DiED ALUS.

PREFACE.

xyn

cc Though he escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffered
him not to live/’

“ Baro antecedentem scelestum
Deseruit pede Poena claudo,”

Hor. iii. Od. 2, 31.

Had he been guilty of the more detestable crime, said
to have been committed against his kind protector
and benefactor, the maker of the Gnossian cow
would have been equally infamous with the maker
of the Syracusan bull. Daedalus and Periilus would
have been alike hated and despised. In this in¬
stance, at least, we may with Diodorus affirm that
“ the ancient writers commemorate many things
which never were, being bred up in idle tales from a
daily acquaintance with fabulous writings and
we are the more justified in this belief, that Plato
and Plutarch attribute the fable to the hatred which
the Greeks entertained of King Minos. Presuming
then that these crimes were never perpetrated, we
may suppose that the fable conceals some allegory.
What the pretended murder of his nephew and
pupil may signify, it is difficult to divine. Perhaps,
that the skill and discoveries of Dgedalus were
greater than one man alone could attain to;
perhaps it merely meant to indicate the jealousy

INTRODUCTION.

pedestal of the statue the name of the birth of Pandora has been
given ; and the figures of the assisting gods to be seen upon it are
no fewer than twenty in number. The figure of Victory, in par¬
ticular, is most admirable, and connoisseurs are greatly struck with
the serpent and the sphinx in bronze lying beneath the end of the
spear. Let thus much be said incidentally in reference to an
artist who can never be sufficiently praised, if only to let it be
understood that the richness of his genius was always equal to
itself, even in the very smallest details.” 1

The statue was robbed of its gold mantle by
Lachares, in the reign of Demetrius. It appears
to have existed up to the time of the Emperor
Julian, after which we lose all trace of it . 3

It is fortunate for art, that while all the great
chryselephantine works of antiquity are destroyed,
the Minerva of Athens is still known to us by no
fewer than five antique copies of this celebrated
statue. These copies are of course reduced, being
only of about life-size; but in all these statues we
observe the same attitude of the figure and arrange-

1 Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 4.

2 These spoliations were not unfrequent. At Antioch was a
statue of Jupiter, considered to be a rival of the Jupiter Olym-
pius. In its hand was a golden figure of Victory, which Alexander
took away, saying, he wished to receive victory from the hands of
Jupiter. At Syracuse were several such statues holding Victories.
Dionysius, the tyrant, took them all away, saying, he did not take
them, he accepted them. On one occasion he took away the gold
mantle from the Jupiter Olympius, saying, it was too hot for him
in summer-time, and a purple garment would be cooler. He also
took away the golden beard of the statue of Aesculapius at Syracuse.
—Val. Max. De Neglect. Relig. ext. Exempt. See also Lucian’s
Jupiter Trcigoedus for similar acts of depredation.

INTRODUCTION.

slightly depressed. Of these copies, that in the
fine collection of Mr. Hope is the least valuable :
the proportions are heavy, and the execution
clumsy. It has, moreover, suffered most; though
perhaps the restorations may be the cause of its
less perfect beauty. It was found at Ostia.
The next in rank is that formerly in the Fal-
conieri Collection, but now in the possession of
M. Demidoff, of Russia. The head of this figure
belonged to some other statue, and the helmet has
been restored in bad style. The arms also are
restored. The statue in the Louvre 1 comes next,
but is also of ordinary execution—one arm is mo¬
dern ; after which the Borgliese Minerva, now in
the Museo Borbonico, at Naples, a cast of which we
have in the Crystal Palace; but perhaps the finest
of all is that of the Villa Albani. It is remarkable
that in none of these do we behold the accessories
of the Athenian figure. There is no sphinx, no ser¬
pent, not even a shield : but while we regret the
omission, we must praise the judgment of the artists
for omitting in a reduced copy what was designed
for effect only in a colossal subject. Were we to
have had these, we should then have required the
ample pedestal with its bas-relief of Pandora and
the Olympic gods ; and having this, we should then
have asked for the section of the Parthenon. I have

1 This statue is erroneously supposed by Visconti to be the
Minerva Pacifera.

USE OF ART.

it kindles in ns at once an attractive principle; it
forms our manners, and influences our desires ;
not only when represented in a living example,
but even in an historical description . 5 ’ 1 Plato
observes, that seeing each day, and being sur¬
rounded by the masterpieces of painting, sculpture,
and architecture, full of nobleness and correct
taste, those who are least inclined to the graceful
by nature, will acquire a taste for what is beautiful,
decent, and delicate. They will accustom them¬
selves to seize with just discernment what is perfect
or defective in the works of art or nature, and this
happy exercise of their judgment will become a
habitude of their soul. Admiration of works of art
is the necessary result of a cultivated mind. It
might be supposed that a work of beauty is beau¬
tiful to all: but this is not so. An ignorant man
is more likely to be attracted by a rude and vulgar
reality, than by a work of studied elegance. He
approves, with loud delight, of the ship’s figure¬
head, coloured to exact identity, in the same manner
that he gazes with wondering admiration at the

of their ancestors in the first part of the house, (the atrium)
that their descendants might not only read of their virtues, hut
imitate them ; so that the portraits of their ancestors might
invoke the good to yet nobler deeds, and at the same time reprove
those who dishonoured their name. — Yal. Max. v. 8, § 3. See
Juvenal, Sat. viii.

1 Plutarch, Life of Pericles.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

containing its seventy thousand spectators, and
hearing them sing the hymn of Hercules, beginning,
“ 0 glorious victor, hail ! ” When we reflect on
these and other honours which awaited him,—his
being borne in triumph to the Gymnasium to receive
the homage of his brother athletes, his being invited
to the feast of victory in the Prytaneum, and when he
left the city his proceeding as though in a triumphal
progress to his native town, the wall being broken
down to receive him, the whole city coming out to
do him honour crowned with chaplets and fillets,
and his then making his solemn entry at the head
of a procession,—which in one instance we are told
consisted of three hundred chariots each drawn
by four horses,—to be henceforth supported at the
public charge, and entitled to the post of honour
in all public assemblies, 1 —

-palmaque nobilis

Terrarum dominos evehit ad Deos,—

we can imagine no better figure that an apostle
could lay before his hearers, to incite them to strive
after a crown of glory.

What must have been the glory of these games,
when such a man as Sophocles, his hoary head
crowned with ninety summers, thought it not

1 The reader is referred to West’s Dissertation on the Olympic
Games, and D’Hancarville, Recueil cTAntiyuites, iv. 157, for a full
account of these honours and privileges, and of the advantages
and evils consequent upon them.

HE LAOCOON

Photographed irom the Origiiuxl/.

THE IDEAL.

with maddened pain, like Virgil’s hero, the mouth is

but surely the mind must owe something to its connection with
an operation of the features, which precedes its own conscious
activity, and which is unerring in its exercise from the very
commencement.” {The Anatomy and Philosophy of Expression .)

Though the accurate knowledge of anatomy evinced by the
ancient sculptors forbids us to agree with Burke, who, in his
chapter on Taste, compares the anatomist to the cobbler mentioned
in the story of Apelles; or with Byron, who in speaking of the
Yenus writes:—

“ I leave to learned fingers and wise hands,

The artist and his ape, to teach and tell
How well his connoisseurship understands
The graceful bend, and the voluptuous swell:

Let these describe the indescribable :

I would not their vile breath should crisp the stream
Wherein that image shall for ever dwell;

The unruffled mirror of the loveliest dream
That ever left the sky, on the deep soul to beam ; ”

yet the too exacting claims of the anatomist, if acted on, would
produce that individuality, which the Greeks so carefully avoided;
while the explaining away of all moral sentiments by the me¬
chanical operation of the muscles, is what every thinking man
would condemn as cold insensibility, and as being false as it is
cold; while it is opposed to what all artists recognize as being
the highest excellence of Greek art. It would be well for the
writer in question had he studied the opinions of other anatomists.
Dr. Bau says, “Do not neglect antiquity and study anatomy, but
study the antique that you may see the necessity of being
acquainted with anatomy.” He might have added,—and study
anatomy in order that you may understand the antique. Dr. Knox
says, “ The antique masters knew practically the theory of beauty,
they knew that when nature aimed at the beautiful in form, (and
without form, there is, there can be no beauty,) she never dis-

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

109

colour. As in all these instances the flesh is merely
tinted, so it is probable that positive colour was
used in the accessories; otherwise the marble might
look dirty. It is perhaps through a neglect of this
consideration, that modern attempts, by Pradier on
the continent, and Gibson in this country, to restore
iconic-polychromy, have not been more successful.
These attempts, however, are not new. Fra Bas-
tiano di Vinesia executed a painted bust of Donna
Julia, on which Guandolfo wrote the following
lines :—

“ Et con quell’ arte, di cbe solo bonori
II secol nostro, e lo farai chiaro e bello,

Con nuovo uso agguagliando i tuoi colori
Alle forze d’incude, e di martello,

Hor coronato di novelli fiori.” 1

The descriptions by Homer of the shield of Achilles,
by Hesiod of the shield of Hercules, and by Yirgil
of that of iEneas, all indicate the use of strong
colours. But in the employment of colour upon
flesh it must be observed that it is not colour, but
an almost imperceptible tint which was employed,
sufficient merely to tone down the marble, and to
suggest, rather than to indicate colour. Whatever
is adorned with chasteness and modesty, says Aulus
Gellius, is excellent, but if daubed and painted, it
becomes contemptible. The same sentiment is

1 Benedetto Yarcbi, Due Lezioni , p. 98.

110

ANCIENT ART.

expressed by Petronius;—A magnificent and chaste
style is neither painted nor puffed up, but becomes
more noble by its natural beauty. Pliny gives us a
story of Praxiteles, which has been understood to
refer to the colouring of statues: but the word
“ circumlitio 5,1 (circumlinitio) seems to refer to the
act of polishing. Praxiteles, being asked which of
his statues he esteemed the most, replied, “ Those
which Nicias has rubbed in so much, says Pliny,
did he value the surfaces of this artist. The word
circumlitio is also used by Seneca, (Ep. lxxxvi.,)
but as he couples the word with variata, we may
conclude that colour was sometimes applied before
the act of polishing. Vitruvius (vii. 9) uses the

1 It is curious what roundabout interpretations have been given
to the word “ circumlitio.” Among other explanations, one
writer supposes that Nicias is here described to round the moist
clay model with his finger, while another explains that Nicias
coloured the hair and other ornaments round about the figure, at
its extremities. Another writer supposes that Nicks gave the
“finishing touches” to the work; that taking Phidias’s chisel,
he went over it carefully with his own hand; and another that
Nicias had discovered a chemical varnish, which he “patented”
by keeping secret. But as absurd as these is the supposition
that so distinguished a painter as Nicias was called in to
the menial occupation of rubbing statues till they were
polished. If however we suppose that Nicias was employed
to colour them, and that this colour was then rubbed in under
his directions, we can understand why Nicias was employed.
When Gibson painted his marble Venus, it was expressly stated
(. Athenaeum , for 1853, p. 1597) that “ he had been obliged to do
it all himself.”

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

113

blue, and gold, were “ for the million,’ 5 and prepared
in the cheapest possible manner : but even in terra¬
cotta works, and in the Greek porous stones of
Sicilian temples, we often see the surface covered
with a most beautiful stucco formed of marble
dust, the sixteenth of an inch in thickness, on
which colouring is laid of the most perfect beauty.
Indeed, the common uses to which terra-cotta
modelling was applied should be no prejudice
against its being also used in works of high art.
The smaller temples frequently had their pediments
filled in with terra-cotta sculpture, signa fictilia, as
evidenced by Pliny and Vitruvius.

But while colour was used most sparingly for the
flesh, it was more freely employed in the drapery
and accessories. Phidias called in the assistance of
his cousin Pansenus, to execute the “ colouring of
his Jupiter Olympius, and particularly the drapery.”
Pansenus was also employed to paint the cuirass
and the inside of the shield of the Minerva at Elis.
The temple of Theseus is adorned with sixty-eiglit
metopes, only eighteen of which are finished. But
as the eighteen have been enriched with colour,
the learned travellers Clarke and Dodwell seem to
think that the remaining fifty were painted pre¬
paratory to being sculptured. 1 A circumstance

1 “ In the description given of the Theseum by Pausanias, he
mentions ypatyal among the decorations, and Chandler gives this
word as he found it in the original without translating it, as some

122

ANCIENT ART,

plaster. This being the most important room in
the house, the owner had chosen it for the exhi¬
bition of these masterpieces, though in most of the
other rooms fresco paintings had been inserted from
other houses, while one room was adorned with
very large and magnificent paintings of mythological
subjects, and which, though quite perfect on their
discovery, had lost all their beauty, and in many
parts were quite ruined, at my second visit, only
two years after ; so perfectly reckless is the govern¬
ment of what becomes of the monuments left at
Pompeii, after removing what it considers will be
an embellishment to its museum.

These paintings on wood would be what the
ancients might have called their “ Old Masters,”
while the fresco decorations which we see at
present must necessarily have been of more modern
date. But though the paintings on wood have
perished, some few and rare specimens have de¬
scended to us of another description—their mosaic
paintings. The richest Roman mosaic pavement
will bear no comparison with the chaste and elegant
Greek mosaics of Pompeii; while these again will
bear no contrast with the mosaic wall-pictures.
There are several of such mosaic pictures in the
Museum at Naples, (J Studii ,) one of which is
engraved in the Museo Borbonico , (vol. iv. tav.
xxxiv.) but being only in outline, and not very
exactly drawn, it conveys no idea of the beauty of

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

123

the original. It represents actors or musicians
on the stage of some rustic theatre. In the upper
part of the picture is the name of the artist, Dios-
corides of Samos. (AIOSKOTPIAHS 2AMIOS
EIIOIHSE.) Of this mosaic painting the editor
thus speaks :—“ Come il primo 99 [it was found at
Pompeii in 1762] “e Tunico che in quel tempo
fosse comparso alia luce, form'd lo stujpore di tutti i
conoscitori delle arti degli antichi 99 The tesserae
are of glass. It is evidently copied from a cele¬
brated picture, as a similar mosaic was found at
Stabise in 1759.

Even of their mosaic pavements, one subject, the
battle of Darius and Alexander, found in the house of
the Faun, and also published in the Museo Borbonico ,
conveys perhaps a better idea of the perfection of
ancient painting than any wall-painting. It is a
most animated battle-piece, crowded with figures,
all carefully placed according to the horizon, and
most finely executed, and forming one of the
most magnificent compositions extant. This mosaic
painting is however, like all the other mosaics of
this house, of Roman times, and what we would
call fitted furniture. There is yet another descrip¬
tion of mosaic, of still greater beauty. It unites
the three arts of sculpture, painting, and working
in mosaic. These monuments are of great rarity.
They are all of the finest execution and purity of
design. Two of these also (Antiq. of Wilton Bouse ,

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

139

imitation of nature, 1 and liave asserted that archi¬
tectural statues, like their architecture, must be
painted entirely. The opponents of polychromy,
with equal recklessness, admit nothing but what is
in consonance with their own preconceived notions.
No testimony, however clear, no evidence however
strong, no facts however staring, are sufficient to
move them. They must be right, and their oppo¬
nents wrong, and if the Greeks held with them,
they must have been wrong also. The ancients,
however right they may be on other points, must
be clearly in the wrong, if opposed to the taste and
intellect of the nineteenth century !

They assert in the first place that no fragments of
coloured statuary have been discovered, whether
in bronze or marble, and that of the numerous

chromy. But this is unjust. The experiment should not have
been regarded as a trial whether ancient polychromy was, or was
not, superior to uncoloured or half-coloured sculpture, but whether
modern taste in colouring was comparable, at whatever distance,
with the exquisite taste of the ancients, such as we are bound to
conceive it to have been. As well might Greek architecture be
condemned, were we to judge of it only by the pseudo-Greek
specimens of the beginning of this century : as well might we
condemn Greek sculpture were we to base our opinion only on the
allegorical sculpture so much in fashion in the last century. The
most that we should say of ancient art is, that we dislike it if we
are to judge of it only by such specimens. To do more than
this is to accuse ourselves of ignorance, and our criticism of
presumption.

1 Voelkel pretends that lights and shadows were also imitated.

152

ANCIENT ART.

described by Lucian. The evidence is said to
be both positive and negative. Positive, because
Lucian, in describing the beauty of the marble,
mentions the existence of a spot or stain; and it
it is contended that if statues had been coloured,
as supposed, the artist would have taken pains to
cover over this stain, so as to render it imper¬
ceptible. 1 But the critics forget, or are uncon¬
scious, that the colouring employed is transparent,
not opaque. It would therefore have been im¬
possible to cover it with the system of colouring
at their disposal; and so the positive argument
falls to the ground. The negative argument is said
to consist in the fact, that Lucian, in describing
the statue, says nothing about its being coloured.
But what is the fact ? Lucian is describing not the
Yenus of Cnidus, but Panthea, a most beautiful
woman; and in order to give an idea of her beauty,

1 Similar to this is the conclusive argument brought against
the polychromy of architecture. They say the ancients parti¬
cularly speak of their anxiety to procure “ white stone” and they
ask, Why, if the building were coloured, were they so careful in
selecting white stone ? Let any one cut out a polychromic
restoration of any ancient temple, and place it on a sheet of
dirty paper, with streaks of colour running across it, and he will
immediately see of what benefit a white ground is for relieving the
colour. We have two parallel instances in Plato. Socrates asks
Grlaucus whether dyers do not select the whitest wool when they
want to impart to it the famous Tyrian dye P A process which he
likens to the education of youth, which will produce nothing unless
grounded in the most perfect manner. (Rep. iv. pp. 429, 430.)

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

161

If such be the case with architectural polychromy,
where the colours were always bright and vivid, how
can it be expected that the faint tints of iconic
polychromy should be preserved to us ?

It is not incumbent on us to prove that this
practice was conformable with pure taste : it is only
by conjecture that we can say to what extent colour
was applied, and how then can we undertake to
say whether the effect was pleasing ? But not only
should we give credit to the Greeks for being as
excellent in this respect as they showed themselves
in all other arts, but considering the chasteness and
severity of their taste in sculpture as in all other
arts, and the simplicity so constantly observed, it
would be alike unreasonable and unjust, that in
this particular alone the taste of the Greek should
be chargeable with extravagance or vulgarity. 1

It now only remains to ask, Is this system of

1 It is with pleasure I perceive that my arguments are sup¬
ported by the opinion of an able writer in the 'Revue Archeologiqiie.
M. Cartier says :—

“ Nous avons sans cesse sous les yeux des statues et des monu¬
ments sans couleur, et nous en concluons que la sculpture et
l’architecture doivent s’en passer pour rendre les masses et les
formes qu’elles emploient. Mais n’est-ce pas parceque nous nous
imaginons que, pour le faire, il faudrait empieter sur le terrain
d’autrui et operer au moyen de la peinture un melange de deux
arts distincts, comme le pratiquent les sauvages ? Cette con¬
fusion reprehensible a bien pu avoir ete faite dans des temps
barbares de la Grece, mais elle cessa lorsque la civilisation rendit
cette contree digne des regards et de Limitation de tous les

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

171

have been sculptured by persons, “ some of whom
would not have been entitled to the rank of artists
in a much less cultivated and fastidious age” than
that of Pericles, to which they were attributed. 1 2
But imagine these metopes elevated to the height
of fifty feet, and placed in the shadow of a bold
projecting corona, and we shall find that just this
sharp clear outline, this bold carving, this deep
undercutting, was necessary to make them appear
equally delicate in finishing to the other sculptures.
Even in ordinary statues the Greeks have not been
unmindful of this principle, but have endeavoured
to represent nature by exaggerating it. The eye
in ancient statues has been observed by sculptors
to be sunk deeper than in nature, in order to give
greater expression, and so make up for the de¬
ficiency of the eyebrow and other details. The
judgment and knowledge evinced in the dispo¬
sition of the figures of these metopes has been
pointed out by the President of the Academy,
in his admirable article on “ Bas-relief ” in the
Penny Gyclojpcedia. In almost every case the
figures are found to have their arms extended,
so as not to cast a confusing shadow across the
body. On looking at the Panathenaic frieze 3 of the

1 Dil. Soc. i. xxxix.

2 Censured equally with the metopes by Mr. Knight, as being

“ probably by workmen scarcely ranked among artists.” (Dil. Soc.
i. xxxix.) These inestimable marbles were nearly lost to us through

184

MODERN ART.

of modern times, notwithstanding the advancement
of science, and the blessings of a pure religion, we
shall find the contrast almost equally unfavourable.
The Greek artist laboured principally for glory, the
modern artist has to work in great measure for his
livelihood: the Greek had constantly before his
eyes the nude figure, or if draped, the most elegant
and natural disposition of drapery, so that each
figure he met with served him as a model; the
modern artist sees nothing but costume of an
artificial, unbecoming, and transient character:
the Greek believed his gods resided in human
form, the modern artist is taught by his religion
to despise earthly things, and to fix his regard
only on things of heaven : the Greek was filled
with enthusiasm, believing that he stood alone in
the world for all that was good and great and
excellent, in art, and arms, and literature; the
modern artist feels that the nation to which he
belongs, however excellent, is only one of the
nations of the world, that he himself is looked upon
as “ only an artist,” and that he has done much
if he gain a passing notoriety : the Greek identified
himself with the purposes for which his work was
destined, the modern artist, like the one referred to
by Apollonius in the story given us by Philostratus,
is often indifferent as to what becomes of his work
when once it is paid for and leaves his studio : the
Greek frequently devoted a lifetime to a single

188

MODERN ART.

portico of Octavia, tlie galleries of the Golden
House, and the Temple of Peace ? Yet history
has not preserved the name of a single Roman
sculptor.”

266

MODERN ART.

which were necessary to character, and even these
were treated in a free and large manner. When
treated in the one manner it is a mere portrait, in
the other it is a work of art.

Still the inefficient artist may deny this, he may
deny the ideal production, finding it easier to copy
than to think; the unreflecting critic may support
him in his opinion, believing it to be contrary to
nature; he may insist upon exact identity of like¬
ness, upon precise conformity to costume : the
ignorant public, as the public ever does, will take
up the cry of those in authority, or of those who
loudest cry ; and thus the evil is perpetuated.
The vulgar, says Cicero, generally judge of things
according to a preconceived opinion, not according
to truth,— C£ Sic est vulgus : ex veritate, pauca ;
ex opinione, multa sestimant.” An opinion very
similar to that of Plutarch, who says,—“ To please
the many is to displease the wise.” Cicero used to
observe that he would prefer the opinion of Cato
to that of all the world.

“ Some ne’er advance a judgment of their own,

But catch the spreading notion of the town.

They reason and conclude by precedent,

And own stale nonsense which they ne’er invent.”

Pope.

Whether the cry be raised against the “ pepper¬
boxes 55 of a National Gallery, the architect of

mmmaamaamM

WjEKET

wmmommmmmtmmm

INTRODUCTION.

is very evident in this latter example, where not
only is an arch on two columns put for the whole
temple, but the head of the divinity on a pedestal
is made to indicate the entire statue.

Another instance might be cited in the ridge tiles
and antefixse of the ancient temple, the feeling of
which is sometimes attempted to be expressed in
the scolloped ornament of the pediment.

It will be objected that all these coins are Homan :
but it must be remembered that the autonomous
coins of Greece never exhibit temples, the temple
being always indicated by the figure of the divinity
to whom it was sacred, or as frequently by an
emblem of the divinity. But though the coins were
executed in Roman times, the temples shown on
them, as on one of these examples, may be Greek.
It will be further objected that the coin here given

been supposed by the learned. I leave the subject for numis-
matologists to decide, and merely refer to it to show that I
have not adhered to the general opinion without consideration.
Animated, as all antiquaries should be, by the like zeal for truth,
and love of art, a difference of opinion in details must yet always
be expected.

INTRODUCTION.

passages probably denote a corbled roof like the
galleries of Tyrins and Mycense, those of the
Pyramids, and the ruins at Inkermann. The au¬
thenticity of the work attributed to Aristotle is
disputed, but this is vindicated by M. Dutens,
(pp. 22—24.)

But whether the original signification of these
Greek words implied an arch or dome, or whether
these significations of them were not given till
afterwards, the passage from Seneca will at least
prove that it was the general belief of the
Romans in his time, that the arch was invented
by Democritus, who was born in 470 B.O., and
died 361 B.C., and who consequently lived a century
before the time of Alexander; and the objection of
the lateness of Seneca’s writing is rather a proof in
favour of the early origin of the arch; for the arch
being then in extensive use, we cannot suppose
that Seneca was describing other than a true arch.
Thus we have evidence of the arch existing in
the time of Alexander, it having been used by
Dinocrates in the temple of Arsinoe; we have seen
it attributed to Democritus, one century earlier;
while a conjecture has been raised that its origin
was of a still earlier epoch, the opinion seeming to
be based on monuments the antiquity of which
could not be disputed.

It is well known, however, that the Greeks were
in the habit of appropriating to themselves the dis-

INTRODUCTION.

u€>

ment of drapery. Tlie left arm is raised, grasping
the spear; the right is extended and slightly de¬
pressed, holding the Victory. The helmet was pro¬
bably, in each, ornamented with a sphinx, griffins,
Pegasus, and horses, as in those which are yet
remaining, and as we see exhibited in the beautiful
gem by Aspasius. 1 The sphinx and griffins are
explained to be the symbols of intelligence ;
Pegasus to be sacred to the Muses ; and the four
horses to denote the rapidity of thought. Slight
deviations are observable in each, as in the ar¬
rangement of the hair, and the disposition of
the aegis with its tortuous fringe of serpents ;
but the general character is the same. In each
we admire the fine tunic, indicated by its close
and compact folds, and the beautiful disposition
of the diplax or folded chlamys. The only par¬
ticular in which the original differed from the
copies was probably in the direction of the eyes,
which in a colossal figure, the head of which was
fifty feet from the ground, would be looking down¬
wards, attentive to the prayers of her suppliants,
like the beautiful figure of the Pallas of Velletri, 2
while in copies reduced to near life-size, though
standing on a pedestal, the eyes would be but

1 Eckhel, Choice des Pierres Gravees, pi. 18.

2 Supposed to be a copy of the Minerva Promochos, the cele¬
brated statue of Minerva, the protectress of Athens, by Phidias,
which stood on the Acropolis.

ANCIENT ART.

we cannot wonder that art was patronized, nor
must we forget that it was not mere wealth which
fostered it. Each town desired to have the most
perfect images of the several divinities, hut espe¬
cially of its protecting god. It was thus that each
city became filled with works of art, even the
smaller cities possessing so many as to be incredible
to ns. The accounts we have of them are from late
writers, as Pliny and Pansanias, who flourished at a
time when most of these cities had suffered from
war or fire. The number of statues contained in
Corinth surpasses belief, and even after its de¬
struction, Pausanias found as many statues here as
in other cities. In Athens, also, after being so
often plundered, he describes three hundred statues
as worthy of particular notice. Altogether, Pliny
supposes that there must have been three thousand
in this city, and as many at Olympia. In the
Parthenon alone there were six hundred, some of
which were colossal. From Delphi, after having
been ten times pillaged, and five hundred bronze
statues had been carried away by Nero from the
temple of Apollo only, there remained some hun¬
dreds more to be described by Pausanias. In
the Altis, at Olympia, he enumerates two hundred
and thirty statues of victors in the Olympic
games, omitting many of less consequence, to¬
gether with an incredible number of statues of
the gods, many of which were colossal : and in

THE BEAUTIFUL.

Thus the burthen of it rang :

4 That shall not be our care
Which is not good and fair.’

Such were the words your lips immortal sang.” 1

Which do you think, asked Socrates of Parrha-
sius, do men behold with the greatest pleasure
and satisfaction — the representations by which
good, beautiful, and lovely manners are expressed,
or those which exhibit the base, deformed, corrupt
and hateful ? The most beautiful of all spectacles,
says Plato, for whoever wishes to contemplate it,
is it not that of the beauty of the soul, and beauty
of the body, united, and in perfect harmony with
each other? 3 The Greeks ever believed beauty,
more especially of the female form and countenance,
to be indicative of goodness.

-“ Every spirit, as it is most pure,

And hath in it the more of heavenly light,

So it the fairer body doth procure
To habit in.”

Spenser.

He alone was esteemed beautiful, who joined a

1 The above free but happy translation is given by J. A.
Symonds, M.D., in his 'Principles of Beauty , 8vo. Lond. 1857.

M ovarcu /cat Xapirsg, icovpai Aiog, at 7 tote K adpov
’Ee yafiov eXSovarai kciXov aeiarar eirog'

44 "O ttl /caAov, tyiXov earl' to ov icaXov ov <piXov fortV.”

T ovt £7rog aSavariov -fiXSe bia (rropariov.

Theognidis Sententice , v. 15—18.

2 u Hence the idea of beauty joined to that of goodness, in the
composition of the word which designated in the Greek language

ANCIENT ART.

lines on which betoken affection more sincere than
that described on many a statelier monument:—

“ A little child in Diodorus’ hall,

From a low ladder by a fatal fall
Breaking his spine, head-foremost roll’d ; but when
He saw my look of answering pity, then
Forthwith his tiny hands he suppliant spread.

In vain ! Yet weigh not down, O dust! the head
Of the young child of a poor female slave :

Spare Corax, two years old, in his small grave.” 1

jSTo one so ready as the Greek to discover, and be
able to express, the slightest evidence of feeling, no
one so quick to detect, and so watchful to avoid,
the least appearance of extravagance. Directing
his steps in the via aurea , he ever preserved 44 a
noble simplicity, and a majestic composure.” Thus
divesting the body of all human passions, he sought
to make it superior to human nature, and to partake
only of the divine. 2 The highest degree of human
beauty was imparted, but it was referred by the
mind of the beholder to corresponding spiritual
excellence. 3 This, therefore, became the aim of the

1 Epitaphs from the Greek Anthology. By Major B. G.
MacGregor. London.

2 Guido’s St. Michael in the Capuchin Convent at Borne has
been referred to as an example of this principle in the sister art.

3 Quartremere de Quincy conjectures that Baphael from his
constant study of the antique was led to represent men in
thought, while Michael Angelo from his anatomical studies chose
rather to represent them in action. “ From the commencement
of his career, as it seems to me, Baphael endeavoured constantly

ANCIENT ART.

head of Jupiter are certain characteristics of the
physiognomy of the lion, in that of Hercules of the
bull, and in those of Fauns and Satyrs of the goat.
What is the Hermaphrodite but a most wonderful
evidence of the powers of idealism ? Lucian
describes the idealism of this commingling of the
sexes in the picture of the Centaurs by Zeuxis.
The picture of Paris by Euphranor, described by
Pliny as exhibiting his several characters of umpire
of goddesses, lover of Helen, and slayer of Achilles,
has been ridiculed by some critics, for attempting to
combine discordant elements, but the subject and
the artist have been triumphantly vindicated by
Fuseli in his “ Ancient Art.” 1

It was in this representation of the qualities of
the soul that Praxiteles, as described by Diodorus,
so much excelled : and so highly did Phidias cul¬
tivate this principle, that he earned for himself the
title of a sculptor of gods rather than of men. It
was of this inner beauty that Plato spoke, when he
said, that it was impossible that Phidias should not
have understood beauty. Aristotle, also, expresses
himself almost in the same terms, and praises
Polygnotus, as having most rarely expressed the

1 It would be much more difficult to imagine how Parrhasius
succeeded in his picture of the Athenian Demus, which “ he
endeavoured to represent as capricious, passionate, unjust, incon¬
stant, inexorable, forgiving, compassionate, magnanimous, boastful,
abject, brave, cowardly ; and all in one expression.”—Pliny.

THE IDEAL.

affections and passions of men : Timanthes also is
said by Pliny to have expressed more than he
absolutely painted. In order that we may be the
better understood, let us take an instance : Venus,
as the goddess of love, is generally regarded as
possessing a certain wantonness of expression, but
unlike Pigal, in his Venus at Potsdam, the ancient
artists considered her as the goddess of modesty,
and, as stated by Euripides, as the associate of
wisdom. Theophrastus says, “ It is in consequence
of modesty that beauty is beautiful.’’ Here beauty
was not so much external, as concealed : it was
not open to the view of all, but had to be sought
for and discovered. Where the sensual eye saw no
beauty, because it could perceive no wanton smile,
the eye of refinement was enchanted with the hidden
beauty expressing the nobler emotions of the soul;
for, according to Euripides, it is not the eye which
sees, but the mind. 1 Venus could not be repre¬
sented otherwise than beautiful, but the artist
never intended to make this beauty sensual. And
therefore I believe that Byron, with a poet’s
licence, expressed more than he felt, when, looking

1 “ Vertu ne peut jamais etre representee que par la beaute ;
metaphysique ingenieuse dont l’objet etoit de representer les
qualites des etres moraux par les proprietes des etres physiques,
de chercher dans les formes des uns celles qui semblent les plus
analogues aux attributs des autres.”—D’Hancarville, Antiquites
Etrusques , &c. iv. 170.

ANCIENT AET.

regards sent encore fixes, a disparu a ses yeux; il semble la con-
templer toujours, et trouver sa joie dans cette contemplation ;
mais ce qu’il voit, ce qu’il considere, ce qu’il aime, c’est cette
beaute plus pure dont il con^oit l’idee, image toute interieure, et
pourtant beaute plus reelle que la beaute vivante qui est devant
lui: car cette image contient en soi et la beaute du modele et
quelque chose de plus qu’elle emprunte a la beaute parfaite de
Dieu; en un mot, ce que l’artiste contemple au-dedans de lui-
ineme, ce qu’il con^it, ce qu’il aime, c’est la beaute ideate —
Burnouf, Brincipes de VArt, selon Platon , p. 37.

“ The Greek artists appear to have considered the whole of
created nature, with all its scattered perfections, but as a mere
chaos and rude mass of incoherent materials, thrown together by
the great Creator for the exercise of those intellectual faculties
he had bestowed upon man—whom he had impressed with ideas
of perfection, and a capacity for combining them, to a degree to
which individual nature might make some distant approaches, but
at which it would never arrive.”— Barry's Lectures , ii.

148

ANCIENT AftT.

Theseion, 1 in tlie Halicarnassian, 3 in the Xan-

1 “Vestiges of bronze and golden-coloured arms, of a blue
sky, and of blue, green, and red drapery, are still very apparent.”
(Col. Leake, Topog . of Athens , p. 400.) See Mr. DodwelTs
evidence, ante , p. 115.

2 The following letter from Mr. Newton, the excavator of the
Mausoleum, dated 31st August, 1859, is very clear with regard to
the polychromy of this monument: —

“ Dear Ealkener,

“ There was abundant evidence of colour on the sculp¬
ture of the Mausoleum when first discovered, though there are
but little traces of it now. I have noted its occurrence in several
cases in my published despatches to Lord Clarendon.

“ The inside of the mouth of the most perfect of the lions was
coloured red. The hind quarters of another lion were dun. The
band round the chest of the colossal horse was red. In the corner
of the eye and nostril of the face of Mausolus was the leucoma
preparatory to colour. The ground of the frieze was blue : ultra-
marine, or some pigment equal in intensity. The drapery of the
frieze, in one case, red. The inside of buckler red. The great
seated figure had most distinctly two colours on first being dis¬
covered. I saw them fade away in the sunlight like a ghost. If
you wish for a corroborative witness, Mr. Gr. E. Watts, the well-
known painter, who was at Budrurn with me, is ready to attest in
writing the facts I now give you.

“ When the sculptures first reached England, I begged
Mr. Panizzi to appoint a committee to examine the sculpture
for traces of colour before it gradually faded away. They do not
appear to have found what I saw ; but perhaps they did not look
in the right places, having no one to indicate to them where the
colour had been seen; and some of the sculpture was on deck
during the voyage in the Gorgon , and was every day swilled down,
b} r order of the first-lieutenant, with buckets of sea-water ! after
which you must not expect much colour. This was the case with
the two pieces of horse, only protected by canvass, and with the
slabs of frieze.

“ If you will ask Mr. Birch to show you the fragments of the

THE MERCURY,

OR ANTINOUS OF THE VATICAN

Photographed/ irow Original/.

218

MODERN ART.

evidently of tlie finest lawn, a material nsed in
the East to the present day. The garments of
Cos were esteemed for tlieir fineness and transpa¬
rency. As Dodwell says, cc the Greek drapery is
remarkable for its ethereal tenuity, and its high-
wrought perfection.” Indeed, it is to be feared
that ce wet drapery ” is too often nsed by the
modern sculptor for the ’Kstttcli o^ouou of the
ancients. The drapery of ancient sculpture was
so skilfully adjusted to the body, that while it
appeared loose and negligent, it never confined the
form. The artist knew exactly where the drapery
must lie close, and where it might flutter in the
wind, and this knowledge was based upon an
accurate observance of nature. The result was
that “ Induitur, formosa est : exuitur, ipsa forma
est.” Wet drapery does not effect this, for though
it sticks close to the flesh, it does not show the
form ; it disguises it, by giving another surface,
at the same time that its monotonous treatment
deprives it of all beauty and variety. Moliere
exactly caught the spirit of ancient drapery, when
he wrote,—

“ Qui ne s’y colle point, mais en strive la grace,

Et sans se serrer trop, le caresse et rembrasse.”

In looking at those of our monuments in West-

woodcut in p. 68, in which the artist has been utterly unable to
represent the character of the drapery.

DECORUM.

225

and the other masters of the Florentine school, 1
employed for the purpose of showing off their
knowledge of anatomy; forgetful of the impressive
maxim,—“ Ars est celare artem.” Nothing can be
more remarkable than the Greek simplicity compared
with modern superfluity in this respect. Compare
the statue of the politician already referred to, with
those of Demosthenes and Aristides, or Aeschines.
What powers of oratory are suggested by the
attitudes ! The one appears as pleading; the other,
as ready to maintain his argument.

“ Gathering his flowing robe, he seems to stand
In act to speak.”

We might almost fancy we were listening to the

1 “ Undoubtedly Michael Angelo possessed great native fire,
and still more acquired skill; but, like a pedant in art, he wished
always to display the whole of that skill; distorted his figures for
that purpose, and made his elect in heaven (in the Sistine chapel)
appear as much racked as the damned in hell. As to the coun¬
tenances, there is no elegance, no suavity, no beauty, either ideal
or individual. In fact, in his figures, it seldom occurs to look
at the face, and when it does, one finds cause to disapprove.”—
Hope's Historical Essay on Architecture , p. 539.

“ On croirait, a entendre tous les ecrivains, que Michel-Ange a
excelle admirablement dans l’anatomie relative a la Sculpture et
a la Peinture. Mais en conscience depouillons-nous des pre¬
ventions suggerees par la celebrite; analysons les qualites, et
nous verrons que ce terrible dessinateur pechait presque toujours
contre la verite du mechanisme, qui est la base de l’anatomie.”—
De Montabert, Traite complet de la Feint, ch. 178. Milizia is
still more severe.— Arte di Videre, pp. 8, 16, 17.

2 G

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

285

undertaken by another. The Panathenaic frieze of
the Parthenon has been most satisfactorily shown
to have been executed without a model, but it
would take too long here to describe the proofs. 1
The artist often appears to forget that the same
work which will look well if of one size, will be
displeasing if enlarged ; or, though the design may
be pleasing, if the parts are designed for one size,
that they will lose their character if made exactly
similar on a larger scale. A colossal work is very
different from an ordinary work enlarged : it should
be expressly designed with reference to colossal
effect. M. Quatremere de Quincy’s design for the
restoration of the group of Neptune and Amphi-
trite appears, for this reason, inferior to the
other restorations in his splendid work Le Jujpiter
Olympien , for there is nothing in the design indi¬
cative of size; it would do just as well if executed
in silver for a Derby cup. However small the
model might be, the practised eye should be
enabled to detect that it is intended for colossal
dimensions. The celebrated colossal statue of
Frederick the Great at Berlin is deficient in this
respect; it might be of any size : a reduced model of
it would look well as a chimney ornament. The bas-

1 Many of Michael Angelo’s works are said to have been
executed without models. This is, however, doubtful; several
of his models and sketches having been discovered in the
Medicean chapel.

PERSPECTIVE.

We have seen of what importance the knowledge
of perspective was considered by the ancients, and
how it regulated the attitude and expression of
their statues. Nothing is more important than
this consideration. Before the artist allows the

STATUE OE PITT—WESTMINSTER ABBEY.

design to grow up in his mind, he should consider
attentively the situation for which it is intended.

BAS-RELIEF, AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE. 255

that no one had told him one-hundredth part of what
he discovered then in one instant. Bernini, in like
manner, is said to have discovered beauties in nature,
by having first seen them in the Medicean Yenus.

“ There too the goddess loves in stone, and fills
The air around with beauty ; we inhale
The ambrosial aspect, which, beheld, instils
Part of its immortality : the veil
Of heaven is half withdrawn; within the pale
We stand, and in that form and face behold
What mind can make, when nature’s self would fail;
And to the fond idolatry of old
Envy the innate flash which such a soul could mould.

“ We gaze and turn away, and know not where,

Dazzled and drunk with beauty ; till the heart
Peels with its fulness; there—for ever there—

Chain’d to the chariot of triumphal Art
We stand as captives, and would not depart.

Away! there need no words nor terms precise—

The paltry jargon of the marble mart,

Where Pedantry gulls Polly—we have eyes:

Blood, pulse, and breast, confirm the Dardan shepherd’s
prize.”

Childe Harold.

moderns have produced.”— Barry's Lectures , Lect. ii. “ The
authority of the ancients, in regard to matters of taste, must be
considered as little short of revelation.”— Okie's Lectures , iv.
“ Prom the remains of the works of the ancients the modern arts
were revived, and it is by their means that they must be restored
a second time. However it may mortify our vanity, we must
be forced to allow them our masters, and we may venture to
prophesy, that when they shall cease to be studied, arts will no

THE IDEAL.

267

which is never praised for his skilful porticos;
the cocked-hat of Wellington on the Marble Arch; 1 2

From Albert Gate. From Piccadilly.

the bare-headed, pig-tailed king of Pall Mall; or
the supposed saddlegirth-lacking horse of the king
at Charing Cross, it is equally the same. 3

But in order to prove our position, let us leave
Sculpture for a moment, and look at Painting.
Which work of the great masters is it which has
attained the greatest celebrity, which most excites
our sympathies, and most commands our admira-

1 A statue which is certainly so ill designed that it might be
taken for that of a grenadier, whether viewed from Piccadilly or
the Albert Gate.

2 Zeuxis had the same reason to complain when he found his

centaurs wondered at, but his picture not admired, as a modern
artist would who heard encomiums passed upon his frame.

308

APPENDIX.

The guilloche pattern itself, called by our author a wreathed or
braided fillet, is stigmatized as,—

“ A dead and meaningless scroll.” (Stones of Venice, ii. 16.)

“The Greek egg and arrow cornice [egg and tongue moulding] is a nonsense
cornice, very noble in its lines, but utterly absurd in meaning. Arrows have
bad nothing to do with eggs, at least since Leda’s time ; neither are the
so-called arrows like arrows, nor the eggs like eggs, nor the honeysuckles like
honeysuckles ; they are all conventionalized into a monotonous successiveness
of nothing—pleasant to the eye, useless to the thought.” (i. 305.)

Festoons of fruit and flowers are forms of “luscious ugliness,” “an ugly
excrescence.” Garlands were “ not meant to be hung upon a wall.” {Seven
Lamps, p. 105.)

The author appears to forget that the hanging of lamps and
garlands was one of the most common customs of antiquity, and
frequently mentioned even by Christian writers.

Our author may object to this string of short sentences, but
we have only carried out his own intentions. He says :—

“I shall endeavour for the future to put my self-contradictions in short
sentences and direct terms, in order to save sagacious persons the trouble of
looking for them.” {Two Paths, p. 115.)

Such are some of the sentiments of a writer who with sin¬
gularly bad taste says,—

“ As soon as our architects become capable of doing and managing little
and contemptible things, it will be time to talk about larger ones.” {Lectures,

P-118.)

And who, with equal flippancy and presumption, denies the
existence of architecture as a separate art of design, and scoffs
in insulting language at its professors as “ so-called architects.”
(pp. 113-116; and Stones of Venice, iii. 79.)

After reviling Greek art, as we have seen in the previous quo¬
tations, our author writes :—

“ Perhaps one of the dullest and least justifiable mistakes which have yet
been made about my writings, is the supposition that I have attacked or
despised Greek work. I have attacked Palladian work, and modern imitation
of Greek work. Of Greek work itself I have never spoken but with a reverence
quite infinite.” {Two Paths, p. 100.)

But if he means to attack Palladian architecture, why, in his

322

APPENDIX.

Toelken (E. H.)—Ueber das Verschiedene Yerhaltniss der Antiken und

Modernen Maierei zur Poesie.8vo. Berlin, 1822

Du Tremblay (J. Frain).—Discours sur le Bon Goftt.12mo. Paris, 1713

Turnbull (Geo., LL.D.)—Treatise on Ancient Painting, &c..Fol. Lond. 1740

Twining (H.)—Philosophy of Painting... 8vo. Lond. 1849

[Usher (Jas.)]—Clio : a Discourse on Taste.8vo. Lond. 1772

Yarchi (Benedetto).—Due Lezioni, una supra M. Angelo Buonarotti, l’altra
se sia pih nobil’ Arte la Scultura o la Pittura.

4to. Fiorenza, 1549

Vierri (Francesco).—Discorso delle Bellezze, dove si ragiona delle Idee e

delle Bellezze.8vo. Firez. 1581

Yisconti (E. Q.)—Opere.4 vols. 8vo. Milan, 1818-22

Waagen (G. F.)—Works of Art and Artists .3 vols. 12mo. Lond. 1838

Wagner (Gio. Maria).—Bassorilievi Antichi del Tempio di Apollo Epicurio.

Fol. Roma, 1814

-Bericht liber die Aeginetischen Bildwerke .... 8vo. Stuttg. 1817

Watelet.—Dictionnaire desArts de Peinture, Sculpture, et Gravure.

5 vols. 8vo. Amst. 1791

Webb (D.)—Inquiry into the Principles of Painting.8vo. Lond. 1769

Welcker (F. G.)—Zeitschrift fur Geschichte und Auslegung der Alten Kunst.

8vo. Gottingen, 1817-8

Westmacott (Richard, Jun., R.A., F.R.S.)—On Colouring Statues.

In vol. xii. of the Journal of the Arch. Ins. of Great Britain,

8vo. Lond. 1855

-Article on Sculpture.Encycl. Metropol.

-Lectures on Sculpture at the Royal Academy.

Wiegmann (R.)—Die Maierei der Alten ..12mo. Hanover, 1836

Wilkinson (Sir Gardner).—On Colour.8vo. Lond. 1858

Winckelmann (J. J.)—Reflections on the Painting and Sculpture of the

Greeks. 8vo. Lond. 1765

-Monumens Inedits.4to. Paris, 1808-9

-Histoire de l’Art chez les Anciens. 4to. Paris, 1790—1803

-History of Ancient Art among the Greeks. Translated by

G. H. Lodge .8vo. Lond. 1850

Wornum (R. N.)—Lectures on Painting. By Barry, Opie, and Fuseli.

8vo. Lond. 1847

-Epochs of Painting.12mo. Lond. 1847

Young (Edward, M.A.)—Art: its Constitution and Capacities.

8vo. Bristol, 1854

-Pre-Rafiaelitism.8vo. Lond. 1857

Yves (Marie-Andr^).—Essai sur le Beau.

Zanetti {Comte). —Raccolta delle Statue.Fol. Yen. 1740-3

Zuccari.—L’ldea de’ Scultori, Pittori, e Architetti.. 4to. Torino, 1670

THE END.

COX AND WYMAN, PEINTEES, GEEAT GUEEN STEEET, LONDON.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

popular esteem who was most lavish in public
magnificence. With such feelings influencing the
masses, the artist knew that the production of his
genius would find no uncertain home, that whether
at home or abroad it would be treasured by Grecian
cities, and wherever it might be, it would be
regarded as a public monument. So ardent was
this principle of patriotism within him, that the
artist frequently laboured without other reward
than his own approval, and his country’s praise,
and for so doing he himself was regarded with
public affection : “ Yerum virtutis prasmium est

honos.”—(Cic .) 1

In these days of simplicity and moral virtue that
citizen only was above his fellows who most excelled
in private worth and love of country. Modesty
and self-denial were considered virtues, and no one
thought to raise himself above his neighbour in
mere affluence and display. Protogenes was content
with a cottage in his garden; no pictures were to
be seen in the humble dwelling of Apelles; no one
as yet loved to paint his walls: all their care was
for the adornment of their cities, and the artist
was considered as the common property of his
country . 2 Myron left nothing to his heirs, and

1 Sixty talents were offered for a painting by Nicias the
Athenian, which he refused, preferring to give it to his
country.

2 Plin. lib. xxxv. 10.

ANCIENT AET.

Lysippus endured the extremity of want. Miltiades,
Themistocles, Aristides, and Cimon, were no better
lodged than their fellow-countrymen. If Mdias
built a house superior to those of his neighbours,
he rendered himself open to an accusation before
the judges. The house of Socrates including his
furniture and effects, was valued at only £18 :
the house of a king of Sparta, Polydorus, was
bought for a few oxen. 1 Paulus iEmilius, the
conqueror of Macedonia, Scipio Africanus the
destroyer of Carthage, and Lucius Mummius who
took Corinth, presented all their spoils for the
embellishment of the public monuments, not re¬
ceiving a single statue or painting for their own
villas. And so others of the early Romans might
be mentioned, as Valerius Publicola, the Pabricii,
the Camilli, Cato and Curius. His own house
being mean and small, the citizen looked with pride
upon the public monuments, and with a sacred
transport on those dedicated to the divinity :
—“ Cives cum civibus de virtute certabant. In
suppliciis (sacrificiis) Deorum magnifici, domi parci
. . . . erant.—(Sallust, Gat. cap. 9.) He had no need

1 The ordinary price of a house at Athens was about half an
Attic talent, say £100. The private dwellings very much
resembled those of a modern Oriental town. The streets were
irregular, the houses projected in the upper floors, and the
staircases were external. — M. de Pauw, Reclierches RJiiloso-
jphiques sur les Grecs, i. 56, 62, 63.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

the temple of Juno he describes twenty statues,
chiefly of gold and ivory. Many of these chrys¬
elephantine statues appear to have been made at
Syracuse, for Diodorus relates that on one occa¬
sion Dionysius the tyrant sent off two shiploads
of such statues to the sanctuaries of Delphi and
Olympia, but the ships were seized by Iphicrates
the Athenian general, and the statues melted down
to pay his men. Such was the wealth of Greece in
works of art that after three centuries of Roman
conquest, Pausanias was able to describe two
thousand eight hundred and twenty-seven statues,
thirty-three of which were colossal. Of the colonies
in the islands and Asiatic cities, it is sufficient to
mention on the authority of Pliny, that three
thousand were taken away from Rhodes, one hun¬
dred of which were of colossal size, and three others
by Bryaxis. Samos contained in its temple three
colossal works by Myron standing on one base.
Cyzicus is described as having so many temples
and statues of the gods, that it seemed as though
they had disputed for the possession of the city.
Tarentum, Syracuse, and other cities, when con¬
quered by the Romans, were filled with statues. It
would be in vain to speak of Delos, Ephesus, and
the other great sanctuaries, but even in obscure
cities we find the same taste prevailing. Two
thousand statues were destroyed by the Mace¬
donians on taking Thermon in iEtolia. Ambracia

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

gods, and these exceeded not three feet in height; 1
but even in after-ages, when a colossal size was given
to the gods, the statues of mortals were not allowed
to exceed life-size, while the heroic size, for Her¬
cules, Antinous, and other heroes and demigods,
was limited to the proportion of one-third larger
than the natural size. This restriction of size as
regarded the statues of mortals formed one of the
conditions imposed in the prizes at the public
games, and the judges are described by Lucian as
being more careful of this particular, than they were
in the examination of the candidates themselves.

Even among the Romans, we find Cicero ridi¬
culing his brother Quintus for having a statue so
big that it made himself appear contemptible; and
Plautus, in like manner, laughs at a statue, of seven
feet in height, erected to the memory of a common
soldier. A story is told of Alexander, that being
in Miletus, he observed several statues of unusually
large dimensions, representing conquerors in the
Olympic and Pythic games. Where, said he sar¬
castically, were these, when the barbarians con¬
quered the city ?

If we turn our eyes for a moment on Roman
times, and Roman cities, what a contrast do we
behold ! We find as many statues here indeed as

1 This was the size of the most ancient statues in the Koman
Eorum.—Pliny, xxxiv. 11.

THE IDEAL.

of the lip. So in the representation of Bacchanals,
however violent their attitudes, however wild their
gestures, they are always exhibited with faces free
from emotion. In the groups of the Laocoon,

“ Opus omnibus, et picture et statuarise artis, preferendum ; ”

and of Mobe and her daughters, were it not for the
action of the whole, and of the individual parts, we
should be at a loss to trace the indications of horror
in the comparatively placid countenances. We
should at most say that in the one were indications
of deep struggle, in the other of absorbing woe.
Of such statues as Niobe it may be said,— cc Their
faces did rather beautify their sorrow, than their
sorrow cloud their faces.” What can be more
touching, more beautiful, or more true than her
pleading look, her vain attempt to shelter and
protect her offspring, forgetful and regardless of
her own danger ! But though not expressed there,
lest it should detract from beauty, 1 the artist did
not omit to indicate this feeling in other parts.

1 The head of Moses would never have been represented by
an ancient sculptor with two horns, like those of a satyr; the
“ meekest of men,” whose countenance shone with a divine glory,
have stamped upon his face a terrific scowl; or the “ servant of
Grod” have worn a beard, the excessive length of which required
the constant use of one of his hands. {Numb. xii. 3, 6.)

They who take a different view of it point to Exod. xxxii.
19, 22.

ANCIENT ART.

In the Laocoon the skilful anatomist may detect it,
though no cry escapes the lips, in the expansion of
the chest, the straining of the throat, the contraction
of the belly, the drawing-together of the fingers,
the working of the muscles of the feet, in the con¬
tortions of the veins and tension of the muscles.
While writhing, however, with pain, the hero does
not forget his noble origin, his sacred character :
instead of following his deadly enemy with his eyes,
or averting them in fear, he fixes his regard on
heaven; his body strives manfully with his corporeal
foe,—-

“ Ille simul manibus tendit divellere nodes.”

2En. ii. 220.

while the mind, pregnant with emotion, recognizes
the ill to come from heaven. 1 Instead of bellowing

1 This opinion has been controverted by a celebrated and
able anatomist, who maintains that the silence proceeds not from
magnanimity, but from an impossibility of utterance during great
muscular exertion in the body. But in the writings of this author
a too great importance is given to anatomy; in the outward
form, sacrificing to it the beauty which we admire in ancient
sculpture ; (p. 203 ;) and in the inner sentiment, laying too great
a stress upon the influence of the body on the mind. Thus,
speaking of an infant’s smile, he says, “ The expression is in fact
the spontaneous operation and classification of the muscles, which
await the development of the faculties, to accompany them closely
when they do arise, and in some measure to control them through
life. It may be too much to affirm that without the co-operation
of these organs of the frame, the mind would remain a blank;

ANCIENT ART.

at the Venus de’ Medici, he wrote, as though over¬
powered with a feeling of sensual beauty :—

“ Appear’dst thou not to Paris in this guise ?

Or to more deeply blest Anchises ? or
In all thy perfect goddess-ship, when lies
Before thee thy own vanquish’d Lord of War ?

And gazing in thy face as toward a star,

Laid on thy lap, his eyes to thee upturn,

Peeding on thy sweet cheek ! while thy lips are
With lava kisses, melting while they burn,

Shower’d on his eyelids, brow, and mouth, as from an urn P” 1

In the same manner writers have pretended to
see in the first view of this statue, aversion; in the
next, compliance; and at last a smile of triumph.
In an interesting vase of the Hamilton Collection,
is represented the marriage of Hercules and Minerva,
attended by Venus and Mercury. The object of
the artist is to indicate the connection between
industry, virtue and wisdom, as distinguished from
indolence, pleasure, and vice. Venus is here put
for Volupia or Voluptuousness, as in other vase-
paintings, where we find Hercules hesitating between
Virtue and Voluptuousness ; and yet the artist has
expressed no indication of wantonness, either in

1 Some writers on Art, however, profess to see nothing but
sensual beauty, no intellect or spirituality, no modesty or decorum ;
so therefore perhaps it may be so—with some. Instances are not
wanting, both in ancient and in modern times, though perhaps
apocryphal, of statues having produced an extraordinary effect
on some minds.

INDIVIDUALITY.

But the Greeks were not content with seeking to
endow the statues of their divinities with the most
perfect bodily grace, and with the highest spiritual
beauty; they sought also to give an individual
character to each divinity, and to represent, as far
as possible, the spiritual attributes of each. It has
been well remarked by Colonel Leake, that cc the
gods were distinguished from one another, among
the Athenians, more by countenance, attitude and
form, than by symbols;” and this remark will apply
to their sculpture in general:—

“ Sua quemque Deorum
Inscribit facies.”

Ovid. Met. vi. Fab. 1.

It would be interesting and instructive to classify
the images of the gods, and see how each artist
felt and treated his subject. In Jupiter we might
behold how the ancient sculptor endeavoured to
represent the perfection of wisdom and majesty, the
highest benevolence, and the utmost placidity of
expression. His almighty power, manifest by the

104

ANCIENT ART.

VII.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, AND ICONIC-POLYCHROMY.

Of colossal statues tlie most glorious were those
of chryselephantine workmanship. Of these the
Jupiter Olympius at Elis and the Minerva of Athens,
by Phidias, are the most celebrated. From the
renown and excellence of such statues, all the great
temples supplied themselves with sculpture of gold
and ivory. Athens, indeed, would seem to have
derived a trade from works of this description,
which she exported to foreign states. Apollonius
is described by Philostratus as going on board of a
vessel at Athens, the cargo of which consisted of
statues of gold and ivory, and gold and marble i 1 2
and more than three centuries before this, Syracuse
appears to have been equally celebrated in this
respect, Dionysius the tyrant 3 being said to have

1 The sculptors were so numerous at Athens that they occu¬
pied one of the quarters of the city. The braziers and workers
in metal had their annual feast, the chalcia , which was attended
by the whole city.

