Pre-Raphaelitism. English art of the 18th century had in its genesis one national peculiarity. There being no demand for it from church or state, it had to find its patrons (i.e. its means of existence) in the wants of the people. Hogarth, the first distinctly national subject-painter, found his themes in the social manners of his day, which were valued by the true instinct of the common people. Portrait-painters of national origin there had been before his time, but these, good and bad alike, had been followers of foreign masters introduced by the court and supported by its patronage. That art other than architecture was not necessarily an exotic in England is proved convincingly by the many beautiful examples of monumental portraiture produced by native workmen before the Wars of the Roses. The bronze effigies of Henry III. and Queen Eleanor in Westminster Abbey were executed by William Torel, citizen of London, in 1291–92, and those of Richard II. and Queen Anne of Bohemia by Nicholas Broker and Godfrey Prest, coppersmiths and citizens of London, in 1395–97. Austin of London furnishes an excellent and later example of this in his monumental tomb in the Beauchamp Chapel, Warwick. Those wars, followed as they were by the Reformation and in quick succession by the parliamentary troubles, smothered native art and necessitated the calling in of foreign aid; for it must be remembered that under the happiest conditions a native artist cannot be produced in less time than a full generation.
Hogarth having once arisen with full daylight of an independent inspiration, it was no longer possible for the mannered reproductions of the imitators of Kneller and Lely to satisfy the spirit of an age now awakened from its long sleep. Hogarth at first gained a footing by portraiture, and when later he devoted himself to subject-pictures he found a poor support by the sale of his engravings to the strictly middle classes. Amongst the wealthy there were two incentives to interest in art, one of these being found in ancestral dignity, the other in that love of sport so indelibly stamped upon English character. Sir Joshua Reynolds and Gainsborough arose, inspiring portraiture with their own precious grace and loveliness; animal-painters now well-nigh forgotten (such as Stubbs and his fellows) satisfied the latter; and Wilson as a landscape-painter made a heroic effort to graft upon the sportsman's instinct a larger love of nature. It has always been regarded as fortunate that at this time the reigning monarch, George III., declared his interest in the higher aims of art, an interest which expressed itself first in the establishment of the Royal Academy, and later in the patronage of Benjamin West for subjects of an exalted character. Although it is just that many of the works of this painter have since suffered a reversal of judgment, his picture of the 'Death of General Wolfe' will always remain a noble illustration of English history, largely justifying the king's favour. The great war for supremacy which at that time absorbed the nation's life, together with the almost ruinous debt then contracted, made further royal patronage impossible. It is easy now for any thoughtful person to trace how the high standard originally set was largely instrumental in sustaining the character of the art that followed. Its effects may be seen in the noble nature of the best works of Romney, Copley, Raeburn,
Opie, Girtin, Blake, Lawrence, Stothard, Constable, Wilkie, Haydon, De Wint, Crome, Turner, Leslie, and not less in the decorative designs of houses by the Adams brothers, in Wedgwood ware, in gold and silver work, and in furniture.
It is rarely that any cause for rejoicing may be found in the disastrous war of the beginning of the 19th century, but undeniably it did great things for the strengthening of English character, and this was the case in no direction more surely than in that of art. When in the peace of 1814 the Continent was thrown open, it is noted by three great painters, Haydon, Leslie, and Constable, that England stands supreme in painting among the nations, and this verdict was endorsed by the judgment of many able foreigners. The selection of Sir Thomas Lawrence to paint the members of the Holy Alliance is a convincing proof of this opinion, and the recognition of Constable by France in 1820 is further evidence to the same effect. But alongside of virtuous influences there had been at work a deadly academic dogma which the few far-seeing of that generation recognised as threatening destruction to the still struggling English school, an influence which had already completely destroyed decorative design. To glance at the members' lists of exhibitions of that day and to recognise how many then held great are now perfectly unknown, brings this to the proof. These painters were creatures of orthodox rule, line, and system, seeing whose influence Constable in 1821 prophesied 'in thirty years English art will cease to exist.' Following up this forecast of the great landscape-painter, Leslie thirty years later finds the fulfilment of Constable's prediction in the death of Turner.
