man; but others award the palm of superiority to the groupe of the sleeping sisters. I abstain from mentioning all his productions, as a cold enumeration must be destitute of interest. After his visit to France, Chantry proceeded to Italy. You will perhaps like to know his opinion of Canova, with whom he contracted a friendship which reflects honour on both. The following extract from one of his letters, may serve to counterbalance the criticism of Sir William. "Above all modern art in Rome, Canova's works are the chief attractions. His latter productions are of a far more natural and exalted character than his earlier works; and his fame is wronged by his masterly statues, which are now common in England. He is excelling in simplicity and grace every day. An Endymion for the Duke of Devonshire, a Magdalen for Lord Liverpool, and a Nymph, are his latest works and his best. There is also a noble equestrian statue of the King of Naples: the revolution of its head have kept pace with those of the kingdom. A poet in Rome has published a book of sonnets on Canova's works; each production has its particular sonnet." The wonderful productions of Michael-Angelo produced a profound impression on Chantry. He formed a just conception of the power of that extraordinary genius, whose defects he thought seemed to be an attempt to express too much, and a wish to attain impossible perfection. During the last few years Chantry has produced works of extraordinary merit, among others the statue of James Watt, &c. LETTER XIV. TO MR. TAYLOR. I MUST not omit mentioning to you the powerful impression produced on me by Flaxman's groupe of Michael subduing the rebellious archangel. Of all the English sculptors, Flaxman has best fulfilled the true vocation of the artist, by labouring for the glory of art, rather than for the celebrity of individuals. When very young he produced some excellent bas-reliefs in Italy, and he early distinguished himself for correctness of design, a point which had been much neglected by his predeces sors. Flaxman's figures possess more ideal beauty than those of Bacon, though the females of the latter are truly angelic. Bacon has acquired great reputation by his mausoleum of Sterne's Eliza and Whitbread's monument: the latter, however, is evidently copied from the monument of Richelieu, by Girardon. With regard to Bacon's works it may be observed, that there is in general a certain degree of confusion in his groupes, and obscurity in his allegories, and that some of his statues present an awkward imitation of modern costume. Flaxman has a more exquisite perception of the beautiful. His mausoleum of Collins, and his monuments of Lords Mansfield, Home and Abercrombie, bear evidence of pure and decided talent. I have heard high praise bestowed on his statue of Washington; and it cannot be doubted that the English sculptor, who has formed the most correct conceptions of the antique, was well qualified to produce an accurate representation of the modern Epaminondas, who bears so many traits of resemblance to the great men whose exalted virtues and simple manners are described by Plutarch. His continual study and imitation of the monuments of antiquity, have procured for Flaxman the surname of the Racine of sculpture; a compliment which is probably greater than those by whom it has been conferred intend it to be. Nothing can be more false than parallels between such opposite kinds of talent and style. The poet creates a whole drama; the sculptor, who is still more restricted than the painter, can at most represent only a single scene. However, Flaxman's profound knowledge of his art, his devoted admiration of the master-pieces of Greece, and his chaste, correct, and dignified style, prove that the complimentary comparison is in some measure just. Flaxman has published a series of drawings, which may be truly called studies of Homer and Æschylus.* He is, in short, a classic artist must we therefore infer that he is deficient in imagination and originality? If so, he would present only one point of resemblance to Racine, who studied nature; while Flaxman has studied the ancients more than nature. The works of Racine present an exquisite grace, sensibility, and * His drawings from Dante are no less excellent, VOL. I. H I MUST not omit mentioning to you the powerful impression produced on me by Flaxman's groupe of Michael subduing the rebellious archangel. Of all the English sculptors, Flaxman has best fulfilled the true vocation of the artist, by labouring for the glory of art, rather than for the celebrity of individuals. When very young he produced some excellent bas-reliefs in Italy, and he early distinguished himself for correctness of design, a point which had been much neglected by his predeces sors. Flaxman's figures possess more ideal beauty than those of Bacon, though the females of the latter are truly angelic. Bacon has acquired great reputation by his mausoleum of Sterne's Eliza and Whitbread's monument: the latter, however, is evidently copied from the monument of Richelieu, by Girardon. With regard to Bacon's works it may be observed, that there is in general a certain degree of confusion in his groupes, and obscurity in his allegories, and that some of his statues present an awkward imitation of modern costume. Flaxman has a more exquisite perception of the beautiful. His mausoleum of Collins, and his monuments of Lords Mansfield, Home and Abercrombie, bear evidence of pure and decided talent. I have heard high praise bestowed on his statue of Washington; and it cannot be doubted that the English sculptor, who has formed the most correct conceptions of the antique, was well qualified to produce an accurate representation of the modern Epaminondas, who bears so many traits of resemblance to the great men whose exalted virtues and simple manners are described by Plutarch. His continual study and imitation of the monuments of antiquity, have procured for Flaxman the surname of the Racine of sculpture; a compliment which is probably greater than those by whom it has been conferred intend it to be. Nothing can be more false than parallels between such opposite kinds of talent and style.— The poet creates a whole drama; the sculptor, who is still more restricted than the painter, can at most represent only a single scene. However, Flaxman's profound knowledge of his art, his devoted admiration of the master-pieces of Greece, and his chaste, correct, and dignified style, prove that the complimentary comparison is in some measure just. Flaxman has published a series of drawings, which may be truly called studies of Homer and Æschylus.* He is, in short, a classic artist must we therefore infer that he is deficient in imagination and originality? If so, he would present only one point of resemblance to Racine, who studied nature; while Flaxman has studied. the ancients more than nature. The works of Racine present an exquisite grace, sensibility, and VOL. I. * His drawings from Dante are no less excellent, H |