subject at Varallo； and there is no resemblance between the Saas
chapel and that by D'Enrico。 The figures are no doubt approximately
in their original positions； but I have no confidence that I have
rearranged them correctly。 They were in such confusion when I first
saw them that the Rev。 E。 J。 Selwyn and myself determined to
rearrange them。 They have doubtless been shifted more than once
since Tabachetti left them。 The sleeping figures are all good。 St。
James is perhaps a little prosaic。 One Roman soldier who is coming
into the garden with a lantern； and motioning silence with his hand；
does duty for the others that are to follow him。 I should think
more than one of these figures is actually carved in wood by
Tabachetti； allowance being made for the fact that he was working in
a material with which he was not familiar； and which no sculptor of
the highest rank has ever found congenial。
7。 The Flagellation。 Tabachetti has a chapel with this subject at
Varallo； and the Saas group is obviously a descent with modification
from his work there。 The figure of Christ is so like the one at
Varallo that I think it must have been carved by Tabachetti himself。
The man with the hooked nose； who at Varallo is stooping to bind his
rods； is here upright： it was probably the intention to emphasise
him in the succeeding scenes as well as this； in the same way as he
has been emphasised at Varallo； but his nose got pared down in the
cutting of later scenes； and could not easily be added to。 The man
binding Christ to the column at Varallo is repeated （longo
intervallo） here； and the whole work is one inspired by that at
Varallo； though no single figure except that of the Christ is
adhered to with any very great closeness。 I think the nearer
malefactor； with a goitre； and wearing a large black hat； is either
an addition of the year 1709； or was done by the journeyman of the
local sculptor who carved the greater number of the figures。 The
man stooping down to bind his rods can hardly be by the same hand as
either of the two black…hatted malefactors； but it is impossible to
speak with certainty。 The general effect of the chapel is
excellent； if we consider the material in which it is executed； and
the rudeness of the audience to whom it addresses itself。
8。 The Crowning with Thorns。 Here again the inspiration is derived
from Tabachetti's Crowning with Thorns at Varallo。 The Christs in
the two chapels are strikingly alike； and the general effect is that
of a residuary impression left in the mind of one who had known the
Varallo Flagellation exceedingly well。
9。 Sta。 Veronica。 This and the next succeeding chapels are the
most important of the series。 Tabachetti's Journey to Calvary at
Varallo is again the source from which the present work was taken；
but； as I have already said； it has been modified in reproduction。
Mount Calvary is still shown； as at Varallo； towards the left…hand
corner of the work； but at Saas it is more towards the middle than
at Varallo； so that horsemen and soldiers may be seen coming up
behind ita stroke that deserves the name of genius none the less
for the manifest imperfection with which it has been carried into
execution。 There are only three horses fully shown； and one partly
shown。 They are all of the heavy Flemish type adopted by Tabachetti
at Varallo。 The man kicking the fallen Christ and the goitred man
（with the same teeth missing）； who are so conspicuous in the Varallo
Journey to Calvary； reappear here； only the kicking man has much
less nose than at Varallo； probably because （as explained） the nose
got whittled away and could not be whittled back again。 I observe
that the kind of lapelled tunic which Tabachetti； and only
Tabachetti； adopts at Varallo； is adopted for the centurion in this
chapel； and indeed throughout the Saas chapels this particular form
of tunic is the most usual for a Roman soldier。 The work is still a
very striking one； notwithstanding its translation into wood and the
decay into which it has been allowed to fall； nor can it fail to
impress the visitor who is familiar with this class of art as coming
from a man of extraordinary dramatic power and command over the
almost impossible art of composing many figures together effectively
in all…round sculpture。 Whether all the figures are even now as
Tabachetti left them I cannot determine； but Mr。 Selwyn has restored
Simon the Cyrenian to the position in which he obviously ought to
stand； and between us we have got the chapel into something more
like order。
10。 The Crucifixion。 This subject was treated at Varallo not by
Tabachetti but by Gaudenzio Ferrari。 It confirms therefore my
opinion as to the designer of the Saas chapels to find in them no
trace of the Varallo Crucifixion； while the kind of tunic which at
Varallo is only found in chapels wherein Tabachetti worked again
appears here。 The work is in a deplorable state of decay。 Mr。
Selwyn has greatly improved the arrangement of the figures； but even
now they are not； I imagine； quite as Tabachetti left them。 The
figure of Christ is greatly better in technical execution than that
of either of the two thieves； the folds of the drapery alone will
show this even to an unpractised eye。 I do not think there can be a
doubt but that Tabachetti cut this figure himself； as also those of
the Magdalene and St。 John； who stand at the foot of the cross。 The
thieves are coarsely executed； with no very obvious distinction
between the penitent and the impenitent one； except that there is a
fiend painted on the ceiling over the impenitent thief。 The one
horse introduced into the composition is again of the heavy Flemish
type adopted by Tabachetti at Varallo。 There is great difference in
the care with which the folds on the several draperies have been
cut； some being stiff and poor enough； while others are done very
sufficiently。 In spite of smallness of scale； ignoble material；
disarrangement and decay； the work is still striking。
11。 The Resurrection。 There being no chapel at Varallo with any of
the remaining subjects treated at Saas； the sculptor has struck out
a line for himself。 The Christ in the Resurrection Chapel is a
carefully modelled figure； and if better painted might not be
ineffective。 Three soldiers； one sleeping； alone remain。 There
were probably other figures that have been lost。 The sleeping
soldier is very pleasing。
12。 The Ascension is not remarkably interesting； the Christ appears
to be； but perhaps is not； a much more modern figure than the rest。
18。 The Descent of the Holy Ghost。 Some of the figures along the
end wall are very good； and were； I should imagine； cut by
Tabachetti himself。 Those against the two side walls are not so
well cut。
14。 The Assumption of the Virgin Mary。 The two large cherubs here
are obviously by a later hand； and the small ones are not good。 The
figure of the Virgin herself is unexceptionable。 There were
doubtless once other figures of the Apostles which have disappeared；
of these a single St。 Peter （？）； so hidden away in a corner near the
window that it can only be seen with difficulty； is the sole
survivor。
15。 The Coronation of the Virgin is of later date； and has probably
superseded an earlier work。 It can hardly be by the designer of the
other chapels of the series。 Perhaps Tabachetti had to leave for
Crea before all the chapels at Saas were finished。
Lastly； we have the larger chapel dedicated to St。 Mary； which
crowns the series。 Here there is nothing of more than common
artistic interest； unless we except the stone altar mentioned in
Ruppen's chronicle。 This is of course classical in style； and is； I
should think； very good。
Once more I must caution the reader against expecting to find
highly…finished gems of art in the chapels I have been describing。
A wooden figure not more than two feet high clogged with many coats
of paint can hardly claim to be taken very seriously； and even those
few that were cut by Tabachetti himself were not meant to have
attention concentrated on themselves alone。 As mere wood…carving
the Saas…Fee chapels will not stand comparison； for example； with
the triptych of unknown authorship in the Church of St。 Anne at
Gliss； close to Brieg。 But； in the first place； the work at Gliss
is worthy of Holbein himself： I know no wood…carving that can so
rivet the attention； moreover it is coloured with water…colour and
not oil； so that it is tinted； not painted； and； in the second
place； the Gliss triptych belongs to a date （1519） when artists held
neither time nor impressionism as objects； and hence； though greatly
better than the Saas…Fee chapels as regards a certain Japanese
curiousness of finish and naivete of literal transcription； it
cannot even enter the lists with the Saas work as regards elan and
dramatic effectiveness。 The difference between the two classes of
work is much that between； say； John Van Eyck or Memling and Rubens
or Rembrandt； or； again； between Giovanni Bellini and Tintoretto；
the aims of the one class of work are incompatible with those of the
other。 Moreover； in the Gliss triptych the intention of the
designer