signed paintings seem to take a definite place, forming a group closely related and of nearly contemporary production. This period seems to have been somewhat before the middle years of his working career, for though there are several works of less developed character which owe their inspiration to the local school and would precede this group in point of time, there are also others which show a change in manner and a development

due to contact with Florentine and Umbrian masters of a later date.

The traits which hold five of the six signed works together are: the treatment of the hair, very metallic and sharply marked into locks, not the spinning out of the hairs on the wig-like basis as in the earlier works; the placing of the figures against a curtain or flat ground; a decided interest in natural objects. This tendency is brought out in the butterfly of the Vatican Madonna, the fruits and flowers of the Visitation, the hanging garland of the Leatham portrait, and in the carefully painted flies on the brow

and chest, respectively, of the Mond and Curtis Ecce Homos. The one signed work which does not share with the rest the treatment of the hair or the Crivellesque interest in natural history, is the Perkins triptych which is more closely related in technique and type to the Fabriano strain and must be the earliest of the group (Fig. 2).

There is undoubtedly a northern influence perceptible in Fran

cesco's style. Mr. Richter saw it in the Mond Ecce Homo,' and was led to the belief that Antonello da Messina was its source (Fig. 3). Mr. Berenson sees the Flemish strain in the same work and in the Matelica Crucifixion, but does not give more reason for it than that it came from Antonio da Fabriano. The same influence appears also in the heavy draperies of the Johnson Madonna No. 130 and perhaps in the facial type of the St. Elizabeth at Bracciano. Might not this be due to the presence of Justus von Ghent in Urbino? Justus worked for some years prior to 1474

FIGURE 3.-ECCE HOMO: MOND COL- in the palace of Federigo da LECTION: LONDON.

Montefeltro. His influence was felt by many artists in

Italy and it would not be surprising if among them was one who lived in the near-by town of Fabriano. The fact that Francesco is accredited with the portrait of Guidobaldo da Montefeltro in the Colonna Gallery (Fig. 4) would add support to the theory of his contact with the work, if not with the personality, of the Fleming. It is interesting in this connection to suggest that the Leatham portrait might represent Guidobaldo when he was older (Fig. 5). The resemblance is not close enough to make the identification sure, but certainly enough to cause conjecture, partic1 Richter, The Mond Collection, London, 1910, Vol. II, p. 485. Venturi, Storia dell'Arte Italiana, Vol. VII, 2, p. 124.

ularly if the similarity of the forms of the mouth and chin in the two pictures is noted.

Another reason for inferring a connection between the work of Francesco and that of Justus von Ghent is found when a figure of the Blessing Christ of the Musée Bonnat in Bayonne, which Mr. Berenson connects with Francesco,1 is compared with a panel of the same subject in Cittá di Castello reproduced in Venturi as the work of a fol

lower of Justus.2 Any exact conclusion about these paintings cannot be made, as the work has been done from photographs

which

small.

were very If it were not

for the badly painted hands of the Citta di Castello picture, I should be tempted to think that it also might possibly be the work of Francesco. In the case of the Bayonne Christ the resemblance to the Vatican Madonna is marked enough to leave little doubt of its authenticity.

In looking over ma

terial collected in the Marches it seems possible to attribute two other paintings to Francesco. One is the work of his earlier period, the other of his last manner. The first is a triptych in the 1 Mr. Berenson, with the greatest generosity, gave free access to his photographs and notes on Francesco with permission to use them. It was there that the Bayonne picture was grouped with Francesco, though it has not been published by Mr. Berenson. The writer also wishes to acknowledge with gratitude the gift of photographs Nos. 5 and 8 from Mr. Berenson and the permission from Mr. Perkins to have made a copy of No. 2. To M. Georges Bergés of the Musée Bonnat thanks are due for the catalogue of the Museum. 2 Venturi, op. cit. Vol. VII, 2, pp. 129, 131.

Pinacoteca Communale of Fabriano, done in the spirit of that locality, the tradition that held over from the time of the great Gentile (Fig. 6). The points which make the attribution reasonable are the treatment of the hair, each hair spun out on a flat mould; the way the hair projects behind the ears, as in the Perugia tavole; the painting of the lobe of the ear in ball

form, the high lights touched with white paint. The Madonna. is very like the one in the Perkins triptych and the solid gray background is the same.1

In the Museo Civico of Pesaro there is a triptych, the central part of which is not by the same hand that painted the two wings. and gable top (Fig. 7). The central part, showing Christ carrying the Cross, may be a late work by Francesco; done under the influence of Pintoricchio (with whose work he shows himself familiar in the Johnson

CIRENCESTER.

it may show more especially the effect

of the Borromeo panel painted by Pintoricchio in 1513. The reasons in this case are found in the similarity of the figure of Christ to the St. Sebastian of Lille (Fig. 8). The hooked loop of

1 In connection with this triptych it is worth while mentioning the striking resemblance borne it by two other paintings which copy the central section in many details. One, a tavola, is in the Monasterio di S. Maria Maddalena at Matelica; the other, a fresco, decorates a sotto-portico of the Brefotrofio of Fabriano. As I have not seen either of the originals it is impossible to make deductions, but the fresco, at least, does not seem to be by Francesco.

drapery in the robe of Christ is characteristic, and there is a feeling in the Mary akin to that in the St. Elizabeth of Bracciano.

If this is Francesco's work, the date of his activities might well be placed somewhat later than formerly. Mr. Berenson suggested from 1460 to the end of the century. Perhaps from 1475 to 1515 would better cover the perplexing variety of style. In so

secluded a region as Fabriano, older strains holding over would explain the harking back to the Gentile types and the crudities of Francesco's early style, while the later date would explain the astonishing change and advanced ideas that appear as the artist travels about-such a contrast as is made by the Perugia tavole and the Berenson Annunciation.

In looking for further evidence of a nature to show that Francesco could have been flourishing in the early part of the sixteenth century, a painting of the Annunciation in the Seminario of