2 We are informed, however, that G-elo and Hiero employed
artists from iEgina for the statues which they dedicated at

Olympia.—Paus. vi. 9.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

Ill

word KOLva-ig for tlie same operation. Colour was
probably first laid on, and then burnished into the
marble, till it became transparent. This would
require the operation of a skilful artist. At Thebes
I observed blocks of marble, the surfaces of which
were stained with transparent colouring, which
was effected probably by the same method. 1 The
following is the operation described by Vitruvius:
— “ When the wall is well cleaned and dry,
(he has previously described the colouring) Punic
wax 2 tempered with a little oil is laid on with a
brush, by the application of heat: the wall being
then well heated by means of a charcoal pan, the
wax is made to sweat and smooth itself. It is then
rubbed with a candle and clean linen, uti signa
marmorea nuda curantur .” These last words are
decisive as to the mode of colouring statues.
Plutarch, in his “ Roman Questions,” when he is
speaking of the ancient statues covered with ver¬
milion, says, that the colour very quickly faded,
and required renewing. Vitruvius, in the passage
just quoted, begins by saying,—“ If it is wished
that the vermilion wash should retain its colour,”

1 The Principe San Severo, at the end of the last century,
was said to have discovered the means of tinting marble so effec¬
tually, that thin slabs might be cut from it, each exhibiting the
same pattern. — Jean Mourse, Obs. sur Vltalie , iii. 91; Mag.
Fncyc. 1795, vol. iii. p. 28 ; 1797, vol. iv. p. 407.

2 Punic wax is purified wax. Its preparation is described by
Wornum in his Notes to Fuseli's Lectures , which see.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

135

wax and oil were used by the ancient sculptors,

obliterated. The atmosphere alone, even of an Italian or Grecian
climate, is sufficient to effect this in half a dozen years, without
washings and cleanings. Indeed, all such traces of colour should,
immediately they are discovered, be protected by a covering of
dissolved wax, so as to render unnecessary the application of the
sponge by each passing antiquary. Millin speaks of colour and gild¬
ing remaining on theElgin marbles previously to their being cleaned
in his time. {Mem. on the subject of the Earl of Elgin's Pursuits in
Greece , p. 77.) The same author, speaking of the bas-relief from
the Parthenon, now in the Louvre, says :—“ Avant que ce marbre
precieux eut ete nettoye , il conservoit des traces, non seulement
de la couleur encaustique dont, suivant l’usage des Grecs, on
enduisoit la sculpture, mais encore d’une veritable peinture dont

quelques parties etoient couvertes.Le fond etoit bleu ;

les cheveux et quelques parties du corps etoient dores. Les
petases (chapeaux) que portent quelques jeunes gens sur le reste
de la frise, sont peints en vert.” ( Mons. Ant. Ined. ii. 48.) Ziegler,
also, speaking of polychromy, says:—“Les marbres antiques de
nos musees, regulierement nettoyes depuis leur exhumation , ne
nous donnent aucune idee de ce que fut la sculpture peinte chez
les anciens, non aux epoques de barbarie ou de decadence, mais
aux temps de l’art de la Grece.” ( Etudes Ceramiques , p. 180.)
Thus we see that others have cried out against this cleaning
process. Had it not been for Canova, our Elgin marbles would
not merely have been cleaned, but restored ! It would be well if
this injury to ancient marbles awoke some of the indignation which
the injury inflicted by cleaning Bubens’ Serpent in the Wilder¬
ness awoke in the public mind, or of the regret which was mani¬
fested at the destruction of one of the masterpieces of Aristides,
on its being cleaned by M. Junius the Praetor. But, indepen¬
dently of injuring the surface, these continued washings destroy
all harmony of colouring. The accidental stains are generally
more prized by the artist than any unnatural rawness which is
obtained. “ Noch jetzt herrscht eine Vorliebe fur Werke der
Sculptur und Architektur, welche durch die Zeit einen Earbenton
erhalten haben.” (Stackelberg, Apollo-Tem'pel zu Eassce.) But

162

ANCIENT ART.

colouring statues by tlie Greeks, and the success
with which they practised it, a sufficient reason for
our doing so ? I think not, with our climate, and
with our architecture, and I may add, with our
sculpture. There is not a drawing-master but who
refuses to let his pupils paint in colours before
they know how to draw correctly. So colour,
even if introduced with all the delicacy and skill
of a Panaenus, a Parrhasius, or a Nicias, would
only make the inferiority of modern sculpture more
conspicuous. But even if perfect, a coloured statue
would scarcely look well where the architecture
remains uncoloured. For this reason I consider
that the application of gilding to the accessories
of the sculpture in the pediment of the British
Museum is unhappy and repulsive, because it is not

siecles; les grands artistes d’alors, par respect ponr certaines
traditions religienses et par indulgence peut-etre pour quelques
faiblesses humaines, admirent la coloration des statues, mais ils la
ployerent aux regies du gout et a l’autorite de leur genie ; opera¬
tion extremement difficile et qui reclamait ordinairement le con-
cours d’un peintre habile. Son ceil seul pouvait apprecier et
combiner ces teintes legeres qui, sans detruire l’harmonie de
1’ensemble, aidaient le spectateur a en admirer les lignes et a en
detailler les formes. II ne s’agissait pas de couches epaisses et
tranchantes qui cachaient la matiere dont on avait fabrique la
statue; c’etait seulement une gaze coloree, laissant paraitre le
marbre, tout en voilant sa durete. La lumiere se jouait a travers
ces couleurs transparentes, jusqu’a ce qu’elle les eut evaporees
comme un nuage; c’est elle encore plus que la main des restau¬
rateurs qui nous a laisse si peu de traces de coloration sur les
sculptures antiques.” (Revue Archeol. for 1845-6, pp. 441-2.)

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

175

where it is chiefly visible. From Cicero we learn
that the beauty of a statue depends upon repre¬
senting to the eye the harmonious proportions of the
several parts. Having once determined what these
harmonious proportions are, we might suppose that
sculptors had nothing else to do than to follow
them implicitly in all their works. The Mercury or
“ Antinous ” now holds the rank which the famous
“ Canon of Polycletus ” anciently possessed : it is
esteemed the most perfect model of human sym¬
metry, the most correct example of beauty and
proportion. Nor is it deficient in ideal excel¬
lence. An elegant writer says of it,—“ Its softness
is wholly its own, neither male nor female : the
attraction of the eyes is but half disclosed; their
lure is not that of a woman, yet it is that which
wishes to be noticed, but dares not fully show that
wish: the modesty of beauty draws a shade from
conscious shame : the look submitted to the earth
avoids the prying eye. More is unnecessary to be
remarked, or the judicious observer will find more
in the figure for his own contemplation.” 1 With
such a canon of art, how is it that some of the
most celebrated works of the Grecian chisel are
ill-proportioned ? How is it that we find the
Hercules by Glycon to be disproportionately large
in the upper part of the body, the head alone being

Bromley, ii. 98.

194

MODERN ART.

persuaded that his grouping will turn out to satis¬
faction, and provided he give a pleasing attitude
to his principal figure, and succeed tolerably well
with the likeness, he considers that he has overcome
his difficulty, and that the rest will be plain work.
How infinitely superior was the ancient method, as
in the monument of Mausolus, or the monument of
Pliilopappus. The hero is at the top, seated perhaps
in his curule chair or chariot, while under him are
rows of bas-relief, relating to his history. Many
examples might be quoted of ancient groups, as
described by Pausanias, and other writers.

The Greek artist endeavoured to throw ideality
into everything which he did, to convey the utmost
amount of spirituality into the faces of his divinities,
but the modern artist too frequently aims only at
identity. Artists should imitate Praxiteles, who
invested all his works with life, rather than his
contemporary Demetrius, who sought only to pro¬
duce a servile resemblance with all its faults.
Aristotle remarks a saying of Sophocles, who
observed,—“ I have depicted men as they should
be, while Euripides represents them as they are.”
It is this neglect of the inner feeling, that essential
requisite of true genius, which causes Jacobs to
exclaim, “While painting, without special models,
reached the highest summit of conceivable excel¬
lence in the course of a single century after its
revival, and filled all the countries of Europe,

204

MODERN ART.

ornaments, said,—“ So not being able to make ber
handsome, yon have made ber rich.” 1 2

“ Poets, like Painters, thus unskill’d to trace
The naked nature, and the living grace,

With gold and jewels cover every part,

And hide with ornaments their want of art.”

Pope.

Somewhat similar is the story given ns by Baldi-
nucci:—Michael Angelo seeing one of his pupils,
John of Bologna, carefully finishing an ill-studied
work, said, “ Young man, learn to dispose a figure
before you think of finishing it.” The history of
ancient art is full of such examples. Lucian points
out the folly it would be in a person who instead of
regarding the general effect of the Jupiter Olympius,
its beauty and majesty, dilates extravagantly on the
workmanship and finishing of his throne, and the
neatness of his pedestal. Yicias the painter used
to observe very commonly that it was no mean
matter in the art of painting to be able to treat
the subject with sufficient breadth and largeness,
and to avoid falling into little conceits. Quintilian
also remarks very justly, — cc Yitium est ubique,
quod nimium est.” 3 Philostratus holds up to our

1 Plutarch’s remark is to the same effect:—Simplicity is greatly
preferable to superfluous finery.— Sympos. vi. 7.

2 Accessories, (parerga,) however, when properly employed,
are praised by Galen, (De Usu Part. Hum. Corp. lib. xi.) and by

Philostratus, (Icon. i. In Piscatoribus.)

FROM THE EASTERN PEDIMENT OF THE PARTHENON.

PERSPECTIVE.

245

upon itself, but upon those immediately above and
below it. The artist of this wonderful group pre¬
ferred to keep his scale, to being over exact in
the proportions of the individual figures, and for
this reason he has diminished the trunk in order
that he may give more importance to the more
prominent lower portions of the body.

With this explanation, these figures may be con¬
sidered as examples of the rule we have established,
that the ancient artist represented the proportions
not as they are, but as he wished them to appear;
but in the Panathenaic frieze we behold an instance
of what appears at first sight to be a contrary
motive, the representing of a form as it really is,
and not as it appears to be : but we shall see that
it is the same principle; and that it is one which
would not be followed by the ordinary artist. In
a figure on horseback the thighs are naturally
thrust outwards, from the roundness of the
horse’s back. An artist, in drawing this, would
represent the thighs as they appeared to him—in
perspective—even if his drawing were to be in
outline: but the Greek artist’s eye was offended
at this; he perceived that the limb, being on
the same plane as all the other members, appeared
too short: he therefore lengthened it to the size
of nature, although it would be never seen so in
nature; preferring a correct appearance to the eye,
to a seeming incorrectness caused by an injudicious

PERSPECTIVE.

247

Halicarnassian frieze is very remarkable, as showing
how easily the eye may be deceived, and how
cautions we should be in discovering errors in the
great masters of antiquity. Any one looking at

this figure would say that the left leg is considerably
shorter than the right: but the contrary is the
fact. The eye naturally makes comparison between
the lines A B and A C : but if instead of doing
this we measure the left thigh from the patella B
to the superior spinous process of the ilium, F,
where a hole happens to be bored in the original

250

MODERN ART.

looked upon, like Algardi’s bas-relief at St. Peter's, 1
as pictures rather than as mere sculptures — for

as such their author evidently conceived them.”

1 It is a great pity that the true treatment of bas-reliefs was
not understood in Barry’s time. The bas-reliefs by Algardi,
Paget, &c., are eulogized by him, and he even proposes to amend
the JNiobe and Laocoon groups by the addition of such picture-
reliefs.— Led. v.

260

MODERN ART.

introducing steps in the centre of the pediment,
the lines of which partake somewhat of the raking
line of pediment.

The same taste and judgment evidenced in the
bas-reliefs and pedimental sculpture of the ancients,
is observable also in the beauty of their gem¬
engraving. We have seen that the bas-reliefs of the
Parthenon are sharp in outline and flat in surface.
In gem-engraving also the artist sought to give
a square character to his work, so that he might
make up by clearness for the want of size : while to
increase the effect, he sought* to obtain a bold relief,
and the utmost contrast of form, both in light and
shade, and in mass and detail.

262

MODERN ART.

Such beauty we may never see, except in mental
vision, but it not the less exists. No doubt but
individual beauty is more captivating when expres¬
sion is given to the eye, the mouth, or dimpled
cheek; and in painting these charms can be ex¬
pressed, for painting, dealing in colour as well as
form, is permitted to aim at identity of resem¬
blance : but sculpture is deprived of this advantage.
A painted statue coloured to the life, would look
more unreal than marble, for a painted image, by
its very resemblance to nature, would make its
deficiency the more apparent, while the marble
statue,' appearing at first sight only marble, by
its just proportions and beautiful symmetry grows
gradually upon the mind, till it forgets the material,
and sees only the unseen. As colour is inadmis¬
sible, so are the other accessories already noticed.
The transient expressions of the eye or mouth, when
indicated in the marble, become perpetualized, and
that which was pleasing in the living model, proves
a blemish in the lifeless stone. The sculptor then
who aims at beauty must discard all adventitious
charms, and fix his eye on the first principles of
beauty, which are marred only when we attempt
to add to them. The opponents pf idealism will
say,—The object of the artist should be to copy
nature. We grant it, but contend that nature by
their procedure is not copied. The idealist observes
nature, and generalizes ’ it; he takes his examples

270

MODERN ART.

age. 1 On the contrary, candour must lead us to
acknowledge that sculpture, with the sister arts, 2 is
rising, both in this country and on the continent. 3
One thing, however, we cannot be too careful lest
we fall into—a pedantry of art, which leads us to
praise Greek art merely because it is Greek, and
to despise modern art because it is not Greek. One

1 The President of the Boyal Academy, West, says,—“ I know
of no people, since the Greeks, who have indicated a higher
promise to equal them, than the British nation. But this can
only take place when the whole mass of the people shall be
awake to the usefulness of the arts, and to the splendour which
they confer.”

2 What has been said of sculpture, in comparing modern art
with ancient, may be said of any of the other arts ; although both
in architecture and painting, as in music, a greater facility is
doubtless afforded for developing new forms and principles of art.

3 At least we must think so, if we can believe the rhapsodies of
a Prench writer, who asks:—

“ Ne trouve-t-on pas dans les compositions des plus celebres
sculpteurs modernes cette verite, cette variete, cette convenance
d’idees qui forment le caractere d’une invention ingenieuse, cette
fidelite, cette clarte, cette decence, ce choix heureux qui enno-
blissent l’historique d’un evenement ? Les efforts de leur genie
ne reunissent-ils pas ce brillant enthousiasme, cette oeconomie
raisonee, cette diversity de groupes, depressions, de contrastes,
d’effets; cette harmonie aimable, cette S 9 avante execution d’ou
resulte le Beau-Pittoresque; cette nouveaute de pensees ; cette
singularity interessante, ce merveilleux eloquent, qui par l’organe
du ciseau parle aux yeux du connoisseur le langage de la Poesie;
enfin, cette elevation d’idees, cette noblesse de sentimens, cette
magnificence de spectacle, qui portent dans l’esprit, et jusqu’au
fond du coeur, les impressions du Sublime ? —Dandr£-Bardon,
Traite de Peinture , p. 20.

312

APPENDIX.

Page 148.

“ I saw them fade away in the sunlight , like a ghost .”

“ Si le temple est renverse, c’est dans le sol qu’il faut chercber
les fragmens enduits de couleur. L’humidite de la terre conserve
ces precieux restes de la decoration peinte, et les rend au jour
avec un eclat admirable. Malheureusement les couleurs ainsi
revivees, c’est-a-dire rougees par les sels terrestres, ne sont que
plus rapidement devorees par la lumiere, et disparaissent en tres-
peu de temps. Le stuc, a cause de son grain et de l’epaisseur de
la couleur, garde mieux que la pierre les tons dont on l’a revetu.
II est done tres-important que celui qui decouvre un monument
ou un fragment, note aussitot les couleurs dont il porte les traces:
bientot il n’est plus temps. Yoila pourquoi le temoignage des
vojageurs ou des explorateurs est precieux, et l’eut ete surtout
jadis, quand les decouvertes etaient faciles et frequentes. Lorsque
les fragments colores sortent du sol, il est impossible de se trom-
per, tant leur teinte est fraiche et saisissable.”—M. Beule, La
JBolychromie , Bevue Gen. de l’Archre., vol. xvi. p. 202.

316

APPENDIX.

Droz (Joseph).—Etude sur le Beau dans les Arts.8vo. Paris, 1815

Duff (Wm.)—Essay on Original Genius. 8vo. Lond. 1767

Duncan (P. B.)—Essay on Sculpture . 8vo.

Durand (David).—Histoire de la Peinture Ancienne, extraite de l'Hist.

Naturelle de Pline, liv. xxxv., eclairci par des Remarques

nouvelles.Fol. Lond. 1725

Dutens (M. S.)—Principes abrdgds de Peinture, suivis d'un Discours sur

f Architecture et la Sculpture. 8vo. Tours, 1803

Dyce (William).—The Theory of the Fine Arts.1844

Eastlake (Sir Charles Lock).—Contributions to the Literature of the Fine Arts.

8vo. Lond. 1848

Eberhard (J. A.)—Handbuch der .Esthetik .... 4 theile, 8vo. Halle, 1807-20

Edwards (E.)—Fine Arts in England.8vo. Lond. 1840

England.—Its Public Monuments...8vo. Lond. 1853

Enguidanos.—Coleccion de Yaciados deEstatuas Antiguas.. 8vo. Madrid, 1794

Essais Historiques et Philosophiques sur le Gofit .8vo. La Haye, 1737

Essay on Perfecting the Fine Arts in Great Britain .8vo. Dublin, 1767

Estbve (M.)—L’Esprit des Beaux Arts : ou Histoire raisonnde du Gout.

12mo. Paris, 1753

Evelyn (John).—Sculptura.12mo. Lond. 1755

Falconet.—Pieces written b}', on Sculpture.4to. Lond. 1777

Fau (Julien).—The Anatomy of the External Form of Man.. Fol. Lond. 1849

Fayole.—Essai sur le Goflt. 8vo. Paris, an. viii.

Felibien.—Des Principes de l’Architecture, de la Sculpture, de la Peinture, etc.

4to. Paris, 1690

Fergusson (James).—Historical Inquiry into the True Principles of Beauty

in Art .8vo. Lond. 1849

Flaxman (J.)—Lectures on Sculpture.8vo. Lond. 1829

Forsyth (James).—Remarks on Antiquities, Arts, and Letters in Italy.

8vo. Lond. 1816

Fraguier.—La Galerie de Yerres.

Acad. Roy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome vi.

-Anciennete de la Peinture.

Acad. Roy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome i.
Francis (Fredk. J.)—The Fine Arts of Greece during the age of Pericles.

8vo. Lond. 1839

Franco (Nicolo).—Dialogo dove si ragiona delle Bellezze.. .. 8vo. Yenet. 1542

Du Fresnoy (Mons. C. A.)—De Arte Graphica.12mo. Paris, 1668

--<-The Art of Painting, translated by the Rev. W. Mason.

12mo. Lond. 1782

Fuseli (H.)—Reflections on the Painting and Sculpture of the Greeks.

8vo. Lond. 1765

-Life and Writings of, by Knowles.2 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1851

--Lectures. See Wornum.

Galenus (C.)—Suasoria ad Artes Oratio.8vo. Lond. 1741

Gallarati (Franc. Maria).—Delle Cagioni per le quali nel nostro secolo pochi

riescono eccellenti disegnatori. 8vo. Milano, 1780

Gamier (Adolphe).—Observations sur le Beau.

Gartside (M.)—Essay on Light and Shade.4to. Lond. 1805

Gauricus (Pomponius).—De Sculptura, ubi agitur de Symetriis, de Linea-
mentis, de Physiognomia, de Perspectiva, de Chemia, de Ecty-

posi, de Celatura, etc.8vo. Flor. 1504

Gddoyn.—Histoire de Phydias.

Acad. Roy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome ix.

Gerard (Alex. DD.)—An Essay on Genius.8vo. Lond. 1774

Ghezzi (Giuseppe).—II Merito delle Belle Arti .4to. Roma.

XV111

PREFACE.

and emulation of art. However this may be, we
follow him to Crete, where we find him engaged in
many great works, amongst others the forming of
a cow. What is the fable connected with this
animal, but another mode of saying that, like
Myron, his skill in forming animals was so great,
that they deceived those of the same species ? 1
Here he built the labyrinth, and the fable next
reports that his guilt being discovered by the king,
he confined Dasdalus and his son Icarus in the
labyrinth which he had just completed. From this
they escaped by means of wings, which Daedalus
constructed of wood and feathers, and fastened to
the body with wax. The wings being adjusted to
the body of his son, Daedalus on his knees conjured
him not to fly too high; but the impetuous spirit
of youth led him to disregard the cautions of ex¬
perience, and the wax melting by the sun’s heat,
the unhappy Icarus, who had taken an opposite
direction to that of his father, fell into the sea by
the island Doliche, near to Samos, which island as
well as the sea itself was thereafter called by his
name. Daedalus, more diffident and more ex-

1 The same is said of a brazen cow placed at the fountain
Peirene at Corinth.—Athen. Deip. xiii. p. 605.

ANCIENT ART.

in one image, and tins image resolved itself into the
eternal principle, the divine.

Having formed in his mind’s eye an idea of the
divine perfections, he next sought so to transfer
this sentiment to the cold marble, that the spectator
should be filled with the same emotions ; and thus
the study of works of art was not with him so much
an investigation into the art of imitating them, as a
searching into the divine attributes therein por¬
trayed. He did not look upon a statue merely as
a fine work of art, but he regarded it also as em¬
bodying his religion. Instead of beholding a bust
with the transient emotion with which we regard
what we call “ a fine Jupiter,” he would con¬
template the majesty of the god shown in his brow

parcequ’il lui etoit arrive quelquefois que des gens qui 1’avoient
vu dans ces transports, Favoient soup 9 onne de folie. Lorsque
dans sa jennesse il travailloit an tableau du Martyre de S. Andre,
qui est a S. Gregoire, Annibal Carracbe etant alle pour le voir, il
le surprit comme il etoit dans une action de colere et menagante.
Apres l’avoir observe quelque terns, il connut qu’il representoit un
soldat qui menace le S. Apotre. Alors ne pouvant plus se tenir
cache, il s’approcha du Domeniquin, et en l’embrassant, lui
avoiia qu’il avoit dans ce moment-la beaucoup appris de lui.”—
j Entretiens sur les Vies des Peintres, iii. 379.

The fables related of Parrhasius, Giotto, and Michael Angelo,
each of whom is accused of subjecting people to torture in
order to make their paintings more real, need merely be
alluded to.

Zeuxis died of laughing at the picture of a comical old woman
which he had painted ; while Spinello of Arezzo died of terror in
having painted Lucifer too ngly.

126

ANCIENT ART.

afterwards Theodoric died. Eight years after, the
tesserae which composed the body suddenly became
disunited and dropped off, and his nephew and suc¬
cessor Atalaricus died. Some time after, the lower
part of the body fell away, and Theodoric’s daughter
Amalasuntha also died. The remainder of the pic¬
ture, from the thighs to the feet, fell down while
the Goths were besieging Rome, so that there was
nothing left of it ; and from this the Romans
augured that as the Goths might be called the feet
of Theodoric, his power was now entirely gone,
and that they might look for victory.” 1 2

The Greeks were, at a recent period, proclaimed
to be ignorant even of chiaroscuro. cc But for this
calumny,” says Opie, “ there appears not the
shadow of a foundation : the works of their poets,
orators, and philosophers abound with allusions to,
and passages in the most lively manner describing
its effects.” 3 It would puzzle some of our painters
who boast in the discoveries and perfection of their
art, were we to tell them that even the process
of painting in oil, alleged to have been invented by
Van-Eyck in the fifteenth century, is clearly shown
by Lessing to have been practised by the ancients . 3

1 Be Bello Goth. i. 24.

2 This question has been amply settled by the discovery of
ancient fresco paintings.

3 Be VAntiquite de la Beinture a VHuile , prouvee par le Moin
Theophile.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

127

The ancients have been declared also to have
been ignorant of anatomy, so far at least as relates
to the internal organization of the human body . 1

1 “ There is a supposition, that because the G-reeks made the
right use of anatomical knowledge, in showing only the conse¬
quences of its internal muscular action on the skin, and not
displaying it as it is when the skin is off, that they were unac¬
quainted with it. Is it likely that a people so remarkable for
acting on principle in everything connected with the arts, should
in this most important point act without it ? I will defy an eye,
ten times more refined than even a Greek’s was, to execute the
infinite varieties of the human body, influenced by internal and
external organization, constantly acting on each other, without
being first thoroughly versed in its structure.”—Haydon, Lectures
on Fainting and Design , ii. 237. So far from anything being
omitted, we find “ every tendon, bone, and muscle, distinguished
from each other in substance and shape, and always indicated
where nature indicated them.”-— lb. ii. 220. See also i. 23.

The fact is, that the study of anatomy from the dead subject is
very simple and soon discovered; it is the anatomy as displayed
in the living subject which requires long study and attention. It
is the former we direct our attention to : it was the latter which
was chiefly studied by the Greeks.

“ The anatomy probably was more strictly the physiology of the
bones and muscles, from the skeleton and the living subject; for
the anatomy or dissection of the dead subject, whether practised
by the Greeks or not, is of little or no service to the painter or
sculptor. The artist studies the forms assumed by the muscles
in various action: after death the flesh becomes flaccid, and the
muscles lose their shape, even that which they had when in
repose ; and the mere knowledge of the origins and insertions of
muscles could avail little toward a comprehension of their various
forms on the healthy living subject. A model of the human
figure with the superficial muscles exposed, and a good living
subject, (or model in academy language,) to show the forms and

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

181

passing beauty: and this is the more probable,
from the temples themselves being decorated in
every part with colour and gilding . 1 Pliny tells
a story of a statue of Diana at Cos by Bupalus
and Anthermus, which was so contrived, that
whoever entered the temple, saw the goddess
frowning, but on their leaving, she appeared to
smile. The story is regarded as a fable : but
it is probably quite true. Such must have been
the effect of these colossal statues, that, on drawing
aside the veil, the eye of the spectator must have
been struck with wonder and astonishment. If
sincere in his belief, he must have looked upon the
image as God, and have fallen down in fear and
trembling. By degrees, as his prayers ascended,
a soothing influence would steal upon his heart,
and he would look up, and behold the beauty of
the goddess, till at length, all fears allayed, he
would retire in the consciousness of peace. Paulus
A^milius, on sacrificing to the Jupiter Olympius,
seemed to think that the flesh was animated; and
Lucian says of this image, “ Those who enter the
temple, see no longer the gold of Thessaly, or
Indian ivory, but the very son of Saturn and
-n

offered to us by the poets, were taken from such statues.—“ We
all know that wherever gold is applied to any object, it increases
its beauty.”—Plato, Ilippias Major.

1 Por a vindication of ancient polychromy, see Kaoul-liochette,
Lectures on Anct. Art , lect. vii.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

145

movement of tlie fingers which grasp it . 1 The
fringe is adorned with serpents which rattle as
she moves. On her head is the crested helmet,
adorned with plume and griffin. The proportions
and symmetry of the figure are perfect, and the
members well executed. The face, though more
beautiful than the Diana of Oplonte, is yet modelled
in the same style, the eyes being pointed, and
the lower part of the face deficient in that grace
and roundness which is observable in works of a
later period. The hair is elegantly arranged in
ringlets falling on the neck, which is adorned with
a necklace of pearls. Her dress consists of a
long tunic, over which is a peplos, both arranged
in close folds, in the Etruscan manner; the peplos
is fastened on the shoulder with a fibula in the
shape of a serpent. The feet are protected by
sandals. c/ ‘ Les cheveux en furent autrefois dores, non
avec les feuilles tres legeres retenues par un blanc
d’ceuf, comme celles qui couvroient la chevelure de
la Venus de Medicis, et de TApollon du Belvedere,
mais par des lames d’or tellement epaisses , qu on
pouvoit les detacher such as that with which in
the time of Homer they used to cover the horns of
oxen killed at the solemn sacrifices. Winckelmann
describes colour also on the drapery, and other

1 It is represented in the same manner in a fragment of terra¬
cotta published by Brondsted, vol. ii. pi. xlii.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

155

The chryselephantine colouring they dismiss as being

arrived in England, that they were not Greek, but Eoman, of
the time of Hadrian: and so Sir William Chambers declared
that in his opinion the Parthenon was inferior to the church of
St. Martin’s-in-the-Eields.

Thus we shall not be surprised to find that even Greek sculp¬
ture is decried by some writers. Perrault declares that it is only
by prejudice that Greek Sculpture is preferred to modern, and
that the works of modern art, and particularly those of Girardon,
would be quite equal to the ancient, if they had but the accumu¬
lated dirt and colour of two thousand years; Bauchardon compares
the Apollo Belvedere to a scraped turnip; (navet ratisse;) and
Dandre Bardon directs his pupils how to avoid “ les pratiques
vicieuses” of the ancient sculptors.

Thus in Painting, Architecture, and Sculpture, writers have
been found, even among men of talent, who, led aside by pre¬
judice, and ignorant of what was foreign to their own art, have
rashly censured what they did not understand. Nor is this
conceit confined to modern times. Apelles and Phidias were called
by the Eoman artists of Petronius’s time “ Mad Greeklings.”
So in literature :—in the same spirit of self-conceit, Voltaire said of
Aristophanes,—that poet whose works St. Chrysostom used to put
beneath his pillow, — “ Ce poete comique, qui n’est ni comique ni
poete, n’aurait pas ete admis parmi nous a donner ses farces a la
foire St. Laurent.” Even Seneca, in his day, is said to have spoken
contemptuously of the writers of antiquity.

In considering the great number of authenticated instances of
chromo-decorated Greek temples, monuments so numerous that
it would be difficult to say that any temple existed in Greek times
without being poly chromized, and considering the elegance and
purity which invariably distinguish such coloured decoration, it
seems wonderful how such a prejudice as to the period of this
colouring could ever have existed in the mind of any artist at all
conversant with antiquity, or of any antiquary having the slightest
feeling for art. It is satisfactory to find Professor Cockerell
giving a decided opinion on this subject. Speaking of the temple

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

163

carried out by colour. At present, these accessories
are as glaring as the gold chain and the pommel
of the sword in the figure of a Lord Mayor in front
of one of our suburban almshouses , 1 where we find
them most elaborately gilt. That which was beau¬
tiful in the Parthenon, becomes offensive in the
modern portico. It is with this feeling that Hume,
in his Essay on Eloquence, observes, ec How
absurd would it appear, in our temperate and calm
speakers, to make use of an Apostrophe , like those
of Demosthenes or Cicero ! [which he quotes, and
then adds:] With what a blaze of eloquence
must such a sentence be surrounded, to give it
grace, or cause it to make any impression on the
hearers ?” 3

1 In the Kingsland Road.

2 The foregoing observations on polychromy have necessarily
partaken of a controversial character; but I trust it will be seen
that the arguments made use of have reference to facts and
principles, and not to persons. The object of the essay was to
establish the transcendent excellency of Greek art, and it would
therefore have ill become me to pass by criticisms condemnatory
of Greek taste, even though such criticisms proceeded from the
pens of writers honoured and esteemed by all lovers of art.

174

ANCIENT ART.

perspective, Lysippus is said to have made his
figures thin, in order to prevent their appearing
squat.

In fact, we should, in looking at works of art,
determine the proportions by the eye and judg¬
ment, (“ phantasy,”) as Diodorus Siculus informs
us was the custom of the Greeks, a custom not
followed by the Egyptians ; we should with Michael
Angelo, have our “ compasses in our eyes;” or
in other words, we should be less careful of actual
proportions than of the proportion which appears
correct. This may be exemplified by the spokes of
a wheel seen in rather rapid rotation. The painter
who would wish to convey the notion of velocity
must represent them, not in straight lines, as
they really are, but in numberless curved lines
directed to the top and bottom, as they appear
to be :—

the reason being that when at the sides they are
transverse to the line of vision, but when at top
and bottom they are longer in vision, being in the
line of axis; and consequently there is a tendency
in each spoke to appear to bend to the quarter

DECLINE OE ART.

187

examples of ancient design collected together
for study and imitation. However much we ac¬
knowledge the necessity and usefulness of public
museums, in which examples of every description
are placed together for the instruction of the
student, we cannot but admit that the mere
possession of such collections will not produce
eminence in art . 1 Constantinople in the eleventh
century is said to have possessed, though there is
some reason to doubt the accuracy of the state¬
ment, the Olympian Jupiter of Phidias, the Juno
of Polycletus, the Pallas of Lindus, the Venus of
Cnidus, and the Opportunity of Lysippus; but
what did it produce? “ Is it not well known,”
says Quatremere de Quincy, “ that Constantinople
once possessed in the collections of the palace of
Lausus and the Gymnasium of Zeuxippus, the most
beautiful assemblage of the works of Greece ? But
did these collections ever create a Byzantine artist ?
Did not ancient Rome possess successively the

1 The very multiplicity of such works prevents their study.
The great majority of the visitors to a museum go there as to a
sight. The eye remains on each successive object only so long as the
visitor is occupied in passing by it. Men are generally too full of
business to devote more than a passing hour to a whole museum.
“ Magni negotiorum officiorumque acervi abducunt omnes a con-
templatione talium, quoniam otiosorum et in magno loci silentio
apta admiratio tabs est.”—Plin. xxxvi. 5. Hume thought that the
importation of Greek sculpture was the cause of the non-success
of art at Pome !

196

MODERN ART.

deity represented . 1 Sometimes the artist has imi¬
tated what he considered to be a beauty, without
understanding it. From an expression in Homer,
relating to large eyes, they have in some modern
statues represented the eye as straining from its
socket. The flat dimpled chin of the Medicean
Venus has been in like manner copied, though by
the best judges it is considered a defect, both
from its attempting to fix a transient emotion,
and from its interfering with the divine expression
of countenance so peculiar to the gods. Mont-
faucon’s error in mistaking a bearded head with
open mouth for a Jupiter pronouncing an oracle,
is an error proceeding from a forgetfulness of
Greek art. The continued expression of senti¬
ment in sculpture, arising from the necessity of
abstaining from all transient emotions, is adverted
to by Byron :—

“ The ruling passions, such as marble shows,

When exquisitely chisell’d, still lay there,

But fix’d as marble’s unchanged aspect throws
O’er the fair Yenus, but for ever fair,

O’er the Laocoon’s all eternal throes,

And ever-dying gladiator’s air,

Their energy like life forms all their fame,

Yet looks not life, for they are still the same.”

Contrasted with the ideality of the ancients is

1 See M. de Montabert’s Traite complet de la Peinture , ch. xi.
“ Des Restorations dans les Monumens de la Sculpture Antique.”

INDIVIDUALITY.

203

Horace showed himself to be a true artist, when he
condemned, not merely the rude identity of form,
but the too careful finishing of parts, rightly con¬
sidering that the simplicity and breadth of a subject
must be prejudiced by such treatment.

“ Eaber imus et ungues
Exprimet, et molles imitabitur ssre capillos :

Infelix operis summa, quia ponere totum
JNesciet.”

Cicero bids us to beware, lest in carefully finishing
the hydra and lion’s skin, we should forget the
Hercules; and so others might be quoted. It
was well said by a great philosopher, though his
meaning has been misunderstood and censured by
an eminent writer on the subject, (Emeric David,
Becherches , p. 217,)—“ Statues, like great men,
should be regarded only from a distance.” That
is to say, we should consider first the general
significance and symmetry of a statue, its attitude
and outline, and not till then should we attempt
to judge of it in detail. Hay more, however beau¬
tiful the individual parts of a work of sculpture
may be, if it be not designed to please the eye at
a distance, it has failed in its object. We laugh
at those artists, says Galen, who aim at truth in
the details, and neglect it in the principal parts.
Zeuxis, seeing one of his pupils occupied in em¬
bellishing a figure of Yenus with superfluous

210

MODERN ART.

III.

COSTUME.

The greatest difficulty with which the modern
sculptor has to contend is that of drapery. No
one can be insensible to the superior beauty of the
ancient costume. Nothing can be more conducive
to simplicity and grandeur, nothing so highly con-
tributive to variety of effect, at the same time that
it furnishes opportunity for the richest detail. All
this will be acknowledged : but the objection is
made,—However beautiful it is, we cannot use it
now; we must identify the costume of our sculpture
with that of the age in which we live. Historically
considered, no doubt this reasoning is correct, but
viewed with regard to art it requires to be modified.
Sculpture of two centuries old, however excellent it
may be, is looked upon as antiquated, and unsuited
to our present tastes. The statue of George the
Third, from representing the king with a bag-wig
and tail, is become a general laughing-theme with the
vulgar, notwithstanding that the horse upon which
he rides is the finest in Europe. But imagine that
this horse had served for a figure of St. George and

214

MODERN ART.

ciations witli all that is glorious in history. Let
the millionaire, or the man who is desirous of pur¬
chasing honour with money, be represented in the
costume of the day : for being unknown to fame,
and unentitled to distinction, his statue will last
but little longer than the fashion of his garment;
but let all those who are entitled to their country’s
praise, be represented in a costume which is alike
honourable and poetical, and suited for distinction
in every age.

The following letter to Yisconti was published in
the Moniteur , No. 216 of the year 1804, by Denon.
In speaking of a statue to be erected to Buonaparte
in the Chamber of Deputies at Paris, he says :—

“ L’execution de cet ouvrage sera pour la sculpture Inaugura¬
tion d’une nouvelle epoque: mais a cette epoque ou les destins
de la France se presentent sous un aspect si grand, pourquoi ne
redonnerait-on pas aux arts, et particulierement a la sculpture,
toute cette grandiosite qui la rendit si recommandable dans les
beaux siecles de la Grece et de Borne P Pourquoi ne la debar-
rasserait-on pas de ces entraves de costume qui arreterent ses
progres sous le regne de Louis XIY, et qui penserent l’aneantir
sous ceux de Louis XY et de Louis XYI ?

“ En vain on pourra alleguer que, pour la veracite de l’histoire,
cbaque monument doit rappeler les usages de chaque siecle; les
Grecs ni les Romains n’avaient coutume de paraitre en public
avec les jambes, les bras, et l’estomac nuds, et cependant ils se
sont bien gardes de couvrir de vetemens les statues de leurs
heros, de leurs rois, de leurs empereurs. Celle d’Epaminondas
(au Musee Napoleon), vetu d’un simple manteau, est aussi de-
cente que noble. S’apper 9 ait-on que le Germanicus soit nud ?
Apr£s le regne de Tibere toutes les recherches de l’affecterie
furent employees dans la parure des empereurs, mais on n’imagina

DECORUM.

227

with gravity, and regulate all their movements by
the laws of elegance and decorum. “ The rules of
gesture and action,” says Quintilian, “ descend to
us from the heroic ages: they are approved by the
greatest men of Greece, and by Socrates himself.
Plato classes them with the useful and necessary
qualifications of a public man; and Chrysippus
has^not omitted them in his book on the education
of children.” Plotinus and Nigidius wrote on the
laws of action : many taught them in their schools.
Quintilian gives minute rules for the observance
of orators. Nothing was thought so much of by the
ancients as an elevated bearing : for any defect in this
respect was considered to denote some imperfection
of the mind. It was with this attention to the laws
of elegance that Cicero advised the Homan youth
not to walk with too hurried a gait. Pericles paid
the same attention to his dress as to his con¬
versation, never allowing it to appear vulgar or
disordered. Cassar cannot fall without adjusting
his drapery, at the foot of the statue of Pompey,
and addressing an earnest reproof to one of the
conspirators. So, too, the chaste Lucretia :—

“ Tunc quoque jam moriens, ne non procumbat honeste,
Uespicit: hsec etiam cura cadentis erat.”

Oyid. ii. Fast. 833.

The Emperor Constantine Palaeologus, on the
storming of Byzantium, finding all further hope

258

MODERN ART.

how the waving lines of the sculpture should con¬
trast happily with the geometric lines of the archi¬
tecture ; how the gradually-increasing sizes of his
figures should be in an harmonious ratio, without
violating the laws of reason ; the subject partaking
of a perspective character, as though the ends of
the pediment were farther removed than the centre;
how the fulness and roundness of the sculpture
should unite the whole in one composition ; how his
composition should tell, whether viewed from a
distance, immediately underneath, or from either
extremity; but above all he took care, by increased
size to his principal figures, to concentrate his
subject, and thus make these figures tell the story,
even at a glance; for unless attention is paid to this
unity of design, all is confusion. On considering the
western pediment of the Parthenon, which contains
the most beautiful group left us from antiquity, 1
we feel convinced that a still more transcendent
grandeur and beauty must have been displayed
in the eastern pediment, so unhappily destroyed
at the time of the Venetian bombardment. But
instead of finding in the restorations of this pedi¬
ment by the various critics who have written on
the subject, that blending of the lines, and weld-

1 So wonderful is this sculpture, that no artist should com¬
mence the sculpture of a modern pediment without making himself
master of the principles of design employed by Phidias.

THE IDEAL.

265

was difficult. One who had not been instructed
in the theory of the beautiful, would have imitated
only the unseemliness and deformity of his model. 1 2
When a painter, says Plutarch, has to draw a fine
and elegant form, which happens to have some
little blemish, we do not want him entirely to pass
over that blemish, nor yet to mark it with exact¬
ness : the one would spoil the beauty of the picture,
and the other destroy the likeness. This difference,
therefore, is to be observed in the treatment of
portraits in ancient and in modern times. While the
Roman and modern portraits represent every acci¬
dental mark or blemish, those of the Greek philo¬
sophers indicate only those peculiarities of the face

1 The details of this figure are thus described by David, from
whom are taken the preceding remarks :—“ Les vices du squelette
ne sont pas deguises; le rachitisme se voit jusque sur le visage.
L’orbite des yeux est plus ouvert et moins profond que dans les
tetes du haut style. On voit les prunelles. Une levre se porte
legerement a droite, et 1’autre vers le cote oppose. Le menton vient
en avant; la barbe courte et pointue presente peu de masses; elle
annonce un homme foible. Mais les muscles surciliers sont forts ;
le front est soutenu; l’enfoncement des tempes le fait paroitre
plus grand. Les cheveux, crepus et groupes en haut de la tete,
en augmentent Televation. Ce mouvement des cheveux, lais-
sant les oreilles a decouvert, agrandit les plans des joues. La
barbe et les cheveux sont d’un beau travail. La bouche
est fine et gracieuse; le regard anime se tourne vers le ciel;
l’ensemble de la figure a une verite, une douceur, une noblesse
inexprimables.”—T. M. Emeric David, Recherches sur la Sculp¬
ture, p. 368. It is remarkable that the statue of iEsop was
placed at Athens before those of all other philosophers.

2 M

APPENDIX.

Pages 1-25.

Was the Ceiling of the Parthenon flat or curved?

“ Paris, le l er Mars , 1860.

“ Mon CHER CoNERERE ET AMI,

“ J’ai re$u votre billet du 18 Janvier, et j’y aurais repon-
da tout de suite, si je ne m’etais trouve, comrae je le suis encore,
dans un demenagement qui m’empeche de rien faire de serieux
et de suivi. J’ai quitte mon ancien cabinet, et je m’en suis fait
construire un nouveau. Quoique toujours dans ma maison, ce
ebangement a ete un grand et long derangement pour moi. Ma
bibliotheque, mes dessins, et mes manuscrits sont encore dans le
plus grand desordre, et avant un ou deux mois, peut-etre, il ne
me sera pas possible de m’occuper, ni du rapport sur l’ouvrage
de l’ami Donaldson, dont l’Academie (Institute of Prance) m’a
charge, ni de celui qui m’a ete demande sur votre brochure.
Youz avez souleve une question du plus haut interet, mais aussi
bien difficile a resoudre d’une maniere precise. Je me suis,
depuis longtemps deja, occupe de la definition de l’hypsethre et
de l’eclairage des temples antiques en general, car je dois en trailer
dans ma prochaine publication du grand temple a Selinunte, qui
formera le complement de mon premier volume de l’Architecture

290

APPENDIX.

observed that in all these instances, the arch of the propylon at
G-ournou only excepted, the bricks are invariably placed longi¬
tudinally :—

whereas in the Roman method, the way followed by ourselves, a
stronger and more perfect principle is employed, by which each
brick has a firmer and more secure bed.

Had the Romans formed the vaults at the Memnonium, they
would doubtless have built according to their own method. The
conclusion is therefore evident that they cannot be Roman, and
must be of the same date as other monuments in Egypt con¬
structed on the same principle of design ; unless, indeed, we
suppose the arches to have been executed by Egyptian workmen,
uncontrolled by Roman architects. Here then are evidences, not
of the mere knowledge of the arch by the ancient Egyptians,
but of their extensive use of it, and we can, therefore, only
explain why the arch is never found in Egyptian temples, or in
Greek temples, by the hypothesis given us by Mr. Bonomi, that
they avoided it from a knowledge of its suicidal properties.

One solitary example occurs of an arch built according to the
present system, or with the bricks placed transversely, which,
for that circumstance, I should regard as of comparatively modern

APPENDIX.

305

his own, (fig. 4,) is preferred to the beautiful forms exhibited in
Corinthian capitals, (ii. 17.)

“ The Corinthian fluting is a mean multiplication and deepening of the
Doric, and is always rigid and meagre.” (i. 293.)

“The classical cornice is a sophistication.” (i. 304.)

“These pediments, and stylobates, and architraves never excited a pleasur¬
able feeling in you, and never will, to the end of time.” {Lectures, p. 52.)

“The putting sculpture at the top of an edifice [on the frieze] under the
cornice, was a Greek way of doing things. I can’t help it: that does not
make it a wise one.” (p. 71.) The putting it at the top is “ the utmost pitch
of absurdity.” (p. 126.)

“The Doric manner of ornament admitted no temptation, it was the fasting
of an anchorite ; the Venetian ornament embraced, while it governed, all
vegetable and animal forms ; it was the temperance of a man, the command
of Adam over creation.” {Seven Lamps, p. 88.)

This style of writing, and the above may be regarded as a fair
specimen, whether understood or not, may be considered very
poetical; but is it true P Or did the Doric temple possess no
delicate lines of bas-relief, no bold metopes, no magnificent pedi-
mental sculpture, no picturesque acroterial ornaments, no glitter¬
ing antifixse, no painted and gilt tiling ? Did it contain under its
porticos no fresco paintings ? Was it embellished with no bronze
and marble sculpture ? Was the whole temple not set off with
the most exquisite painting and coloured ornaments ? And was
not the whole, not merely rich and picturesque, but chaste,
imposing, beautiful, of most wondrous symmetry, perfect, and
hopelessly unequalled ?

SCULPTUEE.

The following are his dicta on sculpture :—

The perfection of art in the Elgin mai'bles is denied, because “the draperies
are unfinished, the hair and wool of the animal are unfinished, and the entire
bas-reliefs are roughly cut.” {Stones of Venice, ii. 171.)

“ Greek statues are blank fields of stone, or depths of shadow, relieving the
form of the statue, as the world of lower nature which they despised retired
in darkness from their hearts.” {Two Paths, p. 36.)

APPENDIX.

818

Keratry.—Du Beau.12mo. Paris, 1822

King (H.)—A Letter on Poetry, Painting, and Sculpture.Lond. 1768

Knisht (R. P.)—Analytical Inquiry into the Principles of Taste.

8vo. Lond. 1805

Knox (Robt.)—Great Artists and great Anatomists .12mo. Lond. 1852

Kugler (Franz Theodor).—Ueber die Polychromie der Griechischen Architek-

tur und Sculptur, und ihre Granzen.4to. Berlin, 1835

-Ueber die Anstalten und Einrichtungen zur Forderung der bil-

denden Kiinste, &c.8vo. Berlin, 1846

-Handbuch der Kunstgeschichte. 8vo. Stuttgart, 1848

----— Handbook of Painting .2 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1854

Lairesse (Gerard).—A Treatise on the Art of Painting.. 2 vols. 4to. Lond. 1817
Lamo (Alessandro).—Discorso intorno alia Scultura et Pittura.

4to. Cremona, 1584

Lanzi (Luigi, Ablate ).—Notizie della Scultura degli Antichi, e dei varj suoi
stili.

Laserre (ISAbbe ).—Discours sur les Causes de la Decadence du Goftt.

.Nismes, 1768

Lawrence (Rd.)—Elgin Marbles .4 to. Lond. 1818

Lazzarini (Gio. Andrea, Canonico ).—Opere e Dissertazioni in materia di Belle

Arti.2 vols. 8vo. Pesaro, 1806

Leclerc (L. J.)—Sur l’Excellence de la Sculpture Antique. Union du Beau

Moral au Beau Physique.Sceance de l’Oratoire, an. xi.

-- Fragment d’un Memoire sur la Sculpture.8vo. Paris, 1815

Legrand (Augustin).—Ode sur le Beau.8vo. Paris, 1816

Legrew (James).—A few Remarks on the Sculpture of the nations referred to

in the Old Testament.12mo. Lond. 1845

Lemde (Franfois).—Traitd des Statues.12mo. Paris, 1688

Lens (Andrd).—Le Costume.4to. Liege, 1776

Lessing (G. E.)—Laocoon : or the Limits of Poetry and Painting.

8vo. Lond. 1836

Letronne (J. A.)—Lettres d’un Antiquaire h un Artiste .... 8vo. Paris, 1835
Leuliette (J. J.)—Essai sur la Supdriorite des Grecs dans les Arts.

8vo. Paris, 1805

Levezow (K.)—Antinous und Venus.4to. Berlin, 1808

Ligorius (Pyrrhus).—Historia Picturae et Sculpturse.

Lomatius.—The Artes of Curious Painting, (Carving, &c.).. 4to. Oxford, 1598

Lomazzo (G. P.)—Pittura, Scultura, &c.Folio, Oxford, 1598

Macchiavelli (Alex.)—Delle Origini e Progressi della Pittura, Sculptura, ed

Architectura ...4to. Bolog. 1736

Macvicar (J. G.)—Philosophy of the Beautiful.8vo. Edinb. 1825

Malaspina di Sannazaro (Marchese ).—Leggi del Bello applicate alia Pittura

ed Architettura.8vo. Milan, 1828

Manutius (Aldus).—De Csslatura et Sculptura Veterum .... Gronov. vol. ix.

Marquis (A. L.)—De la Ddlicatesse dans les Arts.8vo. Paris, 1827

Massias.—Theorie du Beau et du Sublime .Paris, 1824

Mayer (Prof .)—Esquisse d’une Histoire de la Sculpture chez les Anciens.

Mag. Encyc. iii. an. iv.

Mehegan (G. A. de)—Considerations sur les Revolutions des Arts.

8vo. Paris, 1755

Meiners (Prof. Christ.)—Geschichte des Ursprungs, Fortgangs, und Verfalls
der Wissenschaften in Griechenland und Rom.

2 vols. 8vo. Lemgo. 1781-2

-Histoire des Arts de la Grece, traduite de l’Alemand.

8vo. Paris, 1798

Memes (J. S.)—Memoirs of Ant. Canova .8vo. Edinb. 1825

READY FOR THE PRESS,

To be published by Subscription , in One Volume, with numerous Plates,
elegantly bound in cloth, price Two Guineas,

AND THE

OF DIANA.

EDWARD FALKENER.

“ The Empress of Ionia, renowned Ephesus, famous for war and learning.”— Anthol. Grceca.

Ephesus, the port of Ionia, situated on the river Cayster, was, during
the whole period of classical antiquity, a place of the highest importance.
Owing to its favoured situation it became the mart of commerce of Asia
Minor, and here was exchanged the produce of Greece and Egypt with that
of the Persian empire and inner Asia. The wealth of the town, arising
from such intercourse, exposed it to the covetousness of the Persian
monarchs ; but after a long period of three hundred years, during which it
struggled, in common with the other cities of Asia, to maintain its inde¬
pendence, it was obliged to call in to its assistance the Greeks of Europe,
who, from protectors, became its most cruel oppressors. For upwards of
a century it was held by the successors of Alexander, and after the defeat
of Antiochus the Great, it fell into the hands of the Romans. The city
suffered by an earthquake in the reign of the Emperor Tiberius, and though
frequently wasted and destroyed, it ever rose to greater magnificence after
each catastrophe. Its final destruction, which happened a.d. 262, cannot
fail to impress the mind of the philosopher and the Christian, who think
of its former glory, its Christian celebrity, and its final desolation.

The early colonists introduced with them the worship of the goddess
Diana; but, owing to the connection of Ephesus with central Asia, an
Oriental character was gradually given to her rites. It was not the nimble
goddess of the woods, but an uncouth mammiform divinity which was
exposed to view, and which represented the great mother oe nature
and source of all things. Her temple, built at the joint expense of all Asia,
was esteemed one of the seven wonders of the world, not merely from the
engineering difficulties which its builders had to overcome, but on account
of its magnificence and grandeur, the purity of its architecture, the beauty
of its sculptural adornments, and the extraordinary collection of works of
art, in painting and sculpture, which it contained. Seven times destroyed,
it was seven times rebuilt, each time with greater magnificence ; one of its
conflagrations being noted in history as the work of an execrable fanatic.
This sacred shrine was reverenced in Greece and Asia. "When Darius
destroyed all the other temples of Asia, this alone was spared. Here met
for worship the Greeks of Europe and of Asia. Here, in honour of Diana,
sacrificed the great Macedonian conqueror, the proud Persian satrap, and
the Roman general. Alexander, Tissaphernes, and Antony did honour to
her fane.

This celebrated city, the chief seat of Asiatic grandeur, opulence, and

FALKENER’S

MUSEUM OF CLASSICAL ANTIQUITIES,

BEING A SERIES OE

ESSAYS ON ANCIENT ART.

\A new edition, price Two Guineas, hound in cloth.~\

CONTENTS.

hi.

IV.

VI.

VII.
VIII.

IX.

XI.

XII.

XIII.

XIV.

XV.

XVI.
XVII.

XVIII.

XIX.

XX.

XXI,

On the Advantage of the Study of Antiquity, and on Excellence

in Art .. Edward Falkener.

On the Rapid Destruction of Ancient Monuments . . Fra Giovanni Giocondo,

On the Polychromy of Greek Architecture.J. J. Hittorf.

Description of one of the City Gates at Psestum .... Prof. T. L. Donaldson.
On an Important Monument recently discovered in Lycia . . Prof. Schonborn.

On the Paintings by Polygnotus in the Lesche at Delphi . . W. Watkiss Lloyd.

On the Plan and Disposition of the Greek Lesche . . . . Edward Falkener.

On a proto-Doric Egyptian Column at Thebes . . . . Edward Falkener.

Discoveries at Nimrood. Thomas N. Lynch.

On the Paintings by Polygnotus in the Lesche of Delphi . . W. Watkiss Lloyd.

On the Sculptures of the Ionic Monument at Xanthus . . . Benjamin Gibson.

On the Mausoleum, or Sepulchre of Mausolus at Halicarnassus Edward Falkener.
Description of an Ancient Statue of Minerva at Athens . . George Scharf, Jun.

Remarks on the Collections of Ancient Art in the Museums of

Italy, the Glyptothek at Munich, and the British Museum . Charles Newton.

On the Study of Polychromy, and its Revival . . . . Gottfried Semper.

On the Polychromy of Sculpture, with Remarks by Prof. Muller George Scharf.

On the Ionic Heroum at Xanthus, now in the British Museum . Edward Falkener.

A General Statement of the Excavations of Ancient Monuments
in the Kingdom of Naples, from 1830 to 184g. By the Director-

General . Carlo Bonucci.

On the Building Act of the Emperor Zeno, and the other Building

Laws of the Roman Empire.W. R. Hamilton.

On the Lost Group of the Eastern Pediment of the Parthenon . Edward Falkener.

On the Progress and Decay of Art; and on the Arrangement of

the National Museum ........ Francis Pulszky.

On Recent Discoveries at Rome. Benjamin Gibson.

XXIII. On Excavations by Captain Caviglia, behind and in the neigh¬
bourhood of the Great Sphinx. Samuel Birch.

XXIV. Report on a House at Pompeii, excavated under Personal Super¬
intendence . Edward Falkener.

XXV. On the Lydian Double Pipe (Tibiae Pares) at Pompeii . . . James A. Davies.

XXVI. On the Ancient City and Port of Seleucia Pieria . . . . W. Holt Yates, M.D.

XXVII. On the Throne of Amyclaean Apollo.W. Watkiss Lloyd.

XXVIII. On the Cragus, Anticragus, and Massicytus Mountains of Asia

Minor. Prof. Schonborn.

XXIX. On the Theatres of Vicenza and Verona. Edward Falkener.

XXX. Observations on the Theatre of Verona. Conte Orti Manara.

XXXI. Notes upon Obelisks. Samuel Birch.

XXXII. On the Theatre, Odeum, and other Monuments of Acrse in Sicily John Hogg.

XXXIII. On the Antiquities of Candia . . Edward Falkener.

XXXIV. On the alleged Site of the Holy Sepulchre. Edward Falkener.

XXXV. On the True Site of Calvary. Edward Falkener.

London:

LONGMAN, GEEEN, LONGMAN, & ROBERTS, Paternoster Row.

PREFACE.

XX111

behind him in architecture and engineering. Pliny
attributes to him the invention of the sail, the saw,
the axe, the plummet, the gimlet, and glue; while
other writers give to him the potter’s wheel and the
turner’s lathe; traditions which, however mythical,
at least prove him to have been a man endowed with
a most wonderful genius. The name of this skilful
artist was borne by sculptors down to the time of
Socrates, who playfully lays claim to it. Daedalus
is said to have died of the bite of a water-snake at
Daedala in Caria.

INTRODUCTION.

It is due, both to myself and to the subject, both
to myself and to my readers, to offer a few remarks
on the frontispiece to this essay. A vaulted ceiling
to a Greek temple is so repugnant to ones ideas of
Greek taste or Greek knowledge, that few critics will
be independent enough to pause in their opinion,
when they find that the great majority of persons,
learned and unlearned, unhesitatingly condemn it as
an absurd anachronism. These few people I invite
to follow me. If it can be shown that the traditions
of art as to the non-employment of the arch are only
of modern date,—if necessity can be shown for its
introduction, and history confirm its usage, then,
and then only, can I expect my readers to agree
with me.

Of evidence from actual remains we have none.
We have not, in any of our museums, a single spe¬
cimen of a Greek ceiling. Those which are pointed
out to us are the ceilings of porticos, not of rooms.

ANCIENT AET.

gaudiest colours in a picture-gallery . 1 It is by
education only that we are able to appreciate the
charms of beauty. Pythagoras and Anaxagoras did
not regard the sun with the same eyes. Even the
Helen of Zeuxis did not appear fair to all beholders.

“ Der allein besitzt die Musen,

Der sie tragt im warmen Busen;

Dem Vandalen sind sie Stein.”

Schiller.

According as this principle is complied with, —
according as we become capable of understanding
art, just to this extent are we likely to improve it.
It is in vain that we add galleries to our museums,
if we do not study and instruct ourselves in the
works which they contain . 2 Let us devote our¬
selves more and more to the examination of the
Elgin marbles, and so prove ourselves worthy of
the Phigalian, the Xanthian, the Halicarnassian,
and others which may come to us ; let us learn to

1 “ The lovers of common stories and spectacles delight in fine
sounds, colours, and figures, and everything made up of these ;
but the nature of beauty itself their intellect is unable to discern
and admire.”—Plato, Rep. v. 20.

