German fresco painting and the new houses of parliament at westminster, 1834–1851

Historical Journal

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 291-329

  Winter, Emma L ^a  

^a EMMANUEL COLLEGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 27144461491     PISSN: 0018246X     EISSN: 14695103     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0018246X0400367X     Document Type: Article

References (284)

1. W. Bissell Pope, ed., The diary of Benjamin Robert Haydon (Cambridge, MA, 1964), XX, p. 226.
2. Parliamentary debates (1841), LVII, p. 1289.
3. ‘Report from the select committee on the fine arts’, Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, pp. iv, vi.
4. S. and R. Redgrave, A century of painters of the English school (London, 1866), p. 421.
5. J. Steegman, The consort of taste (London, 1950), pp. 32, 133. In the latter quote cited, Steegman states King Otto, but this is factually incorrect and he presumably meant Ludwig. Otto was Ludwig's second son who was crowned King of the Hellenes in 1833. The reference to Dusseldorf refers to Cornelius's tenure as director of the Dusseldorf academy (1819–24). In 1824, following the death of its long-time director, Ludwig invited Cornelius to head the Munich academy.
6. See E. Forster, ed., Peter von Cornelius: Ein Gedenkbuch aus seinem Leben und Wirken (Berlin, 1874), I, pp. 208, 217, 322–9.
7. T. S. R. Boase, ‘The decoration of the new palace of Westminster, 1841–1863’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 17 (1954), pp. 319–58, here at p. 323.
8. W. Vaughan, German romanticism and English art (New Haven, 1979), pp. 177–207
9. D. Robertson, Sir Charles Eastlake and the Victorian art world (Princeton, 1978), pp. 58–70
10. M. Pointon, William Dyce (Oxford, 1979), pp. 80–120.
11. Also see R. Cooper, British attitudes towards the Italian primitives, 1815–1865, with special reference to the mid nineteenth century fashion (DPhil thesis, Sussex, 1976), pp. 255–296
12. C. Fox, ‘Education: fine arts & design’, in G. Sutherland, ed., Government and society in nineteenth century Britain: commentaries on British parliamentary papers (Dublin, 1977), pp. 68–93.
13. D. Mancoff ‘Politics, painting and the new palace at Westminster’, in her The Arthurian revival in Victorian art (London, 1990), pp. 65–100
14. S. Hunter Hurtado, ‘The promotion of the visual arts in Britain, 1835–1860’, Canadian Journal of History, 28 (1993), pp. 59–80
15. C. Willsdon, ‘Royalty and reform: state patronage at the palace of Westminster, 1841–1864’, in her Mural painting in Great Britain, 1840–1940: image and meaning (Oxford, 2000), pp. 27–61
16. J. McLean, ‘Prince Albert and the fine arts commission’
17. W. Vaughan, ‘“God help the minister who meddles in art’: history painting in the new palace of Westminster’
18. D. Mancoff, ‘Myth and monarchy: chivalric legends for the Victorian age’, in C. and J. Riding, eds., The houses of parliament: history, art, architecture (London, 2000), pp. 213–23, 225–39, 241–52
19. P. Barlow, ‘“Fire, flatulence and fog’: the decoration of Westminster palace and the aesthetics of prudence’, in P. Barlow and C. Trodd, eds., Governing cultures (Aldershot, 2000), pp. 67–82.
20. ‘Reviews’, Athenaeum (10 Sept. 1842), pp. 795–796, here at p. 796.
21. J. Sheehan, German history, 1770–1866 (Oxford, 1989), pp. 262, 321.
22. H. von Treitschke, History of Germany in the nineteenth century (London, 1919), VI, pp. 283–284.
23. L. Hüttl, Ludwig I: Konig und Bauherr (Munich, 1986), pp. 69–73, 81–4, 91–2, 103–5.
24. H. Ebertshäuser, ed., Kunsturteile des 19.Jahrhunderts: Zeugnisse-Manfeste-Kritiken zur Münchner Malerei (Munich, 1983), pp. 74–7, 109–11.
