PREFACE.

Two great Schools of Art, illustrating the fourteenth century, rose to robust and healthy vigour; the first under the warm and genial sun of Italy, the second under the colder and more clouded atmosphere of Belgium. The latter, unduly slighted by some, unfairly elevated by others, is the subject of this volume. Inferior to the Italian in the great features of design and sentiment, it has superior claims to attention from an early tendency towards a new mode of colour. Influenced in this, as much by clime as by other causes, it brought to perfection a system which soon extended itself to all the Schools of the world, embracing in its progress the early painters of Venice, and laying the foundation of the future greatness of those masters. In tracing the progress of the painters of Bruges, from their early efforts to their decline and fall, we have not neglected to note the influences which they exercised abroad; and we have found it necessary to include amongst the pupils

of Van Eyck, Antonello da Messina, who formed the link between the schools of Bruges and Venice. In this we have acted not without precedent; and were it otherwise, we should find good reason for such a course in the interest thereby added to the general history of Flemish art.

In the endeavour to bring together the scattered and imperfect notices of the first Flemish artists and their labours, we have had to contend with many difficulties. The paucity of materials, and the dispersion of pictures throughout the Galleries of Europe, rendered the classification of Schools a task not easy of performance. The most valuable additions to our old authorities on the subject of Flemish art have been but recently made. Before their discovery, the most trustworthy had been Vasari, Sanderus, Vaernewyk, and Van Mander; the first of whom, though a stranger, is entitled to the gratitude of the Belgians, for having, in the midst of the slighting humour of his countrymen, rendered to the Van Eycks and their cotemporaries their fair meed of praise. Vaernewyk and Van Mander took Vasari for their guide, and their remarks are little more than repetitions from his book. They had, apparently, no access to the records of the guilds and noble families of Belgium from which they might have derived more exact knowledge; and they added to the general information only lists of pictures extant in their time, and a few dates and inscriptions. Numerous authors followed them.

Descamps, in 1753, wrote afresh the lives of these painters. He did not, however, add much that was new. On the contrary, he confused a history which was already sufficiently obscure. He failed to discover the error of Van Mander, who made two painters out of the old Roger Van der Weyden; and he changed the name of Memling to Hemmelinck, thereby laying the foundation of much subsequent controversy. Having visited Bruges and seen the pictures of the hospital, he sought to repair the neglect of history by writing a legend. Thus altered and falsified, the history of early Flemish art remained for some time, not forgotten, it is true, but still obscure.

In the early part of the present century, successful efforts were made to raise a corner of the veil that covered this interesting subject. In Germany, Mr. Kugler, and the writers of the Kunstblatt,-foremost amongst whom we should mention Dr. Waagen and Mr. Passavant, in Belgium, the contributors to the Messager des Sciences et des Arts de Belgique, such as M. de Bast, Mr. Délepierre, and Mr. Van Lokeren,-combined to throw light on doubtful points by notices of pictures visited, or of documents found in the pages of forgotten authorities. Slight but valuable details derived from documentary evidence, discovered at various periods, were published at intervals, and revealed the existence of more that might be obtained with labour and perseverance;

whilst Mr. de Reiffenberg, in his Appendix to Barantes' History of the Dukes of Burgundy, Mr. Gachard, in his "Documents inédits concernant l'Histoire de Belgique," Mr. Wauters, and M. Schayes, added to our increasing stock of knowledge.

Mme. Schoppenhauer, with the taste of a lady for the poetic in art, and a vivid feeling for the beauties of early Belgian pictures, seen in the Netherlands, and in the Boisserée Collections, shed a gleam of interest on the question by incomplete but enthusiastic criticisms. Schnaase, Förster, Reumont, and other German writers, added the fruit of their observations. But it was evident that in the archives of the palaces of the Dukes of Burgundy, in the records of the guilds, and the chapters of the convents and churches, much valuable information remained in store. Mr. de Stoop, Mr. Goetghebuer, and Abbé Carton, discovered many of these hidden documents, and published them in the " Annales de la Société d'Emulation" of Bruges, and in the "Bulletins" of the Academy of Arts and Sciences of Brussels. Mr. Le Glay made known to us several old inventories of pictures; but all these efforts were partial, and produced in a fragmentary form. The search, though diligently made, had been hitherto of too slight a nature, and too much impeded by official immobility, to be satisfactory.

Besides this, there was a marked absence of order in the records that survived to the present time. The