Was Edward Burne-Jones a Great Religious Painter?

IntroductionThis essay will discuss the extent to which the religious paintings of Edward Burne-Jones influenced the critical public reception of his work. The fortunes of the Pre-Raphaelites have fluctuated over time, their painting style initially received considerable criticism and some of their religious paintings were regarded as scandalous in the mid-19th century. Millais, Rossetti and Burne-Jones were all criticized for their depictions of religious scenes, yet in 1901 an article in The Sunday Strand described Burne-Jones as one of the “great religious painters of the world” (Crossman 2015).

I was intrigued by this marked change over a relatively short period and wanted to investigate how it may have come about. I decided to find out the impact that the religious paintings of Burne-Jones may have had on the critical reception of his work.

When considering the initial reception to Pre-Raphaelite paintings one should also consider how important religion was at the time. I think it is fair to say that Victorian audiences were used to seeing the holy family portrayed in a very respectful if not revered fashion. How did Burne-Jones approach the portrayal of religious subjects? I will investigate this by looking in detail at one of his versions of The Annunciation and will compare his approach to the subject with that of his one-time mentor Dante Gabriel Rossetti. I will then assess Burne-Jones’ vast watercolour The Star of Bethlehem comparing the critical reception this received with his earlier paintings. Finally, I will investigate the role that religious belief may have played in the critical assessment and public reception of art.

The AnnunciationThis is a very vertical image and the positioning of the main figures emphasises this, as does the tall but narrow archway behind Mary. The Angel and Mary are, respectively, placed on the left and right thirds of the painting. The wings and drapery of the Angel’s robe have been rendered in the most intricate detail.

The Angel hovers above the ground, hands held slightly in front, and looks down. This not only places the Angel higher than Mary but also forces the viewer to look up to see Gabriel’s face, perhaps symbolising the position of God and religion above all. Gold has been applied around the Angel’s head to represent a halo and feet. Mann (2014 p664) notes how this painting “sparkles with metallic highlights”.

Mary adopts a somewhat awkward pose, her right knee slightly bent forward beneath her dress, her left hand pulling her dress towards her hip. This has the effect of straightening the material in front of her right thigh and drawing the viewer’s attention to this area of her anatomy. It seems significant to me that

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 1 | 10

The Annunciation, 1879, oil on canvas, 2498x1044mm, Lady Lever Art Gallery - Liverpool

this part of the painting is placed on the lower right third of the image. With the Angel looking down, this may be Burne-Jones’ way of signifying the conception as well as the annunciation.

The colours of the painting are muted, as noted by de Lisle (1906 p120) “The colouring is very much more subdued than in previous works”. The Angel is rather androgynous with a beneficent expression, while Mary appears somewhat bemused by the scene; there is little interaction between the two and no sense of movement in the image.

Burne-Jones received mixed critical reviews for this painting. Walker (2015) quotes from adverse reviews published at the time. “The Annunciation must certainly be considered a failure” and “faulty in the highest degree”. One review was concerned with what it saw as the miserable expressions on the faces of the Angel and “could not believe anyone would choose to show the Virgin Mary like that”. Wedmore (1880 p205-6) wrote “a troubled mind in worn and weary vesture of the flesh is that with which we are most familiar through the art of Mr. Burne-Jones”.

Casteras (1992 p144) describes how “Pre-Raphaelitism was attacked on various grounds during its early years, and one of its areas of greatest vulnerability was its flouting of prevailing standards of beauty and decorum”. It seems to me that the critical responses were harsh not just for this reason. They were particularly harsh because the people represented in a biblical event were portrayed in a way that was perceived as non-reverential and inappropriate.

To me this appears a typical Burne-Jones painting with slender, androgynous figures painted in somewhat muted colours and in a classical or medieval setting.

It is worth, at this point, comparing Burne-Jones’ treatment of the subject with that of his one-time mentor, Dante Gabriel Rossetti.

Ecce Ancilla Domine! Dating from 1849-50 Rossetti’s painting of The Annunciation was strikingly different from almost any previous portrayal of the subject. Instead of fully clothed, older and standing or depicted at prayer, Rossetti shows Mary as a young girl cowering on her bed, a rather haunted look on her face and seemingly afraid to look at the Angel that has appeared before her. The Angel has no wings but his status is denoted by the flames at his heels and his halo. He stares straight at Mary, a dominant pose in relation to the young girl. He wears a white robe which is split at the side revealing his body beneath. The predominant colour of the painting is white and the perspective of the scene has been flattened, together these have the effect of giving a very cramped, oppressive sense to the picture.

