THE P.R.B. JOURNAL, 1849-53 (continued 2)

Tuesday 5th.—Woolner returned from Sevenoaks. His news is—of Gabriel, that he gets up at seven o’clock, is painting his background with mystic feeling, translates canzoni at a great rate of evenings, and will probably be back at the end of the week;—of Hunt, that he is progressing well, painting the ground all covered with the red autumn-leaves;—of Stephens, that he also is getting on. Beyond this, he says that a letter has been received from Millais urging the admission of Collins⁠[240] into the P.R.B.; that Hunt acquiesces in Millais’s suggestion, Stephens in Hunt’s consent, and Gabriel in that of them two. Woolner himself fought the point savagely; being of opinion (in which I fully agree with him) that Collins has not established a claim to the P.R.B.-hood, and that the connexion would not be likely to promote the intimate friendly relations necessary between all P.R.B.’s.... A letter reached me from Allingham, who speaks as being well pleased with my criticism, at some passages of which I had my suspicions he might be offended. He says he has corrected many of the imperfect rhymes in his volume; and, alluding to Gabriel’s commenced picture from Pippa Passes, urges that the Page should not be made too juvenile or helpless. In the evening I had a letter telling me not to go to Patmore’s to-night; and stating that the length of Cayley’s Dante proves an insuperable obstacle to its publication in The Palladium, the Editor, being willing, nevertheless, to insert a canto or two as a specimen. A letter also from Mr. Williams, to suggest that I should enable him to show something written by me to the Editor of the paper he is connected with. I accordingly looked over my Critic critiques (selecting the most mildly expressed, as the note speaks of “courteous consideration”); and, with these and a copy of The Germ, called on Mr. Williams. The paper in question is The Spectator, whose Editor is a Mr. Rintoul; and it appears that its tactics are somewhat hostile to the Academy, in so far at least as the aim of keeping it up to public responsibility may be so construed. I gather, however, that considerable latitude is allowed to the writer, and that I should be but little hampered with any antécédens. The business of the critic extends, beyond the mere notice of exhibitions, to the general discussion of any matter affecting art, so that, if I obtain the engagement, I may reckon upon being pretty constantly occupied. I find Mr. Williams not of very P.R.B. tendencies, and no great admirer of Anthony,—my review of whom at Suffolk Street I had brought with me, fancying it would be appropriate. It seems that a new Associate has been elected, which will furnish present matter for an article. Mr. Williams spoke a good deal of Wells, author of the Stories after Nature, who appears to be a most dangerous and insidious person.⁠[241] His whole aim, it appears, is to exercise influence over others; a craving which occupies him to a most morbid degree, and which he gratifies regardless of means and consequences. On one occasion he played upon Thomas Keats, by keeping up a correspondence with him in the character of a lady, and induced him to go to France in the idea of meeting his correspondent. The discovery of the fraud produced, it seems, a very serious effect on its victim. John Keats became very indignant hereat, and peremptorily broke off all acquaintanceship with Wells; and Mr. Williams is of opinion that Wells’s literary works (written subsequently to this affair) were produced in the hope of pleasing Keats and winning him back. No friendships are safe within the sphere of Wells’s influence, his principle being “divide et impera.”... He is now lord and master in the household of some French lady, whose son, after being given over by the doctors, is supposed to have owed his recovery to Wells’s devout prayers....

Wednesday 6th.—I find announced in The Times the election of Eastlake as President, and of Hook as Associate. Here is ready-made to my hand a subject for a Spectator article, should such be in demand. In the evening, another letter from Mr. Williams, to say that, having himself been asked to write on the point, he mentioned his interview with me to the Editor, Mr. Rintoul, and proposed that I should do it as a specimen. The feeling in which it seems the Editor would wish to speak (disclaiming at the same time the slightest desire of biasing me) is entirely my own. Mr. Williams called to get my answer, which was of course affirmative. On his departure I set about the article, and got through it. It had to be ready by to-morrow evening. The Critic notices have been left with Mr. Rintoul.