25. J. Barrell, The political theory of painting from Reynolds to Hazlitt (London, 1986), passim.
26. H. Hoock, ‘The king's artists: the Royal Academy of Arts as a “national institution”, c. 1768–1820’ (DPhil thesis, Oxford, 2000)
27. J. Conlin, ‘The origins and history of the National Gallery, 1753–1860’ (PhD thesis, Cambridge, 2002).
28. S. Pederson, ‘What is political history now?’, in D. Cannadine, ed., What is history now? (London, 2002), pp. 38–52, here at p. 40.
29. M. Espagne and M. Werner, ‘Deutsche-franzosischer Kulturtransfer als Forschungsgegenstand: Eine Problemskizze’, in M. Espagne and M. Werner, eds., Transferts: les relations interculturelles dans l'éspace franco-allemand xviiième-xixème siècle (Paris, 1988), pp. 11–34
30. B. Kortländer, ‘Begrenzung - Entgrenzung: Kultur- und Wissenschafts transfer in Europa’, in L. Jordan and B. Kortlander, eds., Nationale Grenzen und internationaler Austausch: Studien zum Kultur- und Wissenschaftstransfer in Europa (Tubingen, 1995), pp. 1–19
31. M. Schalenburg, ed., Kulturtransferim 19. Jakrhundert (Berlin, 1998), pp. 7–15.
32. J. Paulmann, ‘Interkultureller Transfer zwischen Deutschland und Groβbritannien: Einführung ein Forschungskonzept’, in R. Muhs, J. Paulmann, and W. Steinmetz, eds., Aneignung und Abwehr: Interkultureller Transferzwischen England und Groβbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert (Bodenheim, 1998), pp. 21–42, here at p. 33.
33. Aneignung und Abwehr: Interkultureller Transferzwischen England und Groβbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert, pp. 7–20.
34. A. Birke and K. Kluxen, eds., Vktorianisches England in deutscher Perspektive (London, 1983), pp. 31, 61
35. L. Kettenacker, M. Schlenke, and H. Seier, eds., Studien zur Geschichte Englands und der deutsch-britischen Beziehung (Munich, 1981), pp. 375–378
36. B.-J. Wendt, ed., Das britische Deutschlandbild im Wandel des 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Bochum, 1984), pp. 58–73
37. F. Otto and T. Schulz, eds., Groβbritannien und Deutschland: Gesellschaftliche, kulturelle und politische Beziehungen im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert (Rheinfelden, 1992), pp. 1–13.
38. Muhs et al., ‘Bücken über den Kanal? Interkultureller Transfer zwischen Deutschland und Groβbritannien im 19. Jahrhundert’, in Muhs et al., eds., Aneignung und Abwehr, p. 12.
39. B. Q. Morgan, A bibliography of German literature in English translation (Madison, Wn., 1922), passim and his survey
40. ‘Magazine reflection of the British reception of German literature, 1750–1860’ in B. Q. Morgan and A. R. Hohlfeld, eds., German literature in British magazines, 1750–1860 (Madison, WI., 1949), pp. 37–75.
41. R. Ashton, The German idea: four English writers and the reception of German thought, 1800–1860 (Cambridge, 1980), passim.
42. Morgan, ‘Magazine reflection of the British reception of German literature’, p. 52.
43. For a general survey, see W. Shirmer, ‘German literature, historiography, and theology in nineteenth century England’, German life and letters, 1 (1948–1949), pp. 165–174
44. for British interest in German theology, which was personified by George Eliot, see Ashton, The German idea, pp. 147–155
45. On music, see P. M. Young, George Grove: a biography (London, 1980), pp. 65–67
46. on science and education, see F. Bosbach, W. Filmer-Sankey, and H. Hiery, eds., Prince Albert and the development of education in England and Germany in the nineteenth century (Munich, 2000), passim.
47. Morgan, ‘Magazine reflection of the British reception of German literature’, p. 64.
48. ‘Magazine reflection of the British reception of German literature’, p. 67.
49. See for example, ‘Foreign correspondence: the arts at Munich’, Athenaeum (10 Apr. 1841), p. 285.
50. On the growth in travel to Germany, which paralleled a deepening disillusionment with modern Italy, see C. P. Brand, Italy and the English romantics: the Italianate fashion in early nineteenth century England (Cambridge, 1957), p. 45.
51. For further discussion of the British in Europe, see J. Pemble, The Mediterranean passion: Victorians and Edwardians in the south (Oxford, 1988), passim
52. J. Buzard, The beaten track: European tourism, literature, and the ways to culture, 1800–1918 (Oxford, 1993), passim.
53. Vaughan, German romanticism and English art, p. 1.
54. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, pp. 343–410.
55. J. Strang, Germany in 1831 (London, 1836), II, p. 383.
56. Germany in 1831, pp. 363–364.
57. For similar, see H. Inglis, The Tyrol: with a glance at Bavaria (London, 1833), p. 74
58. A. Jameson, Visits and sketches at home and abroad (London, 1834), I, p. 230
59. E. Spencer, Sketches of Germany and the Germans (London, 1836), pp. 320, 322
60. B. Hawkins, Germany: the spirit of her history, literature, social condition and national economy (London, 1838), p. 157
61. J. Barrow, Tourin Austrian Lombardy, the northern Tyrol, and Bavaria in 1840 (London, 1841), p. 316
62. W. Howitt, The rural and domestic life of Germany (London, 1842), p. 312.
63. J. Murray, A handbookfor travellers in southern Germany (London, 1837), p. 34
64. Inglis, The Tyrol, p. 86
65. Spencer, Sketches, p. 320
66. Strang, Germany in 1831, p. 364.
67. Förster, ed., Peter von Cornelius, I, pp. 211–212.
68. W. Wackenroder, Outpourings of an art-loving friar (London, 1975)
69. F. von Schlegel, The aesthetic and miscellaneous writings: comprising letters on Christian art (London, 1848), pp. 51, 65, 143–5.
70. M. Kunze and C. Keisch, eds., Italia und Germania: Deutsche Klassizisten und Romantiker in Italien (Berlin, 1976), entry for 1812 in chronology. The most authoritative literature on the Nazarenes is in German.
71. See Förster, ed., Peter von Cornelius, I, pp. 110–217
72. M. Droste, Das Fresko als Idee: Zjur Geschichte öffentlicher Kunst im 19. Jahrhundert (Münster, 1980), pp. 13–37
73. K. Gallwitz, ed., Die Nazarener (Frankfurt, 1977)
74. which is the catalogue that accompanied the 1977 exhibition at the Städelsche Kunstinstitut. The most comprehensive treatment of the Nazarenes in English remains K. Andrews, The Nazarenes: a German brotherhood in Rome (Oxford, 1964), passim.
75. Förster, ed., Peter von Cornelius, I, p. 155.
76. Peter von Cornelius, p. 156.
77. Andrews, The Nazarenes, p. 48.
78. Ebertshäuser, ed., Kunsturteile des 19. Jahrhunderts, p. 30.
79. M. Dirrigl, Ludwig I, König von Bayern, 1825–1848 (Munich, 1980), p. 235.
80. Barrow, Tour in Austrian Lombardy, p. 316
81. Howitt, Rural and domestic life, pp. 311–312.
82. Murray, Handbook for travellers in southern Germany, p. 28.
83. See E. Ursel, Die bayerischen Herrscher von Ludwig I. bis Ludwig III. im Urteil der Presse nach ihrem Tode (Berlin, 1974), p. 41
84. R. Horn and I. Ruckert, eds., Ludwig I. von Bayern: Der königliche Mäzen (Munich, 1986), p. 14.
85. Jameson, Visits and sketches, I, p. 300.
86. B. Haydon, Some enquiry into the causes which have obstructed the advance of historical painting for the last seventy years in England (London, 1829), pp. 15, 17.