By placing Mary’s face on the upper right third of the painting Rossetti is immediately drawing the viewer’s attention to this aspect. The lily held in the Angel’s right hand forms a strong diagonal line pointing at Mary’s womb, a point made by several

writers. This line is emphasised by Mary’s gaze which seems transfixed on the Lily.

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 2 | 10

Ecce Ancilla Domini! (The Annunciation), 1849–50, oil on canvas, 724x419mm, Tate Britain

Rossetti has included several symbols within the painting including the lily and the dove, but to me the most striking aspect of the painting is the portrayal of Mary as a young girl looking shocked, possibly even distraught at what is happening. Doan (1988 p479) considers “Her face registers bewildered apprehension and her body recoils in fear, an unorthodox reaction to say the least”. Pollitt (ND) writes that many artists had tried to portray Mary’s fear and apprehension but “none had treated as explicitly as Rossetti does here the psychosexual nature of the Virgin's anxiety”.

For a Victorian audience, this must have been a shocking depiction of a scene normally presented in a sedate even reverential fashion. Doan (1988 p479) writes “the almost complete avoidance of a more religious, ethereal response, may account in part for the work’s hostile reception”. Maas (1988 p127) refers to the criticism of early Pre-Raphaelite religious paintings, “what they mainly objected to was realism in a sacred setting”. Roe (ND) writes on the British Library website that, together with Millais’ Christ in the House of His Parents, Rossetti’s painting “shocked critics with a hyper-realism perceived to be at odds with the sacred events portrayed”.

Comparing Ecce Ancilla Domine! with Burne Jones’ The Annunciation, it seems to me that the portrayal of emotion by Rossetti is replaced by a depiction of the beauty of the scene by Burne-Jones. With Ecce Ancilla Domine! I felt as though I was witnessing a dramatic moment in time, with shock and emotion to the forefront. With The Annunciation, it felt more like a calm viewing of the wonder of a timeless moment. The Liverpool Museums website (Artwork highlights - 'The Annunciation') describes Burne-Jones’ aim in this painting as “poetic and spiritual in that we are expected to contemplate the news of the arrival of the saviour and feel the mystery of the divine union with human beings”.

Although Burne-Jones received some adverse criticism for his portrayal of The Annunciation, it does not seem anything like as harsh as that received by Rossetti. I think that the difference between the two paintings reflects the style of the two artists and is best summarised by John Christian in (Parris 1984b, p202) when, talking of Burne-Jones, he states “from the beginning he had shown a tendency to think in terms of simple narrative and static, elegant forms which was quite unlike the dramatic, psychological approach of Rossetti”. Parris (1984a, p16) writes “there is no true religious or mystical feeling in Rossetti”, whereas, according to Mancoff (1998 p93) Burne-Jones viewed the biblical world as “a wondrous realm, a spiritual mythology based on mystery rather than theology”.

Following the criticism received, Rossetti did not attempt a further religious painting. Burne-Jones’ reputation survived the critical assault and he was not deterred from painting further religious scenes.

The Star of BethlehemMacCarthy (2011 p388) describes how, 8 years after exhibiting The Annunciation, Burne-Jones was approached by the City of Birmingham to paint a large-scale work for the Museum and Art Gallery. In the previous year, he had produced a tapestry The Adoration of the Magi for Exeter College, Oxford and he now agreed to paint a large scale colour version of this for the Birmingham Gallery.

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 3 | 10

This painting too is a very ‘vertical’ image – the characters are tall and slender, the poles of the shelter and the trees in the background all contribute to this effect. The composition is balanced with three figures on either side of the centrally placed angel. Mary and Jesus are placed precisely on the left third vertical which emphasises their importance, as does the

sense of light surrounding them. It is also a scene of contrasts with the, richly embroidered, fine clothes of the Kings opposing the very plain garments of Joseph and Mary. The obvious wealth of the Kings contrasts with the portrayed humble background of Jesus Christ.

The scene has been painted in immense detail, from the intricately decorated clothing of the Kings to the detail of the wall of the shelter where Mary and Jesus sit. The flowers in the foreground are shown in detail but the rear trees and the background in far less detail.

