CHAPTER XV

THE MODERN BRITISH SCHOOL

THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

This is an English book. It is written for men and women who look upon

the world from the distinctive standpoint arising from the use of a

common language. At the head of a chapter devoted to sculpture in

modern England, let it be said, definitely and defiantly, that _there

is an English school_.

The proposition is by no means as sure of general acceptance as it

should be. There are many critics who appear to doubt the existence

of English sculpture. They seem to regard Paris as the only source of

modern work and the English school as a mere branch of the French. The

real truth is that, apart from technique, the English sculptor has

little to learn from his Continental neighbour. We are not writing of

clay-thumbers or marble-chippers, who work for the promise of a measure

of material prosperity. We have in mind earnest craftsmen who turn to

sculpture naturally—joying in an art which enables them to give form

to the thoughts and feelings astir around them. Great Britain has no

cause to fear a comparison between the number of such men working in

England and France. Owing to the lack of a gallery like the Luxembourg

and the absence of the magnificent facilities offered by the Salons,

the quality and the quantity of the work produced by the English school

is hard to gauge. Nevertheless, it exists. When the English National

Gallery is rebuilt according to Barry’s design and the two glazed

loggie, flanking the main entrance and each running for 300 feet by

15 along the face of the building, are filled with British sculpture,

doubt will be impossible.

Nor is this all. English sculpture is, in a very true sense, a national

art. Not as we should apply the term to the art of seventeenth-century

Holland or Ancient Athens, but in the sense that modern French

sculpture is national. In both England and France, a body of sculptors

has arisen, able and anxious to express to the full individualities

which have been moulded by the influences among which it works.

As we have seen, this became possible in France about the middle of the

last century. In England the growth of a similar movement may be traced

back some thirty years. A convenient date is 1877, when Sir Frederic

Leighton exhibited his epoch-making bronze “Athlete struggling with a

Python.”

After the death of Flaxman, the English sculptors drifted into the

same blind alley in which most of the Frenchmen found themselves. For

fifty years they made little or no effort to rid themselves of the

false canons of Canova and the philo-Hellenes. Westmacott, MacDowell,

and Wyatt, to mention three English sculptors, all based their style

upon that of the Venetian master. Arguing from the supreme achievements

of the Greeks, they chose to imitate the classic manner as closely

as possible. Their technique was Greek; their subjects were Greek;

everything was Greek except their habits of thought and feeling.

To Canova and Thorvaldsen, the ideas of Winckelmann and Lessing

had come with the freshness of a newly discovered truth. They had

the stimulating force of novelty. During the following fifty years,

however, the pseudo-Greek canon was merely accepted as a convenient

form which at least had the merit of sparing the artist the trouble of

fresh invention.

The consequences, as far as English sculpture is concerned, can best be

realized from a visit to the Gibson Gallery at Burlington House, London.

Gibson, who was born in 1790, was, perhaps, the most popular of

Canova’s English pupils—assuming that he did not forfeit all claim to

be regarded as an Englishman during his twenty-seven years’ stay in

Rome. Upon his death, in 1866, he bequeathed the contents of his studio

to the British public, and they are now housed in the Diploma Gallery

at the Royal Academy. Gibson is perhaps best known through his “Venus.”

It created a stir at the time of its first exhibition, owing to the

sculptor’s attempt to popularize “tinted” sculpture, in imitation of

the classical fashion. The statue was designed to stand in a pale

purple-blue niche. The hair and eyes of the goddess were decidedly

coloured, the body being stained a rose tint. Gibson, however, failed

to persuade the public and the sculptors of his age that any departure

from an absolute dependence upon pure form was desirable. The “Tinted

Venus” was the first and the last of its race.

[Illustration: JOHN GIBSON

HYLAS AND THE NYMPHS Tate Gallery, London]

An equally illuminating example of Gibson’s style can be seen at the

Tate Gallery. This is the group, “Hylas and the Nymphs,” modelled

in 1826. The technical industry of the sculptor and his feeling for

sculptural form are obvious at once. But no one, comparing the “Hylas”

with the modern works of the British school which surround it, can fail

to see the sickly conventionalism with which it is imbued. Notice, for

instance, the modelling of the limbs of the two nymphs, and compare

them with those of the boy. Surely any imaginative sculptor of the

modern school would insist, above all, upon the obvious contrast

between the male and the female form, seeing that the story of Hylas

itself depends upon this very point. Gibson, however, practically

models the male and the female limbs, the male and the female flesh,

alike. Hylas has not the legs of a youth, nor have the nymphs, who have

been smitten by his beauty, the legs of women. Gibson has chosen to

adopt a conventional compromise, unrelated to anything in nature, and

selected for no other reason than a fancied resemblance to the Greek

style. The three figures are graceful enough. But they are unsatisfying

in the last degree to all who have felt the far more potent emotions

arising from a rigid adherence to nature. Hence “Hylas and the Nymphs”

and the works in the Gibson Gallery remain as perpetual memorials of

all that the artists of our own day had to rid themselves before the

rebirth of English sculpture was possible.

Matters improved very little during the thirty years following the

production of Gibson’s “Hylas.” What can we learn from the exhibitions

of 1851 and 1862, which may be fairly taken to represent the apotheosis

of mid-Victorian artistic taste?

In his official guide to the Fine Art Section of 1862 the editor, F.

T. Palgrave—of “Golden Treasury” fame—refers to sculpture as “the

forlorn hope of modern art,” and proceeds to answer the question

“whence this deathly decline?” The exhibition contained examples of

all that was best in English sculpture to that time. “The Falling

Titan,” by Banks, now in the Diploma Gallery; the “Thetis and Achilles”

relief, now in the Tate Gallery; Nollekens’ “Cupid and Psyche” Joseph’s

”Wilberforce” (Westminster Abbey), and works by Flaxman, Westmacott,

Chantrey, Wyatt, Watson and Park represented the earlier masters.

Sculptures by Armstead, Baily, Foley, Gibson, MacDowell, Marshall,

Woolner and the younger Westmacott witnessed to the achievements of

the living. Yet Palgrave could only grieve over the decline in natural

taste and the entire absence of that healthy severity and earnestness

of spirit in which sculpture flourishes. “Serious as the subject

claims to be,” says Palgrave, “I confess it is difficult to think of

Nollekens’ ‘Venus,’ Canova’s ‘Venus,’ Thorvaldsen’s ‘Venus,’ Gibson’s

‘Venus,’ everybody’s ‘Venus’ with due decorum. One fancies one healthy,

modern laugh would clear the air of these idle images—one agrees with

the honest old woman in the play who preferred a roast duck to all the

birds in the heathen mythology.”

In the “Albert Memorial” erected in Kensington Gardens, London, “by the

Queen and people of a grateful country,” we have a concrete example of

what was in Palgrave’s mind when he wrote.

Prince Consort was himself a man of real artistic perception. By his

magnificent work in connection with the 1851 Exhibition he had done

an immense amount to raise the standard of taste in England. Funds

were not wanting. £50,000 was subscribed by the nation and at least

another £60,000 was raised by public subscription. The Eleanor Cross

was designed by Sir Gilbert Scott and all the leading sculptors were

invited to co-operate. If the mid-Victorians had had it in them to

produce a noble work, surely we should have seen the result in the

“Albert Memorial.” An examination only confirms the general impression

which every Londoner has about the monument. The “Asia” by Foley,

for instance; the “Africa” by Theed; the “Agriculture” by the elder

Thornycroft—in none of these can we see any clear evidence that the

sculptors had yet rid themselves of the conventions which had been

hampering them for at least fifty years.

THE RISE OF NATURALISM

Nevertheless, among those engaged upon the Albert Memorial were men

who were to see the advent of a new spirit. Foley himself, who died in

1874, lived to carve the fine equestrian statue of Sir James Outram.

This was one of the earliest works to show a clear trace of the return

to the observation of nature, which was necessary if the English

sculptors were to follow the lead given by Carpeaux in France. Even in

H. H. Armstead’s work upon the frieze running round the podium of the

Albert Memorial there are traces of a largeness and vigour of treatment

indicative of better things. Both, however, were born too early to give

English sculptors a decisive lead.

Strangely enough at the very time the sculptors of England were working

upon the Albert Memorial, one of the greatest geniuses in the history

of English sculpture was working upon another national monument. We

mean Alfred Stevens, the sculptor of the “Wellington Memorial” in St.

Paul’s Cathedral—the most complete piece of decorative sculpture ever

set up in this country.

Born in 1817, Stevens went to Italy in 1833. He spent a portion of

the nine years he lived there in Thorvaldsen’s studio, but his first

study was painting. On his return to England he became a teacher of

architectural drawing at Somerset House and then started a career as

a decorative designer. Helped by such followers as Godfrey Sykes and

Moody, who carried his principles into the Government art school,

Stevens founded a school of domestic decorators which influenced

decorative art in England through the remainder of the nineteenth

century. A brilliant example of this side of Stevens’s genius is

furnished by the magnificent “Fireplace” at Dorchester House.

Stevens’s great chance as a sculptor came in 1856 when he secured the

commission for the Wellington Memorial. Such a group as the “Truth

tearing out the tongue of Falsehood” is alone sufficient to prove

how far Stevens was ahead of the English sculptors of his time in

originality of treatment and breadth of design. It is true that the

sculptor’s indebtedness to Michael Angelo is obvious, but the work of

Stevens does not show any slavish copying of the great Florentine. The

English sculptor has merely solved his problem by the light of Angelo’s

experience. He has sought to reach the boldness of mass and line which

he found in the master’s sculpture. A certain naturalism, also derived

from his study of Renaissance art, together with its magnificently

bold design and architectural fitness, gives the Wellington Memorial a

unique place in the history of English sculpture. Nevertheless, Alfred

Stevens was the Baptist of English Naturalism. He died—a voice crying

in the wilderness. So little was his work esteemed that the Wellington

Memorial itself was not brought up from the crypt and placed in the

nave of the Cathedral, where it could be seen, until long after the

sculptor’s death in 1875.

[Illustration: ALFRED STEVENS

FIGURE FROM THE FIREPLACE, DORCHESTER HOUSE, LONDON]

In spite of Stevens’s apparent failure, the elements of a regenerated

school of English sculpture existed. It only needed a man of real

artistic influence and established reputation to focus attention upon

the possibility of better things. In view of the position which the

sister art of painting held in England, it is not surprising that the

lead came from two painters. Both were men of commanding personality,

and both were in the very prime of their artistic careers. The one was

G. F. Watts, the other, of course, was Frederic Leighton.

Watts’s bronze bust, “Clytie,” was modelled some years before

Leighton’s “Athlete Struggling with a Python,” and never aroused the

enthusiastic admiration which fell to the later work. Nevertheless, the

“Clytie”—it can be seen at the Tate Gallery—was a work of real beauty

and power. Moreover, it displayed a naturalism which distinguished it

from almost all the plastic art produced in England earlier in the

century. This alone entitles G. F. Watts to an honourable place in the

history of the renascence of English sculpture.

Leighton’s “Athlete and Python” was a far more ambitious work than

Watts’s “Clytie.” It began as a small study, and the story goes that

Dalou—some say Legros—persuaded Leighton to carry out the design in

life-size. Three years later it was ready.

Probably sheer beauty of formal design was Leighton’s chief aim. But

what struck his contemporaries was the finely vigorous pose, the

splendid rendering of energetic movement and the magnificent naturalism

with which an unfamiliar subject was rendered. The man holds the

creature at arm’s-length, striving to prevent the thrust of the ugly

jaws, which threaten death if once they can bring the full weight

of the crushing coils to bear. The reception accorded to Leighton’s

“Athlete and Python” was such that it is no exaggeration to date the

model school of English sculpture from its exhibition. Appropriately

enough, it became the first purchase under the bequest of the sculptor,

Chantrey.

But all great artistic revivals are two-sided. There must be a

spiritual stimulus as well as a technical. If the first may be credited

to Leighton as far as the revival of English sculpture is concerned,

the improvement in technique is undoubtedly traceable to Jules Dalou,

the French sculptor. Our readers will remember how Dalou fled from

Paris, on account of his connection with the Commune. During his

stay in England he was persuaded to conduct the modelling class at

South Kensington. The influence of his technical example and forceful

personality began to show itself at once. Dalou made South Kensington

one of the first centres of sculptural training in the world. When he

returned to Paris, he was succeeded by Professor Lanteri—the sculptor

of the virile “Head of a Peasant,” in the Tate Gallery—whose influence

has since rivalled that of Dalou. Both were magnificently facile

workers in clay. By continued practical demonstration they proved

to the younger English sculptors the inestimable value of ease in

modelling. The English school, as a whole, is still behind the French

in facility of execution, but Dalou and Lanteri have done very much to

remedy the defect.

The Dalou influence was continued in the second great training school

of London—the Lambeth School of Art—by his pupil, W. S. Frith. The

success of Mr. Sparks’ school may be judged from the fact that Alfred

Gilbert, Frampton, Goscombe John, Harry Bates, Pomeroy and Roscoe

Mullins all graduated there. Indeed, at one time, studentship at

Lambeth seemed a necessary preliminary for all sculptors of ambition.

Year after year, the gold medal at the Royal Academy and the £200

travelling scholarship were taken by Lambeth students.

[Illustration: LORD LEIGHTON

ATHLETE STRUGGLING WITH PYTHON Tate Gallery, London]

If South Kensington and Lambeth have shared the honour of laying the

foundations of the art education of the younger English sculptors,

there are few cases in which the Academy schools cannot claim to have

completed the task. The fact is often forgotten by the Academy’s many

detractors. Under the present system, any sculptor of real promise can

practically command a complete art education. The schools are free, the

professors being the members of the Academy, who take monthly turns in

the schools. Admission is by examination—that for a sculptor entailing

the presentation of an anatomical drawing, showing bones and muscles, a

model in the round of an undraped antique, and a life-sized medallion

from the living model.

In many respects the Academy system is superior to that of the École

des Beaux Arts. Such a judge as Mr. Edwin Abbey has even recommended

American art students to choose London in preference to Paris on this

account. “In Paris,” he says, “all the personality is rubbed out of

a student. French methods and technique are hammered into him so

unceasingly that he departs a mere reflection of the movement of the

latest school. In London there is more catholicity in art matters;

originality is strongly encouraged, and the student, particularly at

the Royal Academy, is given every chance to develop along individual

lines.”

This is proved by the fact that almost all the foremost English

sculptors have been trained in the Academy schools. In France, men

of pronounced originality like Rodin and Dalou become anti-Academic

by instinct. In England, some men leave the beaten track which every

academic course must follow, more readily than others. But even the

most pronounced innovators seem able to benefit from the influence of

the Academicians during their studentship.

Still the distinction between the sculptors who preserve the academic

spirit throughout their careers and those who prefer to rely upon their

native individuality does exist. It furnishes a convenient method for

dividing the modern English school into two distinct parts. Among the

first may be reckoned Thomas Brock and Hamo Thornycroft, while the

second, and more important class, is headed by Alfred Gilbert, and

includes Onslow Ford, Harry Bates, Frampton and Swan.

Thomas Brock was born in 1847. He was a pupil of Foley and, therefore,

came sufficiently under the influence of the mid-Victorian school

to mark a transition rather than a break from the older traditions.

To-day he is pre-eminently the “safe” man in English sculpture—a fact

which accounts for his receiving the commission for the Queen Victoria

Memorial to be erected in front of Buckingham Palace. But Brock’s

“safeness” does not prevent him executing work of real beauty. The

“Eve,” in the Tate Gallery, is a work which any school of sculpture

would be proud to claim. It shows the Mother of Men as a frail girl.

She realizes for the first time what the loss of primal innocence

entails and, with bowed head, moves slowly from the garden. The

design is one of the most beautiful in English sculpture. The grace

of line displayed in the treatment of the abdomen—so beautiful in

womanhood—and the pose of the lower limbs are beyond criticism. If

the “Eve” has a fault it is that the subject is clearly susceptible of

highly dramatic treatment. In Mr. Brock’s statue there is no attempt

to express the intensity of passion which a sculptor of the temper of

Rodin would have regarded as the one thing worth rendering.

[Illustration: THOMAS BROCK

EVE Tate Gallery, London]

[Illustration: W. HAMO THORNYCROFT

THE MOWER Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool]

If Thomas Brock stands for the English academic ideal on its romantic

side, Hamo Thornycroft represents the more naturalistic side of the

same movement.

W. Hamo Thornycroft—who must be distinguished from his father, the

sculptor of a group on the Albert Memorial—was born in 1850. His first

exhibited work dates from 1871. A year later, he entered the Academy

schools, gaining the gold medal in 1874, with his group “A warrior

bearing his Wounded Son from Battle,” one of the very finest works

which ever gained a studentship. It was no empty triumph. The young

Thornycroft defeated no less an opponent than Alfred Gilbert, and his

design challenged attention against such an exhibit as Stevens’s model

for the Wellington Memorial. A man capable of such work in his student

days was bound to go far.

“The Mower” (Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool) shows to what the virile

naturalism of Thornycroft led. There is no sculpture which contains

more of the thoroughly British spirit. Englishmen have little natural

affection for the Whistler method of dashing off a “Harmony” in a

couple of days and charging 300 guineas for it. They like to detect

some definite proof of high thinking and strenuous workmanship in their

art as in everything else. A sculpture of Thornycroft always leaves

this impression. Added to that we feel that the artist is working

towards a definite end, sufficiently ideal to demand effort, yet near

enough to earth to come within his powers.

In the original sketch model of “The Mower,” the upper part of the

figure was draped. Thornycroft, however, finally discarded the shirt.

He evidently felt that the subject could be treated in a thoroughly

modern manner without departing altogether from the classical method.

He succeeded in producing a statue which is neither conventional nor

iconoclastic.

Whether this is to be counted a virtue or a vice depends upon the

critic’s temperament, but the question is, perhaps, worthy of

examination.

Meunier, the Belgian sculptor, has modelled a bronze “Mower,” which

Thornycroft’s statue irresistibly recalls. A comparison of the two

works not only throws a searching light upon the whole school of

sculpture which the Englishman represents, but, incidentally, brings

into relief the leading characteristics of Meunier’s own work. No

excuse is, therefore, necessary for interrupting our general survey

of British sculpture with a reference to a sister school which really

merits a chapter to itself.

Meunier is a man who has devoted himself to themes suggested by the

colliery and artizan life of his country.

Brought up in the Belgian Black Country, the sombre gloom of the life

there became part of his very being. After a period of continuous

struggle against poverty and sickness, he turned to sculpture at the

age of fifty, under the influence of the achievements of Rodin. As a

result, we see in Meunier’s “Mower” the thought and emotion of a man

who feels the beautiful misery of labour in the depths of his soul. The

intense human pathos enshrined in the bronze is something which the

English sculptor neither feels nor seeks to express.

[Illustration: MEUNIER (BELGIAN SCHOOL) THE MOWER]

In saying this we are in no sense disparaging Mr. Thornycroft’s work.

True, he makes no attempt to suggest the vague poetry with which

Meunier invests his Flemish or Walloon labourers. But, at any rate,

the classic severity with which he has treated an essentially modern

theme strikes us as thoroughly honest. There is no trace of a pose.

Thornycroft has set down what he saw and what he felt. The hint of

the Greek manner in the representation of the English labourer only

reminds us that the sculptor who would express the beauty of the male

form to-day is faced with the very task which the Athenian essayed 2000

years ago.

Leighton’s “Athlete and Python,” Brock’s “Eve” and Thornycroft’s

“Mower” must, then, be compared with the works of such Frenchmen as

Chapu, Idrac and Dubois. From the three Englishmen we turn naturally

enough to the sculptors who represent the movement in English art

corresponding to the anti-academic revolt in France. The characteristic

common to Leighton, Brock, and Thornycroft is a certain emotional

restraint. They seem to content themselves with the truthful

representation of natural beauty. From none of the three do we gain the

impression of a forceful individuality striving after self-expression.

Nevertheless, there is a movement in English art comparable with the

anti-academic revolt in France.

THE GROWTH OF INDIVIDUALISM

Alfred Gilbert is the Carpeaux and the Rodin of English sculpture. The

analogy must not be pressed too closely. But, as the first sculptor

to widen the bounds of his art by arousing his fellows to a sense of

fresh technical possibilities, the influence of Alfred Gilbert may

rightly be compared with that of Carpeaux. Through the constancy and

power with which he has asseverated his belief in sculpture as a means

of emotional expression, Gilbert ranks as the English Rodin.