87. E. Edwards, The fine arts in England (London, 1840), p. 204.
88. W. Carey, The national obstacle to the national public style considered (London, 1825), pp. 9, 12.
89. Jameson, Visits and sketches, I, p. 246.
90. Visits and sketches, II, p. 47.
91. Visits and sketches, I, p. 241.
92. Spencer, Sketches, pp. 348, 350.
93. For similar, see Inglis, The Tyrol, pp. 69, 124.
94. F. Trollope, Belgium and western Germany in 1833 (London, 1834), p. 131.
95. Spencer, Sketches, pp. 345, 350.
96. Hawkins, Germany, pp. 157–158.
97. Trollope, Belgium and western Germany, pp. 130, 295, 297.
98. ‘The arts in Germany: Munich’, Athenaeum (7 Sept. 1833), p. 603
99. ‘Foreign correspondence: Rome 18 Jan. 1834’, Athenaeum (15 Feb. 1834), p. 126
100. ‘Foreign correspondence: history of modern German art: Berlin 12 Aug. 1836’, Athenaeum (17 Sept. 1836), p. 675
101. ‘Foreign correspondence: the arts at Munich’, Athenaeum (10 Apr. 1841), p. 285.
102. ‘Foreign art’, Art Union, 1 (1839), p. 45
103. ‘German artists and critics’, Art Union, 1 (1839), p. 136.
104. [Archibald Alison], ‘The British school of painting’, Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, 40 (1836), pp. 74–85
105. [Nicholas Wiseman], ‘Philosophy of art’, Dublin Review, 1 (1836), pp. 435–460
106. [James Burton Robertson], ‘Moral and intellectual condition of Catholic Germany’, Dublin Review, 11 (1841), pp. 53–104
107. [Anon.], ‘Works of art and artists in England’, Edinburgh Review, 67 (1838), pp. 384–415
108. [W. H. Leeds], ‘Architecture at home and abroad’, Foreign Quarterly Review, 24 (1840), pp. 288–312
109. [Henry Wheaton], ‘Modern art in Germany’, Foreign Quarterly Review, 25 (1840), pp. 406–419
110. [Anna Jameson], ‘The exhibition of the Royal Academy: English art and artists’, Monthly Chronick, 1 (1838), pp. 348–355
111. [Anon.], ‘On Albert Durer, and the modern German and English schools of painting’, Monthly Chronicle, 4 (1939), pp. 41–51
112. [Benjamin Hayward], ‘Germany and the Germans’, Quarterly Review, 58 (1837), pp. 297–333
113. [Francis Egerton], ‘Works of art and artists in England’, Quarterly Review, 62 (1838), pp. 131–161.
114. On the character of the modern German school see, for example, ‘Process of fresco painting’, Spectator, 14 (1841), p. 1124.
115. [John Eagles], ‘Report from the select committee on fine arts’, Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine, 50 (1841), p. 592.
116. [George Harris], ‘Education of artisans’, British and Foreign Review, 6 (1838), pp. 76–77.
117. Parliamentary debates (1835), XXIX, p. 555.
118. Parliamentary debates, p. 554.
119. ‘Report from the select committee on arts and manufactures’, Reports, committees, misc. (1835), V, p. 387.
120. ‘Report from the select committee on arts and their connexion with manufactures’, Reports, committee (1836), IX, p. 3.
121. Reports, committee.
122. Reports, committee, p. 4.
123. Reports, committee, p. 5.
124. Reports, committee, p. 11.
125. R. Westmacott, A letter (the second) on government encouragement of the higher claims of art (London, 1836), p. 5.
126. See, for example, [Harris], ‘Education of artisans’, pp. 76–97
127. [Eagles], ‘Report from the select committee on fine arts’, pp. 585–595.
128. [Harris], ‘Education of artisans’, p. 82.
129. ‘Education of artisans’, p. 95.
130. ‘Education of artisans’, p. 96.