Thursday 7th.—Having looked in on Mr. Williams, who says he has told Mr. Rintoul I might probably call to-day at the Spectator office, I went thither with my article after dinner. The Editor however was out; so that, being afterwards at the theatre to see Miss Faucit, I made up a note with the slovenly means at my disposal, and dropped it into the editorial box, coming home at night....

Friday 8th.—A note came from Mr. Rintoul expressing himself much pleased with my paper, of which he sends me the proof. One or two slight verbal differences seem, possibly, intentional, but there is no alteration of the least importance. He asks me to call on Monday and I answered proposing to do so in the evening. I presume I may now consider myself engaged....

Sunday 10th.—I sat to Brown for the head of a figure in his picture—that of a minstrel or poet who looks round at Chaucer with a sort of jealous admiration. He would like me to notice in The Spectator the sale of this work to the Dickinsons, and thinks it might be well to write an article on the relations of painters and picture-dealers—a suggestion I propose to adopt.⁠[242] He tells me that, at the election of Hook as Associate, the only competitor brought to the ballot was Harding,⁠[243] who obtained seven votes out of sixteen....

Wednesday 13th.—Gabriel wrote again that after all he might probably return to-day, and did in fact arrive in the course of the morning. His picture remains for the present at the Inn where the coach stops. Hunt expects to be back to-morrow, and Stephens returned on Sunday. Gabriel brings with him a great quantity of translations from the old Italian, and one or two short original poems; he has also written a stanza or two to a poem he had begun shortly before leaving London suggested by some of the Nineveh sculpture⁠[244].... I called on the Editor of The Spectator, who appears to be a frank, cordial, and agreeable man, without any pretension to knowledge in art.... He observed that it would not be in the least necessary to get up something about art for every week; and indeed, I think, seemed rather impressed with the notion that I should present him with more than is wanted.

Saturday 30th.—... Millais met Frank Stone the other evening, who spoke to him about young men, ignorant of the first principles of art, imagining they are going to do something new, and found a school; and said he supposed Millais and his friends considered him altogether wrong in his productions—to which Millais returned a decided affirmative. An absurd lithograph-caricature is about to be issued of Millais’s last picture, as he is informed by his Brother; something of a big dog sniffing at a cur, with the picture in the background, and some motto to the effect that some one or other fancies he’s like nature, but isn’t.... There was a very laudatory notice ... in The Guardian, he says, of his and Hunt’s last pictures; and some persons in Oxford informed him that Ruskin writes in the paper, and that the article may not improbably be his⁠[245].... Woolner, who passed the evening with Gabriel, was yesterday with Patmore, accompanying Tennyson in the search for a house in the neighbourhood of London, but without result. Tennyson is in a state of disgust at the idea of being presented at court on his appointment to the laureateship. Patmore says that Tennyson has in his memory, and on occasion recites, an immense quantity of poetry which he never intends to commit to paper.... Gabriel finished, all but the last verse, his parody on Ulalume.⁠[246]

Sunday, 1st December.—Gabriel completed the repainting of the angel’s head in his Ecce Ancilla Domini. His translation of the Vita Nuova has been returned by Tennyson, who says it is very strong and earnest, but disfigured by the so-called cockney rhymes, as of “calm” and “arm.” Gabriel intends to remove these before any step is taken towards publication.

Monday 2nd.—Stephens, whom I had not seen for some months, called.... We discussed the shamefully obsolete condition into which P.R.B. meetings have fallen.... I spent the evening with Hunt, who has painted some more of the foreground of his Two Gentlemen picture—fungi and dead leaves. He goes to Lambeth Palace of mornings, to do the cell in his other work, the Claudio and Isabella. While I was there he fulfilled the pleasant duty of making out an account against the Trinity House for work done on the Rigauds thereof in September, to the value of (between him and Stephens) £54 odd. We talked a good deal of the chance of establishing a P.R.B. household, where three or four could live, and paint in common. It might probably be to be done, if Millais would join; and he seems very anxious to live out of London....

Tuesday 3rd.—Gabriel did something on his design, Music, with a Dance of Children.⁠[247] He talks of sending his ballad Denys Shand⁠[248] to Tait’s Magazine, having found a good poem of the same class in last Number. I read through almost all the new matter in Mrs. Browning’s volumes, included in which is a poem I suppose to be that which Patmore says she borrowed without acknowledgment from his Woodman’s Daughter. The resemblance, however, is merely in the moral; the treatment being utterly, and the details of incident considerably, different; nor is the title here printed Maud at her Spinning-wheel....

Thursday 5th.—Gabriel painted on the head of the Virgin in his last picture.

Friday 6th.—Gabriel painted a left hand to his angel Gabriel, thinking it objectionable that one hand only should be visible of each figure.

Saturday 7th.—Woolner, having written at Gabriel’s request to know the price of the rooms in Red Lion Square lately occupied by Harris, called with a note from North Senior⁠[249] the landlord, saying that he will “submit” to £4. 4s. monthly or 20s. a week. He stipulates however that the models are to be kept under some gentlemanly restraint, “as some artists sacrifice the dignity of art to the baseness of passion.” This seems a very advantageous prospect for Gabriel and Deverell, on whom we called to acquaint him. Little seems to have been done to his pictures: to the Hamlet scarcely anything.... We called at Millais’s, having engaged to see his picture and design, but found we had over-stayed our time. However, I met him almost immediately, parading Tottenham Court Road, together with Hunt and Collins, on the search for models....

Sunday 8th.—Woolner called, bringing his head of Tennyson, cast in bronze very satisfactorily. He prides himself not a little on Bernhard Smith’s approval of the execution, and on having rubbed some washing “blue” into the flat of the medallion, to improve its colour. His head of Mrs. Patmore is also to be cast by Mrs. Orme’s desire.⁠[250]...

Tuesday 10th.—Gabriel saw Millais’s design and picture,⁠[251] and pronounces the former to be immeasurably the best thing he has done. The landscape of the picture too is superior to that of the Ferdinand and Ariel. I spent the evening with Hunt, being the only one, of two or three engaged, that did so. Some little has been done to his Two Gentlemen picture.... Coming home, I found Millais with Gabriel, who had read several of his translations from the old Italian, which had just been saved from consumption in lighting fires. Much serious speech ensued.... Gabriel began drawing this evening from the model at Seddon’s....

1851.—January.—A lapse of upwards of a month during which I have neglected the P.R.B. Journal, an omission partly attributable to the nuisance and confusion of moving.⁠[252] However, there has not occurred much requiring record.

Monday last, January 13th, was fixed for a P.R.B. meeting at Hunt’s, with a view to discussing fully the subject of electing any new members in addition to the six remaining of the original number, and in order to frame definite rules for the Brotherhood. Millais, Stephens, and myself, only attended; Gabriel being indisposed, and Woolner in the country.... Rules were also adopted for holding a P.R.B. meeting on the first Friday in every month; for fines in case of default; for a general review of each P.R.B.’s conduct in art at the close of the year; and making the keeping of this journal obligatory on me as secretary. Various other points stand over for settlement.

Millais having raised a doubt as to the propriety of our continuing to call ourselves P.R.B.’s, considering the misapprehension which the name excites, it was determined that each of us should write a manifesto declaring the sense in which he accepts the name; to be read all together at our next meeting, which is fixed for Millais’s, in accordance with the new rule. I have written down my declaration in its chief points.⁠[253]

Another matter of interest has arisen, of which a hint was given some while ago. One Earl has produced an engraving of a china dog being sniffed at by a real dog, with Millais’s picture in the background. It is entitled Nature and Art, dedicated without permission to the Præraphaelites, and is on the eve of publication, by Fores, of Piccadilly. Millais called there the other day, incog.... He has determined to ascertain the law of the case, and to inquire Farrer’s opinion as owner of the picture.

Stephens has taken up the art-criticism for The Critic, which I had declined because of my connection with The Spectator.... Gabriel has, with Deverell, taken the first floor of North’s house, 17 Red Lion Square....

Sunday 26th.—On resuming the P.R.B. Journal I find that my present isolated position renders the continuance of it day by day inefficient to any good purpose. I shall therefore write it up weekly, except where anything particular may call for special record of some one day....