2 “ Let none fondly believe that the importation of Greek
and Italian works of art is an importation of Greek and Italian
genius, taste, establishments, and means of encouragement;
without transplanting and disseminating these, the gorgeous
accumulation of technic monuments is no better than a dead
capital, and, instead of a benefit, a check on living art.”—j Fuseli's
Lectures, lect. xii.

ANCIENT AET.

Emanating from the public, its size was prescribed
by law. At first, statues were erected only to the

in the Pantheon at Paris, attx grands hommes, la patrie
reconnaissante, but which was removed from motives of
jealousy. I hold it as a species of desecration, where a building
has been devoted for ages to those who are distinguished in any
manner, for persons of another class to intrude themselves.
Westminster Abbey is now associated with the names of many
men of genius, and is become an honourable resting-place for the
great and learned; but I should have preferred to see it, as it
once was, a funereal chapel of the royal dead. Cambridge or
Oxford would be a more appropriate locality, and therefore a
more honoured one, for men of genius. Our national cathedral,
St. Paul’s, is a fitting receptacle for heroes. They who infringe
the order, Dean and Chapters, or whoever they may be, should be
liable to fine. Pope wrote an epitaph on one who refused to be
buried in "Westminster Abbey with kings whom he despised. It
is fortunate that his ashes do not desecrate the splendid fane.
What so distressing as to see an ancient private chapel in some
Grothic church invaded by the modern Smiths and Browns illegally
dubbing themselves Esquire, while the tombs of its knightly
owners lie in neglected ruin, or are swept away to make room for
the upstart marble ? Or, which is equally sad, to see the fine old
mansion, associated with our country’s history, and endeared with
many a recollection, passing into the hands of dishonest agents
or usurious money-lenders, while its astonished and unsuspecting
owners wander forth in quest of humbler lodgings P Just so the
noble and proud Venetian skulks forth from his squalid caffe, and
concealed in his dark gondola, mournfully casts a glance at the
palace of his ancestors now tenanted by Austrian sbirri/

In ancient times it was customary to put memorials of the
achievements of the owner in front of his house, and though the
house were afterwards sold, it was forbidden by law to remove
these trophies ; and thus, as Pliny says, the memory of the late
owner triumphed still, though his house was tenanted by some
obscure purchaser.—Pliny, xxxv. 2.

THE BEAUTIFUL.

content with making them beautiful, the sculptor
must represent them with forms of perfect love¬
liness. Of the two youngest sisters nothing can
be more beautiful, nothing more touching, than the
affectionate confiding manner in which the one
figure, Clotho, reposes on the other. After bestow¬
ing all his skill in the execution of these statues,
the sculptor must needs seek to embellish them
further with necklaces and bracelets . 1

Nocturnal Fates ! mild, gentle, gracious-framed,

Atropos, Lachesis, and Clotho named.

Okpheus, Hymn lviii. 14.

Indeed, Venus Urania was considered as the eldest
of the Parcse ; 2 and in the Orphic Hymn to this
goddess we read, “ Thou governest the three Fates.”
Even the Furies, painted by the Latin poets as old,
squalid, gigantic, terrible, and arrayed with vipers,
are exhibited by the Greeks as beautiful young
virgins. Pausanias describes them as of serene coun¬
tenance. Medusa, though one of the Gorgons, was
of matchless beauty. So beautiful was Nemesis, the
goddess of vengeance, considered, that Agoracritus
of Paros, the favourite pupil of Phidias, found no
difficulty in changing a statue of Venus into one of
that divinity. The Amazons are serious, without
any expression of fierceness. In aged figures, as

1 “ On the neck and wrists traces of ornament are discovered.”
—Ancient Marbles of the British Museum , vi.

2 Paus. i. 19.

THE IDEAL.

rage . 1 The indications of bodily suffering, as the
swelling of the breast, and contraction of the feet,
are not so much those of pain, as firmness.

“ Or, turning to the Vatican, go see
Laocoon’s torture—dignifying pain,

And father’s love, and mortal’s agony,

With an immortal’s patience blending. Vain
The struggle : vain against the coiling strain,

And gripe, and deepening of the dragon’s grasp,

The old man’s clench : the long envenom’d chain
Rivets the living links; th’ enormous asp
Enforces pang on pang, and stifles gasp on gasp.”

Ohilde Harold.

This is more fully expressed by Bulwer :—

“ See, round the writhing sire, the enormous serpents roll’d!
Mark the stern pang—the clench’d despairing clasp—

The wild limbs struggling with that fatal grasp—

The deep convulsion of the labouring breath—

Th’ intense and gathering agony of death!

Yet ’mid the mortal’s suffering still is view’d
The haughty spirit shaken—not subdued.”

the Torso, it has been observed, that there is no forced or coarse
delineation of fibre and muscle, to demonstrate the actions of
anatomy. Indeed, the following science instead of nature, is
equally offensive to taste, as it is in a writer who endeavours to
show off his learning by the use of hard words. The word learned
is always applied in sculpture to denote this attention to
anatomy.

1 So Taurus, in Aulus Grellius, (xii. 5,) describes the sick Stoic
philosopher as restraining the violence of an agony almost ungo¬
vernable. He allowed no loud groans, no complaints, no indecorous

108

ANCIENT AET.

as in the Venus de’ Medici, suggesting the rich
auburn hair so much prized by the ancients. Slight
blushes on the cheek are described by Callistratus
as being evident in several statues, as a Cupid, and
a bronze statue of Occasion; and Caylus noticed the
same effect exhibited in the statue of a Vestal in
the Versailles Cabinet. A Bacchante by Scopas is
also described by Callistratus, as carrying a kid, the
opened body of which was of a livid colour. In
bronze the same result was obtained by an alloy of
copper or other metal. The purple border of the
toga prsetexta was made in statues of Cyprian
brass, by adding lead. In the statue of Athamas,
after the murder of his son Learchus, the sculptor
Aristonidas expressed shame in the countenance,
by adding a portion of copper and iron . 1 Sila-
nion, in his statue of Queen Jocasta, gave pallor
to the face by adding silver. In the Cupid by
Praxiteles, described by Callistratus, the face was
of a brilliant red, burning with love. A Bacchus
by the same artist, is also described by Callistratus,
as being tinted in several parts . 2 This art of
colouring bronze was lost in the time of Nero,
whose image Zenodorus was not able to adorn with

1 It is probable that the real nature of these alloys is only
conjectural: the historian endeavouring to account for the effect,
so far as he was able.

2 For most of these examples we are indebted to the labours
of M. Quatremere de Quincy.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

115

that, “ The colours are still perceptible on a close
inspection. The armour and accessories have been
gilt to represent gold or bronze ; the drapery is
generally green, blue, or red, which seem to have
been the favourite colours of the Greeks. The
scene took place in the open air, which is repre¬
sented by being painted blue.” 1

We are too apt to judge dogmatically of what
is unknown, by the limited knowledge which we
possess of other things. We condemn the appli¬
cation of different - coloured marbles in Roman
sculpture, as an evidence of a decline in art, and
we conclude that the union of gold and ivory or
marble, must have appeared equally bad. But not
only is the contrast of colour less violent, and the
union of gold and white more elegant than any
other colours which can be put together, but we
should remember that the joining together of
different-coloured marbles in a small bust is unna¬
tural and offends the eye, while in the colossal
chryselephantine statues, the very nature of the
materials, and the dimensions of the figure, required
that pieces should be joined together. In the
Roman acrolith, or polylithic statue, we are shocked
at seeing that which should appear whole, divided

iidemque pictores : qui Cereris sedem Eomas ad Circum Maximum
utroquegenere artis suae excoluerunt.”—(Plin. xxxv. 12,45.) Feint.
Ant. Ined. p. 278.

1 DodwelVs Travels in Greece, i. 364, 5.

136

ANCIENT ART.

with the like object, to produce what we call
morbidezza. 1

it unfortunately happens that the ‘‘preparations” employed by
the masons for cleaning statuary sometimes leave a most unsightly
stain, as was recently pointed out to me by a verger, in one of
the statues of St. Paul’s Cathedral. All that is required for the
purpose of cleaning is the application of a feather-broom, or of a
pair of bellows, moved by machinery. “ Great part of the Par¬
thenon, which once sparkled with the chaste but splendid brilliancy
of the Pentelic marble, is now covered with the warm and mellow
tint of an autumnal sunset. The whole of the western front has
acquired from age an ochreous patina, which is composed of deep
and vivid hues. The eastern front is still more picturesque.
IJpon some of the statues from the tympana of the Parthenon,
and upon the architectural fragments of the Erechtheion, which
are in the British Museum, remains of this golden patina are
still visible, though much diminished since their removal from
Athens.” (JDodwelVs Travels , i. 344.) In like manner Clarke
describes the ochreous tint on the Theseum. ( Travels , iii. 537.)
Speaking of this rich colour which overspreads the Athenian
buildings, M. Bronsted says : — “ Etant eclaire par le soleil
du matin, le temple de Thesee se presenta a nous, comme une
enorme flamme, sortant d’un entourage obscur. Le Parthenon
presente le meme phenomene, qui m’a souvent et longtemps
charme, place que j’etais dans l’ombre, a une distance convenable.”
(Voyage en Grece, ii. 145.) Even a slight coating of dust may
not be without its advantages in a room where works of sculpture
do not get a direct light and shadow. Mr. Bell, the sculptor,
speaking of the rilievo of the pediment of St. Paul’s Cathedral,
says :—“ One is glad to be able to say for once something favour¬
able for London smoke, for the mode in which it has darkened
certain parts of the rilievo, and left others white, has subserved
the scheme of the composition, and most vigorously enhanced its
chiaroscuro.” ( Papers of the Roy. Inst . of Brit. ArcJits., Session
1858-59, p. 34.)

1 “ IJltimamente io trovo in Giovenale che le statue s’incera-
vano: ‘Genua (dice egli) incerare Deorum;’ e in Plinio che in

140

ANCIENT ART.

statues found in the Baths of Titus or Hadrian’s
Yilla, none had any indications of colour at the time
of discovery. This is a sweeping assertion, but
I think a very unfounded one. Bronze sculpture,
it is well known, is comparatively scarce. The
chances are that some of the specimens which
have come down to us are not of the highest class,
that they are not such as would be adorned with
such colouring. But let us suppose that the
specimens found ought to betray such colouring
if it ever existed. Any one acquainted with bronze
sculpture will know that bronze by lapse of time
acquires a surface and colour quite opposed to what
it once had. How then is it possible for bronze
thus affected to show any indication of local
colouring, which even when first applied was to
be so delicate as to be scarcely perceptible P 1 2

But if the material be of marble ; it seems very
extraordinary that no indications of colour were
ever discovered on any of the statues proceeding
from the Baths of Titus, or Hadrian’s Yilla; for I
well remember that no specimen of good sculpture
has been discovered at Pompeii, without these
indications being very perceptible in the hair and
drapery . 3

1 But though the tints have disappeared, the stronger colouring
of the toreutic process still remains. See several examples in the
two vols. of Bronzes of the Antichita di Ercolano .

2 I abode at Pompeii one twelvemonth, during which time I

142

ANCIENT ART.

ciatura dei sandali.” It will be observed that
statues of an early style of art exhibit a more
intense colouring than those of a more recent and
refined period, and the colours therefore do not
disappear so quickly. Delicate tints disappear
immediately, but if the colouring was sufficiently
strong and vivid to stand the first exposure to the
atmosphere, it may last for some time. Works of
this style of art are generally found to possess great

was invented by Sig. Celestino, and approved of by the king of
Naples, for preserving the pictures of Pompeii:—“ Ce vernis est
compose de cire dissoute dans l’essence de terebenthine alcoho-
lisee, et l’on y emploie la portion la plus pure de la cire, nominee
cirine par les chimistes. II faut, pour se procurer cette cirine,
meler une once de cire ordinaire a deux litres d’alcohol bouil-
lant, de 42 degres; on filtre ensuite la liqueur chaude, et on
la laisse reposer ; lorsqu’elle est refroidie, on obtint un precipite
gelatineux, et c’est la ce qu’on appelle cirine. On jette ensuite
sur ce precipite, avant qu’il ne soit sec, une livre et demie d’huile
de terebenthine alcoholisee. A pres on laisse le tout reposer quel-
ques jours: on fait decouler la liqueur bien clarifiee, et on peut
l’employer.”

It is a great pity, considering the preservative nature of wax,
that it has not been more generally used, not only at Pompeii,
but in all the galleries of Europe wherever traces of colouring
have been discovered on ancient sculpture. Plutarch observes
that “ the view of a beautiful woman to the heart of a lover
becomes as it were fixed by fire: it is an encaustic painting:
it seems to breathe, to act, to speak. Time never effaces it.”—
Arnator. p. 759.

In employing wax as a preservative of ancient paintings, whether
of frescoes or statuary, great care should be taken that the stone
or plaster be perfectly dry, otherwise the colour will be thrown
off and the paintiug ruined.

DIANA. AC-ROTERA—ERCM 0 PL CETTE .

182

MODERN ART.

tries ; but the incentive to glory once lost, pride,
hope, virtue all defunct, genius fled also, and the
artist, no longer able to invent, was content to
copy from the labours of his predecessors. The
correct form, moulded from the canons of his art,
the careful finishing, for some time remained; but
the spark, the living touch of genius was no more.
At length, even this outward perfection ceased.
Pliny observes that when sculpture no longer indi¬
danger from the professors of a purer faith. Among two or three
ancient statues which were found in Ghiberti’s time, and which
excited his utmost admiration, was one of Venus by Lysippus,
found at Siena. The statue was deemed so beautiful that they
resolved to place it as an ornament to the principal fountain of
the city. But it will be more interesting to let him give his own
account of it. Ghiberti goes on to say,—“ Della quale (statua)
ne feciono grandissima festa, e dagl’ intendenti fu tenuta mara-
vigliosa opera; e nella basa era scritto el nome del maestro, el
quale era Lisippo, et aveva in sulla gamba in sulla quale ella si
possava, uno delfino. Tutti gli intendenti e dotti dell’ arte della
scultura, e orifici, e pittori, corsono a vedere quesfca statua di
tanta maraviglia e di tanta arte ; ciascuno la lodava mirabilmente ;
e grandi pittori che erano in quello tempo in Siena, a ciascuno
pareva grandissima perfezione fosse in essa. E con molto onore
la collocarono in su la loro Eonte come cosa molto egregia. Tutti
concorsono a porla con grandissima festa et onore, e muroronla
magnificamente sopra essa Eonte.”

But a disastrous war happening with Elorence, a council was
held, and a citizen thus addressed the assembly:—“ Signori
Cittadini! Avendo considerato che, da poi noi trovamo questa
statua, sempre siamo arrivati male, considerato quando la idolatria
e proibita alia nostra fede; doviamo credere tutte le aversita che
noi abbiamo, Iddio ce le manda per li nostri errori. E veg-
giamlo per elfetto; che, da poi noi onoriamo detta statua, sempre

186

MODERN ART.

in Rome, twenty-three in bronze, and thirty-seven
in marble. Of these the Apollo from Apollonia in
Pontus was forty-five feet high, and cost five
hundred talents, while the Colossus of Rhodes cost
only three hundred talents. The Apollo in the
Library of the Temple of Augustus was fifty feet
in height. The statue of Nero, afterwards con¬
verted into that of Sol, was one hundred and ten
feet high. It is easy to account for this multiplicity
and richness. In ancient times the art of sculpture
was more patronized than that of painting, by
reason of the greater facilities which were afforded
for its exercise. From the smallness of their
houses, and the simplicity of their living, the
Greeks had but few opportunities of collecting
pictures, but statues were in constant request,
whether for their public buildings, or the open
areas. Even in their temples the statue repre¬
sented the material form of the divinity, while the
picture only shadowed him. But in the present
day pictures are collected by every private indi¬
vidual, while sculpture is but rarely called for,
owing to the necessity of keeping marble under
cover in a climate like our own. From these
causes modern sculpture does not meet with the
patronage which it possessed in ancient times. The
subject will be further discussed hereafter.

An important question arises whether success
in art is at all dependent upon the number of

190

MODERN ART.

in the direction of public monuments; it is the
want of that education in art, which at Sicyon,
and afterwards in the other schools of Greece, was
rendered imperative on every free man ; it is a want
of the appreciation of the dignity of sculpture, and
the seeking to appropriate it to ignoble purposes.
Let any one enter the sculpture-room at the Royal
Academy. Nothing is to be seen but rows of
heads, among which we too often find the whisker
and moustache of some man of fashion, or the
simpering look of some young lady. We look to
the name, and we find Smith, Brown, or Jones.
If there is one particular in which the modern
sculptor should be superior to the ancient, it is
in bust-sculpture : yet how inferior is the modern
bust! Does not this arise from the want of
grandeur in the model ? How can it be expected
that the artist shall throw grandeur into that head
which not only evinces none, but does not possess
the germ or hint on which to build it ? The public
think this the end of sculpture, or if it is of any
other use, that it may assist in ornamenting a
conservatory or lady’s boudoir, where some little
figure, perhaps of porcelain, will look e£ pretty ”
among the green. If the unhappy sculptor is
carried away by the enthusiasm of his art to aim
at something monumental, something to develop
the higher principles of his art, his work is returned
to his own studio, there to remain before his eyes

206

MODERN ART.

Tlie following remarks by the President of the
Royal Academy, on the danger of employing a
servile identity of detail, are too valuable to be
abridged:—

“ The colour of white marble, which, it appears, may sometimes
increase the illusion of drapery, is not the only quality by means
of which some substances may resemble nature more literally
than the marble flesh can. The qualities of smoothness, of hard¬
ness, of polish, of sharpness, of rigidity, may be perfectly rendered
by marble. It is not easy to conceive a greater accumulation of
difficulties, for a sculptor aiming at the specific style of his art, to
contend with, than the representation of a personage in the
modern military dress. The smoothness and whiteness of leather
belts, and other portions of the dress, may be imitated to illusion
in white and smooth marble. The polish, the hardness and
sharpness of metal, and the rigidity even of some softer materials,
are all qualities easy to be attained in stone; yet the white marble
flesh is required to be nearest to nature, though surrounded by
rival substances that, in many cases, may become absolute fac¬
similes of their originals. The consequence of the direct and
unrestrained imitation of the details in question is, that the flesh,
however finished, looks petrified and colourless, for objects of very
inferior importance, even to the buttons, are much nearer to
nature. The objection to these details, from their unpleasant or
unmeaning forms, is here left out of the account.

“ The boldness with which the ancient sculptors overcame such
difficulties is remarkable. Thus, to take an extreme case, rocks ,
which in marble can be easily made identical with nature, (thereby
betraying the incompleteness of the art in other respects,) are
generally conventional in fine sculpture; witness the basso-relievo
of Perseus and Andromeda, and various examples in statues where
rocks are introduced for the support of the figures. In order to
reduce literal reality to the conditions of art, the substance, in
this instance, is, so to speak, uncharacterized. The same liberty
is observable in sculptured armour as treated by the ancients;
sharpness is avoided, and the polish does not surpass, sometimes

212

MODERN ART.

would be considered ugly even as an article of
apparel. Look again at the trousers. The artist
has here felt his difficulty. He has fancied it a
beauty to indicate the contour of the legs, as though
the figure had got tights on, as though it were
draped in a transparent Coan garment. But even
if well executed, modern costume never can look
satisfactory, for it is divested of all breadth, it has
no flowing lines, no natural grace, no richness or
variety. Why then may we not avoid it? We may
be told that the Greeks represented the nude figure,
because it was customary with them to go with
little or no clothing. But this is not so. They
departed from the costume of the period because
they considered the nude figure as more becoming
to art. cc Grseca res est nihil velare,” says Pliny.
Can we suppose that on such a solemn occasion as
the Panathenaic festival those who were to take
part in the procession would turn out, some with
sandals, some without; some clothed and others
naked; some with and some without armour ? Or
is it not more natural to conclude that the artist
chose these different costumes to give more variety
to his work ? “ Generally speaking,” observes

Lessing, ce the laws of usage were but lightly
regarded by the ancients : they felt that the highest
object of their art led them entirely to dispense
with it. This object of paramount importance was
beauty.” Laocoon and his sons, instead of being

APPENDIX.

298

with the intention of sending it to France. Unfortunately, the
cases containing the bricks were lost, with other valuable
remains, in the Tigris. The vaulted entrance in the restored
Assyrian edifice at the Crystal Palace was constructed by
Mr. Fergusson upon the drawings and measurements sent to
Europe by M. Place, and may, therefore, be accepted as a
pretty accurate representation of the original. It is evident
that the Assyrians, having employed the vault in an entrance
of this nature, could adapt it to rooms of even greater width.
It is highly probable that the greater part, if not all, of the
entrances formed by winged human-headed bulls and lions were
vaulted. I generally found heaps of painted bricks amongst
the ruins of such entrances, and usually between the sculptures.
Such being the case, it is not unreasonable to conjecture that
the rooms also were in many instances vaulted, although no
remains have hitherto been discovered to prove that such was the
case. In the bas-reliefs arched gateways and entrances are con¬
stantly represented, and even, apparently, domed edifices.

“ I discovered no traces of any arch constructed of stone
masonry. Those found amongst the ruins were of kiln-burnt
and sun-dried bricks.

“ Believe me yours faithfully,

“ A. H. Layaed.”

The following note occurs in Mr. Layard’s “ Nineveh and its
Bemains: ”—

“ Arched gateways are continually represented in the bas-
reliefs. According to Diodorus Siculus, the tunnel under the
Euphrates at Babylon, attributed to Semiramis, was also vaulted.
Indeed, if such a work ever existed, it may be presumed that it
was so constructed. It was cased on both sides, that is, the
bricks were covered, with bitumen: the walls were four cubits
thick. The width of the passage was 15 feet ; and the walls
were 12 feet high to the spring of the vault. The rooms in the
temple at Belus were, according to some, arched and supported
by columns.” (ii. 260, sixth edit.)

294

APPENDIX.

II.

Page 117.

“ Others pretend that the Grecian temples were painted in a
degenerate age”

The following eloquent appeal in favour of poly-
chromic architecture is from the pen of M. Beule,
as published in the Revue Generate de VArchitecture,
vol. xvi. ann. 19, pp. 193—212. It is proper to
observe that some passages have been omitted,
which seem to be descriptive of modern theory,
rather than of ancient practice

“Voila la Grece, la Sicile, l’Asie, avec leur ciel bien digne
d’eclairer la jeunesse de l’humanite. Voila un soleil eclatant qui
einbrasse tout, qui colore tout ce qu’il frappe, et dore les rochers
eux-memes: voila une nature ou tout est vie, eclat, ardeur.
Autour des cites grecques, peuple de marins, s’etend la mer,
avec sa vaste et changeante surface, puissamment coloree. Les
levers et les couchers de soleil ont une magnificence inconnue
a nos regions: les Grecs modernes appellent encore aujourd’hui
le coucber du soleil son regne, sa gloire par excellence, fia<n\ev(nQ.
Les montagnes elles-memes refletent mille nuances qui varient
avec les heures du jour. Au milieu de cette nature inondee de
riantes splendeurs, voyons une peuple aux vetements elegants, aux
draperies cbarmantes : le blanc releve de vives couleurs, la pourpre
dans tout son feu, le lin teint et brode par la main des jeunes
vierges, des qu’il s’agit d’un sacrifice ou d’un festin. L’on vit en
plein air, avec une gaiete et un sang qui courent sur tous les
visages: on s’assemble, on cause, on delibere, on plaide, on juge

APPENDIX.

295

en plein air : les hippodromes, les gymnases, les palestres, les
ecoles des philosophes, tout est a ciel ouvert. Partout des por-
tiques, des fontaines, des lesches, des lieux de repos d’ou la foule
oisive peut contempler sa ville cberie, ses guerriers qui reviennent
d’une expedition avec leurs armes brillantes et leurs boucliers
peints, ses galeres qui sillonnent les dots de leur proue enduite de
vermilion, et tendent aux vents leurs voiles plus jaunes que le
safran. Partout la lumiere, la beaute, la couleur, lumiere de la
beaute.

“ Au milieu de cette societe grecque, enivree de son genie, de
son ciel encbanteur, de ses arts qui grandissent, dans ces villes ou
tout resplendit et cbante sous le regard de Dieu, irons-nous
transporter des monuments blafards, aux teintes lugubres ?

.Ayons plus de courage, secouons nos prejuges, decla-

rons que les anciens voyaient mieux que nous, plus bardis a la
fois et plus sage, qu’ils etaient privileges, que leur climat etait
admirable, et jouissons, au moins par une beure de reverie, des
beautes qu’ils avaient creees et que nous avons perdues. Sur les
bautes collines qui dominent les villes, sur les places publiques, sur
les esplanades et les promontoires de la Grece, qui s’avancent au
milieu de la mer, voyons ces temples brillants de couleurs, toujours
jeunes, parcequ’ils sont toujours rajeunis: on ne les gratte pas, on
les repeint, et ce ne sont pas des badigeonneurs, ce sont des
artistes qui les peignent.

“ Les colonnes 1 . . . . s’enlevent et se detachent vigoureuse-
ment sur le mur rouge de la cella, avec les chapiteaux delicatement
ornes. Les triglypbes puissants montrent leur tete bleue et de

1 M. Beule adopts the theory of those who cover the entire wall and column
with colour. It is true he supposes this colour to be exceedingly light, a mere
tint, little more than the tone acquired by rubbing in Punic wax with the aid of
heat, as practised by ancient sculptors : but there is no authority for this general
colouring. On the capitals of the Doric columns atPsestum are delicate palmette
ornaments, standing out in relief in consequence of their having been painted,
and thus having protected the surface beneath them from the salt atmosphere
which has eaten away the marble all around them. These palmettes have
been seen and sketched by every artist. Now, these palmettes not only show
the application of chromatic decoration to these temples, but they prove that
the general surface of the wall or column was not painted.

2 Q

310

APPENDIX.

cast it out, and shake the dust of it from our feet for ever. Whatever has any
connection with the five orders, or with any one of the orders—whatever is
Doric, or Ionic, or Tuscan, or Corinthian, or Composite, or in any wise Grecized
or Romanized ; whatever betrays the smallest respect for Yitruvian laws, or
conformity with Palladian work,—that we are to endure no more. To cleanse
ourselves of these cast clouts and rotten rags is the first thing to be done in the
court of our prison.” (Stones of Billingsgate, iii. 194.)

Nor is he prejudiced only against ancient art, but, contrary to
the universal suffrage of mankind, he pronounces the architecture
and ornaments of the Alhambra “ detestable ; ” and in the pleni¬
tude of his wrath he denounces grammar, logic, and rhetoric as
“ base sciences,” and accuses philology also of having a “ debasing
tendency.” (iii. 105.)

Our author never condescends to use argument, but either
lectures his opponents like the Romish Pope turned schoolmaster,
or he hectors them, and launches out his anathemas, like a pauper-
schoolmaster turned Pope of Rome.

Such a writer, by the fanatical language which he has used, has
missed his aim; for however he may be looked up to by his own
party, he has set calm-thinking men against him : whereas, if he
had used greater moderation in the enunciation of his views, and
treated his opponents with greater courtesy, he might have been
the means of invoking a more serious, thoughtful, passionate study
of art in general, at the same time that he endeavoured to lead
the public taste to a greater appreciation of the beauties of what
he considered as the most appropriate style for the present age.

We regret, then, that a writer of such established power should
so commit himself against Greek art: for we verily believe that
if the ancient Greeks were now in existence, there are many points
in which they would agree with the sentiments he so forcibly and
so constantly promulgates. They would listen with delight when
they heard him expatiate on the importance and necessity of truth¬
fulness, delicacy, tenderness, study of nature, admiration of the
human form, and necessity of uniting a knowledge of sculpture
and painting to that of architecture. Scopas, who designed the
capital at Ephesus ; Callimachus, who invented the capital at
Corinth ; they who observed and idealized the parsley and the
acanthus, the ivy, the honeysuckle, and the lotus ; would behold

civilization; this city, which witnessed the labours of apostles; this city,
which became a monument of the fulfilment of divine prophecy; this
city, so famous both in pagan and in Christian times, it is the object of
Mr. Falkener to describe. A monograph on such a subject, accompanied
with carefully-measured plans of the city and its various monuments,
should not fail to engage the attention and excite the interest of the
scholar and the historian, the archaeologist and the architect, the traveller
and the divine.

The Table of Contents will enable the reader to form an estimate of
the character of the work.

CONTENTS.

PART I.—THE CITY OF EPHESUS.

I. Introduction : Inaccuracy of our
present information.

II. Origin of Ephesus: Ancient names
of Ephesus : Parts of the City:
Suburbs and Dependencies of the
City.

III. Foundation of Ephesus, and Early

History.

IV. Different Buildings of the City.

1 . The two Ports; 2 . The Agorae; 3. The
Gymnasia or Palaestrae; 4. Opistho-
leprian Gymnasium; 5. The Great
Gymnasium, or Gymnasium of the
Port; 6 . Gymnasium of the Stadium;
7. Gymnasium of the Theatre; 8 .
Other Gymnasia; 9 . The Theatre;

10 . The Stadium; 11 . The Odeon ;
12 . Colonnades; 13. Fountains; 14.
Temples ; 15. City Walls; 16 . Gates;
17. Aqueducts; 18. Tombs; 19 . Castle
at Ai-asalook; 20 . Private Houses.

Y. Prosperity and Affluence of the City:
Natural Advantages : Illustrious
Natives : Schools of Painting,
Sculpture, and Architecture :
Practice of Magic.

VI. Christian Traditions and Modern
History.

Appendix I. — Historical Events con¬
nected with the City of Ephesus.

Appendix II.—Chronological Table.

PART II.—THE TEMPLE OF DIANA.

I. Notice of the Works of Ancient
Writers : Preposterous Accounts
of Modern Travellers : Magnifi¬
cence and Celebrity of the
Temple.

II. Situation of the Temple.

III. The Seven Earlier Temples, and

their Conflagration.

IV. The Celebrated Temple.

1. Difficulties of the subject; 2 . The
Temple of Diana always occupied
the same locality, but not always the
same site; 3. The Quarries; 4. The
Temple occupied two hundred and
twenty years in building; 5. The
rebuilding of the eighth or celebrated
Temple; 6. The dimensions of the
Temple; 7- The columns of the
eighth Temple were not monolithal;
8. The peristyle consisted of one
hundred and twenty columns; 9 . The
Temple was of the Ionic order; it
was decastyle and eustyle; it had
nineteen columns at the sides; and
the columns were eight and a quarter

diameters in height; 10. Thirty-six
of the columns were ornamented
with colour, gilding, and metal, one
of which was by the celebrated
Scopas; 11. The Hypsethros ; 12.
The Temple was surrounded on the
outside by statues ; 13. The door,
roof, and stairs of the Temple.

V. The Contents of the Temple.

1. The statue of Diana; 2. The veil of
the Temple; 3. The Carpentum of the
Deity ; 4. The fountain Hypelceus
within the Temple; 5. Works of art
within the Temple; 6. The Treasury
of the Temple.

YI. The Accessories and Appendages
to the Temple.

1. The Portico of Damianus; 2. The
Banqueting - hall; 3. The Sacred
Grove; 4. The Cave of the Fistula;
5. The Temple of Hecate.

VII. The Asylum of the Temple : Priests
and Ceremonies.

VIII. Final Destruction, and Conclusion.

Gentlemen wishing to subscribe , are requested to forward their names
to the Author of “Ephesus, and the Temple of Diana,” care of Messrs.
Longman & Co.

PREFACE.

XXI

are said indeed to have procured the death of
Minos, who had entered Sicily with an army, after
placing the Athenians under yearly tribute. In re¬
membrance of his fortunate escape, Dasdalus built
a temple to Apollo at Capua. From Sicily he was
invited to Sardinia by Iolaus, who employed him
in many wonderful works, which Diodorus Siculus
says were remaining in his time. These various
exiles and wanderings have been explained as sig¬
nifying the gradual advancement and extension of
Greek art.

As regards his art, Dsedalus is said to have been
instructed by Minerva, and to have contrived
images, which by means of quicksilver were able to
move about, and which had to be tied to prevent
their running away . 1 What is this but that before

1 Extraordinary and amusing as is this account of Daedalus’s
statues, ingenious and minute as were the works of Callicrates,
who carved a chariot and horses of ivory which he hid under a
fly’s wing, a modern artist has surpassed them, if we may credit the
accounts related to us ! Rigelius, in order to show to touch and
eye the circulation of the blood, made a statue so exactly re¬
sembling man in all its internal economy, that one saw everything
which passed in its interior by the principles of physics and hydro¬
statics; one remarked the natural movement of the lungs, the
beatings of the pulse, and generally all those functions which are
natural to the human body. He also made a brazen horse, in
which he placed a spring, which impressed on a machine a sufli-

INTRODUCTION.

columns, and elongating them at pleasure, while
his line of ceiling, from being angular, could never
have looked well. The hypaethron of such a ceiling,
exhibiting a double notch, must have appeared most
awkward; and, indeed, the form is more like that of
an Etruscan tomb than that of a Greek temple.

In the other design the hypaethral opening like¬
wise constitutes an objection; but in this case it
resembles a well, the depth and narrowness of which

precludes the admission of a sufficient body of light,
while from its peculiar form the upper part of the

INTRODUCTION.

comme une sorte de coupe en dessin, c’est-a-dire, une representa¬
tion mixte et conventionnelie de 1’interieur et de 1’exterieur.
Alors je soup 9 onne que ceux de ces frontispices qui ont un arc
dans le fronton, appartinrent a des temples dont l’interieur etait
voute en pierre, ou plafonne en cintre; et si cette conjecture avoit
quelque probability, il seroit probable aussi que les temples voutes
ou cintres en pierre ou en bois furent assez communs.” 1

M. Quatremere believes that Pausanias, where lie
says xou aura? ogocpog, 2 in speaking of the

temple of Apollo at Phigalia, is describing a stone
vault; and he further goes on to remark that
Pansanias tells us that in the city of Megalopolis, near
the portico Philippeon of the Forum, is the temple
of Mercury Acacesius, of which nothing but the
stone vault remains ; 3 while Pliny informs

ns that Dinocrates began to vault (concamerare) the
temple of Arsinoe in Alexandria . 4 Vitruvius, in
recording the names of artists who wrote on their
works, says, “ Theodorus Phoceus (scripsit) de
iholo qui est Delphis,”—on the vaulted (temple)
which is at Delphi. Roman temples, we know,
were sometimes vaulted, as at Nismes, at Baalbec,
and the temple of Honor and Virtue at Rome.

A subject of so much importance would naturally
engage the attention of the learned. M. Dutens
published a work on the use of the arch by the

1 Quatremere de Quincy, Memoire sur la maniere dont etoient
eclaires les Temples des Grecs et des Romains; Memoires de Vln-
stitut Roy. de France—Glasse d' llistoire et de LitteratureAncienne,

tome iii. p. 245.

2 Paus. viii. 41. 3 lb. viii. 30. 4 Plin. xxxiv. 14.

INTRODUCTION.

form capable of admitting the colossal image, and
that it was the only form in which the liypsethral
opening could partake of a graceful character. As
regards effect, I consider that the arch-form gives
greater height and magnificence to the building
than any other, and that it best harmonizes with
such a statue.

ments which he adduces show that it may sometimes be applied
to it as well as to other things ; and surely Vitruvius is the last
witness whose testimony should be dispensed with, especially as
the ambiguity in that writer is not at all connected with the
w r ord hypsethron, but only with the examples which he cites.
What would be thought of a trial where the principal witness is
kept out of the way ? or if produced, where his evidence is not
received because he has a stammering in his voice ? It is possible,
we allow, that in the two instances above quoted, of the temple
of Jupiter Soter at the Piraeus, and of the Herseum at Samos,
the word hypsethron may have reference to the open area, and
not to the temple. Both Prof. Boss and M. Letronne contend
that lepbv signifies the sacred enclosure, and not the temple
itself, but the word lepov in its original signification is evidently
identical with bwf.ia, vabg, or sedes. If then the word hpov be used
synecdochically for the whole enclosure, with still greater reason
might it, by a like synecdoche, be restricted again to the original
signification ; and we may therefore conclude it to be equally
possible that iv Wa/S-pw rov lepov may apply to the temple or naos,
especially as the word refievog might have been used, if intended
to define the open area of the sacred enclosure. M. Baoul-
Bochette directs attention to the sinking in the pavement of the
Parthenon, which he considers as corresponding to an hypsethral
opening in the ceiling; to the fact of Vitruvius not describing the
roof of any of his temples ; and finally to vase-paintings and
other monuments. (Journal cles Savants , Nov. and Dec. 1846,
Pev. 1847 ; Hevue Archeologiqiie , 1848.)

THE MINERVA BORGHESE.

A COPY OF THE CHRYSELEPHANTINE STATUE BY PHIDIAS.

PhjotograspTvedj -from a, Cast.

ANCIENT ART.

USE OF AET.

Woeks of ancient art, viewed only in respect of
art, should be esteemed, not according to their
rarity or monetary value, but in proportion as they
affect our mind, as they raise in us the spirit of
admiration, or as they are capable of improving our
modern taste. It is unnecessary to enlarge on any
of these points. Alexander the Great, on seeing a
portrait of Palamedes, who was unjustly accused by
Ulysses, and put to death, trembled and changed
colour, thinking of his own conduct and cruelty
towards Aristonicus. We are told also that he
carried about with him a bust of Hercules, by
Lysippus, in order to encourage him in his under¬
takings. Csesar is said to have sighed on behold¬
ing a statue of Alexander, which was placed in the
temple of Hercules, regretting that he could never
obtain an equal fame. Augustus declared that in
all the statues of great men which he had erected,

ANCIENT ART.

virtuous soul to a body full of vigour . 1 They who
were possessed of beauty, were esteemed the hap¬
piest of men, and honoured by the gods. According
to an ancient tradition, it was Love who gave to
Greece the Fine Arts. Pausanias says that the
Yenus of Megalopolis was called Mechanitis, or
the artist, “ because, for the sake of beauty, most
of the operations of art take place.” It is the
beautiful, says Lucian, which exalts the virtues,
which adds charms to justice, to wisdom, and to

superior merit, pre-eminent merit, Ka\ofcaya3oc, Ka\oicaya$ta ,
a word which we see repeated a thousand times on the Greek
vases, applied to every kind of person, and from every kind of
motive—through friendship, through gratitude, through piety;
a word, in fine, which comprising at once the idea of physical
beauty and of moral beauty, considered as inseparable, thus offered
to the mind a perfect image, similar to that which was presented
to our eyes by the beautiful productions of art.”—Baoul-Bochette,
Lectures on Ancient Art , p. 133.

“ The sculptures of the Greeks display the mind ; they aim at
a character, rather than an individual expression, even where there
was a necessity to preserve resemblance, and where they did pre¬
serve it; they soar from the humbler to the more elevated display,
from the personal to the moral, from the private object to the
public instruction.”—Bromley, i. 303.

1 Lucian. In Anach. “Amongst the Greeks, the best man,
and the most highly honoured by the public, was he who could
manifest the greatest personal worth, and the most superior
ability. All were invited to a competion, where whatever was
truly excellent in nature, in conduct, and in arts ; whatever was
great, admirable, and becoming; whatever could tend to give the
greatest degree of finish and completeness to the human cha¬
racter, was the object of general admiration.”— Barry's Lectures ,
lect. i.

THE IDEAL.

nearer to divinity than him self/’ “ I lay it down
as a principle,” says Cicero, “ that there is nothing
of whatever kind so beautiful, but that there is
something, above and beyond it, which, though
our outward senses do not perceive it, is distin¬
guishable by the mind and intellect.” Burke, whose
name is associated with all that is elegant and re¬
fined, thus expresses himself in a letter to Barry,—
“ This is the true principle of poetry and beauty.
Homer and Shakspere had perhaps never seen cha¬
racters so strongly marked as those of Achilles and
Lady Macbeth, and yet we feel those characters are
drawn from nature; the limbs and features are
those of common nature, but elevated and improved”
This is the real secret. Ideal art must be founded
upon nature, and is not independent of it. That
artist will go astray who seeks to idealize before
he is conversant with the forms of nature. The
student should be well practised in drawing from
the life, before he sets himself to study the antique.
Baffaelle, who must be acknowledged as no less an
authority in all that is beautiful and sublime, has
expressed this almost in the same words: “ II
modello mio e lodato da molti belli ingegni: ma io
mi levo, col pensier , pin alto ; ed essendo carestia di
belle donne, io mi servo di certe idee die mi vengono
nella mente.” 1

1 “Ace moment, il se produit dans l’ame de 1’artiste une idee
nouvelle: la chose imparfaite qn’il contemplait et sur laquelle ses

100

ANCIENT ART.

spear might have touched the ceiling. It was not,
however, the actual size of these statues which
made them appear so large, as the smallness of the
temple as compared with them. The beauty of
lines in the human face is such, that, however large
it may be, it must always appear beautiful; but the
majestic simplicity of the countenance, though
beautiful in itself, was relieved by the exquisite
arrangement and execution of the hair; and in the
Minerva by the detail and ornaments of her helmet.
From the studied elaboration of the drapery the
naked arm or breast stands out in full relief by its
round and solid mass, and shows itself to be flesh.
The lower parts of the body, which, if naked, would
on so large a scale look heavy, are clothed with
drapery, the folds and ornament of which produce
variety and beauty, and you think that the statue
is intended to be seen at this distance, and at this
distance only. But as you approach, you perceive,
each step as you advance, new beauties which attract
attention;

“ Quse, si proprius stes,

Te capiat magis; et qusedam si longius abstes.

Hoe. De Arte Poet.

that was : the head nearly touching the ceiling, so as to excite the
unpleasant idea, that if it was to rise from its sitting posture it
must lift up the roof.”—Yol. i. p. xl. In like manner Hallaway
mistakes the object .—Statuary and Sculpture amongst the Ancients,

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

129

tale is told us by Plutarch of Anaxagoras having
dissected the head of a ram. But the best proof
is in the excellence of ancient statuary : and to
give one instance only, I would refer to the bust
of AEsop. If the Greeks were ignorant of anatomy,
how is it that the anatomy of Greek statues is
more perfect than that of Roman, more true even
than that of any modern sculpture ?

This long digression is so far connected with our
subject as tending to show that it is not only in
iconic-polychromy, but in chryselephantine sculp¬
ture, in polychromic architecture, in perspective, in
painting, in chiaroscuro, and in anatomy, that the
Greeks have been esteemed ignorant of correct prin¬
ciples, and devoid of taste. We shall see that even
in Sculpture itself they have been declared to have
been led astray by a depraved taste, that their bas-
reliefs are on a wrong principle, and that their
costume is vastly inferior to that of modern art.
We must not be surprised then if in their iconic-
polychromy they meet with detractors : for if men
have not a correct taste in their own minds, it is
impossible that they can admire it in the works
of others. Such detractors do not prove, as they
think, that the Greeks were wrong, but they prove
that they themselves are not Greeks.

But while we defend the application of poly-
chromy to sculpture, we must remember that the
instances which have been mentioned may rather

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

137

If we compare this careful and judicious applica¬
tion of colour by the ancients, with the specimens
of art lately put forward as a representation of
iconic-polychromy, what a contrast do we behold !
The coloured casts of the Elgin marbles which were
exhibited at the Crystal Palace, could only be re¬
garded as a calumny upon Greek taste, as a gross
libel upon ancient art . 1

questa inceratura entrava il bitume giudaico bianco. Oltre di
cio leggo in Vitruvio che quest’ inceratura si faceva all’ encausto ;
e da Plinio si conchiude cbe 1’ incerare le statue era proprio
mestiere dei Pittori.”—Bequeno, Saggi sul Ristabilmento dell'
Antica Arte de* Greci e Romani Riitori, i. 273.

It is proper to state, however, that his quotation from Juvenal
has a religious signification, rather than one affecting art: and
that though Pliny does speak of the anointing statues with
bitumen, (xxxiv. 9 ; xxxv. 51,) probably the white liquid bitumen
of Babylon, he says this was an ancient practice at Borne, and
that a subsequent fashion was to cover statues with gold.

Bequeno goes on to say,—“ L’ inceratura delle antiche statue,
fatta eziandio all’ encausto, era proprio mestiere de’ Pittori. To
di essa non ho fatta prova nessuna; ma da’ testimonj oculari, che
scrissero della medessima, benche per accidente, argomento che si
facesse in questa maniera.” He then quotes what we have already
seen from Pliny and Vitruvius, after which he says,—“ Con un
tal metodo le statue ne’ siti scoperti non solo si rendevano piu
durevole, ma piu morbide all’ occljio dello spettatore, senza che
l’acqua piovane, e le nevi le danneggiassero. Puo farse la prova ;
ma non ne vorrei una sola, o due, ne che si facessero dai Gfio-
vani superficiali, o da’ Maestri pregiudicati, ma dai diligenti
Bomani, testimonj oculari della nitidezza e bianchezza degli
antichi marmi d’alcune statue greche.”—i. 317-8.

1 An able writer in the Quarterly, who upholds the principles
of ancient art while he repudiates the extravagant practice of

138

ANCIENT AET.

Considerable discussion has of late been excited
by this subject. The defenders of polycbromy, car¬
ried away by an indiscreet and over-anxious zeal to
support the art, have referred to the coloured statues
of a mediseval period, have insisted on the perfect

modern polychromists, well remarks that with the strong colours
chosen by the artist for the figures, he might at least have relieved
them by a white ground; and then asks,—“ If the transfusion of
the glorious Panathenaic Procession into a bad * Pilgrimage to
Canterbury 5 —derogatory alike to Stothard. and Phidias—were
not intended to please the ignorant, for whom could it have been
designed ? ” {Quart. Ren., March, 1855.)

The colouring of these bas-reliefs was evidently copied from the
paintings in the Etruscan tombs, where the horses are coloured
alternately with different tints, while the men are painted dark
and the women white. The object of this was to assist the eye.
Accustomed to the glare of an Italian sun, it is a considerable
time before the eye of the observer is able to make out forms and
details. At first he sees only the torch and figures near him :
then a wall or pier; then the entire tomb ; then a faint idea of
painting : and it is only by the strongly-contrasted colours that
he is at length able to form a general idea of the composition.
This difficulty of discerning objects in the dark is well described
by Plato in his celebrated allegory of the Philosopher’s Cave.
{Rep. vii.) It is well that these casts have been whitened, as
they tended to produce one of two evils:—a depraved taste in
the inquiriug student, or a distaste to Greek art among more cul¬
tivated minds.

The coloured casts in the Crystal Palace were placed by the
side of casts of which the ground only was coloured, (blue,) in
order to form conclusive evidence of the necessity of the colours
shown in the other specimens. Instead, however, of furnishing
a convincing proof of such colouring, they have had the effect of
enlisting all men of taste in the ranks of the opponents of pol v-

MINERVA — FR()M HER C U L ANEW

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

159

The foregoing observations and quotations amply
prove the existence of colour on pedimental and
frieze sculpture. We know it to have been employed
in the earliest times, it continued to be used in the
best periods of Greek art, and we see it at the present
day in the excavations of Pompeii and Herculaneum.
Is it not reasonable to suppose that colour, applied
thus generally to their architecture and architectural
sculpture, was considered necessary to sculpture in
general, and might we not conclude that it was so
applied, even though ancient writers were not so
unanimous in their assertions respecting it ? Two
circumstances, however, have to be borne in mind
relative to this subject: — pedimental and frieze
sculpture were probably much stronger in colour
than other sculpture; and the sculptural accessories
of temples have frequently been buried in the earth
for centuries, and thus preserved their colour, while
statues and other sculpture have been more exposed.
Yet even in this sculpture we must not forget the
Yenus de’ Medici itself was ornamented with
armlet, necklace, and earrings, and that her hair
was overlaid with gilding, as was also that of the

approves, was continually resorted to by the most celebrated
artists during the best period of art in Greeceand again,—“We
know that the great statue of Jupiter was not only composed of
gold and ivory, but that it was also richly painted, and orna¬
mented throughout in the most elaborate manner.” (E. West-
macott, Jun., Art. on “ Sculpture,” in the JEncycl. Metrop .)

222

MODERN ART.

treatment, the subjects are connected with the last
war. Each group represents a Prussian youth
instructed, aided, or shielded by Minerva, or a
genius. Other groups of sculpture, at the Hal-
lischer-Thor, represent the allied forces contending
with the enemy, designed in an equally classic
spirit. Such monuments will remain as orna¬
ments to the city, whatever changes fashion may
hereafter undergo in costume ; in the same manner
as Benvenuto Cellini’s admirable colossal group
of Perseus holding the head of Medusa, the
Pape of the Sabines, and the Mercury, by John
of Bologna, although exhibiting too much of ana¬
tomy, continue to attract the visitors of Florence.
Nor is it merely in the subjects and mode of treat¬
ment that our street sculpture is defective, it does
not even appear what it is. There is scarcely a bronze
statue but what might have been cast in lead, and
appeared no blacker. Doubtless, this is owing to
our smoke and climate, but for that very reason the
bronze should be of a brighter colour, and polished,
as the ancient were, if not gilt. Again, our bronze,
lead-looking statues are in utter want of harmony
with their pedestals or bases. Instead of being of
white stone, these should be of the darkest granite
or marble. I do not know any statues that look
so well, in this respect, as those of Stockholm.

It cannot be expected that every one will concur
in these remarks ; the subject of costume is so diffi-

224

MODERN ART.

IV.

DECORUM.

In ancient sculpture there is no extravagance;
all is characterized by simplicity and grandeur:
the figures are in repose, except the event requires
action. The movements of the wise man, says
Plato, are tranquil; those of the base are extra¬
vagant and irregular. Plutarch censures those
unreflecting sculptors of his day, who thought to
make a colossal figure great and powerful by re¬
presenting him with legs striding out, with violent
attitudes and open mouth. Such parenthyrsus
was ever avoided in the best times; but on entering
our abbey once more, what extravagance of action
do we not behold ? Figures reclining awkwardly
in the lap of some ill-understood symbolic per¬
sonage, the legs and arms projecting over the
monument, Cupids and allegorical figures rubbing
their eyes with pretended grief; and even in our
more modern groups, the accessorial figures doubled
up, in imitation of those which Michael Angelo,

240

MODERN ART.

He should fix upon the distance at which it would
be seen, and the accompaniments by which it would
be surrounded. An example of the ill effects of
a neglect of this precaution occurs in the statue
of Pitt over the great door of Westminster Abbey,
which from its elevated position appears to have
one arm of greatly disproportioned size, as if the
figure were that of an orang-outang. In this case
the artist should either have reduced the limb, as
we find in other examples, or he should have so
altered the position of the arm as not to appear
excessive. Every reader of Vitruvius will remember
that the Greeks increased the diameter of the angle
column of a temple, because, being surrounded by
air, it would otherwise appear thinner than the
other columns. In the statue of the Elector Maxi¬
milian at Munich, by Thorwaldsen, the hand is
upraised, and being surrounded by air, this very
defect is produced, thus foreseen and allowed for by
the ancients—the hand and arm appear too small
for the body. This principle was well understood
by Testelin, in 1672, who writes,—“ Les figures de
sculpture qui sont en plein jour doivent etre plus
ressenties que celles qui sont renfermees de quelques
batimens, parce que 1’air qui les environne efface les
contours, les derobant a la vue.” 1

Another modern instance may be adduced in the

1 Sentimens des plus Habiles Jdeintres , p. 15.

BAS-RELIEF, AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE. 253

what has been stated in a previous page, 1 2 that
these sculptures were adorned with metal, gilding,
and colour. In each one of the horses’ heads, close
above the ear may be seen a small hole bored
by a drill: another such hole is in each horse’s
month, and another in the extended hand of each
rider. Here then there can be no doubt that metal
bridles were applied. Many of these holes would
have escaped detection, being concealed by the
boldness of the relief, had not the projecting sculp¬
ture been broken off, and thus revealed the deep-
drilled hole intended for the metal plug. It will be
observed that no colour is visible, all traces of it
have disappeared; and so likewise no bronze is
visible, and it might be argued with as good reason
that it had never existed : but here we see the
evidences of the application of metal, and from this
evidence we should admit that colour also may have
been applied. 3 The group is further remarkable
as exhibiting the boldness with which the ancient
sculptor sometimes dispensed with truth, when it
would be prejudicial to his subject. One of the
horses’ heads is in a line with a rider’s shoulder,
but merely outlined on it; the horse’s head and the
man’s shoulder are exactly in the same plane.

1 See p. 146.

2 This reasoning is totally independent of the fact of colour

having been discovered, and recorded in published documents.

272

MODERN ART.

let the man of fortune consider that while pos¬
session of the antique may constitute, or be sup¬
posed to do so, a title for taste, the patronage of
living artists will prove that he is imbued with a
love of art, and wishes to improve it.

But it is not so much by private patronage as by
public encouragement that the arts are fostered.
That is a motive of false economy which grudges
money for the embellishment of public monuments.
It is a principle well admitted, that the Arts give
back more than they receive. It is not merely the
artist who is benefited, but ingenuous youth are
trained up, by the exhibition of such monuments,
to be serviceable to the state, and to emulate the
glorious actions of those who have been thus
honoured by their country. Let not the artist
then be overlooked. Let him not feel, after
devoting years in silent labour on some great
monument, that his work, when exhibited to the
public, is regarded with indifference and apathy
by those to whom he had looked for encourage¬
ment and support; that instead of receiving that
praise to which he is entitled, his work is criticised
by cold envy or detraction. Let him rather feel
that it is a distinction and an honour to be an
artist, and that such honour and distinction are
recognized by the public.

The late president of the Boyal Academy, in
speaking of the promotion of the Arts, observes,

278

CONCLUSION.

fine effluvia, like vapours from the sacred orifices,
which work themselves insensibly into the breasts
of imitators, and fill those who naturally are of a
soaring disposition with the lofty ideas and fire of
others. A greater prize than the glory and renown
of the ancients can never be contended for, where
victory crowns with never-dying applause; where
even a defeat, in such a competition, is attended
with honour.”

-“Non tam

Turpe fuit vinci, quam contendisse decorum.”

Ovid.

A sentiment likewise expressed by Cicero, and
applicable alike to the student and writer upon
art,—

“ Si quem, aut natura sua, aut ilia prsestantis ingenii vis, forte
deficiet, aut minus instructus erit magnarum artium disciplinis,
teneat tamen eum cursum quem poterit: prima enim sequentem,
honestum est in secundis tertiisque consistere.”

APPENDIX.

319

Memes (J. S.)—History of Sculpture, Painting, &c.8vo. Edinb. 1829

Memoires pour l’Histoire des Sciences et des Beaux Arts.

56 vols. 12mo. Trevoux, 1701-1750
Mendelssohn (Moses).—Inflexions sur les Sources et les Rapports des Beaux

Arts, et des Belles Lettres.

-- Sur le Sublime et le Naif.Variates Littdraires.

Mengs (Anton Raphael).—Opere.4to. Roma, 1787

-Antologia dell’ Arte Pittorica.4to. Aug. 1784

Mercey (F. B.)—Etudes sur les Beaux-Arts.8vo. Paris, 1855

Meyer (H.)—Geschichte der Bildenden Kunst-Abbildungen.

4to. Dresden, 1825

Miel (M.)—Rapport fait k la Socidtd des Beaux-Arts, sur un Mdmoire de
M. Hittorff, intituld “ Recherches sur l’Archre. Polychrdme

chez les Grecs ”.8vo. Versailles.

Milizia (Francesco).—Dell’ Arte di Vedere nelle Belle Arti del Disegno.

8vo. Venezia, 1781

---Dizionario delle Belle Arti del Disegno, estratto in gran parte

della Enciclopedia Metodica, da— .. 2 vols. 8vo. Bassano, 1797

Millin (A. L.)—Monumens Inddits.2 vols. 4to. Paris, 1802-6

Millingen (J. G.)—Ancient Inedited Monuments ...4to. Lond. 1826

Milton (H.)—Letters on the Fine Arts, written from Paris in 1815.

8vo. Lond. 1816

Monier (P.)—Histoire des Arts qui ont rapport auDessein.. 12mo. Paris, 1698
Monseau (ISAbbe ).—Quelle est la cause du plaisir que les chefs-d’oeuvre en
tout genre nous procurent. Discours lu k l’Acad. des B. L.

de la Rochelle.1813

Montabert (Paillot de).—Traitd complet de la Peinture.

9 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1829

-L’Artistaire.8vo. Paris, 1855

Moroni (Gio. Bat.)—Le Pompe della Scultura.12mo. Ferrara, 1640

Muller (C. 0.)—Ancient Art and its remains.8vo. Lond. 1850

Muratori (L. A.)—Reflessioni sopra il Buon Gusto, intorno le Scienze e le

Arti, di Lamindo Pritauio. 12mo. Ven. 1717

Nyphus (Augustin).—Sur la Beautd.

Observations Historiques, et Critiques sur les Erreurs des Peintres, Sculp-
teurs, et Dessinateurs, dans la Representation des Sujets tirds

de l’Histoire Sainte .2 vols. 12mo. Paris, 1771

Opie.—Lectures. See Wornum.

Ottonelli (Giulio).—Trattato della Pittura e Scultura.4to. Fir. 1652

Overbeck (J.)—Geschichte der Griechischen Plastik flir Kunstler und Kunst-

freunde.8vo. Leipzig, 1857

Palaye (J. B. de la Curne de St.)—Lettre sur le Bon Goftt dans les Arts et

dans les Belles Lettres. 8vo. Paris, 1751

Passeri (Nicola).—Esame Ragionato sopra la Nobilita della Pittura, e della

Scultura.8vo. Napoli, 1783

De Pauw (M.)—Recherches Philosophiques sur les Grecs.

2 tomes, 8vo. Berlin, 1787

Pavie (L.)—Epitre k David, Statuaire.8vo. Paris, 1824

Pericles and the Arts in Greece.8vo. Lond. 1815

De Permon. — Discours et Dissertations sur les Caractbres du Beau, du

Sublime, et du Styl Simple.8vo. Marseilles, 1810

Philostratus (Flavius, Junior). —leones : sive Imagines.Fol. Lips. 1709

-Les Images, ou Tableaux de platte Peinture des deux Philostrates.

Fol. Paris, 1615

Piles (Roger de).—Art of Painting. See Du Fresnoy.8vo. Lond.

Du Piles.—Principles of Painting.8vo.1743

2 T

PREFACE.

of success. Daedalus gives wings to his son, to
signify that no one can arrive at the highest excel¬
lence of his profession, who is devoid of genius :—

“ Sine pennis volare haud facile est.— Plautus.

Being endowed with genius, Daedalus then advises
his son neither to fly into fanciful conceits, nor to
sink into a low and contemptible manner. Seeing
his son inattentive to his counsels, and about to
follow his own course, lie holds him by the arm to
restrain him, he conjures him to follow his direc¬
tions, falling at his feet he beseeches him. Beware,
he says, of extremes : avoid extravagances :—

“ Inter utrumque vola.”— Ovid.

“ Fuge magna.”-— Hor.

Daedalus married a woman of Glortyna, by whom
he had Iapyx, who subsequently led a colony into
Italy. Notwithstanding this, Minos appears to have
been jealous of him, and thought that his queen
visited the artist’s studio too frequently, on the pre¬
tence of seeing his famous cow. Certain it is that,
on his arrival in Sicily, Daedalus soon ingratiated
himself with the daughters of King Cocalus, who

INTRODUCTION.

space to account for, wlrile on the other hand I
required the utmost altitude in order to admit the
statue. This space being just sufficient for a semi¬
circular arch, and the arch being the form which
filled up the angular lines of walls and rafters with
least sacrifice of room, I did not hesitate to adopt
it, particularly as I considered that this was the only

going through the press, I discovered in the Revue Archeologiyue ,
and in the Journal des Savants , some articles by M. Baoul-
Bochette, and by M. Letronne, on the subject of the hypsethron.
The latter gentleman takes up the opinion of Prof. Ludwig Boss,
who wrote an essay,—“ Nicht Hypathraltempel mehr,” and
subsequently another,—“ TJnmoglichkeit der Hypathren,” in his
Uellenika. The titles of these essays show evidently the nature
of their contents. Prof. Boss imagines that the Greek temples
—shrines for the most beautiful and costly works—were illumined
only by the door. The hypsethral temples were of course the
largest, and therefore had three or four rows of columns in the
pronaos, one behind the other, and extending over a space of say
fifty to ninety feet. What light could penetrate through a doorway
placed behind such a grove of columns ? To make this distance
greater, the staircases are generally placed inside of the doors.
Let any traveller in Egypt call to his remembrance the temple at
Dendyra, and think of the darkness and gloom and unwholesome
atmosphere of the inner chambers of that temple, the only light
to which is that which enters through the doorway! Binding the
word hypsethron used in connection with other words, as an
agora, a gymnasium, or other open space,— kv vnaiSpa) rov iepov ,—
rov aXcrovg,—rov 7 repi&oXov,—rrjg ayopag, he boldly affirmed that
it had nothing to do with a naos or temple. Vitruvius, it is true,
says it has ; but as the passage in Vitruvius is somewhat obscure,
he resolved to abandon that author altogether, and to try to
resolve the subject independently of his authority. But granting
that the word cannot be used exclusively to a temple, the argu-

INTRODUCTION.

endeavoured in the accompanying frontispiece to
represent the effect of these colossal works, where
the work colossal in itself appeared more so from
the confined area of the temple, and from contrast
with other works of art. It was not without reason
that Phidias made the Victory exactly of the human
size, that the worshippers might be the more
impressed with the grandeur of the goddess.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

of the causes above named, if we except the last,
may have contributed to the result, but many
other circumstances must have assisted; circum¬
stances which it is improbable or impossible can
ever combine again. One of the most important
of these causes was the nature of their religion.
To this we may add — their social institutions,
their isolated position, their public games, the
spirit of their philosophy, the excellence of their
poetry, music, and oratory, their simplicity of
living, their kindliness and urbanity of manners,
their piety to the gods, their patriotism 1 and love

M. de Montabert, in a subsequent page, seems to admit all which
he has denied. Speaking of Phidias he says,—“ II dut a son
siecle ce qui eleve toujours les artistes habiles a un degre supe-
rieur, je veux dire l’amour du tout nn peuple pour les grandes
choses, la protection du premier citoyen de l’etat, et les applau-
dissemens de toute une patrie ivre de gloire et idolatre de chefs-
d’oeuvre ; ” (ii. 329,) and a little further he says,—“ II n’ignorait
pas que le ciel l’avait favorise par un genie superieur, une sensi-
bilite exquise, et une tendance naturelle vers le beau et le sublime;
mais il reconnut que pour servir sa patrie, des etudes nouvelles
et des sacrifices nouveaux etaient necessaires.” Here we have
mentioned in a few lines nearly all those causes which have been
at once rejected and advanced.—Paillot de Montabert, Traite
Complet de la Peinture.

Of modern writers, some attribute the flourishing of the arts
to a warm climate ; Sir John Chardin, to a cold; M. de Pauw, to
poverty; the Abbe Du Bos, to a generous diet: so fanciful and
absurd are the theories of some writers.

1 Notwithstanding all their feuds, no sooner did danger
threaten them, than Athens protected Sparta, and Sparta

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

mind was a sense of religion. In order to form to
Himself a clear conception of the divinity, it was
necessary tliat lie should study the hidden nature
of such deity, and so express, not merely the
outward form, hut the inner sentiment. Deeply did
he meditate upon such attributes, till at length the
divine principle seemed to dwell upon his own spirit,
and to be transferred to his own labours . 1

Est Deus in nobis ; agitante calescimus illo :

Impetus hie saerse semina mentis habet.

He could not, like the poet, represent each individual
action of the deity, and portray him sometimes as
sensual, sometimes as divine, but he had to concen¬
trate, as it were, the various attributes of the deity

1 An amusing instance of this feeling is given us in the life of
Domenichino, by Eelibien :—

“ II ne pouvoit comprendre qu’il y eut des peintres qui tra-
vaillassent a des ouvrages considerables avec si peu duplication,
que pendant leur travail ils ne laissassent pas de s’entretenir avec
leurs amis. II les regardoit comme des ouvriers qui n’avoient que
la pratique, et nulle intelligence de l’art; etant persuade qu’un
Peintre, pour bien reiissir, doit entrer dans une parfaite connais-
sance des affections de l’esprit et des passions de Fame; qu’il doit
les sentir en lui-meme, et s’il faut ainsi dire, faire les merries actions
et souffrir les memes mouvemens qu’il veut representer ; ce qui ne
se peut au milieu des distractions. Aussi on l’entendoit quelque-
fois parler en travaillant, avec une voix languissante et pleine de
douleur, ou tenir des discours agreables et joyeux, selon les divers
sentimens qu’il avoit intention d’exprimer. Mais pour cela, il
s’enfermoit dans un lieu fort retire, pour n’etre pas apperqu dans
ces differens etats, ni par ses eleves, ni par ceux de sa famille ;

ANCIENT ABT.

III.

THE BEAUTIETTL.

But let us take a nearer view of art itself, and as
we have seen some of the causes which led to its
excellency, let us now consider in what that excel¬
lence consisted.

The first principle which we meet with respecting
Grecian art, is that it sought always the beautiful . 1
Nothing common or vulgar was to be allowed:
every object was to be exhibited in the most beau¬
tiful aspect of which it was capable. The ancients,
says Aristotle, pronounced the beautiful to be the
good. And so Socrates, — Nothing is beautiful
which is not good.

“ Muses and Graces, daughters of high Jove,

When erst ye left your glorious seats above
To bless the bridal of that wondrous pair,

Cadmus and Harmonia fair,

Your voices peal’d a divine air:

‘ What is good and fair
Shall ever be our care.’

1 Lucian. CJiaridemus , sive De Pulchritudine.

ANCIENT ART.

that was unnecessary and unbecoming, so that they
could preserve the likeness. Catullus describes the
Fates as old, wrinkled, and bent with years, but
the Greeks represented them as the very reverse of
all this.

CLOTHO AND LACHESIS.—PEDIMENT OF THE PARTHENON.

In the pediment of the Parthenon 1 they are por¬
trayed as fair and young. So delicate and graceful
do they appear, that this group is regarded by
artists as an inestimable masterpiece of antiquity.
Only in their being draped, says Montfaucon, are
they to be distinguished from the Graces. Not
content with concealing all marks of horror, not

1 See other remarks on this subject in my Essay “ On the Lost
Group of the Eastern Pediment of the Parthenon,” Mus. of Class.
Antiq. i. 396.

ANCIENT AET.

scarcely open, expressing pain, but neither fear nor

played to the eye the internal anatomy of bone or muscle, sinew
or aponeurosis. All these she and they knew the mind of the
observer dislikes and abhors. A hard anatomical style can only
be corrected by copying from the life.”— The Anatomy of the
External Forms of Man , 8vo. Lond. 1849.

The same principles are maintained by the Dilettanti Society,
vol. i. p. xlii. Mr. Bell, the author of “ Observations on
Italy,” not the same as the author of “ The Anatomy and
Philosophy of Expression,” though fully alive to the im¬
portance of anatomy, admits that whether the ancients were
acquainted with anatomy or not, their observance of nature,
and their greater facilities for observation, render their works
superior to any produced by the study of anatomy by the
moderns. In speaking of the Antinous he says : “ With models
such as this, and other precious remains of ancient sculpture, it
seems wonderful that John of Bologna and other great artists
should have fallen into the error of so constantly seeking to dis¬
play their knowledge of anatomy, frequently injuring their finest
productions, by forcing the features of that science into notice.
Because the moderns, among their other philosophic discoveries (?)
found that the human body was composed of bones, muscles,
tendons, and ligaments, is the statuary called upon perpetually
to remind us of this circumstance ? Why was it so beautifully
clothed with skin, but to hide the interior mechanism, and render
the form attractive ? Anatomy is useful as a corrector, but no
more. Its influence ought only to be felt. In the Antinous the
anatomist would look in vain to detect even the slightest mistake

or misconception. In the finest works of the ancients

I have never seen a muscle caricatured. This science

should not be brought into evidence in a statue—it is the beau¬
tiful round fleshy forms of the living body only that should be

displayed, even in high energetic action. Even in the

Dying Gladiator there is no obtrusive anatomy. Sinews, tendons,
and muscles are all in play; but hid as in the beautiful forms of
youth, not strongly expressed or obtruded on the eye.” So in

124

ANCIENT ART.

pi. vii.j and Zoega, Bassirilievi, ii. tav. Ixiv.) are
copied from some painting. The subject is Her¬
cules in the garden of the Hesperides. The former
of these, formerly in the possession of Cardinal
Albani, was brought to England in the beginning
of the eighteenth century by Cavalier Fontana ; —
the latter was found at the Villa Albani. Another
mosaic bas-relief, representing the Three Hours,
said to be ancient, and to have been found in
the house of Joseph II. at Pompeii, is now in
the Museum at Vienna . 1 A beautiful medallion
head, published by Cte. Caylus, is in the Louvre.
The accompanying illustration is a facsimile in
size and colour of one of two figures in the museum
of the archbishop of Tarento, at Naples. It repre¬
sents Hope. The corresponding figure is that of
Mercury with a ram. They were found at Meta-
pontum, and excited the liveliest enthusiasm among
antiquaries at the period of their discovery. Copies
of these two figures, or rather copies taken from
the same original, are in the Louvre : thus we see

1 It is so described by Welcker, in bis Zeitschrift fur Geschichte
und Auslegung der Alien Kunst , p. 292, and quoted by Eaoul-
Rochette, p. 429 ; but it appears to be a modern work executed
by Savini for Cardinal Albani, and bearing the inscription Bom-
peius Savini fecit. It was given by the Cardinal to the Emperor
Joseph, who was then at Rome. Hence the mistake. See Memorie
per le Belle Arti, iv. 108-111, where the whole process employed
by Savini for executing bassi-rilievi in mosaic work is fully
described.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

133

cuse and Rome. Athenagoras tells us tliat it was
customary to regild the statue of Alexander at Troy,
on solemn occasions, and to crown it with chaplets . 1
Nero is said to have gilt a statue of the youthful
Alexander by Lysippus, but the gilding, being
found to damage it, had to be removed. This was
possibly owing to its being placed inside a build¬
ing. In the open air a gilt statue would receive a
strong light and shade, and acquire a sparkling
brilliancy : 2 but when placed inside a building, the
polished gilding would under some circumstances
reflect so many lights, that all effect of shadow
would be lost. But as it is said that on removing
the gilding, marks of the tool were left upon the
work, it is supposed that the image was overlaid
with solid plates; and if so, we cannot wonder at
the statue being spoilt. A statue of Janus in the
temple built by Augustus, which was attributed to
Scopas or Praxiteles, was said to be quite hidden by
the quantity of gold that covered it. On the other
hand, the employment of thin gilding, polishing,
or even flat tinting, often tends to bring out the

1 Athen. pro Christ.

2 Passing one of onr public institutions one wet day, I perceived
in the open air a bust of Hercules painted of a strong ochreous
colour. The wet surface, increasing the reflecting power, threw
out the modelling in the most complete manner, causing it to
look as if it were gilt, doing there some time afterwards, in order
to compare my notes, I found the bust bronzed over, with artificial
lights and shades, and of course spoilt.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

151

prepared to find it stated that the acknowledged
beauty of the great chryselephantine works de¬
pended simply upon the form, and that it was quite
independent of the accidental presence of gold and
ivory, and colour, which it is asserted, were applied
as mere spoils of war I 1 One solitary instance is
however brought forward, and that with great
triumph, to prove the position of those who thus
set aside, at one blow, ancient art, ancient artists,
and ancient critics. It is the Venus of Cnidus,

altesten Zeiten mit der Architektur verb linden waren, und eine
stiitzte die andere. Wie die Yereinigung der Musik und Tanz-
kunst mit der Poesie, so bezweckte der Verein der drey bildenden

Kiinste die hochste Wirkung in religiosen Bestrebungen.

Das gefarbte Belief behauptete die Stelle der Glemalde; Glemalde
waren lange nur Nachahmungen da von.” These evidences he
concludes “lassen die Uebereinstimmung des Glebrauchs polychro-
mer Parbung von Bildwerken mit dem Gleschmack der Grriechen
in vorzuglichsten Kunstepochen nicht bezweifeln.” (Stackelberg,
Das Apollo-Tempel zu Bassce , pp. 79-82.)

1 This assertion, though unnecessary to be answered, is dis¬
proved by the facts of the case. Valerius Maximus says that
Phidias intended to have made the Minerva of marble instead of
ivory, because it was a cheaper material, and that the Athenians
immediately ordered him to employ ivory. This anecdote no
more proves that it was because the materials were spoils of war,
than their refusal to allow the portraits of Pericles and Phidias
proves the statue to have been hieratic or archaic: but both these
circumstances show us that the Greeks regarded their statues
with the most religious feeling, that they washed to make them
as worthy of the divinity as possible, and thus being full of a
devout admiration of their beauty, they were unwilling to be
reminded that they were the works of men’s hands.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

153

lie tells his readers that they must imagine her
head to be like that of the Yenus of Cnidus, by
Praxiteles ; the nose mouth, and neck, resem¬
bling the works of Phidias; the hands and fingers
from Alcamenes ; the drapery of the figure from
Calamis ; and the age to be about that of the Yenus
of Cnidus. Having thus described her form, he goes
on to depict her colour; and here he has recourse
to the painters, and calls in no fewer than four,
and not content with this he brings in the poets
also to his assistance, Homer and Pindar. Who
does not see that this description has nothing to
do with the Yenus of Cnidus, but with Panthea;
or if it relates to Yenus, that we might suppose,
that the Yenus, instead of merely lacking colour,
had no nose, mouth, neck, hands, or body, because
these parts are taken from other statues ? Nothing
then can be more weak than this objection, either
in its positive or negative character. But it is time
to pass on to other subjects. It may, however,
be mentioned that these critics have written mostly
in refutation of opaque colouring, or colouring in
oils, which they believed to be the system of poly-
chromy attributed to the ancients. In denying the
colouring which is just described, which was neces¬
sarily a water-colour, they acknowledge that the
plastic works of the ancients were coloured; they
allow, of course, that the Egyptian and Etruscan
works were coloured: these they regard as hieratic,

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

165

temple, adorned by tlie works of Phidias, we have
but to mention the universality of its curved lines,
its columns of greater and less diameter, its leaning
columns, and other particulars, to show to how great
an extent the ancient architects studied the laws
of optical illusion and perspective. This study was

of others he showed only the breasts, then the helmets only, and
last of all their spears. This, young man, is proportion; for the
objects must thus disappear from the eye, as it follows the several
groups in their several gradations.”—Lib. i. Icon. 4. In the
picture of Ulysses’ descent into hell, by Polygnotus, some fish are
described by Pausanias as appearing at a great depth in the water;
a fact which shows some acquaintance with the perspective of
colour. Lucretius describes the vanishing lines of a colonnade, in
as technical language as if he spoke of the plane of the picture, the
point of sight, and vanishing points. In another place he describes
the refraction of an oar in water; and again he notices that distant
objects lose their angularity .—De Rerum Naturd , lib. iv. Pliny,
speaking of Apelles, says, “ Cedebat Asclepiodoro de mensuris, hoc
est, quanto quid a quo distare deberat .”—Lib. xxxv. 36. In Plato’s
Republic we read: “ The same magnitude perceived by sight, does
not appear in the same manner, whether near or at a distance.
And the same things appear crooked and straight, when we look
at them in water and out of the water, and concave and convex,
through error of the sight. It is this infirmity of our nature which
painting attacks, leaving nothing of magical seduction unat¬
tempted.” And in his Sophist he says: “ The arts of imitation
are of two kinds, the assimilative, and the representative, or art
of producing phantasms. One is the assimilative art; and this
especially takes place, when any one, according to the propor¬
tions of the original, in length, breadth, and depth, and moreover
by adding fitting colours, works out the productions of an
imitation. Put the representative art is aimed at by such as
mould or paint any great work. (Sculptors or Painters.) For if

DECLINE OF AET.

185

work , 1 the modern artist is generally obliged to fix
the shortest possible time for the completion of his
undertaking: the mind of the Greek was naturally led
to see the beautiful and the good in everything, the
modern artist can only succeed in realizing beauty
in his mind’s eye, by careful study and abstraction
from the world: the Greek lived in an age of
invention, when art was perfected, the modern
artist has to study ancient examples, and can
seldom do more than imitate: the Greek sought to
represent the inner motives, the divine principle of
man, the modern artist is content to exhibit the
outward beauty of form, designed according to the
rules of art: the Greek could claim the honour of
elevating his religion above the idolatry from which
it sprang, the modern artist has too often been
the means of degenerating his to idolatry again :—

“ And so the multitude, allured by the grace of the work,
took him now for a god, who a little before was but honoured as
a man.”— Wisd. of Sol., xiv. 20.

We have seen how works of art arose in every
city of ancient Greece, and we have also seen how
these works were torn from their sanctuaries, and
crowded together by the Romans. Of colossal
statues alone there are said to have been collected

1 Scopas we know executed numerous works : but Pliny speaks
of one of them, the Achilles, as “ prseclarum opus, etiamsi totius
vitae essetso careful was the finishing, nad so perfect the design.

2 B

208

MODERN ART.

nized in sounds, that, intrinsically and even conventionally, have
no meaning; in poetry, when the free variety of thought and
expression compels us to forget an almost unvarying form or
rhythm ; and in architecture, when the union of fitness and cha¬
racter, (the attribute of the most perfect productions of nature,)

is accomplished in a new creation.

“ To conclude: it appears that, of all the Eine Arts, (except
perhaps theatrical representation,) sculpture is most liable to be
partially confounded with reality. Of the attributes of material
objects, it first possesses substance and form; and when in addi¬
tion to these qualities it happens to have colour and surface in
common with nature, it is evidently in danger of sacrificing its
general consistency, and the illusion which art proposes. Again,
in consequence of the absence of colour, identity with nature is
impossible in the chief object of imitation, the living figure. These
two circumstances—the impossibility of absolute resemblance to
nature in the principal object, and the extreme facility of such
resemblance in many inanimate substances—define the style of
sculpture ; a style fully exemplified in the works of the ancients.
On the authority of these works, it has been shown that this art,
on the one hand, aims at the closest imitation of the living figure
in its choicest forms; for such can best compensate for the want
of colour, and enable the art to rival nature. In subordination to
this, its first aim, sculpture affects the imitation of elastic and
flexible substances generally. On the other hand it is distin¬
guished by the greater or less conventional treatment, or the
entire omission of all particulars which are more literally imitable
than the flesh. The instances of such conventional treatment,
including alteration of costume and omissions of various circum¬
stances, which are observable in the sculpture of the Greeks, are
perhaps the most remarkable liberties, with a view to consistency
of style, which the history of art presents.”—(Sir) C. L. Eastlake,
R.A., Contributions to the Literature of the Line Arts.

From the above it will be seen that the ancient
artist was careful to keep down his accessories in
order that they should not interfere with his main

232

MODERN ART.

longer the deity who is honored by his exclusive
right, but every one may hope for posthumous
distinction, if friends be found willing to contribute
the necessary expense. In the earlier times even
of pagan idolatry, it was not permitted to place the
image of man in the temple of Giod; but what can
be more unbecoming the reverence of God’s sanc¬
tuary than to see one statue proudly overtopping his
neighbours, as if of superior dignity and worth, as
is witnessed in the statues of Follet and Kemble in

Westminster Abbey, where Follet seems rejoicing
in his size, while Kemble stretches out his neck in

BAS-RELIEF, AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE. 251

Cicognara well says, relative to tliis depraved taste
in the treatment of bas-reliefs, which has now
become universal, and examples of which are seen
in the Nelson column,—“ le Arti abbiano sofferto
piu da nn prestigio d’ innovazione e di modo, che
da nn irrnzione di barbari.” Falconet is the ex¬
ponent of the principle of picture-sculpture. He
considers that bas-relief should “ participate of the
illusion of a picture,” and he holds up the contrary
opinion, held by Anguier, to contempt and ridicule :
but as it is Falconet himself who is in error, it is
due to the President of the French Academy to
transcribe his words. He says, cc The ancient
sculptors never made a useless figure, nor lost one
by its remoter distance from the eye; and it was
with the best reason that they made their figures,
as well those in front as those behind, as large as
possible; that they might all appear, and that the
whole subject of the history might be told with few
figures, and at the distance whence they ought to
be seen.” 1

1 The same simplicity of treatment is apparent in their painting.
Pliny states that the best painters of antiquity used but four
colours ; and then complains, almost in the words of Vitruvius,—
“ But now they make up for merit by many and showy colours.”

Emeric David expresses himself in like manner, pp. 481—483 :
as do also the Dillettante Society.— Specs, of And. Sculpt. II
xxxvii., xxxviii.

At a conference held at the Academy of France, in 1672, the
Academicians, after examining bas-reliefs in the old and new style

252

MODERN ART.

In the group of the Panathenaic frieze which has *
been chosen for illustration of the ancient bas-relief,

ANCIENT BAS-KELIEF-PANATHENAIC FRIEZE.

seven horsemen are represented riding abreast; but
there is no attempt at perspective, the furthest
horseman is as large as the nearer, the figure has
exactly the same degree of relief as the others, and
being several feet forwarder in position, actually
appears in advance of the nearer horsemen. The
other slabs also represent a cavalcade of several
figures riding abreast, but it is difficult sometimes
to make out the entire line. The object of the
sculptor in thus treating the work was that the
surface might be equally covered in every part.

This group is interesting also as evidencing,

of sculpture, declared that “ on resolut unaniment, que le meilleur
etoit d’eviter les degradations, et de ranger toutes les figures sur
une meme ligne.”—Testelin, Sentimens des plus habiles Peintres,
p. 16. The perspective of the sculpture on Trajan’s column is
condemned by Perrault, and vindicated by M. De Piles.

CONCLUSION.

275

ancient proverb was a very true one—“ Difficult
are the beautiful.” As the theologian should look
at everything with an eclectic eye, as the Christian
should ever esteem others better than himself, so in
art we cannot sufficiently remember that it is far
more difficult, and requires much longer study, and a
higher order of intellect, to discern excellences than
to perceive defects ; and indeed it would be well for
the artist were he ever to bear in mind the injunction
of Winckelmann, “ Seek not to detect deficiencies
and imperfections, until you have previously learnt
to recognize and discover beauties.” That which is
best, says Apollonius, is difficult to be found, and
difficult to be judged of. Zeuxis wrote under his
picture of Penelope the famous sentence :— fiC It is
easier to find fault with this than to equal it.”

“ ’Tis by comparison an easy task
Earth to despise; but to commune with heaven
’Tis not so easy.”

Admiration, says Plato, is the sentiment of a
philosophic mind, and the avenue which leads to
philosophy. If then it be an object to discover

formly preserved and happily reached this consummation, must
be the eternal standards of instruction from whence it must be
drawn; that the sooner we become imbued with its principles,
the sooner we move in the right path to greatness : that without
it we may be just, we may be natural, we may be excellent in
various ways, but we can never be sublime.”—Bromley, i. 302.

286

APPENDIX.

“ Maida Hill West, Dec . 2, 1859.

“ Mt dear Sir,

“ On considering the argumentative pictures given in your
Introductory Essay on the Ceiling in the Parthenon, I felt satisfied
that, if there was nothing in the writings of the ancients to con¬
tradict in the most distinct terms the evidence of the coins and
the artistic argument you produce of the flat and pointed roof,
you had good presumptive evidence for the curved ceiling; and
when I afterwards read your essay, and consulted the lexicon for
such terms as axf/iSa, irpofirjKY}, and used by writers of the

time when the roof of the Parthenon and other Greek temples
were standing, it seemed to me impossible to withhold consent. I
had no idea such evidence could be produced.

“ The fact of a gallery being found in the oldest Pyramid,
the roof of which is constructed of approaching stones, I have
ever regarded, not as a proof that the arch was then unknown,
but that its suicidal property was known to the very ancient
Egyptians. That the Egyptian architect was acquainted with the
arch, but was fearful of the propensity of destruction inherent
in its structure, is evident from the fact that it is frequently
found in small, and the most ancient structures of brick, more
especially where they occur between rocks, while it is never found
in their larger structures, except in instances where the abutments
are unexceptionable, as in some tombs at Sakkara, where the abut¬
ment consists of the solid rock. The Indians say * the arch never
sleeps : ’ in other words, that night and day it is always seeking to
take some advantage of any failing in its abutments. To obviate
this tendency in arched structures, the architects of the West
have invented the buttress, and the pinnacle to give weight to
the buttress; neither of which contrivances are required in the
trabeated structure. Further evidence of the fact may be afforded
by pointing to an Egyptian brick of wedge-formed shape, in
the British Museum, and to the rows of brick arches round
the Memnomium, which are now considered as ancient by the
learned. Brick arches have also been found in Nineveh.

“ I am, my dear Sir, yours very truly,

“Joseph Bonomi.”

300

APPENDIX.

tecture and Painting,” he exhibits a parallel view of a Greek
lion’s head, from the Schools of Design at Edinburgh, and the
head of a tiger sketched from nature, and says, speaking of
this—

“ Grecian sublimity of your ideal beast.”—“ It is seldom that anything so
contemptible as this head can be ever found. Do not think Mr. Millais has
caricatured it; it is drawn with the strictest fidelity.” .... “ It is a bar¬

barous type of sculpture ”....“ not merely ridiculous, it is seriously harmful
to your powers of perceiving truth or beauty, of any kind, or at any time,” ....
“a barren and insipid absui’dity.” (pp. 82, 83.)

The ornament is ridiculed because it it placed at a height at
which “it cannot be seen,” and because the same ornament is
repeated a hundred times. But while this is thirty or forty feet
high, the crochet of the Gothic steeple is three hundred or four
hundred, and it is repeated a thousand times without any
difference. Even if there were a difference, would such a
difference be appreciable ? Even if appreciable, would it be
desirable ?

But let us test his “ strict fidelity ” by comparing his tiger’s
head with a lion’s head from Athens.

To compare these two, for the purposes of architectural sculp¬
ture, is about as ridiculous as to cry up the head of a common
back-horse as being more natural and more beautiful than the
famous horse’s head of the Elgin collection ; or the head of some

APPENDIX.

317

Goethe (J. W.) — Essays on Art. Translated by S. G. Ward.

16mo. Boston, 1845

Green (Benj. R.)—Series of Heads after the Antique.Fol. Lond. 1836

Greswell (Rev. Richard).—On Education in the Principles of Art.1844

Griffoul d’Orval.—Essai sur la Sculpture en bas-relief.8vo. Paris, 1822

Groppo (Antonio).—Collezione di Dissertazioni di diversi Autori in materia

d’Arte, e di Antichita.4to. Yenez. 1748, &c.

Grund (Johann Jakob).—Die Malerei der Griechen.

2 tomes, 8vo. Dresden, 1810-11
Guasco (Abbb de).—De l’usage de Statues chez les Anciens.. 4to. Brux. 1768

Guizot (M.)—Etudes sur les Beaux-Arts.8vo. Paris, 1852

De Guys.—Voyage Littbraire de la Grbce : ou, Lettres sur lesGrecs.

8vo. Paris, 1776

Hagedorn (M. de).—Reflexions sur le Peinture. 8vo. Leip. 1775

Hancarville (Le Sieur d’).—Recherches sur l’Origine, l’Esprit, et les Progrbs

des Arts de la Grbce. 4to. Lond. 1785

Harford (J. S.)—Life of M. A. Buonarotti .8vo. Lond. 1857

Harris (James).—Three Treatises : concerning Art, Music, Painting and

Poetry, in vol. ii. of his works.8vo. Lond. 1772

Haus (Marchese).—Raccolta delle Belle Arti.8vo. Palermo, 1823

Hay (D. R.)—Science of Beauty.8vo. Edinb. 1856

Haydon (R. B.)—The Judgment of Connoisseurs upon Works of Art ; in
reference more particularly to the Elgin Marbles.

8vo. Lond. 1816

-Lectures on Painting and Design.2 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1844-6

-Life of.3 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1853

Hayley (Wm.)—Essay on Sculpture.4to. Lond. 1800

-A Poetical Epistle to an eminent Painter.4to. Lond. 1779

Hazlitt (W.)—Criticisms on Art.8vo. Lond. 1843-44

Hermann (K. F.)—Studien der Griechische Kiinstler.8vo. Goet. 1847

Hermsterhuis (M.)—Lettre sur la Sculpture, k M. Thbodore de Smeth.

4to. Amst. 1769

Hettner (H.)—Yorschule zur Bildelden Kunst der Alten.. 8vo. Oldenb. 1848
Heyne (C. G.)—Akademische Yorlesungen iiber die Archaologie der Kunst
des Alterthums, insbesondere der Griechen und Romer.

8vo. Braunschweig, 1822

-Ex C. Plinii Secundi Historia Naturali excerpta quae ad Artes

spectant.8vo.

Hickey (Thomas).—History of Painting and Sculpture, from the earliest

account, English and Italian.4to. Calcutta, 1788

Hirt (A.)—Die Geschichte der bildenden Kiinste.8vo. Berlin, 1833

Hittorff (J. J.)—Restitution du Temple d’Empedocle k Sblinonte.

4to. and atlas fol. Paris, 1851
Hofstaeter (Felix Franz).—Von derUebereinstimmungderWerkederDichter

mit den Werken der Kiinstler.8vo. 1773

Hogarth (William).—The Analysis of Beauty.8vo. Lond. 1810

Hort.—Sur l’Origine des diffbrentes Beautes d’lmitation chez les Grecs.

.1822

Huch (Ernst L. D.)—Philosophie der Bildhauer .... 8vo. Brandenburg, 1775
Hutcheson (Fr.)—An Inquiry into the Origin of our Ideas of Beauty and

Virtue.8vo. Lond. 1728

Jacob (Fred.)—Hellas, translated by Oxenford.8vo. Lond. 1855

Jacob (Hildebrand).—On the Sister Arts .8vo. Lond. 1734

Jarves (J. J.)—Art Hints.8vo. Lond. 1855

Junius (F.)—-De Pictura Veterum.4to. Amst. 1638

-Painting of the Ancients.4to. Lond. 1638

INTRODUCTION.

shows Corinthian columns, whereas we know the
temple of Samos to have had Ionic : but this is only
another proof of the conventional character of their
medallic art, the object of the artist being merely
to indicate a temple, without caring for or distin¬
guishing minor details.

But it is fair to M. Quatremere to let him give
his own words :—

“ Malgre ce qu’il a plu a quelques antiquaires de publier sur la
fidelite des artistes monetaires dans les representations des monu¬
ments, je crois que le plus souvent ils n’ont donne que des images
reduites, et que la plupart des temples n’y sont qu’indiques par
des abbreviations d’usage.

“ J’ai toujours eu quelque peine a m’expliquer ce grand nombre
de peristyles de temples qui ont un arc inscrit dans leur fronton.
Cette methode, qui est un des abus familiers de Farcbitecture
moderne, n’est pas, a la verite, denuee de toute espece d’exemples
dans la basse antiquite. On voit des niches a Balbeck et a Spa-
latro, on en voit aussi dans quelques sepulchres du bas age pres
de Borne, ornees de frontons ainsi coupes par un arc. Ces details
vicieux ne sont que de Uornement. Mais que jamais le fronton
en grand d’un temple ait ete, dans 1’antique, ainsi decoupe et
adultere par un caprice de decoration, je crois qu’on peut se per-
mettre de le nier. Cependant, beaucoup de revers de monnoies
offrent ce vice, et l’offrent comme un vice d’usage. Qu’a pu
l’inspirer aux graveurs ? J’avois cru d’abord que cet arc n’etoit
imagine que pour donner un peu plus de hauteur a la statue du
dieu, placee le plus souvent sous ces peristyles rapetisses: mais
en ayant observe beaucoup ou cette supposition n’est pas admis-
sable, j’ai soup 9 onne par le fait seul de la statue indiquee sur ces
monnoies, et qui naturellement est la statue ineme de l’interieur
du temple, (comme Yitruve nous l’a enseigne plus haut,) que le
graveur s’etoit propose, dans ces frontispices, de faire voir trois
choses, le peristyle exterieur, l’interieur du temple, et la statue ;
de maniere qu’il faudroit regarder ces representations de temples

INTRODUCTION.

ancients, 1 in which, he asserted its remote origin.
This was objected to by a writer in the Edinburgh
Review, and again defended by M. Dutens. The
authorities on which he rests his opinion are :—a
passage in Plato in which he recommends a monu¬
ment being raised to the chief magistrate, which
should be constructed with a waggon - headed
vault, n§oL irpofjLrjvr) ; 2 another from Aristotle, who
compares the world and the works of God “to
those stones in coved buildings called arch-stones
(\|/ax/8s$) which sustain all the edifice by the re¬
sistance which they yield on every side;” 3 and
the following from Seneca, — “ Democritus, said
Posidonius, is believed to have invented the arch,
(of such construction) that by the curvature of
stones gradually inclined, it should be held together
by the middle stone. This I should say was false;
for bridges and gateways must have existed before
the time of Democritus, the tops of which were
gradually curved.” 4

To this it is objected that B-oAo£ was applied also
to any building circular on plan, that also

signifies a conical or pointed roof, and a\ |/i$ denotes
merely the act of touching; and that the first two

1 Dutens, (Louis,) RecJierches sur le Terns le plus recule de
V Usage des Voutes chez les Anciens, 8vo. Lond. 1805.

2 Plato, De Legibus , xii. 947.—Steph. 3 Aristot. De Mundo.

4 Seneca, Epis. xc. See also Eurip. Hippol. v. 1247 ; Aristoph.

ThesmopJi. v. 58 ; and Sophoc. Lacence , quoted by Pollux,

lib. ix.

INTRODUCTION.

portion for colonnades, are only of about one-half
the height of the lower columns. So singular is this
proportion, that I once heard a learned professor
endeavour to account for it by observing that the
temple at Passtum being long anterior to the time
of Pericles, there is no doubt but that art had
improved wonderfully during this period. But
finding nearly the same proportion observable at
^Egina, I felt it would not be safe in deviating from
these authorities, and I accordingly adopted the
same relative proportion in my restoration of the
Parthenon. It was not till I had done so, that I
perceived what I believe to be the reason of such an
arrangement. The lower order, from the size of the
columns, three feet six inches in diameter, and the
smallness of the intercolnmniations, appears like a
wall of stone, and the upper colonnade would have
presented a similar appearance, had the proportions
been at all alike. We should then have had two
walls of stone, without the possibility of seeing
between the columns. These small porticos agree
perfectly with the expression of Strabo,—

But by diminishing the height of the upper order
to one-half of that of the lower columns, the
diameter of these upper columns also became
reduced to one-half, and by this means the
architect obtained a light and open gallery, thus
giving an opportunity for exhibiting some of the
numerous works of art which were treasured up

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

appreciate the works of Phidias, and then shall we
be able to recognize the skill of Scopas. But why
should only the originals engage onr attention,
why should we not, if really endued with a correct
principle of art, value the design more than the
object itself ? Why should we not attempt to
supply, by a gallery devoted to sculpture-casts, the
want of those which we do not possess ? The
student would then be enabled to compare and
contrast together the various excellences exhibited
in the sculptures of the Parthenon with those of
the Laocoon, the Apollo, the Venus, or the Anti-
nous. The public would then frequent our Museum,
not from motives of curiosity, but for purposes of
study.

II.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

In thus prizing the productions of ancient art,
we are led to inquire, Whence is excellence in art ?
To what are we to attribute the high degree of
excellence attained to by the ancient Greeks ? The
question has often been asked, but the answer has

ANCIENT ART.

nature; or, like Prometheus, he apostrophized the
cc atmosphere divine, the swift-winged breezes, the
fountain-source of rivers, the laughing ripples of
the ever-flowing ocean,” 1 and his mind, freed from
care, and revelling in joy, was fit for contem¬
plation, and prepared to seek the beautiful and
the good. As a member of the commonwealth, he
thought of his country’s glory and achievements,
its ennobling civilization, its moral worth, its love
of freedom, its martial valour, its unvarying suc¬
cess, its future destiny; he called to mind the
high deeds of glory effected by its hero-sons, and
he felt his spirit soar within him at thoughts of
his own excellence, in feelings of his own conscious
dignity; and he longed for a path by which he
might equal the glory of his ancestors, and raise
to himself a name worthy of his country’s remem¬
brance. As an artist, he took pride in the reflec¬
tion that this glory was self-created, that it was
indigenous to the soil ; he sought not models
from other countries, he copied not the works
of others, seeking only how best to conceal his
plagiarisms, but studying deeply the excellences of
his predecessors, and striving how most entirely to
reach their meaning, he relied upon his own powers
to equal or excel them.

But above all other motives which influenced his

1 ^Eschylus, Prom. Vinctus.

THE IDEAL.

gesture or costume, but the goddess appears as a
modesty-clad female, and with the exception of a
diadem and pomegranate, has no indication of her
calling. 1 2

PAINTING ON A YASE IN THE HAMILTON COLLECTION.

This regard for spiritual idealization is the cause
that Polygnotus is also praised by Aristotle, 3 for
representing men as more beautiful than they are,
while Dionysius merely made them what they are.
Ctesilaus, also, is said by Pliny to have made noble
men appear more noble ; while Aristotle praises
Zeuxis for preferring the impossible, if probable, to
the barely possible. One who carried this principle
to an extreme was Lysippus of Sicyon, who said he

1 D’Hancarville, Antiq. Etrusq. iv. p. 17, pi. 12. The figures
in the original are black upon a red ground, which will explain
what would otherwise appear to be incorrectness of drawing.

2 In another place he praises him for the careful depiction of

manners, a point in which Zeuxis was inattentive.

112

ANCIENT AET.

and then describes the process of polishing with
wax. From this it is evident that the statues
described by Plutarch were merely daubed with
vermilion, but not polished: but where more care
was required the colour was rubbed in, and became
transparent. And thus we may understand that
the reason of the statue-polishing by Mcias being
preferred to that of others, was because Nicias
displayed more judgment in the application of the
local tints, before the act of polishing. 1 From
Plutarch we learn that the encaustic painting and
gilding of statues, were separate trades or pro¬
fessions. 2 Aristotle is thought to allude to coloured
statues in his Poet . i. 1. It is owing to this cir-
cumlitio , this protection of the surface by encaustic
polishing, that ancient marble statues have been
preserved to us in such a perfect state. It will be
observed that all this is very different to the rude
daubing with which terra-cotta figures of the Lares,
and other divinities, are found covered, and which
are adduced in evidence of polychromy by some
writers, and objected to as barbarous by its oppo¬
nents, as if there were no other evidence of the
art. Such figures, and votive offerings for the
temples, as Cupids covered all over with vermilion,

1 Eorse variavasi cosi il colore d’alcune parti delle statue

e tale operazione richiedeva il discernimento d’un valente maestro.”
—Visconti, Mus. Pio Clem. ii. 72 and iii. 6.

2 JDe Gloria Athen. 6.

116

ANCIENT AET.

and separated into different parts., but in tlie chrys¬
elephantine work the eye was astonished at the
wonderful manner in which small pieces of
ivory were so artistically united, that the whole
appeared to be of one mass. Barthelemy, M. de
Panw, Count Caylns, Knight, Flaxman, Forsyth,
Watelet, D alia way and others already named, and
latterly an able writer of the present day, together
with a learned professor, 1 2 have judged too hastily,
and with too great presumption, when they con¬
demned, as evincing bad taste, these works of the
ancients, which were regarded as the masterpieces
of antiquity. 3 There is little doubt but that the
erroneous idea of the moderns on this subject is
due to the fact of so few works of bronze, and
none of ivory and gold having come down to us.
Few of the best works of antiquity were executed
in marble; and yet it is these marble ones chiefly
which we possess. These form our beau ideal of
Greek art. All which is added to it is so much
spoilt. Such is the common opinion. But many

1 Backed by these authorities, a distinguished architect has
not hesitated to state, “ It has been received almost as an indis¬
putable fact, that even Phidias himself was addicted to the vicious
practice of his age in painting his sculpture .”—Papers of the
Roy. Inst, of Brit. Archts ., Session 1858-59, p. 9.

2 It has been objected that chryselephantine sculpture was

not used in the time of Praxiteles, but we know, on the contrary,
that it continued to be employed even so late as the age ot
Hadrian.

HOPE _ A MOSAIC BASRELI EF.

ur THE MHSETJM 0 T THE ARCHBISHOP OP TAREHTO .

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC

143

simplicity of form, an imperfect beauty of coun¬
tenance, a most careful arrangement of drapery,
which is composed of numerous straight folds, a
symmetrical crispness of the hair, a profuse or¬
namentation of necklaces, bracelets, rings, and
diadems, characteristics sufficiently displayed in
this instance. The figure is in the act of running
to the chase, a position so frequently observable
in statues of this goddess. 1 The proportions of
the figure are elegant, and in keeping with the
slender neck, which is that of a virgin. The
goddess is possessed of great beauty, though the
eyes are rather elongated, the corners of the
mouth a little turned, and the chin not sufficiently
rounded. The feet however are most exquisitely
beautiful, and not surpassed in statues of the finest
period. The hair was of a golden hue, and kept
up in front by a white fillet ornamented with red
rosettes in relief, and falling in ringlets on the
shoulders, and in matted queue behind. The
drapery is white, fringed with coloured ornaments.
On the tunic is a red border, without other orna¬
ment, but the peplos has a line of gold, then a
bright red band charged with white palmettes, to
imitate embroidery, above which is another line of
red. Both the tunic and the peplos are arranged
in close compact folds, as in the Etruscan manner.

1 See Mus. Class. Antiq . vol. i. p. 885.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

147

mony to the existence of colour on these venerated
sculptures. So, not only in the archaic sculptures
of the JEginetan temple, 1 but in those of the

tion of Panathenaic frieze given in a subsequent page, when treat¬
ing of the ancient bas-relief.

“ Le fond (des bas-reliefs) etoit bleu ; les cheveux et quelques
parties du corps etoient dores.” (Millin, Descr. d’un Bas-relief
du Parthenon. ) See also Wilkins’s Atheniensia , pp. 87, 88.
This colouring is denied by M. Dubois in the Bevue Arche'o-
logigue, (ii. 28, 29,) who says that when Millin saw the bas-relief
there was a violently-coloured Gothic bas-relief in front of it, and
that Millin must have mistaken one for the other ! that he pointed
out the mistake to Millin, but that he persevered in his error!
The reader may believe Millin or M. Dubois, as he feels disposed.

“ It appears on examination that even now there are remains
of blue colour disceruiblethe darker and decided
colour of the background.”—Westmacott, On Colouring Statues ,
Archaeol. Journ. 1855.

It will be seen that I take no account of M. Semper’s state¬
ments. This enthusiastic artist no doubt had colour in his eye,
and saw it there when none existed in the monument itself.
M. Semper saw the Trojan column adorned with gilt sculptures
on a blue ground, where M. Morey, a French architect, who
examined the monument with at least equal care, saw only a
ferruginous oxidation, and a greenish deposit from the bronze
statue. M. Semper saw the Colosseum painted red, which no one
has ever seen before or since ; and M. Semper saw the cella walls
of the Parthenon coloured blue, where another polychromist,
Schaubert, says he saw yellow! (See evidence of Kugler and
Wiegmann, and arguments of Haoul-Fochette, in the Journal des
Savans, Nov. 1836.)

1 “ The statues found in the temple of Jupiter Panhellenius
were all painted ; the colours are visible, and the attributes were of
bronze and lead.” ( DodwelVs Travels , i. 343.) “ All the figures

have been painted: the colour is still visible, though nearly
effaced.” ( lb . i. 571.)

INDIVIDUALITY.

The first principle of ancient art was beauty,
but how can this be attained when the attention
of the sculptor is confined to the production
of individual likeness ? The ancient artist was
occupied constantly in embodiments of the gods
and heroes, the modern artist in representations of
every-day life; the former was ever idealizing his
art, the latter seeks only to produce identity. Even
the commissions which he receives are not of a
character to encourage art. Patronage alone will
not accomplish this. The ancient artist felt his
soul enlarged by receiving a commission, for it
was one the subject of which afforded the deepest
energy for his mind, and kindled the warmest
affections of his heart; but the employment of the
modern sculptor is almost exclusively limited to the
execution of portrait-busts, with or without tailors’
clothes—works which Agesilaus called mechanical.
It is not the artist whom we must blame for this,
it is the public taste, or rather the want of taste

200

MODERN ART.

confined only to pedimental forms : it is observable
also in tlie Panathenaic frieze, in the slabs of which,
though all of one height, we see the twelve gods
represented as of colossal stature, larger than any
of the other figures, in order that they might
command a greater reverence and honour. In the
Theseion, also, the gods are recognizable by their
increased size, and by being seated and draped as
spectators of the fight. On the other hand, the
insisting upon a servile identity of defect in sculp¬
ture is to magnify that defect, and make it lasting.
Who, in considering the achievements of Frederick
the Great, or Wellington, would think of their having
been small in stature ? Most people, indeed, who
are yet sufficiently conversant with their histories,
are forgetful of the fact. Neither would Napoleon’s
stature be remembered were it not for the sobriquet
attaching to his name, and the ubiquity of the little
plaster images. 1 But if this diminutiveness be made
observable in their statues, who could fail of being
struck by it ? Who could deny that the artist had
directed attention more to the material form, in
which they were deficient, than to the sublimity of

1 It is remarkable that Augustus also was short of stature,
Suet. e. xxix.; and in modern days, Havelock. Alexander’s
shortness of stature passed into a proverb. Yirgil says of such
persons:—

“ Ingentes animos angusto in pectore versant.”

Georg, iv. 83.

INDIVIDUALITY.

205

admiration and example the able manner in which
the artist represented Bacchus, in his picture of
Ariadne. “ It is not the vulgar Bacchus, with
thyrsus and corimbus, with flowery robe and soft
doeskins, but a beautiful youth, radiant with love
alone.” (Icon. i. 15.) It was with this feeling that
Protogenes, having painted a partridge too well
in his famous picture of the Satyr, effaced it, that
the accessory might not be taken for the principal;
on the same principle on which portrait-painters
acted, who, Pausanias says, dwelt on the face,
caring little about other parts. Pliny gives us a
similar anecdote of Zeuxis, who, having painted a
child carrying some grapes so naturally that the
birds flew down and pecked at the grapes, re¬
moved them, in order that the attention might be
directed to the proper object, saying, “ I have surely
painted the grapes better than the child; for if I
had fully succeeded in the latter, the birds would
not have dared to touch the grapes.” All such
defects were carefully avoided by the Greeks.
Pyreicus, who painted subjects like those of the
Flemish school, was called in contempt a painter
of worthless things. We may apply to such defects
what Longinus says of coarse expressions in
oratory, which are, he says, “ mere patches, or
unsightly bits of matter, which entirely confound
the fine proportions, mar the symmetry, and deform
the beauty of the whole.”

COSTUME.

217

varied and flowing curves as it reached the bottom,
were crossed by the ample width of the pallium,
the lines of which passed gradually from a scarcely
indicated sinking to the swelling fold, and from
the diagonal lines of the skirt to the horizontal
lines about the waist, and these again relieved by
the short quick folds beneath the girdle. But this
drapery is never alike. Notwithstanding the sim¬
plicity of the garments themselves, the combina¬
tions of form were endless, and so beautifully was
the whole executed, that even a small fragment of
the drapery of a figure is sufficient to enable us
to pronounce whether the statue were of Grecian
workmanship. 1 But in modern representations of
ancient costume the sculptor too frequently con¬
tents himself with hastily arranging his drapery
after the ancient manner, and this done, he takes
no great trouble whether the lines fall well or the
folds be skilfully adjusted. 2 The ancient drapery
they call wet drapery, because it lies so close to
the flesh; but no one in looking at the tunic of
the youngest or extreme figure of the three Fates,
Clotho, 3 can mistake that for wet drapery : it is

1 “ The smallest fragment is sufficient to show the degree of
excellence of a statue.”—Plin. ii. j Epis. 5.

2 Of all the great masters of the middle ages, Eaffaelle, from
his careful study of the antique, appears to have best succeeded in
the arrangement of his draperies.

3 The reader is referred to the marbles themselves, not to the

2 E

COSTUME.

228

cult a one, that no certain rule can be laid down
regarding it: even ones own opinion may change,
as already remarked, in seeking to apply it to
different examples : but however diversified opinions
may be upon the subject, all must agree that every
particularity of detail which is unnecessary, and
which is not merely unconducive, but prejudical to
beauty, should be discarded. M. Quatremere de
Quincy relates an instance of a blind subservience to
identity, in a statue of Moliere, which was clothed
in homely fashion, and which held in the lap a
looking-glass, to indicate his power of depicting the
various phases of human nature. But this looking-
glass was so formal in its shape, and so exactly
identical with modern taste, as to obtain for the
statue the name of the looking-glass dealer, Le
marchand miroitier! Another instance is told us by
Sir Joshua Reynolds, which forms a good comparison
with that just narrated. There was a statue of
Yoltaire, which the sculptor, not having that respect
for the prejudices of mankind which he ought to
have had, made entirely naked, and as meagre and
emaciated as the original is said to have been. The
consequence was what might have been expected—
it remained in the sculptor’s studio.

226

MODERN ART.

oration which ^Eschines described so generously
in his Rhodian exile. 1

In speaking of ancient art, we noticed how a
statue of Nemesis, by Agoracritus, was made beau¬
tiful as one of Yenus. On looking at the angel of

Victory recently exhibited in one of our parks, we
might suppose that an artist unacquainted with the
refinements of Greek taste, had wished to typify
the goddess of vengeance, if not of disgust. Instead
of beautiful forms we find nothing but angular
lines. The Grecian youths were instructed to walk

1 During the time when all the masterpieces of Italy were
collected in Paris, a Drench lady, on viewing the statue of one of
these orators, exclaimed—“ Qu’il raisonne bien!” Her uncon¬
scious exclamation was the best compliment she could have paid.

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

Colossal sculpture originated in the desire to
show increased reverence to the Divine Being, to
excite particular veneration or astonishment; and
to increase these effects most, resort was ever had
to the power of contrast. The statue was placed
alone, or surrounded only by small objects, so that
nothing tended to detract from size, but everything
helped to make it more impressive. Such works,
however, were offered only to the gods : mortals had
to be contented with statues of the life size. Modern
sculptors, instead of limiting their works to this
size, are ambitious of making them colossal. Like
the unskilful artist, who, incapable of attaining
beauty, aims at richness, the sculptor seeks to
compensate for quality in quantity. 1 It is no

'“H

1 “ No, no,” observed Nollekins, “a grand thing don’t depend
upon the size, I can assure you of that. A large model certainly
produces a stare, and is often admired by ignorant people, but
the excellence of a work of art has nothing to do with the size,
that you may depend upon from me .”—Nollekins and his Times.

THE IDEAL.

263

not from an individual member, not even from an
amalgam of scattered beauties, as Lucian’s Panthea
was composed, 1 not from tbe average mean, accord¬
ing to Sir Joshua Reynolds’s theory, but from a
comparison of mankind in general. Like Eupom-
pus, he points to the crowd as his model, and by a
comparison of various forms seeks to realize the
perfection of beauty implanted in our first parents,
diminishing the traits of character common to the s
animal creation, and giving prominence to, and ■
exaggerating those which relate to the intellectual
faculties : the copyist, on the other hand, contents
himself with a single figure as his model, and which,
despite its blemishes, he insists on copying, and calls
it nature. He, says Proclus, who takes for his model
such forms as nature produces, and confines himself
to an exact imitation of them, will never attain to
what is perfectly beautiful; for the works of nature
are full of disproportion, hnd fall very short of the
true standard of beauty. 2 The copyist merely
copies; but the idealist imitates from nature, the

1 Cicognara has been praised by an elegant writer on anatomy
for saying that “ The artist should contemplate the beauties of
the Venus, the youthful Apollo, the vigorous Athletes, and the
Hercules, select the perfect form, and recompose them into a
beautiful whole.” But this is quite opposed to ancient doctrine,
and contrary to the first principles of art.

2 See many excellent remarks on this subject in Sir Joshua
Reynolds’s Third Discourse.

280

APPENDIX.

Antique de la Sicile, et, ulterieurement, en publiant le temple de
Jupiter a Agrigente. Quoique vous n’ayez mis votre opinion an
jour que recemment, elle reproduit en general celle de M. Quatre-
mere de Quincy, souvent cite par vous ; et quoique vous ayez
ajoute a ses preuves et raisonnements de nouveaux elements, vous
ne m’avez, a la premiere lecture, pas plus convaincu que ce savant
archeologue, mon ami et venerable maitre, ne l’avait fait.
J’admets que les temples comme le Parthenon et celui de Jupiter
a Olympie etaient partiellement couverts et recevaient le jour d’en
haut. Mais il faut, a mon avis, pouvoir concilier ce systeme avec
la construction de la couverture des temples, telle que nous la
connaissons, et sans recourir a une voute. Les medailles romaines
citees, ou l’idole du temple de Junon a Samos se trouve repre¬
sente sous un arc, ne m’ont jamais paru suffisamment concluantes.
II y a beaucoup de raisons a donner pour ne pas y voir la repro¬
duction exacte du Naos de ce sanctuaire; et celle qu’un artiste
romain, habitue a ne voir dans tous les temples qu’il connaissait
que des cella voutees, ait ainsi represente la cella d’un temple
grec, n’est pas une des moindres objections a faire. Mais, encore
une fois, je n’ai pas etudie de nouveau la question, et aussitot que
je pourrai le faire je m’y livrerai sans aucune idee precon 9 ue, et en
pesant consciencieusement le pour et le contre de vos idees. Du
reste, le genre des temples hypsethre variait autant, comme on le
voit par les exemples existants, que les autres genres de temples
qui se trouvent plus ou moins modifies dans l’execution. Le
grand temple de Selinunte en est un exemple curieux, et auquel
d’autres exemples de la Sicile viennent se joindre. Je demande
au Supreme Architecte de rilnivers la grace de me laisser achever
mes travaux sur les restes antiques de ce beau et merveilleux
pays, et je le prie aussi de vous soutenir dans vos glorieux efforts
de cooperer a la propagation de l’amour et d’une connaissance
plus intime de l’art antique, qui, quoiqu’on puisse dire et faire,
sera toujours la plus pure source ou l’art moderne doit puiser.

“ Je serai heureux, cher confrere et ami, de vous serrer la
main lors du voyage a Paris, que vous comptez faire cette annee.

“ Mille compliments affoetueux,

“ Hittoeee.”

APPENDIX.

281

In the foregoing letter it will be seen that Mr. Hittorff takes
as granted that the arch within the porticos of temples repre¬
sented on Eoman coins is indicative of arched or vaulted ceilings,
though he forms a different deduction from the fact. Mr. Hittorff’s
hypothesis is entitled to consideration on a subject where the
arguments on both sides are necessarily hypothetical: still it must
be remembered that the coin, though executed by Eoman artists,
was struck at Samos, and by artists who had the temple of Juno
before their eyes. For the reasons stated in his letter, Mr. Hit¬
torff has not had time to take into his regard the arguments
based upon the height of the statue in the Parthenon, the low
height to which the known sizes of the columns could possibly
be made to extend, and the impossibility of a stone trabeated
ceiling. It is therefore only out of kind compliance with my
request that this eminent French architect and antiquary has
offered his present observations; and we may look forward with
interest to the expected work of this accomplished writer on
ancient art.

“ Berlin, 7 Mdrz, 1860.

“ Lieber Herr Falkener,

“ Ihrem Wunsche gemass antworte ich sogleich in Betreff
der Parthenonssache. Yerzeihen Sie mir, wenn ich dieselbe in
meiner neulichen Zuschrift nicht beruhrte ; Ihre Schrift war mir
nicht zur Hand, da ich sie sogleich unter unsern Architecten
verbreitete, und von denselben nicht wieder erhielt. Die Frage
fiber AYolbung des Parthenon iibersteigt meine eigene Compe-
tenz; um so mehr habe ich in unserer Archaologischen Gresell-
schaft dieselbe angeregt. Ich kann Ihnen nicht verhehlen dass
alle anwesenden Architecten, namentlich die Herrn Boetticher,
Strack, Lohde, und Adler, gegen Ihre neue Ansicht sich strau-
ben, und Ihre Ausfuhrung einer so gewagten Thesis, wie die
Annahme eines Holzgewolbes im Parthenon ist, erst abwarten
wollen, bevor sie sich Ihnen irgendwie beizustimmen ent-
schliessen. Kommen Sie aber zu uns, so sollen Sie nichts desto
weniger mit uns zufrieden sein ; unsere Gfesellschaft versammelfc

284

APPENDIX.

appear to me inconclusive, and your deductions erroneous. As
to the inaccuracy of medals, I think that I have in my work
shown the identity between the medals and those buildings whose
remains still exist, and which are described by ancient authors
—Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, Jupiter Feretrius, Concordia,
Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, the temple at Baalbec, and
the Propylea. Now, until those who call in question the veracity
of medals can quote as numerous instances of dissemblance, as I
do of resemblance, my faith is not shaken in their accuracy.

“ You will observe, also, that the medals you quote are of Asia
Minor, and of a period when the arch was notoriously so used by
the Homans, particularly in Syria.

“No concentric stones have been found in the ruins of the
Parthenon. Could they all have escaped ? Thirty years ago I
entered upon the question in the supplementary volume to Stuart’s
4 Athens; ’ but I could make nothing of it, the Greek terms were
of such doubtful interpretation, and so few monuments in Greek
art, except the subterranean chambers, to reason upon. How¬
ever, ventilating the question can produce no harm. Pacts, they
say, are stubborn things ; but preconceived notions are stub-
borner, so you will have a hard fight to go through to overcome
the established conviction of pure Greek architecture having been
entirely trabeated.

44 Believe me most truly yours,

44 Thos. L. Donaldson.”

(Ph.D. and Prof, of Arch. Lond. Univ.)

The remarks on medals in this letter from my friend Prof.
Donaldson bear reference to my observations in pages 7, 8. After
an examination of Mr. Donaldson’s most interesting and valuable
work, it would be preposterous to deny that the ancients repre¬
sented portraits of buildings on many of their coins ; but the build¬
ings so represented are generally of a special character. The Meta
Sudans, a Naumachia, an Acropolis, were buildings which had not
been represented before, and the artist was obliged to study them
previous to engraving them on his coins. Temples, on the other
hand, were the objects most commonly represented, and moreover

XY1

PREFACE.

not to propitiate his manes by incense and sacri¬
fice. Nor let it be thought presumptuous in arro¬
gating to my humble offering a name so great. It
is not by choice, but by necessity that it is so
named; for, in consequence of his great celebrity,
all statues were named after him, Scu&aXa; and
therefore a work on sculpture can bear no other
name.

The name of Dsedalus carries us back to the very
infancy of art, to the time of Theseus and Hercules,
before the Trojan war, when history is concealed
by a veil of myths and legends. The very existence
then of Dsedalus has been denied by some, though
I am bound to believe that he was an Athenian
by birth, the son of Metione, and grandson of
Erechtheus, king of Athens. His name is cele¬
brated both in ancient and in modern times, not
more for his art than for the variety of his wander¬
ings and calamities. Two deeds are laid to his
charge, either of which is sufficient to overwhelm
his memory with infamy ; and yet there is no name
in the history of art which has received such
honour. Had he been guilty of the murder of his
nephew, and fled to good King Minos, we might
be sure that it would have been said of him,—

INTRODUCTION.

imagining that the arch which is shown on many
Roman coins of Grecian buildings represents the
vault of the temple, that the artist endeavoured to
show in one view, the front portico, and the interior
of the temple, with its statue and vault over; a
conjecture which is perfectly reasonable when we
recollect that the ancient medallists were frequently
in the habit of giving conventional representations
of the objects which they wished to portray. 1

Of these coins, one is remarkable as exhibiting
the Temple of Juno at Samos, which we know to
have been a Grecian building; the other as ex¬
hibiting only the vaulted interior of the temple,
without the exterior.

The conventional character of ancient art as dis¬
played in the synecdochical treatment of their coins

1 A distinguished Architect has just published a most
interesting -and valuable work on numismatical architecture,
(“ Architectura Numismatica; or, Architectural Medals of Classic
Antiquity.” By T. L. Donaldson, PH. D. London: Day & Son,
Grate Street, Lincoln’s-Inn Fields) in which he propounds a
new theory. He supposes that these conventional types of
temples are mere baldachinos, instead of temples, as has always

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

no perfection at Sparta, where beauty was so much
prized ? How is it that Cicero complains of the
Athenians being plain : or if Cicero were wrong,
how is it then that the inhabitants of Georgia 1
or Circassia are not equally distinguished in art ?
If with Aristophanes, Diodorus Siculus, Cassiodorus,
Pliny, and Winckelmann, we attribute it to smiling
peace after splendid victories, and Tacitus makes
even the love of glory depend on peace, how is it
that Pome did not become even more celebrated,
in respect of art, than Greece itself ? But though
these with Cicero make Peace and Ease the com¬
panions of the arts, we must not forget that the
ancient proverb said,

“ Plus nocuere togse quam loricse.”

Indeed, we may say that the arts of Greece flou¬
rished in the midst of war. If with Maximus
Tyrius, Quinctilian, and other writers, we affirm

had sacrifices offered to him in his lifetime, on account of his
beauty. Cypselus instituted prizes for beauty; while such was
the honour conferred by its possession, that Elpinice, the sister
of Cimon, did not hesitate to sit as model to Polygnotus.

One of the strangest competitions among the ancients was that
caused by the institution of a prize to whosoever should give the
sweetest kiss. If the competitors were restricted to those who
had contended for the prize of beauty, and if, as the Greeks
believed, beauty was ever indicative of goodness, it would have
been no disagreeable thing to pass a course in their gymnasium.

1 “ That country of beauty, where a pure and serene sky pours
fertility.”— Chardin's Travels.

ANCIENT ART.

artist was not content with representing the double
nature of the being, but he endeavoured to display
this characteristic throughout the entire frame.
The great distinction, however, which the artist
had in view, was to impart a spiritual beauty to his
gods, and a corporeal beauty to his heroes. The
gods he represented as devoid of passion, his heroes
partook of the delicacy of female beauty. The
expression of face of the Laocoon, originally adorned
with a laurel wreath, and of the dying Achilles, is
almost unruffled. So also in the Wrestlers . 1 In
the AGginetan pediment, Laomedon and Patroclus,
though mortally wounded, are still unmoved, sus¬
taining themselves in beauty and dignity, smiling
upon death . 2 In all the prostrate figures of the
Elgin and Phigalian marbles we do not find
one countenance on which are expressed the
marks of horror or dismay. Hercules is ex¬
hibited as in youthful beauty. In the Apollo
the only indications of anger are pointed out in
the inflated nostril, of contempt in the raising

1 How different are the Florentine Wrestlers from Canova’s
Wrestlers of the Vatican in this respect.

2 The sculptures of iEgina and Phigalia, two of the most interest¬
ing specimens of the great period of Grecian sculpture, exhibit
the same unvarying principle in the practice of this fine art.

We are happy to hear that the relation of these admirable
works to the architecture which they adorned, will be explained
in a publication, long a desideratum, announced by Professor
Cockerell, one of the original discoverers.

ANCIENT ART.

the detail of their works as they increased in size.
This had the effect, at once, of ornamenting their
works, and of giving them a greater apparent mag¬
nitude by the very contrast of this minuteness.
How is it that the Parthenon looks so immense ?
To look at it on an engraving representing a parallel
view of ancient buildings, it appears one of the
smallest of the ancient temples, and yet no one can
have seen its ruins without being struck with its
apparent size. To what are we to attribute this ? It
is caused by contrast: contrast with the accessories
of the temple, and contrast in its own details. The
columns of the peristyle of temples appeared colossal
when viewed in proximity with the comparatively
diminutive columns of the surrounding peribolus,
and the simplicity of the general forms acquired
majesty when contrasted with the exquisite finish of
some of their parts. It is this very property of uniting
in the same object ideas of size and minuteness,
which creates perfection, for in this it imitates the
operations of nature. There are some ornaments of
the Parthenon so small, so fine, so delicate, that their
detail cannot be distinguished from below, but this
very minuteness appears to have been designed
purposely to give to the entire temple an increase of
size by contrast . 1 Pliny describes a painting by

1 Many other instances to this purpose might be pointed out in
ancient architecture ; but so little is this law of contrast considered

102

ANCIENT ART.

of the colossal figure appearing of increased gran¬
deur and sublimity by comparison with the smaller
objects, and these objects appearing of increased
richness and beauty by comparison with the simpler
mass. It was to this principle, manifested as it
was in all the works of Phidias, that Demetrius
Phalerius referred, when he spoke of his cc mag¬
nificence of style united with the most exquisite
delicacy.” This indeed is the important principle
which regulated the treatment of colossal works.
In smaller works, as we shall presently see, the
skilful artist neglected his accessories, even in his
most finished works, in order that they might not
interfere with the principal subject: but in colossal
works all such accessories were finished with the
greatest care, that they might impart richness
to what would otherwise appear clumsy . 1 In
Phidias’s works we are told that “ even in the
smallest things a magnificence equal to that which
the artist had displayed in the entire was to
be perceived.” Mention has just been made of
the footstool of the Jupiter, and of the sandal of
Minerva : another instance occurs in the sceptre

1 The colossal Victory at Apsley House may be cited as an
example in point. The aegis of this figure, having no fringe of
serpents, wants richness. It looks bald and inelegant: and the
same feeling which discarded the serpents, as an emblem of
Minerva, should also have discarded the aegis itself, which is not
a usual distinction of a figure of Victory.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

107

down to ns. Pliny says tliat the Egyptians dyed
their silver statues, and that statues so coloured
were much enhanced in value. Homer describes
the blood-stained thighs of Menelaus as resembling
ivory steeped in purple dye . 1 2 It is probable from
the description of the Venus of Cos by Apelles,
that a similar effect of colour was there produced.
Epicurus, in speaking of the gods, says,—“ It is
not the real body, but only an appearance of the
body; nor is the red blood, but only the appear¬
ance of blood.” The eyes of the Minerva were of
precious stones , 3 and it would have been easy to
select such stones as should resemble life, but
Plato says that the colour resembled ivory: the
difference of colour therefore must have been very
slight, and sufficient only to create illusion. This
stone was probably a chalcedony. This circum¬
stance is most important in the subject of iconic-
poly chromy. In the Roman acroliths the eyes are
filled in with strong colours. Here the colour is but
just perceptible. We should regard this therefore
as the key for the application of poly chromy to
ancient sculpture. The hair was frequently gilt,

1 Ovid alludes to Assyrian ivory, tinted by Maeonian women
so that it should not turn yellow; (Amor. ii. Eleg. 5:) and he
likens the cheeks of Hermaphroditus, when blushing at the
advance of Salmacis, to “painted ivory.” (Met. iv. 331.)

2 The inserting of coloured eyes to statues was a distinct

profession.

180

MODERN ART.

become of the country ?” Glory and independence
being gone, the arts became debased, and manners
were corrupted. Petronius, having inquired how
it was that there was so great an indolence and
indifference to art in his day, and why so many
most beautiful arts had perished, among which
painting had not left the smallest trace, was
answered, sarcastically, “ The love of money is
the cause. But in the early ages, when as yet
simple virtue pleased, the ingenuous arts flourished,
and it was the greatest endeavour among men that
what was profitable should not be concealed from
posterity. But we, sunk in wine and lascivious¬
ness, care not to practise art; but, accusers of
antiquity, we teach and learn only its faults. Do
not wonder then that Painting is lost, when both
with gods and men a mass of gold seems to be
more comely than anything which those mad
Greeklings, Apelles or Phidias, ever executed.”

“ Aurum omnes, victa jam pietate, colunt.”

Property iii. 13, 48.

Pliny the younger complains that “ The liberal arts
are neglected, and the arts of avarice are the only
ones which are now cultivated :” and in another
place,—“ What was formerly done for glory, is now
undertaken for the mere purposes of gain.” What
the Macedonian conquest had begun, the Boman
conquest perfected. Imagine the feeling of the

INDIVIDUALITY.

191

as a constant memento of the necessity of confining
his genius to the depraved tastes of his customers,
if he wishes to procure a living. If the public,
instead of giving way to this overweening vanity,
were to be content, like the ancients, in seeing
their own houses simple and unadorned, so that
the public monuments were worthy of the nation,
we might then expect to see the art of sculpture
taking its right tone, and assuming its proper
station.

It is the same with the other arts. Why is it
that we see so few historical pictures in our ex¬
hibitions ? Is it because our artists cannot paint
them, or because they can find no sale for them
when they are painted ? A man may starve now¬
adays who devotes himself to what he considers
to be high art. In all the arts, the student begins
with enlarged views of the dignity and beauty of
his art, but it is so long before he gets his first
client, and there is so much difficulty in getting
others after, that he is content to execute a bust
for his pastry-cook, or paint a kit-kat of some
simpering dandy , 1 or put up a hideous red-brick
Gothic front to a London house; and thus high

'•-'7

1 It is amusing to read of Hay don’s stealthily scratching
caricatures of the “ stupid heads and vapid faces of his sitters,”
and of Nollekins regarding busts as the “ small change, which
enabled him to buy his marble, and pay his men.”

198

MODEKN AET.

the neck, was represented by Lysippus , 1 as fixing his
regard on heaven, an attitude which is said to have
imparted to him a sublime appearance. The attitude
is taken advantage of by the Greek epigrammatist,
who writes:—

“ See Philip’s son with dignity appear,

With lion front, and proud imperial air!

Hear him exclaim, upturn’d his piercing eye—

‘The earth is mine—Jove, govern thou the sky.’ ”

Antigonus, having lost an eye, was painted in
profile by Apelles, so that he might not spoil his
picture by a blemish. Pauson only would have
ventured to exhibit Hannibal as one-eyed . 2 Julius
Caesar, we are told, was represented with a laurel-
wreath in order to hide his baldness. Augustus
is described by Suetonius as in other respects
most handsome, but having eyebrows which united
together across the forehead; but what sculptor
would have so portrayed him ? 3 Hadrian had
warts upon his chin, and set the mode of wearing

1 It is asserted by a modern writer, but without any authority,
that this artist was selected by Alexander because he represented
him of average proportion: although the hero is known to have
been short of stature.

2 See the anecdote related by Visconti, in a subsequent page
(p. 215), of Marechal Luxembourg and his hunchback.

3 So in other cases. That artist has mistaken his calling who
would be content to represent Socrates merely as flat-nosed,
iEsop as deformed, or Virgil as clownish.

202

MODERN ART.

mean. Alexander is said to have been of a low stature; a painter
ought not so to represent him. Agesilans was low, lame, and of
a mean appearance : none of these defects ought to appear in a
piece of which he is the hero. In conformity to custom, I call
this part of the art history-painting; it ought to be called poetical,
as in reality it is.

“ All this is not falsifying any fact; it is taking an allowed
poetical licence. A painter of portraits, retains the individual
likeness; a painter of history, shows the man by showing his
action. A painter must compensate the natural deficiencies of
his art. He has but one sentence to utter, but one moment to
exhibit. He cannot, like the poet or historian, expatiate, and
impress the mind with great veneration for the character of the
hero or saint he represents, though he lets us know, at the same
time, that the saint was deformed, or the hero lame. The painter
has no other means of giving an idea of the dignity of the mind,
but by that external appearance which grandeur of thought does
generally, though not always, impress upon the countenance; and
by that correspondence of figure to sentiment and situation,
which all men wish for, but cannot command. The painter wdio
may in this one particular attain with ease what others desire in
vain, ought to give all that he possibly can, since there are so
many circumstances of true greatness that he cannot give at all.
He cannot make his hero talk like a great man; he must make
him look like one. For which reason he ought to be well studied
in the analysis of those circumstances which constitute dignity of
appearance in real life.”—Sir Joshua Reynolds, Discourse 4.

It was but an ignorant cobbler who had the
presumptive folly to find fault with the sandal
painted by Apelles: it is the sculptor himself
who in a great German work servilely imitates the
coarseness of material, and the ugliness of form and
execution, of German hobnailed boots and leather
trouser-straps.

“ Tanta gentium in rebus frivolis plerumque religio est.”

COSTUME.

219

minster Abbey, tbe figures of which are represented
in classical costume, we sometimes see the deceased
represented as if swaddled up in heavy folds of dra¬
pery, such as no ancient ever wore, or certainly such
as no ancient artist would ever indicate ; and at other
times the poor man appears half denuded, and his
very look inspires pity. It cannot be classical costume
of such a character which we would recommend;
nor indeed would classical costume under all cir¬
cumstances be equally appropriate. Who would wish
to alter the costume of Milton ? His flowing locks
and religious aspect would ill become a Roman
toga. So with Shakspere : every one would grieve
to see a change of costume ; not merely because it
is the costume of the day, but because such costume
becomes him. Much therefore depends upon the
subject, as to the style of costume which should be
employed : otherwise, if the head, by the arrange¬
ment of hair and general character, be modern, it
will appear not to belong to the body to which it is
attached. Thus we have two rival principles, each
of which is attended with its disadvantages. The
modern costume is ugly and soon becomes anti¬
quated; the ancient costume is foreign and often
inappropriate. But a mean between these is open
to us, and this is often the most pleasing : it is
idealization, approaching sometimes nearer to the
one, and sometimes to the other. If ancient cos¬
tume be selected, its peculiarities which stamp it

BAS-RELIEF, AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE. 257

scale, that it would not become us to pass it by
without consideration. I have, however, in another
work 1 2 entered so fully on this subject, in treating
of the pediments of the Parthenon, that I can do
little more than refer the reader who is desirous of
information to the essay there published. I endea¬
voured to show how carefully the ancient artist
studied his subject, so as to present a true and
thoughtful picture of the event which he wished to
indicate. No figure was introduced without a mean¬
ing ; instead of being put in to “ fill up,” it could
not be removed without damaging the story. This
unity of action is well described by Aristotle. He
says,—it is necessary that “ the parts be so con¬
nected, that if any one of them be either transposed
or taken away, the whole will be destroyed or
changed : for whatever may be either added or
omitted without making any sensible difference,
cannot be a part of the whole.” Having thus
conceived his subject, he then studied how the
figures were to be placed, and with this intent not
only how each would look well in itself, but how it
would combine with others; how his masses on
each side should correspond with and balance each
other; how sometimes he should study resemblance
of form ; at others contrast; how the voids and
masses should be opposed by those of the building ;

1 Museum of Class. Antiq. i. 353-402.

2 L

268

MODERN ART.

tion ? Is it the brilliant colouring of a Titian, or
the deep shadowing of a Rembrandt ? Is it the
soft finish of a Carlo Dolce, or the exact identity
of a Denner ? No, it is none of these ; far less
is it the rustic nature of a Teniers. What is it
then ? It is the simple mother and child of
Raffaelle , 1 developing the beautiful innocency of
childhood, and the beautiful tenderness of a mo¬
ther’s love : but even in those tender traits of
childhood the idealization of the Divinity is ex¬
pressed, even in that virgin - mother’s love is
evident the idealization of wonder and gratitude,
of humility and adoration. Thus should it ever
be with works of art devoted to the representa¬
tion of the human form. Not only must the eye
be pleased with the correct delineation of the out¬
ward form, not only must the mind be satisfied
with the attitude and action, but the sympathies
of the heart must be excited, if we desire to
attain success—if that success is hoped to be
enduring.

1 Raffaelle was a great studier of the antique in general, as
G-uido was of the Niobe, Michael Angelo of the Torso, Domeni-
chino and Carlo Maratti of the Antinous. Raffaelle employed
others to take drawings of monuments which he could not himself
behold. It is to the study of the antique that these artists owe
half their excellence.

APPENDIX.

289

Near this, in the valley of the Assaseef, is another tomb, of the
date of Thothmes III., 1740 rv!320 B.C., represented in the
accompanying plate. It is remarkable that in both these instances
the arch is introduced merely as a ceiling, to hide the roughness
of the rock above. It might be supposed that the arches are
comparatively modern, but not only do the cutting-away of the
rock, and the solid abutments, show that the arch was coeval with
the excavation, but the hieroglyphics are not found stamped on
the bricks, but on a coating of stucco with which the brickwork
was covered. There can be no doubt, therefore, as to the antiquity
of these two vaults.

The next example is a series of vaults round the Memnonium
at Thebes, built by Baineses II., 1579 cv> 1160 B.C., which we will
refer to presently, after recording another instance in the arch of
Campbell’s tomb, which contained a sarcophagus of the date of
Psammetichus I., 654^611 B.C., or Apries, 595^585 B.C.
This tomb is remarkable in exhibiting the early arch of three
blocks, as shown above, together with a stone arch in four rims,
evidently copied from brick arches. The stones measure 4 feet,
by 1 foot 3 inches, by 11^ inches, and the span of the arch is
11 feet. Here again, the whole construction, the sinking of the
tomb in a well, and the great pains taken to preserve its sanctity,
prevent our entertaining the bare possibility of a doubt as to its
antiquity. Another example of a stone arch occurs in a tomb at
Saceara, and is of about the same epoch.

But the most remarkable example is the series of vaults
round the Memnonium, just alluded to, which appear so perfect
and so modern, that travellers, finding the bricks stamped with
the cartouche of Rameses II., have explained away the fact by
supposing the vaults to have been executed by the Romans with
old materials. But it is remarkable that though ancient struc¬
tures of the reign of Thothmes III. exist in the immediate
neighbourhood of these arches, no brick stamped with the name
of that king has been discovered in the arches, but only those of
Rameses.

But the strongest argument for the genuineness of these arches
is afforded by the nature of their construction. It is to be

APPENDIX.

299

IY.

Page 129.

“ The Greeks have been esteemed ignorant of correct principles ,
and devoid of taste”

“Atque ego idem existimavi, pecudis esse, non hominis, cum tantas res
Graeci susciperent, profiterentur, agerent, seseque et videndi res obscurissi-
mas, et bene vivendi, et copiose dicendi rationem hominibus daturos pollice-
rentur, non admovere aurem.”—Cic. Be Oratore, ii. 36.

But of all writers, the author of the “ Seven Lamps of Archi¬
tecture ” appears to have least courted the guidance of Minerva,
or the influence of the Graces, to whom were attributed the deli¬
cacies and refinements of Greek art. Other writers dispute its
excellency in this or that particular, owing to mere mistake or
ignorance on their part; but to what must we attribute the
invective and abuse with which this author so insidiously
assails the Greeks ? Like the mediaeval antiquary, who expa¬
tiates with rapture on a fibula or piece of broken pottery,
and is indifferent to the stupendous ruins of the cities of
antiquity, the author of the “Seven Lamps” sets aside those
principles which are founded on the experience of ages, and
discourses with perplexing “ earnestness ” on a boss or finial.
Gifted with dangerous and seductive eloquence, endowed with
fertility of imagination, his assertions, however wild, however
false, are received by the vulgar as from an oracle. The greatest
fallacies and contradictions are received undoubted, in the same
manner that the poor pervert gulps down all the difficulties of a
false religion. In the frontispiece to his “ Lectures on Archi-

LIST OF WORKS

RELATING TO

SCULPTURE

AND ITS CONNECTION WITH THE OTHER FINE ARTS.

Accademia.—Saggi di Dissertazioni dell’ Accademia Palermitana del Buon

Gusto .Palermo

D’Agincourt (Seroux).—Histoire de l’Art .Fol. Paris, 1823

-(English) 3 vols. fol. London, 1847

-Fragmens de Sculpture Antique .4to. Paris, 1814

D’Alberg (W. H.)—De l’lnfluence des Sciences et des Beaux Arts sur la

Tranquillity publique.4to. Parma, 1802

-Pericles : De l’lnfluence des Beaux Arts sur la Felicity publique.

4to. Parma, 1811

Alberti (Leone Battista).—De Statua, de Pictura, Libri Tres.. 8vo. Basil, 1540

-Della Pittura, e della Statua . 8vo. Milano, 1804

Alberti (Rom.)—Trattato della Nobilitk della Pittura.4to. Roma, 1585

Albinus (B. S.)—Tables of the Skeleton and Muscles.Fol.1777

Alison (Archibald).—Essay on the Nature and Principles of Taste.

4to. Edinb. 1790

Amateur.—Remarks on Ancient and Modern Art .8vo. Lond. 1837

Ancient Marbles of the British Museum .10 vols. 4to. Lond. 1845

Andry (Y. M. Padre .)—Essai sur le Beau, le Modus, le Decorum, la Grace,
l’Amour du Beau, l’Amour ddsinteressy .... 12mo. Amst. 1759

Anghle (Philippe).—Eloge de la Peinture.12mo. Paris, 1642

Arphe (Juan de Arphe y Villafanne).—Varia Commensuracion para la Escul-

tura y Arquitectura.Fol. Madrid, 1736

-El Quilador.Fol. Madrid, 1736

De Baader.—Sur la Liaison qui existe entre les Beaux Arts et la Physique.

.1813

Le Barbier.—Des Causes Physiques et Morales qui ont influd sur les Progrks

de la Peinture et de la Sculpture chez les Grecs.Paris

Barry (James).—An Inquiry into the real and imaginary Obstructions to the
Acquisition of the Arts in England.

-Lectures. (See Wornum.)

Barthez (P. J.)—Thyorie du Beau dans la Nature et les Arts.

8vo. Paris, 1817

Bell (C.)—Anatomy and Philosophy of Expression.8vo. Lond. 1844

Bell (J.)—Observations on Modern Italy.4to. Edinb. 1825

Bettinelli (Saverio).—Dell’ Entusiasmo delle Belle Arti .... 8vo. Milan, 1769
Blackie (J. S.)—On Beauty .12mo. Edinb. 1858

APPENDIX.

32 ]

Ruskin (John).—Obsoletism in Art.8vo. 1852

-Political Economy of Art.16mo. Lond. 1857

-On the Proper Use of Art in Education.8vo. 1858

Sallier.—La Perspective de l’Ancienne Peinture ou Sculpture.

Acad Roy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome viii.

Salvage (J. G.)—Anatomie du Gladiateur combattant.. Eol. and 8vo.1812

Schelling (F. W.)—Philosophy of Art. Catholic Series.... 12mo. Lond. 1844

-Verhaltniss der Bildenden Kiinste zu der Natur.

8vo. Berlin, 1848

Schimmelpenninck (M. A.) — Theory on the Classification of Beauty and

Deformity.4to. Lond. 1815

Schlegel (A. W.)—Legons sur l’Hist. et la Thborie des Beaux Arts. Tra-

duites par Couturier-de-Vienne. .8vo. Paris, 1830

Schomann (G. F.)—Schonheit in den Plastischen Kunstwerken der Griechen.

8 vo. Griesswald, 1843

Schorn (Ludwig).—Ueber die Studien der Griechischen Kiinstler.

12mo. Heidelberg, 1818

Sculpture.—Ancient and Modern.4to. Lond.

Sears (B., D.D.)—Classical Studies.12mo. Boston, 1849

Seitz (Jos.)—Essai sur la Fonte des Anciens, et celle des Chevaux de Chio,

avec les Notes de M. Millin.8vo. Paris, 1806

Semper (Gottfried).—Bemerkungen liber vielfarbige Architectur und Sculptur

bei den Alten .8vo. Altona, 1834

-Ueber Polychromie und ihrenUrsprung .. 8vo. Braunschweig, 1851

Seran de la Tour (ISAbbe). —L’Art de Sentir et de Juger en Matibre de Gotlt.

8vo. Paris, 1762

Sharp (Wm.)—Elgin Marbles... Fol. Lond. 1817

Shee (M. A.)—Rhymes on Art.8vo. Lond. 1805

-Elements of Art.8vo. Lond. 1809

Smith (Adam).—Works. On Imitation in the Fine Arts. .. 8vo. Lond. 1812

Smith (J. T.)—Nollekins and his Times .8vo. Lond. 1828

Snow (R.)—Observations on Imitation.12mo. Lond. 1847

Sobry (J. F.)—Pobtique des Arts ; ou, Cours de la Peinture et de Litterature

comparbes.8vo. Paris, 1810

Soehnee (Charles Frbdbric).—Recherches nouvelles sur les Procedbs de Pein¬
ture des Anciens.8vo. Paris, 1822

Somaglia (Giulio Cesare della).—Delle Arte del Disegno, Orazione.

8vo. Roma, 1775

Soster (Bartolomeo). — Esame Analitico dei Pregiudizi e False Idee nelle

Belle Arti.8vo. Milan, 1850

Spence (Jos.)—Crito .8vo. Lond. 1752

-Polymetis.Fol. Lond. 1747

Studmond (A. W.)—Ueber den Ursprung und die Geschichte derKunst.

8vo. Jena, 1767

Sulzer J. G.)—Allgemeine Theorie der Schonen Kiinste.

2 theile, 4to. Leipzig, 1771

Symonds (J.)—Principles of Beauty.8vo. Lond. 1857

Tagliazucchi (Girolamo).—Orazione e Poesie per l’lnstituzion dell’ Accademia

del Disegno de Torino.8vo. Torino, 1736

Ten Kate.—The Beau Ideal.4to. Lond. 1732

Testelin (Henry).—Sentimens des plus Habiles Peintres sur la Pratique de la

Peinture et Sculpture.Fol. Paris, 1696

Thompson (W.)—An Inquiry into the Elementary Principles of Beauty in the

Works of Nature and Art.8vo. Lond. 1798

Thiersch (F.) — Ueber die Epochen der Bildende Klinsten bei den Alten.

8vo. Berlin, 1833

DAEDALUS;

OR,

THE CAUSES AND PRINCIPLES OF THE EXCELLENCE

GREEK SCULPTURE.

EDWARD EALKENER,

MEMBER OF THE ACADEMY OF BOLOGNA, AND OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL
INSTITUTES OF ROME AND BERLIN.

LONGMAN, GREEN, LONGMAN, & ROBERTS,

PATERNOSTER ROW.

I860.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

Photographs and Chromo-Lithographs.

Interior op the Parthenon . Frontispiece.

The Minerva Borghese . To face Page 24

The Laocoon. 74

Bas-relief in Mosaic. 124

Diana Agrotera {Two Views) . 142, 143

Minerva, from Herculaneum . 144

The Antinous. 174

The Apollo Belvedere ( Two Views ). 176, 178

The Fates— Clotho and Lachesis. 218

A Greek Orator—Aristides. 224

The Venus de’ Medici . 254

Antiquity of the Arch {Two Plates) . 286

Woodcuts.

INTRODUCTION.

These porticos do not exceed ten feet in width.
Nothing conld be easier, or more natural, than to
cover these porticos with stone. Argument would
be unnecessary to prove it, for experience shows it
in the remains of every ancient temple. It is from
these ceilings of the outer porticos, the stone or
marble lacunaria, overlaid with gorgeous colouring
and gilding, that architects have too rashly presumed
that the interior also of the temple was covered
in a like manner. But this opinion is unsupported
by any proof, or any confirmation . 1 Nevertheless, the
opinion has been received and adopted, and modern
buildings, as for instance our National Museum,
which are erected after the Greek manner, have
their ceilings, it may be, of cast-iron, girders, or
lath and plaster, painted to imitate, what it would be
impossible to execute—a marble roof. Such, then,
is the tradition of the so-much-talked-of trabeated
ceilings of the ancients. So little do we know of
the interior of the Greek temples, that we cannot
even decide upon their arrangement. Some have
supposed that the hypsethron consisted of a range
of skylights on either side, ignorant of the sacred
signification of an hypaethron. Some have supposed
that there was only one order of columns within
the temple; others that there were two, and that

1 Unless the temple were very small, or the cella of diminished
width, as in the temple of Apollo at Bassae, the roof of which
Pausanias expressly mentions was of stone.—Paus. xli. 5.

INTRODUCTION.

the part which is hypasthral is full of the finest
works of sculpture, among which are, &C .” 1 These
galleries were appropriated to the smaller and more
precious works of art, and without them we cannot
well imagine where the numerous objects, described
to us by Pausanias and other authors, could have
been displayed . 2

SECTION OE THE PAETHENON.

Having restored the colonnades as described, I
found that there was yet remaining a considerable

1 Strabo, p. 637, lib. xiv. See also Raoul-Rochette, Peintures
Ant. Ined. pp. 94, 95, 116 ; Q. de Quincy, Le Jupiter Olymp. 212 ;
Winckelmann, Geschichte d. K. iv. 1, § 31 ; Boettiger, Archdol.
der Malerei, p. 119, &c. &c.

2 Since writing the above, indeed while the proof-sheets were

ANCIENT AET.

of liberty , 1 their heroic fire, and, to mention no
other causes, their insatiable love of praise , 2 and
the enthusiasm generated by all these principles . 3

Athens. Aristides and Themistocles laid aside their enmity on
being sent as co-ambassadors to a distant state, to resume it again
so soon as they returned.

1 Athens, like England, was a land of asylum to political
refugees of all descriptions.

2 Horace’s well-known lines beginning “ Graiis ingenium,”
will suggest themselves to every reader.

3 The following notices of the manners and customs of the
Athenians have been collected by Bromley, from Gioguet’s “Origine
des Lois,” &c., where the reader will find much more on the same
subject:—

“We behold all the elegance, both in life and in address, that
could be expected from the most enlightened minds—an ease and
a freedom which reached to every individual—a politeness on all
occasions which was kept up by the very dregs of the people—a
circumspection and decorum in most circumstances where decency
was concerned, which if violated in some cases was fatal to any
character—a mildness and humanity which was perfectly cha¬
racteristic, even to their slaves, even to their beasts—a sense of
honour, which carried them to as great deeds as the sense of
discipline ever produced in the Spartans—a pleasantness of de¬
meanour, which ran through all the habits of life, and yet never
forgot the improvement of the mind, and the embellishment of
society, in the very midst of their feasts—a zeal for commercial
intercourse, because it extended their acquaintance with men and
things, and civilized them rather than because it enriched them—
an attention to the blessings of education, because it perpetuated
the blessings which they enjoyed. If they were luxurious in their
living, they should rather be called dainty and delicate than
voluptuous and excessive ; for they were temperate and sober to
the greatest degree:—if there were debauchees among them, such
things are everywhere, and perhaps they can by no regulations

THE BEAUTIFUL.

valour ; it is this which makes everything valuable,
which without it would be mean and contemptible.
Yulcan, the famous artificer, was said never to have
succeeded in his art, unless the youngest of the
Graces attended him. It was an ancient practice
to make the good as good as possible, but to con¬
ceal and diminish the bad. The Theban law, indeed,
if we may trust iElian, not only confined works of art
to the beautiful, but inflicted a fine for delineating
anything offensive to the eye. Plato prescribes to
the artists of his republic that they should create
nothing illiberal or deformed, as well as nothing
immoral or loose, but should everywhere strive to
attain to the nature of the beautiful and the
becoming: while Aristotle, in like manner, strove
to guard from the view of youth all objects capable
of exciting a low and degraded taste . 1 In con¬
formity with this precept the Greeks avoided all

1 On the same principle the poets sought to invest every¬
thing with a glorious aspect. Do base intriguers seek to corrupt
the fidelity of a lovely wife—they are the illustrious suitors, god¬
like suitors ; do a mutinous crew rebel against their captain—their
noble mind is persuaded; does a wicked enchantress turn men
into swine—she is the venerable Circe, the immortal Circe, the
fair-haired Circe, the divine one of goddesses ; does terrible
Charybdis engulf ones companions—it is the divine Charybdis;
does a poor blind minstrel sing—it is the hero Demedocus. the
divine bard; is a pigsty described—it is a lofty abode, beautiful
and large, and the swineherd is divine, chieftain of men. So too
in the Iliad, the ruthless slayer of Eetion and her seven brothers
is designated by Andromache as the divine Achilles.

THE IDEAL.

sculptor. He sought to convey to the marble the
hidden attributes of the soul, to awaken by bodily
forms the secret operations of the mind ; 1 and this
was not an occasional exercise, but a constant duty.
Socrates is made to observe to Clito that statuary
must represent the emotions of the soul by form.
“ It is not sufficient,” says he, cc that you give to
your works an expression of life, and choice of
agreeable forms which will charm the spectator,
you must represent by the forms of the body the
different emotions of the soul .” 3 And in the same
dialogue Parrhasius and Socrates agree that the
good and evil principles of the soul may be re¬
presented by the material likeness. Images, says
John Hamascenus, are the interpreters of internal
sentiments. All this may be accounted fancy, but
it is not so. As an illustration, the reader may be
reminded that the ancients constantly made use of
animal peculiarities to indicate human attributes.
Thus, it has been frequently observed that in the

to represent the minds and passions of men and women, to paint
them not only alive, but as influenced by the nature of their
minds ; by their present thoughts and prevailing emotions. This
was his scheme—this his secret.”—E. Knox, M.D., Great Artists
and Great Anatomists , p. 194.

1 It was probably only this which Plutarch meant, when he
said that the Greeks neglected the other parts of the body, con¬
fining expression only to the countenance: an observation as we
have seen otherwise confuted by the Laocoon.

2 Xenoph. Mem. Socr.

156

ANCIENT ART.

gaudy and offensive to pure tastethe application
of colour to marble sculpture they attribute either
to a rude archaic period, or to a degenerate Roman
age; the bronze colouring, with the stories of
Callistratus, Pliny, and Pausanias, they regard as
fabulous, the chemical amalgam of metals as im¬
possible . 2 With carpers and cavillers such as these
it is impossible to argue.

of iEgina, the sculptures of which he was one of those who dis¬
covered, he says,—“ In this temple we have a very ancient example
of the practice which prevailed among the Greeks of painting their
sculpture ; for the style and execution of the colours found on the
statues and ornaments of the temple prove that they cannot he of
any other date than the original construction.”— Journal of Science
and the Arts, No. xii. p. 340.

1 “ La description des statues colossales de la Minerve Athe-
nienne et du Jupiter Olympien, sculptees en or et en ivoire par
Phidias, excite le sourire incredule ou le regret de ne pouvoir
mettre en doute la perfection de l’art chez les Atheniens et les
Eleens. Que seroit-ce si le Bacchus de Phigalie apparissait au
milieu de nous avec sa draperie d’or et ses chairs peintes du
cinabre le plus pur ! ” (Ziegler, j Etudes Ceramiques , p. 180.)

In like manner M. Eauvel, speaking of the evidences of colour
on the monuments of Athens, remarks, “ C’est chose difficile a faire
entendre a nos architectes, qui ne veulent pas croire aux statues,
et aux bas-reliefs peints.” {Mag. Hncyc. 1812, ii. 92.)

2 Modern critics may well deny the possibility of effecting this,
for, as we have seen, the art was lost in the time of Nero. (Plin.
U. W. xxxiv. 7.) We are told by Pausanias that they possessed
the art of giving such a degree of whiteness to copper, as to
make it resemble silver. (J. Seitz, JJssai sur VArt de la Uonte des
Anciens .) Iron has likewise been combined with copper in very
ancient statues. (M. Rollin, History of the Arts and Sciences
of the Ancients, p. 131.)

MODERN ART.

DECLINE OF ART.

Having thus taken a view of Greek art in its
excellence, let us examine it in its decline, and
compare it with the state of art in the present
day. We commenced by considering the causes of
Greek excellence. We saw it take its rise after
the victories of Salamis and Platgea; it began to
degenerate after the disasters of Cheronsea. On
losing their independence, and with it their glory
and ambition, the Greeks lost everything. The
love of honour and virtue was no more, and the
Greek character soon sank to what it is.

“ By Jove’s decree it is, whatever day

Makes man a slave, takes half his worth away.” 1

Lucian, in his Anacharsis, asks, “ If you take
away the love of glory from the citizen, what will

“ G-rsecorum animi servitute ac miseria fracti sunt.”— Liv.

DECLINE OE ART.

181

unhappy Greek, as one barbarous conqueror after
another, followed by Praetors each more exacting
than his predecessor, ravaged the Grecian cities
and their colonies, leaving no town in Greece or
Asia, Sicily, Magna Graecia, Rhodes, or the other
islands of the Mediterranean unpillaged, till scarcely
a statue remained for the miserable people to
address in supplication ! Imagine deputies from
these cities having to appear at Rome, and there
seeing the sacred statue which had been adored for
ages, now forming part of some vast museum, or
serving as an ornament to the villa of a Mummius
or a Verres ! With what spirit or enthusiasm could
the poor artist work, who saw such a probable
termination to his labours ? But whatever spirit
remained after such a calamity, art was utterly
extinguished at the conquest of the country by
the Christians. Libanius informs us that the
monks, carrying axes and torches, overspread the
country, burning the temples and breaking the
statues, and leaving nothing behind them but
smoking ruins . 1

“ Thus the monks finished what the Goths began.”

Pope.

dH "

Security and patronage being gone, the Greek
artists fled to Egypt, Syria, Italy, and other coun-

1 This will scarcely be believed by some, and yet we find that
so late as the fifteenth century ancient art was still exposed to

INDIVIDUALITY.

195

even to the boundaries of Asia, with its marvels,
sculpture has but seldom passed beyond the barrier
of imitation, though instructed by the greatest
models. It is laboriously propagated, but in an
artificial warmth, just as if its productive powers
had been exhausted in Hellas. Its few and scattered
works seldom proceed from the inner life : still more
rarely do they enlarge the province of forms by new
and genial creations. Some that have attempted to
open new paths have gone astray therein; most,
lingering on the beaten track, have contented
themselves to give back the old in manifold com¬
binations.” This want of appreciation of the
inner sentiment, having regard only to the out¬
ward form, has been the reason that so many of
the works of antiquity have been erroneously
restored, even by the best artists. We have only
to go through the museums of Europe to perceive
how many ancient statues have thus suffered.
Forgetful how some of the gods are represented
with traits scarcely differing from those of the
female sex, Apollo has been changed into Berenice
or Adonis, and Bacchus into Ariadne. Regarding
only the outward form and the significancy of
emblems, Yenus Urania, from wearing a diadem,
has been mistaken for Juno ; but if the artist
had but noticed the love-exciting and languish¬
ing look caused by the elevation of the under
eyelid, he could not have been deceived as to the

INDIVIDUALITY.

197

a servile identity of likeness in modern art. In
order to perpetuate beauty, tlie Greeks accorded
a portrait-statue only to him who had thrice been
victorious in the Olympic games. This statue was
a portrait of the whole body, the object being
to show what development of muscle, what peculiar
symmetry of limb, had conduced to such success.
Those who had conquered but once or twice had
to be content with an idealized representation,
which, to prevent monotony, was often in the
attitude in which the hero had gained the victory.
But even in their portraits the Greeks sought
ever to elevate natural beauty, not debase it.
Pliny speaks of it as a novelty in his time, the
studying to produce a perfect likeness in all its
details. The accidents caused by war or other
calamity are an adventitious interference with the
normal symmetry of the human frame: the artist,
therefore, if he could not reject, at least attempted
to disguise them . 1 The Grecian artist, not daring to
exhibit Pericles, nicknamed Schgenocephalus, with
a conformation of skull differing from that of true
proportion, masked its excessive length and size by
investing him with a helmet, and thus produced an
object of great beauty instead of one of marked
deformity. Alexander, having a slight inclination of

1 Richardson, in his Theory of Tainting , gives an instance
where some degree of elevation is given to the bust of a plain
man, by adding trifling incidents which do not affect the likeness.

INDIVIDUALITY.

209

work. Just so a skilful architect will keep some
portions of his buildings plain, in order to make
the principal parts appear more rich. In the same
manner a painter will bring out his lights by
shadows, a composer will change suddenly from
joiano to forte , from slow to rapid, and an orator
from slow and measured cadence to impassioned
declamation. No true artist can be insensible to
the power of contrast.

-n

2 E

COSTUME.

213

represented in their sacrificial robes, or distin¬
guished by Trojan peculiarity of attire, are naked,
because the artist felt that the naked form would
be more conducive to beauty. But not only did
the artist take this liberty, but he increased the
size of the hero, and represented him sitting, and
diminished the size of the two sons, in order to
make the principal figure more important, and so
tend to centralize the action. Thus we see in this
celebrated group, which is esteemed the finest of
ancient art left to us, the artist, or artists, have not
hesitated to depart from custom or reality, where
they thought it would be an advantage to their
subject. Not only were their heroes, as Hercules
and Antinous, represented naked, but even their
princes, orators, and poets, were thus exhibited.
Can we suppose that Augustus or Adrian, Drusus
or Germanicus, Pompey or Agrippa, went about
naked, because they so appear in sculpture ? It is
not necessary for us then to adhere servilely to the
costume of the day. By some it may be argued
that the proper costume for a figure may be con¬
sidered that of the country to which we would refer
whatever is noble in his character. We may asso¬
ciate men of talent and learning with Greece, and
make their costume assimilate to that of the
country where learning reached perfection. States¬
men, orators, and men of genius deserve a costume
which will be considered honourable from its asso-

216

MODERN ART.

Citoyen Eenon,” in which he fully corroborates the views there
stated. He shows that even the Greeks did not follow the
costume of their age, but represented their fellow-citizens whom
they honoured with a statue, as if living in the times of barbarism,
when little or no clothing was made use of. The Homans also,
instead of adhering to their national costume, preferred to appear
in that of Greece. Even a habit like the Eoman toga, so capable
of artistic effect, was rarely introduced, and many portions of the
dress which were considered characteristic of rank and station,
were never indicated. In referring to Eenon’s letter he says,—
“ C’est un zele bien eclaire pour les beaux arts, que celui qui tend
a les debarrasser de ces facheuses entraves du costume moderne,
qui en arretent les progres.” And at the conclusion of his
essay, his editors thus express themselves: — “ II pregiudizio
che le statue debbano copiare il costume de’ tempi ne’ quali
sono esse modellate e scolpite, cioe che debbano servire alia
volubile moda, per tramandarne i capricci alia pin remota pos¬
terity, non e per anche sgombrato dalla mente degli uomini.”
A fact which is but too true even in the present day. For further
remarks on this subject, see Richardson, Theory of 'Painting ,
pp. 185—189 ; Guizot, Etudes sur les Peaux-Arts—Essai sur les
Limites qui separent , et les Liens qui unissent les Peaux-Arts , 8vo.
Paris, 1852; and Paillot de Montabert, EArtistaire, 8vo. Paris,
1855.

It cannot, however, be understood that it is
sufficient to represent a figure in classical costume
to insure its elegance, any more than an acade¬
mical figure can hope to equal the Greek original,
which was framed from a close study of nature.
It was the object of the Greek artist so to arrange
his drapery as to obtain the most pleasing flow
and contrast of lines, an opportunity admirably
afforded in the female figure, where the elaborate
and deeply-cut lines of the tunic, changing to

A GREEK O-RATOE

MRSEO ROEBOKICO.

288

MODERN ART.

says, that though so small that it might be held in
the hand, the proportions were so perfect that it
appeared to be colossal . 1

“-finesque inclusa per arctos

Majestas. Deus ille ! Deus ! seseque videndum
Indulsit, Lysippe, tibi, parvnsque videri
Sentirique ingens, et cum mirabilis intra
Stet mensura pedem,

Hoc spatio, tam magna, brevi, mendacia formse!”

Hercules Epitrapezios.

Let the modern artist equal the Greek in the ex¬
cellency of his art, and then let him think of making
his own works larger in proportion : for “ goodness
does not consist in greatness, but greatness in
goodness .” 2

1 This statuette had been the property of Alexander, of Han¬
nibal, and of Sylla. Statius was so charmed with it, on seeing
the epitrapezian god placed on the table of the triclinium, that
he could not take his eyes off it. See also Mart. _i Epig. ix. 44.

2 Caphesias, apud Athen. xiv. 26.

PERSPECTIVE.

243

point of sight. As well might he require that the
mural paintings at Pompeii should have been
painted so as to be seen only when closely ex¬
amined, and not from other parts of the room.
But it is sufficient to answer that the Greeks did
so, and that the Greeks knew. better than we.
And not only was this the practice of the Greek
sculptors, but the Greek architects, as we have
seen, introduced a bulged line so as to appear
straight, a falling line so as to appear upright,
and unequal forms, so as to appear equal. In
the same way also, if we were to ask a painter
how he would represent shadows from differently-
coloured objects, he would tell us that he would

when the statues were brought to the level of the eye, were not
visible from the point at which the statues were best seen in the
front of the cathedral. It was a great matter for the artist,
whether sculptor or architect, to insure a good optical effect for
his works when placed in the position they were intended to
occupy; hence this working together of the architect and the
sculptor must be attended with the best results for both parties.”

I have quoted the passage in extenso , though unprepared to
adopt the conclusion natural to be drawn from the premises here
given; otherwise we should have to attribute to these sculptures
an amount of skill and refinement quite incompatible with the
state of the arts in the middle ages. Nothing is so common in
mediaeval sculpture as to see seated figures carved out of an almost
flat surface, and we are satisfied with it as being the conventional
character of the art of the period: so in these figures, although
remarkably fine for mediaeval art, the projections are made to
partake of an architectural character. The anecdote, however, is
no less interesting as an illustration of our subject.

CONCLUSION.

277

least, by studying them as we ought, preserve
ourselves from falling into error. As Plutarch
observes, the very acting of an excellent part in¬
sensibly produces a love and real imitation of it.
But “ imitation,” says Dionysius of Halicarnassus,
“ is not the making use of the thoughts of others :
it is the knowing how to make the same princi¬
ples serve for other purposes. We may imitate
Demosthenes without copying him : so also Plato or
Homer. Imitation, therefore, is but emulation.”

And now, having brought our essay to a con¬
clusion, we would recapitulate by observing that,
owing to the various causes we have described, the
art of sculpture had greater advantages among the
Greeks than in our day; that it was practised by
its professors with greater zeal; and received by the
public with greater enthusiasm; and that together
with sculpture the other arts also attained to the
highest perfection during the best ages of Grecian
history : while, with respect to modern times, that
art has ever best succeeded when respect has most
been paid to ancient models; and that the errors
and mistakes of modern art are ever to be attri¬
buted to a neglect of those precepts mutely but
eloquently revealed to us by the marbles and
bronzes of our museums. Influenced by this con¬
viction, we cannot better conclude than in the
words of Longinus, who says : — “ From the
sublime spirit of the ancients there arise some

296

APPENDIX.

bien loin accusent la cliarpente. Sur les frontons, qui sont de la
couleur du ciel, combattent Ajax, Hector et les heros d’Homere.
Les moulures fines des portiques et des entablements sont distin-
guees des fonds unis par des ornements qui les signalent aux yeux
et les font valoir. Les tuiles peintes brillent sous les rayons
obliques du soleil: les antefixes a tete de Meduse, les acroteres,
les griffons a la patte etendue, couronnent l’edifice, et la couleur
prete a ces monstres l’illusion et la vie. Leur silhouette, en se
decoupant sur l’horizon, donne a tout le monument plus de le-
gerete et plus de mouvement. Joignons les bandelettes, les guir-
landes de fleurs, les boucliers d’or cloues sur l’architrave, les
inscriptions en lettres d’or, les grilles de bronze, les trophees, les
statues, les autels, les vases, les offrandes innombrables. Con-
templons avec une attention passionnee et nourrie par l’etude,
contemplons au dedans de nous-memes cette apparition rayon-
nante du temple antique, et osons dire, comme on l’a fait quelque-
fois, que c’etait la une oeuvre de barbares!

“Les barbares! j’ai bien peur que ce ne soient pas les anciens.

..He quel droit dirons-nous aux Grecs, a nos maitres, que

nous n’avons jamais pu egaler dans les arts: ‘Vous etiez des bar¬
bares ! ’ Nous ressemblerions fort a ces descendants de vieilles
families qui ricanent devant les enormes lances de leurs aieux et
ne pourraient meme les soulever. Ces lances ont gagne des
batailles: de meme ces couleurs dont les Grecs peignaient leurs
temples ont ete un objet d’admiration, une cause de jouissance
pour un peuple entier, qui a ete autrement puissant que nous
dans les arts, et qui a compris avec bien plus de grandeur la divine
beaute.

“ Inclinons-nous la tete au lieu de railler nos maitres, nous qui
sommes desherites des richesses qu’ils possedaient, et que nous ne
pouvons meme plus vous figurer. Ils voulaient que toutes les
branches de l’art, peinture, sculpture, architecture, contribuassent
a former les temples des dieux. Hedaigner la polychromie, c’est
paraitre ne l’avoir ni etudiee ni comprise. Avons-nous ete moins
etonnes d’entendre parler de statues en or et en ivoire, de statues
peintes, de bronzes de Corinthe aux teintes si diverses ? Ne
songeons-nous pas aux mosaiques immenses des eglises byzan-
tines, aux peintures des edifices gothiques, aux porches, vitraux,

298

APPENDIX.

III.

Page 125.

“ A Greek epigram speaks of the statue of a Satyr in mosaic .”

SPECTATOR.

Satyrs deal in pert grimaces ;

Saucy Satyr, prithee say,

Why you look in all our faces,

Thus to laughter giving way.

SATYR.

When was such a laughing matter,

When was such a wonder known ?

All at once I’m grown a satyr,

Out of these odd bits of stone.

Nilus Scholasticus.
Brunck, Anthol. Gr. t. iii. p. 14.

304

APPENDIX.

or the unrecorded sculptors of Wells Cathedral, or of Henry the
Seventh’s Chapel.

But let us listen to some of the golden sentences of this much-
esteemed writer on art:—

ARCHITECTURE.

“ The Greek system, considered merely as a piece of construction, is weak
and barbarous.” {Lectures on Architecture and Painting, p. 13.)

“ The worst feature of Greek architecture is not its costliness, but its
tyranny.” (p. 76.)

“The assertion that Greek architecture is the architecture of proportion,
is another of the results of the same broad ignorance.” (p. 116.)

“ That work has no sculpture, nor colour, nor imagination, nor sacredness,
nor any other quality whatsoever in it, but ratios of measures.” (p. 117.)

“ Truth and judgment are the declared opposites of the whole system of
Greek architecture.” (p. 140.)

It must be observed that some of the above passages are quali¬
fied by using some such terms as “our common Greek style,” or
“ as practised in our day ; ” and our author says, in contradistinc¬
tion,—Ho I not constantly speak of Phidias in the highest terms ?
It is quite true he does occasionally commend Phidias, and compare
him to Michael Angelo; he does sometimes incidentally commend
Greek art; but in these instances Phidias and his school are only
trotted out as his stalking-horse, behind which he takes more
deliberate and deadly aim at whatever is Greek in art.

“Varieties of the Orders.—Of these phantasms and grotesques, one of some
general importance is that commonly called Ionic, of which the idea was taken,
Vitruvius says, from a woman’s hair curled; but its lateral processes look
more like rams’ horns : be that as it may, it is a mere piece of agreeable extra¬
vagance, and if, instead of rams’ horns, you put ibex horns, or cows’ horns, or
an ass’s head at once, you will have ibex orders, or ass orders, or any number
of other orders, one for every head or horn.” {Stones of Billingsgate, i. 359.)

“ The Ionic capital, to my mind, as an architectural invention, is exceed¬
ingly base.” {Seven Lamps, p. 95.)

A base Byzantine transcript of the acanthus, ( Stones of Venice ,
ii. pi. ii. fig. 5,) exhibited side by side with an exquisite sketch of

CONTENTS,

PREFACE. Page xiii.

INTRODUCTION . 1

ANCIENT ART.

I.-—USE OF ART. 27

II.—CAUSES OF SUCCESS. 31

III. —THE BEAUTIFUL. 64

IV. —THE IDEAL. 71

V.— INDIVIDUALITY. 91

VI.—COLOSSAL SCULPTURE. 95

VII.—CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, AND ICONIC-

POLYCHROMY. 104

Vni-PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION. 164

MODERN ART.

I.—DECLINE OF ART. 179

II.—INDIVIDUALITY. 189

III. —COSTUME. 210

IV. —DECORUM. 224

V.—COLOSSAL SCULPTURE . 231

VI.—PERSPECTIVE . 239

VII.—BAS-RELIEF AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE .... 249

VIII.—THE IDEAL. 261

IX.—CONCLUSION. 269

ANCIENT AET.

lie had ever been guided by the desire of setting an
example to himself and to those who should suc¬
ceed him, and that the citizens themselves should
see that honour was open to all alike. The statues
of Nelson and of Wellington must enkindle the like
spirit of emulation in the soldier of our own age,
while those of Howard, Heber, or Pitt, must awaken
kindred sentiments of other description, according
as the minds of those who behold them may be
affected. Gregory of Nazianzen tells us of a cour¬
tezan, who suddenly beholding a portrait of the
philosopher Polemo, turned back, unable to pursue
her course . 1 Sallust states that he had often heard
Quintus Maximus, Scipio, and other excellent men
declare that whenever they beheld the images of
their ancestors, they felt their soul most powerfully
excited to virtue . 3 He who is of a soul fitted to
receive instruction, with Paratus,

“ Per oculos hauriat innocentiam.”

“ The beauty of goodness has an attractive power;

1 “ Intanto alia crescente Roma un simulacro di Giove in atto
di vibrar fulmini, atteriva bene spesso, e richiamava dal cammino
del vizio; ed una statua di Pallade, vergine di virtu adorna, e
guerriera, invitava le genti al primo ignoto sentiero della virtu;
o una pittura d’Ercole domatore de’ mostri le invogliava della
fortezza e robustezza, e di sopportar le fatiche, e d’incontrare
senza timore i perigliosi contrasti .”—Orazione dell’A bate Domenico
Riviera, p. 28.

2 Valerius Maximus says that the ancients placed the images

ANCIENT ART.

not been satisfactory. For however answered, the
further question arises, How is it then that nations
possessing the same advantages have not attained
to equal excellence ? If with Euripides, Aristotle,
and Epicurus, we suppose climate to be the cause—
and climate must be allowed its sway, when we re¬
member that Minerva was believed to have chosen
Athens, from the nature of its soil being so favour¬
able to the cultivation of art and literature,—how
is it that the modern Greeks are inferior in this
respect to their renowned ancestors ? 1 If the form
of government—and from Longinus we learn that
it was a common belief of the ancients that demo¬
cracy is the nurse of true genius 2 — how is it then
that the republics of the present day are not pro¬
ductive of like effects ? If the general beauty of
the corporeal frame be the cause , 3 and, according
to Hippocrates, such a sky produces not only the
most beautiful of men, but a perfect harmony be¬
tween their inclinations and shape, how is it then
that, comparatively speaking, the arts arrived at

1 “ Whence is the Athenian name so celebrated ? Not on
account of the fertility of the soil, for it is sterile, but because
the many great and excellent men who are born there endeavour
to make their country participate in their glory.”—Galenus,
Suasoria ad Artes Oratio , cap. vii.

2 Barry’s name was struck out of the list of Boyal Acade¬
micians, by George the Third, for asserting this principle.

3 So much was beauty prized by the Greeks that Philippus of
Crotona was actually deified by the inhabitants of Segeste, and

ANCIENT ART.

particular age ; 1 for it is the admiration of true
genius which fires ones own intellect, and excites
to noble deeds . 2 This last hypothesis seems nearly
allied to the truth, for it is not by any forced
application to one art that we may hope to succeed,
but by a general enthusiasm for and application to
all. The Lacedaemonians, though devoting them¬
selves exclusively to war, did not for this reason
produce such able commanders as the Athenians.
One more opinion remains to be cited, which is
that of Seneca and Sidonius, who affirm that the
decline of art is owing to the decay of nature ;
an opinion which we of the nineteenth century
may not be willing to admit . 3 No doubt each

1 This reason has been often adduced, but the cause has not
been sufficiently explained.

2 Contemporary with Pericles and Phidias, lived JEschylus,
Sophocles, Euripides and Aristophanes, Thucydides, Lysias and
Isocrates, Anaxagoras, Socrates, Plato and Xenophon.

3 All these causes are rejected by M. de Montabert, w T ho devotes
a dozen consecutive chapters, 27—38, to deny the influence on
art, of religion, manners, Olympic games, beautiful models, love
of beauty in the abstract, liberty, peace, riches, co-flourishing of
other arts, climate, physical organization, or philosophy. But
though, as we have seen, it is easy to prove that none of these
individually was the cause of the excellency of Greek art, it would
be still more easy to show that each may have contributed. The
cause which M. de Montabert assigns is a correct teaching, an
opinion which is also held by Barry. But experience has long
shown that academical teaching, however true, is not sufficient of
itself to form an artist. Besides, on this principle, when once art
has arrived at its zenith, it ought never to degenerate. But even

ANCIENT AET.

competitors in tlie games , 1 after receiving his prize,
proceeding to the temple of the Olympian Jove,
where even the god himself was habited in an
embroidered robe, in no way more gorgeous than
that worn by the late combatant ; 2 where he ap¬
peared indeed as though presiding at the games,
crowned with the olive-wreath, and holding the
Victory, as if to do him honour. Nor was this all—
but coupled with his own name to hear his father’s,
and to feel that in that moment he had repaid all
that fond parent’s care and love, to know that
henceforth his own name would be bound up in his
country’s history, that time would be called by his
name, that every event which might happen during
four long years would be said to have happened in
such a year of his Olympiad ! Imagine, if possible,
his feelings as he approached the chryselephantine
table on which lay that crown, to obtain which he
had been training himself for ten long months , 3
his proceeding in triumph through the Stadium,

1 We read of a king of Macedon, and of a tyrant of Syracuse
contending in these games, of Plato’s winning a crown for
wrestling at Corinth, and of Pythagoras one at Elis.

2 It is possible that it was some such robe which Zeuxis wore,
having his name embroidered on it in gold letters : for this hap¬
pened at the Olympic games, and Zeuxis had been employed to
paint a picture of the Olympian Jove.

3 One instance is recorded in which the excessive joy was too
great for the poor victor’s strength, and the poet sank down
lifeless at the judges’ feet.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

Could a statue, in the Altis, or sacred enclosure
of Jupiter, erected under such circumstances,
have produced no other sensation than those
which strike the student in our museums ? It
was thus that art produced a strong reaction on
religion, and from its beauty and perfection tended
in some measure to modify the evils of idolatry.
Quintilian, speaking of the Minerva at Athens and
of the Jupiter Olympius at Elis, says, these works
possessed beauty which seemed to have added
something to religion, the majesty of the work
being so worthy of the divinity. And in another
place he says that the statue of Jupiter by Phidias 1
had done much to awaken a greater degree of

every base action, and will ever study, both by word and deed,
to attain to that which is decorous and good. (De Musica , xxvi.
and xli. pp. 1140 and 1146.) Aristophanes speaks of music and
virtue as identical. (JEquit. 191.) The Pythagoreans, says Quin¬
tilian, played the lyre on awakening in the morning, and lulled
themselves to sleep with it in the evening, (ix. 4.) Music is
said by Aulus Gellius, (iv. 3.) Athenseus, (iv. 14,) and many other
ancient writers, (see Dutens, Origin of Inventions, bk. iii. ch. 13,)
to have been employed to cure diseases ; and by Aristotle (Plut.
De Ira) to alleviate the pains of torture ; their slaves being always
flogged to the sound of music. The compulsory study of music
was enacted by law. iElian tells us of a curious application of
music to the arts. Theon, a painter, having executed a portrait
of a warrior, would not withdraw the curtain, till he had aroused the
spirit of the spectators by a martial air. (Var. Hist. ii. c. ult.)

1 “ Before all others is Phidias,” — “ the most famous of
artists,”—“ an artist who can never be sufficiently praised.” —
(Pliny.) “ Inimitable for grace and beauty.”—(Plut. Peric. 13.)

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

truth, which developed itself by laws, modified and
accommodated to each condition. The Arts, like the
Graces, held each other by the hand: the Sciences,
as the Muses, formed portions of one body. Paint¬
ing, sculpture and architecture, music, poetry and
oratory, history, science and philosophy, were all in¬
timately connected together, and formed upon one
model: but though the principle was common, the
rules were distinct and suited to every necessity. If
the works on art which we know to have been written,
had come down to us, we should no doubt have had
writings as valuable as the most esteemed works of
the poets and the orators. Genius was regulated
and fostered by teaching. Let it not be then sup¬
posed that the artist can attain perfection by his
own unaided genius : nor let him blindly follow the
teaching of his age, or he will rise no higher. Art
itself must be perfect, if the artist seeks perfec¬
tion. It was this no doubt, the excellency of their
teaching , 1 their seeing around them men distin¬
guished by all that was great and glorious, and
their beholding on every side the masterpieces of
their art, at once serving for instruction and incen¬
tive, which enabled the Grecian artist to succeed
in imparting a charm to everything he touched.

From the causes Avhich have been described,

1 It is remarkable that there is scarcely an artist at all eminent
in the history of Greek art, but we know the names both of his
preceptor and his pupils.

IV.

THE IDEAL.

The faces of the gods are always joyous, and
always maintain a similar expression, that of
serenity and joy, though each deity has his own
peculiar characteristic. In the portraiture of the
gods they sought to give the highest ideality to
the expression, divesting it of all earthly passions.

But it is not only in the gods, but in heroes also,
and indeed in every circumstance, that the Greeks
aimed at ideality. In representing a god, the
sculptor sought to impart to his work the highest
character of divine excellence; if a hero, a portion
of the divine image was supposed to rest on him;
if a child , 1 the development of those attributes for
which he afterwards became famous; if an aged
person, he sought how he could soften the marks of
age, and decay of nature. In the Hercules and the
Laocoon, the development of muscle is carried to
the limits of possibility; in the Hermaphrodite the

1 I piu teneri bambini son disegnati con una grandiosita cbe
sdegna minuzie, con una rotondita di f'ronte, con una incassatura
di occbi, con una quadratura di forme, che fa parerli qualcosa
sopra il lignaggio umano. — Lanzi, Notizie della Scultura,
p. 40.

ANCIENT ART.

mighty chest and muscular development, is seen
exerted in his contest with the Titans, but on all
other occasions he was to be exhibited as the
Supreme Being, and source of all things. The
poet might represent him as partaking of human
faculties and passions, but the sculptor could only
know him as the Good, the Wise, the Merciful, and
the Just,—

“ Most placid, as most mighty.”

The hair is made to part and curl over on the
forehead of this divinity, giving to the face a pecu¬
liarly majestic appearance; and this arrangement
of the hair is seen in the representation of those
divinities who descended from him. The eye alone,
so full of majesty and power, would be sufficient to
represent Jupiter. In the Neptune and the Pluto
we see, as we might expect, indications of the same
attributes, though differing in their degree and
character, but beauty remains the same. In Apollo
we behold the highest form of bodily beauty. His
spiritual attribute is godlike, intellectual nobleness,
and in his bodily representation the artist sought to
unite manly beauty with the softness and elegance
of youth. Mercury partakes of a more manly
beauty, but one which is also characterized by
grace and elegance. The form of Bacchus is more
feminine. He appears with rounded limbs and
expanded hips as a disguised virgin. His form is

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

Timanthes in which young Satyrs were represented
as measuring the Cyclops’ thumb with their thyrsus.
In the same manner the Nile and Tiber, as per¬
sonified by sculptors, are attended with infant
children , 1 to give them greater importance. How
different is the practice of certain artists complained
of by Plutarch, who placed small statues on great
bases, thereby exposing their own unskilfulness, by
making a small statue appear even less. Great
judgment is requisite in this particular, for any
departure from the laws of symmetry and pro¬
portion, whether in excess or diminution, is attended
with failure. The statues of the temple of Yenus
at Rome were found to be too large, while those of
Mercury and Philesius in the Trapezuntian temple

in modern times, that in St. Peter’s at Pome, not only is the
contrary principle, that of diminishing the apparent size, carried
out, but it is considered by the vulgar as a beauty. The outside
also of St. Peter’s is deficient in the power of contrast. The
feature of St. Peter’s is its cupola ; and to give effect to this, the
front should have been kept low, but one has only to compare the
views of St. Peter’s, as designed by Michael Angelo, and as exe¬
cuted, to perceive that, as it now is, it looks like a statue placed
upon too lofty a pedestal. (See Harford, Illustrations Archi¬
tectural and Pictorial of M. Angelo , Plate No. 7.)

1 These children are cupids, and are sixteen in number. They
are a Poman pun on the number of cubits to which height it was
wished that the Nile would rise. (Sami. Sharpe, Hist, of Egypt
from the Earliest Times till the Conquest by the Arabs , 4th edit.
8vo. Lond. 1859, p. 184.) This passage has been pointed out to
me by my friend Mr. Lloyd, to whom I am much indebted in
these sheets.

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

101

The detail of the drapery now appears more exqui¬
site, the plain surfaces, which otherwise would have
looked heavy, are covered with minute ornament,
so minute, and flat, and delicate, as not to interfere
with the required breadth when seen from a distance.
Even the footstool of the god, and the edge of the
sandal of the goddess, are ornamented with minute
bas-reliefs, representing Theseus and the Amazons,
and the Centaurs and Lapithge, the relative propor¬
tions of which at once impart richness and size to
the work itself. The small figure of Victory also,
held in the hand, itself of the size of life, not only
gives scale to the principal figure, but, by its ex¬
ceeding delicacy and richness, imparts an idea of
care and finish to the whole composition. So the
buckler at the feet of Minerva, by its sculptured
bas-reliefs on front and back, keeps up the interest
of the spectator when tired of looking at the simple
figure. These parts were not treated as mere
accessories, for they would be invisible at the point
of distance requisite for beholding the colossus, but
they were studied and finished carefully, as though
each were a separate composition. Themistius
indeed expressly informs us that Phidias was occu¬
pied for a considerable time about the sandals of the
goddess. Assisted by these details, the composition
can never look bald, the attention never weary.
The two elements of grandeur—magnificence and
simplicity—are thus conjoined, the breadth and mass

130

ANCIENT ART.

be considered as exceptions, and that even where
colour was applied, it was applied with the utmost
delicacy. These works should be regarded as
simply of gold and ivory or marble. It is said
that Phidias wished to have executed the ex¬
tremities of his statue of Minerva of marble,
because it would retain its whiteness longer. In
smaller works it is probable that even the drapery
was of ivory, and the gold confined to mere orna¬
ments, the hair, earrings, sandals, and other acces¬
sories, so that the effect must have been more
chaste, but less illusive. Lucian says, in his
Jupiter Tragoedus, that the ivory statues had very
little gold in them, just sufficient to colour and
adorn them. The chryselephantine statues must
be regarded, therefore, not as painted images , 1 but
as statues simply of gold and ivory, in which
colour, though present, was scarcely perceptible.
No one can deny the chaste and splendid effect
produced by white and gold in decoration:—

“ Quale manus addunt ebori decus, aut ubi flavo
Argentum Pariusve lapis circumdatur auro.”

JEn. i. 592. 2

Thus there is every reason to suppose that these
chryselephantine images must have been of sur-

1 In some instances, it is concluded that the statues were very
rich in colour, or they would not have harmonized with the
variegated peplons occasionally thrown over them.

2 It is probable that the pictures of “ ivory limbs,” so frequently

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

173

frieze, the flat surface receives an even light, while
the square edge casts a clear shadow : so admirably
did the Greek artists understand the science of
perspective. This fact also is clearly stated by
Sir Charles Eastlake, in the article above alluded to.
He shows that being situated in a position where
the light which fell on them could only be by
reflection, it was necessary, in order to give value
to that light, to keep the surfaces as flat and the
outlines as sharp as possible. This attention to
perspective was carefully studied by the ancients.
Pamphilus, the master of Apelles, is praised by
Pliny for having been not only an excellent painter,
but also as being thoroughly instructed in all
kinds of sciences, and chiefly in arithmetic and
geometry. He used to affirm that art could not
well be perfected without these studies. Prom
the inflation of the muscles of the abdomen in the
Farnese Hercules, it has been supposed that this
statue was elevated about thirty to forty feet above
the eye ; but the force of the argument is not
clear.

In like manner, the Laocoon is supposed by
Visconti to have been seen from above, and to
have been placed at the bottom of a flight of stairs.
This supposition is based upon the discovery of
a leg of one of the sons being longer than the
other, and the flesh remaining unfinished in parts
not seen from above. With a similar attention to

176

ANCIENT ART.

small ; and, what is still more remarkable, the
Apollo Belvedere to be as seemingly faulty in the
proportions of the neck, and of the lower part of
the body ? It is because the Greek did not confine
himself to rule, but studied nature. He ever con¬
sidered the effect which he had to produce, and
how that effect was best to be accomplished. In
the Hercules he wished to convey the idea of
strength, and he obtained it by shortening and
strengthening the neck, by diminishing the head,
by enlarging the chest and back, and giving pro¬
minence to the muscles and sinews of this part of
the body, but the lower parts are comparatively
small, precisely as we find the hinder part of the
lion less bulky than the fore part. The attitude
also is characteristic : it is that of repose, it is the
consciousness of strength. In the Apollo, on the
other hand, the sculptor wished to convey the idea
of swiftness, the velocity of thought and motion.
His eye is bright; as the god of light, clothed in
his meridian splendour, he shoots out his arrows.
His neck is elevated, indicating the activity of the
god-like principle within. The thighs and legs are
elongated for the same purpose, to give lightness
and elasticity to his motion.

No wonder then that the seeming defects are the
means of raising the admiration of the beholder to
the highest fervour. No wonder that this combina¬
tion of grace, beauty and majesty caused the poor

INDIVIDUALITY.

199

beards . 1 Lucian gives us an amusing story of
Stratonice, the wife of Seleucus, who attempted
to conceal her baldness by bribing poets to sing
in praise of her hyacinthine locks. In modern
times we insist upon identity. Nelson will not
be recognized, unless without his arm. Who does
not see that this is a depreciation of art ? The
hero is not to be recognized by his face, or action,
but by an empty arm-sleeve. Who among the
Greeks would have dared to portray Alexander as
diminutive in stature ? Only in modern times is
a great monarch thus caricatured, as is said to be
the case in a statue on the continent. Zeuxis, as
Quintilian tells us, made his proportions larger
than the life, feeling that they thereby acquired a
nobler and more majestic appearance. If Hercules
be grouped with the Nemsean lion, the hero must
be shown with more than his usual strength, with
the greatest development of sinew and muscle, lest
he should appear weaker than his formidable op¬
ponent. The servile law of identity would require
that the central figures of a pediment be no larger
than the others, but a reference to the Parthenon
pediments, and to the groups of Niobe and Laocoon,
will show the admirable result and necessity of so
distinguishing them. Nor is this increase of size

1 An instance to the contrary effect is exhibited in coins of the
emperor Maximinus, in which the artist has cleverly exaggerated
his naturally long chin, in order to produce a likeness.

COSTUME.

221

costume be employed, it is inappropriate, and
affords no idea of individual character. Bust-
sculpture seems therefore to be the most becoming
for portrait purposes, and it has the advantage of
being suitable either to the nude figure, to classical
costume, of which the mass being small it will
appear rather poetical than classical, or to modern
costume, which also being small may the more
easily be concealed and idealized, so as not to be
unsightly. Bust-sculpture might represent the
likeness, and, which is very important, bring the
features nearer to the eye ; and when more is
required, the curious can be referred to portrait-
paintings, and if he yet desire more, to wax por¬
traits, like those which the ancients so carefully
maintained in memory of their ancestors. If
portrait-sculpture were confined to hermal busts,
excepting of course where military cloaks, royal or
civic robes, composed of flowing lines, admitted of
entire figures, our streets and squares might be
ornamented with a new class of sculpture. The
single figure or group, nude or draped, a genius,
Victory, or other symbolic representation, subjects
which would admit of the highest degree of ele¬
gance and beauty, might be made typical or com¬
memorative of passing events, and be a lasting
ornament to the state.

The sculpture on the Schloss-briicke at Berlin is
of this character. While classic in design and

228

MODERN ART.

was vain, laid aside his royal robes and orna¬
ments, fearing that they should be sullied in the
sacking of the city . 1 We admire even wicked
Jezebel when she painted her face, and tired her
hair, and went as a king’s daughter to meet her
fate, boldly rebuking Jehu for his rebellion. The
wretched gladiator even cannot die unless with a
a calm countenance and tranquil attitude . 3 A story
is related by Herodotus and Athenseus, of Clisthenes
the tyrant of Sicyon, who, intending to give away
his daughter, selected from among the suitors Hip¬
po elides, by reason of his noble descent and valour,
but no sooner had he seen him dance with unseemly
and indecorous action, than he cried,—“ You have

1 The following lines of Dryden are applied by Gibbon to the
heroic monarch:—

“ Let them search the field;

And where they find a mountain of the slain,

Send one to climb, and looking down beneath,

There they will find him at his manly length,

With his face up to heaven, in that red monument
Which his good sword has digg’d.”

2 Quis mediocris gladiator ingemuit P quis vultum mutavit
unquam ? quis non modo stetit, verum etiam decubuit turpiter ?
quis cum decubuisset, ferrum recipere jussus, collum contraxit ?—
Tusc. Qucest. lib. ii. cap. xvii. It is this expression of fortitude
and nobleness of mind which commands our sympathy, and creates
such interest in the Dying Gladiator. Were his face distorted
with fear or pain, we should turn from it with horror and
disgust.

236

MODERN ART.

reliefs of the pedestal, though their relative propor¬
tion as regards the mass would be proper if alone,
are disproportionately large for a colossal work. In

STATUE OF FREDERICK THE GREAT AT BERLIN.

the colossal works of the ancients, the bas-reliefs
on the pedestal or throne were disposed sometimes
in several bands, one above another, about two or
three feet in height, thereby reducing the size of
the figures represented in such bas-reliefs, and
giving scale to the great god himself: but in this

TH E VENUS

DE J MEDICI.

Photographed -from, the OrigwxxZ .

276

MODERN ART.

the excellences of art, rather than its defects, we
must devote ourselves to the study of Greek art,
for it is Greek art only which ever preserves,
what the great moral of Daedalus teaches us, the
via media of art, avoiding at the same time every¬
thing that is mean, as well as all exaggeration.
It is unnecessary to transcribe Horace’s well-known
injunction with regard to Greek art, as it will occur
to every one. It used to be said by an ancient
artist,—“Ho day without a line;” so we would
say,—No day without consulting the antique. No
one can expect to succeed in modern times, no one
can hope to obtain a name among posterity, who
disregards the excellences, the cautions, and the
experience of antiquity. It was by the study of
HDschines and Demosthenes that Cicero became so
eloquent, and by the study of Homer that Virgil
improved his style.

“ C’est pourquoi Yirgile se fit
Un devoir d’admirer ITomere;

II le suivit dans sa carriere,

Et son emule il se rendit,

Sans se rendre son plagiaire.”

Voltaire, Zaire.

Epitre Eedicatoire a M. le Chev. Falkener. 1

If we may not equal the ancients, we may, at

1 Afterwards Ambassador at the Porte, and Postmaster-General;
and a great friend of Voltaire’s. See Lettres Ineditesde Voltaire,
vol. i. pp. 71-227,—Paris, 1857.

282

APPENDIX.

sich noch immer am ersten Dienstag jedes Monats bis in den
Monat Juli.

“ Ihr kunstgescbicbtlicbes Werk wird jedenfalls viel neue
Anregung uns gewahren und zu vielem Dank uns verpflichten.

“ Mit besonderer Hochachtung und Ergebenheit,

“ Gerhard.”

My friend, and colleague, as be allows me to call bim, Professor
Gerhard, bas kindly laid my arguments for curved ceilings
to Greek temples, and to the Parthenon in particular, before
the archaeologists and architects of Berlin. The latter are un¬
willing to admit the hypothesis, and they ask for further proofs
on a subject on which it is only by hypothesis and conjecture
that we can arrive at any conclusion. But I would ask the
supporters of the trabeated theory whether their ceiling is of wood
or stone ? If of stone, how is it to be constructed over so large
a span; what vestiges of such construction exist in any of our
museums ; and how is it that only one stone ceiling is described
by ancient authors ? I refer to the temple at Bassse. If of
wood, what proof have they that the ceilings were flat ? But
more particularly would I invite their attention to the section of
the Parthenon. Let them draw out to a large scale the section
of the temple. Let them then commence with the lower columns,
3 feet 6 inches in diameter; let them give them a proportion
similar to those of other examples : let them then set up
the upper columns, observing that in all examples which can
be determined the upper columns are only of about half the
diameter of the lower columns. They will then find that they are
considerably short of the height which they require. Let them
then place the statue in the middle, remembering that it is twenty-
six cubits, or thirty-nine feet in height, and that it stood on a
pedestal which could not have been less than ten. Having done
this, let them show what other form of ceiling would at the same
time suit the columns, the statue, and the restricted height of the
temple.

APPENDIX.

285

the first objects so represented: it is natural to suppose, there¬
fore, that, like the Egyptian hieroglyphic, a type would soon
become established, and that this type would be put to indicate a
temple, and that artists, having to represent other temples, copied
this type from memory, inserting fewer or more columns as the
space permitted or the ambition of the artist prompted. It is
thus we find the same temple exhibited on different occasions with
two, four, six, or more columns, as the case may be. Precisely in
this manner we see M. Hittorff arguing in the preceding letter
that the arch shown in a coin having the temple of Juno at Samos
on the reverse is copied from the usual vaulted roof of Eoman
temples in Italy or elsewhere, an hypothesis which is quite
feasible. Still it must be admitted that even temples are some¬
times shown on Eoman coins with a remarkable degree of indi¬
vidual character: but such examples are exceptions to the general
rule.

In speaking of the “concentric stones” of the Parthenon,
Prof. Donaldson forgets that the argument is not for a vaulted
roof, but for an arched wooden ceiling.

“ Brighton, 9 th December , 1859.

“ Many thanks, my dear sir, for your pamphlet on the * Ceiling
of the Parthenon,’ being the introduction to c Daedalus.’ I am
not aware of any argument against the arrangement in your
‘ section,’ nor can I, a layman as to architecture, imagine any
more graceful and appropriate. Quaere.—Do not the known
height of the basis, the statue, and the temple require an arched
ceiling over the figure ?.

“ I remain, my dear Sir, yours truly,

(Colonel) “ W. Martin Leake.”

This letter was written just before the lamented decease of the
distinguished geographer of classic lands.

306

APPENDIX.

“ The Greeks used drapery in sculpture, for the most part as an ugly neces¬
sity.” {Seven Lamps, p. 103.)

“ By the artists of the time of Pericles the hair was considered as an
excrescence.” (p. 176.)

And this, in spite of the marvellous treatment of the hair and
heard of the Jupiter Olympius! Contrast the following :—

“ Her waxen-colour’d hair, in curling ringlets dress’d,
Well-order’d, as in some fair statue seen,

Waved in the favouring breeze luxuriant.”

.ZEneus, apud A then. xiii. 88.

The following ornament from a psalter of the eighth century is
put forward as illustrating a precept of Aristotle, that the princi¬
ples of the Beautiful are Order, Symmetry, and the Definite.

“ Here you have the most pure type possible of the principles of idealism in
all ages,” an 11 utterly dead school.” “ From this dead barbarism we pass to
living barbarism, and get work which in every line of it is prophetic of power,
and has in it the sure dawn of day.” {Two Paths, p. 27.)

A representation of the Serpent beguiling Eve then follows,
taken from the church of S. Ambrogio at Milan, the highest aim
of which is nature without elevation. Now, is it not evident that
in giving this latter as the germ of mediaeval sculpture, the former
is meant to portray classical sculpture ? And why, if it had not
been his aim to bring Aristotle and the ancients into contempt,
did he not, instead of attributing to them an early specimen of

PREFACE.

would mention the name of the President of the
Royal Academy, from whose “ Contributions to the
Literature of Art” he has ventured to quote
more than one long paragraph, and that of the
present Professor of Sculpture, whose admirable
lectures are so replete with plain good sense.

Some of the subjects discussed are subjects of
long and earnest controversy : the author has
taken up these with the object of vindicating the
ancients, and finding out the truth. He trusts
that it will be felt that he has neither been guilty
of exaggerating the praises of ancient art, nor of
detracting from the just merits of modern art;
and that in expressing the opinions of a layman,
though an artist, it will be considered that he
has done so with as much moderation and diffi¬
dence as his subject would permit. Should it,
however, be thought otherwise, it must be remem¬
bered that in the treatment of such a subject—
“ Difficile est satiram non scribere.”

And now a few words for Daedalus,—

“ Daedalus ingenio fabrae celeberriraus artis.”

Ovid. Met. viii. 159.

for having invoked him, it would ill become me

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

by Sallust, Pliny, and Plutarch., and insisted on by
Junius and Emeric David, is not sufficient to ac¬
count for this success; for in many ages and many
countries the arts have been rewarded with honors
and titles, without assisting them; and where this
is the case, instead of benefiting art, they tend only
to depress it; for art is then pursued for a wrong
object; and when this object is attained, the artist
flatters himself that he has arrived at perfection;
but Quintilian says, “ Art laughs at those who
are conceited in themselves.” Velleius Paterculus
has more reason when he attributes success in
art to the general diffusion of genius in any

Venus, the Torso, the Hercules, and the Ephesian Hero.—Lect. ii.
and note to Lect. iv.

So far are the fine arts from being dependent on Poetry for
inspiration, that we find Poetry itself inactive without their
assistance. It has been remarked that landscape-painting being
unknown before the age of Augustus, there is no grand descrip¬
tion of landscape scenery to be met with in the poets. “ They
had no Thomsons, because they had no Claudes.” “ Elegant
imitation has strange powers of interesting us in certain views of
nature. These we consider but transiently, till the poet, or
painter, awake our attention, and send us back to life with a new
curiosity, which we owe entirely to the copies which they lay
before us.”—Wood’s Essay on Homer , Pref. p. xiii.

We have one instance which furnishes us with the means of
trying the experiment. Which is best in the treatment of the
Laocoon ? The famous epic poet, or the artists whose names
would have been unknown, were it not for this statue ? The
one making the royal martyr bellow like a bull, the others who
have rendered his name celebrated for enduring the extremity of
suffering with fortitude and sublimity ?

CAUSES OE SUCCESS.

Tlie reward of the theatre and the stadium, of
the successful general equally with the favorite
poet, was a fading chaplet; or if it were of a more
lasting nature, the victor was expected, and felt
proud in being permitted to suspend it as a votive
offering in the hallowed temple. Each man laboured
for distinction, each man was content with glory.
If the artist’s design met with approbation, it
became his object so to improve and perfect it, that
the finished work should rank with the master¬
pieces of his age, and be treasured up by posterity
as a sacred heir-loom. His patron was not a

be prevented in populous cities.”—Bromley, Philosophy and Crit.
Hist, of the Pine Arts. vol. i. 93.

It is quite true that, with all this, qualities of the very opposite
character were also observable, but this was a result of the
democratic nature of their government. Nothing can be truer
than the character of the Athenian people as portrayed by
Parrhasius, — “capricious, passionate, unjust, inconstant, inex¬
orable, forgiving, compassionate, magnanimous, boastful, abject,
brave, and cowardly ” : though to these political characteristics
might be added several othor opposing elements, as religious,
sceptical, virtuous, immoral, wise, aud pleasure-loving.

It was a proverb among the Greeks, that the Athenians when
good were eminently so, but that their goodness could not be
depended upon. After reading of the noble deeds and lofty^
aspirations of the Greeks, it is sad and sickening to turn to a
description of their degenerate state at a later period. This
enthusiasm, as a nation, not being based on principle, gave way
at the first reverse, and changed to excitement, passion, madness,
inconstancy, injustice, venality, and other attendant evils which
brought about their final ruin.—See Paterson’s admirable Pssay
on the National Character of the Athenians, 138-149.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

the inhabitants of Cyzicus, for their Ajax or
Medea ? What the Rhodians for their Xalysus ?
What the Athenians for their marble Bacchus, their
picture of Paralus, or their bronze heifer by Myron ?
It would be tedious and superfluous (he concludes)
to dwell upon all the rarities, which attract
strangers throughout Asia and Greece.” Cicero
also tells us that there was no example known of a
Grecian city’s having alienated such treasures;
while Pliny says that the wealth of a whole town
was scarcely sufficient to buy a fine picture.
Respecting one of the above-named pieces we are
told, that being in danger of destruction at the
siege of Rhodes, should the city be set on fire, a
deputation of the inhabitants waited upon Demetrius
the son of Antigonus, who assured them, that he
would sooner burn the images of his ancestors,
than destroy a work of such excellence as the
Ialysus of Protogenes. But it was not a few of
the leading citizens who directed the public taste,
the whole community was alike influenced by a love
of art. The Greeks, says Cicero, enthusiastically
admire statues, paintings, and all works of art.
The study of the fine arts was early imposed upon
their children by the Greeks, as we learn from
Aristotle, and they were thus enabled to appreciate
the works of art in after-life. In order to raise in
their minds the standard of pure beauty, the Greeks
instituted prizes for the most beautiful of men and

ANCIENT AST.

reverence towards this deity. No wonder then
that the expert artist was held to be inspired of
the gods, as narrated to us expressly concerning
Phidias . 1 2

“ Then nature form’d for Love’s embrace,

The earth in brighter glory trod;

All was enchanted ground, each trace
The footstep of a God.”

Schiller’s Gods of Greece?

But an anthropomorphic belief, religious venera¬
tion, enthusiasm, patriotism, or the other qualities
we have been considering, however conducive they
may have been to the perfection of Greek art, are
worth nothing unless guided by Wisdom. Minerva
reigned supreme at Athens. All classes acknow¬
ledged her authority. It was not by the individual
exertions of any one class that it raised itself to
perfection, but by its harmonious relations with the
rest. All the conditions of life were regulated by
one principle—the unity of wisdom, goodness, and

1 The same sentiment is expressed also in an epigram,—

“ Say, Phidias, did the god come down to thee ?

Or didst thou mount to heaven his form to see ? ”

2 This poetical translation is by Patterson: the original runs
thus:—

“ An der Liebe Busen sie zu driicken,

Gab man hohern Adel der JNatur;

Alles wies den eingeweihten Blicken,

Alles eines Gottes Spur.”

Die Goiter Griechenlands.

ANCIENT ABT.

In his description of this masterpiece of anti¬
quity, Pliny has been accused for giving particular
praise to the serpents : but they are deserving of it.
Instead of representing them as dragon-headed,
lest they should excite horror, the artist has availed
himself of their curved forms, to tie in and connect
his three figures, and most admirable is the skill
with which this has been accomplished. The
artist also has been reproached for expressing the
same degree of pain in each of the two sons.
Nothing can be more unjust. The younger son
is already bitten. The averted face, the closing
eyes, the drawing-in of the month, express the
anguish of the soul. With one arm he tries to
remove the serpent’s head, the other is thrown up
into the air in the abandonment of alarm. His
right hand and his right leg denote the extremity
of pain. The elder son is the image of fear. He
is entangled in the coils, but he is not attacked as
yet, and it seems uncertain whether he will not be
able to escape . 1

As in tragedy many parts were kept hidden from

words to escape him ; and yet there were manifest proofs of a
contest between mind and body for the possession of the man.

1 It is interesting to know what Burke thought of this group.
He says, “ The author of the Laocoon was as deeply skilled as
Halle or Gaubius, and hence he has been able to give that con¬
sistency of expression which prevails through the whole body;
from the face, through every muscle, to the ends of the toes and
fingers.”—Letter to Barry, Harry's Works, i. 262.

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

says Strabo, we require not only beauty in its
minor parts, but we look for beauty in it as a
whole. With Lucian, in regarding the statue
of Jupiter by Phidias, we must admire the god,
without looking at his pedestal. And indeed when
we reflect upon the enormous size of the statue
itself, and on the circumstance that the throne and
pedestal, though large, were cut up by bands of
bas-relief, one above another, so that the sculpture
appeared rich, without being large or prominent,
we may imagine that the god, seated as it were
alone, and like the Minerva, by his size filling the
temple, and almost touching the roof with his head,
could not but have appeared imposing and sublime.
These works must always have appeared so. At a
distance, you were enabled to judge of the enormous
size of the image, by contrasting it with the objects
around, by comparing it with the size of man
himself. It was said of the Jupiter Olympius, that
if the god rose up, his head would knock through
the roof . 1 The Minerva also was so large, that her

view, but it would have been better bad be so designed bis own
that they should appear to advantage from one.

Since writing tbe above, the intended position of the monument
has been changed, and it is now to be erected in the Consistory
Court. The design for the monument I have not seen, but the
circular wall behind it is to be lined with some noble bas-reliefs
by Calder Marshall.

1 The Dilettanti Society of 1809 so far forgot the motive as to
write,—“ It seems to have been too big for the temple, large as

134

ANCIENT ART.

modelling in an extraordinary manner. The Mercury
or “ Antinous ” is an example of the delicate beauty
of form observable in a highly-polished and brilliant
marble. Photographers have observed that a white
plaster cast exhibits no perceptible shade, unless
exposed in a favourable light; and they and artists
sometimes colour their casts to make the modelling
more clear. All the works of Greek sculpture are
executed in Greek marble of a rich colour r 1 2 it is
not white, like the Carrara marble, but suffused with
a delicate tint: no doubt this was by design, and
not resulting from necessity; and that chrysele¬
phantine sculpture owed its origin to an observance
of the beautiful natural colour of ivory. Even in
their architecture, we are told by Pliny that they
subdued the rawness of white marble by washes of
milk and saffron ; 3 and from Vitruvius we learn that

1 “ I never perhaps found so great a difference between a plaster
cast and marble, as in the Elgin marbles. The Pentelic marble of
which they are formed, has a warm yellowish tone, and a very
fine, but at the same time, a clear grain, by which these sculptures
have extraordinary animation, and peculiar solidity. The block,
for instance, of which the horse’s head is made, has absolutely a
bony appearance, as if it were the petrified original horse that
issued from the hand of the goddess.”—Dr. G. E. Waagen, Works
of Art and Artists in England , i. 80.

2 These examples will be sufficient to convince every one of the

impolicy of “ cleaning ” ancient sculpture. The process of scrub¬
bing and washing the Greek and Koman sculptures of the British
Museum was two years ago carried on for some months; and
there is no doubt that the original polish, where existing* must be
injured by such a process, and all traces of ancient colouring become

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

141

The following is the description of a statue of
Diana Agrotera, discovered in 1760, in an exca¬
vation at the ancient Oplonte, near Pompeii,
between Torre del Greco, and Torre dell’ Annun-
ziata. At the time of the discovery “ i discritti
colori vivacissimi erano ed intatti, e coll’ esser poi
stati esposti all’ aria, siano alquanto svaniti, ed
in qualche sito scomparsi, massimamente all’ allac-

excavated a house by the kind permission of the minister of the
interior, the Marchese Sant’ Angelo. A description of the house
is published in the Museum of Classical Antiquities. My object
in soliciting this permission was to be able to watch the process
of excavating, and to take note of those details and evidences,
which are thought nothing of and are disregarded by the workmen
employed, but which are often most valuable as determining some
disputed question, such as the nature of the upper floors, if any,
the evidences to restore parts all subsequent traces of which would
disappear, the forming deductions from the relative heights at
which objects were found in the ashes, and as in this case, the
taking note of colour which appears quite fresh and vivid on the
exhumation of ancient sculpture, but which vanishes gradually
from sight by exposure to the atmosphere.

The house was remarkable for containing several marble groups
and statues, and for being ornamented with the richest arabesques
and most noble paintings. Several of these were very large, and
might be called historical paintings. Although exciting the
greatest astonishment at the time of their discovery, they were
allowed to go to ruin, like all the frescoes of Pompeii, for want
of the simple precaution of a coating of wax. Some years ago
several experiments were made, which answered most completely,
but the preservative was laid aside notwithstanding its trifling
cost. The solution employed consisted of dissolved wax. Egg is
mentioned as having been employed by the ancients as a solvent.
According to the Moniteur of 11th of January, 1826, a solution

■

146

ANCIENT ART.

parts. At present no vestiges of it are to be seen.
D’Hancarville attributes it to the time of Romulus,
or 700 years B.C. 1

In ignorance of such evidence it has been boldly
asserted that no fragments have ever been dis¬
covered of such colouring. But the most convinc¬
ing evidence is that afforded by the Elgin Marbles, 3
the Reports on which furnish undoubted testi-

1 D’Hancarville, Antiqidtes du Cabinet de M. Hamilton , iv. 170;
Winckelmann, Hist . de VArt, vi. 2, § 13 ; vii. 2, § 13 ; Einati,
II Regal Museo Rorbonico , Statue, Ho. 102 ; Millingen, Anct.
Uned. Monts, series ii. pp. 9, 10.

2 u Among the remains of the sculpture in the western pedi¬
ment of the Parthenon, which is in a very ruined state, the artists
had observed, not only the traces of paint with which the statues
had anciently been coloured, but also of gilding. It was usual to
gild the hair of the statues which represented deities, and some¬
times other parts of their bodies.”—Clarke’s Travels , iii. 495.

The head of Hike in the eastern pediment, now in the possession
of M. Laborde, has a metal wreath and ear-rings. ( Revue Archeol.
i. 834.)

“ From the position of the sculpture in this monument, (the
Parthenon,) and its being always seen in shadow, the advantage
of painting it must be apparent. The ground was an azure blue,
the ornaments and armour were of bronze gilt, and the draperies,
as at the temple of Theseus, were probably diversified against the
flesh-colour of the naked figures, in encaustic painting. Traces
of paint and of gilding were discovered by the artists who were
present at the removal of these sculptures, and particularly on the
statues of the pediments ; and to this day the hair of the fragment
of the head of Minerva, in the Museum, unequivocally shows the
remains of a red colour, possibly of the groundwork of obliterated
gilding, lost in the attrition of the atmosphere during the lapse of
so many ages.” (Kinnard’s Stuart's Athens , ii. 53.) See descrip-

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

167

select that which should be considered the most
excellent in public opinion. Alcamenes, who was
ignorant of geometry and optics, executed such an
image that the spectators believed nothing could
be more beautiful. But Phidias, most practised in
all studies relating to the arts, but especially in
geometry and optics, considering that all objects
change their appearance according to their height,
made the lips open, the nostrils convulsed, and the
rest of the face similarly distorted. The two sta¬
tues being exposed to public view, that of Phidias
was nigh being pelted with stones; but no sooner
were they raised to their proper height, than the
statue by Alcamenes was hooted at, while that by
Phidias was praised and approved by every one.”

“ Ut Phidise signum simul aspectum et probatum est.”

The story is laughed at by some, but I suspect by
those who do not understand the delicacies of art.
This principle is well explained by Heliodorus, who
says :—“ Such is the care of the maker of a colossus
to give an apparent symmetry to his work, that it
may appear proportional to the sight, though not
in reality. For works placed at a great height
do not appear as they exist.” 1 A similar instance
which occurred to myself may not be deemed

1 Ileliod. Capita Opticorum.

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

169

proper point of view, from time to time as the
work advanced. 1

The Halicarnassian marbles exhibit other instances
of the care and judgment exercised by the ancients
in the production of their works of art. Fearful
that the outline would not be clearly recognizable
at so great an altitude, the artist has indented this
outline, so as to produce a clear line, even on the
light side. Another instance of the like care and
judgment conspicuous in these marbles is evinced
in their peculiarity of composition. In the Par¬
thenon frieze, the Phigalian sculptures and others,
the subjects are continuous, whether in individual
procession or in mingled grouping, but in these
bas-reliefs the composition is in marked lines.
Three figures perhaps form a triangle. On either

Extended Group. .Extended Group

Simple Group. Simple Group.

side are two figures, the lines of which are parallel
with the sides of the triangle, thus forming an
extended group. Beyond these are inverted tri-

1 See this subject insisted upon by M. Beule in an article on
the Pediments of the Parthenon in the Revue Archeologique , vol.
for 1854-5.

178

ANCIENT AET.

((

And if Prometheus stole from heaven
The fire which we endure, it was repaid
By him to whom the energy was given
Which this poetic marble hath array’d
With an eternal glory—which if made
By human hand, is not of human thought:

And Time himself hath hallow’d it, nor laid
One ringlet in the dust—nor hath it caught
tinge of years, but breathes the flame with which
’twas wrought.”

Childe Harold.

statue, is the following incident narrated by Mons. Pinel in his
work Sur VInsanite :—

“Yet on that form in wild delirious trance
With more than rev’rence gazed the Maid of France.

Day after day the love-sick dreamer stood
With him alone, nor thought it solitude;

To cherish grief, her last, her dearest care,-—

Her one fond hope, to perish of despair.

Oft as the shifting light her sight beguiled,

Blushing she shrank, and thought the marble smiled:

Oft breathless list’ning heard, or seem’d to hear,

A voice of music melt upon her ear.

Slowly she waned, and cold and senseless grown,

Closed her dim eyes, herself benumb’d to stone.

Yet love in death a sickly strength supplied;

Once more she gazed, then feebly smiled and died.”

An Italian lady once said of this statue,—“ Peccato ! che io non
sia una gentile per adorarlo ! ”

DECLINE OF ART.

188

cated the hidden beauty, the outward form itself
became neglected.

“ Cessavit deinde ars.”

The causes of Greek excellence having been
unfolded, it is only necessary to say that the
absence of these causes in the Roman element
tended to its decadence. 1 We have seen how the
arts were honoured by the Greeks : in Rome, the
exercise of them would have been considered a
disgrace to one of noble birth; and Petronius
expressly ascribes the decay of art among the
Romans to the fact of their being no longer in
honestis manibus ;, but cultivated only by slaves and
freedmen. So, if we compare ancient art with that

siamo iti di male in peggio. Certo mi rendo, die per insino noi
la terremo in sul nostro terreno, sempre arriveremo male. (Io,
Ghiberti,) son uno di quelli consiglierei essa si ponesse giu, e
tutta si lacerasse e spezzassesi, e mandassesi a seppellire in sul
terreno de’ Fiorentini. (Their burying it in their enemies’
ground is very amusing.) — Frammenti Inediti di Lorenzo
Ghiberti, in the Raccolta Artistica, tomo ii. p. 13, 14.

Even in modern times the works of ancient art may sometimes
be destroyed. I knew a traveller in Samos who found a most
beautiful gem, representing Nymphs adorning a hernial statue
with garlands. So exquisitely was it arranged that it was not
till the third day that he discovered that it was what the Italians
call “una cosa tenera,”—and it immediately flew into a dozen
pieces.

1 For the absence of all these excellences in the Greek cha¬
racter, see the portraiture of Roman times depicted by Bromley,
Philosophy and Crit. Hist, of the Fine Arts, vol. ii. p. 67-74.

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

237

work the bas-reliefs or alto-reliefs being only in
one band, are so enlarged in scale as to detract
from the appearance of the figure above. Thus
attention to the laws of contrast requires, that
in enlarging a work to colossal size, the elabora¬
tion of details must not only be increased; it
must be done with judgment. While some of the
parts are finished with the utmost delicacy and
elaboration, others should be kept as broad and
large as possible, in order that size should not
appear to be sacrificed to detail,. nor detail serve
to conceal size, but that one should assist the
other by its opposition. Colossal works in ancient
times were intended to be seen alone, or where
the colossal work was to be the chief object: but
the modern artist, regardless of all propriety, and
careless of the effect it will produce on other works,
or on the building which contains them, makes his
own work of colossal stature, forgetful that while
killing others, his own subject becomes, by this very
contrast of size, awkward and obtrusive : and, as we
might expect, the objectionable increase of size is
not atoned for by increase of beauty or grandeur.
Well would it be if the artist recollected what we
find stated in Longinus, that an ill-wrought colossus
cannot compare with a little faultless image, as
the Doryphorus, the spear-bearer or warlike youth,
of Polycletus : and worthy of remark is the ob¬
servation of Statius, who, in speaking of a Hercules,

246

MODERN ART.

subserviency to truth. So careful was the ancient
artist to judge of everything according to its own
nature.

Many supposed instances of disproportion have
been discovered in ancient sculpture, but we must
beware how we take all such instances as granted.
It has been lately stated by a sculptor, 1 that the
left thigh of the “ Theseus,” (Cecrops,) that which
projects over the corona, is shorter by an inch
and a half than the other. It has been also stated
that the left leg of the Apollo Belvedere is longer
than the other. Both these measurements are
inaccurate. So hypercritics have discovered that
in the Laocoon also the left leg is longer than the
right, in the elder of the two sons of Laocoon the
right leg is the longer, in the Yenus de’ Medici the
bent leg is longer than the other, and in the Apollo
Belvedere the left shoulder is further from the neck
than the right. In many of these cases allowance
is not made for the limb in repose being actually
longer, or rather for the limb in action being com¬
pressed, and so appearing shorter. Some of these
defects are imaginary, as we have already seen,
and others may perhaps, as in instances which have
been pointed out, be the result of a careful study of
perspective. The accompanying example from the

1 Papers of the Boy. Inst, of Brit. Archts. Session 1858-9 ;

248

MODERN ART.

for the purpose of fixing the metal sword-belt, we
shall find that this leg is about one-sixth longer
than the other, D E, a quantity which is just equal
to what the limb loses in the act of bending.

Another peculiarity in the Panathenaic frieze,
but one resulting from another principle, is that
the men on foot are represented larger in pro¬
portion than the horses and horsemen, and what is
still more extraordinary, that in many instances the
men sit below the level of the horse’s back. 1 2 This
was merely a contrivance of the artist to fill up the
ground of his composition as much as possible.
Thus, as Burke observes, a true artist puts a
generous deceit on the spectators. With this view
we sometimes find that he resorted to the expedient
of shortening the lower bones of the leg, that he
might give more importance to the body, and so
better fill up his ground. 3

1 See an instance of a similar effect, treated of in the next
chapter, when describing the principles of the ancient bas-relief.

2 Kaffaelle’s celebrated picture of the Miraculous Draught of

Dishes is an adaptation of this principle. The apostles are twice
too big for the size of the boat; but if they had been smaller, the
painter could not have given sufficient importance to his subject.
The difficulty, however, might have been met, in great measure,
by making the boats project out of the picture on either side.

VII.

BAS-RELIEF, AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE.

A great contrast of effect is observable in ancient
and modern bas-reliefs: the former being always
elegant and simple, the latter confused either with
a multiplicity of objects, or by an attempt at per¬
spective, in representing the distant objects so
faintly as to be not distinguishable. This effect
results from an injudicious attempt to go beyond
the province of sculpture, and imitate the powers
of the painter. The magnificent gates of the
Baptistery at Florence, by Ghiberti, are justly
criticised by the late Baron Von Bumohr as being
inferior in this respect to those by Pisano, pre¬
viously executed in the same building, who, “ treat¬
ing his subjects with greater simplicity, and
more conformably with the principles of sculpture,
avoided the confused and crowded appearance which
prevails in those of Ghiberti. The latter give us
the spirit of painting, working upon materials
belonging to the plastic art; so that in order to
be fully appreciated and enjoyed, they ought to be

2 K

256

MODERN ART.

The enthusiasm expressed by Quatremere de Quincy
is akin to that of the sculptor Bouchardon, who,
on reading Homer, felt his mind so elevated by
consideration of the nobler qualities of man, as
to exclaim, that men appeared to him more than
twice as big as they did before; exactly as Cicero,
before him, said,—that Homer transformed men
into gods. 1

The subject of pedimental sculpture, whether the
figures are in ronde-bosse or in alto-rilievo, is so
connected with that of bas-relief, and at the same
time so important, from being called into exercise
more frequently than other sculpture on a grand

longer flourish, and we shall again relapse into barbarism.”—Sir
Joshua Reynolds, Sixth Discourse. Similar to this is the evidence
afforded by West and Canova; (.Ancient Marbles , Brit. Mus. vii.
33 :) and we must be careful lest we esteem all this as idle praise,
and attach no further meaning to it. Unless we act up to our
convictions, we shall not draw from these marbles the great
truths which they contain. The present professor of sculpture
remarks :—“ As a sculptor I feel bound to lay great stress on the
importance of the profound study of the best ancient sculpture.”

. “ The 1 antique ’ is not set before you as superseding

nature; but because tbe best works of the ancient Greek artists
are found to be the best transcripts of nature.”—Prof. West-
macott’s Second Lecture. 1858. Professor Welcker writes :—
“ The British Museum possesses in the works of Phidias a trea¬
sure with which nothing can be compared in the whole range of
ancient art.”— Glass. Mus. ii. 368.

1 Phidias, on being asked how he had produced his Jupiter,
answered in a verse from Homer, thus proving that it was by no
servile copying, but by meditation on ideal grandeur.

BAS-RELIEF, AND PEDIMENTAL SCULPTURE. 259

ing, 1 we might almost say, of the forms together, we
perceive, in the generality of such designs, insulated
perpendicular figures, 2 without life or meaning:
instead of the greatly-increased proportion given to
the principal figures, as observable in the western
pediment, we find in such designs the figures are,
as much as possible, reduced to one medium
size. Judging then of these designs abstractedly
or artistically, we cannot consider that they ex¬
press the spirit and character of the lost original.
Such is the defect observable in most modern pedi¬
ments,—those of the Fitzwilliam Museum at Cam¬
bridge, and St. George’s Hall at Liverpool may be
considered as exceptions. As an example of the
usual modern style of pedimental sculpture, we may
select that of the Royal Exchange, where we find
the naturally long columns of the composite style,
still further lengthened by square plinths or pe¬
destals under them, and by the perpendicular lines
of the sculpture above ; these figures in many cases
seeming to be the continuation of the columns:
and instead of the sculpture in the centre being of
a more colossal character, we find care has actually
been taken to equalize the size of the figures by

■ 5 ?1

1 See Bronsted’s observations on the aicoXia epya of the Greek
pediment .—Voyages en Grece , ii. 160, note 8.

2 See Stuart’s restoration of the Parthenon pediment, as an
example of this class.— Stuart's Athens , vol. ii.

APPENDIX.

283

“ 4sth Nov. 1859.

“ My deae Falkenee,

“ I have read with much pleasure your esteemed essay on
the roof of the cella of the Parthenon, and agree in the high pro¬
bability of your solution, however contrary to the rabid Greeks of
the late era. The objections to a tie-beam roof are great and
obvious. 1. I know not how the sacrifice of space included in
the triangular form comprized between the lines of roof and
a horizontal tie-beam could have been suffered by the Greeks, a
defect so easily avoided by the arch you have suggested. Did the
Greeks use no bridges ? Did they reject the arch, so many years
previously employed by their neighbours the Egyptians? In
Greek tombs, or cippi, we find constant indication of the arch.
2. M. de Quincy has taken your roof for granted—see his
Jupiter Olympius. The rejection of it seems to me to be pure
pedantry. At Phygaleia we found no vestige of the roof over
the cella, while fragments of every other part of the roof are
found. At Balbeck indications of a circular roof were dis¬
covered.

“ I think you do well to insist in thus correcting the Anglo-
Greek presumption, and opposing it as you do, and I write hastily
to offer you my thanks and leading notions in confirmation of
your views.

“ Believe me ever most truly yours,

“ C. R. CoCKEEELL.”

(R.A., and Pres. R.I.B.A.)

“ Bolton Gaedens, Russell Squaee,

“ 31s£ October, 1859.

“ My deae Falkenee,

“In matters of art and science of course differences of
opinion will arise, and doubtless it is for the good of progress
that all men should not think alike, though some may be right
and some must be wrong.

“ My own impression is that you are mistaken. Your reason

302

APPENDIX.

account of its peculiar ugliness. The only other specimen in the
book is one nearly as disgusting, it is a man vomiting; but we
thought this better suited for comparison, as it represents a lion.
Monsters quite as ugly, and quite as gross, may be seen ornamenting
some of our colleges at Oxford, affording models of the beautiful
and the sublime to the minds of our ingenuous youth. Though
we cannot give it in all its grossness, we will compare it with one
from Pompeii. Were the author of the “ Seven Lamps ” to com¬
pare Hyperion with a Satyr, he would doubtless prefer the latter >

so in these gargoyle heads, the Gothic one will assuredly be
pronounced more earnest, and therefore more beautiful. The
author of the “ Seven Lamps ” may have the lamp of Power, but
can the possession of the lamp of Power justify a man in
neglecting to subject his labours to the lamp of Reason ?
Again, can that writer be said to have really desired the lamp
of Truth, who, after regarding the exquisite leaf-ornamentation of
Greek capitals and stelse, and other treasures of ancient art, has
the effrontery to put forward the accompanying figure as a
specimen of Greek leaf-decoration ?

LONDON I

PRINTED BY COX AND WYMAN, GREAT QUEEN STREET,
LINCOLN’S-INN FIELDS.

INTRODUCTION.

coveries of other nations, and we must therefore go
back to a far earlier date for the discovery of this
important principle. It has been found that the
arch was very generally made use of in Egypt 1,490
years before the time of our Lord, as is proved by
the monuments of Thebes and paintings at Beni-
Hassan, while a still earlier use is shown by the
brick pyramids, which were built several centuries
earlier. 1

Thus it must be acknowledged that were the
question even about a vault, it is far from im¬
probable but that a vault might have been em¬
ployed ; but the frontispiece does not show a vault,
it merely represents a wooden ceiling of a circular
form : the one is an arch of masonry and con¬
struction, the other of mere form and semblance.
It is unnecessary to say that there is a vast
difference between the two. I do not show a
vault: not that I doubt the antiquity of the vault,
but because I believe that most of the temples were
ceiled with wood. Having, in another work, treated
on this subject, I will here merely refer to some of
the passages which support the argument. 2

Having thus far considered the subject as a matter
of antiquity, let us now briefly regard it as concerns

1 Sir Gardiner Wilkinson, On Colour and Taste, p. 296.

2 Plin. H. N. xiv. 1, 2; xvi. 79; xxxvi. 15. Yitr. ii. 9.
Paus. i. 18, 20; v. 12, 20, and viii. 22. Philost. Vita Her.
Att. 5.

INTRODUCTION.

in these galleries. This destination of the upper
galleries, as we have seen, has been doubted by
these architects ; but we have several accounts
handed down to ns which prove the fact. That
galleries existed is evident from Pausanias 5 de¬
scription of the temple of Jupiter Olympins at
Elis, where he says,—“ There are columns also in
the lower part of the temple, supporting galleries ;
from which you may be able to see the god.” 1
Pausanias, in speaking of the temple of Diana at
Ephesus, mentions a cabinet containing pictures :
*Ev Ss ’A prefjLifiog rrjg 'E^sa-lag 7 rpog to o’i'xy}[aol Ep^o^svip
to s%ov Tocg ypoKpag , 2 — an expression which has been
understood by writers as referring to a joinacotheca
or picture-gallery. Strabo describes the famous
temple of ^Esculapius at Cos as being full of
paintings and other works of art; 3 and the same
author, in speaking of the temple of Jupiter
Soter at the Piraeus, says, — “ The small por¬
ticos (< TTothcL , porticus parvi,) contain wonderful
paintings, the works of illustrious artists: the
hypaethral portion of the temple contains statues;” 4
—and in describing the Herasum at Samos, he
says,— 66 In addition to the multitude of paintings
placed there, there are other picture-galleries
(pinacothecae) and some chapels ( vata-xoi Tivsg eWi)
full of ancient works of art. In the same manner

1 Pans. v. 10, § 10. 2 lb. x. 38.

3 Strabo, xiv. p. 657. 4 lb. p. 396, lib. ix.

INTRODUCTION.

Of the statue we have tlie following notices given
us by Pausanias and Pliny. Pausanias says :—

“ The statue of Minerva is of ivory and gold. On the summit
of her helmet is a sphinx, and griffins are couched on either side,
having the body of a lion and the beak and wings of an eagle.
The statue is erect, with a garment reaching to the feet. (In the
centre of the aegis) on her breast is an ivory head of Medusa.
(This was originally of gold, but it was stolen by Philorgus.) In
one hand she holds a Victory, about four cubits in height, (or the
size of life;) in her other is a spear. A shield lies at her feet, and
near her spear is a dragon. On the pedestal of the statue is the
birth of Pandora.” 1

The following is the description by Pliny :—

“ Among all nations which the fame of the Olympian Jupiter
has reached, Phidias is looked upon, beyond all doubt, as the most
famous of artists : but to let those who have never seen his works,
know how deservedly he is esteemed, we will take this opportunity
of adducing a few slight proofs of the genius which he displayed.
In doing this, we shall not appeal to the beauty of his Olympian
Jupiter, nor yet to the vast proportions of his Athenian Minerva,
twenty-six cubits in height, and composed of ivory and gold : 2 but
it is to the shield of this vast statue that we shall direct attention;
upon the convex face of which he has chased a combat of the
Amazons, while upon the concave 3 side of it he has represented
the battle between the gods and the giants. Upon the sandals
again we see the wars of the Lapithse and Centaurs, so careful has
he been to fill up every smallest portion of his work with some
proof or other of his artistic skill. To the story chased upon the

1 Paus. i. 21.

2 The gold is estimated to have been worth £100,000.

3 This chasing was painted by Pansenus, the cousin of Phidias,
who also painted the concave side of the shield of Minerva,
at Elis.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

of stately mansions, for the public squares and tem¬
ples of his city were his, equally as with the wealthiest
inhabitant. His private interests were merged in a
desire for the general good. Were a temple to be
rebuilt, happy was that citizen who could con¬
tribute a column to the projected edifice; and
where no stately monument was required, the richer
citizens might show their patriotism by contributing
to the public games and religious festivals. By
the general interest thus excited, the artist felt
that every eye was upon him, each man was able to
appreciate or criticise his labours : his work was no
offspring of private caprice, but looked forward to
anxiously by the public eye. Nor was this all: he
himself felt that he was as much a citizen as any
other, that he was working for himself, and that he
would be as much grieved as any one did the monu¬
ment not answer to the expectations raised of
it. Their public and private life were each con¬
ducive to this result. The life of the Greek re¬
sembled that of the gods. Born in a sunny climate,
enjoying a clear sky, a pure atmosphere, his
country girt about by a calm serene ocean, while
the grateful land brought forth almost without toil
of husbandry, he looked upon the hazy, sultry mist
hanging upon the horizon, softening and colouring
the distant objects, upon the exhalations rising
from the ground beneath him, quivering and dancing
in the sun’s rays, and typical of an ever-active

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

sion. Sometimes statues were expressly made for
the occasion, and these of the most costly materials.
In Julius Caesar’s triumph after the African war,
the images were made of ivory and gold, and among
these was one of Caesar himself. The colossal head
of Pompey, executed for a like purpose, was com¬
posed of a mosaic-work of pearls. The funereal
car of Septimius Severus was adorned with ivory
statues and paintings, together with an image of the
emperor, seated on an ivory couch. So common,
at last, were the triumphal entries at Pome, and
granted on such slight occasions, that Tacitus says
generals would sometimes hesitate to leave upon
some foreign expedition, lest on their return they
should he placed on a footing with those question¬
able conquerors whom they so despised. Thus, at
length, Rome was said to have as many statues as
men. They decorated the temples, theatres, forums,
circuses, and thermas, and, when these were full,
they were taken, first by the generals and after¬
wards by the citizens, to their private houses. We
are told by Pliny that three thousand statues were
placed in the temporary theatre of Scaurus, and
probably as many more helped to furnish the palace
of the Caesars, Hadrian’s villa at Tivoli, and his
mausoleum at Rome. The result of such luxury
was as might have been expected ; having such
works of art in their own houses, men despised the
temples of the gods.

