This short analysis of Botticelli's elemental principle will not have been found out of place, we trust, if it has established what we must look for in every work bearing his name that can claim to be authentic. No matter what its types, qualities, or faults, if it has Botticelli's line, it is a genuine work, and consequently the picture which lacks this line is not genuine, but merely a school-picture, imitation, or copy -- precisely which to be determined by its relation to the master's line. Dr. Ulmann never so much as hints at the existence of this quality of line, and, as it is the only adequate test, it is no wonder that his conclusions with regard to the genuineness of pictures ascribed to Botticelli are without great value. To discuss them in detail would take a volume, and scarcely be of interest to anyone. Suffice it to say, that he leaves out of count any works which are probably authentic; accepts a number of crude imitations, such as the lady with the horse-tail coiffure at Frankfurt; and adds a number of works that, like the Madonna in the Uffizi, which he christens Madonna of the Clouds, have nothing in common with Botticelli, and would be an insult to the reputation of even a tenth-rate artist.