Jewellery

For necklaces the engravings of these same designers supply many patterns. Like the carcan of the fifteenth century, they are often in the form of a band about an inch in width, composed of precious stones—rubies, emeralds, pearls, and diamonds—in open-work, or attached to velvet. They are generally constructed so as to reach only half-way round the neck, the back part being a band of black velvet. Portraits of the time frequently exhibit ropes of pearls, and finally rows of large diamonds, like the renowned collier of Marie Antoinette composed by the Court jewellers Boehmer and Bossange. Numerous circumstances connected with it, too lengthy to relate here, gave to the affaire of the diamond necklace a world-wide celebrity, making it one of the chief events of the century. Though historically one of the world's most famous pieces of jewellery, the necklace itself, described in quaint but vivid language by Carlyle in his Miscellanies, calls for no special comment, being on the whole of comparatively small artistic importance. Its value—£90,000, a great sum for those days—lay in the size and quality of the brilliants and pendeloques of which it was composed.

A favourite point of adornment in female attire was still the breast, where, in the first part of the century, jewelled ornaments, or sévignés, in the form of bows and rosettes, hung with pendants and set with table-cut stones or rose diamonds, continued to be worn. Generally they assumed the girandole shape hung with pear-shaped pendants. About 1770 a large bunch of flowers, or a bouquet-shaped ornament formed of precious stones, was worn in the breast. For the latter the jeweller Lempereur enjoyed a great reputation. Upon the stiff bodice, which came into fashion at the end of the seventeenth century, scope was afforded for a goodly use of ornament, and soon we find the corsage literally covered with jewels, in a manner similar to that in which the ladies of the Renaissance almost completely covered the upper part of their dresses with pendent chain-ornaments. At the time, however, of which we now speak the ornaments are single pieces mounted upon the dress and arranged symmetrically in the form of a jewelled "stomacher" or devant de corsage. The Santini drawings contain many examples of this kind of open framework composed of precious stones; and several interesting designs for the same are figured on Plates 16, 17, and 18 of Maria's Livre de Dessins de Jouaillerie et de Bijouterie. At this period also, when luxury reached its climax, even the panier or tucked-up upper skirt had the whole of its exaggerated dimensions sprinkled with pieces of jewellery, so that of this time again it may be said that the ladies of the Court displayed the whole of their wealth, and often enough of their credit too, upon a single dress.

Fashion endeavoured to fill a corresponding part in gentlemen's attire by adorning coat and waistcoat with buttons of artistic workmanship. To match the beautiful embroidered garments of the time, buttons were sewn with bugles, steel beads, or spangles; and many have survived which may be reckoned as real articles of jewellery. Every material and mode of decoration was applied to them. Occasionally we find buttons set with diamonds and other precious stones, but more often paste, or with odd natural stones such as agates, carnelians, marcasite, blood-stones, lapis-lazuli, or buttons of tortoise-shell, or of compositions such as Wedgwood ware, in frames of cut steel. Translucent blue glass or enamel, mounted or set with pearls, diamonds or pastes, and chased and coloured gold, were all fashionable. On the whole, cut steel was the most popular. A Birmingham craftsman by name of Heeley, who worked for Wedgwood about 1780, is recorded is being especially skilful at this class of work; while in France a certain Dauffe had almost a monopoly in the production of steel objects. Certainly some of the open-work steel buttons of the time—English as well as French—are jewels of a very high order.