Unlike Rodin, Gilbert has never severed his connection with the

academic school. Indeed, the Professorship of Sculpture at the Royal

Academy was actually revived in his favour in 1901. But Gilbert’s

artistic creed is essentially Rodinesque. Again and again he has

preached from the text:

“Be your own star.”

Again and again he has impressed upon the sculptors of to-morrow

the vital truth—that the future lies with men who will dare to put

themselves into marble and bronze. He has never tired of reiterating

his belief that for the sculptor:

“Strength is from within, and one against the world will always win.”

Born in 1854, Alfred Gilbert realized his vocation in early youth.

As a boy it is said that he carved heads of walking sticks for his

schoolmates. He confesses himself that he hired a small room near

Aldenham School at 1_s_. a week as a studio. Coming up to London,

he finally entered the Royal Academy schools and joined Sir Edgar

Boehm—Queen Victoria’s sculptor in ordinary—as an “improver.” After

losing the R.A. Gold Medal to Thornycroft, he crossed to Paris,

studying at the École des Beaux Arts.

Gilbert has put on record his reasons for leaving France. They are

thoroughly typical of the sculptor. Finding the influences at work

were too potent to allow of the due assertion of his own personality,

he determined to go to Italy—a stronghold of individualism. “In

Florence,” he tells us, “I saw, for the first time in my life,

the works of the fathers of the Renaissance, and I was struck by

the absolute independence and freedom of thought and truthful

representation of the ideas they possessed. So impressed was I with the

fact that their representations were not mere photographs and yet so

true to nature, that they seemed to reveal to me what I then understood

as style, but which I have since learnt to regard as the expression of

an individuality.”

This is the essence of the artistic philosophy of Alfred Gilbert. It

adumbrates a high ideal, but allied with sane craftsmanship, it is one

which has always served the sculptor who honestly strove to put its

precepts into practice. What has been the outcome in Gilbert’s case?

There is a strain of pathos in the answer. No sculptor of our day has

had more abundant opportunities. Yet, somehow, Fortune has proved a

fickle jade to Gilbert. This is particularly the case with his larger

works.

The Shaftesbury Memorial, in Piccadilly Circus, should be regarded by

every Londoner as an epoch-making work. It compares with Stevens’s

monument to the Duke of Wellington in the wealth, imagination and

craftsmanship lavished upon it. In point of fact, it is held in

universal disregard. Not one Londoner in a thousand even troubles to

remember the name of the sculptor.

The Shaftesbury Memorial was conceived under an unlucky star. Alfred

Gilbert was about thirty years of age when the commission reached him.

He accepted it as the chance of a lifetime. The design has always been

admitted to be a masterpiece, but throughout its erection, the Memorial

was dogged by misfortune, until, as it stands to-day it can hardly be

said to represent the sculptor’s idea at all. This is due to causes

largely outside his control. It is true that the aluminium figure of

the archer which surmounts it has darkened and has lost its first

silvery lightness. It may be alleged that Gilbert should have foreseen

the eventuality. But in several material respects the Memorial differs

entirely from what he proposed. At the very last moment a new base

was added at the request of a party of humanitarians who were anxious

that the thirsty Londoner might not be disappointed. Alfred Gilbert’s

design did not contemplate this, but the London County Council held

that, since the monument had taken the form of a fountain, it was only

logical—logical, forsooth!—that water should be there for man and

beast. Later the design was shorn of its ground-floor—which was to

have been a bronze basin. This space is now occupied by the steps.

The sculptor contemplated the water from the fountain playing into

the basin. The change actually reduced the structure by six feet.

Finally, the cry of a too large water bill was raised, and the jets of

all shapes and forms, which were to have played among the fishes that

form the principal part of the decorative scheme, were reduced to the

present trickle.

Our readers may remember how the artists of Florence turned out to

debate what site the “David” of the youthful Michael Angelo was to

occupy. A less tragic note would sound through the story of the

Shaftesbury Memorial if the sculptor had had to deal with a similar

body of men, instead of a committee chosen for its ability to collect

subscriptions and a soulless corporation like the London County

Council.

[Illustration: ALFRED GILBERT

SAINT GEORGE From the Clarence Memorial, Windsor]

In the nature of things it is hard to illustrate the whole of a full

and vigorous personality from one or two of his works. Perhaps Gilbert,

in his double capacity of craftsman and imaginative designer, can best

be judged from the Tomb of the late Duke of Clarence, in the Memorial

Chapel, Windsor. It has a double interest, inasmuch as it reveals at

once the strength and the weakness of his method.

Directly after the sad death of the Prince in 1892, the sculptor

was called to Sandringham. He arrived on the Saturday and learnt

the wishes of the present King and Queen. During the Sunday night

Gilbert conceived and designed the whole monument. Three days later he

submitted the completed sketch.

He knew the Wolsey Chapel in which the tomb was to be placed to be

of Gothic design and, consequently, determined upon a sarcophagus,

surrounded by an open-work grille, such as Peter Vischer might have

chosen. As it is to be seen to-day, the recumbent figure of the

Prince lies upon the bier. Two angels kneel, the one at the head, the

other at the feet. With beautiful fancy, Gilbert has carved the first

holding a crown above the dead man’s head—the crown of immortality,

which prince, peer and peasant can earn. The angel at the base of the

sarcophagus places a broken wreath on the feet—in memory of a death

upon the eve of marriage.

The figure of the “Saint George” is one of a series of Patron Saints

introduced into the grille. St. Nicholas, St. Edward the Confessor, St.

Barbara, and St. George are included, the selection depending upon some

legendary connection with the Royal House of Britain.

The “Saint George” was exhibited in the form of a statuette at the

Royal Academy. The poetical design and fine craftsmanship aroused

general enthusiasm. What could be more charming, for example, than the

grace with which Gilbert has played with his pretty fancy of basing

the armour of the Saint upon forms suggested by the sea-shells? Yet

there is nothing oppressive in the sculptor’s use of this idea. It is

never permitted to interfere with the main lines of the figure. The

insistence upon the shell-like forms has, rather, a fugal charm, the

fancy being treated now in one part of the design, now in another, a

slightly varying form here, answering a similar one there, until all

have been interwoven into one beautiful complexity.

Unfortunately, the praise that is due to a work as beautiful as the

“Saint George” cannot be given to the Clarence Memorial as a whole.

Indeed, in its place, the effect of the statuette, instead of being

heightened, is diminished. The instance is typical of the impression

left by the complete work. Brilliantly imaginative as the general

conception was, the original ideas have not fused into that grand unity

which is the last test of the greatest works of art. Between the first

conception of a great memorial—say the Medici Chapel, the Tomb of

Maximilian, or the Clarence Memorial—and the final result, there is a

great gulf fixed. More than imaginative craftsmanship is required to

bridge this. The task calls for unswerving patience and not a little

business tact. In one or another of these faculties, Gilbert seems to

be lacking. The imagination and craftsmanship which produce a work like

the “Saint George” flag before a commission of the first magnitude is

completed. An artistic creed like Alfred Gilbert’s is a magnificent

thing. But it needs to be allied with strength of character and a

rigid self-criticism. Had the English sculptor added a measure of the

nature of Michael Angelo to the strain of rich poetry and high artistic

ideality with which he has been endowed, England would have been able

to boast a genius of the first order. As things are, it can be grateful

for—an Alfred Gilbert.

[Illustration: ONSLOW FORD

EGYPTIAN SINGER Tate Gallery, London]

The sculptor who shared with Alfred Gilbert the honour of having been

the earliest Englishman to express through marble and bronze the

whole of a rich poetical philosophy was Onslow Ford. Born in 1852 and

sending his first work of sculpture to the Academy in 1875, Onslow Ford

received his early training as a painter. Indeed, he never had any

systematic instruction as a sculptor. He came into notice by winning

the “Rowland Hill” competition, the result being the statue which

stands behind the Royal Exchange, within a stone’s-throw of Dalou’s

charming bronze fountain, “Maternity.”

Very shortly after he carved the magnificent marble “Henry Irving as

Hamlet,” now at the Guildhall, the property of the Corporation of

London. The “Henry Irving” is one of the most complete efforts in

English art. The beauty of the design and the powerful modelling of

the face and hands, place the statue in the very forefront of modern

English sculpture. Added to this is the magnificent realism with which

the sculptor has preserved the sense of theatrical portraiture. The

figure is not Henry Irving; nor is it Hamlet. The imaginative insight

of the artist has been able to reach an absolute fusion of the two

ideas. It really is “Henry Irving as Hamlet.”

No reference to the genius of Onslow Ford would be complete without a

word as to his statuettes, particularly as “sculpture in little” may

well prove to be the means whereby the English sculptor will regain the

attention of the art-buyer in the near future.

One of Onslow Ford’s most charming efforts in this direction is the

delightfully whimsical “Folly.” It represents a figure with the

adolescent charms of budding womanhood balancing herself on the edge of

a precipitous rock. Toes clutching at the slippery edge—a fancy which

is characteristic of Onslow Ford—“Folly” is calling to the foolish

to follow the dream picture she can see in the distance. The charm of

the little work lies in the freshness of the conception, the perfect

balance of the figure and the beautiful realism with which form and

flesh have been rendered. “The Egyptian Singer” (Tate Gallery) is an

equally charming example of the sculptor’s art.

Onslow Ford died in 1901. A sculptor of almost equal genius, though

of less prolific accomplishment, was lost to English sculpture at an

equally early age. We are referring to Harry Bates (1847-1899). There

are two fine examples of his work at the Tate Gallery, London. Note

the grace with which the artist’s imagination has given a new turn

to so hackneyed a theme as the myth of Pandora: Bates’s “Pandora” is

less an illustration of the Greek story than it is of an episode in

the life-history of a woman of to-day. A sweet, virginal figure, she

is opening the box in which Fate has hidden the unknown, without a

premonition of the sorrows which must attend the revelation of the

secret.

The equally well-known “Hounds in Leash,” was sculptured by Bates to

prove that he was as much at home in treating a subject requiring the

expression of vigorous action as he was in the treatment of figures at

rest.

