Then we have the statues of Romulus and Tatius without the tunic; and the equestrian statue of Marcius Tremulus, clad in the toga, before the Temple of the Castors, who twice subdued the Samnites, and by the capture of Anagnia delivered the people from their tribute.
Nor must I forget to mention Cneius Octavius, on account of the language used by the senate. When King Antiochus said, “I will give you an answer at another time,” Octavius drew a line round him with a stick, which he happened to have in his hand, and compelled him to give an answer before he allowed him to step beyond the circle. Octavius was unfortunately slain[214] while on this embassy, and the senate ordered his statue to be placed in the most conspicuous spot, which of course was the Rostra. A statue appears also to have been decreed to Taracia Caia, or Furetia, a Vestal Virgin, the same, too, to be placed wherever she might think fit; an additional honor, no less remarkable, it is thought, than the grant itself of a statue to a woman. I will state her merits in the words of the Annals: “Because she had gratuitously presented to the public the field bordering on the Tiber.”
I find also, that statues were erected in honor of Pythagoras and of Alcibiades, in the corners of the Comitium; in obedience to the command of the Pythian Apollo, who, in the Samnite War, had directed that statues of the bravest and the wisest of the Greeks should be erected in some conspicuous spot: and here they remained until Sylla, the Dictator, built the senate-house on the site. It is wonderful that the senate should then have preferred Pythagoras to Socrates, who, in consequence of his wisdom, had been preferred to all other men by the god himself; as, also, that they should have preferred Alcibiades for valor to so many other heroes; or, indeed, any one to Themistocles, who so greatly excelled in both qualities. The reason of the statues being raised on columns, was, that the persons represented might be elevated above other mortals; the same thing being signified by the use of arches, a new invention which had its origin among the Greeks. I am of opinion that there is no one to whom more statues were erected than to Demetrius Phalereus at Athens: for there were three hundred and sixty erected in his honor, no more days being reckoned at that period in the year: these, however, were soon broken to pieces.
Pedestrian statues have been, undoubtedly, for a long time in estimation at Rome: equestrian statues are, however, of considerable antiquity, and women even have participated in this honor; for the statue of Clælia is equestrian, as if it had not been thought sufficient to have her clad in the toga.
There are still extant some declamations by Cato, during his censorship, against the practice of erecting statues of women in the Roman provinces. However, he could not prevent a statue being erected at Rome to Cornelia, the mother of the Gracchi, and daughter of the elder Scipio Africanus. She is represented in a sitting posture, and the statue is remarkable for having no straps to the shoes.
Various circumstances prove, that the art of making statues was commonly practised in Italy at an early period. The statue in the Cattle Market is said to have been consecrated to Hercules by Evander; it is called the triumphal Hercules, and, on the occasion of triumphal processions, is arrayed in triumphal vestments. King Numa dedicated the statue of the two-faced Janus; a deity who is worshipped as presiding over both peace and war. The fingers are so formed as to indicate three hundred and sixty-five days,[215] or in other words, the year; thus denoting that he is the god of time and duration.
There are also Etruscan statues dispersed in various parts of the world, which beyond a doubt were originally made in Etruria. I should have supposed that these had been the statues only of divinities, had not Metrodorus of Scepsis, who had his surname “Misoromæus,” from his hatred to the Roman name, reproached us with having pillaged the city of Volsinii for the sake of the two thousand statues which it contained. It appears to me a singular fact, that although the origin of statues was of such great antiquity in Italy, the images of the gods, which were consecrated to them in their temples, should have been formed either of wood or of earthenware, until the conquest of Asia, which introduced luxury among us. It will be the best plan to enlarge upon the origin of the art of expressing likenesses, when we come to speak of what the Greeks call “the plastic art,” for the art of modelling was prior to that of statuary. This last, however, has flourished to such an extraordinary degree that a full account of it would fill many volumes.
PANDA, OR WAH.—Ailúrus Fulgens.
We learn from Mucianus, who was thrice consul, that there are still three thousand statues in Rhodes, and it is supposed that there are no fewer in existence at Athens, at Olympia, and at Delphi. What living mortal could enumerate them all? or of what utility would be such information? Still, I may, perhaps, afford entertainment by giving some slight account of such of those works of art as are in any way remarkable, and stating the names of the more celebrated artists. Of each of these it would be impossible to enumerate all the productions, for Lysippus alone is said to have executed no less than fifteen hundred works of art, all of which were of such excellence that any one of them might have immortalized him. The number was ascertained by his heir, upon opening his coffers after his death, as it was his practice to lay up one golden denarius out of the sum which he had received as the price of each statue.
This art has arrived at incredible perfection, both in successfulness and in boldness of design. As a proof of successfulness, I will adduce one example, and that of a figure which represented neither god nor man. We have seen in our own time, in the Capitol, before it was last burnt by the party of Vitellius, in the shrine of Juno, a bronze figure of a dog licking its wounds. Its miraculous excellence and its perfect truthfulness were not only proved by the circumstance of its having been consecrated there, but also by the novel kind of security that was taken for its safety; for since no sum appeared equal to its value, it was publicly enacted that the keepers of it should be answerable for its safety with their lives.
As to boldness of design, the examples are innumerable; for we had statues of colossal bulk, equal to towers in size. Such, for instance, is the Apollo in the Capitol, which was brought by Lucullus from Apollonia, a city of Pontus, thirty cubits in height, and which cost five hundred talents: also the statue of Jupiter, in the Campus Martius, dedicated by the late Emperor Claudius, but which appears dwarfed from its vicinity to the Theatre of Pompey: and the Jupiter at Tarentum, forty cubits in height, the work of Lysippus. It is a remarkable circumstance that although this statue is so nicely balanced as to be movable by the hand, it has never been thrown down by a tempest. This, the artist guarded against, by a column erected at a short distance from it, upon the side on which the violence of the wind required to be broken. On account of its magnitude, and the great difficulty of moving it, Fabius Maximus did not touch it, when he transferred the Hercules from that place to the Capitol, where it now stands.
But far the most worthy of our admiration is the colossal statue of the Sun, which stood formerly at Rhodes, and was the work of Chares the Lindian, a pupil of Lysippus;[216] no less than seventy cubits in height. This statue, fifty-six years after it was erected, was thrown down by an earthquake; but even as it lies, it excites our wonder and admiration. Few men can clasp the thumb in their arms, and its fingers are larger than most statues. Where the limbs are broken asunder, vast caverns are seen yawning in the interior. Within it, too, are to be seen large masses of rock, by the weight of which the artist steadied it while erecting it. It was twelve years before this statue was completed, and three hundred talents were expended upon it; a sum raised from the engines of warfare which had been abandoned by King Demetrius when tired of the long-protracted siege of Rhodes. In the same city are other colossal statues, one hundred in number; which though smaller than the one already mentioned, would, any one of them, wherever erected, have ennobled the place. In addition to these, there are five colossal statues of the gods, which were made by Bryaxis.
In Italy the Tuscan Apollo, in the library of the Temple of Augustus, is fifty feet in height from the toe; and it is a question whether it is more remarkable for the quality of the metal, or for the beauty of the workmanship. Spurius Carvilius erected the statue of Jupiter. Capitolinus, after he had conquered the Samnites, who fought in obedience to a most solemn oath; it was formed out of their breast-plates, greaves, and helmets, and is of such large dimensions that it may be seen from the statue of Jupiter Latiaris on the Alban Mount, twelve miles from Rome. He made his own statue, which is at the feet of the other one, out of the filings of the metal. There are also, in the Capitol, two heads which are very much admired, and which were dedicated by the Consul Lentulus, one of them executed by the above-mentioned Chares, the other by Decius; but the latter is so greatly excelled by the former, as to have all the appearance of being the work of one of the poorest of artists.
COLOSSUS AT RHODES.
But all these gigantic statues have been surpassed in our own age by the Mercury, made by Zenodotus for the city of the Arverni in Gaul, which was ten years in completing, and cost four hundred thousand sesterces. Having given sufficient proof there of his artistic skill, he was sent for by Nero to Rome, where he made a colossal statue intended to represent that prince, one hundred and ten feet in height. In consequence, however, of the public detestation of Nero’s crimes, this statue was consecrated to the Sun.[217] We used to admire in his studio the accurate likeness not only in the model of clay, but in the small sketches which served as the first foundation of the work. This statue proves that the art of fusing precious bronze was then lost, for Nero was prepared to furnish the requisite gold and silver, and Zenodotus was inferior to none of the ancients, either as a designer or as an engraver. At the time that he was working at the statue for the Arverni, he copied for Dubius Avitus, the governor of the province, two drinking-cups, chased by the hand of Calamis, which had been highly prized by Germanicus Cæsar, and had been given by him to his preceptor Cassius Silanus, the uncle of Avitus; and this with such exactness, that they could scarcely be distinguished from the originals.
An almost innumerable multitude of artists have been rendered famous by their statues and figures of smaller size. Before all others is Phidias, the Athenian,[218] who executed the Jupiter at Olympia, in ivory and gold, but who also made figures in bronze as well. He flourished in the eighty-third Olympiad, about the year of our City, 300. In the ninetieth Olympiad there were Polycletus, Phradmon, Myron, Pythagoras, Scopas, and Perellus. In the hundred and fourth Olympiad, flourished Praxiteles[219] and Euphranor; in the hundred and thirteenth, Lysippus of Sicyon, who was the contemporary of Alexander the Great, his brother Lysistratus, and Silanion, who was remarkable for having acquired great celebrity without any instructor: Zeuxis was his pupil.
The most celebrated of these artists, though born at different epochs, have joined in a trial of skill in the Amazons which they have respectively made. When these statues were dedicated in the Temple of Diana at Ephesus, it was agreed, in order to ascertain which was the best, that it should be left to the judgment of the artists themselves who were then present: upon which, it was evident that that was the best, which all the artists agreed in considering as the next best to his own. Accordingly, the first rank was assigned to Polycletus, the second to Phidias, the third to Cresilas, the fourth to Cydon, and the fifth to Phradmon.
Besides the Olympian Jupiter, which no one has ever equalled, Phidias also executed in ivory the erect statue of Minerva, which is in the Parthenon at Athens. He also made in bronze, beside the Amazon above mentioned, a Minerva, of such exquisite beauty, that it received its name from its fine proportions. He also made the Cliduchus, and another Minerva, which Paulus Æmilius dedicated at Rome in the Temple of Fortune of the present day. Also the two statues, draped with the pallium, which Catulus erected in the same temple; and a nude colossal statue.