Bracelets were mostly formed of bands of velvet with oval clasps. The clasp was decorated in a variety of ways, and was very frequently fitted with a painted or enamelled miniature. The practice of wearing miniatures in this way seems to have been a common one, judging by the numerous advertisements inserted in the London Public Advertiser about the middle of the century by "ingenious artists," willing on "reasonable terms to paint elegant portraits in miniature for bracelets, rings, etc." Madame de Chamillart had amongst other jewels "Un petit portrait en mignature en forme de bracelet garny de quatre diamants, monté en or." In fact, according to Fontenay, the terms bracelet and boîte à portrait had for a time practically the same meaning.[187] Cameos were sometimes employed as bracelet clasps, but not to the same extent as they were subsequently under the Empire. In the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris are two portrait cameos in sardonyx (Nos. 788 and 927) which served as the clasps of the bracelets of Madame de Pompadour, and were bequeathed by her to Louis XV in 1764. The work of the celebrated gem-engraver Jacques Guay, the one represents Henri IV, and the other, which is signed, Louis XV. The mounting of each, an admirable example of French jewel-work of the time, is formed of a circlet of emeralds arranged in the manner of a laurel wreath, and tied at intervals by cords of rose diamonds terminating above and below in knots. Among other decorations for bracelets, mention may be made of the celebrated enamels produced at Battersea between 1750 and 1775, very many of which, oval in shape, were set in gold frames so as to be easily mounted in bracelets. The productions of the rival establishment at Bilston, in Staffordshire, were similarly employed, and, like the former, were frequently worn as buttons.

The finger ring in the eighteenth century was a particularly favourite jewel. That considerable attention was paid at the time to the design and decoration of the ring, may be judged from Bourguet's designs, which contain patterns for enamel-work intended for its enrichment. The beauty of the sentiments displayed on the rings of the time is nowhere more charmingly expressed than on an English wedding-ring at South Kensington, which is formed of two hands in white enamel, holding between the thumbs and first fingers a rose diamond in the shape of a heart set in silver and surmounted with a jewelled coronet. It bears the date 1706 (Pl. XXXVI, 3). Other rings of similar style have the bezel formed of two precious stones in the form of hearts united by a knot. Rings which served simply as souvenirs of affection were very popular. In addition to the plain gold ring engraved with a posy or motto, were rings containing a like sentiment read by means of the first letters of the stones with which they are set.

The most typical ring of the period is perhaps the marquise ring, which dates from the second half of the century. The bezel, which is oblong, and either oval or octagonal, is often of such size that it covers the whole joint of the finger. It is formed of a plaque of transparent blue glass on matted gold, surrounded with diamonds, and set either with a single diamond, or with several arranged at regular intervals, sometimes in the form of a bouquet. Often instead of diamonds are pastes and even marcasite. Of other varieties of rings of the time it is necessary only to mention those set with Wedgwood cameos, or with stones such as moss-agates, and a form of agate somewhat similar, but of lighter colour, called the mocha stone. Mourning and memorial rings, of which this period was so prolific, will be spoken of subsequently.

An ornament that showed a peculiarly wide development throughout the eighteenth century was the shoe-buckle. Various kinds of buckles are recorded in the Caution to the Public, issued in 1733, in connection with his famous ware, by Edward, the son of Christopher Pinchbeck. They include the following: buckles for ladies' breasts, stock-buckles, shoe-buckles, knee-buckles, girdle-buckles. Of these the most important was the buckle worn on the shoes of every one—man woman, and child—attached to the latchet or strap passing over the instep. It assumed all sorts of forms and was made and enriched with every conceivable material. It is interesting to observe that in spite of the immense number produced, hardly any two pairs of buckles are precisely alike—this is shown in the case of the collection of Sir S. Ponsonby Fane, which contains upwards of four hundred specimens. Towards the last years of the century buckles began to be supplanted by shoe strings. During this period of transition many attempts were made to foster their use.[188] On tickets to public entertainments at the time one occasionally finds a notice that "Gentlemen cannot be admitted with shoe strings." The latter, however, won the day, and about the year 1800 shoe-buckles disappeared from use.