ANCIENT AET.

in Jupiter, Neptune, and tlie Indian Bacchus, the
beard and arrangement of hair are the sole evidences
of age; neither wrinkles, nor hollow temples are
seen; the cheeks are less full than in some youthful
figures, but the cheek-bones are not projecting.
The deformity of Vulcan’s lameness was concealed
by Alcamenes, in the statue of this divinity at
Athens, by the more than ordinary beauty which
he succeeded in imparting to his countenance.
Although the figure was standing, he so managed
the drapery as to express lameness without exhibit¬
ing deformity. Agoracritus, for the same reason,
chose a sitting posture, in order that he might
the better avoid the offensiveness of deformity.
The figure was draped ; and yet he so skilfully
attended to the anatomy, as to convey to the
mind of the spectator the idea of that which he
thought proper to conceal. In each case the artist
chose rather to depart from the custom of repre¬
senting the gods as naked, than by adhering to it to
exhibit a defect. The artist seemed ever to bear in
mind the serene life which the gods enjoyed, that
state, in which a happy and passionless existence, a
cheerful serenity, a celestial joy, and godlike calm,
for ever reigned.

ANCIENT ART.

—as Mengeceus, who, having inflicted upon himself
a death-wound, stands with placid, serene eye, re¬
joicing at having saved his country : the dead body
of Antilochus, whose features are lit up with joy at
the consciousness of having saved his father’s life:
the dead body of Abderos, the mangled lower
portion of whose corpse, half consumed by the wild
horses of Diomede, is concealed from the view of
the spectator by a lion’s skin: Panthea, still beau¬
tiful in her grief; and Evadne offering herself on
the pyre of her husband. In the celebrated picture
of the Immolation of Iphigenia, by Timanthes, the
attitude of Agamemnon hiding his grief in his
hands, erroneously explained by ancient writers as
evincing the inability of the artist to depict the
intensity of his sorrow, is defended from the attacks
of Falconet and other modern critics by Fuseli,
who convincingly shows that the attitude was not
dictated by inability of the artist, but by his deep
knowledge of human nature, and of the indications
of sorrow in a noble mind. 1 A similar instance
occurs in the Siege of Troy painted by Polygnotus,
in which the artist represented poor Cassandra
veiled; but through this veil might be seen the
mounting colour of outraged shame. In contrast
with this sense of delicacy and decorum, as displayed
by the Greeks, we behold Paffaelle and Poussin, in

1 Knowles, Life and Writings of Fuseli, ii. pp. 50-58.

ANCIENT AET.

were too small. 1 So in these colossal statues we
have long descriptions of the thrones and pedestals,
covered with the most elaborate sculptures, in¬
tended to produce the same effect. The statue of
Minerva was as remarkable, says Pliny, for the
delicate sculptures on its shield as for its colossal
size. On the helmet of the statue of Pome in
the Villa Borghese are sculptured the history of
Pomulus and Pemus. But these sculptured details,
how elaborate soever they were, did not interfere
with the grandeur of the whole. In a colossal work,

1 Too great praise cannot be awarded to the arrangement of tbe
sculpture in St. Paul’s Cathedral: each monument looks well in
its place, and each of them tends to embellish the cathedral.
Exceptions to this observation, however, must apply to the monu¬
ment of Bishop Heber, which is too large for so simple a subject,
and to that of Bishop Middleton, which is wretchedly placed:
and if, as is reported, a colossal statue of Wellington is to be
placed in one of the arches of the nave, a position intended by the
architect to be left open, not only will it be difficult to design as
an insulated monument, like the Dirce, or Toro Earnese, but it will
be badly lit, having a large window immediately behind it, while,
from its colossal size, it will detract from the consequence of theother
sculpture, and destroy the general harmony of the sacred structure.
It is stated by an ancient author, that he who erects a monument
unworthy of his country, has inflicted a wrong which will cease
only with the destruction of the monument. Single figures, as the
Ephesian hero, vulgarly called the Eighting Gladiator, by Hegesias
of Ephesus, may be beautiful from many points of view ; but this
is not the case with groups. With the exception of the Dirce,
just referred to, there is scarcely a group extant which can be seen
from more than one point of view. Bernini, indeed, pretended
that all sculpture should be seen from eight different points of

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

117

of these marble statues were copies 1 of bronze ones,
and coloured ones. Thus of the Minerva of the
Parthenon there are five marble copies, without
any colour; although the chryselephantine statue
from which they were copied was covered with
the richest colouring.

In like manner it has been attempted to decry
their poly chromic architecture, Millin attributing
it to the rude taste of primeval art, while others
pretend that the Greek temples were painted in a
degenerate age. It is sufficient for us to know
that every monument of Grecian art, of pure
style, whether of Greece, Sicily, Metapontum,
Xanthus, or Halicarnassus, was adorned with
colour; and if we judge by the evidences of
colour on the monuments themselves, instead of by
the unfounded “restorations” by modern archi¬
tects, we must, if capable of appreciating art, con¬
fess its beauty :—“ II n’y avait pas, dans toute la
Grece, un seul temple construit avec soin et avec

1 “ In all originals a measure of grace and natural beauty is
discernible, but in works which are executed in imitation of them,
although such imitation may be carried to the utmost exactness,
there is always a certain affectation and want of nature observable
about them. In this manner we may not only judge of modern
orators as distinguished from ancient; but among painters, of
those which are painted after copies by Apelles from the genuine
works of that master ; among statuaries, of the imitations of Poly¬
clitus; and among sculptors, of the imitations of Phidias.” (Dion.
Halic., De Dinarcho Judic. vii.)

118

ANCIENT ART.

quelque luxe, qui ne fat plus on moins colore.”
Such is the remark of the diligent inquirer, the
Chev. Brondsted. 1

With as little reason do we suppose that the
Greeks were, even in their best times, ignorant of
perspective, because their style of composition was
different to ours. Let the lines of the Parthenon
decide whether this science was not understood by
them. The further consideration of this subject
will be referred to presently.

With as little reason do we suppose that the
Greeks were inferior to us in painting, because
all paintings of the ancient Greeks are lost to
us. So far should we be from judging of Greek
art by paintings executed in Roman times, five
hundred years after, that it appears from Petro-
nius, that the art of Painting, as practised by
the Greeks, was lost in his day; and he laments
that Painting had not left the smallest trace.

1 Voyages en Grece , p. 145.

Wiegmann’s remarks on this subject are very true :—“ Unser
Auge ist durch das ewige JNebelgrau unserer Decorationsmalerei,
und durch die hergebrachte Earblosigkeit der Architektur- und
Skulpturwerke, allmalig in einen so krankhaften Zustand gerathen,
dass frische Earben es nicht weniger unangenehm afficiren, als
das Licht bei Entziindungen. Wir miissen uns erst wieder daran
gewohnen, ehe wir zu der Einsicht gelangen, dass, wie in der
Natur nur das Todte farblos ist, so auch in der Kunst das Ear-
blose todt und ode scheint.”—Wiegmann, Die Malerei der Alten ,
p. 113. Wiegmann was a pupil of K. 0. Muller’s.

154

ANCIENT ART.

and as corresponding with the mediasval, hut while
they deny that this style of colouring ever improved
itself into one corresponding with the perfected art
of Phidias, they pretend that polychromy as applied
to sculpture was limited to such rude colouring, 1
an opinion which, after what has been said, it is
needless to refute. Nor are these critics agreed
amongst themselves. Some, as we have seen,
assert the colouring, which they cannot deny, to
have been of a rude primeval period, while a recent
lecturer pretends that all the Grecian temples were
coloured by the <e churchwardens of antiquity. 5 ’ 2

1 This plastic colouring was chiefly confined to votive offerings,
to the copies of the different divinities exposed to sale, to the
Lares and Penates of antiquity, and to architectural sculpture,
anything which was intended to strike the eye at a certain distance.
Of this description was the object of the vow which Virgil makes
to Venus—a Cupid with coloured wings and painted quiver ; and
that to Diana, a marble statue with red buskins. ( Eclog . vii. 31;
Catalecta.y

2 The same sentiment was held in France some years ago. On
the first occasion of an intelligent artist’s endeavouring to ascer¬
tain the principles of ancient polychromy, “ on l’accusa d’impiete
envers les Grecs. II osait, disait-on, leur attribuer les ornements
grossiers dont la main des barbares avait souffle leurs monu¬
ments.” A more rational view has since taken possession of the
public taste. “ On finira par s’etonner un jour que ce fait ait ete
attaque avec tant de perseverance, et qu’il ait fallu, pour le
defendre, tant de luttes et tant d’efforts. La principale raison,
selon nous, est que, pour la plupart, les artistes ne sont pas
savants, et que les savants ne sont pas artistes.” (E. Cartier,
De V Archre. Polychr ., Revue Acheol. 1852-3.)

In the same manner it was said when the Elgin marbles first

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

157

Another argument is put forward by a modern
writer. He says that Greek sacred sculpture was
more fettered than their other works; that 66 the
artist was restricted by usage, from which it was
neither safe nor lawful to departand therefore
that “in statues of the gods we must not expect
to find the free untrammelled production of the
artist :” and, “ in obedience therefore to the
universal feeling, Phidias made the statues of
Jupiter at Elis, and of Minerva at Athens, of
various materialsand he refers to the incident
relating to the portraits of Pericles and Phidias on
the statue of Minerva, as a proof of the statues
being of archaic or hieratic character.

Of the Minerva, as we have already seen, we
have no fewer than five ancient copies in marble,
of the Jupiter we have copies of the head in gems,
and of both these statues we have the most en¬
thusiastic descriptions of all ancient writers. Can
any modern writer, then, in the face of all this,
pretend that these statues exhibited the trammels
of Egyptian, Assyrian, or archaic art? Is there
anything in either of these statues which reminds
us of the style of the statues of Branchidse ? He
might as well deduce an argument against poly-
chromy from the archaic forms of the Yenus or
Apollo. Perhaps it will be said that this archaic
style was not exhibited in the form, but only in
the colouring. But what reason have we to

172

ANCIENT AET.

Elgin marbles, more especially in the equestrian
figures, we shall find that the figures of the first
plane are less projecting, that is to say, less round
than those of the second, in consequence of the
latter being more obscured by shadow. These
parts, moreover, have been slightly tinted, so as to
assist the eye in distinguishing them from the
figures in the first plain. Chantrey, in his evidence
before the House of Commons, remarks in these
marbles a difference in the treatment of drapery,
according to its position, and states that in all
these sculptures effect has been their principle
aim, and that they have gained it in every point. 1
Another circumstance connected with these marbles
is the flatness of surface, and squareness of outline.
Roman and modern bas-reliefs placed in this posi¬
tion would have the figures rounded like half-statues
and appear confused; whereas in the Panathenaic

the ignorance or hostility of Mr. Knight, owing to whose evidence
the Earl of Elgin lost £16,000 in handing them over to the nation.
We ought to see that this sum is reimbursed to his descendants,
It is a disgrace to the Government of the time, and its advisers,
that the marbles remained in this country eight years before they
were purchased.

1 “ The sculpture of the Parthenon, and indeed of all temples,
was designed for effect: and the intended position of the figures
on the edifice was evidently taken into consideration. The inac¬
curacies, the disproportions, and the apparent negligence observ¬
able in some parts, and which are striking when placed on a level
with the eye, disappear when elevated to that height for which
the effect was calculated.”—Do dwell, Travels in Greece , i. 338.

INDIVIDUALITY.

207

does not equal, that of the flesh. In like manner, steps, or any
portions of architecture, are irregular and not geometrically true
in their lines and angles; on a similar principle, probably, the
inscriptions on the finest antique medals are rudely formed: for
it cannot be supposed that the artists who could treat the figures
and heads so exquisitely, could have been at a loss to execute
mechanical details with precision.

“ In Canova’s monument to the Archduchess Maria Christina
at Vienna, (in many respects a fine work of art,) figures are
represented ascending real steps and entering the open door of a
real tomb, all executed with a builder’s precision. It is plain
that, to keep pace with the literal truth of these circumstances,
the figures should at least have colour, life, and motion. The
want of all these is injudiciously made apparent by the comparison
in question, and some pains are taken to convince the spectator
that he is looking at marble statues.

“ In the antique, on the contrary, it will generally be found
that the employment of conventional methods (as opposed to the
more direct truth of representation) increases in proportion as
objects are easily imitable, and consequently in danger of inter¬
fering with the higher aim.

“ The contrivances which are intended to give the impression
of reality to the master object of imitation, as exemplified in the
best works of the ancients, thus point out the course to be pur¬
sued in the difficult treatment of statues in modern costume. The
general principle, it is repeated on the authority of such examples,
is never to suffer literal truth in the accessories to remind the
beholder of the unavoidable incompleteness in the more important
object of imitation.

“In like manner a close resemblance to nature is judiciously
sought by the sculptor where his material seems least to promise
it; while he suppresses literal imitation when the qualities of that
material greatly coincide with those of the object to be repre¬
sented. The principle is the same in all the arts; for whether
directly imitative or not, all set out with restrictions, and all
excite wonder and delight when those restrictions cease to be felt
as such. It is this which wins our admiration in musical compo¬
sitions, when the language of imagination and feeling is recog-

COSTUME.

215

pas d’exiger des sculpteurs d’en surcharger les statues heroiques,
consacrees au senat et dans les temples; et celles que nous avons
d’Antonin, de Marc-Aurele, et Septime-Severe, pour etre nues
n’en paraissent pas moins decentes. La nudite est tellement
inherente a la sculpture, qu’en aucun terns on n’a cru pouvoir lui
substituer la mode. Le regne de Louis XIV n’a pu meme se
soustraire a cette loi. Les statues equestres de ce prince furent
faites avec les bras, les jambes, et les pieds nuds. II est vrai que,
n’osant tout-a-fait braver le prejuge, on ajouta alors a cette licence
l’assemblage ridicule d’une grande perruque du terns, et des
armures sans caractere; devenus plus rigides observateurs des
minuties, nous avons vu, sous le regne de Louis XVI, ordonner
aux malheureux sculpteurs d’exprimer dans les portraits de nos
grands bommes jusqu’aux plus basses trivialites; nous avons vu
demander la statue du marechal de Luxembourg en longue per¬
ruque, l’epee au poing, la tete nue, et plus que tout cela encore,
avec la difformite dont la nature avoit afflige ce heros. Uhistoire
peut ennoblir une bosse en repetant ce que disait Luxembourg
en parlant du prince d’Orange : ‘ Comment sait-il si je suis bossu;
il ne m’a jamais vu par derriere P ’ Mais quand il faut parler a
l’ame par les yeux , l’artiste doit se garder de transmettre des
verites qui lui repugnent, des verites si peu heroiques, si peu
monumentales. C’est a la peinture seule a conserver les costumes
des terns ; la richesse de la palette peut distraire et faire passer
sur toute espece de vetemens: les etoffes, les broderies augmentent
encore ses tresors: le nombre de ses personnages, celui de leurs
expressions rendent son patrimonie immense; mais la sculpture ,
sans couleurs, qui n’a pour apanage que ses formes severes, qu’une
gravite de pose, si difficile a varier, reduite le plus souvent dans
ses compositions a 1’unite d’un personnage, que lui restera-t-il si
on exige d’elle qu’elle couvre d’habits mesquins ses tranquilles
mouvemens, si elle ne peut recbauffer le marbre de la vie, de la

nudite?. Au nom d’un siecle ou tout doit etre grand,

qu’on accorde a la sculpture ce sacre caractere. Je me joins a
tous les artistes, a tous les veritables amateurs des arts, et je
demande cet exemple du retour du bon gout.”

Visconti published a short essay in answer to this letter,
entitled, “ Sur le Costume des Statues Antiques; Lettre au

DECORUM.

229

danced away your marriage. 5,1 That man was es¬
teemed awkward and ill-bred, whose action did not
correspond with the music to which he danced.
Milizia says that only two instances are known of
figures being represented sitting with their legs
crossed. But here we have a female raising one of
her feet almost to the level of the block on which
she is sitting, an attitude the difficulty of which will

be evident to any one who tries it, and at the same
time keeps the other foot on the narrow ledge be¬
neath. Instead of a soft undulating outline, we have
nothing but sharp angles,—the bent knee, the bent
elbow, the bent wrist, the turned head, the sharp

1 Herod, vi. 129: Athen. xiv. 25. The expression afterwards
became proverbial.

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

233

the vain attempt to attain to the height of his pre¬
sumptuous rival ? We may almost fancy we hear
Lucian’s Jupiter Tragoedus declaiming against the
Colossus, “ What does he come amongst us for—
only to disgrace our diminutive size, and throw the
assembly into confusion?” 1 The smaller the repu¬
tation of some men, so much the more important do
they wish to have their likeness; precisely in the
same manner that Actius, being small in stature,
desired to have his image so much larger than the
ordinary size. There is a good anecdote told by
Macrobius of Cicero, who, seeing a shield on which
his brother Quintus’ effigy was painted (in profile)
on a large scale, said—I never knew before that the
half was greater than the whole. 2 It would be well
if, instead of forgetting our own littleness, we
imitated the greatness of mind of Alexander, who
declined the tempting honour of a colossal statue.
It would be well if, with Cato, men should ask
why a statue had not been erected to a certain
person, rather than why one had been so erected;
and with Socrates and Agesilaus we should consider

1 So sensible of this incongruity was the late Dean of West¬
minster, that he offered to remove the statue of Kemble to the side
of Mrs. Siddons’ monument: and the Dean is also said to have
jokingly offered to the Dean of St. Paul’s the colossal statue of
Watt, which Chantrey had the want of taste to place behind the
screen of the Bouchier monument.

2 This paradox is given us by Hesiod, Op. et Di. v. 40; and Plato,
Rep. v. 13. So the Latin proverb,—“ Dimidium plus toto.”

2 H

PERSPECTIVE.

241

sitting figure of Britannia in the new western
addition to Somerset House. Being placed at so
great a height, it is impossible to see the whole of
the statue, or, if seen in profile, the perpendicular
lines appear diminished by the obliquity of vision.

The consequence is, that the thighs or horizontal
lines seem to be enormously prolonged, while the
trunk appears foreshortened. Had the artist ex¬
amined the figure of the draped Bacchus, 1 now
in the British Museum, which was found on the

1 This statue was originally taken for Niobe or Diana.
2 i

VIII.

THE IDEAL.

Hogarth and Bernini, Hazlitt, Falconet, and
other critics may scoff. 1 They may tell us that
ideal beauty is cold and passionless. But, as we
have already seen, the wisest and the best of men
declare that beauty to be perfect must be perfect
also in purity and virtue. Indeed, this is acknow¬
ledged by every thinking man. Lucian, in speaking
of Panthea, remarks that where the virtues of the
mind and graces of the body are united in one
person, there, and there only, is true beauty. 2

1 “ La partie de la Sculpture qui apprenoit a rendre le caractere
appellee par les auciens (le morale) est infiniment plus diffi¬
cile, et suppose bien plus d’intelligence que celle des proportions,
et fut regardee toujours comme la premiere de toutes.”—D’Han-
carville, Recueil d'Antiquites, i. 135.

2 Lord Shaftesbury asserts that, “ Of all the beauties, nothing
affects the heart like that which is purely from itself, and of its
own nature ; such as the beauty of sentiments, the grace of
actions, the turn of characters, and the proportions and features
of a human mind.” ( Characteristics .) Again :—“ What is beau¬
tiful is harmonious and proportionable: what is harmonious and
proportionable is true: and what is at once both beautiful and
true, is of consequence agreeable and good.”— Miscel. Reflect .:—
Taste.

264

MODERN ART.

power of doing which, as Dionysius observes, is
only acquired by long practice and study.

This triumph of ideal art is well described, both
by Maximus Tyrius, and by Proclus. No beauty,
says the former, is to be found in nature so beautiful
as that which is seen in a fine work of sculpture.
The other observes, If you take a man formed by
nature, and another made by the hand of a sculptor,
will not the latter appear more excellent ? It
may be objected that where the physiognomy is not
beautiful, it would be impossible to idealize without
destroying the resemblance. But let us see how
the Greeks acted under such circumstances. It is
quite true, as Ammonius states, that “ if in a por¬
trait of Socrates, we did not perceive his bald pate,
his flat nose, his prominency of eye, we should say
it is not a good likeness. 55 But the portraits of
blind Homer, of Seneca bleeding to death, of the
flat-nosed Socrates, of the corpulent Yitellius, may
offer as much truth, delicacy, and elevation, mixed
with characters of a less engaging nature, as those
of the Antinous or the Alexander. Able to embel¬
lish everything, the Greeks did not fear to under¬
take anything. Extremes did not intimidate their
skilful hands. Nature could, even in its vagaries,
offer greatness. The body of H^sop was deformed ;
his genius was divine. The sculptor of the HSsop
of the Villa Albani had to express the physiognomy,
the spirit, and the soul of the poet. The enterprise

288

APPENDIX.

This last form was effected by increasing the number of stones,
so as to cover over any area, however small might be the stones.

These arches are therefore, strictly speaking, polygons, whether
the intrados were rounded or not, and when loaded in the middle
there must always have been a tendency in the lateral joints to
open at the haunches.

Another way of accounting for the origin of the arch, and one
which admits of an equal claim for antiquity, is the covering by
approaching stones, as practised in the galleries of the Pyramids.
The overhanging corners, being thought useless, might be cut
away, and thus the appearance of an arch would be presented.
The following example is from the Assaseef, and is of the reign of
Amenophis I., of whose time, as we shall presently see, we have
the earliest evidence of a true arch.

The earliest arch of which we can fix the date is a brick arch
of elliptical form, 8 feet 6 inches span, in one of the Tombs of the
Queens at Thebes, bearing the name of Amenophis I., and dating
back to 1822 cv 1420 B.C.: but Sir Gardner Wilkinson thinks it
possible that the arch was used in the brick pyramids at Memphis,
700 years before Amenophis. 1

Ancient Egyptians, iii. 317.

APPENDIX.

291

date. 1 It is in a propylon at Gournou, in the centre of which is
an archway, the arch of which is formed of nine rims of bricks,
three of which have fallen in. The bricks are placed side by
side, transversely, thus bonding the whole together. It is ascribed
to the reign of Psammetichus I., 654^611 B.C.

In addition to the examples above given, many others might be
adduced, showing the application of the same principle. Several
pyramids exist at Thebes with arches of the same construction.
As in Campbell’s tomb we have seen the arch used contempora¬
neously with the angular arch of three stones, so in some of these
pyramids we observe a vaulted chamber below, with a dome above
formed of horizontal courses gradually oversailing. What does
this show but that the Egyptians considered this method of
construction less liable to injury, w'hen loaded, than the arch
of concentric joints; and thus we may see the reason why the
arch was so seldom employed in their great works, in their pyra¬
mids and temples, and why for a similar reason it was discarded
by the Greeks.

It is interesting to find not only that the arch was extensively
used by the Egyptians, but that they employed, in addition to
the semicircular arch, the elliptical arch, as in the most ancient
instance referred to, 1822 cv 1550 B.C.; the skew disposition of
the bricks as at the Memnonium; the segmental, and even the
pointed arch, as at Meroe in ^Ethiopia : and if we can place
any reliance on the paintings at Beni Hassan, where a granary
covered with a vaulted roof is observable, it may be traced back
to the reign of Sesertesen I., 8338 ou 1600 B.C., for there is this
great divergence in the tables of Egyptian chronologists.

1 Sir Gardner Wilkinson, however, observes that arches so constructed
are common at Thebes, and of the age of Psammetichus. (Ancient Egyptians,
iii. 319.)

314

APPENDIX.

Blanchard (Le Comte).—De l’lnfluence des Arts .8vo. Paris, 1801

-Observations gbnbrales .sur les Statues des Anciens.

Acad. Boy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome xiv.
Bottiger (C. A)—Ideen zur Archaologie der Malerei .... 8vo. Dresden, 1811

-Kunst-Mythologie .8vo. Leip. 1839

Bober.—Dialogue entre la Peinture et la Sculpture .... 8vo. Perpignan, 1803

-Sur le Beau Idbal, sur le Beau Sublime, dans l’Art du Peintre et

du Statuaire.8vo. Paris, 1822

Bonomi (Joseph).—The Proportions of the Human Figure, according to the

ancient Greek Canon of Vitruvius.8vo. Lond. 1857

Bonsi ( Canonico ).—Orazione sopra l’Utilita delle Belle Arti.

8vo. Firenze, 1767

Bonstellen (C. V. de).'—Becherches sur la Nature et les Lois de lTmagination.

8vo. Geneva, 1807

Borboni (Gio. Andrea).—Discorso delle Statue.Fol. Boma, 1661

Borghini (BafFaello).—II Biposo.8vo. Milan, 1807

Du Bos (J. B. Abbb).—Bbflexions Critiques sur la Poesie et sur la Peinture.

3 vols. 4to. Paris, 1755

Boulland (Auguste).—Mission Morale de l’Art .. 8vo. Paris, 1852

Bouterwek (Fred.)—Parallelen vom Griechischen und Modernen Genius.

8vo. Gottingen, 1791

Bouterwek (Prof.) —AEsthetik. 8vo. Leipzig, 1806

Bromley (Bev. B. A.)—Philosophical and Critical History of the Fine Arts.

2 vols. 4to. Lond. 1793-5

Brondsted (P. O.)—Voyages en Grbce.4to. Paris, 1826-30

-Bronzes of Siris.Fol. Lond. 1836

Bruce (T.)—Memorandum on the Earl of Elgin’s Pursuits in Greece.

8vo. Lond. 1815

Brunei (Chev. de Varennes)—L’Art du Dessin chez les Grecs.

8vo. Paris, 1810

Bulengerus (J. Cses.)—De Pictura, Plastice, et Statuaria Veterum.

12mo. Lugd. 1627

Bulwer (Sir E. L.)—Sculpture : a Poem .8vo. Cambr. 1825

Burke (Bt. Hon. Edm.)—A Philosophical Inquiry into the Origin of our

Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful.8vo.1776

Burnet (John)—Education of the Eye.4to. Lond. 1837

-Practical Essays.12mo. Lond. 1848

Burnouf (E.)—Principes de l’Art d’apres Platon.8vo. Paris, 1850

Butler (Geo.)—Principles of Imitative Art.12mo. Lond. 1852

Callistratus.—Descriptiones Statuarum.Fol. Lips. 1709

-La Description de quelques Statues Antiques, traduite par Blaise

de Vigenbre.Fol. Paris, 1615

Canova (Antonio).—A Letter from—and Two Memoirs .... 8vo. Lond. 1816
Carlencas (Juvenal de).—The History of the Belles Lettres, and of the Arts
and Sciences. Translated from the French.. .. 8vo. Lond. 1740
De Carli (Anton. Luigi).—Sculptura, Carmen.—LaScultura, Versi sciolti.

8vo. Milan, 1775

- Gall. (Doissin)...12mo. Paris, 1767

Carradori (Francesco).—Istruzione Elementare per gli Studiosi della Scultura.

4to. Firenze, 1802

Carrara (Francesco).—Delle Lodi delle Belle Arti. Orazione.. 4to. Boma, 1758
Cartaud (De la Vilate).—Essai Historique et Philosophique sur le Goht.

12mo. Lond. 1751

Cartier (E.)—De l’Architecture Polychrome.Bevue Archeol. 1852-3

Casanova( G.)—Discorso sopra gli Antichi, e varii Monumenti loro ; per uso
dell’ Accad. delle Belle Arti di Dresda.4to. Lipsia, 1770

APPENDIX.

315

Cavaceppi (B.)—Raccolta d’Antiche Statue .Fol. Rom. 1768-72

Caylus (Comte de).—Parallele de la Peinture et de la Sculpture.. Mag. Encycl.

-De la Sculpture, et des Sculpteurs Anciens.

Acad. Roy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome xxv.

-La Perspective des Anciens.

Acad. Roy. des Ins. et Belles Lettres, tome xxiii.

Cellini (Benvenuto).-—Due Trattati.4to. Fir. 1568

Chappuy (Gabriel).—Examen des Esprits propres aux Sciences et aux Beaux-

Arts.12mo. Rouen, 1653

Chaussart (P. R.)—Essai Philosophique sur la Dignite des Arts.

8vo. Paris, an. iv.

Christie (J.)—Inquiry into the Early History of Greek Sculpture.

4to. Lond. 1833

Ciampi (Sebastiano).—Lettera a Lorenzo Bartolini, celebratissimo Statuario.

8vo. Fir. 1834

-Breve Prospetto dell’ Origine della Statuaria e delle varie maniere

in diversi tempi adoperate per le Statue degli Dei e degli Uomini.

8vo. Firenze.

Cicognara (L.)—Del Bello.4to. Fir. 1808

Clarac (Comte de).—Manuel de l’Histoire de l’Art chez les Anciens.

3 vols 8vo. Paris, 1847

--Musde de Sculpture.8vo and fol. Paris, 1825

Colson.—Parallfele de l’dtat de la Peinture chez les Anciens, et de celui du meme

Art chez les Modernes.8vo. Paiis, an. viii.

Combe (T.)—Description of Marbles in the British Museum.

Fol. Lond. 1812-18

Coussin (J. A.)—Sur les Causes de la Perfection de la Sculpture chez les Grecs.
Question proposde par l’lnstitut.

Crespi (Luigi C.)—Lettere sulla Pittura e Scultura.4to. Roma, 1769

De Crousaz (J. P.)—Traitd du Beau.2 vols. 12mo. Amst. 1724

Cumberland (Geo.)—Thoughts on Outline, Sculpture, &c.4to. Lond. 1796

Cunningham (Peter).—Westminster Abbey.16mo. Lond. 1842

Dallaway (J.)—Of Statuary and Sculpture amongst the Ancients.

8vo. Lond. 1816

Dandrd-Bardon (Michel Franfois.)—Traitd de Peinture, suivi d’un Essai sur

la Sculpture.12mo. Paris, 1765

-Costume...4to. Paris, 1784-6

D’Argenville(A. J. Dezallier).—Abregd de la Vie des plus Fameux Peintres, &c.

4 tomes, 8vo. Paris, 1762.

D’Argenville (A. NT. Dezallier).—Vies des Fameux Architectes et Sculpteurs

depuis la Renaissance.2 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1788

David (T. B. Emeric).—Recherches sur l’Art Statuaire.

8vo. Paris, 1805 (an. xiii.)

-Jupiter.8vo. Paris, 1833

Dayes (E.)—Works . 4to. Lond. 1805

Dechazelle (P. J.)—De l’lnfluence de la Peinture sur les Arts d’lndustrie

cqmmerciale. 8vo. Paris, 1804

Delfico (Melchiore).—Nuove Ricerche sul Bello.8vo. Napoli, 1818

Demontjosius (Ludovicus).—Commentarius de Sculptura et Pictura, v. Vitruvii

Architecturam ab J. Laet editam .Fol. Amst. 1649

Devielle.—Essai sur la Peinture en Mosaique.12mo. Paris, 1768

Diderot (Denis).—Essais sur la Peinture.4to. Paris, 1796

Dilettanti Soc.—Specimens of Ancient Sculpture.Fol. Lond. 1809-33

Doni (Ant. Franc.)—Disegno : nel quale si tratta della Scoltura e Pittura.

8vo. Vinet. 1549

——-I Marmi.4to. Venezia, 1552

Thou first and simplest of the Arts which rose
To cheer the world, and lighten human woes!

Friend of the mourner! guardian of the tomb !

May I, chaste Sculpture i without blame, presume,

Rude in thy laws, thy glory to relate,

And trace, through chequer’d years, thy changeful fate.”

Haylby.

RESTORATION OF THE PARTHENON AT ATHENS.

SHEWING THE CHRYSELE PHANTl N E STATUE OF MINE RVA, BY PHIDIAS.

Flmtoo/raplo&oL from ao dramj-uy lyF.F.

XIV

PREFACE.

ancients upon the subject. These opinions he has
endeavoured to classify and methodize, so that
conclusions may the more easily be deduced from
them. At the same time he has avoided as much
as possible putting those opinions into the form of
quotations, lest he should interrupt the regular con¬
tinuity of the discourse. Those only which would
not work in have been thrown into foot-notes.
Many of these passages have been collected by
former writers, sometimes as mere anecdote, some¬
times without drawing any deduction from them,
sometimes indeed they have been mentioned with
derision. The author believes that every tradition
is pregnant with a meaning.

The treatment of such a subject naturally enjoins
upon the author the duty and necessity of perusing
the writings of those who have gone before him:
and having done this, it becomes him to ac¬
knowledge the assistance he has received. Among
those whose works he has read with the greatest
pleasure, and from which he has received the
greatest profit, are Quatremere de Quincy, Winckle-
mann, and Reynolds. The names of others may
be found useful, as given at the end of the volume.
Among modern writers of our own country, he

INTRODUCTION.

interior must liave been in continual gloom. But
a more fatal objection arises from the fact that an
interior so constructed would not have been suffi¬
ciently lofty to contain the celebrated Minerva of
Phidias.

The statue of the goddess, as we shall presently
see, is represented as being twenty-six cubits in
height, while her spear touched the ceiling. She
stood upon a pedestal on which was sculptured the
birth of Pandora, attended by all the gods of Olympus.
The plan of the pedestal may still be traced on the
pavement, by which we find it to have been twenty-
one feet six inches long by eight feet six inches
wide, with a railing round it extending nearly three
feet more on every side. This must have required
a height of about ten feet to be in proportion,
which added to the thirty-nine feet, or twenty-six
cubits, gives us a total height of nearly fifty feet.
This height of fifty feet requires the utmost limits
of the temple: so that the horizontal ceiling must
be rejected, were it only from this evidence. Of
these two projects, therefore, the one is inadmis¬
sible from the loftiness of its colonnades, the other
from the lowness of its ceiling. The only alterna¬
tive, then, is a mode of construction somewhat
similar to that exhibited in the frontispiece.

We now come to the third point of consideration,
how far such theory is in accordance with historical
data. Much has been written regarding the an-

ANCIENT ART.

women. So general was this sense of beauty
among the Greeks, that each man was a musician,
each a painter, each danced or sang in the sacred
festivals. Thus the arts in Greece became so
highly prized, that no slave was allowed to practise
them. Slaves were forbidden even to exercise
themselves in the palestra, lest they should become
too handsome. The reason of this enactment
was that they thought, with Demosthenes, that it
is impossible that they who are employed in mean
and servile actions, should share noble and generous
sentiments; for the pursuits we are engaged in
wholly engross our thoughts : 1 and, on the other
hand, with Quintilian, they considered that the more
generous and noble the mind is, so much the more
easily is it excited to great things. It was with
this feeling for art that men frequently devoted of
their abundance to the embellishment of their
native city. Living in simplicity, their wants were
few, and they could thus give up to the public good
the residue of their estate. That was no uncommon
thing which we are told of Cimon, who laid out
his own property in embellishing the public areas
of his native city. Such was the noble emulation
evinced on this subject, that he was most sure of

1 A sentiment copied by Longinus, who says, that “ it is im¬
possible that they who, all their lifetime, have been occupied with
mean and servile things, should produce anything worthy of
admiration in all ages.”-—Cap. iii.

CAUSES OF SUCCESS.

and hair, the calm serenity of his countenance, the
heavenly light and wisdom of the eye, the goodness #
indicated in the mouth, and all the other attributes
of the god, till he were more inclined to worship
than admire. It was not admiration merely, but
love and respect which were enkindled in the mind
of the worshipper. Imagine then the feelings of a
Greek wdio, in a land said to be “ the work of the
gods, and of the ancient heroes , 551 as he passed
from shrine to shrine, at every spot connected
with his religion, at every locality pointed out by
nature as suitable and acceptable to the gods, found
representations of the divinities, not rude, formal,
lifeless productions, but forms in each of which
he could find subject for meditation and delight.
How must his enthusiasm have been excited, when,
on leaving the city by any of the public roads,
the marble stela, the lofty column, the honorary
inscription, would remind him at each step of
glorious ancestors and fellow-countrymen, whose
achievements had earned for them an immortal
fame ! Imagine the effect produced on the mind of
the successful competitor in the games, and of the
enthusiastic spectators, in hearing the victor’s
praises sung by the chief poet of the nation, in
seeing his statue executed by the first sculptor;
and himself, envied by the great and noble, his late

1 Hegesias, apud Strabo, ix. p. 396.

CAUSES OE SUCCESS.

have such objects before our eyes, teaching us
what we owe to the good of the republic, and
to glory. Honour would have been considered as
contemptible, if it could have been bought for
money; and virtue would be vilified, were we to
present to it a prize which avarice might claim.
To have, and to deserve a statue, were considered
as of equal honour, for one implied the other. No
man ever erected a statue to himself, or bribed his
friend to vote one to him, for this would have only
blazoned forth his own unworthiness. The statue
was not a private, but a public monument . 1

1 Hitherto, the monuments in St. Paul’s have been public
monuments, inscribed with the words, “At the public expense ; ”
“By the King and Parliament;” “By his grateful country;”
and it is gratifying to read such inscriptions: but latterly class-
monuments have intruded themselves into the sacred area, monu¬
ments raised by “pupils and contemporaries.” Such monuments
should have been placed in the College of Surgeons, or in the
College of Physicians. What is to prevent men of other occupa¬
tions seeking to honour their class, by raising a monument to one
of their members ? If a public monument is deserved, be the
individual whom he may, let it be raised by the nation. The
Censor Cornelius Scipio removed from the Boman Forum all
statues of magistrates which had been placed there by themselves
or friends, allowing only those to remain which had been erected
by order of the people or the senate. “ Among the ancients,”
says Gruasco, “ it was the public interest of the country which
claimed and required honorary monuments due to merit and
to virtue. These immortal tokens of national gratitude were the
principal sources of those virtues, and of that heroism, of which
ancient history affords us so many examples.” (De V Usage des
Statues , p. 237.) That was a noble inscription which once existed

ANCIENT ART.

in Grecian countries, but they are not their own,
they are the proceeds of conquest and of spoil.
We have witnessed the losses sustained by the
Greek cities at their overthrow. The conquerors
returned to Rome, bringing with them in tri¬
umphant entry the statues of their conquered
nations. On the entry of M. Fulvius, that general
brought with him from JEtolia, two hundred and
eighty-five brazen, and two hundred and thirty
marble statues ; while the triumph of Paulus AEmy-
lius is described as being yet more magnificent.
It occupied three days, one of which was devoted
to the procession of colossal and other images borne
on two hundred and fifty carriages. Two thousand
statues are said to have been removed from Yolsci . 1
In the triumph of Antigonus, king of Syria, a
countless number of statues were carried in proces¬
sion, each of which was dressed in robes of gold
and silver, and the fingers decorated with rings.
In the Dionysiae festival of Ptolemy Philadelphus
at Alexandria, an immense number of statues and
colossal figures were drawn on cars of a prodigious
structure . 2 In the triumph of Antiochus Epiphanes,
a countless number of gods were carried in proces-

1 Even in Greek times it was customary to rob the conquered
countries of their images, though they usually respected the
statues of the gods.

2 We may form some idea of the excellence of Greek painting
when we are told that notwithstanding all these statues, what
was admired most were the superb paintings from Sicyon.

ANCIENT ART.

sought to represent men such as they appeared, or
should appear, not such as they are. It was for
this cause that he was selected by Alexander as the
only artist who might represent him in bronze; for
whereas others gave his exact lineaments, and indi¬
cated even the humidity of his eyes, he succeeded in
expressing the energy of his mind, and the courage
of his heart . 1 It was thus, says Apuleius, that in
representations of this hero were ever distinguished
the same vigour of ardent valour, the same marks
of noble dignity, the same form of youthful grace,
and the same nobility of brow.

Longinus, in speaking of the productions of Plato
and Lysias, observes,—“ What can we suppose they
have in view, who labour so much in raising their
compositions to the highest pitch of the sublime,
and look down with contempt on accuracy and cor¬
rectness ?—Amongst others, let this be accepted:—
Nature never designed man to be a grovelling and
ungenerous animal, but brought him into life, and
placed him in the world, as in a crowded theatre,
not to be an idle spectator, but spurred on by an
eager thirst for excelling, ardently to contend in the
pursuit of glory. For this purpose she implanted
in his soul an invincible love of grandeur, and a
constant emulation of whatever seems to approach

1 And yet this was done without flattery. See the anecdote
recorded of him and Apelles, in Plutarch’s Isis and Osiris.

VI.

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

It has been remarked that many of the works of
the ancients were of colossal size. No fewer than
one hundred colossal statues were found at Rhodes,
each of which, says Pliny, would have made the
fortune of another city: three were by the
hand of Bryaxis. The famous colossus of that
island was one hundred and five feet high, while
the Jupiter of Phidias, executed of ivory and gold,
was sixty feet, and the Minerva forty feet. The
Juno of Samos and many others might be mentioned,
though these are the most celebrated. The Jupiter
of Tarentum by Lysippus, was sixty feet in height,
and so nicely balanced as to be movable by the
hand. These works were remarkable, not only for
their size, but they were conceived in the highest
beauty, and executed with the greatest care. In
the Jupiter of Elis “ the dignified expression of the
highest majesty went far beyond the admiration
which its size conveyed.” So far from these works
being enlarged copies of an ordinary statue, which
by increased size would appear bald and plain, the
ancient sculptors, like the microscope, increased

106

ANCIENT ART.

tliat tlie vision of our Lord, which St. John beheld,
was formed in his mind by the remembrance of this
effect of images in pagan temples,—

“ The image spotted with divers colours.”

Wisd. of Sol. xv. 4.

In our days we should be apt to associate ideas of
dazzling light to such an appearance, but to one
living in those times the materialistic expressions
of such a vision would be the whiteness of ivory or
marble, the face glistening as the sun shining in his
strength, the drapery reaching down to the feet and
girt about with a golden girdle, the feet of shining
brass, and the right hand extended and holding
the symbol of divinity. To assist this belief in
the presence of the deity, slight tints of colour were
resorted to, so slight as to be scarcely perceptible,
so delicate that the spectator was not sure whether
the colour were natural or artificial. This colour
was to be applied with all the judgment requisite to
a lady’s rouge ; it was to produce its effect upon
the mind, while its presence could not be detected
by the eye. Many instances of this are handed

arbitrary decision of choice or taste in the sculptor, to render his
work agreeable in the eyes of the beholder. It was produced by
a much higher motive. It was the desire of rendering these
stupendous forms living and intelligent to the astonished gaze of
the votary, and to confound the sceptical by a flash of conviction
that something of the divinity resided in the statues themselves.”

132

ANCIENT ABT.

Rhsea, whom Phidias has caused to descend froni
heaven . 5 5 Such was the universal admiration ex¬
cited by this statue that Epictetus remarks, <c Each
of you would regard it as a misfortune to die without
having seen the Jupiter of Elis.” An instance of
a comparatively modern date may be cited in the
statue of Sta. Rosalia at Palermo. The figure is of
white marble, with drapery of gold elaborately
ornamented. It is placed in a subdued light under
an arch, with railing in front, so as only partially
to be exposed to sight. All this is from design :
the surpassing beauty of the face, the delicacy of
figure, the elegance of attitude,—all this seen in
a subdued light, and invested with a sacred awe
arising from sympathy with her fate,—give such
appearance of life to the figure, “ que Ton serait
tente de la croire vivante.” 1

As the statues in the interior of the temple were
frequently ornamented with colour, those in the
open air were not unfrequently adorned with gild¬
ing. The statues of Fortune at Prasneste, the
horses at Venice, the horse of Marcus Aurelius,
and two equestrian statues from Herculaneum,
were all gilt, and as we learn from Byzantine
writers, the Colossus of Rhodes was so likewise. So
were those which Verres erected to himself at Syra-

1 Goethe, Rosalia's Sanctuary; Houel, Voyage Rittoresque de
la Sidle,

150

ANCIENT ART.

can we wonder at the careful statements of Callis-
tratus and other writers of antiquity being set aside ?
Is it reasonable to reject testimony so invariable,
so agreeing, and coming from different writers, and
this not because we have counter-evidence from
other writers of equal antiquity and standing, but
merely because it does not tally with our precon¬
ceived opinions P To act thus, is to imitate a
child, who disregards facts and insists upon his
own opinion. Truth and reason are set aside,
beauty and taste are disregarded, merely because
we will have it so. Do we find Phidias calling in
the assistance of Panssnus, and Praxiteles that of
Mcias — are the works described, and the artists
designated by name—all this is set aside as nothing
to the purpose, simply because it is inconvenient to
admit it, simply because—let the fault be where it
may — ancient taste is not the same as modern
taste.

We have seen how the word circumlitio has been
twisted by different writers, so as to mean anything
but what it really does signify: and so we may be

Greeks in the earliest times, and even in the age of Pericles. No
doubt all the Grecian temples were ornamented in the same
manner, and the painting was certainly coeval with the buildings
themselves, as it is always executed with the highest finish, and
the greatest elegance, corresponding with the sculptured parts.”
DodivelVs Travels , i. 342.

Baron Stackelberg, who has devoted much attention to this
subject, thus writes:—“ Die Bildner- und Malerkunst seit den

158

ANCIENT ART.

suppose that the colouring was archaic, when all
the rest was most chaste and beautiful ? Can we
imagine that Phidias daubed the entire statues over
with vermilion, because ancient statues were so
coloured : or with bitumen because they were pre¬
viously covered with that substance ? Or, if the
“various materials” constitute the archaic style
“ adopted from other countries,” in what other
countries do we find evidences of chryselephantine
art ? And even if they could be found, we should
have no more right to call the Jupiter and the
Minerva archaic, than we should to call the finest
works of the Greek sculptor in bronze or marble
archaic, because bronze and marble were employed
for sculpture in Egypt or Assyria.

The reader who has gone through the foregoing
observations on iconic-polychromy, must judge how
far an author is correct who says that “ in marble
statues the colour must have been put on very
coarsely, and almost in patches,” and “ there is
not the most remote hint in any reliable written
authority, nor in any recovered fragment or work
of art, to indicate that this delicate and partial
tinting was the ancient practice, or was ever re¬
sorted to, even exceptionally, by any of the great
masters of art—Myron, Phidias, Praxiteles, Alca-
menes, Lysippus .” 1

1 Mr. Westmacott writes in 1845, speaking of poly chromic
sculpture,—“ This mixture of materials, which modern taste dis-

160

ANCIENT AET.

Apollo. The pupil of the eye is painted in the
colossal figures on the Quirinal, attributed to Phidias
and Praxiteles, and the eyebrows in the Farnese
Hercules, the Antinous of the Capitol, and the
river-god of the Vatican and the Villa Albani; while
in the Minerva of Velletri remains of a blue colour
and ornaments on the peplus are still observable.
That was no pedimental sculpture of Praxiteles,
for which he called in the assistance of the
painter ISTicias.

It is sufficient for us to know that such works
were painted. Even if they remained to us, we
could not be expected to point out those tints
which were scarcely perceptible even when they
left the painter’s studio. It is with surprise that
we distinguish traces of the stronger colours, as
in the instances recorded, for we know that those
early statues which were painted with vermilion,
had constantly to be recoloured to preserve their
freshness.

This argument is too important not to be re¬
peated. Let any one inspect the fragments of
polychromic decoration in the British Museum, or
any other gallery of antiquities, and he will find
in the few places where traces of colour are still
evident, that the colours are almost effaced; while
the greater part of the marble, though once covered
with the same bright hues, is of spotless white, as
though the brush had never been passed over it.

168

ANCIENT AET.

irrelevant, exemplifying, as it does most perfectly,
the case in point. Examining tlie Gallery of Anti¬
quities in tlie British Museum in company of a
Professor of the Academy and an eminent sculptor,
we came to the Halicarnassian marbles, which till
lately were ranged immediately under those from
Phigalia. The former were pronounced to be in¬
ferior in the “ filling-in : ” the Phigalian marbles
thereby appearing rich and ornate, while those from
Halicarnassus seemed poor and naked. On reach¬
ing the opposite side of the room, however, we
happened to turn back, and then we perceived that
what before was rich and intended to be seen at a
moderate distance, was now confused; while the
Halicarnassian sculptures, calculated for double the
altitude, stood out clear and distinct: so admirably
did the artist in each case consider the effect
required.

It has generally been supposed that the sculp¬
tures of ancient temples were executed in the
artists’ studios, and exhibited to the public before
they were placed in position, in consequence of the
extraordinary care with which every part is finished,
even those parts which could never be seen from
below. To me, however, it appears that the con¬
trary was the case. I cannot believe that the
wonderful effects of perspective evident in these
sculptures could have been obtained by mere
theory, and without their being seen from the

COSTUME.

211

the Dragon, as at first intended; it would, from the
classical treatment with which it must necessarily
have been executed, have been an admired orna¬
ment in every generation . 1 If therefore our modern
sculpture be executed in accordance with the fashion
of the day, in another generation it will become
antiquated, and in its turn be passed by. But
neither is it elegant even in its day . 3 Look at the
statue of a celebrated politician in one of our lead¬
ing thoroughfares. It is above the size of life, and
therefore we may expect something: but what is
it ?—a lay-figure from a tailor’s shop . 3 Look at
the waistcoat. Is there one line of grace in it ? It

1 A horse by Canova has in like manner changed its rider: that
of the equestrian statue of Charles III. of Naples having been
originally intended for the Emperor Napoleon. Another instance
of metamorphose occurs in the Eape of the Sabines, by John of
Bologna, a group originally intended for Youth, Manhood, and
Old Age.

2 “ If an artist is compelled to exhibit the modern dress, the
naked form is entirely hid, and the drapery is already disposed by
the skill of the tailor. Were a Phidias to obey such absurd com¬
mands, he would please no more than an ordinary sculptor; in the
inferior parts of every art the learned and the ignorant are nearly
upon a level. Present time and fashion may be considered as
rivals; and he who solicits the one must expect to be discoun¬
tenanced by the other.” — Sir Joshua BeynolcTs Discourses:
Disc. 4 and 7.

3 No doubt this is one of the causes of the inferiority of modern
art—the facility with which modern costume may be copied.
Some have attempted to explain the superiority of ancient art by
the facility afforded for studying the nude: it would have been
truer if they had referred it to its compulsory study.

220

MODERN ART.

as Greek or Roman are omitted, and it becomes an
idealization of that style : if modern costume, it is
so concealed and idealized, that the formalities are
scarcely if at all observable . 1 It is after the former
of these manners that Falconet endeavoured to
compose the drapery of his statue of Peter the
Great, which he thus describes :—“ His habit is
that of all nations, that of every age; in a word it
is an heroic habit.”

We have then to consider what is to be the object
of sculpture. Is it to represent a portrait of the
deceased, or person honoured with a statue, or is
it to produce a work of art ? In ancient times,
no doubt, art was primarily considered. But this
cannot be the case when the figure of the individual
to be immortalized in sculpture has no character¬
istics of beauty, and where the artist is himself con¬
vinced of the unsatisfactory nature of the costume.
This being so, what object can we have in repre¬
senting the entire figure, what object do we gain
in representing the lower part of the body, even in
the most celebrated men of modern times ? There
is nothing which enables us either to form an
estimate of the character of the man, or which we
can admire as a work of art. Even if classical

1 It was thus that Sir Joshua Reynolds prescribed (and prac¬
tised) the kind of drapery to be used by painters. “ It is neither
woollen, nor linen, nor silk, satin nor velvet: it is drapery; it is
nothing more.”— Disc. 5.

230

MODERN ART.

nipple of the breast, and the bent demon-like wings.
It is sufficient to compare this, even in thought,
with the graceful undulating lines of the Venus de’
Medici. On looking at it from the left, the attitude
is such that the right foot, though so much elevated,
seems to touch the ground; on looking at it from
the right, the left knee seems to reach up to the
elbow: in either case one limb appears to be of
nearly double its proper length . 1 The heavy cum¬
brous forms of drapery also, when viewed in front,
are incompatible with a figure of Victory. Whether
we consider the statue as regards beauty of ex¬
pression or attitude, we may say,—It is not what
the Greeks would have done.

1 This is very curious. The statue might be called the bat¬
winged chamelion. One leg appears half as long again as it should
be, but you cannot tell which. Sometimes it is the right leg, some¬
times the left, according as from which side you view it. This
distortion is caused by a fold of drapery hanging from the right
knee, which always conceals the leg behind it.

APPENDIX.

297

tombeaux, statues, que l’art du moyen age coloriait, depuis
Westminster jusqu’a Naples, et jusqu’en Sicile ? Pompei et
Herculanum, qu’etait-ce autre cbose qu’une page immense de
peinture ? Toutes ces decouvertes n’ont-elles pas embarrasse
successivement les modernes P A mesure qu’ils avan£aient dans la
science, ils comprenaient, goutaient, louaient ce qui, tout d’abord,
les avait choques. L’education est bien puissante en matiere
d’art. II faut attendre que notre siecle fasse son education pour
la polychromie. On l’a appliquee deja a Athenes, a Munich, a
Paris meme. Le climat a ses exigences, mais l’art peut les
vaincre ou les satisfaire: c’est une question de matieres et de
procedes. Si un jour nous reprenons le gout des edifices peints,
je ne dirai point alors que nous sommes des barbares, je dirai que
nous faisons une conquete : car nous aurons reconquis un heritage
auquel nous avions renonce, une beaute que nous avions
perdue.

Beule.

“ Professeur d’Archeologie a la Bibliotheque Imperiale.”
(now) Membre de l’lnstitut.

APPENDIX.

307

mediaeval barbarism, refer to the “human face divine” as an
illustration of Order, Symmetry, and the Definite ?

With respect to Greek polychromy as applied to sculpture, he
says —

“1 cannot help the Elgin frieze.” {Seven Lamps, p. 127.)

Because a Gothic window would not look well if filled in with
painted glass of good figure-drawing, therefore

“ All arrangements of colour, for its own sake, in graceful forms, are bar¬
barous.” {Seven Lamps, p. 129.)

ORNAMENT.

“ The ornamentation of Greek buildings is often bad.” {Lectures p. 72.)

Of these ornaments, some of them are “ mistakes and impertinences in the
Greek himself, such as his so called honeysuckle ornaments and others, in which
there is a starched and dull suggestion of vegetable form, and yet no real
resemblance nor life, for the conditions of them result from his own conceit of
himself, and ignorance of the physical sciences, and want of relish for common
nature, and vain fancy that he could improve everything he touched, and that
he honoured it by taking it into his service.” {Stones of Venice, i. 234.)

“ That so-called ornament, the Greek fret [improperly by the author called
a guilloche] I allege to be ugly; or, in the literal sense of the word, monstrous ;
different from anything which it is [in] the nature of man to admire ; a vile
concatenation of straight lines .... a painful horrible design.” {Seven Lamps,
p. 98.)

It is fortunate that the outside of my book will prevent his
ever looking into the inside. The argument for this assertion is
based upon the following enthymeme :—

The only natural substance resembling a Greek fret is the crystal of
Dismuth. (p. 97.)

But salt and other crystals are much more common than the crystal of
bismuth, (p. 99.)

Therefore the crystal of salt is more beautiful than the crystal of bis¬
muth. (p. 99.)

Was ever syllogism so absurd! As well might he say that
because sparrows are more common than lories, humming-birds,
or birds of paradise, therefore they must be more beautiful!

APPENDIX.

309

illustration of it, ( Two Paths, p. 260,) does he place the words
classical architecture in capital letters at the top, and
describe it in the text as a “ farm-house arranged on classical
principles ” ? Why, if he wishes to attack modern imitations of
Greek sculpture, did he not, when he put a lion’s head in his
frontispiece, label it modern sculpture; why did he not, if he
really reveres Greek art, (!) contrast it, as we have done, with a
lion’s head of pure Greek art ? Must we not suppose that he
wishes us to identify his, or Millais’ lion’s head with Greek art ?
He goes on to say :—

It is “executed, I suppose, on some noble Greek type.” The School of
Design is “ a good example of the style,” and his remarks are “ rather a com¬
pliment to its architect than otherwise ; but it is not his fault that we force
him to build in the Greek manner.” {Lectures, pp. 80, 81.)

Notwithstanding then the specious covering with which our
author thinks to mask his designs, notwithstanding his sometimes
speaking of Phidias and the age of Pericles with admiration,
(and who would not ?) it is evident that he hates the Greeks.

-“Non possum ferre, Quirites,

Graecam urbem.”

But the real feeling of our author will best appear from the
following quotations:—

“ Let the whole system of the orders and their proportions be cast out and
trampled down as the most vain, barbarous, and paltry deception that was
ever stamped on human prejudice.” ( Stones , iii. 99.)

“ Let us cast out utterly whatever is connected with the Greek, Roman, or
Rennaissance architecture, in principle or in form. We have seen that the
whole mass of the architecture, founded on Greek and Roman models, which we
have been in the habit of building for the last three centuries, is utterly devoid
of all life, virtue, honourableness, or power of doing good. It is base, unna¬
tural, unfruitful, unenjoyable, and impious. Pagan in its origin, proud and
unholy in its revival, paralyzed in its old age, yet making prey in its dotage of
all the good and living things that were springing around it in their youth,
as the dying and desperate king, who had filled his failing veins with the blood
of children ; an architecture invented, as it seems, to make plagiarists of its
architects, slaves of its workmen, and Sybarites of its inhabitants; an archi¬
tecture in which intellect is idle, invention impossible, but in which all luxury
is gratified, and all insolence fortified ;—the first thing we have to do is to

XXII

PREFACE.

his time sculpture was, like the Egyptian figures,
fixed and motionless, whereas he, by varying the
attitude, and rectifying the oblique position of the
eye, at once gave life and motion to his works P
The sculpture of this early period is rude and
inelegant, and thus Hippias, in Plato, laughs at
it, but Pausanias, in acknowledging its rudeness,
confesses in it a divine influence, while Plato says
that the works of Daedalus were truly works of
great value. It was thus that his name became
celebrated in the highest degree in Greece, Crete,
Sicily, and Italy, while in Egypt he was wor¬
shipped as a god. Here he designed a temple
to Vulcan, which was esteemed so beautiful, that
they placed in it a wooden statue of Daedalus,
which the artist himself had executed ; and by
reason of his great skill and discoveries paid
to him divine honours. At Plataea also, a yearly
festival was held in his honour, for the like motive.
Nor was he great in sculpture only, but in Crete,
Agrigentum, Selinuntum, Capua, Cumae, Mount
Eryx, Sardinia, and Egypt, he left monuments

ciently strong and continuous movement to enable bim to ride on
it twenty-four miles on a level road !—Journal des Savants for
1677, 1680, and 1683.

