wrought creation” is a miniature 7 by 6 inches in size.  Such an insignificant fragment requires no serious consideration; at most it would seem only to be a reduced copy after some lost original.  Morelli alludes to it as a copy after Palma, but one may well doubt whether he is not referring to another portrait in the same gallery (No. 123).  Be that as it may, this “Giorgione” miniature is sadly out of place among genuine pieces of the master.[68]

[Illustration:  Hanfstaengl photo.  National Gallery, London

THE ADORATION OF THE MAGI]

One other picture, of special interest to English people, is in dispute.  By Crowe and Cavalcaselle “The Adoration of the Magi,” now in the National Gallery (No. 1160), is attributed to the master himself; by Morelli it was assigned to Catena.[69] This brilliant little panel is admittedly by the same hand that painted the Beaumont “Adoration of the Shepherds,” and yet another picture presently to be mentioned.  We have already agreed to the propriety of attribution in the former case; it follows, therefore, that here also Giorgione’s name is the correct one, and his name, we are glad to see, has recently been placed on the label by the Director of the Gallery.

This beautiful little panel, which came from the Leigh Court Collection, under Bellini’s name, has much of the depth, richness, and glow which characterises the Beaumont picture, although the latter is naturally more attractive, owing to the wonderful landscape and the more elaborate chiaroscuro.  The figures are Bellinesque, yet with that added touch of delicacy and refinement which Giorgione always knows how to impart.  The richness of colouring, the depth of tone, the glamour of the whole is far superior to anything that we can point to with certainty as Catena’s work; and no finer example of his “Giorgionesque” phase is to be found than the sumptuous “Warrior adoring the Infant Christ,” which hangs close by, whilst his delicate little “S.  Jerome in his Study,” also in the same room, challenges comparison.  Catena’s work seems cold and studied beside the warmth and spontaneity of Giorgione’s little panel, which is, indeed, as Crowe and Cavalcaselle assert, “of the most picturesque beauty in distribution, colour, and costume."[70] It must date from before 1500, probably just before the Beaumont “Nativity,” and proves how, even at that early time, Giorgione’s art was rapidly maturing into full splendour.

The total list of genuine works so far amounts to but twenty-three.  Let us see if we can accept a few others which later writers incline to attribute to the master.  I propose to limit the survey strictly to those pictures which have found recognised champions among modern critics of repute, for to challenge every “Giorgione” in public and private collections would be a Herculean task, well calculated to provoke an incredulous smile!

[Illustration:  Dixon photo.  Duke of Devonshire’s Collection, Chatsworth