It remained for the young generation to find out what lay at the root of the decay and also its remedy. How to get free from the prejudice which blinds the eye to established errors is the preliminary problem to effecting all reformation. The attempt made in Germany in the beginning of the century to cultivate what was called 'Early Christian Art,' was participated in by W. Dyce, D. Macleise, and a few other artists in England. But for youthful seekers after a perfect method these efforts, even where they expressed much of English individuality, were not unboundedly promising, because they lacked the full inspiration of nature. One of the earnest young students of the day was William Holman Hunt, who, already feeling his way as a practical painter, was led by circumstances to study in exceptional degree the works of the greatest old masters, and he perceived that in every school progress ended when the pupils derived their manner through dogmas evolved from artists' systems rather than from principles of design taught by nature herself. He determined therefore, for his own part, to disregard all the arbitrary rules in vogue in existing schools, and to seek his own road in art by that patient study of nature on which the great masters had founded their sweetness and strength of style. Without any idea of 'forming a school,' but for his own development alone, he began to study with exceptional care and frankness those features of nature which were generally slurred over as unworthy attention; and to this purpose he found most timely encouragement in the enthusiastic outburst of Ruskin's appeal to nature in all vital questions of art criticism, as expressed by him in Modern Painters.
At this period an increasing intimacy was cemented between W. Holman Hunt, aged nineteen, and John Everett Millais, who was already at the age of seventeen the precociously efficient medal student of the Royal Academy and an emulator of the pseudo-classical Etty. This youthful friendship led to frequent consultations over the needs of the growing generation of artists, and Millais declared his confidence in the closer study of nature, which he determined to adopt as soon as work to which he was committed should be completed.
Dante Gabriel Rossetti was at this time also fascinated by the newly-revived principle of patient striving after nature, but he had not yet become a practical painter, and there was no certainty that he would do so. He had, before his intimacy with Holman Hunt, begun the study of art under Ford Madox Brown, a painter who had distinguished himself by some of the most admirable contributions to the Westminster Hall competition, works which Rossetti had the independent good sense to admire. In the year 1848 (when Holman Hunt was engaged on a picture of Rienzi, of which he had already completed the painting of the landscape from nature, and other complicated preparatory work) D. G. Rossetti placed himself with Holman Hunt in his studio in Cleveland Street, where he followed a course of study specially devised for him by the older student to enable him to cope with the difficulties of a picture undertaken in pure experiment, in which finally he triumphed; this picture is now well known as 'The Girlhood of the Virgin.'
Millais, on his part, forthwith took for his first subject to be treated on the new principles a design from Keats's Isabella. This was originally intended for one of a series of etchings which the three, now formed into a band called the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, had undertaken to publish. It is the justly famous picture now in the Liverpool Art Gallery.
The three artists, as representing the Pre-Raphaelite body, appeared in the exhibition season of 1849, Millais with 'Lorenzo and Isabella,' Holman Hunt with 'Rienzi,' Rossetti with 'The Girlhood of the Virgin,' and excited the most flattering attention; but by the following year a storm of enmity of the most bitter kind was raised against them. Their pictures this second year were 'Christian Priests Escaping from Druid Persecution,' by Holman Hunt; 'Christ in the House of his Parents,' by Millais; Rossetti's picture of the 'Annunciation' he exhibited (as he had done with his picture of the previous year) at another exhibition than the Academy. Many journals now joined the onslaught upon the three young artists, but undeniably the most damaging attack was one made by Charles Dickens in Household Words. (From this date to his life's end Rossetti discontinued public exhibition.) With this attack the bitter feeling against the young men so increased that in the following year (1851) one influential journal advocated that their pictures should be removed from the walls of the Royal Academy a few weeks after the opening of the exhibition. Thus, in the third year of its joint existence, the new school was threatened on all hands by powerful opponents, when there appeared in the Times three letters from Ruskin denouncing the spirit of jealousy and injustice with which the young men had been assailed. He pointed out the merits of the works and the great influence for good which the revival was likely to exercise upon the English school. Later followed a succession of pictures from the hands of the three young painters, works the titles of which have become familiar throughout England.
