ABSTRACT
REQUESTS have come from almost every quarter of the globe for a history of the art of painting in Japan, to be included in any new edition of this work. Wishing to fall in with these suggestions, I endeavoureq. to compile a succinct account. of this large subject. I however found it impossible of satisfactory compression within a volume which has never aimed at being more than a manual and introduction of an inexpensive kind. Another and more serious objection is that my research into this branch has never been sufficiently extended to warrant my adhesion to one or other of the varied views which authorities now hold. For a study of the text-books discloses a remarkable divergence of opinion between their authors, not only as to the relative merits of the Japanese painters inter 88, but as regards the giants of the outer world. For instance, Professor Fenollosa, who, in the estimation of those who know him, is considered the first authority extant, and who has had the advantage of years of study on the spot, is scathing in his criticisms of Mons. Gonse's opinions. In his" Review of the chapter on Painting in Gonse's 'L' Art J aponais' " (Boston: Oilgood & 00., 1885), not only does he hold up to ridicule and attempt to demolish everyone of the French savant's dicta, but he places Japanese painters upon pinnacles, or degrades them to depths. that few will be disposed to assign to them. Kanaoka resembles Phidias in sculpture, Nobuzane is divine, Tanahisa
is superb, and in colour rivals Titian, whilst as for poor Hokusai, he is as " a barbel' " or " a bar-tender" beside a god, a "saloon lounger" beside a gentleman.