Sunday, 2nd February.—Woolner returned on Thursday, after about six weeks’ absence.... There is some prospect of his getting the commission for a monument to Wordsworth⁠[254] to be erected over his grave; Mr. Fletcher, whom he met when with Tennyson at the Lakes, having proposed him to a brother of Sir Humphrey Davy, who manages the affair, and some preliminary notes having been exchanged.... He, with Gabriel and myself, spent the evening with Patmore on Saturday. Gabriel left some more of his translations from the Italians before Dante, which Patmore says are the only true love-poems he ever saw.

Sunday 9th.—Friday was the second P.R.B. meeting under the new system, when we assembled at Millais’s: all were present, an event which has not happened for months. A few further regulations were made—involving, at Hunt’s suggestion, the important principle that any possible new member is to be re-eligible annually—not permanently admitted in the first instance. An unanimous vote against any P.R.B. (in the case of one of the original six, the vote of his fellow foundation-members only) is to amount to expulsion; a case not precisely foreseen at present. Election is to be by ballot. We voted moreover to keep, under the same obligation as a P.R.B. meeting, the birthday of Shakespeare; and that any one contemplating a public course of action affecting the Brotherhood shall mention the matter first to his colleagues. Millais’s new design is of the dove’s return to the ark. He has finished a small study from Miss McDowall⁠[255] illustrating the love-custom of passing cake through a ring.⁠[256]...

Sunday, 2nd March.—To-day I sat to Deverell for the hand of his Hamlet, and with him and Gabriel spent the evening with Hunt. We found there a cousin of Hannay’s⁠[257] who had been sitting for the head of Valentine. This week has been signalized by Woolner’s taking a medallion of Carlyle, who gave him sittings the four first days of the week, and who of course furnishes material for any number of “nights’ entertainments.”...

Sunday 9th.—... To-day I called on Woolner, and saw his head of Carlyle, and a first sketch for the Wordsworth monument competition. Wordsworth is seated, the whole arrangement of the figure being subordinated to the supremacy of the head; on the base of the plinth whereon he sits is a bas-relief of Peter Bell. Two side-plinths are left entirely plain, as expressive of the ideal in contrast with the human. Mounted on these are two symbolic groups; the first of Control—a refractory child restrained by the authority of his father; the second of Aspiration—a girl who, showing to her mother a flower which she has gathered, is taught to raise her thoughts to the stars. The manhood (rather than womanhood) of the controlling figure in the first symbol is the suggestion of Carlyle, who expressed his entire approval of the general conception of the monument. There are several excellent names on the Committee for carrying out the subscription and awarding the commission—such as ought to give Woolner a fair chance of success; and the terms of the prospectus promise a certain elevation of principle in the selection....

Friday, 2nd May.—After another discreditable lapse, I take occasion to renew the P.R.B. Journal—this being the private-view day at the Academy, to which I had a ticket through The Spectator. The P.R.B. pictures here are Millais’s from The Woodman’s Daughter, The Return of the Dove to the Ark, and Mariana,—and Hunt’s Valentine rescuing Sylvia from Proteus. Millais’s two first are on the line—The Woodman’s Daughter in the old architectural room, from which the architecture has been this year transferred to the Octagon Room; the two others in the West Room—the Mariana being partly below the line. Hunt’s has been abominably shirked off into much the same position as his Rienzi of 1849 occupied. Collins exhibited two pictures—a portrait, and Convent Thoughts—very charming indeed; a strong claim to P.R.Bhood, which it appears however he is now in no hurry to apply for, thinking it should have been offered long ago. Brown’s Chaucer is here, and attracts much admiration; the other best pictures being Eastlake’s, Dyce’s, Leslie’s, Mulready’s (an old one), and Poole’s.... In my progress I heard some one—by his looks, an Academician—observe, in reference to one of Millais’s pictures, that no sarcasm could be too fierce for such absurdities; and another, a Frenchman-cropped monkey-looking being,⁠[258] was in ecstacies of amusement which he made it his care to communicate. The Mariana appeared nevertheless to be a great favourite with women, one of whom said it was the best thing in the exhibition.... The rest of the evening was spent here (the time happening to have come round) in assembled P.R.B.: Woolner excused himself through indisposition.... Millais had heard from Mrs. Collins⁠[259] something about abuse encountered by his pictures; which, it seems, are denounced by Mrs. Jones, and make Jones, R.A., walk about in a state of despondency and distress⁠[260]....