The Kings appear to give their attention to the baby Jesus, whereas both Joseph and Mary look

down at the ground. Jesus, naked and vulnerable, looks at the crown on the ground and clutches at His mother’s clothes. This is a painting where aesthetic beauty takes precedence over the realism of the scene.

Mancoff in (Royal Academy of Arts [Great Britain], 2003, p63) considers that the painting “evoked a still and reverent world, distant from mundane reality, where wealthy kings bowed in deference to a Holy Child”. MacCarthy (2011 p389) states that “Far from being a straightforward Christian interpretation, the composition is imbued, as the Art Journal was to comment, with Burne-Jones’ own peculiar vein of mysticism”.

The Star of Bethlehem had a very different critical reception to The Annunciation and Ecce Ancilla Domine! MacCarthy (2011 p390) writes that it “was given reverential treatment when permanently installed in the city gallery”. Wildman & Christian (1998 p295) describe how, when it was first exhibited, viewers were “deeply impressed by this new icon of British religious art, not only for its sumptuous color and unusual gravitas, but also for its exceptionally spiritual quality”.

Reaction to Burne-Jones Religious WorksBy transposing the settings of many of his paintings to medieval times and highlighting the aestheticism as opposed to the realism of the scene, Burne-Jones was not so exposed to the harsh criticism other Pre-Raphaelite painters received for their depictions of religious events. His

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 4 | 10

The Star of Bethlehem, 1887-91, 2560x3868mm, watercolour & bodycolour on paper, Birmingham Museum & Art Gallery

increasing fame in the period between the painting of The Annunciation and The Star of Bethlehem may also have been due to the regard in which his work was held by religious writers.

Crossman (2007 p223) believes that Burne-Jones “had the unusual advantage of reaching at least two distinct publics during his lifetime—the cult of aestheticism which grew up around the Grosvenor Gallery and religious viewers, who appreciated his art for its perceived sacred content”. She has also investigated the relationship between the religious paintings of Burne-Jones and how they were viewed in his later career. She looked at how his paintings were received by the clergy and in religious periodicals (as opposed to art magazines). She states (Crossman 2015) that “Clergy and authors contributing to religious journals, then, approached Burne-Jones in ways that were different to other kinds of art writing, since their primary concern was the moral edification and spiritual life of their readers. Their responses focused on the artist’s faith and his work’s religious significance rather than solely the formal and artistic qualities of his work”. As an example of this Phythian (1908 p101) analyses The Star of Bethlehem and considers that it “makes the legendary scene a forecast of the growth of Christianity”.

Boase (1966, p366) talks of Burne-Jones’ ability to “create a mythical world of his own that impressed itself upon popular imagination”. Rod (1888 p181) described the Burne-Jones’ religious works as “very far removed from the sermonizing art of Holman Hunt” and “religious art in the sense that it is more transcendental than picturesque”. Weir (1898 p6) believed “Some of his most beautiful pictures are scenes from the Old Testament and from the life of Christ”.

It may also be important to recognize the number of stained glass designs produced by Burne-Jones and their installation, predominantly in places of worship. Crawford in (Wildman & Christian 1998 p12) describes how from 1872-78 Burne-Jones produced “more than 270 cartoons for stained glass”. His stained-glass designs were installed in important religious settings, such as St Philips Cathedral, Birmingham; with The Last Judgement installed in 1897. MacCarthy (2011 p472) believes that the St Philips’ windows “heralded a new evolution of stained glass as an art form in the coming century. Crossman (2007 p145) describes Burne-Jones as an “ecclesiastical designer” referring to his paintings for altars and chancels as well as stained glass designs.

It is hardly surprising, then, that Burne-Jones’ paintings were used by writers who were just as concerned with the religious significance of the portrayal as with the artistic merit. This would, surely, have widened the audience and interest in Burne-Jones’ work and added to his fame. The widespread public interest in religious paintings did not appeal to all of the art writers at the time , in a chapter titled Religiosity in Art Moore (1893 p178) contended “It is a matter for wonder that more artists do not devote themselves to painting religious subjects. There seems to be an almost limitless demand for work of this kind, and almost any amount of praise for it, no matter how badly it is executed”.

Interestingly Crossman (2005 p275) found that “Perhaps the most common and remarkable thread throughout the religious literature on Burne-Jones is a consistent assertion that his mythological, classical, or medieval subjects resonated with as much Christian meaning as his biblical paintings or stained-glass windows”. She found religious interpretations of The Golden Stairs and The Wheel of Fortune.

