MINOR WORKS 
yet complete. For the modelling of the Orpheus 
is not all that could be desired, the legs of this 
figure in particular being awkward and constrained. 
The Eurydice is more successful, and is less hard 
and angular in treatment. But, as Liibke ob- 
served, the parallelism produced by the present- 
ation of the two forms in the act of turning lends 
a distinct harshness to the composition. For all 
that there is one quality present here which we 
have learnt to expect from this master. He has 
seized the dramatic moment when, in Vergil’s 
words, ‘‘ a sudden madness took hold of the un- 
wary lover,” and, “in his desire to behold her, he 
turned his eyes ” upon his half-regained Eurydice. 
But he could not hold her safe * within the bond 
of one immortal look.” Just as she emerges from 
the rocks of the underworld he yields to this desire 
and turns. And as he turns and looks she stops 
and begins, under the constraint of the inexorable 
law of Proserpine, to be drawn back to the shades 
whence she came. Into her face there has come 
a look of sorrow and sad reproach, whilst the 
movement of her hands and head and hair betoken 
the beginning of that inevitable return. With the 
gesture of her left hand Eurydice seems almost to 
utter the lines of Vergil : 
“Quis et me miseram et te perdidit, Orpheu, Quis tantus furor ? 
Jamque vale—!” 
The other version of this same subject to which 
Peter Vischer the younger returned apparently in 
o1