[Illustration: HARRY BATES

PANDORA Tate Gallery, London]

[Illustration: J. M. SWAN

“ORPHEUS”]

There are many sculptors in England at the present time who would claim

attention were our survey an exhaustive one. This, of course, is not

our purpose. It will therefore suffice to recall two other works in

proof of the intense individualism of latter-day sculpture in Great

Britain.

The first is J. M. Swan’s charming statuette “Orpheus,” exhibited in

the Royal Academy of 1895.

J. M. Swan is, of course, the painter. He studied first at Lambeth,

then at the Academy and finally at Paris, where he came under the

influence of Frémiet, the animal sculptor. It is as a sculptor of

animals that Swan has made his reputation. Indeed he may be roughly

labelled as the English Barye.

Note how delightfully the sinuousness of the lithe figure of the

“Orpheus” is rendered. Here we have the spirit, not the echo, of the

Greek myth. Like Barye, Swan is a realist, though his method is the

reverse of realistic, since he is more concerned with the masses than

the details. Swan’s supreme gift lies in his power to detect character

in the whole of the human and animal form. His charm depends on the

delightfully individualistic methods by which he expresses his insight.

None of his statuettes ever strike us as coming from another man’s

studio.

An equally strong individualistic note is struck in George Frampton’s

“Mysteriarch.”

This beautiful marble was exhibited in the Academy of 1893. It

affords a fine example of the sculptor’s art at its best. The bust

is set in front of a gilded disc supported upon an architecturally

treated screen, the figure being cut, Florentine fashion, just below

the shoulders. The treatment of the subject is in a high degree

imaginative, while the subtlety with which the serene severity of the

face is rendered proves the possession of fine technical powers.

George Frampton was born in 1860. He studied, like Harry Bates, under

Mr. Frith at Lambeth, passed on to the Academy school, and finished by

gaining the Gold Medal in 1887. He has since acted as an art adviser to

the Technical Education Board of the London County Council, a position

which has enabled him to give a wide currency to very definite artistic

ideals. He is one of the men with whom the future of English sculpture

rests.

This brief sketch of modern British sculpture completes our task. Our

aim has been to map out the entire history of the art. In our view the

study of the development of sculpture in terms of isolated craftsmen

would have involved a basic fallacy. The individual is no more than the

crest of a wave in the sea of mental, emotional and physical energy,

whence art arises. We have, therefore, been content to note the various

forms in which a common temper has found expression.

Doubtless it would have been possible to trace an international traffic

in thought and emotion. Its main channels might have been correlated

with the manifestations of an international art spirit. We have

preferred to avoid the standpoint of cosmopolitanism and individualism

alike, choosing the middle position—that of nationalism. The

proposition that every great art is essentially a national art may be

disputed. But it has the merit of not requiring actual demonstration.

Most of us _feel_ that the artist must draw the greater part of his

inspiration from the men and women with whom he lives and to whom he

appeals. The only thing to avoid is a too narrow use of the word.

“National” does not connote a merely territorial or a supposed racial

bond. Coleridge defined the term for all time when he wrote: “I, for

one, do not call the sod under my feet my country; but language,

religion, laws, government, blood, identity in these make men of one

country.”

[Illustration: GEORGE FRAMPTON

“MYSTERIARCH”]

That art alone is truly living which is a record and an interpretation

of national life—an epitome of the loves and the hates, the sorrows

and the joys, the caprices and the enthusiasms, of men like ourselves.

We have demonstrated that the marbles and the bronzes of the greater

schools of sculpture of the past answer to this supreme test. Surely

this justifies the proposition with which we started—“that they are

not dead things which may be left to gather dust in unfrequented

museums and galleries.”

One further claim upon the affection and regard of this restless

century may be made. Much of the greatest sculpture speaks of other

days than ours. It tells of times

“Before this strange disease of modern life,

With its sick hurry, its divided aims,

Its heads o’ertax’d, its palsied hearts, was rife.”

LIST OF BOOKS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

STURGIS (Russell). Annotated Bibliography of

Fine Art, Boston (Mass.). 1897

QUARITCH (Bernard). Catalogue of Works on the

Fine Arts (London). 1904

JELLINEK (Arthur L.). Art Bibliography. 1902

GREEK SCULPTURE IN GENERAL

JONES (Henry Stuart). Select Passages from

Ancient Writers illustrative of the History of

Greek Sculpture (with a Translation). 1895

FRAZER (J. G.). Pausanias (translated). 1900

GARDNER (Percy) and IMHOOF-BLUMER. A

numismatic Commentary on Pausanias, &c. 1887

GARDNER (Ernest Arthur). Ancient Athens

(Illustrated). 1902

COLLIGNON (Maxime). La Polychromie dans la

Sculpture Grecque. 1898

COLLIGNON (Maxime). Manual of Mythology in

relation to Greek Art. 1890

LÖWY. Inschriften griechischer Bildhauer. 1885

Journal of Hellenic Studies. Society for the

Promotion of Hellenic Studies. 1880, &c.

American Journal of Archæology (Baltimore). 1885, &c.

FURTWAENGLER (Adolf). Masterpieces of

Greek Sculpture Translated by Eugénie Sellers

(Illustrated). 1895

GARDNER (Ernest Arthur). A Handbook of Greek

Sculpture. 1905

COLLIGNON (Maxime). Histoire de la Sculpture

Grecque (Illustrated). 1892-93

MURRAY (Alexander Stuart). A History of Greek

Sculpture (Illustrated). 1890

AMELUNG and HOLTZINGER. Museums and

Ruins of Rome (edited by Mrs. Strong)

BRITISH MUSEUM. Official Guide to Sculpture

Galleries.

MURRAY (A. Stuart). Greek Bronzes (Portfolio).

1899

WALTERS (Henry Beauchamp). Catalogue of the

Bronzes British Museum (Illustrated). 1899

PERROT (Georges) and CHIPIEZ (Charles).

Histoire de L’Art dans L’Antiquité. 1891

Les Fouilles de Delphes, vol. ii. Sculpture

PARIS (Pierre). Polyclete (Les Artistes

Célèbres). 1895

MURRAY (A. Stuart). The Sculptures of the

Parthenon (Illustrated). 1903

WALDSTEIN (Charles). Essays on the Art of

Phidias. 1885

COLLIGNON (Maxime). Phidias (Les Artistes

Célèbres). 1886

DEFRASSE (A.). and LECHAT (H.)

Épidaure—Restauration et description des

principaux monuments du Sanctuaire d’Asclépios

(Illustrated). 1895

GARDNER (Percy). Sculptured Tombs of Hellas

(Illustrated). 1896

PERROT (George). Praxitèle (Les Grands Artistes

Series) (Illustrated). 1905

CURTIUS (E.) and ADLER (F.). Olympia

(Illustrated). 1898

HAMDI BEY and REINACH (T.). Necropole la

Royale á Sidon (Illustrated). 1892-6

COLLIGNON (Maxime). Lysippe (Les Grands Artistes

Series) (Illustrated). 1905

POST-ALEXANDRIAN AND ROMAN SCULPTURE

BEVAN (E. R.). House of Seleucus. 1902

COLLIGNON (Maxime). Pergame (Restauration par

E. Pontremoli) (Illustrated). 1900

TORR (C.). Rhodes in Ancient Times. 1885

MAHAFFY (J. P.). Empire of Ptolemies. 1895

WICKHOFF (Franz). Roman Art. Translated by Mrs.

S. A. Strong (Illustrated). 1900

MRS. S. A. STRONG. Roman Art (Illustrated). 1907

SYMONDS (J. A.). Antinous, from Italian Sketches

and Studies. 1898

ITALIAN SCULPTURE IN GENERAL

VASARI. The Lives of the Painters and Sculptors.

SYMONDS (J. A.). Renaissance in Italy (vol. iv.

The Fine Arts). 1877

VENTURI (A.). Storia dell Arte Italiana

(Illustrated). 1901

BODE (Wilhelm). Renaissance Bronzes

(Illustrated). 1907

PERKINS (C. C.). Italian Sculpture. 1883

REYMOND (Marcel). La Sculpture Florentine

(Illustrated). 1897

FREEMAN (L. J.). Italian Sculpture of the

Renaissance. 1901

THE PISANI AND THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY

CONWAY (W. Martin). Early Tuscan Art. From the

Twelfth to the Fifteenth Centuries (Illustrated). 1902

WEIR (J. P.). Photographs of Baptistery Gates

(L. Ghiberti), Yale College. 1873

DOUGLAS (R. L.). History of Siena. Chapter upon

Jacopo della Quercia

LORD BALCARRES. Donatello (Illustrated). 1903

CRUTWELL (Maud). Luca and Andrea della Robbia

(Illustrated). 1902

MICHAEL ANGELO AND THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY

SYMONDS (J. A.). Life of Michael Angelo

(Illustrated). 1893

HOLROYD (C). Michael Angelo, with translation of

Life by Condivi. 1903

BENVENUTO CELLINI. Autobiography. Translated by

J. A. Symonds

DESJARDINS. Jean Bologne—La Vie et l’œuvre

FRASCHETTI (S). Il Bernini (Illustrated). 1900

SCULPTURE OF MONARCHICAL FRANCE

HEADLAM (Cecil). Peter Vischer (Handbook of the

Great Craftsmen). 1906

GONSE (Louis). French Sculpture in the

Fourteenth Century. 1895

GONSE (Louis). Chefs d’œuvres des Musée de

France (Illustrated). 1900-4

PATTISON (Mrs. E. F. S.) (Lady Dilke).

Renaissance of Art in France (Illustrated). 1879

LISTER (Reginald). Jean Goujon (Illustrated). 1903

AUQUIER (Philipe). Pierre Puget (Les Grands

Artistes Series) (Illustrated).

PATTISON (Mrs. E. F. S.) (Lady Dilke). French

Sculptors of the Eighteenth Century (Illustrated). 1900

TARBÉ (Prosper). Vie et œuvres de Pigalle

(Illustrated). 1859

THIRION (Henri). Les Adam et Clodion

(Illustrated). 1885

DIERKS. Life of Houdon (In German). 1887

POST-REVOLUTIONARY SCULPTURE

CICOGNARA. Works of Canova (Illustrated). 1876

PLON (Eugene). Thorvaldsen. Life and Works.

