[P 86] A painter of portraits retains the individual likeness; a painter of history shews the man by

shewing his actions.

[P 87] . . . be well studied in the analysis of those circumstances, which constitute dignity of

appearance in real life.

Those expressions alone should be given to the figures which their respective situations

generally produce.

[Nonsense]

[P 89] . . . the distinct blue, red, and yellow. . . in the draperies of the Roman and Florentine

schools. . . effect of grandeur. . . . Perhaps these distinct colours strike the mind more forcibly,

from there not being any great union between them; . . .

These are Fine & just Notions Why does he not always allow as much

[P 90] . . . the historical Painter never enters into the detail of colours [ nor] does he debase his

conceptions with minute attention to the discriminations of Drapery.

Excellent Remarks

Carlo Maratti [thought] that the disposition of drapery was a more difficult art than even that of

drawing the human figure; . . .

I do not believe that Carlo Maratti thought so or that any body can think so. the

Drapery is formed alone by the Shape of the Naked [next word cut away in binding]

[P 92] . . . the Venetians. . . accomplished perfectly tile thing they attempted. But as mere

elegance is their principal object, . . .

They accomplishd Nothing

[P 93] To this question [why Veronese had put his principal figure in shade-Reynolds answers

that he was] an ornamental Painter [whose] intention was solely to produce an effect of light and

shadow; . . .

This is not a Satisfactory Answer

To produce an Effect of True Light & Shadow [Nothing must be sacrificd for