131. See G. Foggo, Results of the parliamentary inquiry relative to the arts and manufactures … explained (London, 1837)
132. M. A. Shee, Letter to Lord John Russell on the alleged claim of the public to be admitted gratis to the exhibition of the Royal Academy (London, 1837)
133. E. Edwards, A letter to Sir Martin Archer Shee on the reform of the Royal Academy (London, 1837).
134. W. Dyce and C. H. Wilson, A letter to Lord Meadowbank on the best means of ameliorating the arts and manufactures of Scotland in point of taste (Edinburgh, 1837), pp. 3–4.
135. A letter to Lord Meadowbank on the best means of ameliorating the arts and manufactures of Scotland in point of taste, pp. 10–12.
136. G. F. Waagen, Works of art and artists in England (London, 1838), II, p. 321.
137. Works of art and artists in England, III, p. 32.
138. Edwards, Fine arts in England, p. 334.
139. For similar see, for example, ‘Encouragement of art’, Art Union, 2 (1840), p. 139
140. [Jameson], ‘The exhibition of the Royal Academy: English art and artists’, p. 349.
141. Edwards, Fine arts in England, p. 187.
142. G. Foggo, ed., Report of the proceedings at a public meeting to promote the admission of the public, without charge to Westminster Abbey, St Paul's cathedral, and all depositories of works of art (London, 1837), pp. 3–20.
143. Education: speeches and observations of Lord Brougham the marquess of Lansdowne and Lord Lyndhurst in the house of lords, Thursday 29 June 1837 (London, 1837), pp. 7–18.
144. [Laman Blanchard], ‘The influence of periodical literature on the state of the fine arts’, Monthly Chronicle, 4 (1839), p. 503.
145. [Anon.], ‘Works of art and artists in England’, pp. 387–389.
146. Westmacott, A letter (the second) on government encouragement, p. 10.
147. Speech of the Lord Bishop of London in the house of lords, 5 July 1839, on the government plan for promoting national education (London, 1839), p. 15.
148. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, pp. iv, viii.
149. H. Clarke, Handbook guide to the cartoons now exhibiting in Westminster hall (London, 1843), p. VIII.
150. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, p. 334.
151. Parliamentary papers, p. 337.
152. Reports, committee (1836), IX, p. 220
153. Jameson, Visits and sketches, I, p. 268.
154. M. H. Port, The houses of parliament (London, 1976), p. 232.
155. On the prevailing character and practice ofthe English school see Carey, The national obstacle, p. 9
156. ‘An investigation of the effects of government patronage’, Arnold's Library of the Fine Arts, 1 (1832), p. 94
157. T. Phillips, Lectures on the history and principles of painting (London, 1833), p. V
158. Jameson, Visits and sketches, I, p. 246
159. G. Foggo, A letter to Lord Brougham on the history and character of the Royal Academy (London, 1835), p. 12
160. [Alison], ‘The British school of painting’, p. 85
161. ‘Foreign correspondence: Berlin’, Athenaeum (25 Nov. 1837), p. 863
162. ‘Exhibition of the Royal Academy - opening of the new National Gallery’, Spectator, 10 (1837), p. 426
163. [Anon.], ‘Works of art and artists in England’, p. 387
164. [Jameson], ‘The exhibition of the Royal Academy: English art and artists’, p. 351
165. [Benjamin Robert Haydon], ‘Notes on British art’, The Times (5 Sept. 1838), p. 5
166. [Eagles], ‘Report from the select committee on the fine arts’, p. 593.
167. [Egerton], ‘Works ofart and artists in England’, p. 155
168. [Henry Cole], ‘Prospects ofthe fine arts: decoration of the Westminster palace’, Westminster Review, 38 (1842), pp. 168–93, here at p. 185.
169. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, p. 369.
170. ‘Reviews’, Athenaeum (10 Sept. 1842), p. 796.
171. B. Haydon, Thoughts on the relative value of fresco and oil painting (London, 1842), p. 11.
172. ‘The question concerning frescoes’, Art Union, 3 (1841), p. 179.
173. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, p. 359.