Translated by Mrs. Cashel Hoey (Illustrated). 1874

HAMERTON (P. G.). Life of Rude (Modern Frenchman). 1878

FOURCAUD (L. de.). Life of Rude (Illustrated).

1904

SCOTT (W. B.). British School of Sculpture. 1872

COLVIN (Sidney). Flaxman. 1876

MODERN SCULPTURE

BROWNELL (W. C.). French Art. 1902

CLARÉTIE (J.). Contemporary Sculpture

(Illustrated). 1881-7

ARSÈNE (Alexandre). Life of A. L. Barye

(Illustrated). 1889

CHESNAU (E.). Le Statuaire de J. B. Carpeaux

(Illustrated). 1880

DREYFOUS (M.). Dalou. La vie et son Œuvre

(Illustrated). 1903

LAWTON (F.). Life of Rodin (Illustrated). 1906

MAUCLAIR (C.). Rodin. 1905

SPIELMANN (M. H.). British Sculptures and

Sculptors of To-day (Illustrated). 1901

HATTON (Joseph). Alfred Gilbert. Art Journal

(Illustrated). 1903

ARMSTRONG (W.). Life of Stevens. 1881

STANNUS (Hugh). Alfred Stevens (Illustrated). 1891

WILLARD (A. R.). History of Modern Italian Art

(Illustrated). 1900

TAFT (L.). History of American Sculpture

(Illustrated). 1903

DESTREE (O. G.). Sculpture in Belgium

(Portfolio) (Illustrated). 1905

LEMONNIER (Camille). Constantin Meunier

(Illustrated). 1904

WIEGAND (Otto). German Sculpture.