Polycletus of Sicyon,[220] the pupil of Agelades, executed the Diadumenos, the statue of an effeminate youth, and remarkable for having cost one hundred talents; also the statue of a youth full of manly vigor, and called the spear-bearer. In this he made what the artists have called the Model statue, from which, as from a sort of standard, they study the lineaments: so that he, of all men, is thought in one work of art to have exhausted all the resources of art. He also made statues of a man using the body-scraper, and of a naked man challenging to play at dice; as also of two naked boys playing at dice, and known as the Astragalizontes; they are now in the atrium of the Emperor Titus, and it is generally considered, that there can be no work more perfect than this. He also executed a Mercury, which was formerly at Lysimachia; a Hercules seizing his arms, which is now at Rome. Polycletus is generally considered as having attained the highest excellence in statuary, and as having perfected the art, which Phidias invented. A discovery which was entirely his own, was the art of placing statues on one leg. It is remarked, however, by Varro, that his statues are all square-built, and made very much after the same model.
Myron of Eleutheræ,[221] who was also the pupil of Agelades, was rendered more particularly famous by his statue of a heifer, celebrated in many well-known lines. He also made the figure of a dog, a Discobolus, a Perseus, the wood-sawyers, a Satyr admiring a flute, and a Minerva, the Delphic Pentathletes,[222] the Pancratiastæ,[223] and a Hercules, which is at the Circus Maximus, in the house of Pompey. Erinna of Teios makes allusion in her poems to a monument which he erected to a cricket and a locust. He also executed the Apollo, which, after being taken from the Ephesians by the Triumvir Antonius, was restored by the Emperor Augustus, from a warning received in a dream. Myron appears to have been the first to give a varied development to his art, having made a greater number of designs than Polycletus, and shown more attention to symmetry. And yet, though he was very accurate in the proportions of his figures, he has neglected to give much expression.
Pythagoras of Rhegium, in Italy, excelled him in the figure of the Pancratiast which is now at Delphi. Pythagoras also executed the statue of Astylos, the runner, which is exhibited at Olympia; that of a Libyan boy holding a tablet, also in the same place; and a nude male figure holding fruit. There is at Syracuse a figure of a lame man by him: persons, when looking at it, seem to feel the very pain of his wound. He was the first artist who gave expression to the sinews and the veins, and paid more attention to the hair.
There was also another Pythagoras, a Samian, who was originally a painter, seven of whose nude figures, in the Temple of Fortune, and one of an aged man, are very much admired. He is said to have resembled the last-mentioned artist so much in his features, that they could not be distinguished.
Lysippus was most prolific in his works, and made more statues than any other artist. Among these, is the Man using the Body-scraper, which Marcus Agrippa had erected in front of his Warm Baths, and which wonderfully pleased the Emperor Tiberius. This prince, although in the beginning of his reign he imposed some restraint upon himself, could not resist the temptation, and had this statue removed to his bed-chamber, having substituted another for it at the baths: the people, however, were so resolutely opposed to this, that at the theatre they clamorously demanded the Apoxyomenos to be replaced; and the prince, notwithstanding his attachment to it, was obliged to restore it.
Lysippus is also celebrated for his statue of the intoxicated Female Flute-player, his dogs and huntsmen, and, more particularly, for his Chariot with the Sun, as represented by the Rhodians. He also executed a numerous series of statues of Alexander the Great, commencing from his childhood.[224] The Emperor Nero was so delighted with his statue of the infant Alexander, that he had it gilt: this addition, however, to its value, so detracted from its artistic beauty that the gold was removed, and in this state it was looked upon as still more precious, though disfigured by the scratches and seams which remained upon it, and in which the gold was still to be seen. He also made the statue of Hephæstion, the friend of Alexander the Great, which some persons attribute to Polycletus, whereas that artist lived nearly a century before his time. Also the statue of Alexander at the chase, now consecrated at Delphi, the figure of a Satyr, now at Athens, and the Squadron of Alexander, all of whom he represented with the greatest accuracy. This last work of art, after his conquest of Macedonia, Metellus conveyed to Rome. Lysippus also executed chariots of various kinds. He is considered to have contributed very greatly to the art of statuary by expressing the details of the hair, and by making the head smaller than had been done by the ancients, and the body more graceful less bulky, a method by which his statues were made to appear taller. The Latin language has no appropriate name for that “symmetry,” which he so attentively observed in his new and hitherto untried method of modifying the squareness observable in the ancient statues. Indeed, it was a common saying of his, that other artists made men as they actually were, while he made them as they appeared to be. One peculiar characteristic of his work, is the finish and minuteness which are observed in even the smallest details. Lysippus left three sons, who were also his pupils, and became celebrated as artists, Laippus, Bœdas, and, more particularly, Euthycrates; though this last-named artist rivalled his father in precision rather than in elegance, and preferred scrupulous correctness to gracefulness. Nothing can be more expressive than his Hercules at Delphi, his Alexander, his Hunter at Thespiæ, and his Equestrian Combat. Equally good, too, are his statue of Trophonius, erected in the oracular cave of that divinity, his numerous chariots, his Horse with the Panniers, and his hounds.
Praxiteles, who excelled more particularly in marble, and thence acquired his chief celebrity, also executed some very beautiful works in bronze, the Rape of Proserpine, a Father Liber, a figure of Drunkenness, and the celebrated Satyr. He also made the youthful Apollo, known as the “Sauroctonos” (Lizard-killer), because he is aiming an arrow at a lizard which is stealing towards him.