The chatelaine was perhaps the most characteristic of all eighteenth-century ornaments. It was exceedingly popular, and formed, it may be observed, a very favourite object of the time for a wedding present. It usually consisted of a shield with a stout hook, suspended from which were several chains united by another plate or shield which carried the watch. Besides this were two or more chains for holding the watch-key or seals. Extraordinary skill was exercised in the elaboration of chatelaines. The plaques, hinged or united by chains, withstood the incursion of the precious stone that dominated all other forms of jewellery, and afforded peculiar opportunities for the display of the art of the goldsmith in chased and repoussé metal-work enriched with exquisite enamels. The jeweller's whole artistic skill was thus exhibited, not only upon the shields, but upon the solid links of the chains and upon the various breloques hung therefrom. The chief of the latter was of course the watch. Its dial-plate was enriched with enamel, and chased and coloured gold: even the hands when made of gold showed a high degree of skilled workmanship within a very small space. The principal ornamental part was, however, the outer case; and it may be maintained that there was not any species of work connected with the goldsmith's art that was not displayed in its finest form upon watch-cases, more especially in the time of Louis XVI.

It was the seal above all which experienced particular artistic development. Ever since the sixteenth century the seal had been worn in addition to the signet ring. Though hung perhaps like a pomander from a chain at the neck or from the girdle, the seal seems to have been but rarely displayed on the person until the general introduction in the early seventeenth century of the watch, to which for more than a couple of centuries it was a regular accompaniment. The majority of seventeenth-century seals are of silver with the arms engraved in the metal; others of steel are on swivels and have three faces; others, again, of gold set with stones engraved with heraldic devices, have finely worked shanks, occasionally enriched with delicate enamel-work. The gold seals of the eighteenth century, which are among the best examples extant of rococo jewellery, are of open-work in the form of scroll and shell patterns, of admirable design and workmanship. It is out of the question to attempt a description of the numerous attractive forms these pendent seals assumed, or the peculiar interest they possess from an heraldic point of view.

About the year 1772 fashionable men carried a watch in each fob-pocket, from which hung bunches of seals and chains. From the custom set in England of introducing masculine fashions into dress, ladies likewise wore two watches, one on each side, together with rattling breloques, seals, and other appendages. In addition to the real watch with beautifully enamelled back which adorned the left side, they wore on the right what was called a fausse montre or false watch. These false watches were, however, often little less costly than the genuine article, being made of gold and silver, with jewelled and enamelled backs. The front had either an imitation dial-plate, some fanciful device, or a pin-cushion. For those of less ample means the fausse montre was made of gilt metal or even of coloured foils.

CHAPTER XXXIII

The severe and academic influence of the leading and most popular artist of the day, the painter David, and of his pupils, with their extravagant taste for the antique, was universally felt. Yet while the antique celebrated its triumph in all directions, the Empire failed to shake itself entirely free from eighteenth-century styles. As far indeed as jewellery was concerned, the classical revival cannot be said to have been altogether unhappy; for its ornaments are not without a certain charm. Like all else, they breathed the spirit of the past, and are not less formal and rigid than the other art productions of the period.

It was under the short-lived reign of the associated kings, termed the Directory, that the taste for the antique first became thoroughly dominant. Jewellery of all kinds assumed classical forms. The few individuals who were fortunate enough to procure them wore ancient Greek and Roman jewels; the rest had to be content with facsimiles of objects discovered at Pompeii, or simple copies adapted from representations on early vase paintings, sculptures, or engraved gems.

So exaggerated became the enthusiasm for the antique that, following the lead of Madame Tallien and Madame Récamier, the fashionables of the period adopted in its entirety, without regard for differences of climate, what they deemed to be classical costume, and appeared on public promenades in Paris with unstockinged feet in sandals that allowed them to exhibit jewels upon their toes.