It would seem that Burne-Jones’ style of painting, the aestheticism and mysticism, was just as important to its reception by both artistic and religious critics.

ConclusionThe evidence suggests that the use of Burne-Jones religious imagery by the clergy and in religious publications at the turn of the century enhanced the reputation of the artist. The adverse criticism

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 5 | 10

given in the 1880’s to paintings such as The Annunciation gave way in the later part of the century to critical acclaim from both artistic and religious authorities. Claude Philips is quoted in (Masters In Art: Burne-Jones, 1901) that The Annunciation was “The picture on which Burne-Jones’ claims as a worker in the domain of sacred art chiefly rest”.

The decline in religious beliefs during the 20th-century has been well documented (see Gill, Hadaway and Marler, 1998; Crockett and Voas 2006). Following the First World War the reputation of Victorian painting, including the Pre-Raphaelites went into steep decline. This may have been due more to the dismissal of Victorian painting generally than to any connection with religion. There is no evidential link between the decline in both religious belief and Burne-Jones’ critical reception. Equally there is no evidence to suggest that religion played any part in the revival of interest in the Pre-Raphaelites in the later part of the 20th century.

Was Edward Burne-Jones a great religious painter? He was certainly regarded as such by many at the turn of the century, to the extent that religious interpretations were placed on many of his paintings, not just those illustrating biblical scenes. This would seem to have enhanced his reputation as an artist, appealing as he did to two distinct audiences. Bradford (1902 p13) believed that “Among modern painters no one has achieved a more enduring or splendid fame than Sir Edward Burne-Jones, whose work bids fair to be the glory of England”.

Many late 20th and 21st century books and articles refer to his skill as an artist, describing him as a “figure of enormous influence” (Christian et al 1989 p79), but, I have found none that refer to him as a religious painter. Perhaps the decline in religious beliefs over the past 100 years makes the question less important or relevant than it once was. Or perhaps most people now simply admire the skill of the artist without attaching religious connotations to his achievements.

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 6 | 10

BibliographyANON., 1885. Burne-Jones As A Decorator. The Art Amateur, 14(1), pp. 6-6.

ARNSTEIN, W., BRIGHT, M., PETERSON, L. and TEMPERLEY, N., 1989. Recent Studies in Victorian Religion. Victorian Studies, 33(1), pp. 149-175.

Artwork highlights - 'The Annunciation' 1876-79, by Edward Burne-Jones (1833-1898). Available: http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/picture-of-month/displaypicture.aspx?id=14 [Accessed 20/8/2016]

BARRINGER, T.J., 2012. Reading the Pre-Raphaelites. Rev. edn. New Haven, Conn.; London: Yale University Press.

BARRINGER, T.J., ROSENFELD, J., SMITH, A., PRETTEJOHN, E., WAGGONER, D., NATIONAL GALLERY OF ART, TATE BRITAIN and GOSUDARSTVENNYI MUZEI IZOBRAZITELʹNYKH ISKUSSTV IMENI A.S. PUSHKINA, 2012. Pre-Raphaelites: Victorian Avant Garde. New Haven Conn.; London: Yale University Press.

BIRCHALL, H., 2016. Pre-Raphaelites. Koln: Taschen.

BIRMINGHAM MUSEUM AND ART GALLERY, [Homepage of Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery], [Online]. Available: http://www.birminghammuseums.org.uk/bmag/highlights/the-pre-raphaelites [Accessed 30/11/2016].

BOASE, T.S.R., 1966. Biblical Illustration in Nineteenth-Century English Art. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 29, pp. 349-367.

BRADFORD, A., 1902. Messages of the masters; spiritual interpretations of great paintings. New York: Crowell.

BULLEN, J.B., 1998. The pre-Raphaelite body: fear and desire in painting, poetry, and criticism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

BURROUGHS, B., 1935. 1935 VIEWS THE PRE-RAPHAELITES. The American Magazine of Art, 28(1), pp. 6-13.

BURROUGHS, B., 1947. A Modern View of the Pre-Raphaelites. The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, 5(9), pp. 229-233.

CASTERAS, S.P., 1992. Pre-Raphaelite Challenges to Victorian Canons of Beauty. Huntington Library Quarterly, 55(1), pp. 13-35.

