^c . — 5 ^ ^ , ^*2, * £f 'srspie^ovr i rijv (rc “j«.aTJ ; $£>s yoip svTog ^U^r r — Plutarch. Horn. Qycest. 72. es-iv PREFACE. As these disquisitions were not originally intended for the public eye, the writer, several years ago, was induced to limit an im- pression of them to a small number of copies, that he might have the pleasure of placing them in the hands of a learned few, for whom he entertained a particular affection or respect, and whom he knew to be conversant with, or interested in, the subject of his enquiry. While the book was confined to this circle, he felt the less pain when he subsequently discovered its many imper- fections, but he soon found with considerable regret, that by this attempt at privacy, he had unintentionally stamped a price upon it that was greatly beyond its merits. He has long wished to correct this unfair estimate of its value ; and as many new dis- coveries (if he may dare to term them such) have presented themselves in the course of his further reading and reflection, he now lays his disquisitions before the public, revised, and some- what enlarged ; aware, however, that, in adding to the contents of his work, he will have increased the occasion he had for the reader’s indulgence. He apprehends that few, since the time of D’Hancarville, have been disposed to regard the embellishments of these vases as fair specimens of the art of painting among the Greeks. Ne- vertheless, he will venture to repeat on this occasion, an observ- VI PREFACE. ation with which he had prefaced the former impression of his work, as an answer to any who may still be found to advocate this opinion. In this work he has advanced an original supposition, and as he conceives upon very sufficient grounds, that the paintings upon the Greek vases were copied from transparencies. Should this be denied, it will nevertheless be evident, that D’Hancarville was not justified in reasoning upon the art from the paintings upon Greek vases ; for we must admit, that unless better speci- mens existed at the same early times, upon wood, or canvas, or in fresco, the art of painting in Greece was very far behind that of sculpture, and by no means entitled to high encomium, which would involve a contradiction to many high authorities, and it would follow, that the Greek painters were very deficient in com- position* and colouring, at the same time that we acknowledge they excelled in character and design. f If, on the other hand, it be credible, that very skilful Greek artists were engaged in the * Either the ground or the figures in these paintings being illumined, it be- came necessary that the latter should be detached as much as possible from each other, to prevent confusion. Hence the difficulty of grouping, otherwise than by placing the figures upon different- elevations in the picture. A most valuable am- phora, formerly in the possession of William Chinneryj and now in that of Thomas Hope, Esq. is a notable instance. This vase is well known from the subject of the painting, usually termed the death of Patroclus. It presents a complicated group of figures designed with great spirit. These are placed, not on the same plane, but on three tiers or stages, in defiance of the rules of perspective. f This excellence may be particularly instanced in a lettered Campana vase of the late James Edwards, Esq., the subject of which is the mysterious descent of The- seus accompanied by Castor and Tydeus, to bring back Acteeon from the shades. It is well known to the virtuosi in this country. PREFACE. Vll service of religion, to copy scenes from the temple at Eleusis, and that those who executed them were on some occasions proud of their work appears from their names being inscribed upon them*, we shall be left to regret, that those who so employed their pencils could never rise to a higher title than that of Ex&jyfetyo/, or shadow painters ; for the nature of the subjects they had to imitate necessarily limited their powers. The credit, however, of the Greek painters has been vindi- cated by several writers, particularly by the ingenious Mr. Webbe. His evidences tend to prove that, except at least as to mixed com- positions, the Greeks had attained a high degree of excellence in every department of the art. However this may really have been, the writer of this tract feels inclined to discourage any further attempts, either to ascertain the progress of the art, or the perfec- tion of it at any particular period, by such imperfect documents as the Greek vases afford ; and he trusts the reasonableness of his conjectures respecting their use will justify his dissent from the opinions of D’Hancarville on this head. That the paintings upon these Vases have an allegorical refer- ence to the doctrines of the mysteries, is an opinion that has been very tardily admitted by the learned on the Continent. But an antiquary of superior intelligence, the Cav. Inghirami, with whose work the writer has become acquainted only since he completed the revision of his book for the press, (and the perusal of that work * Thus, upon a vase in the collection of Thomas Hope, Esq. is inscribed TA L.H I AE f EPotEJEy. This vase was found at Agrigentuny and is of very early manufacture. via PREFACE. has not induced him to alter or enlarge the contents of his own,) has adopted this opinion, and maintained it ' with ingenuity and success. By comparing together the paintings of many vases, the Cav. Inghirami has discovered, in certain of them, allusions to figures in the celestial sphere, to which the Mystse were supposed to gain admission by initiation. He imagines that these astronomical phenomena were descanted upon in the mys- teries ; “ which,” he says, “ regarded the passage of souls from this “ life to another state, and from another life back to this state of “ mortality.” (Vasi Fittili, vol. v. p. 205.) In this view of the sub- ject he has surmounted considerable difficulties. In explaining also certain other paintings, in a moral and religious sense, by the doctrines of the Platonists, he has gone very much farther than the writer of these disquisitions, and he has given many lu- minous expositions, that must be deemed, if not always, yet most frequently, satisfactory and convincing. To have been mentioned by this learned foreigner in flatter- ing terms must necessarily be a gratification to the writer of the present work ; and although such favourable expressions have been qualified by others, discrediting the writer’s general views upon this subject, yet he is contented to have gone before this learned foreigner in many opinions which the Cav. Inghirami has adopted. If this ingenious antiquary had been acquainted with the writer’s opinions, otherwise than through the imperfect medium of the Magazin Encyclopedique, he must have seen, that however they might have trodden a different path in pursu- ing their several enquiries, their conclusions were frequently the PREFACE. IX same, and that the researches of both had one ultimate object. At the same time he thinks he has some cause to complain of this learned foreigner, for condemning in the gross, before he had him- self perused the original work of the author ; and for advancing a complaint of a paucity of proofs adduced, and those partially selected, to the exclusion of a greater number that would, as he imagined, have controverted the author’s scheme. The Cav. Inghirami, however, has had the candour to quote a passage from another distinguished antiquary, Mr. Vermiglioli, who had re- proved the learned foreignerfor having attached himself to what he terms the “ Sistema emanato dal Christie”* This, then, is sufficient for the author. It is possible that he may have erred, by adher- ing too closely to the Horatian precept respecting brevity f ; but, if from a small selection of proofs, which were designed by him as illustrations of so many different classes dependent upon them, and with a scanty proportion of letter-press, he has obtained results that do not differ widely from those which the Cav. Inghirami has arrived at, in a quarto volume of no ordinary bulk, he presumes this learned foreigner will allow him the merit of having turned his materials, such as they were, to a good account, with as little inconvenience as possible to the reader. He is content with such an acknowledgment, that this systematic view of the subject had been long ago adopted by him, and he very cheerfully leaves the defence of the system to so powerful a cham- pion as the Cav. Inghirami. * Yasi Fittili, vol. v. p. 488. Mr. Vermiglioli does the writer too much honour. It was Charles Towneley, Esq. who first observed a mystic theology in works of Grecian art. He, jointly with the late R. P. Knight, Esq., furnished D’Hancarville with a great part of the materials of his quarto work on the Esprit des Arts dela Grece. f Quicquid praecipies, esto brevis. De Arte Poet. X PREFACE. Believing, then, that whatever new light may be further thrown on the allegorical paintings of the Greek vases will be reflected upon them by the labours of such a writer as the Cav. Inghirami, the author of the present work does not regret that he has added very little to this part of his enquiry. He has left what had occurred to him on the subject more than nineteen years ago, nearly as he then represented it.