DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.63331#0052
46
THE ART OF VELAZQUEZ
in 1632 ; but, on the other hand, Velazquez may have used a study or a
previous portrait, and all three pictures look as if they were painted with
no long intervals between. Deductions from their appearance must be
drawn, however, with some caution, as all three bear marks of having been
worked over again at a later period. The hounds, especially, recall the
manner of about 1645. All three pictures are distinguished by great
simplicity of arrangement, sobriety of colour, and a breadth and directness
of handling not previously attained to. They are remarkable, too, for
their dogs. Don Balthazar has two, the king and Don Fernando one
each. These dogs are marvellous, and give an extraordinary proof of
Velazquez’s facility. They are the first he painted, and yet no professed
animal-painter has ever equalled them, so truly built are their frames, so
loose and tactile is their skin, so subtle and just are their indications
of mood and character. The sober colour scheme of these three pictures,
with their browns, buffs, blacks, and silvery greys, was perhaps suggested
by the tones of the room into which they were to be permanently set.
But it was not characteristic of the master’s work at the time, and may
possibly be partly due to repainting already alluded to.
The five years which end with about 1640 saw the creation of the
four great equestrian portraits in the Prado. Here, again, Olivares seems
to have acted as taster to the king ; at least his picture has a tentative look
in parts which is changed for assurance in Philip’s portrait. The Count-
Duke’s horse is not altogether a success. Its movement lacks life, and its
perspective is so exaggerated that the head and neck look absurd beside
the huge bulk of Olivares. All this is corrected with the king, whose
heavy charger is superb. Here, too, the colour is more luminous and the
design better suited to the space. The Queen Isabella is reduced to
secondary importance through the amount of surface occupied by the
elaborate dress and saddle-cloth, which are not by Velazquez ; but the
little we see of her white horse is magnificent.
Finest of the four is the Don Balthazar Carlos {Portfolio for July,
Plate III.), which I also take to be the latest in date. Never in his whole
career did Velazquez equal this picture in spontaneous vitality or in
splendour of colour. The design, too, has a freshness and felicity which
we miss from the Olivares, and, to a less extent, from the Philip and
Isabella. Intellectually the motive is absolutely simple. The boy gallops
THE ART OF VELAZQUEZ
in 1632 ; but, on the other hand, Velazquez may have used a study or a
previous portrait, and all three pictures look as if they were painted with
no long intervals between. Deductions from their appearance must be
drawn, however, with some caution, as all three bear marks of having been
worked over again at a later period. The hounds, especially, recall the
manner of about 1645. All three pictures are distinguished by great
simplicity of arrangement, sobriety of colour, and a breadth and directness
of handling not previously attained to. They are remarkable, too, for
their dogs. Don Balthazar has two, the king and Don Fernando one
each. These dogs are marvellous, and give an extraordinary proof of
Velazquez’s facility. They are the first he painted, and yet no professed
animal-painter has ever equalled them, so truly built are their frames, so
loose and tactile is their skin, so subtle and just are their indications
of mood and character. The sober colour scheme of these three pictures,
with their browns, buffs, blacks, and silvery greys, was perhaps suggested
by the tones of the room into which they were to be permanently set.
But it was not characteristic of the master’s work at the time, and may
possibly be partly due to repainting already alluded to.
The five years which end with about 1640 saw the creation of the
four great equestrian portraits in the Prado. Here, again, Olivares seems
to have acted as taster to the king ; at least his picture has a tentative look
in parts which is changed for assurance in Philip’s portrait. The Count-
Duke’s horse is not altogether a success. Its movement lacks life, and its
perspective is so exaggerated that the head and neck look absurd beside
the huge bulk of Olivares. All this is corrected with the king, whose
heavy charger is superb. Here, too, the colour is more luminous and the
design better suited to the space. The Queen Isabella is reduced to
secondary importance through the amount of surface occupied by the
elaborate dress and saddle-cloth, which are not by Velazquez ; but the
little we see of her white horse is magnificent.
Finest of the four is the Don Balthazar Carlos {Portfolio for July,
Plate III.), which I also take to be the latest in date. Never in his whole
career did Velazquez equal this picture in spontaneous vitality or in
splendour of colour. The design, too, has a freshness and felicity which
we miss from the Olivares, and, to a less extent, from the Philip and
Isabella. Intellectually the motive is absolutely simple. The boy gallops