Tuesday 6th.—... The Editor of The Spectator, on whom I called in the afternoon, alluded, but always in a pleasant way, to the difference of tone concerning Millais in my preliminary observations of last week, and the reviews of previous years. I of course stuck up; and whether this is to be the beginning of the end, or whether its end was simultaneous with its beginning, remains to be seen. However, the opening remarks in my notice for this week will probably tend to bring the point to an issue. I claim the certain reversion of supremacy in art for the newcomers, and Brown is reviewed at a triple allowance of space....

Thursday 8th to Saturday 10th.—... On Saturday Hunt, Gabriel, and I, met at Hannay’s; when Hunt informed us (having it from Patmore), that Ruskin had wished to buy Millais’s picture of The Return of the Dove to the Ark, which is already sold; and that Patmore has suggested to him to write something about the P.R.B. The result is not known yet; but, were Ruskin to do so, this is the very thing we want—evident as it is from the affair of Millais’s picture (were it from nothing else) that he must be an admirer of the P.R.B. Indeed so desirable would something of the kind be that it had been proposed among ourselves to write to Ruskin requesting him to express his opinion in some public manner....

Sunday 11th.—The picture Hunt is purposing to do for next year is a life-sized one on the passage from one of Moses’ hymns or exhortations where it is said that God found for Jacob honey in the clefts of the rock.⁠[261]

Monday 12th.—Woolner called, having returned to his study to-day after cold and fever. His model for the Wordsworth monument competition was sent in a few days ago according to the regulations; among the other models is one, also with symbolical figures, by Behnes.⁠[262] He explains to me that it was Ruskin’s father who wanted to buy Millais’s picture, but this makes little difference in the state of the case. Ruskin himself has, in conformity with Patmore’s suggestion, written a letter to The Times, on the P.R.B., and, if it do not appear there, will send it to The Chronicle. This ought to be worth something to us....

Tuesday 13th to Thursday 15th.—On Tuesday Ruskin’s letter appeared in The Times. He says that he believes Millais and Hunt to be at a turning-point of their career, “from which they may either sink into nothingness or rise to very real greatness.” The explanation he gives of the name “Præraphaelite” is very sensible; “They intend to return to early days in this one point only—that, as far as in them lies, they will draw either what they see or what they suppose might have been the actual facts of the scene they desire to represent, irrespective of any conventional rules of picture-making; and they have chosen their unfortunate though not inaccurate name because all artists did this before Raphael’s time, and after Raphael’s time did not this, but sought to paint fair pictures rather than represent stern facts; of which the consequence has been that, from Raphael’s time to this day, historical art has been in acknowledged decadence.” Ruskin then deals with the nonsense about “imitation of false perspective”; asserting that the only error in the five pictures (including Collins’s) is that the top of the green curtain in the distant window (of the Mariana) has too low a vanishing point; and that he will undertake to prove a dozen worse errors in any twelve of the most popular pictures of the day containing architecture;—and, as to the accusation of “drapery snapped instead of folded,” that, “putting aside the small Mulready, and the works of Thorburn and Sir W. Ross, and perhaps some others of those in the miniature-room which he has not examined, there is not a single study of drapery in the whole Academy, be it in large works or small, which, for perfect truth, power, and finish, could be compared for an instant with the black sleeve of the Julia, or with the velvet on the breast and the chain-mail of the Valentine; or with the white draperies on the table in Mariana, and of the right-hand figure in The Dove returning to the Ark; and further that, as studies both of drapery and every minor detail, there has been nothing in art so earnest or so complete as these pictures since the days of Albert Durer.” He concludes with objecting to the Sylvia and the figure in the Dove picture, on the score of deficient beauty, and hopes “to be permitted to enter into more special criticism in a future letter.” Altogether the letter is very satisfactory; anything but unqualified praise, which is well in one sense, as doing away with the accusation of partisanship. Ruskin himself expressly disclaims personal acquaintance. One point which I think it might be advantageous to notice in a letter from some of ourselves to The Times is that Ruskin says something of P.R.B. “Romanist and tractarian tendencies,” in reference to the Mariana and to Collins’s picture. Such tendencies, as utterly non-existent in fact, it might not be amiss to repudiate; the doing which would, besides, afford an opportunity for entering into any other details or rectifications seeming advisable. But perhaps it will be preferable to wait for Ruskin’s sequel.... On Wednesday I had a letter from Gabriel, enclosing a notice of Hunt,⁠[263] and bidding me to Millais’s to-morrow. Brown, Hunt, and Gabriel, were there; and we are all agreed that Ruskin’s letter will do good. Patmore, at whose instance it was written, thinks we should send Ruskin our thanks; but this seems of doubtful propriety, as it might be interpreted into making interest with a view to his second letter. When that is out, something of the kind suggested would certainly appear right. Millais has had another request (from a Mr. Boddington) for his Dove in the Ark, and a particular invitation from the Birmingham Exhibition for him to send it thither. Mr. Combe also (who bought Hunt’s picture of last year) has written to ask the price of the Valentine and Proteus, and of Collins’s. A laudatory review of Hunt and Millais appears in The Guardian, devoting to them three or four times as much space as to any other artist.... As to abuse, it seems to be in the air, so much does the infection spread among critics in word and print.... A nuisance which has revived within these three days is the buried Germ; George Tupper having called on me to say that he is winding up its money-matters, and finds himself a clear loser by some £30. Outstanding accounts are of course in requisition; and I find that the copies of Nos. 3 and 4 with which he credits me have so almost entirely disappeared that, what with making good their value (the money-value of The Germ!) and paying for the etching-plates which I could scarcely leave Tupper to defray, I have still a pretty sum to fork out; whilst most of the other quondam proprietors have to look up their share of the expenses of Nos. 1 and 2.