His kindness of heart, too, is witnessed by another figure; for in a chariot and horses which had been executed by Calamis, he himself made the charioteer, in order that the artist, who excelled in the representation of horses, might not be considered deficient in the human figure. This last mentioned artist has executed other chariots also, some with four horses, and some with two; and in his horses he is always unrivalled. But that it may not be supposed that he was so greatly inferior in his human figures, it is as well to remark that his Alcmena is equal to any that was ever produced.
Lycius was the son and pupil of Myron: he made a figure representing a boy blowing a nearly extinguished fire, well worthy of his master, as also figures of the Argonauts. Leochares made a bronze representing the eagle carrying off Ganymede:[225] the eagle has all the appearance of being sensible of the importance of his burden, and for whom he is carrying it, being careful not to injure the youth with his talons, even through the garments.
Theodorus of Samos,[226] who constructed the Labyrinth at Crete, cast his own statue in bronze, which was greatly admired not only for its resemblance, but for the extreme delicacy of the work. In the right hand he holds a file, and with three fingers of the left, a little model of a four-horse chariot, which has since been transferred to Præneste: it is so extremely minute, that the whole piece, both chariot and charioteer, may be covered by the wings of a fly, which he also made with it.
The most celebrated of all the works, of which I have here spoken, were dedicated, some time ago, by the Emperor Vespasianus in the Temple of Peace, and other public buildings of his. They had before been forcibly carried off by Nero, brought to Rome, and placed by him in the reception-rooms of his Golden Palace. There is one other famous statue, the author unknown, which should not be omitted here,—that of Hercules clothed in the poisoned tunic; it stands near the Rostra, and the countenance is stern and expressive of his last agonies, caused by that dress. There are three inscriptions on it; the first of which states that it had formed part of the spoil obtained by Lucullus the general, in his war against Mithridates; the second, that his son, while still a minor, dedicated it in accordance with a decree of the Senate; the third, that Septimius Sabinus, the curule ædile, had it restored to the public from the hands of a private individual. So vast has been the rivalry caused by this statue, and so high the value set upon it.
Next to copper comes the metal known as iron, at the same time the most useful and the most fatal instrument in the hand of mankind. For by the aid of iron we lay open the ground, we plant trees, we prepare our vineyards, and we force our vines each year to resume their youthful state, by cutting away their decayed branches. It is by the aid of iron that we construct houses, cleave rocks, and perform so many other useful offices of life. But it is with iron also that wars, murders, and robberies are effected, and this, not only hand to hand, but from a distance even, by the aid of missiles and winged weapons, now launched from engines, now hurled by the human arm, and now furnished with feathery wings. The last I regard as the most criminal artifice that has been devised by the human mind; for, as if to bring death upon man with still greater rapidity, we have given wings to iron and taught it to fly.[227] Let us therefore acquit Nature of a charge that here belongs to man himself.
In the treaty which Porsena granted to the Roman people, after the expulsion of the kings, we find it expressly stipulated, that iron shall be only employed for the cultivation of the fields; and our oldest authors inform us, that in those days it was considered unsafe to write with an iron pen, or stylus.
Still human industry has not failed to employ iron for perpetuating the honors of more civilized life. The artist Aristonidas, wishing to express the fury of Athamas subsiding into repentance, after he had thrown his son Learchus from the rock, blended copper and iron, in order that the blush of shame might be more exactly expressed, by the rust of the iron making its appearance through the shining substance of the copper; a statue which still exists at Rhodes. There is also, in the same city, a Hercules of iron, executed by Alcon, the endurance displayed by the god in his labors having suggested the idea. We see too, at Rome, cups of iron consecrated in the Temple of Mars the Avenger. Nature, in conformity with her usual benevolence, has limited the power of iron, by inflicting upon it the punishment of rust; and has thus displayed her usual foresight in rendering that substance the most perishable, which brings the greatest dangers upon perishable mortality.
Iron ores are to be found almost everywhere. But of all the different kinds the palm of excellence is awarded to that which is made by the Seres, who send it to us with their tissues and skins; next to which, in quality, is the Parthian iron. None of the other kinds of iron are made of the pure hard metal, a softer alloy being welded with them all. In our part of the world, a vein of ore is occasionally found to yield a metal of this high quality, as in Noricum, but in other cases, it derives its value from the mode of working it.
I cannot conclude what I have to say about art and artists without some reference to painting, an art which was formerly illustrious, when it was held in esteem both by kings and peoples, and ennobled those whom it deigned to transmit to posterity. But at the present day, it is completely banished in favor of marble, and gold. For not only are whole walls now covered with marble, but the marble itself is carved out or marqueted so as to represent objects and animals of various kinds. No longer now are we satisfied with formal compartitions of marble, or with slabs extended like so many mountains in our chambers, but we must begin to paint the very stone itself! This art was invented in the reign of Claudius, but it was in the time of Nero that we discovered the method of inserting in marble spots that do not belong to it, and so varying its uniformity; representing the marble of Numidia variegated with ovals, and that of Synnada veined with purple; just as luxury might have willed that Nature should produce them. Such are our resources when the quarries fail us, and luxury ceases not to busy itself, in order that as much as possible may be lost whenever a conflagration happens.