INDEX

Abbey, Edwin, 289

Academy, Royal

Foundation of, 258, 261

Schools, 289, 290, 294

Medals, 261, 289, 291, 294, 302

Exhibits at, 297, 299, 301

Accademia delle Belle Arti, 204

Achæan League, 108

Acropolis at Athens, 12, 27, 77, 260

At Pergamus, 91

Ægospotami, 47, 194

Æschylus, 8, 194

Ætolian League, 109

“Africa,” by Theed, 285

Agasias, 69

Agatharchus, painter, 56

Ageladas, 23

“Age of Brass,” by Rodin, 273, 275

Agesander, 94

“Agias” of Lysippus, 73

Agostino di Duccio, 186

“Agriculture,” by Thornycroft (the elder), 285

Alaric, 139

Albert Memorial, 284, 285

Alcamenes, 36, 50

“Pentathlon Winner” of, 23

Alcibiades, 56

Alexander the Great, 66

Portrait by Lysippus, 78

Alexander of Pheræ, 66

Alexandria, sculpture of, 97, 98

“The Nile,” 97, 98

Conquest by Rome, 116

Alexandrian Empire, 84, 85

Allée d’Eau at Versailles, 239

Altar of Zeus. _See_ Zeus

Aluminium, 296

Aldenham School

Alfred Gilbert at, 294

Amboise, Cardinal of, 228

American sculpture. _See_ Preface

Amphion, 97

Anet, Castle of, 230

Angelico, Fra, 165, 184

Angelo. _See_ Michael Angelo

Angers, David d’, 265

Anne of Brittany, 226

Antigonus, 86

Antinopolis, 137

Antinous, 137, 138

Antioch, on the Orontes, 86, 87

Antiochus IV., 88

Antipater, 86

Apamea, City of, 87

Aphrodite

Hellenistic conception of, 111

“Aphrodite of Cnidus,” 61-64, 96, 228

Comparison with “Venus of Medici,” 112

Compared with Canova’s “Venus,” 249, 250

Apollo

Type fixed by Praxiteles, 57

“Apollo Belvedere,” 105, 108, 228

Count Stroganoff’s statuette, 106-107

Comparison with Pergamene style, 107

Popularity in eighteenth century, 248

“Apollo and Daphne” by Bernini, 218

“Apollo and the Nymphs,” by Girardon, 237-239

“Apoxyomenus” of Lysippus, 68-70, 74, 75

Ara Pacis, of Augustus, 130

Aratus, 108

Archaistic art, 12, 122

Architecture, 12, 29, 145, 146, 149, 152, 198, 222

“Ares Ludovisi,” 71

Argos, 108

Second to Athens as an artistic centre, 22, 31

“Ariadne” in Vatican, 228

Aristogiton, 13

Aristonidas of Rhodes, 103

Armourers, Guild of, Florence, 172

Armstead, H. H., 284, 285

Artemesia, 48, 49

“Artemis of Versailles,” 106

Asceticism

In Gothic art, 152

In Italian Renaissance, 165, 173, 177

In French sculpture, 231

“Asclepius,” British Museum, 42

“Asia,” by Foley, 285

Aspasia, 60

Assisi, Francis of, 156-157, 161

Assisi, Upper Church at, 157

“Athamas,” Statue by Aristonidas, 103

Athena, 27

Polias, 30

Parthenos, 8, 28-32, 35, 119

“Lemnian Athena,” of Phidias, 77

“Triumph of Athena,” at Pergamus, 92, 112

Athenodorus, 94

Athens, 8, 22, 44, 77, 84

Influence of Ionia, 11, 12

Painted dedicatory statues from Acropolis, 12-13

Superiority over Dorian School, 22-24

Effects of Persian invasion, 25, 28

Parthenon, 27-33

Decline of Empire, 44-49

“Athens, the school of Hellas,” 47, 48

Ceramicus at, 54-55

Growth of individualism in, 53-56

Women in, 58-60, 110-112

Historical circumstances (362-338 B.C.), 66-68

Influence upon Alexandrian Empire, 84, 85

In Hellenistic times, 101-102, 114

Plundered by Sulla, 119

Visited by Roman Republicans, 118

Rebuilt, by Hadrian, 137, 138

Athens Museum, 12, 13, 103

“Athlete struggling with Python,” by Leighton, 281, 287, 288, 293

Athletic statuary

Influence upon Hellenic art, 14-24, 169

In fourth century, 67-69

Attalus I., 91

Augustus Cæsar, 124, 131

Augustan Rome last Hellenistic centre, 127

“Organiser of Roman Imperialism,” 124, 125, 129, 130

Statue of, in Vatican, 125, 127, 128

Ara Pacis of, 130

Aurelius, Marcus

Equestrian statue of, 139

German invasion under, 139

Austrian ascendency in Italy, 200, 218

Autobiography of Cellini, 203, 204, 205-209, 228-229

Avila, Convent of St. Joseph, 217

Babou de la Bourdaisière, 225

Babylonia, 7, 11, 35, 266

Baily, E. H., 284

Banks, Thomas, 284

Baptistery at Florence, 162, 199, 275

Barbara, St., 297

Barberini Maffeo, 214

Bargello, 173, 210

Baroco style. _Also see_ Bernini, 216

Barye, 265, 267, 301

“Centaur and Lapith,” 266

Bates, Harry, 288, 290, 302

“Pandora,” 300

Baudelaire, 275

Bayeaux, 148

Bedford, Duke of, 259

Belgian school, 237, 292, 293

Bellini, Giovanni, 184

“Belvedere Apollo.” _See_ Apollo

Bentivoglio, 181

Berlin Museum, 92

Bernini and the Catholic reaction, 198, 200, 212-218

Rebuilds St. Peter’s, 214

“St. Teresa,” by, 216-217

“Apollo and Daphne,” by, 218

Fountains by, 218

Visit to France, 235

Influence upon Puget, 237

“Birth of Venus,” by Botticelli, 196

Boehm, Sir Edgar, 294

Boethus of Chalcedon, 115

Bologna, 181

Bologna, Giovanni, 198, 200, 203, 218

“Mercury,” by, 210

“Rape of Sabine Women,” by, 211

Influence upon French School, 211

Characteristics of his art, 210-212

Bontemps, 227

Borghese, Pauline, 249-250

Borgia, Cæsar, 200

Borgia, Francis, 215

Boscoreale, 115

Botticelli, 184, 187, 196, 222, 232

Boucher, 243

Bourges, 148, 150

“Boy strangling Goose,” 115

Brennus, 106

British Museum, 77, 230, 258

British school, 256-262, 280-302

Northern art, characteristics of, 221-224

Italian influence in sixteenth century, 256-257

Historical circumstances during seventeenth and

eighteenth centuries,257, 258

Society of Dilettanti, 258-260

Pseudo-Greek canon, effects of, 260-262, 281, 293

Mid-Victorian, 283-285

Comparison with French, 257, 280, 281, 293

Naturalistic revival, 285-293

Growth of individualism, 293-302

Brock, Thomas, 290, 293

“Eve,” 290

Victoria Memorial, 290

Bronze, 24, 103, 105, 120, 121

Compared with marble, 68

Original Greek, 102, 115, 121

Casting of Cellini’s “Perseus,” 205-209

Brotherhood of San Michele, 171

Brunelleschi, Filippo, 163, 173

Bruni d’Arezzo, Leonardo, 166

“Bruno, St.” by Houdon, 244

Buonarroti, Ludovico, 185

Burlington House, 282

Byron, 89, 266

Byzantine art, 140, 141, 155

Cæsar, Julius, 119

Founder of Roman Imperialism, 124, 129

Portrait bust, 125, 126, 130

Calydonian boar, 72

Canova, 244-256, 262

His Hellenism compared with Donatello’s, 174

A borrowed Hellenism, 247, 254, 262, 281

“Cupid and Psyche,” 249

“Pauline Borghese,” 249, 250

Napoleon, statue of, 250

Flaxman compared with, 261, 262

French School, influence on, 263, 271

British School, influence on, 281-284

“Cantoria,” by Luca della Robbia, 178, 179

By Donatella, 178

Caracalla, Baths of, 97

Carpeaux, 265, 267, 268, 271, 285

Art training, 267

“Flora,” by, 267, 274

“Dance,” by, 268

Caraffa, 213

Carrara marble mines, 154, 191

Carrier-Belleuse, 273

Catholic Church

Attitude of early Church towards sculpture, 140, 141

Gothic Art, influence on, 146-152, 165

Italian Platonists, 174

Patrons of sculptors in fifteenth and sixteenth centuries,

190, 191, 199

Catholic reaction, 198, 200, 212-218

Historical circumstances, 212-214

Effect on sculpture, 214-218

Ideals of, 215-216

Effect on sculpture, 216-217

and Puget, 237

Cella of Parthenon, 29

Cellini, Benvenuto, 198, 200, 203-210, 218

Early life, 204

French visit, 205, 228, 257

“Perseus,” 205-210

“Jove,” silver statue of, 229

Michael Angelo compared with, 210

“Centaur and Lapith,” by Barye, 266

Ceramicus, 54, 55

Cerigotto bronze, 102

Chæronea, 66, 67

Chambord, Châteaux of, 227

“Chant du Départ,” by Rude, 255, 267

Chantrey, Sir F., 284

Chantrey Bequest, 288

Chapu, Henri, 293

“Charioteer of Delphi,” 14

Mausoleum, comparison with Delphi Charioteer, 50

Chares of Lindus, 104

Charles the Great, 145, 146, 234

Charles V., 202, 213

Charles VIII., 225, 228

Chartres, 148, 150

Chatsworth, 252

Chiarmonti, “Daughter of Niobe,” 51

Child with Lantern, Terme Museum, 115

Chios, 12

Christianity

Attitude towards sculpture, 117, 140, 141, 224

_See also_ Catholic Church

Chryselephantine statues, 36, 56

Athena Parthenos, 28

Zeus at Olympia, 36

Hera at Argos, 36

Asclepius at Epidaurus, 42