Friday 16th to Friday 23rd.—A hit at the P.R.B. (conscientiously speaking, very stupid) appears in Punch of Wednesday, introducing caricatures of the Mariana and of Collins’s picture. It is admitted, however, with a reference to Ruskin, that the P.R.B. pictures are true; and the article is directed in part against supposed Romanizing tendencies. On the 16th Woolner, Gabriel, and myself, were at Tupper’s; this being the first day since his illness that Woolner has returned to work, doing something on the minor Wordsworth monument⁠[264] for which he was commissioned. He is to be introduced next week at Carlyle’s to Ruskin; who, as Patmore informs him, had written his second letter to The Times, but now thinks of withholding it on the consideration that it casts so strong a slur on all non-P.R.B. living painters.... Carlyle the other night, in talking with Woolner was speaking of “Alfred” (as he calls Tennyson) and Browning in reference to their embodying their thoughts in verse, when there is so great need of doing things in the directest way possible: “Alfred” he said, “knows how to jingle, but Browning does not.” He spoke however of Browning’s intellect in the highest terms. He then referred to the P.R.B.; “These Præraphaelites they talk of are said to copy the thing as it is, or invent it as they believe it must have been: now there’s some sense and hearty sincerity in this. It’s the only way of doing anything fit to be seen.” Woolner’s medallion pleased him very greatly. We saw Tupper’s bas-relief which the Academy rejected. It is illustrative of The Merchant’s Second Tale, by (or ascribed to) Chaucer, and represents the chess-playing between the merchant and the old man he meets in the strange city. It is at the extremest edge of P.R.Bism, most conscientiously copied from nature, and with good character. The P.R.B. principle of uncompromising truth to what is before you is carried out to the full, but with some want of consideration of the requirements peculiar to the particular form of art adopted. According to all R.A. ideas, it is a perfect sculpturesque heresy, whose rejection—especially seeing that it is the introductory sample of the P.R.B. system in sculpture—cannot be much wondered at, though certainly most unjustifiable....

Saturday 24th.—... Gabriel, who has given notice to quit his present studio in Red Lion Square, has received from Brown the offer of a share in his; and purposes to accept it. He is inclined to paint this year, instead of The Meeting of Dante and Beatrice on Earth and in Paradise (which he is re-designing), some other Dantesque subject—probably from the Vita Nuova.