CHILVERS, I., 2009. The Oxford dictionary of art and artists. 4th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

CHRISTIAN, J., STEVENS, M.A., HOOLE, J., DELANEY, J.G.P., ERRINGTON, L., READ, B., POWERS, A., JENKINS, D.F. and BARBICAN ART GALLERY, 1989. The Last Romantics: the romantic tradition in British art, Burne-Jones to Stanley Spencer. London: Lund Humphries in association with the Barbican Art Gallery.

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 7 | 10

CROCKETT, A. and VOAS, D., 2006. Generations of Decline: Religious Change in 20th-Century Britain. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 45(4), pp. 567-584.

CROSSMAN, C., 2007. Art as lived religion: Edward Burne-jones as a painter, priest, pilgrim and monk. Available: http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/handle/1903/6825/umi-umd-4313.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y [Accessed 16/12/2015]

CROSSMAN, C., 2015. Seeing the Sacred: Burne-Jones’s Reception as a ‘Great Religious Painter’ [Homepage of Nineteenth-Century Art Worldwide, Vol. 14, No. 2 (Summer 2015)], [Online]. Available: http://www.19thc-artworldwide.org/summer15/crossman-on-burne-jones-s-reception-as-a-great-religious-painter [Accessed 20/12/2015]

CRUISE, C., 2004. 'Sincerity and Earnestness': D. G. Rossetti's Early Exhibitions 1849-53. The Burlington Magazine, 146(1210), pp. 4-12.

CRUISE, C., 2010. 'Sick-sad dreams': Burne-Jones and Pre-Raphaelite Medievalism. The Yearbook of English Studies, 40(1), pp. 121-140.

CRUISE, C., BIRMINGHAM CITY MUSEUM AND ART GALLERY and ART GALLERY OF NEW SOUTH WALES, 2011. Pre-Raphaelite drawing. London: Thames & Hudson.

DE LISLE, F., 1906. Burne-Jones ... With forty-one illustrations ... Second edition (revised). London: Methuen & Co.

DOAN, L.L., 1988. NARRATIVITY AND TRANSFORMATIVE ICONOGRAPHY IN D.G. ROSSETTI'S EARLIEST PAINTINGS. Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 71(4), pp. 471-483.

DONNELLY, B., 2010. Sonnet—Image—Intertext: Reading Rossetti's "The Girlhood of Mary Virgin" and "Found". Victorian Poetry, 48(4), pp. 475-488.

Ecce Ancilla Domini! Available: http://www.rossettiarchive.org/docs/s44.rap.html [Accessed 19/8/2016]

Edward Burne-Jones, The Star of Bethlehem | English for art historians. Available: http://arthistoryinenglish.edublogs.org/painting/xixth-century-painting/edward-burne-jones-the-star-of-bethlehem/ [Accessed 20/8/2016]

FORTY, S., 1997. The Pre-Raphaelites. New York: Barnes and Noble.

FOWLE, F., 2000-last update, 'Ecce Ancilla Domini! (The Annunciation)', Dante Gabriel Rossetti: Summary | | Tate . Available: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/rossetti-ecce-ancilla-domini-the-annunciation-n01210/text-summary [Accessed 19/8/2016]

GAUNT, W., 1988. The Pre-Raphaelite tragedy. Rev. edn. London: Cardinal.

GILL, R., HADAWAY, C.K. and MARLER, P.L., 1998. Is Religious Belief Declining in Britain? Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37(3), pp. 507-516.

GOMBRICH, E.H., 1989. The story of art. 15th edn. Oxford: Phaidon.

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 8 | 10

GRIEVE, A., 1969. The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and the Anglican High Church. The Burlington Magazine, 111(794), pp. 294-292.

GRIEVE, A., 1973. The Applied Art of D. G. Rossetti-I. His Picture-Frames. The Burlington Magazine, 115(838), pp. 16-24.

HAWKSLEY, L., 1999. Essential Pre-Raphaelites. Bath: Parragon.

HOFFMANN, E., 1972. Burne-Jones and the Pre-Raphaelite Influence, in Paris. The Burlington Magazine, 114(830), pp. 354-357.

KESTNER, J., 1984. Edward Burne-Jones and Nineteenth-Century Fear of Women. Biography, 7(2), pp. 95-122.

MAAS, J., 1988. Victorian painters. London: Barrie & Jenkins.

MACCARTHY, F., 2011. The last Pre-Raphaelite: Edward Burne-Jones and the Victorian imagination. London: Faber.

MANCOFF, D.N., 1998. Burne-Jones. San Francisco: Pomegranate.