Cimon, 26, 27, 181

Cipriani, 260

Cithæron, 97

City-state system

Civic pride in fifth-century Greece, 15, 16, 26, 27, 33,

41, 108, 153

Necessity for physical fitness in Greece, 16, 17, 18, 67, 68, 69

Decline of civic pride, 46, 48, 49, 67

Political circumstances in fourth century, 46, 47, 67

Effects on sculpture, 69, 79, 80

Hellenistic age, 108, 109, 110

In France, 147, 148

In Northern Italy, 153, 154, 160, 166, 169, 181, 199, 200, 214

Clarence, Duke of, 297

Clarence Memorial, Windsor, 297-299

Clement VII., 191, 192

Clement XIII., 244

Clermont, 147

Clodion (Claude, François Michel), 243

Cluet, Jean, 225

Cluny Museum, 243

Cnidus. _See_ Praxiteles’ Aphrodite

Cockerell, C. R., 50

Colbert, 235, 236

Colleoni Monument, by Verocchio and Leopardi, 139, 180

Collignon, Maxime, 129

Colombe, Michel

Tomb of Francis II. of Brittany, 225

Founder of School of Tours, 225

Colossus at Rhodes, 104

Colour in statuary

Athenian dedicatory, 13

Parthenon, 29

Mausoleum, 50

Aphrodite of Cnidus, 62

Sidon Sarcophagi, 76

“Augustus” in Vatican, 127, 128

Collignon’s “Polychromie dans la Sculpture Grecque,” 129

Evidence from wall paintings at Pompeii and Herculaneum, 129

“Tinted Venus,” by Gibson, 282

Commune, 272

Company of Jesus. _See_ Jesuits

Condé, Hotel de, 235

Condivi, 188-189

Congreve, 114

Constable de Bourbon, 204

Constantine, 140

Constantinople, 76, 140

Convent of St. Paul, Parma, 195

Copenhagen, 251

Corinth, 119

Correggio, 184, 195, 222, 277

Corupedion, Battle of, 86

Cos, 61

Cosimo de Medici, 181-182, 192, 201

Cosimo, Piero di, 187

Cosmopolitanism, influence of modern, 110, 246, 302

Council of Trent, 202, 213

Cour des Comptes, Paris, 275

Cousin, 227

“Creation Panel” in Ghiberti’s Baptistery gates, 165

Cresilas, 77

Criticism, modern sculptural, 70-76

Critius, 14

Crusades, 147, 154

“Cupid and Psyche,” by Canova, 249

“Cupid and Psyche,” by Thorvaldsen, 251

“Cupid, The Winged,” Mr. Pierpont Morgan’s, 115

Dalou, Jules

Pierre Puget and, 237

École des Beaux Arts, 271, 272, 289, 290

“Triumph of Silenus,” 272

Rodin, connection with, 271

Visit to England, 272, 287, 288

“Maternity” by, 299

“Danaid, Fallen,” by Rodin, 274

“Dance,” by Carpeaux, 268

Dante, influence on Rodin, 275

Dashwood, Sir Francis, 259

“David,” by Donatello, 173, 174, 188

By Michael Angelo, 185-188, 296

David d’Angers, 265

David (painter), 253

“Dawn,” by Michael Angelo, 193, 194, 196, 278

“Death of Socrates,” 54

Dedicatory offerings, Greek, 13, 18

Delacroix, 264, 266

Delafosse, 239

Delphi, 73, 106, 119

Demetrius, of Alopece, 79

Demosthenes, 66, 67

Devonshire, Duke of, 252

“Dexileus Relief,” 54

“Diadumenus” of Polyclitus, 22

“Diana,” archaistic, Naples, 12

“Diana,” by Houdon, 244

Diana of Poitiers, 230-231, 232

Statue of, in Louvre, 230

Diappus, his “Perixyomenus,” 74, 75

Dijon, 255

Diocletian, 140

Dionysus, Theatre of, 67

Diploma Gallery, London, 282, 284

Dirce, 97

“Discobolus” of Myron, 15, 21, 23

“Standing Discobolus,” 23

Donatello, 168-174

Assists Ghiberti, 164, 168

Burgher patrons, 169, 170, 199

Or San Michele, 172

“St. Mark,” its Gothic character, 172, 173

“St. George,” 172, 173

“David,” 173, 188

Platonism, influence of, 173-176

Pisani, comparison with, 177, 178

Cantoria, 178

Luca della Robbia and, 178

Rodin, compared with, 278, 279

Dorchester House, 286

Dorian invasion, 9

Dorian sculptors, 22

_See also_ Polyclitus

“Doryphorus” of Polyclitus, 22

Drama, Greek, 8

Drapery, 31, 152

Dresden Gallery, 194

Dubois, Paul, 270, 293

Duomo at Florence, 187, 195

Durer, 224

“Dying Gaul,” 88-93

Inspired by Gaulish invasion, 89, 90

Compared with later Pergamene art, 92, 93

“Dying Jocasta,” 103, 104

Eastern Empire. _See_ Byzantium

École des Beaux Arts

Rude’s opinion, 254

Influence on French sculpture, 269-272

Rodin and, 274

Compared with Royal Academy, 289

Alfred Gilbert and, 294, 295

Egypt

Ancient, 7, 9, 11, 35

Ptolemaic age, 97, 98

Hadrian, time of, 137

“Egyptian Singer,” by Onslow Ford, 300

Elgin marbles, 30, 31, 260

Elgin, Thomas, Earl of, 260

Elusis, Sacred Way to, 54

Epheboi, 67

Epidaurus

Chryselephantine statue of Asclepius at, 42

“Eros” of Praxiteles, 60

Of Thespiae, by Praxiteles, 61

Of Centocelle, 61

’Estampe, Madame D., 229

Este family, 181

Eumenes II., 91

Euphranor, 36

Eutychides of Sicyon, 87

“Eve,” by Brock, 290, 293

Exhibitions of 1851 and 1862, 283, 284

Falconet, Etienne Maurice, 242

“L’amour Menaçant,” 242, 243

Falguière, 270

Falieri, Senator, 249

“Falling Titan,” by Banks, 284

“Farnese Bull,” 97

“Farnese Hercules,” 101, 102

“Fates, The Three,” from Parthenon pediment, 31, 112

Feltre, Vittorino of, 174-175

Ferrara, 160, 181

Ferruccio, Francesco, 187

Fireplace, by Alfred Stevens, at Dorchester House, 286

Flaxman

Connection with Neo-classical revival, 246, 247, 254, 261, 262

Early life, 261

Wedgwood, association with, 261

“Michael and Satan,” 261

Homeric illustrations, 262

Elgin marbles, opinion upon, 260

Successors of, 281, 284

“Flora,” by Carpeaux, 267, 274

Florence

Struggles between Empire and Papacy, 153

Rise of city-state system, 153

Contention between city and city, 160, 169

Centre of intellectual activity in Italy, 160

Influence of Pisani upon sculpture, 157, 158, 164

Increase in trade and wealth, 169

Burghers’ pride in city, 169

Florentine guilds, their political influence, 169

Commissions for Baptistery gates, 162-164, 166, 169

Or San Michele, Oratory of, 171

Commissions for statuary on, Or San Michele, 172, 199

Cathedral, building of, 171

Luca della Robbia’s “Cantoria,” 178, 179

Influence of Medici family, 181, 191, 192, 196, 199, 203

Lorenzo the Magnificent, 182

State commissions Michael Angelo’s “David,” 185-187

Siege of, 196

Extinction of republic, 199

Loss of liberty, 200, 201

Decline of burgher class, 201

Cellini at, 205, 209

Sends craftsmen to France, 228

National Museum, 163

Foley, 284

“Asia” in Albert Memorial, 285

“Sir James Outram,” 285

“Folly,” by Onslow Ford, 300

Fontenoy, 241

Ford, Onslow, 290

“Rowland Hill” competition, 299

“Henry Irving as Hamlet,” 299

Statuettes “Folly” and “Egyptian Singer,” 300

Fontainebleau

School of, 205

Palace of, 227-229

Fountain of the Dragon at Versailles, 238, 239

Fountain of Innocents, by Goujon, 230

Fountain of Trevi, by Bernini, 218

Fouquet, 225

Frémiet, 301

Fragonard, 240, 242

Frampton, George, 290

Art training, 288, 302

“Mysteriarch,” 301, 302

London County Council, connection with, 302

France

Northern mysticism, 221-224

Communal life, rise of, 147

Cathedrals built by lay guilds, 148

Catholic Church, influence of, 148

Cathedrals compared with Greek temples, 148-151

Italian circumstances more favourable to sculpture, 152, 153

Refuses anti-Humanistic creed of Reformation, 213, 224

Italian Renaissance, influence of, 211, 213, 225, 228

Tours, school of, 225, 226

Political circumstances after 1515 A.D., 226, 227

Francis I., “Creator of French Sculpture,” 227-229

Cellini at Court of Francis I., 205, 228, 229

Fontainebleau, school of, 205, 229

Goujon, First French sculptor, 230

Influence of women upon art, 230-233, 241, 243

Louis Quatorze, political circumstances under, 234

Versailles, 234-236, 237-239

Puget and Louis Quatorze, 236

Influence of Bernini and Catholic reaction, 237

Louis Quinze and Louis Seize, 239-245

Popularity of single figures and statuettes, 240, 242, 243

Pigalle and Saxe Memorial, 241, 242

Eighteenth-century sculpture, characteristics of, 243

Revolution, 253-256

Pseudo-Hellenic school, 263-264

Renascence of individualism, 263, 265-268

Academic sculptors of to-day, 268-272

Dalou and Rodin, 271-279

Modern French sculpture compared with British, 280, 281

Francis I.