Among the works of Holman Hunt are 'Rienzi' (1849), 'Christian Priests Escaping from Druid Persecution' (1850), 'Two Gentlemen of Verona' (1851), 'Claudio and Isabella' (1853), 'Strayed Sheep' (1853), 'Light of the World' (1854), 'Scapegoat' (1856), 'Finding of Christ in the Temple' (1860), 'Isabella and the Pot of Basil' (1867), 'Christ the Carpenter' (1874), 'The Triumph of the Innocents' (1885). Amongst those of J. E. Millais are 'Isabella' (1849), 'Christ in the House of His Parents'
(1850), 'Ferdinand lured by Ariel' (1850), 'The Huguenot' (1852), 'Ophelia' (1852), 'The Order of Release' (1853), 'L' Enfant du Régiment' (1855), 'Vale of Rest' (1859), 'Autumn Leaves' (1865), 'Chill October' (1870), 'A Flood' (1870). Amongst those of D. G. Rossetti are 'The Girlhood of Mary Virgin' (1849), 'The Triptych, Llandaff Cathedral' (1856), 'Giotto painting the Portrait of Dante' (1859), 'Mary Magdalene at the Door of Simon the Pharisee' (1861), 'Beata Beatrix' (1865), 'The Blessed Damozel' (1877), 'La Donna della Finestra' (1879), 'The Day Dream' (1880), 'Dante's Dream' (1881), 'Found,' 'Proserpine' (1882). Many of these pictures exist in replica. For a list of Holman Hunt's collected works, see catalogue of Fine Art Society (1886); for J. E. Millais, Fine Art Society (1884), and Grosvenor Gallery (1886); for D. G. Rossetti, Royal Academy (1883).
Two of Rossetti's noble pictures have since his death become the property of the nation. These are the 'Annunciation' and 'Beata Beatrix.' Rossetti makes reference to many of his pictures in his sonnets. The title Pre-Raphaelite was adopted not without some sarcastic spirit intending to reflect upon the use of the name of the prince of painters by artists of the day to justify their own flimsy and un-Raphaellesque art; but it had also a more serious justification in the conviction that Raphael's latest style, having been adopted, as that of an emulator, from the system built up with slow effort by Michael Angelo and Leonardo da Vinci, did not at last altogether escape those marks of decadence entirely unknown in the works of his immediate forerunners. This defect the seekers after the second Renaissance traced to the remoteness of Raphael from those influences of the training of humility which the study of nature had directly or indirectly given in full measure to Michael Angelo and Leonardo da Vinci. The first pictures of the new school had upon them, together with the initials of the painters, the letters P.R.B., meaning Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood; when public hostility became highly injurious (the meaning of the letters having been revealed, contrary to the original intention) this practice was abandoned.
Besides the three working founders, some few friends were enrolled as hopeful converts, with the idea that they would assist the movement. These were James Collinson and Thomas Woolner among artists, W. M. Rossetti, brother of the painter, and F. G. Stephens, who have followed other professions than art. There can now be little question that the Pre-Raphaelite school has exercised a powerful influence upon modern art; whether it has done so to the extent hoped for by its promoters lies with the future to reveal. One ambition which it had from the beginning was the restoration of decorative art; this has been much retarded by the hindrances of opposing forces; still, a great movement, clearly traceable to the revival, has taken place. There is no question that many established painters of the time were beneficially affected by the new impulse, but still more was this the case for the men who followed them. Unfortunately for the school, its recognition came too late for it to profit by the temporary patronage of art extended by government in the decoration of the Houses of Parliament, for which all the commissions were bestowed before the Pre-Raphaelite school could claim attention; their work, therefore, has been confined to the limits of private patronage, which for the poetic and ambitious art they aimed at is too limited a sphere. Works of national importance are the only entirely appropriate field for the highest efforts.
[In fulfilling the part of chronicler of Pre-Raphaelitism it has been inevitable that the writer should avow the degree of responsibility which he himself had in the movement, the more so, as statements of different tenor have appeared, and although the present article bearing the author's name may to some persons appear egotistical.—W. H. H.]