Correct portraits of individuals were formerly transmitted to later ages by painting; but instead brazen shields are now set up, and silver faces, with only some obscure traces of the countenance: the very heads, too, of statues are changed, a thing that has given rise before now to many a current sarcastic line; so true it is that people prefer showing off the valuable material, to having a faithful likeness. Yet, at the same time, we tapestry the walls of our galleries with old pictures, and we prize the portraits of strangers; while as to those made in honor of ourselves, we esteem them only for the value of the material, for some heir to break up and melt, and so forestall the noose and slip-knot of the thief.
Far different was it in the days of our ancestors. Then there were to be seen in their halls not statues made by foreign artists, or works in bronze or marble, but family portraits modelled in wax, each in its separate niche, always in readiness to accompany the funeral processions of the family; occasions on which every member of the family was always present. And the pedigree of the individual was traced in lines upon each of these colored portraits. Their libraries, too, were filled with archives and memoirs, stating what each had done when holding the magistracy. On the outside, again, of their houses, and around the thresholds of their doors, were placed other statues of those mighty spirits, in the spoils of the enemy there affixed, memorials which a purchaser even was not allowed to displace; so that the very house continued to triumph even after it had changed its master. A powerful stimulus to emulation this, when the walls each day reproached an unwarlike owner for having thus intruded upon the triumphs of another! There is still extant an address by the orator Messala, full of indignation, in which he forbids that there should be inserted among the images of his family any of those of the stranger race of the Lævini. It was the same feeling, too, that extorted from old Messala those compilations of his “On the Families of Rome;” when, upon passing through the hall of Scipio Pomponianus, he observed that, in consequence of a testamentary adoption, the Salvittos—for that had been their surname—to the disgrace of the Africani, had surreptitiously contrived to assume the name of the Scipios. But the Messalas must pardon me if I remark, that to lay a claim, though an untruthful one, to the statues of illustrious men, shows some love for their virtues, and is much more honorable than to have such a character that no one should wish to claim them.
There is a new invention, too, which we must not omit to notice. Not only do we consecrate in our libraries, in gold or silver, or at all events, in bronze, those whose immortal spirits hold converse with us in those places, but we even go so far as to reproduce the ideal of features all remembrance of which has ceased to exist; and our regrets give existence to likenesses that have not been transmitted to us, as in the case of Homer. Nothing can be a greater proof of having achieved success in life, than a lasting desire on the part of one’s fellow-men, to know what one’s features were. This practice of grouping portraits was first introduced at Rome by Asinius Pollio, who was also the first to establish a public library, and so make the works of genius the property of the public. Whether the kings of Alexandria and of Pergamus, who had so energetically rivalled each other in forming libraries, had previously introduced this practice, I cannot so easily say.
That a strong passion for portraits formerly existed, is attested both by Atticus, the friend of Cicero, who wrote a work on this subject, and by Varro, who conceived the very liberal idea of inserting, by some means or other, in his numerous volumes, the portraits of seven hundred individuals; as he could not bear the idea that all traces of their features should be lost, or that the lapse of centuries should get the better of mankind. Thus was he the inventor of a benefit to his fellow-men, that might have been envied by the gods themselves; for not only did he confer upon them immortality, but he transmitted them to all parts of the earth; so that it might be possible for them to be present, everywhere and each occupy his niche. This service Varro conferred upon persons who were not members of his own family.
We have no certain knowledge as to the commencement of the art of painting. The Egyptians assert that it was invented among themselves, six thousand years before it passed into Greece; a vain boast—evidently. As to the Greeks, some say that it was invented at Sicyon, others at Corinth; but they all agree that it originated in tracing lines round the human shadow. The first stage of the art was this, the second the employment of single colors; a process known as “monochrome-painting.” The invention of line-drawing has been assigned to Philocles, the Egyptian, or to Cleanthes of Corinth. The first who practised this line-drawing were Aridices, the Corinthian, and Telephanes, the Sicyonian, artists who, without making use of any colors, shaded the interior of the outline by drawing lines; hence, it was the custom with them to add to the picture the name of the person represented. Ecphantus, the Corinthian, was the first to employ colors upon these pictures, made, it is said, of broken earthenware, reduced to powder.
But already had the art of painting been perfectly developed in Italy. At all events, there are extant in the temples at Ardea, at this day, paintings of greater antiquity than Rome itself; in which, in my opinion, nothing is more marvellous, than that they should have remained so long unprotected by a roof, and yet preserving their freshness. At Lanuvium we see an Atalanta and a Helena, without drapery, close together, and painted by the same artist. They are both of the greatest beauty, the former being evidently the figure of a virgin, and they still remain uninjured, though the temple is in ruins. The Emperor Caligula attempted to have them removed to his own palace, but the nature of the plaster would not admit of it. There are in existence at Cære, some paintings of a still higher antiquity. Whoever carefully examines them, will be forced to admit that no art has arrived more speedily at perfection, seeing that it evidently was not in existence at the time of the Trojan War.
Among the Romans this art very soon rose into esteem, the Fabii, a most illustrious family, deriving from it their surname of “Pictor;” the first of the family who bore it, himself painted the Temple of Health, in the year of the City, 450; a work which lasted to our own times, but was destroyed when the temple was burnt, in the reign of Claudius. Next in celebrity were the paintings of the poet Pacuvius, in the Temple of Hercules, in the Cattle Market: he was a son of the sister of Ennius, and the fame of the art was enhanced at Rome by the success of this artist on the stage. After this period, the art was no longer practised by men of rank; unless we except Turpilius, in our own times, a native of Venetia, and of equestrian rank, several of whose beautiful works are still in existence at Verona. He painted, too, with his left hand, a thing never known to have been done by any one before.[228]
Titidius Labeo, a person of prætorian rank, who had been formerly proconsul of the province of Gallia Narbonensis, and who lately died at a very advanced age, used to pride himself upon the little pictures which he executed, but it only caused him to be ridiculed and sneered at. I must not omit to mention a celebrated consultation upon the subject of painting, which was held by some persons of the highest rank. Q. Pedius, who had been honored with the consulship and a triumph, and who had been named by the Dictator Cæsar as co-heir with Augustus, had a grandson, dumb from his birth, whom the orator Messala, to whose family his grandmother belonged, recommended to be brought up as a painter. He died, however, in his youth, after having made great progress in the art. But the high estimation in which painting came to be held at Rome, was principally due, in my opinion, to Valerius Maximus Messala, who, in the year of the City, 490, was the first to exhibit a painting to the public; a picture, namely, of the battle in which he had defeated the Carthaginians and Hiero in Sicily, upon one side of the Curia Hostilia. The same thing was done, too, by Lucius Scipio, who placed in the Capitol a painting of the victory which he had gained in Asia; but his brother Africanus was offended at it, for his son had been taken prisoner in the battle. Lucius Hostilius Mancinus, who had been the first to enter Carthage at the final attack, gave a similar offence to Æmilianus, by exposing in the Forum a painting of that city and the attack upon it, he himself standing near the picture, and describing to the spectators the various details of the siege; a piece of complaisance which secured him the consulship at the ensuing Comitia.
The stage which was erected for the games celebrated by Claudius Pulcher, brought the art of painting into great admiration, for the ravens were so deceived by the resemblance, as to light upon the decorations which were painted in imitation of tiles.
The late Emperor Augustus placed in the most conspicuous part of his forum, two pictures, representing War and Triumph. He also placed in the Temple of his father, Cæsar, a picture of the Castors, and one of Victory, in addition to those which we shall mention in our account of the works of the different artists. He also inserted two pictures in the wall of the Curia which he consecrated in the Comitium, one of which was a Nemea seated upon a lion, and bearing a palm in her hand. Close to her is an old man, standing with a staff, and above his head hangs the picture of a chariot with two horses. Nicias has written upon this picture that he “inburned”[229] it.
In the second picture the thing to be chiefly admired is the resemblance that the youth bears to the old man his father, allowing, of course, for the difference in age; above them soars an eagle, which grasps a dragon in its talons. Philochares attests that he is the author of this work, an instance, if we only consider it, of the mighty power wielded by the pictorial art; for here, thanks to Philochares, the senate of the Roman people, age after age, has before its eyes Glaucion and his son Aristippus, persons who would otherwise have been altogether unknown.
Cimon of Cleonæ first invented foreshortenings, or in other words, oblique views of the figure, and first learned to vary the features by representing them in the various attitudes of looking backwards, upwards, or downwards. It was he, too, who first marked the articulations of the limbs, indicated the veins, and gave the natural folds and sinuosities to drapery. Panænus, the brother of Phidias, even executed a painting of the battle fought by the Athenians with the Persians at Marathon: and so common had the employment of colors become, and to such a state of perfection had the art arrived, that he was able to represent the portraits of the various generals who commanded at that battle, Miltiades, Callimachus, and Cynægirus, on the side of the Athenians, and, on that of the barbarians, Datis and Artaphernes.
Polygnotus of Thasos was the first to paint the figures of women in transparent drapery, and to represent the head covered with a parti-colored head-dress. He, too, was the first to contribute many other improvements to the art of painting, opening the mouth, for example, showing the teeth, and throwing expression into the countenance, in place of the ancient rigidity of the features.
In the ninetieth Olympiad lived Aglaophon, Cephisodorus, Erillus, and Evenor, the father of Parrhasius, one of the greatest of painters, and of whom we shall have to speak when we come to the period at which he flourished. All these were artists of note, but not sufficiently so to detain us by any further details, in our haste to arrive at the luminaries of the art; first among whom shone Apollodorus of Athens, in the ninety-third Olympiad. He was the first to paint objects as they really appeared; the first too, we may justly say, to confer glory by the aid of the pencil.[230] Of this artist there is a Priest in Adoration, and an Ajax struck by Lightning, a work to be seen at Pergamus at the present day: before him, there is no painting of any artist now to be seen which has the power of riveting the eye.
The gates of art being now thrown open by Apollodorus, Zeuxis of Heraclea entered upon the scene, in the fourth year of the ninety-fifth Olympiad, destined to lead the pencil, for which there was nothing too arduous, to a very high pitch of glory. Of him Apollodorus wrote a verse to the effect, that Zeuxis had stolen the art from others and had taken it all to himself. Zeuxis also acquired such a vast amount of wealth, that, in a spirit of ostentation, he went so far as to parade himself at Olympia with his name embroidered on the checked pattern of his garments in letters of gold. At a later period, he came to the determination to give away his works, there being no price high enough to pay for them, he said. He gave an Alcmena to the people of Agrigentum, and a Pan to Archelaüs, King of Macedonia. He also painted a Penelope, in which the peculiar character of that matron appears to be delineated to the very life; and a figure of an athlete, with which he was so highly pleased, that he wrote beneath it the line which has since become so famous, to the effect that it would be easier to find fault with him than to imitate him.[231] His Jupiter seated on the throne, with the other Deities standing around him, is a magnificent production: as, also, is his Infant Hercules strangling the Dragons, in presence of Amphitryon and his mother Alcmena, who is struck with horror. Still, however, Zeuxis is generally censured for making the heads and articulations of his figures out of proportion. And yet, so scrupulously careful was he, that on one occasion, when he was about to execute a painting for the people of Agrigentum, to be consecrated in the Temple of the Lacinian Juno there, he had the young maidens of the place stripped for examination, and selected five of them as models, in order to adopt in his picture the most commendable points in the form of each. He also painted some monochromes in white.
The contemporaries and rivals of Zeuxis were Timanthes, Androcydes, Eupompus, and Parrhasius. The last, it is said, entered into a pictorial contest with Zeuxis, who represented some grapes painted so naturally that the birds flew towards the spot where the picture was exhibited. Parrhasius, on the other hand, exhibited a curtain, drawn with such singular truthfulness, that Zeuxis, elated with the judgment which had been passed upon his work by the birds, haughtily demanded that the curtain should be drawn aside to let the picture be seen. Upon finding his mistake, with a great degree of ingenuous candor he admitted that he had been surpassed, for while he himself had only deceived the birds, Parrhasius had deceived him, an artist.
There is a story, too, that at a later period, Zeuxis painted a child carrying grapes, and the birds came to peck at them: upon which, with a similar degree of candor, he expressed himself vexed with his work, and exclaimed—“I have surely painted the grapes better than the child, for if I had fully succeeded in the latter, the birds would have been in fear of it.” Zeuxis executed some figures also in clay, the only works of art that were left behind at Ambracia, when Fulvius Nobilior transported the Muses from that city to Rome. There is at Rome a Helena by Zeuxis, in the Porticos of Philippus, and a Marsyas Bound, in the Temple of Concord there.
Parrhasius of Ephesus also contributed greatly to the progress of painting, being the first to give symmetry to his figures, the first to give play and expression to the features, elegance to the hair, and gracefulness to the mouth: indeed, for contour, it is universally admitted by artists that he bore away the palm. This, in painting, is the very highest point of skill. To paint substantial bodies and the interior of objects is a great thing, no doubt, but at the same time it is a point in which many have excelled: but to make the extreme outline of the figure, to give the finishing touches to the painting in rounding off the contour, this is a point of success in the art which is but rarely attained. For the extreme outline, to be properly executed, requires to be nicely rounded, and so to terminate as to prove the existence of something more behind it, and thereby disclose that which it also serves to hide.
Such is the merit conceded to Parrhasius by Antigonus and Xenocrates, who have written on the art of painting; and in this as well as in other points, not only do they admit his excellence, but enlarge upon it in terms of the highest commendation. There are many pen sketches by him still in existence, both upon panel and on parchment, from the study of which, even artists may greatly profit.
In his allegorical picture of the People of Athens, he has displayed singular ingenuity in the treatment of his subjects; for in representing it, he had to depict it as at once fickle, choleric, unjust, and versatile; while, again, he had equally to show its attributes of implacability and clemency, compassionateness and pride, loftiness and humility, fierceness and timidity—and all these at once. He painted a Theseus also, which was formerly in the Capitol at Rome, a Naval Commander wearing a cuirass, and, in one picture, now at Rhodes, figures of Meleager, Hercules, and Perseus. This last painting, though it has been thrice struck by lightning, has escaped being effaced, a circumstance which tends to augment the admiration which it naturally excites. He painted an Archigallus[232] also, a picture which the Emperor Tiberius greatly admired. According to Deculo, that prince had it shut up in his chamber, the price at which it was valued being six hundred thousand sesterces.
Parrhasius also painted a Thracian Nurse, with an Infant in her arms, a Philiscus, a Father Liber attended by Virtue, Two Children, in which we see portrayed the careless simplicity of childhood, and a Priest attended by a Boy, with a censer and chaplet. There are also two most noble pictures by him; one of which represents a Runner contending for the prize, completely armed, so naturally depicted that he appears covered with perspiration. In the other we see the Runner taking off his armor, and can fancy that we hear him panting aloud for breath. His Æneas, Castor, and Pollux, all represented in the same picture, are highly praised, as well as his Telephus, Achilles, Agamemnon, and Ulysses.
Parrhasius was a most prolific artist, but at the same time there was no one who enjoyed the glory conferred upon him by his talent with greater arrogance. He went so far as to call himself “Habrodiætus” (Liver-in-Luxury), and the “prince of painters,” and asserted that in him the art had arrived at perfection. He boasted that he had sprung from the lineage of Apollo, and that he had painted his Hercules, a picture now at Lindos, just as he had often seen him in his sleep. Upon being defeated by Timanthes, at Samos, by a great majority of votes, the subject of the picture being Ajax and the Award of the Arms,[233] he declared in the name of his hero, that he felt himself quite disgraced on thus seeing himself a second time defeated by an unworthy opponent.
As to Timanthes, he was an artist highly gifted with genius, and loud have some of the orators been in their commendations of his Iphigenia, represented as she stands at the altar awaiting her doom. Upon the countenance of all present, that of her uncle Menelaus in particular, grief was depicted; but having already exhausted all the characteristic features of sorrow, the artist adopted the device of veiling the features of the victim’s father, Agamemnon, finding himself unable adequately to give expression to his feelings. There are also some other proofs of his genius, a Sleeping Cyclops, for instance, which he has painted upon a small panel; but, being desirous to convey an idea of his gigantic stature, he has painted some Satyrs near him measuring his thumb with a thyrsus. Indeed, Timanthes is the only one among the artists in whose works there is always something more implied by the pencil than is expressed, and whose execution, though of the very highest quality, is always surpassed by the inventiveness of his genius. He painted the figure of a Hero, a master-piece of skill, in which he carried the art to the very highest pitch of perfection, in the delineation of the warrior: this work is now at Rome, in the Temple of Peace.
At this period, too, Euxinidas had for his pupil Aristides, who became a most illustrious artist; and Eupompus instructed Pamphilus, who afterwards became the instructor of Apelles. There is by Eupompus, a Victor in a gymnastic contest, holding a palm. So high was the reputation of this artist, that he established a school of painting, and so divided the art into three styles; whereas till then there had been but two, known respectively as the Helladic and the Asiatic. In honor of him, a native of Sicyon by birth, the Helladic school was divided into two, and from this period there were three distinct styles recognized, the Ionic, the Sicyonian, and the Attic.
We have, by Pamphilus, a picture representing the Alliance and the Battle that was fought at Phlius; a Victory also and a representation of Ulysses in his ship. He was a Macedonian by birth, but was the first painter who was also skilled in all the other sciences, arithmetic and geometry more particularly, without the aid of which he maintained that the pictorial art could not attain perfection. He gave instruction to no one for a smaller sum than one talent, at the rate of five hundred denarii per annum,[234] and this fee both Apelles and Melanthius paid. It was through his influence that, first at Sicyon, and then throughout the whole of Greece, all children of free birth were taught the graphic art, or in other words, the art of drawing upon boxwood; in consequence of which this came to be looked upon as the first step in the liberal arts. It is the fact, however, that this art has always been held in high estimation, and cultivated by persons of free birth, and that, at a more recent period, men of rank even began to pursue it; it having always been forbidden that slaves should receive instruction in it. Hence no celebrated work of painting or drawing has been executed by a slave.
In the hundred and seventh Olympiad, flourished Aëtion and Therimachus. By the former we have some fine pictures; a Father Liber, Tragedy and Comedy, Semiramis from the rank of a slave elevated to the throne, an Old Woman bearing torches, and a New-made Bride, remarkable for the air of modesty with which she is portrayed.
But it was Apelles of Cos, in the hundred and twelfth Olympiad, who surpassed all the other painters who either preceded or succeeded him. Single-handed, he contributed more to painting than all the others together, and even went so far as to publish some treatises on the principles of the art. The great point of artistic merit with him was his singular charm of gracefulness, and this too, though the greatest of painters were his contemporaries. In admiring their works and bestowing high eulogiums upon them, he used to say that there was still wanting in them that ideal of beauty so peculiar to himself, and known to the Greeks as “Charis;” others, he said, had acquired all the other requisites of perfection, but in this one point he himself had no equal. He also asserted his claim to another great point of merit: admiring a picture by Protogenes, which bore evident marks of unbounded laboriousness and the most minute finish, he remarked that in every respect Protogenes was fully his equal, or perhaps his superior, except in this, that he himself knew when to take his hand off a picture—a memorable lesson, which teaches us that over-carefulness may be productive of bad results. His candor was equal to his talent; he acknowledged the superiority of Melanthius in his grouping, and of Asclepiodorus in the niceness of his measurements, or, in other words, the distances that ought to be left between the objects represented.
A circumstance that happened to him in connection with Protogenes is worthy of notice. The latter was living at Rhodes, when Apelles disembarked there, desirous of seeing the works of a man whom he had hitherto only known by reputation. He repaired at once to the studio; Protogenes was not at home, but there happened to be a large panel upon the easel ready for painting, with an old woman who was left in charge. To his inquiries she made answer, that Protogenes was not at home, and then asked whom she should name as the visitor. “Here he is,” was the reply of Apelles, and seizing a brush, he traced with color upon the panel an outline of a singularly minute fineness. Upon his return, the old woman mentioned to Protogenes what had happened. The artist, it is said, upon remarking the delicacy of the touch, instantly exclaimed that Apelles must have been the visitor, for that no other person was capable of executing anything so exquisitely perfect. So saying, he traced within the same outline a still finer outline, but with another color, and then took his departure, with instructions to the woman to show it to the stranger, if he returned, and to let him know that this was the person whom he had come to see. It happened as he anticipated; Apelles returned, and vexed at finding himself thus surpassed, took up another color and split[235] both of the outlines, leaving no possibility of anything finer being executed. Upon seeing this, Protogenes admitted that he was defeated, and at once flew to the harbor to look for his guest. He thought proper to transmit the panel to posterity, just as it was, and it always continued to be held in the highest admiration by all, artists in particular. I am told that it was burnt in the first fire which took place at Cæsar’s palace on the Palatine Hill; but in former times I have often stopped to admire it. Upon its vast surface it contained nothing whatever except the three outlines, so remarkably fine as to escape the sight: among the most elaborate works of numerous other artists it had all the appearance of a blank space; and yet by that very fact it attracted the notice of every one, and was held in higher estimation than any other painting there.