MANN, F., 2014. A ‘born rebel’: Edward Burne-Jones and watercolour painting 1857–80. The Burlington Magazine, 156(1339 (October 2014)), pp. 657-664.

MARSH, J. and NATIONAL PORTRAIT GALLERY (GREAT BRITAIN), 2005. The Pre-Raphaelite circle. London: National Portrait Gallery.

MASTERS IN ART: BURNE-JONES, 1901. Part 19, Vol 2, July 1901. Boston, Mass: Bates & Guild Co.

MITCHELL, P. and ROBERTS, L., 2000. Burne-Jones's Picture Frames. The Burlington Magazine, 142(1167), pp. 362-370.

MOORE, G., 1893. Modern Painting. New York: Scribner.

NEWMAN, A., 2004. Drastic Innovations on a Traditional Theme: Rossetti's "Ecce Ancilla Domini". Available: http://www.victorianweb.org/painting/dgr/paintings/newman4.html [Accessed 19/8/2016]

PARRIS, L., 1984a. The Pre-Raphaelites. London: Tate Gallery.

PARRIS, L., 1984b. The Pre-Raphaelite Papers. London: Tate Gallery/Allen Lane.

PHYTHIAN, J.E., 1908. Burne-Jones ... With thirty-two illustrations. London: Grant Richards.

POLLITT, B., Rossetti: Ecce Ancilla Domine [Homepage of Khan Academy], [Online]. Available: https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/becoming-modern/victorian-art-architecture/pre-raphaelites/a/rossetti-ecce-ancilla-domini [Accessed 18/8/2016]

POULSON, C., Burne-Jones, Morris, and God [Homepage of The Morris Society], [Online]. Available: http://www.morrissociety.org/publications/JWMS/AU98.13.1.Poulson.pdf [Accessed 04/02/2016]

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 9 | 10

PRETTEJOHN, E., 2000. The art of the pre-Raphaelites. London: Tate Publishing.

PRETTEJOHN, E. (Ed), 2012. The Cambridge companion to the Pre-Raphaelites. Cambridge England ; New York: Cambridge University Press.

ROD, E., 1888. The English Pre-Raphaelites. The Connoisseur, 2(4), pp. 175-187.

ROE, D., The Pre-Raphaelites [Homepage of British Library], [Online]. Available: http://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/the-pre-raphaelites [Accessed 25/07/2016]

ROSENFELD, J., 2012. Pre-Raphaelites. London: Tate.

ROYAL ACADEMY OF ARTS (GREAT BRITAIN), 2003. Pre-Raphaelite and other masters: The Andrew Lloyd Webber Collection. London: Royal Academy of Arts.

STALEY, A., NEWALL, C., SMITH, A., WARRELL, I., BATCHELOR, T., TATE BRITAIN, FUNDACIÓN "LA CAIXA" and ALTE NATIONALGALERIE, 2004. Pre-Raphaelite vision: truth to nature. London: Tate.

SUSSMAN, H., 1980. The Pre-Raphaelites and the "Mood of the Cloister". Browning Institute Studies, 8, pp. 45-55.

UPSTONE, R., 1999. Burne-Jones. Birmingham and Paris. The Burlington Magazine, 141(1150), pp. 50-52.

WALKER, K.S., 2015, The Kissed Mouth: The Scandalous Spring of 'Seventy Nine... . Available: http://fannycornforth.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/the-scandalous-spring-of-seventy-nine.html [Accessed 20/8/2016]

WEDMORE, F., 1880. Studies in English Art. Second series. London: R. Bentley and son.

WEIR, I., c1898. Great Artists Series; Burne-Jones. Boston: Perry Pictures Co.

WILDMAN, S., and CHRISTIAN, J., Eds. 1998. Edward Burne-Jones: Victorian artist-dreamer (Exhibition). New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art.

WILTON, A., UPSTONE, R., BRYANT, B., ROSSETTI, D.G., BURNE-JONES, E.C., WATTS, G.F., TATE GALLERY, HAUS DER KUNST MÜNCHEN and VAN GOGH MUSEUM, A., 1997. The Age of Rossetti, Burne-Jones & Watts: symbolism in Britain, 1860-1910. London: Tate Gallery Publications.

WOOD, C., 1998. Burne-Jones: the life and works of Sir Edward Burne-Jones (1833-1898). London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

R o b e r t C o e S t u d e n t N o : 5 0 7 1 4 0 H i s t o r y o f A r t 2 P a g e 10 | 10