174. Parliamentary papers, p. 382.
175. For similar, see Dyce's evidence, p. 378.
176. Dyce's evidence, p. 395.
177. Dyce's evidence, p. 359.
178. Dyce's evidence, pp. 382, 402.
179. Dyce's evidence, pp. 334, 385.
180. Dyce's evidence, p. 385.
181. Dyce's evidence.
182. Dyce's evidence, p. 386.
183. [Wheaton], ‘Modern art in Germany’, p. 419.
184. ‘The German school’, Art Union, 2 (1840), p. 145.
185. D. Scott, British, French, and German painting (Edinburgh, 1841), pp. 66–68.
186. ‘On fresco painting by C. Eastlake, R. A.’, Athenaeum (2 Oct. 1841), p. 764.
187. Cornelius was visiting England at the invitation of Lord Monson, who had visited Munich earlier in the year and hoped to engage the artist to paint a fresco cycle for his London residence. Cornelius had explained to Monson that he did not expect to be free to undertake any new commissions for the next three years, as he had promised his services to Friedrich Wilhelm IV of Prussia. At best, he would design the cycle and have one of his students execute it. See Förster, ed., Peter von Cornelius, II, pp. 148–9, 177–9.
188. See W. Ames, Prince Albert and Victorian taste (London, 1967), p. 51
189. Pointon, William Dyce, p. 85
190. most recently McLean, ‘Prince Albert and the fine arts commission’, pp. 217–218.
191. E. H. Heuffer, Ford Madox Brown (London, 1896), I, p. 36. I have found no evidence to substantiate the idea that Albert approached Cornelius to see whether he might consider undertaking the frescoes. Even if he had, it is unlikely that the artist would have accepted the commission. See n. 114.
192. Queen to Peel, 26 Sept. 1841, Ford Madox Brown, fo. 202
193. Peel to queen, 26 Sept. 1841, Ford Madox Brown, fo. 204.
194. [Elizabeth Eastlake], ‘The late Prince Consort’, Quarterly Review, 111 (1862), pp. 176–200, here at p. 195.
195. Parliamentary debates (1841), LIX, p. 1014.
196. An earlier draft of Albert's memo to Peel is preserved in the Royal Archives (RA). The draft that Albert sent to Peel is more nuanced and poetic; his summary of Cornelius's critique of the English school is toned down, his defence of English artists more restrained, his expectations more measured, and his hopes more personalized. See ‘Papers concerning the rebuilding of Westminster palace, the fine arts commission, and the establishment of a higher school of art in England, 1841–1844’, vol. 1, RA VIC/F29/7. All the material from the Royal Archives is reproduced here by permission of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
197. Förster, ed., Peter von Cornelius, II, pp. 185–7. At no point in this communication did Cornelius take the opportunity to recommend Dyce, even though he knew him well from their days in Rome during the 1820s.
198. Peter von Cornelius, fo. 258.
199. ‘Report of the commissioners on the fine arts’, Parliamentary papers (1842), XXV, p. 7.
200. Parliamentary papers, p. 5.
201. ‘The national commission: British art’, Art Union, 4 (1842), p. 3.
202. ‘Our weekly gossip’, Athenaeum (9 Apr. 1842), p. 321.
203. Boase, ‘The decoration of the new palace of Westminster’, p. 328.
204. Steegman, Consort of taste, p. 36.
205. Robertson, Sir Charles Eastlake, p. 328.
206. ‘The cartoons: Westminster hall’, Art Union, 5 (1843), p. 207.
207. Clarke, Handbook guide, pp. iii-iv.
208. ‘Fine arts: exhibition at Westminster hall’, Athenaeum (6 July 1844), p. 627.
209. ‘Third report of the commissioners on the fine arts’, Parliamentary papers (1844), XXIX, p. 7.
210. ‘Fine arts: fresco decorations and stuccoes of churches and palaces in Italy during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries by Ludwig Gruner’, Athenaeum (7 Dec. 1844), p. 1121.
211. F. Knight Hunt, ed., The book of art: cartoons, frescoes, sculpture and decorative art as applied to the new houses of parliament (London, 1846).
212. M. P. Merrifield, The art of fresco painting (London, 1846), p. iii.
213. ‘Sixth report of the commissioners on the fine arts’, Parliamentary papers (1846), XXIV, pp. 7, 9.
214. ‘Eighth report of the commissioners on the fine arts’, Parliamentary papers (1849), XXII, p. 7.
215. T. Martin, Life of H. R. H. the Prince Consort (London, 1875), I, p. 125.
216. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, p. 369.
217. ‘Fine arts: exhibition at Westminster hall’, Athenaeum (6 July 1844), p. 627. The Hofgarten, a garden that adjoined the royal palace, had been frescoed by Cornelius's students with scenes from the history of the Wittelsbach house between 1826 and 1829.
218. See F. Buttner, ‘Bildung des Volkes durch Geschichte: Zu den Anfängen öffentlicher Geschichtsmalerei in Deutschland’, in E. Mai, ed., Historienmalerei in Europa: Paradigmen in Form, Funktion und Ideologie (Mainz, 1990), pp. 77–91.
219. ‘Das Nibelungen Lied or Lay of the last Nibelungers’, Athenaeum (23 Sept. 1848), p. 953
220. [W. Dafforne], ‘British artists: their style and character: no. LI. William Dyce, R. A.’, Art Journal (1 Sept. 1860), p. 296.
221. Eastlake to Albert, 15 Oct. 1852, ‘Papers concerning the rebuilding of Westminster palace, the fine arts commission, and the establishment of a higher school of art in England, 1851–1865’, vol. 3, RAVIC/F31/5.
222. ‘Correspondence: the question of frescoes: by a looker-on’, Art Union, 4 (1842), p. 142.
223. Art Union.
224. Scott, British, French and German painting, p. 47.
225. [Elizabeth Rigby], ‘Modern German painting’, Quarterly Review, 77 (1845), pp. 323–48, here at p. 326.
226. ‘Correspondence’, Art Union, 4 (1842), p. 142.
227. Clarke, Handbook guide, p. iii
228. ‘Advice to aspiring artists’, Punch, 9 (1845), p. 103.
229. For contemporary usage of the term ‘brethren’ in this connection, see Parliamentary papers (1842), XXV, p. 29.
230. Pointon, William Dyce, p. 89.
231. ‘German criticism on British art’, Art Union, 9 (1847), p. 21.
232. ‘The alarming spread of the German school in art’, Punch, 10 (1846), p. 145.
233. ‘The competition at Westminster hall’, Athenaeum (10 July 1847), p. 737.
234. ‘Fine arts: contributions to the literature ofthe fine arts by C. L. Eastlake’, Athenaeum (23 Dec. 1848), p. 1300.
235. For similar see ‘High art in Westminster hall’, Punch, 12 (1847), p. 267.
236. ‘The classical German mania’, Punch, 10 (1846), p. 145.
237. Parliamentary debates (1848), XCVI, pp. 543, 563, 578.
238. A. Chandler, A dream of order: the medieval ideal in nineteenth century English literature (London, 1970), p. 192.
239. Lord Lindsay, Sketches of the history of Christian art (London, 1847), I, p. ccxlvii; III, pp. 406, 422.
240. For a discussion of the differences between the PRB and the Nazarenes, see B. Ford, ed., Victorian Britain: the Cambridge cultural history (Cambridge, 1992), p. 183.
241. See Errington, Social and religious themes, p. 28.
242. Social and religious themes, p. 248.
243. Ford, ed., Victorian Britain, p. 184.
244. Errington, Social and religious themes, p. 23.
245. For similar, see ‘Advice to aspiring artists’, Punch, 9 (1845) p. 103.
246. A. Jameson, Sacred and legendary art (London, 1848), I, p. XX.
247. ‘Romanism and Protestantism in their relation to painting’, Art Journal (1 May 1850), pp. 133–136.
