That most delightful of gossips, Samuel Pepys, has much to say about art, of which he was no mean critic. Writing on February 1st, 1688, Pepys said: "I was carried to Mr. Streater's, the famous history-painter, whom I have often heard of, but did never see him before; and there I found him and Dr. Wren and several virtuosos, looking upon the paintings which he is making for the new Theatre at Oxford; and indeed they look as if they would be very fine, and the rest think better than those of Rubens in the Banqueting-house at Whitehall, but I do not fully think so. But they will certainly be very noble; and I am mightily pleased to have the fortune to see this man and his work, which is very famous, and he is a very civil little man, and lame, but lives very handsomely."
SAMUEL COOPER (1609—1672) was a miniature painter of a high order, whose art attested the influence of Van Dyck; the Duke of Buccleuch has the two famous unfinished portraits of the Protector by him, and a galaxy of other works of this class. Pepys, speaking of a portrait-painter named JOHN HAYLS, of whom he thought highly, said: "He has also persuaded me to have Cooper draw my wife's picture, which though it cost over £30, yet I will have it done." He called Cooper "a limner in little," and referred to him several times in his Diary. On the death of Sir Peter Lely, another foreigner became the popular painter of the Court. This was—
Sir GODFREY KNELLER (1648—1723), a native of Lübeck, who came to the Court of Charles II. in 1674, and maintaining his popularity during the reign of James II., William III., and Anne, lived to paint the portrait of George I. Kneller's works are chiefly portraits. Of these the famous Kit-Kat series of likenesses of distinguished men is invaluable. His portrait of his fellow-countryman, Grinling Gibbons, is one of his best paintings. He was the fashionable painter of the age, and kings and fine ladies, wits and statesmen, are embodied in his art. Dryden was amongst his sitters, and the poet has left the following praises of the painter:—
"Such are thy pictures, Kneller! such thy skill,
That nature seems obedient to thy will;
Comes out and meets thy pencil in the draught,
Lives there, and wants but words to speak the thought."
The popularity of allegoric painting did much to hinder the progress of English art. Nature gave place to naked gods and impossible shepherdesses, who were painted on walls and ceilings at so much a square foot. Charles II. had probably acquired a taste for such painting abroad, and it retained its popularity for a considerable period. Fuseli said: "Charles II., with the Cartoons in his possession and the magnificence of Whitehall before his eyes, suffered Verrio to contaminate the walls of his palaces, or degraded Lely to paint the Cymons and Iphigenias of his Court, while the manner of Kneller swept completely away what might be left of taste among his successors. It was reserved for the German Lely and his successor Kneller to lay the foundation of a manner which, by pretending to unite portrait with history, gave a retrograde direction for nearly a century to both; a mob of shepherds and shepherdesses in flowing wigs and dressed curls, ruffled Endymions, humble Junos, withered Hebes, surly Allegros, and smirking Pensierosos usurp the place of propriety and character." We can see the triumphs of allegory over nature fully illustrated in Hampton Court Palace. Chief among painters of this class of art was Antonio Verrio (1634—1707), who received from Charles II. £10,000 for the decoration of Windsor Castle. LOUIS LAGUERRE (1663—1721) was associated with Verrio, and carried on similar work after Verrio's death. His best works are at Blenheim. In his later years Laguerre found a coadjutor in SIR JAMES THORNHILL (1676—1734), whose decorations are superior to those of Verrio or Laguerre. His chief productions are in the cupola of St. Paul's Cathedral, the Great Hall of Greenwich Hospital, an apartment at Hampton Court, and a saloon in Blenheim Palace. Thornhill was knighted by George I., being the first English artist who received that honour, and he sat in Parliament for his native place, Melcombe Regis. Perhaps the most enduring fact about him is that he was the father-in-law of Hogarth. Walpole said of the reign of George I.:—"No reign since the arts have been in any estimation produced fewer works that will deserve the attention of posterity." It was not only in England that art slumbered. The Flemish, Dutch, and Spanish schools had passed from the brilliance of their seventeenth-century period. In Italy art had shrivelled with the last of the Bolognese school. France possessed some original painters, but not of the highest order.
Before passing on to the period of Hogarth and the creation of the English school, we may mention a few names of painters in England. These were JOHN RILEY (1646—1691); JAMES PARMENTIER (1658—1730); WILLIAM AIKMAN (1682—1731); MARY BEALE (1632—1697); JOHN CLOSTERMANN (1656—1713); MICHAEL DAHL (1656—1743); Gerard von Soest (1637—1681); JOHN VANDERBANK (1694?—1739); WILLIAM WISSING (1656—1687); Joseph Michael Wright (1625?—1700?), a pupil of Jamesone; JONATHAN RICHARDSON (1665—1745), a pupil of Riley; CHARLES JERVAS (1675—1739), a follower of Kneller, and the friend of Pope, who, with the fulsome flattery of the day, compared him to Zeuxis. GEORGE KNAPTON (1698—1778) was famous for crayon portraits; a large group, in oils, representing the Princess of Wales and her family, by his hand, is at Hampton Court.
In the middle of the eighteenth century, THOMAS HUDSON (1701—1779) became the fashionable portrait painter. His chief remaining claim to fame is that he was the first master of Joshua Reynolds. FRANCIS HAYMAN (1708—1776) lived long enough to write himself R.A. among the earliest members. His Finding of Moses may be seen at the Foundling Hospital; and his own portrait in the National Portrait Gallery. He seems to have been highly esteemed, and, among other works, executed some for Vauxhall Gardens. His fame is now almost as extinct as the lamps of that once famous place of entertainment.