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 c 22 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. 24 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. 29 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. 51 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. 75 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 Q 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 Y 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 8 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. 12 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. 56 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. 65 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