248. See E. Norman, Anti-Catholicism in Victorian England (London, 1968), pp. 51–65, 105–6.
249. K. Clark, The gothic revival (London, 1995), p. 118.
250. Parliamentary debates (1850), CXI, p. 356.
251. Errington, Social and religious themes, p. 154.
252. Q. Bell, A new and noble school: the Pre-Raphaelites (London, 1982), p. 7.
253. Copy of letter from Albert to Sir Charles Wood, 25 May 1850, ‘Papers concerning the rebuilding of Westminster palace, the fine arts commission, and establishment of a higher school of art in England, 1845–1850’, vol. 2, RA VIC/F30/83. The title of this volume of papers is in Albert's hand.
254. ‘Papers concerning the rebuilding of Westminster palace, the fine arts commission, and establishment of a higher school of art in England, 1845–1850’.
255. ‘Papers concerning the rebuilding of Westminster palace, the fine arts commission, and establishment of a higher school of art in England, 1845–1850’.
256. [J. W. Croker], ‘The life of Haydon’, Quarterly Review, 93 (1853), pp. 558–600, here at p. 582.
257. S. and R. Redgrave, A century of painters, p. 498.
258. For the former, see Boase, ‘The decoration of the new palace of Westminster’, p. 357
259. C. Lloyd, ‘Monarchy, politics and patronage’, in C. Lloyd, ed., The quest for Albion: royal patronage of British painting (London, 1998), pp. 9–31, at p. 26
260. for the latter, see for example K. Theodore Hoppen, The mid-Victorian generation, 1846–1886 (Oxford, 1998), pp. 402–15. In the section on ‘painting’, Hoppen makes no mention of either the fresco project, the royal commission on the fine arts or the exhibitions in Westminster hall.
261. Robertson, Sir Charles Eastlake, p. 65.
262. At its height, as many as 20,000 people were reported to have attended this exhibition daily, see Steegman, Consort of taste, p. 134
263. ‘Our weekly gossip’, Athenaeum (12 Aug. 1843), p. 739
264. ‘Cartoons: Westminster hall’, Art Union, 5 (1843), p. 207
265. ‘Two visits to Westminster hall by Mrs. S. C. Hall’, Art Union, 5 (1843), p. 219
266. ‘Varieties: visitors to the cartoons’, Art Union, 5 (1843), p. 223.
267. On the 1844 exhibition see ‘Fine arts: exhibition at Westminster hall’, Athenaeum (6 July 1844), p. 627
268. on that of 1845 see ‘Varieties: Westminster hall’, Art Union, 7 (1845), p. 293.
269. Roberston, Sir Charles Eastlake, p. 65.
270. R. Strong, And when did you last see your father? The Victorian painter and British history (London, 1978), p. 34.
271. Parliamentary papers (1841), VI, p. vi.
272. ‘On the present state of the fine arts in Britain’, Art Union, 1 (1839), p. 113.
273. ‘Two visits to Westminster hall’, p. 219.
274. ‘Art in continental states’, Art Union, 7 (1845), p. 7.
275. A. Briggs, The age of improvement, 1783–1867 (London, 1963), p. 344.
276. See W. L. Burn, The age of equipoise: a study of the mid-Victorian generation (London, 1968), pp. 15–16.
277. Edwards, Fine arts in England, p. 203.
278. ‘Encouragement of art’, Art Union, 2 (1840), p. 139.
279. Parliamentary debates (1848), XCVI, p. 548.
280. E. Hellmuth, ed., The transformation of political culture: England and Germany in the late eighteenth century (Oxford, 1990), p. 16.
281. B. Porter, ‘Bureau and barrack: early Victorian attitudes towards the Continent’, Victorian Studies, 27 (1984), pp. 407–33, here at p. 422.
282. [Thomas Wyse], ‘Report of the commissioners of the fine arts’, British and Foreign Review, 15 (1843), pp. 193–246, here at p. 217.
283. Paraphrasing E. Gellner, Nations and nationalism (Oxford, 1983), p. 51.
284. ‘Art in continental states’, Art Union, 10 (1848), p. 246.