1853, 23rd January.—I at last resume the P.R.B. Journal, not too sanguine of continuing it for long.

Our position is greatly altered. We have emerged from reckless abuse to a position of general and high recognition, just so much qualified by adverse criticism as suffices to keep our once would-be annihilators in countenance. I limit myself to the briefest recapitulation of last year’s public doings and our present state.

Hunt, Millais, Stephens, and Woolner, exhibited at the R.A.—Hunt sent The Hireling Shepherd; Millais, Ophelia, and A Huguenot on the Eve of St. Bartholomew; Stephens, a small portrait of his Mother; Woolner, his cast for the competition monument to Wordsworth, and medallion heads of Carlyle, Wordsworth, and Miss Orme.⁠[265] Gabriel exhibited three designs (water-colour) in the Exhibition of Sketches opened in December—Giotto painting Dante’s Portrait, Beatrice denying Dante her Salutation, and a Lady in Venetian Costume.⁠[266]

At present Hunt is preparing for next exhibition. He purposes exhibiting his old picture from Measure for Measure, Christ at the Door, a picture of Sheep commissioned by Maude, a portrait, and probably two others of which I shall be able to speak more certainly hereafter. Soon after sending in, he intends to go to Syria. Millais is painting two subjects of invention—one of the Stuart period,⁠[267] the other named The Ransom. Gabriel has in hand a picture in two compartments,⁠[268] symbolizing, in life-sized half-figures, Dante’s resolve to write the Divina Commedia in memory of Beatrice. Woolner is absent from England since July last, having gone to the diggings in Australia, where he hopes to make money sufficient to enable him to return in a few years, and pursue sculpture with endurable prospects. Stephens is doing a portrait of his Father. I am still on The Spectator.

Monday 17th to Saturday 22nd.—Better than art-news signalizes this week—that, namely, of the arrival of Woolner’s vessel, the Windsor, at Melbourne on the 22nd October last. It is the first we have heard about him since he reached Plymouth on his passage out. The Howitts, whom he had gone to join, with Bernhard Smith and Bateman, had started into the interior of the country only two days before. Thus much is gathered from the shipping news in the Times and Howitt’s letters to his family: from Woolner himself we have yet to wait for news. Another item of information is rather sad. Poor Collinson, our once P.R.B., is said to be on the eve of relinquishing art and entering a Jesuit college⁠[269] as a “working brother,” I am told, whatever that may mean.... Gabriel has been giving the finishing touches to some alterations he has made in his old Annunciation picture, consequent on an offer from McCracken of Belfast to buy it, on Hunt’s recommendation, for the original price, £52. 10s. I have been sitting to him to assist his repainting of the Angel’s head. Friday was to have been a P.R.B. meeting at Stephens’s, but no one attended except myself. Hunt had to take advantage of the moonlight night for his picture of Christ at the Door.... The only change in domicile that has taken place since I dropped this journal is that Gabriel and I now have Chambers overlooking the river at Blackfriars Bridge, 14 Chatham Place.... I should not have forgotten to premise that, though both Præraphaelism and Brotherhood are as real as ever, and purpose to continue so, the P.R.B. is not and cannot be so much a matter of social intercourse as it used to be. The P.R.B. meeting is no longer a sacred institution—indeed is, as such, well-nigh disused; which may explain the quasi-non-attendance at Stephens’s. And the solemn code of rules which I find attached to these sheets reads now as almost comic.⁠[270] In fact it has been a proof of what Carlyle says in one of his Latter-day Pamphlets, that the formulation of a purpose into speech is destructive to that purpose—for not one of the new rules has been acted on, and the falling off of that aspect of P.R.Bism dates from just about the time when those regulations were passed in conclave.

Sunday 23rd to Saturday 29th.—Gabriel finished and sent off the Annunciation picture. It has now lost its familiar name of “The Ancilla,” the mottoes having been altered from Latin to English, to guard against the imputation of “popery.” He is now possessed with the idea of bringing out his translation of the Vita Nuova,⁠[271] revised and illustrated. He had intended photographed designs a short time ago, but now again purposes etchings.

FOOTNOTES: