As to the subject many conjectures have been made:  Aristotle surrounded by emblems illustrating the objects with which his philosophy was concerned, an initiation into some mystic rite, the poet musing in sadness on the mysteries of life, the philosopher imparting wisdom to the young, etc. etc.  I believe Giorgione is simply giving us a poetical rendering of “The Golden Age,” where, like Plato’s philosopher-king, the seer all-wise and all-powerful holds sway, before whom the arts and sciences do homage; in this earthly paradise even strange animals live in happy harmony, and all is peace.  Such a theme would well have suited Giorgione’s temperament, and Ridolfi actually tells us that this very subject was taken by Giorgione from the pages of Ovid, and adapted by him to his own ends.[117] But whether this represents “The Golden Age,” or some other allegory or classic story, the picture is completely characteristic of all that is most individual in Giorgione, and I earnestly hope the slur now cast upon its character by the misleading label will be speedily removed.[118] For the public believes more in the labels it reads, than the pictures it sees.

Finally, in the “Venus disarming Cupid,” of the Wallace collection, we have, in my opinion, the wreck of a once splendid Giorgione.  In the recent re-arrangement of the Gallery, this picture, which used to hang in an upstairs room, and was practically unknown, has been hung prominently on the line, so that its beauties, and, alas! its defects, can be plainly seen.  The outlines are often distorted and blurred, the Cupid has become monstrous, the delicacy of the whole effaced by ill-usage and neglect.  Yet the splendour of colour, the cast of drapery, the flow of line, proclaims the great master himself.  There is no room, moreover, for such a mythical compromise as that which is proposed by the catalogue, “It stands midway in style between Giorgione and Titian in his Giorgionesque phase.”  No better instance could be adduced of the fallacy of perfection implied in the minds of most critics at the mention of Giorgione’s name; yet if we accept the Louvre “Concert,” if we accept the Hermitage “Judith,” why dispute Giorgione’s claim on the ground of “weakness of construction”?  This “Venus and Cupid” is vastly inferior in quality to the Dresden “Venus,”—­let us frankly admit it,—­but it is none the less characteristic of the artist, who must not be judged by the standard of his exceptional creations, but by that of his normal productions.[119]

[Illustration:  Hanfstaengl photo.  National Gallery, London VENUS AND ADONIS]