tive of
empty pomp and degraded luxuriance of colour." He considers Andrea del
Sarto to have been his copyer, not his imitator. Tibaldi seems to have
caught somewhat of his mind. As did Sir Joshua, so does Mr Fuseli
mention his Polypheme groping at the mouth of his cave for Ulysses. He
expresses his surprise that Michael Angelo was unacquainted with the
great talent of Tibaldi, but lavished his assistance on inferior men,
Sebastian del Piombo and Daniel of Volterra. We think he does not do
fair justice to the merits of these undoubtedly great men. We shall have
occasion hereafter to notice his criticism on the great work of
Sebastian, in our National Gallery. We are surprised that he should
consider Sebastian del Piombo deficient in ideal colour, and that the
lines of Daniel of Volterra are meagre and sterile of idea--his
celebrated Descent from the Cross being in its lines, as tending to
perfect the composition, and to make full his great idea, quite
extraordinary. Poor Vasari, who can never find favour with our author,
is considered the great depravator of the style of Michael Angelo.

At the too early death of Raffaelle, his style fell into gradual decay.
Still Julio Romano, and Polidoro da Carravaggio, "deserted indeed the
standard of their master, but with a dignity and magnitude of compass
which command respect."

The taste of Julio Romano was not pure enough to detach him from
"deformity and grimace" and "ungenial colour." Primaticcio and Nicolo
dell Abate propagated the style of Julio Romano on the Gallic side of
the Alps, in mythologic and allegoric works. These frescoes from the
Odyssea at Fontainbleau are lost, but are worthy admiration, though in
the feeble etchings of Theodore van Fulden. The "ideal light and shade,
and tremendous breadth of manner" of Michael Angelo Amerigi, surnamed
Il Caravaggi, are next commended. "The aim and style of the Roman school
deserve little further notice here, till the appearance of Nicolo
Poussin." His partiality for the antique mainly affected his style. "He
has left specimens to show that he was sometimes sublime, and often in
the highest degree pathetic." Mr Fuseli takes occasion, by contrasting
"the classic regularity" of Poussin with the "wildness of Salvator
Rosa"--we think unnecessarily, because there seems to be no true point
of comparison, and unjustly to censure that great, we may say, that
original painter. We have noticed occasionally a capricious dislike in
ou