The affected classicism of the Republic and First Empire stimulated the use of engraved gems. Far from cameos and the less decorative intaglios being considered out of place with fine precious stones, they often occupied positions of honour, surrounded and mounted occasionally with important diamonds. In the majority of cases, however, they were used alone and were made up into special ornaments by themselves. Antiques were worn when procurable, but the greater number of gems were of modern manufacture, carefully studied both as regards technique and style from ancient examples. Somewhat later, small mosaics, on which were figured classical subjects or buildings of ancient Rome, were also employed. These, together with cameos, generally on shell, were produced in quantities, particularly in Italy, where cameo cutters and mosaic workers still carry on a somewhat languishing trade in ornaments of this nature, Venice, Florence, and Rome sharing in the industry of mosaic jewellery; Rome, Naples, and the whole of Southern Italy in that of cameos. The production of both kinds of objects is now in a sterilised condition. They have entirely lost their earlier qualities, for the reason that they find but little favour and have ceased to be worn by the upper classes. Except during the height of the First Empire the fashion for engraved gems never took a very thorough hold. Ladies have seldom a taste for archæology. If a few, in accordance with the current idea, affected a sober and refined style of ornament, the majority soon wearied of the burden of cameos in the necklace and bracelet, and preferred sparkling stones to the delicate cutting of the gem. The general and instinctive preference for brilliant jewels did more than anything to kill the attempted employment of antique forms and designs.

As regards technique, the metal-work of the early nineteenth century generally displayed considerable poverty of material. The gold, if not pinchbeck imitation, was usually thin, light, and of low quality, with simple designs in the form of clusters of grapes. Borders of leaves and flowers in the antique style were stamped and chased sometimes in open-work, with small rose-shaped ornaments applied. Granulated, beaded, and purled work was much employed, and the surface of the metal was often matted. Artistic effect in chased work was produced by the use of ornamental inlays, or rather overlays, of coloured gold.

Actual jewel-work and settings, as a rule, displayed good quality of workmanship. The general tendency lay in the direction of the coloured stones popular in ancient times—the topaz, peridot, aquamarine, and amethyst; together with precious stones, such as emeralds, rubies, sapphires, and diamonds, and with pearls. The latter were generally reserved only for the most sumptuous ornaments, but were occasionally used in conjunction with jewels of less value. The stones most commonly used were carnelians, moss-agates, turquoises, garnets, pink and yellow topazes, as well as coral, mingled together. Wedgwood ware and its imitations, popular in the latter years of the eighteenth century, continued for some time to meet with favour, while paste jewellery was also worn to some extent.

On every species of jewellery the taste for the antique was clearly visible. Ornaments for the head took the form of frontlets and diadems, hair-combs, hair-pins, triple chains, and strings of pearls. Earrings were in general use, together with necklaces, brooches, bracelets, rings, and girdles. The chief head-ornaments were wide metal combs, fixed in the hair in such a manner as to be visible from the front. The general form of the Empire comb, with its upright rows of pearls or coral, is well known, since a number of examples exist. At the same time frontlets or tours de tête were worn on the upper part of the forehead and over the hair. These, enriched with pearls, cameos, or precious stones, took the form of broad bands or coronets. Another ornament, which did not, however, come into fashion till about 1820, was the ferronnière—a band round the head, with a jewel in the middle of the forehead. It was generally a fine gold chain, but might be made of velvet ribbon or silken cord, or strings of beads. The origin of its title has been given in connection with Italian jewellery of the fifteenth century. Cameos and moss-agates entered largely into the composition of necklaces as well as the various coloured stones mentioned above. Cameos often assumed considerable proportions. They were occasionally set with precious stones, and were linked together with fine chains. Bracelets were much worn, three on each arm: one on the upper part of the arm, a second just above the elbow, and a third upon the wrist. They were usually composed of a number of small chains, or even a band of velvet; while the clasp was formed by a cameo, or else an amethyst, peridot, or topaz set in stamped and pierced gold. Girdles for the most part were fashioned in the same manner as bracelets, with a large cameo on the clasp.

