A visual and conceptual connexion between Sir Joshua Reynolds's painting of Ugolino, first exhibited at the Royal Academy in London in 1773 (Fig. 1) and Jacques-Louis David's Lictors returning to Brutus the bodies of his sons, first shown at the Paris Salon in 1789 (Fig.2), was proposed in an article of 1986 by Stefan Germer and Hubertus Kohle. They argue that Reynolds's picture was a prototype for the process of 'radical subjectivization' through which David offers the viewer a new freedom of interpretation, thus transforming the traditional conception of history painting. Thomas Crow has also recently argued that an important link between painting and liberal patriotism in the pre-Revolutionary decade resided less in the actual choices of subject matter and iconography made by artists than in 'modes or styles of narration that would themselves be lessons in emancipated conduct'. Germer and Kohle's perceptive comparison of the two paintings details this concern for the viewer's active rôle; but, in spite of useful references to Rousseau and Diderot to support their thesis, they are principally concerned with the evidence and meaning of the participatory relationship. The present article will seek to establish a more concrete historical relationship between the two paintings by invoking social, cultural, political and ideological factors. In addition to exploring whether David would have known Reynolds's composition during his work on the Brutus, why it would have been of interest to him, and how it might have affected the meaning of his picture, contemporary French interest in Michelangelo, Dante and Shakespeare will also be adduced.

, why it would have been of interest to him, and how it might have affected the meaning of his picture, contemporary French interest in Michelangelo, Dante and Shakespeare will also be adduced.

WILLIAM DYCE was a painter. He was also an art educator and, on occasion, was marginally involved in the public collecting of art. In addition he was interested in art history, and his views on this had a profound effect on his other activities. The concept of art history held by David Wilkie, Dyce's fellow countryman who was of an earlier generation, was what one might label the organic theory. Art was regarded as having, in its history, an infancy, childhood, and maturity, which were repeated in the career of the individual artist and again even in the progress of each picture, as it moved from the dry, flat, and linear forms of the preparatory drawing to the rich, atmospheric, and painterly. Wilkie's was, for him, a convenient kind of art history since it endorsed, within his own practice as a painter, his decision to change from a detailed to a broader manner- removing this from the realm of personal choice, and bestowing on it a kind of natural inevitability. To Wilkie, aerial perspective and chiaroscuro were devices that best procured for the artist the mental, emotional, and spiritual expression of his subject. These devices reached their full development only late in the history of art.

GOOD eighteenth-century English pictures are rare in France, and it was an unexpected pleasure recently to be shown, in a private collection in Paris, a fine late bust portrait said to be 'by SirJoshua Reynolds of the musician, Dr Philip Hayes' (Fig. 17).* However, in spite of the excellent quality of the picture, brilliantly painted with splashes of cherry red, black and white - the brush- work reminiscent of a number of late Reynoldses - and in spite of the fact that it is listed in Graves and Cronin's catalogue of Reynolds's works, it was soon apparent that the subject was not Hayes, and the painter not Reynolds.

MOST people associate Agnew's with exhibitions of old masters but in fact they have always tried to show contemporary work as well. Success with the latter has depended on timing. In 1890, Burne-Jones's Briar rose series attracted over a thousand visitors a day, and caused traffic problems. On the other hand, in 1873 the firm failed to interest Manchester textile magnates in Degas's A cotton office in New Orleans, the timing factor being the collapse of the cotton market in that year. In the 1930s, spurred by the en'thusiasm of Louis Hoare on the staffof Agnew's, the gallery frequently held exhibitions of work by living artists, although they were mainly confined to the conservative mod- ernism of such painters as Sickert, Grant and Bell. Once, how- ever, in January 1937, Agnew's moved too far ahead of the taste of its clients.

, the timing factor being the collapse of the cotton market in that year. In the 1930s, spurred by the en'thusiasm of Louis Hoare on the staffof Agnew's, the gallery frequently held exhibitions of work by living artists, although they were mainly confined to the conservative mod- ernism of such painters as Sickert, Grant and Bell. Once, how- ever, in January 1937, Agnew's moved too far ahead of the taste of its clients.

ON 21st May 1641 abbé Cesare Alessandro Scaglia di Verrua died in his house in Antwerp. He was only forty- nine, but had for nearly three decades played a leading role in the political and diplomatic life of Europe. His links with Van Dyck and Jordaens are familiar to art historians, but his interest in and patronage of the fine arts has not hitherto been known save in the vaguest outlines. A newly discovered document in Biella provides information on at least part of his collection at the time of his death (see the Appendix below), and provides the opportunity for a fresh assessment of this important figure.

THE first complete inventory of Cardinal Ludovico Ludovisi's art collection was prepared in 1623 by Giovanni Antonio Chiavacci, guardaroba of the Vigna di Porta Pinciana. It is known to scholars and has occasionally been cited, but only its list of sculptures has been published. Chiavacci's catalogue of the paintings at the Vigna cannot compare with that compiled by Antonio della Corgna ten years later, and published by Klara Garas in 1967. But although he includes fewer attributions or attempts at attribution, Chiavacci carefully describes each paint- ing, and this makes it possible to identify many of the works with those given attributions in 1633. A comparison of the two in- ventories, moreover, reveals much about the development of the collection in the years between the death of Pope Gregory XV in 1623, when Chiavacci's inventory was made, and that of Cardinal Ludovisi in 1632, which prompted Antonio della Corgna's.

of the Vigna di Porta Pinciana. It is known to scholars and has occasionally been cited, but only its list of sculptures has been published. Chiavacci's catalogue of the paintings at the Vigna cannot compare with that compiled by Antonio della Corgna ten years later, and published by Klara Garas in 1967. But although he includes fewer attributions or attempts at attribution, Chiavacci carefully describes each paint- ing, and this makes it possible to identify many of the works with those given attributions in 1633. A comparison of the two in- ventories, moreover, reveals much about the development of the collection in the years between the death of Pope Gregory XV in 1623, when Chiavacci's inventory was made, and that of Cardinal Ludovisi in 1632, which prompted Antonio della Corgna's.

ALTHOUGH many of the seventeenth-century inventories of the Hamilton collection have been published, one brief list has escaped detailed attention and is here published in full for the first time (see the Appendix below). It not only shows that the second Marquis of Hamilton was a significant collector in the 1610s and 1620s, but also throws new light on the celebrated collection of the 1st Duke of Buckingham.

THE exhibition Treasures of a Polish King recently on show at the Dulwich Picture Gallery, provides the occasion to publish another of the pictures which once belonged to King Stanislaus Augustus of Poland. The red inventory number in the bottom right-hand corner of the Wallace Collection's Lancret, Fête in a wood (Fig.38), identifies the painting as no.23 in the Catalogue des Tableaux appartenant à sa majesté le roi de Pologne of 1795, where it is given to 'Vatteau', and briefly, but identifiably, described. An earlier, undated, description of the same picture in the Warsaw archives was published by Mankowski in 1932: