Satyre Ménippée de la vertu du catholicon d’Espagne
(1594) [commentaire]
— {Why didn't Mané~Katz think of painting Menippus?}
— The
Coronation of the Virgin (1644, 176x124cm) _ This is one of the several
religious paintings Velázquez made in the 1640s.
— Portrait
of a Man (1649, 76x64cm) _ Alonso Cano and Velázquez were good friends
from their days as students in Seville. Even they worked together restoring
the Venetian paintings of the king damaged by fire. It is supposed that
the sitter of this painting is Alonso Cano, however, there is no documentary
evidence of it.
— Pope
Innocent X (1649) _ Perhaps the preeminent Spanish artist of the seventeenth
century, Velázquez was, from 1623 on, court painter to Philip IV in Madrid.
In 1650 Velázquez was sent to Italy to buy paintings for one of his monarch's
palaces; while in Rome the artist was commissioned to portray the Pope.
The final version (next) was preceded by several small sketches; this canvas
by virtue of its great vivacity is sometimes assumed to be a direct study
from life. Velázquez was given the unenviable task of depicting the most
powerful and, according to contemporaries, the ugliest man in Rome. The
artist was successful, for when the Pontiff saw the portrait he is said
to have remarked, "troppo vero".
— Portrait
of Innocent X (1650, 141x119cm) _ "He was tall in stature, thin, choleric,
splenetic, with a red face, bald in front with thick eyebrows bent above
the nose [...], that revealed his severity and harshness...". These were
the words used by Giacinto Gigli in 1655 to describe the pope (Giovanni
Battista Pamphili [1574-1655], made a cardinal in 1629 and elected to the
papal throne on 16 September 1644), adding that "his face was the most deformed
ever born among men." Justi and later Morelli considered his head "the most
repugnant... of all the Fisherman's successors" and "insignificant, indeed
vulgar," with an expression similar to "that of a cunning lawyer." And yet
this ugly and sullen man was paradoxically the subject of one of the most
admired portraits of the seventeenth century, and perhaps of all time. Mention
has often been made of the chromatic unity of this portrait, in which the
red flesh tones, the red cape, the red camauro, and the armchair of red
velvet against the backdrop of a red door create such a dramatic effect
that, if the pope were to open his mouth, even his saliva would be blood
red. This marvelously orchestrated profusion of crimson tints - sometimes,
as in the cape, with cold reflections as if "lit by neon" - undoubtedly
derives from the example of Titian, while the representation of the contrasting
white gown certainly harks back to Veronese, the only sixteenth-century
Venetian painter who knew how to handle this difficult "non-color." A man
of power, bolt upright, depicted in magenta, an aggressive and vital color,
that together with white symbolizes creation. In those years in Rome, the
artist painted portraits of other personages connected with the papal court,
such as Cardinal Camillo Astalli Pamphili, Monsignor Camillo Massimi, Donna
Olimpia Maidalchini Pamphili, Monsignor Abate Ippolito, and Cristoforo Segni.
The portrait of Pope Innocent X is by common consent one of the world's
supreme masterpieces of portraiture, unsurpassed in its breathtaking handling
of paint and so incisive in characterization that the pope himself said
the picture was 'troppo vero' (too truthful).
— Juan
de Pareja (1650, 81x70cm) _ Exceptional powers of observation and an
unprecedentedly vibrant technique make Velázquez the greatest Spanish
painter of his century. As court painter to King Philip IV of Spain, Velázquez
was sent in 1648 to Rome, then the center of the international art world,
where he made two of his greatest portraits, one of Pope Innocent X and
this one, of his studio assistant Juan de Pareja, a Sevillian of Moorish
descent. When the picture was exhibited at the Pantheon in 1650, one connoisseur
remarked that while all the rest was art, this alone was truth.
— Las
Hilanderas (1657, 220x289cm) _ There has been much discussion about
the meaning of this painting, but essentially it is clear enough. Just as
Velázquez in The Drinkers set ordinary folks beside Bacchus, here he sets
Minerva, the goddess of weaving, and Arachne, who rashly challenged her,
in the context of actual tapestry-makers. The scene may reflect the disposition
of the Royal Tapestry Factory of Saint Elizabeth in Madrid. Minerva is seen
arriving in the background, where Arachne is at work, while other spinners
in the foreground concentrate on the business in hand. Velázquez conveys
their industry with brilliant immediacy, seeming to mingle the hum of their
mills with the shifts of color in the light. Nothing could be further from
the silent suspension and frozen movement of Las Meninas. But Las
Hilanderas shares with Las Meninas and certain early works
by Velázquez an ambiguity in the handling of space, with which he deliberately
fascinates the viewer.
— Venus
at her Mirror (The Rokeby Venus) (1651, 122x177cm) _ The Rokeby
Venus is widely regarded, along with Titian's
Venus
of Urbino, as one of the most beautiful and significant portrayals
of Venus in the history of western painting. Yet it is virtually impossible
to explain the magic of this painting. The consistent reduction of color
to lucid red, gentle blue, clear white and a warm reddish-brown allows the
skin tone of Venus - blended, incidentally, only from the other colors in
the painting - to emerge as an independent hue whose sumptuous sheen dominates
everything else. Venus is presented in a sensually erotic pose, and yet
she seems chaste and is so completely merged with the overall image that
she cannot be touched. Cupid, disarmed, without his bow and arrow, is holding
a mirror, his hands bound by fragile pink fetters, condemned to do nothing
and completely immersed in contemplation of the beautiful goddess. The mirror
image - in defiance of all laws of optics - does not reveal the other side
of Venus, but only permits a vague and blurred reflection of her facial
traits. This may in fact indicate the underlying meaning of the picture:
it is not intended as a specific female nude, nor even as a portrayal of
Venus, but as an image of self-absorbed beauty. The goddess of love appears
here as a mythical being with neither aim nor purpose, needing no scene
of action, but blossoming before our very eyes as an image of beauty itself.
During the Inquisition pictures were censored and artists who painted licentious
or immoral paintings were excommunicated, fined very heavily and banished.
Rather than punish so notable an artist as Velázquez, his Venus was accepted.
Cupid and the face to be seen in the looking-glass were, in all probability,
heavily painted over in the eighteenth century.
— View
of Zaragoza (1647, 181x331cm) _ The painting was completed and signed
and dated by Juan Bautista del Mazo, the son-in-law of Velázquez
— The
Pavilion Ariadné in the Médici Gardens in Rome “Sunshine”
(1651, 44x38cm) — The
Entrance to the Grotta in the Médici Gardens in Rome “Noon”
(1650, 48x42cm) _ Velázquez made two views of the Garden of the Villa Médici
in Rome, the Entrance to the Grotta and the Ariadné Pavilion (called also
as Noon and Sunshine, respectively, referring to the difference in lighting).
By these paintings the artist anticipates the spirit of the plein-air painting.
— 114
images at the Athenaeum
— 79
images at Bildindex
—
Velázquez commemorative postal stamps.
|
%11!=founders-b-m-553.jpg){kind=link}
site safe for children 