supreme tragedies, not less than the happy interludes, of the sacred
drama, in the purely human spirit and with the pathos of earth? A not
dissimilar comparison might be instituted between the portraits of
Lorenzo Lotto and those of our master. No Venetian painter of the golden
prime had that peculiar imaginativeness of Lotto, which caused him,
while seeking to penetrate into the depths of the human individuality
submitted to him, to infuse into it unconsciously much of his own
tremulous sensitiveness and charm. In this way no portraits of the
sixteenth century provide so fascinating a series of riddles. Yet in
deciphering them it is very necessary to take into account the peculiar
temperament of the painter himself, as well as the physical and mental
characteristics of the sitter and the atmosphere of the time.[2]

Yet where is the critic bold enough to place even the finest of these
exquisite productions on the same level as _Le Jeune Homme au Gant_ and
_L'Homme en Noir_ of the Louvre, the _Ippolito de' Medici_, the _Bella
di Tiziano_, the _Aretino_ of the Pitti, the _Charles V. at the Battle
of Mühlberg_ and the full-length _Philip II._ of the Prado Museum at
Madrid?

Finally, in the domain of pure colour some will deem that Titian has
serious rivals in those Veronese developed into Venetians, the two elder
Bonifazi and Paolo Veronese; that is, there will be found lovers of
painting who prefer a brilliant mastery over contrasting colours in
frank juxtaposition to a palette relatively restricted, used with an art
more subtle, if less dazzling than theirs, and resulting in a deeper,
graver richness, a more significant beauty, if in a less stimulating
gaiety and variety of aspect. No less a critic than Morelli himself
pronounced the elder Bonifazio Veronese to be the most brilliant
colourist of the Venetian school; and the _Dives and Lazarus_ of the