* He gladly turns from these to other more agreeable and consolatory considera- tions ; and he has been irresistibly led to point to them in the conclusion of his work, and in the Appendix. In the latter he has also broached some novelties, that he hopes may prove useful or entertaining. His Systematic Classification of Vases, what- ever may be thought of the grounds on which it rests, may be found useful to those who regard these vessels merely for the beauty of their forms, and to others, who may have occasion to describe them in large collections. In attempting to trace the influence of the mystic theology of the ancients upon their sacred architecture, and the imitation of that practice by the Christians in the early centuries, in illustra- tion of more genuine truths, he has produced some novel observ- ations and conjectures, which may not be generally approved, because they differ from received opinions. If these shall not be thought of the value which he himself attaches to them, they may serve at least to give a new train of thought to more judicious enquirers. He merely desires that they may be weighed and considered ; since it cannot be denied, that the information we possess respecting the origin of Gothic archi- tecture is far from satisfactory or conclusive. * The former impression of his work was given in 1806. ERRATA. Page 5 . note, for lxv., read xlv. 5. for Nafepacos, read Nafapaios. 55. for airotTftrj^as, read inrofffiri^as. 47. for Heraclium , read Heracleum. 105 . for Choreeous, read Chorcebus. 104 . for page 455 ., read page 485 . 131. line 2. after incurved, read lip reflected. Accents misplaced. — Title-page, for yl ip er tv ri, read ydpestv -q : — page 18. for Se nva, read Se nva : — page 19. for -wapapl>Srp.oi, read -vrapdpvSriJ .01 : — page 35. for avyy read uiiyfi : ■ — page 115. for xaubs, read kuk6s : — page 121. for &v shj, read av e%. CONTENTS. CHAP. I. Of the painted Greek Pottery found in the Tombs of Magna Graecia Use of these Vessels, as conjectured from a Passage in Pindar, — As proved by a Passage in Aristophanes. — Their Connection with the Greek Mysteries inferred from Apu- leius. — Mazzocchi’s Explanation of the Inscription KA AOS confuted. — That these Vessels were symbolical Records of religious Doctrines and Opinions. Page 1 CHAP. II. Origin of these Vases considered from an Examination of the Paintings upon 'them. — An early Sicilian Cup illustrated by a Phoenician Coin. — Origin of the Statues and Symbols of Minerva, and the Meaning of the latter explained. - 10 CHAP. III. The Devices of the Apulian Vases derived from Sparta and Phoenicia. — Imported from Magna Graecia to Rome. — Digression respecting the Games of the Roman Circus. — Of the Olive Wreath on the Campanulate Vases. — Banquet of the Blessed. - - - - - - -- -16 CHAP. IV. An Exposure of the Mysteries by Clemens Alexandrinus. - - - 26 CHAP. V. Of the Scenery of the Eleusinian Mysteries. — The Paintings on the Greek Vases copied from them. — Eastern Illuminations and the Eleusinian Shows compared. 34 CHAP. VI. Of the Lesser and the Greater Mysteries. — The Vase and the Lantern comparatively considered as Symbols. — Various other Symbols explained Use of the Intaglio. — The Descent of Bacchus, uijder different Characters, ad Inferos , his Voyage over the Styx, and Re-ascent, exhibited as a Mystical Drama, in a Succession of transpa- rent Scenes, selected chiefly from antique Gems. 43 CHAP. VII. The Ceremonies peculiar to each Day of the Greater Mysteries, as enumerated by Meursius, and an Attempt to explain the Exhibitions in the Propylaea. — Cha- Xll CONTENTS. racters assumed by the Priests. — These Characters discovered on a Sicilian Vase, illustrating the Mysteries of the Idaei Dactyli. - - Page 58 CHAP. VIII. Harmonious Arrangement of the Universe. - - - 68 CHAP. IX. Attributes of the Deity variously personated on Vases. — Of Shields, and their Devices. ___ - - - - 71 CHAP. X. Temporary Repose of Nature. — Of the Egyptian Horus in the torpid State. — Mutes on the Reverse of Vases. — Figures draped and naked. - 74 CHAP. XI. Of Fish, and the Allegory of Angling. - - - 81 CHAP. XII. Of Old Age, Wine, Music, and Rhetoric. - - - 85 CHAP. XIII. Of the dotted Chaplet, Girdle, and Scarf. — The Fate of Cassandra, and the Flight of iEneas mystically treated. - - - - - - 89 CHAP. XIV. Of Solstitial Fountains. - ------ 97 CHAP. XV. Of the Window and the Ladder, and the Banqueting Chamber of the Blessed. — Singular Customs of the Oriental Buddhists explained. - - 101 CHAP. XVI. Extinction of Heathen Rites in Greece and Italy. — Eleusinian Mysteries inade- quate to the End proposed in them. — Conclusion. - - 107 APPENDIX. Section I. — Classification of the Greek Fictilia. - - - - 119 Section II. — Of the Water Lilies of Egypt and Greece. — Of the Cibotium and Cibotus, or Ark of the Covenant. — Mysterious Allusions in the Nymphasa Lotus. — These Allusions discoverable in the Grecian, Moorish, and Gothic Architecture. The latter probably derived from Alexandria in Egypt. - - 135 CHAPTER I. Of the painted Greek Pottery found in the Tombs of Magna Grcecia. — Use of these Vessels, as conjectured from a Passage in Pindar, — As proved by a Passage in Aristophanes. — Their Connection with the Greek Mysteries inferred from Apuleius. — Mazzocchi’ s Explanation of the In- scription KAAOS confuted. — That these Vessels were symbolical Re- cords of religious Doctrines and Opinions. The antiquary, who has investigated Pagan customs and opinions in very early times, when the field of his enquiry has extended beyond those periods- to which the events of history can be traced with accuracy, has usually had little more than tra- ditions to consider, etymologies to sift, and allegories to reduce to some consistent meaning ; and much has been effected by men of learning in this way. If it has been said, that deductions from such imperfect premises are little to be depended upon, yet must it be better to approximate to the truth by such means, than to reject them, because we may not be able to show that they lead us precisely to it. Nay, many have wandered much farther from the truth by declining such aid. They who shrink from the dif- ficulties presented by these studies, and who will not exercise B 2 their judgment upon them, are apt to take the «V of the ancients in too literal a sense ; and unbelievers have gladly availed themselves of their errors, which enabled them to set at nought the chronology of Scripture. But there is another class of materials of a more substantial nature, that seem calculated to supply the void occasioned by the want of records and authentic dates, in the early ages. The analogies of symbols furnish conclusions that, on some occasions, amount almost to certainty. If allegory was the style that pre- vailed in the first languages, symbols were the characters in which they were noted down. Many of these are confessedly national signs. The concurrence of them in distant situations, proves a connection no less clearly than the page of history could have transmitted it. The means of explaining them one by another may be attained by a careful examination ; and, by beginning with the more obvious and simple, and proceeding upward to the more intricate and obscure, it is not impossible that the studious en- quirer may eventually succeed in penetrating the engraven records of Egypt, and in extorting from them all the information they conceal. On these analogies I shall very much rely, in my present enquiry respecting the ancient earthen vessels, which have been discovered at different times and in great numbers, chiefly in the tombs of Lower Italy. So various have been the rites of sepulture among the nations of antiquity, that their languages scarcely present a stronger cha- racteristic of each individual people. While the Egyptian filled the corpse with gums, and swathed it in asphaltus, the Jew contented himself with a more superficial mode of embalmment. Both deposited their dead in caves, or subterranean recesses. The Romans burnt their dead, having received the custom from their Trojan ancestors. The Heracleidas introduced it into Greece, from the example of the founder of their race, who constructed for 3 himself a pile upon Mount (Eta. Burning and interment were, indeed, long and indiscriminately practised in Greece ; but I sus- pect that the former custom became less frequent, as the doctrines of Eleusis obtained a stronger influence on the public mind. The notion of combustion was inconsistent with the doctrines alluded to on the painted vases. A presumed connection between these vessels and the mysteries of Eleusis, may both account for the use of them as a funeral rite, and for the very scanty allusion made to them by Greek authors. This custom of depositing vases in sepulchres, is supposed to have been introduced into Sicily and Magna Graecia by the early Greek colonists from Greece Proper, and into Etruria, by emigrants from the same country. The term Etruscan, indeed, applied to these vases, seems to be now generally abandoned. Nevertheless the early use of them by the Tuscans is established by the discoveries of the late Mr. Wilcocks at Civita Turchino, in Italy. * The Cav. Bossi in his history of Italy, claims the first manufacture of these vessels for the Tuscans : — “ Di quest’ arte, “ siccome di molte altre, furono maestri gli Etruschi ai Romani, e “ fors’ anche ai Greci .” — Istoria oivigv, alf^a^devToc, aoctri'yvriTuv V7T0 Sicnruv. H. 39. V. 6. “ stained “ with blood, and falling by the hands of two relative celestial “ bodies with allusion to the bloody appearance of the moon in eclipse, as also to her temporary obscuration, followed by a re- novation of her light. Such I conceive to be the meaning of the combat of the three Curetes, which serves as a vignette to this chapter. It is from a Sicilian Lachrymatory, now in the collection of Thomas Hope, Esq. It was from Chaldaea, that parent of astronomical science, and of its bastard associate, astrology, that Phoenicia must have derived a taste for such speculations. It is interesting to trace them downwards through Lacedaemon to Magna Graecia, and thence to Rome itself, where these doctrines were embodied under symbols, that were' publicly exhibited, but which the learned only in those times could explain. The curiosity of the subject, and the instruction to be derived from this inquiry, will, I hope, be accepted as excuse for the following digression. OF THE ROMAN CIRCENSIAN GAMES. The Circensian Games, originally termed Consualia *, were instituted in honor of Neptune, who was styled Consus, the god of secret counsels. That they had an astronomical and secret religious allusion is very evident, and hence we may collect the true meaning of the term consualia. * They were celebrated about the 18th of August. 21 The principal erections in the centre of the area, and the num- ber of the circuits performed by the chariots in the race * * * § , denoted the solar system f, and possibly the passage through the several parts of that system, which individuals were supposed to ex- perience in a future state ; for such was the fixed hope of the more enlightened in Magna Grsecia, whom Romulus professed to imitate in establishing these games ; a scheme that never entered into the imagination of the vulgar. On the spine, as it was termed, or that elevated bank between the metes, was erected in the centre, one great obelisk in honour of the sun, and the spine itself was sacred to Cybele, or the earth. Upon the circular plinth at each end of the spine, were three conical obelisks called Ova Castoris, the eggs of Castor and Pollux J, which obelisks were considered in the place of altars to six planets ; the one group to Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars ; the other to Mercury, Venus, and the Moon. The use of them in the race was this : at the completion of every circuit by the chariots round the spine, one of these obelisks was thrown down, and the whole were levelled in succession. By these means the competitors could better reckon the number of circuits made. In a mystical sense, the candidates had thus passed through each planet in suc- cession, and the last circuit was accordingly performed round the * The number of the circuits performed was seven, f “ Solis honore novi grati spectacula Circi Antiqui sanxere patres.” — coripp. African. t Seven eggs occurred likewise on the top of a colonnade dedicated to Castor upon the spina, as also seven dolphins on a temple or colonnade dedicated to Consus. Both of these seem to be alluded to by Juvenal, Sat. 6. lib. 2. v. 588. “Consulit ante “ Falas, Delphinorumque columnas.” Nevertheless Vitruvius asserts that these falce § were round towers, egg-shaped at top, the same as the woeiSJj 8rjjt4