INTRODUCTION.

art. Previous restorations of this temple exhibited
the interior as the taste or inclination of the archi¬
tect led him : but in 1846 Mr. Knowles discovered
that the pavement of the temple still exhibited
traces of the inner colonnades, marking not only the
number, but the character and sizes of them. The
columns were twenty-three in number, having the
odd column facing the entrance. The reason of
this arrangement, which was very general in ancient
temples, was that the lines of the statue might not
appear to be cut up by the perpendicular line of the
column, but having the column immediately behind
it, it might appear to stand in an intercolumniation
double the width of any of the others. In Wheler’s
time the upper-row of columns was also standing.
He writes,—“ On both sides, and towards the door,
(not the original door, which was at the other end,
but the door to the Greek church,) is a kind of
gallery, made with two ranks of pillars, twenty-two
below, and twenty-three above; the odd pillar is
over the arch of the entrance, which was left for the
passage.” From this unequal number of columns
in plan, Kinnard supposes that they formed no part
of the ancient temple, he not being aware of the
object of using an odd column. Their authenticity is
however fully vindicated by Knowles’ plan; the num¬
ber of columns given by him exactly agreeing with
the description by Wheler. Another circumstance
brought to light by the traces on the pavement,

INTE0DUCTI0N.

was that the columns were Doric. Thus we have
three temples, the cellse of which were built after
one uniform system, the temple of Neptune at
Pas stum, the temple of Jupiter at ^Egina, and the
Parthenon at Athens. In addition to these we have
an account by Pausanias of the temple of Jupiter
Olympius at Elis, clearly showing that this temple
also was so constructed. He says,—“ Within the
cella there are columns or porticos, supporting other
porticos.” 1 The temple of Minerva at Tegea was
also so built, the lower order being Doric, the upper
Corinthian. 3 In the temple of Ceres at Eleusis, we
are told that Coroelus erected the lower order of
columns, uniting them together with epistylia,
or architraves, 3 and Metagenes the upper. 4 The
temple of Hercules at Agrigentum had a double
order of columns, 5 as had also the temple of Castor
and Pollux at Agrigentum. 6 It is a remarkable
circumstance, and at first sight appearing very con¬
trary to our ideas of taste or proportion, that the
upper columns of these temples, so far as we can
judge by the remains of the two first mentioned,
instead of being of what we in the present day
consider to be of the most pleasing and regular pro-

1 Paus. y. 10. 2 lb. viii. 45.

3 It will be observed that architraves only are used, not enta¬

blatures ; precisely as we see practised in the temple at Psestum.

4 Plut. In Vita Periclis , § 13.

5 Journal des Savants, 1838, p. 263. 6 Id. 1847, p. 117.

ANCIENT ART.

that the poetic fire of the artists of antiquity was
fed from the verses of Homer, 1 —

Say why in Sculpture Greece has reign’d supreme ?

Nature with marble gave her rocks to teem;

And fostering Freedom bade her chisel trace
Unfettered forms of dignity and grace,—

Propitious both to Art: but higher still
Flows the bright fountain of her plastic skill.

Homer first vivified the public mind,

Arm’d it with strength, with elegance refined :

* * # * *

And Phidias rose, while Art and Nature smiled,

The mighty Poet’s intellectual child,

Whom Sculpture boasted in her proudest hour,

By Heaven invested with Homeric power.

Hayley.

We might ask, if this be so, why should not our
art rise to equal eminence by the study of Milton’s
poetry ? We fear then, however important may be
the influence of poetry, that other causes must be
wanting. 2 Even the celebrated maxim of Cicero’s,
“ Honos alit artes,” an opinion which is supported

1 “ Homere apprit les Grecs a exprimer la Beaute, dont il a tant
parle, dont partout il a fait l’eloge, et dont il donne quelquefois
les regies. La lecture de ses poemes enseigna dans la suite a
rechercher la Beaute ideale, qui seule etoit capable de representer
des figures divines.”—D’Hancarville, Recherches sur V Origine et
les Progres des Arts de la Grece , ii. 310.

2 It is important to bear in mind that Sculpture did not
borrow from Poetry, but was inspired by the same sentiments.
This is very clearly shown by Barry in his “ Lectures,” by
reference to the statues of Jupiter, the Apollo, the Laocoon, the

ANCIENT ART.

capricious individual, but the public taste. How
must the mind of the ancient sculptor have been
excited to the highest enthusiasm, when he learnt
that the citizens of Cnidus had refused to part
with their statue of Yenus by Praxiteles—a statue
esteemed so beautiful as to be displayed in an open
temple, that all the world might see it—though
tempted by the dazzling offer of Nicomedes of
Bithynia to release their city from its pressing
burden of debt; choosing rather to submit to any
hardship than to bear this loss ! How must he
have felt his spirit stirred within him, prompting
him to higher deeds, when he knew that a whole
city thought itself ennobled by possessing one of his
works ! Nor was this a solitary instance. Cicero,
in his oration against Yerres, the Sicilian praetor,
for his spoliation of that province, thus sums up his
declamation by enumerating several of the most
celebrated works of antiquity : — C£ What remu¬
neration, do you imagine, could compensate the
Bhegians, now Roman citizens, for the loss of
their marble Yenus P What the Tarentines, if they
were to lose their Europa on a Bull, their Satyr,
and other works deposited in their temple of Yesta ?
What the Thespians for their statue of Cupid, for
which alone strangers crowd to Thespiae ? What
the Cnidians for their marble Yenus ? What the
Coans for their image of that goddess ? What the
Ephesians for the loss of their Alexander ? What

THE IDEAL.

their pictures of the Plague, exhibiting the most
loathsome and revolting sights, forgetful that their
province was to raise compassion not disgust in the
mind of the spectator. In representing the infernal
regions, Polygnotus, although introducing eighty
figures in his composition, of those who were
condemned to various punishments, did not exhibit
one which excited any degree of horror in the
spectator. One of the most interesting monu¬
ments of antiquity, in this respect, is that of the
Dying Gladiator. No feeling of horror marks the
death of the poor combatant, but one of pity
comes over us as we behold how the poor stranger,
with no friend to care for him, sheds his last life-
drop in obedience to a cruel law, and though he
has nothing to fear or hope for, meets death with
a calm and tranquil brow and with no imprecation
on his lips :—

“ Calm in despair, in agony sedate,

His proud soul wrestles with o’ermastering fate.”

“ But his were deeds unchronicled ; his tomb
No patriot wreaths adorn ; to cheer his doom
No soothing thoughts arise of duties done,

Of trophied conquest for his country won;

And he, whose sculptured form gave deathless fame
To Ctesilas, dies here without a name !”

G. R Glnnnery.

Similar is the pity awakened in the breast on
beholding the tomb of a poor slave’s child, the

INDIVIDUALITY.

waving and undulating, and his look soft, pensive,
and almost voluptuous. A tender delight seems
to pervade his countenance, the characteristic ex¬
pression of which is gentleness, modesty, and
mildness. Both he and Apollo have long hair,
sometimes falling down in ringlets on the neck,
sometimes parted on the forehead, in exact imi¬
tation of the manner used by females. Bacchus’s
hair is occasionally dressed out with grapes and
vine leaves, imparting an equally feminine appear¬
ance. Indeed in both these divinities, but more
expressly in the former, the artists sought to repre¬
sent a commingling of the sexes. All the gods were
represented youthful, for they were believed to be
endued with perpetual youth, free from all the
accidents of mortality. Mars has no marked de¬
velopment of sinew, muscle, or even veins,—

“No struggling muscle glows,

Through heaving vein no mantling life-blood flows ;

But animate with deity alone,

In deathless glory lives the breathing stone.”

His attitude is that of godlike repose, and strength
is exhibited without the exertion of force.

Of the goddesses, we behold in Juno a lofty and
commanding aspect, a solemn majesty, a stately
gait. Her full and expansive forehead betokens
majesty, her large round eye inspires respect, her
imperious lip demands submission; but with all this

ANCIENT ART.

we perceive the traits of highest beauty. Minerva
does not appear with masculine activity, but,
as becomes wisdom, with downcast, meditating
eye. Her beauty seems to have nothing earthly
in it; it is spiritual, heavenly. Diana is no less
known by her distinctive arrangement of hair-knot,
than by her open joyous countenance; her beauty
is pure and simple; animation and courage light
up her face; characteristics which were said to be
especially shown in the statue of this goddess in
the temple built at Athens, by Themistocles. Yenus
comes before us, as already stated, not as the
goddess of wantonness, but as the goddess of
modesty : her eye denotes tenderness and affection ;
her slightly-opened lips gentleness and joy.

Thus we perceive that the sculptor ever sought
to represent the peculiar characteristics of the deity,
but in each instance they were made to unite with
spirituality and beauty. The object of art ever was
to lead the soul to virtue. 1

1 With all these distinguishing characteristics of ideal beauty,
why should not we establish a Christian standard of ideal
beauty ? If the pagan artist was enabled, by contemplation of
the divinity, to express in one image the perfection of majesty, in
another that of intellect, in another that of softness, what is to
hinder our artists from arriving at some ideal standard of the

perfection of the Christian attributes ?

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

119

Dionysius Halicarnassus and Themistius praise old
paintings as being correct in form and design, while
modern art is distinguished only by its mixture of
many colours. 1 2 JSTo one can read Lucian’s descrip¬
tion of the painting of Centaurs by Zeuxis, without
perceiving that he is speaking of a picture. Cor¬
rectness of drawing, colour, light and shade, and
general harmony, are all referred to. 3 Sir Joshua
Reynolds generously exclaimed that “ if the coloured
masterpieces of antiquity had descended to us in
tolerable preservation, we might expect to see works
(paintings) designed in the style of the Laocoon,
painted in that of Titian.” Richardson also deter¬
mines the question of the greater excellence in
ancient or modern painting in favour of the former f

1 “ Quanto colorum pulchritudine et varietate floridiora sunt
in picturis no vis pleraque quam in veteribus, quse tamen etiamsi
primo aspectu nos ceperunt diutius non delectant.” (Cic. De
Oratore , iii. 25.) See also Yitr. vii. 5.

2 Zeuxis, 5. M. de Montabert praises ancient painting in bis
chapters 42-45. He hopes that a painting by Protogenes or
Timanthes will one day be discovered, which shall be equal to the
works of Phidias.

3 Discourse on the Science of a Connoisseur , pp. 80-82.

Poussin is represented to have expressed himself in a somewhat

gross manner in comparing modern art with ancient. Raphael
Mengs, Webb, Watelet and Levesque, also declared themselves in
favour of ancient painting.

It is objected that the ancients could not have produced any
wonderful paintings, because they had so few colours, and yet we
find Quintilian stating that these ancient paintings, executed when
fewer colours were known, were more chaste and more beautiful

128

ANCIENT ART.

The reason why the ancients did not more evi¬
dently exhibit their anatomy, was because they
thought that any exaggeration of it would diminish
from the grandeur of the work. 1 But how
then is Prometheus represented in gems, as
modelling a skeleton P Gralen wrote a work on
anatomy, intended for the use of artists, as did
also Hierophylus and Eastratus of Alexandria ;
and Hippocrates expressly says that the writings
on anatomy by physicians and sophists are of
more service to art than to medicine. We are
told by Pliny that the kings of Egypt did not
think it beneath them to dissect animals. Hip¬
pocrates dissected apes, and he speaks of the
comparative size and weight of the corresponding
internal parts of a man and of a dog ; and a

uses of the muscles on, is all that the anatomical demonstrator
requires in treating the subject for artists. Among the Greeks,
in consequence of their customary athletic games, excellent models
must have been numerous and accessible; and to this faculty is
doubtless owing much of the excellence of Greek sculpture.”—
"Wornum, Lectures on Fainting , by Barry, &c.

1 That accurate observer, Testelin, writes:—“ De toutes ces
considerations on conclut qu’un Peintre doit eviter autant qu’il
seroit possible les contours petits et chetifs, a moins d’y etre
oblige par la necessity des sujets et la variete du contraste; que
l’ceconomie des contours doit servir a degager la taille et la pro¬
portion, qui devient comme accablee sous la confusion des muscles,
dont les petites parties doivent ceder aux plus grandes qui servent
aux mouvemens.” (Sentimens des plus Habiles Feintres sur la
Fratique de la Feinture et Sculpture , fol. Paris, 1696, p. 18.)

DI ANA AGRO TE RA— E ROR OPL OETE .

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

149

tliian, 1 and other marbles, 2 we have evidence of the
application of metal, of gilding, and of colour in
occasional parts. 3 If facts such as these are ignored,

sculpture from the Temeuos of Demeter at Cnidus, you will then
find red colour on the sole of the sandal of a foot. In short, there
is not the smallest doubt about the matter, though the fact was
disputed at a meeting of the Institute of British Architects, by
one of the members. (Vide Builder , Nov. 6, 1858.) Prof. West-
macott was present. There is a silly prejudice against colour in

England. It is time to do away with it.

“ Yours, &c.

“ C. T Newton.”

Since the receipt of this letter, Mr. Newton had the kindness
to point out to me several of the marbles, in which I perceived the
colour most distinctly , and advised its being preserved by a coating
of wax. One instance, as we were walking through the gallery,
caught my own eye.

1 In the Museum of Classical Antiquities is a drawing of the
coloured decoration of the lacunaria. These colours are now
nearly obliterated, never having been protected by wax.

2 The Phigalian marbles were doubtless coloured also, although
no record has been taken of the fact: for the temple was built by
the architect of the Parthenon. Dodwell writes,—“ The temples
of Jupiter Panhellenios in iEgina, and of Apollo Epikourios in
Arcadia, are enriched with a profusion of painted ornaments, which
time has not yet obliterated.” ( Travels , i. 342.) (See Baron
Stackelberg’s arguments in favour of colour, Apollo-Tempel zu
Bassee, 79-82.)

3 “ The glittering armour which was probably of gold or bronze,
with its numerous metallic appendages, fixed on the sculpture,
which there is reason to suppose was painted, together with the
dazzling whiteness of the columns, must have reflected a splen¬
dour, and exhibited a magnificence, beyond imagination. It is
difficult to reconcile to our minds, the idea of polychrome temples
and statues; but it is certain that the practice was familiar to the

ANCIENT AJRT.

164

VIII.

PEESPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

The Parthenon has been referred to as exhibit¬
ing the law of contrast; we will now refer to it as
evidencing another principle — the law of optical
illusion. The knowledge of perspective by the
ancients has been questioned by most writers. It
will be sufficient to refer in a note to several pas¬
sages clearly proving its practice, 1 and to confine
ourselves here to a branch of perspective — the
interesting subject of optical deception. In this

1 The following is the testimony of Vitruvius on this sub¬
ject :—“ Agatharcus was the first who painted a scene, and this
was at the time when iEschines was exhibiting his tragedies in
Athens: he has left us a Commentary on the subject. After
this Democritus and Anaxagoras wrote further on the science of
perspective, showing how we should, having fixed the point of
sight and the distance, in imitation of Nature, draw down all the
lines to a point fixed upon as the centre, and thus on a deceptive
canvas represent the appearance of real buildings, in such manner
that although painted on a flat surface, they shall appear, some to
recede, and others to advance towards one.”—Lib. vii. Prsef.
The fact is further conclusive from a passage in Philostratus :—
“ For having manned the walls with armed soldiers, the painter has
represented some as wholly visible, others as merely half-figures,

PERSPECTIVE, AND OPTICAL ILLUSION.

177

pagan to think that the being that was before him
was superhuman, was divine ; l and that even the gods
of Olympus rose up to meet him on his entrance.

“ Or view the lord of the unerring bow,

The god of life, and poesy and light,

The sun in human limbs array’d, and brow
All radiant from his triumph in the light.

The shaft hath just been shot—the arrow bright
With an immortal’s vengeance. 2 In his eye
And nostril beautiful disdain, and might
And majesty, flash their full lightnings by,

Developing in that one glance the Deity.

“ But in his delicate form—a dream of Love
Shaped by some solitary nymph, whose breast
Long’d for a deathless lover from above, 3
And madden’d in that vision—are express’d
All that ideal beauty ever bless’d
The mind with, in its most unearthly mood,

When each conception was a heavenly guest,

A ray of immortality,—and stood
Star-like around, until they gather’d to a God.

1 “ Humanam supra formam.”— Phcedrus, iv. 24.

2 “ Dn serpent, symbole de la medicine, de la sante, et de la vie,
s’entortille au tronc d’olivier qui sert de soutien a la figure. Cet
accessoire n’a point ete place ici sans intention : il faut en conclure
que le combat livre par Apollon doit offrir quelque analogie avec
l’embleme de la vie et de la sante; et il est naturel de penser que
l’objet de la colere d’un Dieu bienfaisant etoit le terrible Python
monstre que les eaux du deluge avoient fait sortir des champs
marecageux de la Phocide, reptile impur, symbole des exhalaisons
envenimees et pestilentielles.”—Visconti, Opere , tome i. 28.

3 In the Dean of St. Paul’s scarcely less beautiful lines on this

2 A

THE APOLLO BELVEDERE.

PhotogrouphedL from, a, Cast.

192

MODERN ART.

art is either forgotten or derided. 1 Yasari wittily
observes that “ Fame e sovente il prezzo d’un amor
di Fama But let not the artist be discouraged.
If he pursues art for its own sake, he will be
satisfied with the pleasure which it affords, and
though it be not lucrative, he will console himself
with the observation of Seneca,—

“ Semper honos, nomenque tuum, laudesque manebunt.”

At the same time it must be felt that it is the duty
of a country to cherish the arts, and afford ex¬
ercise for native genius. The artist must rely upon
himself; but art is dependent on encouragement
by the state. The artist must strive for glory;
but it is the duty of the state to see that that glory
be not an empty one.

“ Contentus fama jaceat Lucanus in hortis
Marmoreis: at Serrano, tennique Saleio,

Gloria quantalibet quid erit, si gloria tantum est ?”

Juv. Sat., vii. 79.

One way to do this would be by establishing a

1 Nothing can be more sad than to read the diary of that
unhappy man B. R. Haydon. With talents vastly overrated by
his own opinion, he yet possessed at least an ordinary talent as an
artist, united with great powers of imagination. The mind of such
a man would not allow him to engage in other than great works,
and his life exhibits one great chain of trials and disappointments,
caused by the vain attempt to establish the claims and privileges
of “high art”—a life, as we know, ending in misery, wretched¬
ness, and despair.

234

MODERN ART.

that “ statues should be a remembrance of our
virtues rather than of our persons.” A colossal
statue is frequently felt to be less an honour than a
pretension, a pretension not so much of the public
as of the artist. In point of art the statue would
in most cases be better, had it been confined to
the life size, instead of being larger; but even in
those cases where a larger size might be per¬
mitted, the artist appears to have forgotten that
as the size is increased the design requires to be
more studied and elaborated. It is to be feared
that the sculptor too often studies his model from
the life, and when perfected and approved of, pre¬
pares the enlarged model by the rules of art, and
examination of casts of ancient sculpture; and the
finished work in stone or marble is merely copied
from the model, thus losing accuracy and vigour by
a twofold copying, instead of finishing the work itself,
as the Greek artists did, from nature. Models appear
to have been originally used merely in designing;
it was not till Alexander’s time that sculptors got
into the habit of employing full-sized models:
Lysistratus of Sicyon, the brother of Lysippus, was
the first to do so. 1 In Pliny’s time, when art
became degenerated, the model was executed of the
full size by one artist, and the casting and finishing

1 Pliny declares Rhoecus to have been the inventor of model¬
ling, and that Arcesilaus never executed a statue without first
forming a model in wax.

244

MODERN ART.

not paint them all alike, as they really are, but he
would paint them in complementary tints to the
colours of the surrounding objects, as they appear
to be. It must be remembered that this diminution
of projection is only necessary when the limbs are
horizontal. In the Minerva at the eastern extremity
of the National Gallery the thighs are considerably
depressed, so as to be nearly in the line of vision.
This occasions a natural foreshortening of those
limbs, and causes the trunk to assume its proper
elevation.

We must take heed in establishing a principle
that we do not trammel art. Art is independent
of rules, or rather the rules of art are subject to
constant modification. In the eastern pediment
of the Parthenon, the two figures next to the
Theseus, and, at the opposite extremity, the eldest
of the Fates, have bodies, the trunks of which
are less than those in nature, instead of exceeding
those proportions: but this peculiarity is owing to
other causes. On examining and considering these
statues, it will be perceived that the great difficulty
of the sculptor lay in managing the intervening
statues between the upright and the reclining.
Had the statues in question been of true proportion,
their size would have been so much diminished,
that they would have appeared out of scale to the
adjoining figures. For, like a note of music, the
scale of each figure in a pediment does not depend

CONCLUSION.

273

that “ it is impolitic to confine them, by discourage¬
ment, to the lower classes. He would wish to see
the Arts restored to those honours which they have
enjoyed in every other cultivated nation: he would
claim for them that rank to which they are entitled
by the common law of civilized man; by their office,
their utility, and their ancient fame: that rank
which excites to glory, without inspiring pride,
and in which genius, while it is distinction to the
humblest, is not degradation to the most exalted
character.” 1 2

As evidences of modern art, no one can be
insensible to the beauty of many of our national
monuments which decorate St. Paul’s Cathedral
as a building, and which encumber Westminster
Abbey. Allusion has been made to the figure of
Nelson. In the statue by Flaxman in St. Paul’s
Cathedral, as in the famous statue of St. Cecilia
Decollata at Rome, we admire the skill with which
the artist at once conceals and expresses that which
art forbids him to expose. The hero has a cloak 3
thrown over the right shoulder, the sleeve of which
hangs down; but on regarding it for a moment you
become conscious of the motive, and the attempted
concealment only the more excites your admiration
of the hero, and your sympathy with the man. In

1 Sir Martin Archer Shee, Elements of Art, p. 398.

2 The pelisse of honour, given by the Sultan after the battle of
Aboukir.

2 N

274

MODERN ART.

the St. Cecilia, had the head been severed, we
should be shocked at the frightful spectacle, and
turn away with disgust; had it been attached and
full of life, we should treat the legend with con¬
tempt ; but shrouded as it is in linen, and slightly
turned downwards, we become conscious of the
tragic story, and though we know it to be a legend,
the eye wandqrs over the beauteous form only the
more to lament her touching fate.

Many of the sculptures of St. Paul’s Cathedral are
composed with great originality, and are highly orna¬
mental to the building; and even in Westminster
Abbey monuments of great beauty may be found,
though they are injured by the crowd of indifferent
performances around them, many of which would
form appropriate decorations to a Tower of Babel.
It would be invidious to particularize. But with
this acknowledgment of modern skill, we must still
remember that all which is excellent is to be
obtained by a careful study of Greek art. 1 The
artist must not be content with copying what he
admires, he must set himself to discover the causes
of such admiration. This is no easy matter. The

1 “ No sooner had Kaffaelle seen the monuments of ancient
art at Rome, than the soundness of his understanding and the
maturity of his genius grasped them all; leaving to all that came
after him this important lesson from his example:—that the study
of nature and of the human mind in all its higher feelings is the
consummation of art; that the works of those ancients who uni-

BY THE SAME AUTHOR,

(Price 5s.)

A DESCRIPTION

OP SOME IMPORTANT

THEATRES & OTHER REMAINS

CRETE,

PROM A

MS. HISTORY OF CANHIA, BY ONORIO BELLI, IN 1586,

BEING

A SUPPLEMENT

TO THE

MUSEUM OF CLASSICAL ANTIQUITIES,

EDWARD FALKENER.

TRUBNER & CO., 12, PATERNOSTER ROW.

1854.

Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2018 with funding from
Getty Research Institute

https://archive.org/details/daedalusorcausesOOfalk

TO THE

PRUSSIAN AND BAVARIAN

PEOPLE,

WHO HAVE DONE SO MUCH TO PROMOTE THE STUDY,

TO FURTHER THE APPRECIATION,

AND RESTORE THE CHARACTER,

ANCIENT ART,

THIS ESSAY IS INSCRIBED

WITH SENTIMENTS OF ADMIRATION AND RESPECT,

BY THE AUTHOR

PllEF ACE.

The following Essay grew out of a request from
a foreign publisher to write an Introduction to
a proposed English translation of the cc Kunst-
Mythologie” of Dr. Emil Braun, the late distin¬
guished Secretary of the Archaeological Institute
of Rome. The remarks then written are chiefly
confined to the fifth section. The project of
translation being given up at the death of the
publisher, the Essay has outgrown its original
limits, and is presented to the public in its
present form.

In apologizing for the great number of quotations,
the author desires it to be remembered that the
only way in which he could exhibit the genius of
ancient art, was by giving the opinions of the

PREFACE.

XIX

perienced, flew low, neither exposing himself to the
sun’s rays, nor allowing his wings to dip in the
briny waves, and at length reached Sicily in safety.
The fable was understood by most of the ancients
to mean that Daedalus had escaped by means of
sails, of which he was the supposed inventor;
Lucian, perhaps in sport, explains it by reference
to astronomy; but it is probable that this portion
also of the fable has reference to his art. The
winged flight of Daedalus may have been invented
to denote the soaring nature of genius, the
superiority of intellect over mere physical force.
Daedalus’s genius was controlled by sound judg¬
ment, and though he departed boldly from the
trammels of hieratic prescription, he gave not free
license to his fancy, but subjected his imagination
to the rules of art. Icarus, on the other hand,
with the rashness and ignorance of youth, thought
he would go beyond his father, and establishing
himself at the island which bore his name, fell into
extravagance of style, and most miserably failed.
Under the figure, therefore, of Icarus, who is made
to represent the student in art, the ancients wished
to inculcate those important lessons which are
necessary to be borne in mind for the attainment

INTRODUCTION.

tiquity of the arch; and the general impression is,
that it was not invented, or at least not commonly
made nse of, when these temples were erected.
M. Dutens, on the other hand, insists on the remote
antiquity of its invention, and M. Quatremere de
Quincy believed in its employment by the Greeks at
the highest period of their history. The last-named
writer based his opinion on the description of the
temple of Jupiter Olympins at Elis, where it is said,
C£ The statue of Jupiter was of so great magnitude,
that though he was represented sitting, his head
seemed to touch the summit of the roof; and if he
arose and stood upright, he would have broken
through the covering of his temple.” M. Quatre¬
mere suggests from the words ry xopu$y rr t g opo<£%,
the summit of the ceiling, that the central part of
the temple had a circular ceiling of wood ; observing
that it is but a circular ceiling which can have a
summit . 1 This opinion Kinnard strongly opposes,
without offering any other interpretation, perhaps
without having any. He contents himself with
saying, “ So gross an anachronism as the introduc¬
tion of the representation of a type or principle
then unknown, can scarcely be contemplated with
gravity .” 2 M. Quatremere supports his theory by

1 Q. de Quincy, Memoires de VInstitut — Hist, et Lit. Anc.
tome iii. p. 242; Le Jupiter Olympien , Part TV. parag. sii.
p. 267.

2 Kinnard, Stuart's Athens , ii. 34.

ANCIENT ART.

beneath him to contend for a prize, and died of
joy in having gained it ! What ought to have been
the merit of other performances, when out of
seventy-five tragedies written by Euripides, and
one hundred and five comedies by Menander, five
only of each received a crown ! Philip of Macedon,
when one of his chariots had won a prize, was
as rejoiced as if he had won a province or begot
a son, and signalized the event by stamping it on
his coins . 1

1 Let it not be thought that this was a mere trial between
jockeys and prize-fighters. The object the state had in view was
to perfect the symmetry of the body, to increase its agility and
power, and render every man fit to serve his country at the hour
of need. Euripides, however, scoffs at the idea of the athlete
being better suited to serve his country, while Hippocrates and
Galen inveigh, in somewhat too fanciful a manner, against the evils
induced upon the system by the gymnastic process. (Galenus,
Suasoria ad Artes Oratio .) But it must not be supposed that
nothing else was aimed at. Conjointly with gymnastics for the
body, music for the mind, with all those accomplishments which
came under that head, was considered as the essential element of
education. (Plato, Re Rep. ii.—The first thing Plutarch men¬
tions in the life of Pericles, is the name of him who instructed
him in music.) The man who could not sing was looked upon as
rude ; even Themistocles, if he could not play upon the lyre, was
regarded as uneducated. Plutarch, in his treatise on music, says,
that the ancient Greeks thought it not undesirable to teach their
children music, believing that it helped to form and regulate their
minds to what was good and comely, and to incite them to every
noble action : and he affirms that if any one of a liberal disposi¬
tion applies himself to the study of music, he will come to admire
and embrace whatever is noble and just, and to hate and condemn
whatever is the contrary : such a man, he says, will be free from

ANCIENT ART.

in Epirus, when taken by the Romans, was found
filled with the rarest works of bronze and marble,
together with the choicest paintings. Aspendus in
Pamphylia, is described by Cicero as haying pos¬
sessed a vast treasure of most excellent works of art;
the medals of Panticapseum in the Tanric Chersonese
exhibit “ a grandeur of style, and truth of execution,
unmatched by the productions of any other age ; ” 1
while those of Syracuse and the other Sicilian towns
are the gems of modern collections.

The instances above quoted may give some idea
of the cultivation of art by the ancient Greeks. It
must not be attributed to luxury or ostentation, but
it must be connected with the social and religions
feelings of the people. Either the statue was an
offering of piety to the gods, or it was an act of
justice to distinguished individuals. No man was
allowed a statue, unless he had deserved it, but the
ways to distinction were open to every citizen.
Hence it was esteemed the highest honour to be
entitled to a statue. Quintilian speaks of it as a
divine honour which ought to be accorded but
rarely. John Damascenus regarded it as the
triumph of virtue, and Chrysostom as its true
reward : — “ JEneum stare magnum esse videtur
generosis viris, et digna virtutis merces.” —
(Orat. 31.) Nothing is so useful, says Livy, as to

1 Dil. Soc. Specs, of And. Sculpt. ]. xliv.

THE IDEAL.

the public eye, 1 so the Greek sculptor rejected
everything which impaired beauty ; he considered
how little was absolutely necessary to the repre¬
sentation of character ; he preferred to deviate from
truth rather than from beauty. In representing,
as he often did, the incidents mentioned by the
poets, he never forgot that the amount of force
and colouring proper to description, because tem¬
porary, is inapplicable to the permanent nature of
sculpture. In the Medea of Timomachus, instead
of placing before us the fearful deed, the sculptor
represented her as regarding her children with
looks of mingled love and pity, preparatory to
striking the deadly blow. With the same delicacy
of sentiment, the murder of Learchus by Athamas,
was indicated by the traits of sad remorse evident
in the father’s countenance after the commission of
the fatal crime. Ajax could not be represented by
Timomachus, under the influence of fury, without
shedding a tear of anguish at the thought of leaving
his aged father to deplore his loss. Philo stratus
gives us several examples of this high heroic feeling,

1 11 Non tamen intus

Digna geri promes in scenam: multaque tolles
Ex oculis, quae mox narret facundia prsesens.

Nec pueros coram populo Medea trucidet:

Aut Humana palam coquat exta nefarius Atreus :

Aut in avem Progne vertatur, Cadmus in anguem.
Quodcumque ostendis mihi sic, incredulus odi.”

Hor. De Arte Poet. 182.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

105

despatched two vessels laden with statues of gold
and ivory as offerings to Delphi and Olympia. At
the Hergeum, or temple of Juno, in this latter city,
were twenty-five chryselephantine statues, in addi¬
tion to many of other materials. In consequence
of the demand for such works, elephants’ tusks
were considered of great value, and frequently borne
in triumph. Six hundred were borne in procession
in the festival of Ptolemy Philadelphus, eight hun¬
dred in that of Antiochus Epiphanes, and twelve
hundred in that of Scipio Asiaticus. But the value
set upon such statues did not arise so much from
the price of the material, or the difficulty of the
workmanship, as from the exquisite effect produced.
The grand idea impressed upon the mind of the
artist was that flesh and drapery should be indicated
by different colours, and that these colours, while
not appearing to affect Nature, should suggest
reality. It required but little exertion in the mind
of the worshipper, bent in deep devotion before the
idol, thinking only of the greatness of the deity,
and his attention wrought to the highest fervour,
on opening his eyes, for him to be deceived by
the sudden contrast of material, and believe in
the actual presence of the god. 1 It seems probable

1 It is curious tliat Llaxman who is an opponent of iconic-
polychromy, should accurately enough express this feeling. He
says:—“ Let not this application of colour, however, in the
instances of the Jupiter and Minerva, he considered as a mere

114

ANCIENT AET.

which gives probability to this is that Nicon, who
is described by Pausanias as painting some works
for this temple, was a statuary as well as a painter;
and we know that on another occasion Parrhasins
painted the battle of the Lapithse and Centaurs on
the shield of the Minerva Promachos, for Mys to
sculpture. 1 Phidias was a painter in his younger
days. Why may not he then have sketched out his
bas-reliefs in colour previously to executing them ? 2
Mr. Dodwell, in speaking of the Theseum, says

have done, ‘ pictures ’ or ‘ painted representations.’ The very
subjects of these representations correspond with the remaining
sculptures upon the metopes and frieze.”— Clarice's Travels ,
iii. 537. See also Dodwell’s Travels , i. 364.

The same interpretation of the word is given by Walpole, who
says,—“ There is reason to believe that the word ypatyio was
applied by the Greeks to express a combination of sculpture
and painting.”— Memoirs relating to Turkey , p. 386. And his
Reviewer admits that—“Since it was customary to paint sculp¬
ture, the word ypatyetv may have been used of a rilievo , taking the
previous carving for granted.”— Quart. Dev. April 1818, p. 240.
H. von. Klenze discovered that the metopes of the Propylsea at
Athens were alternately filled in with coloured sculpture, and
painted on a flat surface in imitation of sculpture ; thus serving
as another instance in confirmation of their theory.— Journal des
Savants , 1834, p. 751, 2.

1 Paus. i. 28.

2 In an inscription in Reinesius w 7 e learn that the statuary
sometimes painted his own work. Speaking of Aphrodisius, a
sculptor, it is said —* AyaXyaroTroioQ eyKavarpQ .— Walpole’s Turkey ,
p. 384. Raoul-Rochette brings forward an instance in the temple
of Ceres at Rome, where two artists, Damophilus and G-orgasus,
who were employed in its decoration, were sculptors as well as
painters,—“ Plastse laudatissimi fuere Damophilus et Gorgasus,

120

ANCIENT ART.

while Hayden in his chapters on Composition and
Colour, proves that they practised processes in art,
believed to be the peculiarities of modern times.
We have only to read of the great value set upon
paintings by the ancients to be persuaded of the
high state of art which they had reached. Many
examples might be quoted in proof of this, but it
will be sufficient here to refer to the instance of
the Rhodians, who esteemed their paintings of
lalysus and the Satyr as of greater value than all
their one hundred colossal statues, and other
masterpieces which they possessed, 1 among which
we know to have been included the Colossus, the
Laocoon, and the Dirce, (Toro Farnese,) besides
three thousand other statues. Indeed, Rhodes
was so celebrated for its paintings, that Anacreon
addresses a painter as

“ Sovereign of the art which they practise at Rhodes.”

Even in the infancy of art, so early as the time of
Candaules, king of Lydia, 725 B.C., a picture
representing the battle of the Magnesians in de¬
fence of Ionia and Lydia, was bought by that
monarch at its weight in gold. But in the

than those in his time. Levesque observes to those who deny the
merit of ancient painting, “We might as well say that Homer
could not compose an epic poem, and that neither Sophocles,
Euripides, nor yet iEschylus, could write tragedies.”

1 See page 62, note 2.

CHRYSELEPHANTINE SCULPTURE, ETC.

121

flourishing times of art we are told by Pliny that
a single work of Apelles, or of other great artists
whom he enumerates, was worth the entire trea¬
sure of a city. Polybius tells us of the enormous
sum offered for the painting of Bacchus by Aristides,
and Pliny records the sum paid for the painting of
the Argonauts by Cydias.

We are told by Pliny that the best paintings
were on wood. Unhappily not one painting of this
description has come down to us. These paintings
were very common in Pompeii, one or two of them
being generally found in the best houses. Sinkings
similar to those for the reception of paintings
on wood were also made for the reception of
fresco paintings. A man on changing his house
might wish to remove with him some of his best
fresco paintings. These he cut out, and then placed
them in their new position. Many examples are
observable of this practice. But the sinkings which
contained wooden paintings can always be distin¬
guished from these, by their having at the time of
excavation charcoal in the lower part, which has
been compressed by the weight of ashes. In the
house which I excavated in 1847, 1 I found the sink¬
ings or chases of two large paintings on wood, so
large that each panel was strengthened by a couple
of clamps, the impressions of which were left in the

1 See Mus. of Class. Antiq.

144

ANCIENT ART.

The strap supporting the quiver is red studded
with silver rivets. The sandals of the feet are also
red. The height of the statue is four palms two
inches. 1 2

So also at Herculaneum : not only was colour
found on the marble statues, but many beautiful
specimens of empestic and toreutic bronze sculp¬
ture from this place, fortunately preserved by the
lava, have enriched the collection of the Museo
Borbonico at Naples. As a specimen of the marble
sculpture, I have selected the beautiful statue of
Pallas found here in one of the earliest exca¬
vations. It is of the finest Greek marble and of
the size of life, and is fortunately in the most
perfect state of preservation; the spear only
being wanting. The goddess is engaged in active
warfare. She brandishes her formidable lance,
with which she overthrows whole ranks of foes who
have dared to excite her anger. On her left arm
she holds her ample Eegis as a buckler, 3 through
which one sees the form of the hand, and the

1 Museo Borbonico , vol. ii. tav. 8; D’Hancarville, Antiquites du
Cabinet de M. Hamilton , vol. iv. p. 161; Winckelmann, Hist, de
VArt , i. 2, § 15 ; iii. 2, § 12; Baoul-Bochette, Peintures Ant.
Inedites , p. 412—415.

2 The aegis is suspended by a leathern strap round the neck,

which is the way the shield was carried at the time of the Trojan
war, when not wanted, but w-hen required for use it was worn in
the usual manner.

170

ANCIENT ART.

angles, and then two figures parallel to the further
side of this inverted triangle ; so that a second
group is now formed, consisting either of the simple
triangle, or with its additions forming a truncated
cone. The consequence of this is that the same
figures form portions of two different groups, those
of the upright triangle and the inverted triangle.
The motive of this arrangement, in these Halicar-
nassian marbles, was, that notwithstanding the
great increase of height, the eye might yet be
enabled to make out the groups.

The last instance in these marbles which I have
to point out is the attenuated proportions of the
figures in the upper frieze. Owing to the height of
this frieze, as already described, the perpendicular
lines would naturally appear very foreshortened as
viewed from below. To remedy this the figures
are made more delicate in proportion, to give them
more apparent height. We find this only in the
upper frieze, a circumstance which proves most
clearly the reason of the peculiarity. From all
this it appears that whereas the modern artist
considers his work as a mere architectonic frieze,
the ancient sculptor regarded it ever in the first
place as a work of sculpture.

Exactly similar in principle are the sculptured
metopes of the Parthenon. When first exhibited
in this country, their dry hard style, their hasty
execution, led critics to pronounce that they must

INDIVIDUALITY.

193

national gallery to be devoted exclusively to British
art, and to be supported by an annual grant for
the purchase of pictures and works of sculpture.
If only one work in each sister art were so chosen,
it would be an honour which all artists would
look up to; and painters and sculptors would
then no longer feel that in producing a great
work they had done so for their own studios or
cellars.

Another means of employment open to the
sculptor is in our public monuments. These he
regards as the chief opportunity of exhibiting his
art. But how unsatisfactory the result. The ancient
artist, in his large groups, composed them with the
greatest variety of effect. All was life and motion,
while all appeared simplicity and grandeur. But
modern monumental sculpture seems to be all cast
in one mould, and that taken from the middle ages.
The form is to be pyramidal, the hero at the top,
under him Justice and Mercy if a judge, Mercy
and Charity if a philanthropist, Religion and Truth
if a bishop, Minerva and Victory if a warrior, or
Trade and Commerce if a citizen; and at the
bottom sea or river gods to denote the country,
with occasionally a Britannia, an Asiatic, a negro
or a Chinese, introduced for the same purpose;
with maces, rudders, cornucopias, Lord Mayor’s
swords and other emblems to fill up the gaps.
Moulded according to this recipe, the artist is

2 c

242

MODERN ART.

summit of the choragic monument of Thrasyllus
at Athens, he would see that the Greek sculptor, to
avoid this appearance of defect, has in that figure
diminished the length of thigh. 1 It may be said,—-
What! do you approve of altering the proportions
of the human figure, of representing them as what
you acknowledge to be wrong ? Must they not,
if so represented, appear distorted ? As well might
the unreasonable objector complain of the scenes
of theatres being painted in false projection,
because intended to appear true only from a
distance. Not content with their appearing true
from the seats of the spectators, he might insist
that they should appear true also from every other

1 The following curious confirmation of this principle of per¬
spective, is taken from the printed papers of the Boyal Institute
of British Architects, at a meeting of which society, on Nov. 29,
1858, Mr. Digby Wyatt observes One point which was most
interesting to them as architects, was to observe the different
effect of figures at different heights and distances from the eye,
and to take care that sculpture, as an accessory to architecture,
should be treated and modified according to its position. As a
case in point he would refer to the casts of the figures from the
west front of Wells Cathedral, which had been taken under his
directions for the Crystal Palace Company. Although slightly
elongated, the originals looked well in their places, but he found
that the casts could not be put up in the Mediaeval Court at the
Crystal Palace without considerable modification. Two or three
of them, in fact, were several heads too high, and the sitting
figures were so proportioned that they appeared to have scarcely
any thighs at all. The architect and the sculptor had, however,
worked so well in combination, that these defects, obvious enough

CONCLUSION.

But let not modern art be disregarded while we
give utterance to our admiration of the works of
the Greek chisel. We may, like the Rhodian
ambassadors before the Roman senate on the
occasion of the defeat of Antiochus, declare, that
we make bold to contend with the ancients in
pious strife after every good art and virtue. If
Polygnotus painted gratuitously the Poikile at
Athens and the Lesche at Delphi,—Reynolds and
West offered to adorn St. Paul’s, while Hogarth
painted the Foundling, and Barry the Adelphi.
In the preceding remarks it has been the object
not so much to point out some of those particulars
in which modern art is inferior to ancient, as to do
justice to the excellences of ancient art, “Ingeni-
orum monumenta quge seculis probantur,”— [Quint.
iii. 9,) and explain as far as possible the causes which
led to that success. Far be it to attempt to attach
that measure of inferiority which may be found on
comparison, to our own country, and to our own

CONCLUSION.

271

reason only will suffice to show this, though many
others might be adduced,—the injustice which is
done to the modern artist. The ignorant critic
may praise the antique, because he knows it to
be safe, but let him pause before he proceeds to
condemn a work which has entailed labour, think¬
ing, and expense, united with a long study of the
antique, and a constant analysis of modern wants.
Let him reflect that he is seeking to gain a transient
reputation for his pen, at the permanent loss of
reputation to the artist; that possibly his criticism
may be false, and therefore, as the artist has no
opportunity of being heard in defence, he is taking
upon himself the part of a calumniator rather than
that of a critic. Let him consider that he will
more surely found a reputation, and gain respect,
by making himself sufficiently acquainted with
the art to be able to appreciate excellences ; 1 and

1 “ A true connoisseur who sees tlie work of a great master,
seizes at the first glance its merits and its beauties. He may
afterwards discover defects; but he always returns to that which
pleased him, and would rather admire than find fault. To begin
with finding fault where there are beauties to admire, is a sure
proof of want of taste. This remark is the result of several years
of my observation in Italy. All bhe young men looked for defects
in the finest works of Correggio, Gruido, and Baffaelle, in the Yenus
de’ Medici, in the Apollo Belvedere, and the church of St. Peter :
whereas those who profited by the lessons which were given them,
saw only beauties.” (. Dutensiana , p. 110.) “ True taste,” says

this writer, “ is characterized by the discernment of the beautiful;
vulgar taste by the discernment of blemishes.”

ANTIQUITY OF THE ARCH IN EGYPT.

M EM N 0 N I U M AT THEBES_ RAMESES II

PROPYLON AT G0URN0U , THEBES

temp. J^sammetuJiyV.

(Zepsius, Denkmale^J

Day8c Seen., Litlf 5 lo the Queen.

292

APPENDIX.

ANTIQUITY OF THE ARCH IN ASSYRIA.

In the following letter, favoured me by Mr. Layard, it will be
seen that a like antiquity can be claimed for the invention of the
arch in Assyria: but it is remarkable that whereas in Egypt the
arches, with the single exception already mentioned, are invariably
formed of stretchers , or bricks placed lengthways, the Assyrian
arch appears to be always constructed with headers , or bricks
placed transversely. (See woodcuts, pages 162, 164, and 165, of
Layard’s “ Discourses in the Hums of Nineveh and Babylon,”
8vo. Lond. 1853.) In his description of the Mound at Nimroud,
Mr. Layard says, “ In the centre of the wall, about fifteen feet
below the surface of the platform, the workmen came upon a
small vaulted chamber, built of baked bricks. If was of about
ten feet high, and the same in width. The arch was constructed
upon the well-known [modern] principle of vaulted roofs—the
bricks being placed sideways, one against the other, and having
been probably sustained by a framework, until the vault was
completed .”—Nineveh and its 'Remains , ii. 41, sixth edit.

“ April 11, 1860.

“ My dear Sir,

“ There can be no doubt as to the knowledge and employ¬
ment of the arch by the Assyrians. In my accounts of the
discoveries in the ruins of Nineveh I have described the remains
of arched and vaulted masonry found during the excavations
carried on under my superintendence in Assyria. I need only
refer you to them. But the most important discovery con¬
nected with the subject, and the one most likely to interest
you with reference to your investigations as to the knowledge
of the arch by the Greeks, was that made by M. Place amongst
the Assyrian ruins of Khorsabad. He found a complete
vaulted entrance of considerable size, constructed entirely, I
believe, of kiln-burnt bricks, and in so good a state of pre¬
servation, that he was able to move and pack the whole structure,

APPENDIX.

311

with admiration how his magic pencil converts the thistle and
the grass of the field into exquisite ornament; and would only
regret that one who can think so deeply, and speak so eloquently,
and draw so exquisitely, should so easily go astray into deceitful
turnings.

Such, then, is the form of argument pursued by the great
art-teacher of the age, a writer who, notwithstanding all his
merit, has done more to debase the sister-art of painting
than any man living. The contest, be it remembered, is not
between such a man and his contemporaries, who may be vastly
inferior to him in power and ability, but between him and the
ancients, whose monument of adamantine rock will stand the
rudest shock of the unbridled horse : and let him remember also
that the contest will be judged of by 'posterity ! A teacher of others
should always remember that he himself is a student; and should
always be prepared the more to doubt his own judgment, the
more he finds it opposed to the judgment of others. The more
ardently he enforces that which he believes to be the truth, the
more ready should he be to admit truth in others, though opposed
to him. He who does not admire an old Gothic edifice, has no
eye for grace, no feeling for beauty, no love for the picturesque :
he who reviles Greek art has no refinement of feeling, no soul or
sentiment, no capacity for the sublime.

320

APPENDIX.

Pisani (Pietro).—Memorie sulle Opere di Scultura in Selinunte ultirnamente

scoperte. 8vo. Pal. 1823

Pope (Alexander).—Essay on Criticism.

Pritanio (Lamindo).—Delle Riflessioni sopra il Buon Gusto nelle Scienze e nell’

Arti .2 vols. 8vo. Venez. 1742

Puy (Bernard Du).—Traitd sur la Peinture, &c.4to. Paris, 1700

Pye (John).—Patronage of British Art: an Historical Sketch.

8vo. Lond. 1J345

Quatremdre (De Quincy).—Le Jupiter Olympien.Fol. Paris, 1815

-Considerations Morales sur la Destination des Ouvrages de l’Art,

ou de l’lnfluence de leur Emploi sur le Genie et le Gofit.

8vo. Paris, 1815

-Lettres a Canova ....8vo. Rome, 1818

-Destination of Works of Art.12mo. Lond. 1821

-Venus de Milo...Eol. Paris, 1821

--Monumens et Ouvrages d’Art Antique restitues.. 4to. Paris, 1829

-Essai sur l’ldeal dans ses Applications Pratiques aUx CEuvres de

Plmitation propres des Arts du Dessin .8vo. Paris, 1837

-Essai sur limitation dans les Beaux Arts. Translated by Kent.

8vo. Lond. 1837

-Essai sur la Nature, le But, et les Moyens de limitation dans les

Beaux Arts. Translated by J. C. Kent.8vo. Lond. 1837

Raccolta Artistica.12mo. Fir. 1846—

Raoul-Rochette.-—Peintures Antiques Xnedites .4to. Paris, 1836

-—-— Lettres Archdologiques sur la Peinture des Grecs—Ouvrage destind

k servir de Supplement aux ....8vo. Paris, 1840

-Mdmoires d’Archdologie.4to. Paris, 1848

-Lectures on Ancient Art.8vo. Lond. 1854

Rauch (C.)—Engravings of Sculpture of.Fol. Berlin.

Raymond (Geo. Marie).—De la Peinture considdree dans ses Effets sur les
Hommes, et de son Influence sur les Mceurs et le Gouvernement

des Peuples.8vo. Paris, 1804

Recueil de Fragmens de Sculpture Antique.. 4to. Paris, 1814

-quelques Pidces concernantes les Arts, extraites des plusieurs

Mercures de France. 12mo. Paris, 1757

Requeno (V.)—Saggi sul Ristabilmento dell’ Antica Arte de’ Gr. e Rom.

Pittori.8vo. Parma, 1787

Reynolds (Sir J.)—Discourses.4to. Lond. 1842

Rica.—Traitd de la Plastique ; ou, quelques Observations sur la Forme et la
Figure.

Richardson (Jonathan).—Essay on the Theory of Painting .. 8vo. Lond. 1715

-*— Traitd de la Peinture et de la Sculpture.8vo. Amst. 1728

-Two Discourses on the Art of Criticism.8vo. Lond. 1719

Riem (Andreas).—Uber die Malerei der Alien ... „.4to. Berlin, 1787

Rollin (Charles).—History of the Arts and Sciences of the Ancients.

8vo. Lond. 1846

Roquet (M.)—L’Etat des Arts en Angleterre .12mo. Paris, 1755

Rousseau (J. J.)—A Discourse, &c. whether the re-establishment of Arts and
Sciences has contributed to purify our morals. Translated by

R. Wynne .. 8vo. Lond. 1752

Rumohr (Carl Fr. von). — Erlauterung der artistischen Bemerkungen des
Herrn Jacob ueber den Reichthum der Griechen an plastischen

Kunstwerken...4to. Mtinchen, 1810

Von-Rumohr (Baron).—Dissertation sur le Groupe de Castor et Pollux ; ou.
Notions sur le Beau Iddal dans les Ouvrages de l’Art.

4to. Lubeck, 1812

INTRODUCTION.

the second reached the ceiling. Some have sup¬
posed that there was indeed an upper gallery, but
that this gallery was void and unadorned, a recep¬
tacle for dust and cobwebs ; others that there was
not even a gallery, but that the two orders of
columns went round the cella like a screen or
scaffolding. With this ignorance as to the internal
plan, can it be wondered at that we were unable
to discover the nature of the ceiling ? It has been
asked, How is it, if such vaults existed, that no
mention of them has been made by ancient writers ?
With the like reason we might ask, How is it, if
such galleries existed, that they are not described ?
We have assumed the fact without attending to the
contrary. But of this anon : we pass on to the
second point.

Perhaps there is no temple, with the exception of
the temple of Jupiter Olympius, at Agrigentum, of
which so many attempts have been made to restore
the interior, as the temple of Minerva, at Athens.
Of these projects two deserve attention. The one,
entitled to consideration from the celebrity of its
author, carries up the columns to the line of rafters,
and makes the line of ceiling to correspond with
that of the line of roof; the other gives a less alti¬
tude to the columns, but covers the cella with a
horizontal ceiling. In the former case the architect
could only succeed in his object of reaching the
line of rafters by employing imaginary Corinthian

'"v ; i

COLOSSAL SCULPTURE.

103

of the god, which glittered with precious stones
and colours . 1

All this is evidence of study : the placing the
colossus as it were alone, and in a small temple, the
contrast of the smallness of the figures in the bas-
reliefs which ornamented the throne and pedestal
with the grandeur of the god himself, (for we may
feel assured that so far from their interfering with
the nobleness and simplicity of the work, as Caylus,
Falconet, and Heyne have supposed, they would
greatly add to it by the law of contrast,) the
extreme delicacy of some of the details, all this is
evidence of a master-mind. It was on this same
principle that the bas-reliefs on the hyposcenium of
the ancient theatre were arranged, the smallness of
which was designed to convey an idea of increased
size to the actors above it.

1 This consideration of the effect of colossal sculpture forbids
us to consent to the theory of Burke, who confines the beautiful
to what is small and smooth. Doubtless some objects must be
so, to appear beautiful; but who can deny beauty to a lofty moun¬
tain, with snowy top and wooded base, lit up and coloured by a
setting sun ? Who would find fault with the vast domes of
St. Peter’s or the Pantheon ? A large fruit, again, is almost always
beautiful. Neither can beauty in all cases be confined to what is
smooth in opposition to what is rough ; for who does not admire
more the old stone ruin than the smooth plaster wall of a Gothic
building P

“ Time consecrates,

And what is grey with age becomes religion.”

Schiller.

166

ANCIENT ART.

not neglected by the sculptor. We have a remark¬
able instance of this in the story given us by
Tzetzes :—“ The Athenians, desiring to erect on a
lofty column a statue to Minerva, invited Phidias and
Alcamenes, each to execute the most beautiful work
he could design, so that of these two they might

they would give the true proportion of beautiful things, you know
that the upper parts would appear smaller than is fitting, and the
lower parts larger, through the former being seen by us at a dis¬
tance, and the latter close at hand. So that the artists, bidding
farewell to truth, work out not real proportions, but such as will
appear such. Now what can we call that which appears indeed
similar to the beautiful, when seen from a favourable point, but
which when regarded by one who is capable of viewing it on all
sides, is not like that to which it professes to be like ? Must we
not call it an appearance, since it appears to be, but is not like P
And may we not call that art which produces an appearance but
not an image, the art of producing phantasms ? And it is this
art which is found so abundantly in painting, and in the whole of
the imitative arts.”

Nothing can be more satisfactory than the words of the present
professor of the Royal Academy, when speaking on this subject:
“We modern artists might be content humbly to take our practice
from the fine remains of ancient art, without question or inquiry;
but modern genius , so called, sometimes is disposed to dispute
authority, and to imagine its own inventions to be lights unknown
to our ancestors. It is well, therefore, when the ground of prac¬
tice of the greatest masters of the art can be set plainly before
students, and the principles upon which their art was conducted
explained.”— Lecture on Sculp, in Relief, at the S. Kens. Mus.

The works of two ancient writers on perspective are preserved
to us—Heliodorus, in his Capita Opticorum , and Proclus, in his
Commentaries on the First Book of Fuclid. Geminus of Rhodes
also wrote on perspective.

THE APOLLO BELVEDERE.

Photographed/ from, th& Original/.

INDIVIDUALITY.

201

soul and genius, in wincli they were transcendent P
It is on this principle that history is composed. Who
on reading ancient history would suppose that the
admirable orations which we there meet with were
delivered precisely in the words in which they are
composed ? Sometimes indeed no speech was
delivered, but the historian puts words in the
speakers’ mouths, expressive of their character
and of the occasion, heightening and colouring
each, so as to make them more clear and striking.
And this colouring is true, because conformable
with truth. Who on reading Plato’s Dialogues
would suppose that Socrates spoke all the things
that are recorded of him ? And yet Plato only
mentions his own name twice throughout all the
the dialogues. It is only the unpractised writer
who insists upon recording every trifling incident,
not seeing that he thereby renders his narrative
confused and mean. And so in art, a too rigid
compliance with matters of fact only makes a
work contemptible.

The following note, from Sir Joshua Reynolds’s
64 Discourses,” cannot be read with too great
attention :—

“ In all the pictures in which Raffaelle has represented the
apostles, he has drawn them with great nobleness, he has
given them as much dignity as the human figure is capable
of receiving; yet we are expressly told in Scripture they
had no such respectable appearance; and of St. Paul in
particular, we are told by himself, that his bodily presence was

2 D

254

MODEKN ART.

We shall be less surprised at Falconet’s opinion,
when we know that he considered many produc¬
tions of the French chisel as superior to Greek art,
both as regards the careful finishing of the flesh,
and the arrangement of the drapery . 1 2 But even
Falconet, in speaking of the works of Greek art,
acknowledges, “ The intelligent and attentive artist
will discover in them the most profound knowledge
of design, joined to all the energies of nature.”
And so, even Hippias, while vaunting that the
works of Dsedalus, notwithstanding the great name
which he acquired, would be laughed at in his day—
confesses that he is accustomed to look at the works
of the ancients with reverence, and the envy of the
moderns with suspicion . 3 Cicero says that he is not
ashamed to attribute the successes attained to in
his age, to the studies and the arts of Greece. Such
enthusiasm will ever be excited in a mind capable
of appreciating these beauties. When Quatremere
de Quincy first saw a cast of one of the Parthenon
statues, he describes it as a revelation, and says

1 D’Argenville, also, held the same opinion in both these par¬
ticulars.— Vie des Architects et Sculpt eurs, tome ii. 27, 33. The
Abbe Du Bos is still more enwrapped in prejudice. He says,—
“ On peut dire que les anciens n’avoient pas l’art des bas-reliefs.”
—Reflexions Critiq. sur la Poesie et sur la Sc. i. 473.

2 With this agree the opinions of the great writers on our art.

“ It is universally acknowledged, by all intelligent people, that
there is in the great monuments of Grecian art a strain of per¬
fection, beauty, and sublimity, far beyond anything which the

EGYPT.

ANTIQUITY OF THE ARCH IN

TOMB NEAR THE M EM NONIUM, THEB ES
with fartouc/ie of Tkotfanes III.

(J[oshuts, hEthwpiaf)

CAMPBELL'S TOMB
newr frr&ip Jfyrctmict
Jfsewim^tiehzzsl.

PYRAMID AT GIBEL- EL-BIRKEL

SMALL PYRAM I DS-GO U R N 0 U;'TH EBES. temp. PscuruneUcho.
tlepsUzsj •«»*

APPENDIX.

287

ANTIQUITY OF THE ARCH IN EGYPT.

In the accompanying plates the reader will be better able to
judge for himself of the antiquity of the arch than by any verbal
reasoning which we might offer. It has been frequently alleged
that the Egyptians were acquainted with the arch; and reference
has been made to the Great Pyramid, and to the Pyramids at
Abouseir, where we find two large stones placed anglewise, and

meeting together at the top, so as to relieve the weight from over
the entrance; and doubtless such an expedient may have been the
prototype of the arch. The next step would be the inserting a
horizontal piece at the top, between these two stones, as we see

contrived over the semicircular arch in Campbell’s tomb. Prom
this to the perfected Egyptian arch, the process is easy and simple.

2 P

APPENDIX.

301

member of a toxoptiilite society as more sublime than the head of
the Apollo Belvedere.

As we have considered the lion’s-head ornament of sacred edifices,
let us now examine the gargoyle head of domestic architecture.

We will produce a specimen from “ Pugin’s Examples.” The
reader must not suppose that we have selected this specimen on