The pictures in the gallery at Versailles afford perhaps the best idea of ornaments in the Empire style; since jewellery is more clearly represented on French portraits than on any others of the time. Among the most striking of such portraits are those of Marie Pauline, Princess Borghese, by Lefèvre, of Caroline Buonaparte, Queen of Naples, by Madame Vigée-Lebrun, and of Madame Mère, by Gérard. The first has a high comb and bandeau, earrings, and girdle, all decorated with cameos, the second a parure of pearls and cameos, and the third a head-ornament mounted with a single large cameo. The coronation of Napoleon in 1804 furnished the painter David with the subject of a picture unrivalled in its kind—"Le Sacre de Napoleon i^er à Notre-Dame," which is exhibited in the Louvre. This grandiose production, besides being a truly epic rendering of a great historical event, serves as a valuable document in the history of jewellery, in that it represents jewellery of the most magnificent kind carried by Josephine, the princesses, and the ladies of honour. The Empress is shown wearing comb and diadem of precious stones, brilliant earrings, and a bracelet on the wrist formed of two rows of jewels united with a cameo. Her suite have, besides, necklaces and girdles mounted in several cases with cameos. Josephine herself possessed a perfect passion for engraved gems, and she actually induced Napoleon to have a number of antique cameos and intaglios removed from the gem collection in the Royal Library and made up into a complete parure of jewellery for her own use.

A German speciality of the expiring Empire was the cast-iron jewellery, brought into favour largely on account of the prevailing scarcity of gold and silver. A foundry for its production was first set up in 1804 at Berlin, where articles of great fineness were cast in sand moulds. In the year 1813, the time of the rising against the Napoleonic usurpation, more than eleven thousand pieces of iron jewellery were turned out, and among them five thousand crosses of the new order of the Iron Cross. In that year appeared the well-known iron rings. During the War of Liberation, when every man joined the Prussian regiments to fight against the French, the patriotic ladies who remained behind laid at the Altar of the Fatherland their valuable jewels, which were melted down for the benefit of the national war-chest. For the articles thus surrendered they received in exchange from the Government iron finger rings bearing the words "Eingetauscht zum Wohle des Vaterlandes," or the famous inscription "Gold gab ich für Eisen." In addition to crosses and rings, other jewels, such as diadems, necklaces, brooches, and bracelets, were executed in cast iron, open-worked and in relief (Pl. LI, 8). Complete parures comprising a comb, necklace, earrings, and bracelets are not infrequently met with, and the name of the manufacturer, such as "Geiss, Berlin," etc., is sometimes found stamped on them. Most of the work is in the antique taste, and is occasionally adorned with classical heads in the manner of Wedgwood and Tassie. Considering the material and method of production, the fineness and lace-like delicacy of this iron jewellery is little less than marvellous.

At this period cameos were still worn, but seldom of strictly classical character. Sentimental hair jewellery likewise continued, as did the iron jewellery. The latter, however, no longer displayed classical forms, but debased Gothic designs. Chains of various kinds were in considerable favour. They were usually looped up at intervals with circular or oblong plaques of thin and coloured gold set with small turquoises and garnets. With the development of machinery appeared thin goldwork, ornamented with stamped and pressed designs. Work of this kind, characteristic of its first decades, extended far into the nineteenth century.

As far as men's jewellery is concerned there is little or nothing to chronicle. Strangely enough, the masculine delight in splendid jewels that had existed up to the end of the eighteenth century, came all at once to an end, along with that older world on the ruins of which Napoleon rose. Almost all that remained to them was the bunch of seals, often of considerable size, that hung by a silken cord from the fob. It is true that occasionally beaux and macaronis actually wore earrings. But these were not employed solely as ornaments, but largely as the result of a fanciful idea, still prevalent in certain quarters, of the value of such objects against diseases of the eye.

Fashion next, about the middle of the century, harked back to rococo, and imitated the style of Louis XV. It was rococo of a kind, but lay as far from the eighteenth century as did Romantic Gothic from the Gothic of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Design for the most part was deplorably bad, defects in this direction being passed off under a glitter of stones.

Instead of the close setting which had so long satisfied the jeweller, open setting for precious stones became universal. Countless old and valuable ornaments perished. The diamonds and other precious stones were picked out of them and transferred to newer settings, and the beautiful old metal-work was ruthlessly melted down. Many fine jewels during the course of the nineteenth century have likewise been spoiled and reduced in value by their owners attempting to adapt them to a prevailing fashion. Vast is the number of family treasures that have undergone the fate of remounting. It is to be hoped that the new-born interest in the beautiful work of earlier craftsmen may help to save what is left from the same sort of destruction that the ancient churches of our land have undergone as the result of ill-judged "restoration."

THE MODERN REVIVAL

Long prior to the developments that have taken place in recent years, attention had been attracted to the artistic qualities of gold and an impetus given to the manipulation of the simple material. It was early in the "sixties" that notice was first drawn to the gold jewellery then being executed in Rome, and the discoveries that had been effected in the working of the wrought metal by the firm of Castellani.

The head of this famous family was the goldsmith Fortunato Pio Castellani, one of the best-known jewellers and dealers of his day. In 1814, at an early age, he started a business in Rome, which he developed about 1826 on the lines of the antique work. The process of production of the old granulated gold jewellery of the ancient Etruscans—that in which the surface is covered with minute grains of gold set with absolute regularity—had long been a puzzle and problem to jewellers. Castellani was deeply interested in the lost art, and searched Italy through to find some survival of it. At last in St. Angelo in Vado, a village of the Apennines, in the corner of the Umbrian Marches, he found a caste of local goldsmiths who had preserved it in what seemed to be an unbroken tradition. He transported some of them to Rome, and together with his sons Alessandro and Augusto succeeded in imitating the tiny golden grains of the Etruscans and soldering them on to the surface of jewels. The work he accomplished in this direction has become famous all the world over.

In 1851 Fortunato retired, and on his death in 1865 his property was divided—Augusto retaining the business, Alessandro setting himself up as a collector and dealer. Augusto, born 1829, carried on the traditions of his father's atelier, and was afterwards promoted to the Directorship of the Capitoline Museum.

Alessandro, the elder brother, was perhaps one of the most striking personalities of his age. Born in 1824, he first assisted his father; but his political opinions, which led him to take an active part in the revolutionary movement in Rome in 1848, and implicated him in the conspiracy of 1852, resulted in his imprisonment in the Castle of St. Angelo; but successfully feigning madness, he was liberated and sent out of the Pontifical States. He then proceeded to travel about exploiting the productions of the Casa Castellani. Gradually he devoted himself to archæological pursuits. His knowledge of these matters was profound, and he became the finest expert of his day. He was continually collecting, and dealt largely, his chief customers being the museums of Europe and America. The finest of the antique jewellery in the British Museum was purchased from him in 1872-1873. A few years before, in 1867, his unrivalled series of peasant ornaments, gathered together from all parts of Italy, was acquired by the Victoria and Albert Museum, which also made large purchases at the sale that took place after his death in 1883.

The art of filigree and granulation practised by Castellani was carried to still greater perfection by another Italian, Carlo Giuliano, who was largely indebted to the discoveries of his compatriot. Examples of his work, with that of Castellani, are in the Victoria and Albert Museum. Since his death, his business house in London has been continued by his sons.

Another Italian who has surpassed both Castellani and Giuliano in the reproduction of the antique is Melillo of Naples. His jewellery, though "copied closely from ancient models, has a certain modern cachet" and is in fact "a translation of the most refined ancient art into modern language."

An eminent English jeweller, whose name is worthy of record, was Robert Phillips of London, who died in 1881. He also came under the influence of Castellani. At the same time he was responsible for the production of some of the most original work executed in England during the Victorian era.

A forerunner in France of the modern movement in artistic jewellery, and one entitled to a high place in the history of the art, was the goldsmith Lucien Falize (b. 1838), who was a partner with M. Bapst, crown jeweller of the Second Empire. He succeeded Bapst as official goldsmith to the French Government, and died in 1897. Another great French jeweller was Eugène Fontenay, author of the important history of jewellery, who died in 1885.

Side by side with the improvement in taste which during the last few years has prompted people to preserve old jewellery, and a genuine love for its peculiar and indefinable attractions which has induced them to collect it, the present age has witnessed a truly remarkable revival in the artistic production of articles of personal ornament. The general awakening that has taken place in the industrial arts has nowhere made its influence more strongly felt than in respect to jewellery. Owing to the example set by the highest artistic spirits, which has affected even the ordinary productions of commerce, there has arisen a new school of jewellery, the residue of which, when the chaff of eccentricity on the one hand and coarse workmanship on the other is winnowed from it, consists in works which combine the charm and sense of appropriateness requisite to objects of personal adornment with qualities that mark them as individual works of art.

The ornaments of the past reveal an elemental truth of art which it may be to the ultimate advantage of the decorative artificer of modern times to study and to imitate. They show, particularly in their most refined periods, that the simplest materials and the simplest modes of decoration can be associated with beauty of form and purity of design, and that the value of a personal ornament does not consist solely in the commercial cost of the materials, but rather in the artistic quality of its treatment. In the revival of the arts in the latter part of the nineteenth century the artistic styles of the past began to be carefully studied, and for the first time were brought together and exhibited as models. They have undoubtedly exercised a profound influence both on design and technique. It is well at the same time to remember that personal ornaments, as indeed all productions of former times, which are thus shown in museums, must not be reckoned with from one standpoint only. The intention of their public display is to afford material for instruction, investigation, and inspiration, for the craftsman, the student, and the "man in the street." Their function in this respect is not only to produce artists and craftsmen, or even connoisseurs, but to inspire the lay public with a love of beauty, and to induce a divine discontent with the ugliness with which it is surrounded.

Though it is very well to use and reproduce the forms and motives of the past, an indefinite persistence in that attitude is liable to be construed as a confession of æsthetic sterility. But while empty revivals and false adaptations are to be rejected, the reckless race after originality, resulting in the eccentricity which is so rife in modern art, should especially be avoided. It is the desire for originality instead of a modest devotion to fine workmanship, "a love for the outrageous and the bizarre, and a lack of proportion, both in form and in choice of material," that has ruined much of the jewellery produced under the Nouveau Art movement.

If colour and form produced by a study of harmony and a limited appeal to nature could be united to elaboration and minuteness of finish, with symmetrical arrangements freed from purely mechanical detail of ornament; if more insight could be obtained into the spirit which produced those splendid fragments that have survived from the past, there would be a gradual return to a style of work wherein the inherent preciousness of material might be accompanied by a fuller appreciation of its artistic possibilities, and a way opened to the restoration of the art of the goldsmith to the honourable place it once held.

Apart from matters of design the new movement has resulted in great changes in the artistic aspect of jewellery. In distinction to the tendency hitherto prevalent which bids the metal mounting of jewellery to be rendered almost invisible, the working of gold and silver has once again become a matter of some moment. A second change, due to the study of old models, has been the revival of enamelling—an art which offers many an opportunity for the exercise of the craftsman's taste and skill, and has once again resumed its proper position as handmaid to the goldsmith. A third change has been the wider choice and employment of stones. Till recent years only those stones that are reckoned as fine—the diamond, ruby, emerald, and sapphire—have been allowed a place in jewellery. Though their commercial value can never be set aside, precious stones are now valued, as they were in Renaissance times, for the sake of their decorative properties. The taste for colour effects in jewellery has resulted in the adoption of certain gems not very precious, yet sufficiently rare, while the artistic value of broken colour in gems is beginning to be appreciated in purely commercial productions. There is now a welcome tendency to use such stones as the aquamarine, peridot, zircon, topaz, tourmaline, chrysoprase, and others of beautiful colour and high decorative value. For a precious stone, as has been truly said, "is not beautiful because it is large, or costly, or extraordinary, but because of its colour, or its position in some decorative scheme."

The present master of the jeweller's art is René Lalique of Paris, universally recognised as the greatest of modern artists in this class of the fine handicrafts. He possesses a perfect mastery over materials of all sorts, even of such as ivory, horn, and mother-of-pearl, and above all enamel, especially that in open settings. To his wonderful dexterity of technique he unites a fertile imagination and infinite resource of design in the direction of naturalistic forms, as flowers, winged insects, and human figures.

The style of Lalique, freed entirely as it is from the forms of tradition, is carried out by several artists of individual talent, such as Lucien Gaillard, Gaston Laffitte, Georges Fouquet, Comte du Suau de la Croix, Vever, René Foy, and Louis Bonny. It has, in addition, hosts of imitators, whose productions are wrought with rare skill, but display, nevertheless, singular disregard of appropriateness and utility, and are further marred in many cases by eccentricities of design.

Much original, if not always very attractive, work has been produced also in Germany and Austria since the full expansion of the Nouveau Art movement about the year 1897. Among the first in Germany to display activity in the design and production of jewellery in the new style have been the artists Hirzel and Möhring, and Piloty of Munich. Van der Velde, Olbrich, and Schaper and J. H. Werner of Berlin have all obtained a reputation for their work in this direction. The movement has been fostered with success in the leading art schools, under the superintendence of Gnauth at Nuremberg, Hammer and Göss at Karlsruhe, Graff at Stuttgart and Dresden, and Luthmer at Frankfort. The chief centres in Germany for the production of jewellery are Pforzheim, Hanau, and Gmünd. The leading craftsmen of Pforzheim are Zerrenden, Fahrner, Friessler, and Stoffler; while Gmünd possesses the well-known jeweller Hermann Bauer.

Messrs. Tiffany of New York have shown how artistic design may be combined with fine and rare gems—the natural instinct for which will have to be gratified so long as jewellery is worn. A number of other firms both in England and France have in recent years displayed remarkable advance in this direction, also, as in the case of Messrs. Boucheron, in a skilful combination of coloured stones, as well as in a reserved use of enamel.

A hopeful sign for the future of this refined art is the thoroughness with which it is taught in schools of art throughout the country, and the eagerness and success with which it is practised also by a number of gifted amateurs. The work produced, though far behind that of continental craftsmen in point of execution, avoids many of the extravagances of the "new art," and exhibits, for the most part, taste and reserve in design, and adaptability to ultimate uses.

CHAPTER XXXIV

This old peasant jewellery has at the present day nearly all passed out of the hands of its original owners. The chief cause of its disappearance has been increased facilities for travelling, which resulted in jewellery fashioned wholesale in industrial centres being distributed to the remotest rural districts. The demands of the modern collector, and improvements in present-day taste among certain of the cultured classes, which have led to the adoption of old articles of jewellery for personal use, have also contributed to the disappearance of peasant jewellery in recent years. The wiles of the dealer have induced peasants to yield up heirlooms, which, handed down for generations, have escaped the fate of the jewels of the wealthy and more fashionable. The great museums of art and industry springing up everywhere, especially in Germany, have all obtained a generous share of the spoil, and have preserved it from what, until lately, would have been inevitable destruction.

So completely in most parts has this old jewellery gone out of use among the peasantry, that hardly a trace remains of a once flourishing industry carried on by local craftsmen working on traditional lines, and untrammelled by the artistic fashion of the moment. Machines driven by steam power have crushed out of existence skill to make things by hand, and the cold and monotonous production of the artisan has taken the place of the old work, whose peculiarly attractive character is due to its expressing the fresh ideas and inspiration of the artist.

The French peasant jewel par excellence is the cross. It is suspended from the neck by a velvet ribbon, and varies in form according to localities. Its size is often in proportion to the social condition of the wearer. Sometimes it attains considerable dimensions. Fixed upon the velvet ribbon, and drawing it together just above the cross is a slide or coulant, in the form of a bow, rosette, or heart, and of the same style as the cross itself. In many provinces of France, such as Savoy, gold is reserved exclusively for married women—custom having it that all their jewels should be of that metal. Silver, on the other hand, is often employed solely for girls' jewellery, possibly because it is considered the natural symbol of virginal purity, just as in ancient times it was consecrated to the virgin goddess, Diana.