In Italy, 213

Cellini at court of, 205, 228, 229

“Creator of French sculpture,” 227, 234

His buildings, 227-229

Francis of Assisi

Love of Nature, 156, 157

Influence upon Naturalism, 157

Andrea Pisano, and, 156, 158, 161

Franciscans compared with Jesuits, 214, 215

Friedland, 255

Frieze of Parthenon

Use of colour, 29

Panathenaic procession, 30, 31

Frith, W. S., 288, 302

Frost, K. T., criticism upon “Apoxyomenus,” 69, 75

Fürtwangler, Professor

Upon Stroganoff Bronze, 107

Upon bust of “Julius Cæsar,” footnote, 125

Gaillon, Châteaux of, 228

Gainsborough, 256, 262

Galérie des Glaces, Versailles, 240

Gardner, Mr. E. A., 50

Gardner, Mr. Percy, 73

“Gate of Hell,” by Rodin, 274-277

Gaulish invasion

Of Asia Minor, 90-92, 106

Of Greece, 106

Of Rome, 139, 146

Pergamene art, effects on, 88-93

Hellenistic art, effects on, 105-108

“Dying Gaul,” 89

“Gaul killing his wife,” 89

Genoa, 153, 154

“George, St.” by Gilbert, 297, 298

Gericault, 266

Germany

Mysticism in, 221-223

Protestantism in, 213

Sculpture after Reformation, 223, 224, 298

Modern sculpture, preface, 298

Ghiberti, Lorenzo, 162-173, 184

Early life and art education, 162

Baptistery Gates competition, 162-164

“Gates of Paradise,” 164-168, 275

Pictorial quality in his art, 165, 167, 172

Revolt against asceticism, 165, 177, 178

Donatello compared with, 168, 172

Or San Michele commissions, 170-173

“John the Baptist,” 171

“Saint Matthew,” 172

Gibbons, Grinling, 257

Gibson, John

Visit to Rome, 247, 282

“Tinted Venus,” 282, 284

“Hylas and the Nymphs,” 282, 283

Gibson Gallery, Burlington House, 282, 283

Gilbert, Alfred, 293-299

Early life, 294

Lambeth School of Art, 288, 289

Royal Academy Schools, 291, 294

France, visit to, 294, 295

Florence, visit to, 295

Shaftesbury Memorial, 295, 296

Clarence Memorial, 297-299

“Saint George,” 297, 298

The Carpeaux and Rodin of British sculpture, 290, 293, 299

Ginevra, Maria, 207

Giorgione’s “Venus,” 194

Giotto

Andrea Pisano, influence upon, 157, 161

Ghiberti compared with, 165

Bernini compared with, 214, 215

Giovanni de Medici, 181

Giuliano, Duke of Nemours, tomb of, 192-197

Girardon, Francis

Giovanni Bologna, influence upon, 211

Inspector of Sculpture at Versailles, 237

Versailles Gardens, 238, 239

“Apollo and Nymphs,” 237, 238

“Rape of Proserpine,” 211

“Fountaine en Pyramide,” 239

Glycon, 101

Goethe, 248

Goldsmithery, influence upon sculpture, 162, 205

Gonzaga, Family of, 175, 181

Goscombe John, _see_ John

Gothic art, 145-154

Mysticism in Northern Europe, 152, 153, 221-223

Dates from about 1000 A.D., 145, 146

Historical circumstances, 146, 147

Cathedrals, 147, 148

Compared with Hellenic, 148-153

Compared with Italian, 152, 153, 177, 178

Sculpture, 149-151

Drapery in, 152

Rodin and, 279

Goujon, Jean

Employed by Francis I., 227, 257

Fountain of the Innocents, 230

“Diana” from Anet, 230

Diana of Poitiers, and, 230-233

Gozzoli, 164

Græco-Roman style, 116, 118, 120-131, 155, 156

Grand Prix de Rome, 244, 254, 269

Greek colonies, 11

Greek sculpture, _see_ Hellenic and Hellenistic

Gregory VII., 147

Gregory XIII., 198

Guido Reni, worship of Byzantine “Madonna della Guardia,” 10

Guildhall, 299

Guilds, Florentine

Giovanni de Medici, leader of lesser, 181

Commission Baptistery gates, 162 164, 166, 171

Commission Or San Michele statuary, 172

Guinigi, Paolo, 178

Guise, Hotel de, 235

Hadrian

Trajan’s policy, reaction against, 137

Effect on sculpture, 138

His buildings, 137

Athens, visit to, 138

Antinous and, 137, 138

Hamdi Bey, 76

Hamilton, Lady, 232

Hannibal, 123

Harmodius, 13

Statue, by Cretius and Nesiotes, 14

“Head of Peasant,” by Lanteri, 288

Heine, 221, 266

Hellenic age of Greece, 6-80

Early beginnings, 6-11

Growth of Naturalism, 11-14

Effect of athleticism, 14-24, 69

Effect of religious beliefs, 16, 33-43, 217

Effect of civic ideals, 15, 16, 32, 33, 109

Comparison of philosophy with mysticism of North, 221-223

Persian invasion, 26-28, 91, 106

The fifth century “The golden age,” 41, 45, 46, 183

Athens, “The School of Hellas,” 47, 48

Transition to fourth century, 44-46

Historical circumstances in fourth century, 46-49, 66-68

Growth of individualism, 44-49, 53-56, 110

More passionate note, 49-53

Home life, 55, 56

Womanhood, 58-64

Reaction against fourth-century individualism, 65-69

Portraiture, 77-80

Transition to Hellenistic, 80, 83, 84

Winckelmann upon Hellenism, 248

Sculpture compared with Bernini’s, 217

Sculptures compared with Rodin’s, 279

Hellenistic age of Greece, 97-116

Definition and comparison with Hellenic, 84, 99-101

Historical circumstances during, 84-87, 106, 108, 109

Decline of patriotism, 110

Growth of individualism, 109, 110

Comparison with twentieth-century ideals, 110

Womanhood and home life, 110-113

Sphere of Greek influence widened, 84, 85

Absence of artists of first order, 99, 100

Lesser intensity of motion, 113-116

Tendency towards theatricalism, 96, 97

Decline of fine critical faculty, 104

Growth of allegory, 115

Followers of Lysippus, 100-104

Followers of Praxiteles, 105-108

Conquest by Rome, 116

Influence upon Roman art, 118, 119

Henry II. of France, 230

Tomb by Germain Pilon, 225

Henry IV. of Germany, 153

Henry IV. of France, 233, 234

Henry VII., tomb in Westminster Abbey, 256

Henry VIII. of England, 256

Hephaestus, 29, 31

Hera, 35

Chryselephantine statue of, by Polyclitus, 36, 38

“Of Samos, Louvre,” 11

“Ludovisi,” 41

“Barberine,” 42

Heræa of Elis, 17

Herculaneum, 129

Hercules

Type fixed by Lysippus, 101

Statue at Lansdowne House, 74

“Farnese,” 101, 102

“Commodus,” 228

“Hermaphroditus,” of Praxiteles, 194

Hermes

Type fixed by Praxiteles, 57

“Bearded Hermes,” of fifth century, 57

“Hermes,” of Praxiteles, 46, 57, 58, 195

Compared with “Belvedere Apollo,” 107

Hermitage, 244

Hetaerae, 59, 60

Hieron of Syracuse, 14

Hobbs, 147

Holbein, 224

Holland, 222, 281

Holy Roman Empire, 153

Home life in Greece

Sacrificed in fifth century, 55

In fourth century, 56

In Hellenistic time, 110

Homer, 8, 34, 114

Influence on sculpture, 35, 36, 42

Flaxman’s Homeric illustrations, 262

Hope, Thomas, 251

Houdon, Jean-Antoine

An eighteenth-century artist, 243, 244

Visit to Italy, 244

“Saint Bruno,” 244

“Diana,” 244

“Voltaire,” 244, 245

“Hounds in Leash,” by Harry Bates, 300

Hugo, Victor, 264, 266

Humann, Carl, 92

“Hylas and Nymphs,” by Gibson, 282, 283

Ictinus, 28, 32

Idealistic school of Praxiteles contrasted with realistic

school of Lysippus, 70

Idrac, Antoine, 270, 293

“Mercury inventing the Caduceus,” 270

Ignatius of Loyola, 215, 216

Ilaria del Carretto, Tomb by Quercia, 178

“Immaculate Conception,” by Puget, 236-237

Imperialism

Failure of, in Athens, 44-49

Roman, 117-141

Founded by Julius Cæsar, 129

Effect on sculpture, 130

Climax under Trajan, 132-136

Effect on sculpture, 131, 135, 136

Reaction under Hadrian, 136

Effect on sculpture, 138

Downfall of, 139, 140

Effect on portraiture, 140

British, 133-136, 257, 258

Impressionist sculpture compared with Impressionist painting, 278

India, 84, 133

Individualism

In fifth-century Hellas, 15-17, 109, 110

Growth of, in fourth century, 44, 49, 55, 56

Effects on sculpture, 49-53, 54, 55, 69, 75

In Hellenistic age, 101, 109, 110

Effects on sculpture, 110-113

Absent in Roman Empire, 130-132, 136

In Italian city-states, 176, 177

Modern individualism, 109, 110, 262, 264

Effects on French sculpture, 265, 266

Of Rodin, 273, 279

Effects on English sculpture, 293, 302

Innsbruck, 223

Ionia, 11

Ipsus, Battle of, 86

“Irving, Henry, as Hamlet,” by Onslow Ford, 299

Isis, Temple of, 98

Italy

Philosophy compared with Northern mysticism, 152, 153, 221-223

Circumstances after twelfth century, compared with French, 152-154

Struggles between Emperor and Pope and city and city, 153, 160

Pisa, 154-158

Slow growth of sculpture compared with Greece, 159-160

All centres of culture assist in moulding Italian Renaissance, 160

Florence, 161-173, 181, 182

Platonists, 173-178, 188

Indebtedness to Greek sculpture, 174, 176

Individualism in, 176, 177

Educational ideals, 174, 175

Status of sculptors compared with Gothic, 177, 187

The Medici, 181, 182

Michael Angelo, 183-197

Catholic Church in fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, 190

Political circumstances in early sixteenth century, 194-197

Political circumstances between 1527 and 1580 A.D., 198-203

Absence of political stability, 200

Decline in morality, 201

Cellini, 203-210

Catholic Reaction, 212-218

During Austrian ascendency, 200, 218

Canova, 246-256

Influence upon France, 228, 237

Influence upon England, 256, 257

Ivory, 36, 38

Jacopo della Quercia. _See_ Quercia

Jahn, Otto, 128

“Jason,” by Thorvaldsen, 251

Jerusalem, capture of, 154

Jesuits, 213, 215

“John the Baptist,” by Ghiberti, 171

John of Douay. _See_ Giovanni da Bologna, 210

John, Goscombe, 288

“John, Saint,” by Dubois, 270

By Rodin, 273, 277

Joseph’s “Wilberforce,” 284

Julius II., Tomb of, 189-191

Juste, Jean, 225, 226

King Arthur, by Peter Vischer, 223-224

Kipling, Rudyard,

Comparison with sculptor of Nerva, 134, 135

Kneller (painter), 259

“Kiss, The,” by Rodin, 275, 276

Lambeaux, Jef. (Belgian sculptor), 237

Lambeth School of Art, 288, 289

“L’amour Menaçant,” by Falconet, 242

Lansdowne House, statue of Heracles, 74

Lanteri, Professor, 288

Laocoon Group, 93-97, 228

“Laocoon” of Lessing, 248

Lastricali, Alessandro, 207

Laurion silver mines, 67

Le Brun, Charles, 237, 240

Legros, A., 287

Leighton, Lord, 281, 287

“Athlete struggling with Python,” 281, 287, 288, 293

Lemoyne, 242

Lennox, Charles, Duke of Richmond, 260

Le Notre, André, 238

Leopardi, The Colleoni Monument, 180

Leo X., 97, 190, 192

Lessing, 248, 255, 260, 282

Library of Hadrian, 137

Lichfield Cathedral, 148

“Lion,” by Barye, in Louvre, 266

Lippi, Filippino, 187

Liverpool Walker Art Gallery, 291

Livia, Villa of, 128

Loggia dei Lanzi, 187, 202, 209

Lombardy, 145

London County Council, 296, 302

Lorenzo de Medici

Pericles of Italian Renaissance, 181, 182

Sculptors at his court, 182, 185, 187, 188

Medici tombs, 192

Lorenzo of Urbino, 192

Tomb in Medici Chapel, 192-197

Statue by Michael Angelo, 195

Louis XI., 225

Louis XII., 227, 228

Tomb of Jean Juste, 225-226

Louis XIV.

Political circumstances under, 233, 234

Necessity for extreme centralisation, 233, 234

Building of Versailles, 234, 236, 240

Gardens of Versailles, 238, 239

Pierre Puget and, 236, 237

Marquise de Montespan and, 232, 233

Louis XV.

Popularity of single figures and statuettes, 240

Pigalle and, 241, 242

Louvre

Works in, 106, 236, 242, 244, 254, 266, 267

Preferred by Colbert to Versailles, 235, 236

Dalou, curator of, 272

Lovelace, 257

Luca della Robbia

Singing Gallery (Cantoria), 178, 179

“Visitation” at Pistoja, 179

Humanity of his religion, 179

Comparison with Donatello, 179

Relation to Michael Angelo, 184

Lucca, 154

Lucian, 36, 79

Ludovisi Villa, 89-90

Leubke, Dr., and “Ares Ludovisi,” 72

Luther, 224

Luxembourg, works in, 270, 272, 273

Value to French sculpture, 280, 281

Lycæan Gymnasium, Athens, 67

Lycurgus (The Athenian), 66, 67

Lysimachus, 86, 90

Lysippus, 65-80

Historical circumstances of his age, 66-68

Effect on sculpture, 68, 69

“Apoxyomenus,” 68-75

Characteristics of his style, 68, 70-75

Portraiture of, 77-80

Portrait of Alexander, 78, 79

“Ares Ludovisi,” 72

“Agias,” 73, 74

“Cerigotto Bronze,” 103

Hercules, type fixed by, 101

His preference for bronze, 68

Followers of, 79, 84, 100, 104, 120

Lysistratus of Sicyon, 79

Macedonia. _See_ Alexander

MacDowell, Patrick, 281, 284

“Madonna,” by Ugolino, 171

“Madonna della Guardia,” 10

Mæcenas, 125

Malatesta, Signor, 163

Magliabecchian Library, 162

Maison Carré at Nîmes, 137

Mantegna, 184

Mantinea, Battle of, 66

Mantua, 174, 175, 181

Marathon, 26, 28

Marble

Copies of bronze originals, 24, 68, 90, 105, 120

Pentelic, 29

Praxiteles’ use of, 58

Bronze preferred by Polyclitus and Lysippus, 68

In “Dying Gaul,” 90

Marcus Aurelius, 139

“Mark, St.,” by Donatello, 172

Maria della Vittoria, St., 216, 217

Marius, 124

“Marseillaise,” by Rude. _See_ Chant du Départ

Marshall, W. Calder, 284

“Maternity,” by Dalou, 299

Matilda, 153

“Matthew St.,” by Ghiberti, 172

Mausoleum

Of Halicarnassus, 48, 49

“Charioteer,” 50, 74

Mausolus, statue of, 50

Maximilian, tomb of, 223-224, 298

Mazarin, 234

Mazzini on Italian liberty and art, 200, 201, 218

Medici Family

Donatello and, 173

Relation to Florentine art, 181, 182

Medici Chapel, 189, 191-197

Michael Angelo and, 187, 188, 191, 192

The Papacy and, 191, 192

In sixteenth century, 199

Patron of Cellini, 205

Catherine of Medici, 225

“Meleager,” 71, 72

Melos, 42, 112

Menelaus, 122

“Menelaus and Patroclus,” 53, 75

Mengs, Raphael, 246

“Mercury,” by Pigalle, 242

“Mercury inventing the Caduceus,” by Idrac, 270

Metal additions in statuary, 29, 76

Metopes, Parthenon, 29, 30

Meunier, 292, 293

Michel, Claude François. _See_ Clodion

“Michael and Satan,” by Flaxman, 261

Michael Angelo, 183-197

Laocoon group, opinion upon, 94

Donatello’s “St. Mark,” opinion of, 172

Apotheosis of Italian sculpture compared with Shakespeare

and Phidias, 161, 183

Historical circumstances of, 181, 182, 194, 196, 197

Why worked early sixteenth century, 161, 180-184

Early life, 184

Court of Lorenzo de Medici, 185

“David,” 185-188

“Pieta,” 188, 189

Work for Papacy, 190, 218, 247, 250

Tomb of Julius II., 189-191

Medici Tombs, 191-197

Artistic philosophy of, 192, 193

Preference for male form, 193, 194

Savonarola, influence of, 196

Correggio, comparison with, 195

Cellini and Bologna, comparisons with, 203, 210, 211, 212, 218

Rodin’s impressionism compared with Angelo’s method, 278

Alfred Stevens and, 286

Milan, 153, 160, 181, 201, 228

“Milo of Crotona,” by Puget, 236

Milton, 256

Mithridates, 119, 124

Mona Fiore da Castel del Rio, 206

Monciatto, Francesco, 187

Moneychangers, Guild of, Florence, 171

Montefeltro, 181

Montespan, Marquise de, 232, 233

Montesquieu, 232

Moody, the decorator, 286

Moricière, General de la, 270

“Moses,” from Tomb of Julius II., 190, 191

“Mower,” by Meunier, 292, 293

“Mower,” by Thornycroft, 291, 292, 293

Mullins, Roscoe, 288

Murray, Dr., 122

Museo di Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence, 179

Musée des Arts Décoratifs, 275

Music, 149, 217, 223

Mycenæan age, preface, 7, 9

Myron, 31, 36

“Discobolus” 15, 20-22, 23-24

“Mysteriarch,” by Frampton, 301

Nantes, Cathedral of, 270

Naples, 160

National Museum, 12, 14, 97, 129, 173

Napoleon, 250, 251, 254, 264

Colossal statue by Canova, 250

“Narcissus” at Naples Museum, 173

National Assembly, 253

National Gallery, London, 187, 281

Nationalism, preface

Definition of, 302, 303

In Greece and N. Italy. _See under_ City-state system

In seventeenth-century France, 226, 227, 234

Of to-day, compared with Hellenic, 245, 281

Naturalism

Growth in Greece, 11-14

Absence in Byzantine Art, 140

Growth in Italy, 155-158

Influence of Francis of Assisi, 156, 157

In modern French sculpture, 265-267

In modern English sculpture, 285-288

Naxos, 12

“Neapolitan Fisher Boy,” by Rude, 254

By Carpeaux, 267

“Necropole Royale de Sidon,” 76

Neo-classical Revival, 246-252

Nerva, 131, 132

Comparison with “Augustus” and “Antinous,” 131, 138

Sculptor of, comparison with Kipling, 134, 135

Nesiotes, 14

Netherlands, 145

Nicea, decree of Council at, 141

Nicholas V., 190

Nicias, painter of Praxiteles’ statuary, 62

Nietzsche upon Greek art, 15

“Night,” by Michael Angelo, 193-197, 278

Nightingale Monument, by Roubilliac, 257

“Nile,” statue of, 97, 98

Nîmes, Maison Carré at, 137

Niobe Group, 51-53

Authorship doubtful, 51, 75

Historical circumstances of, 46-49, 195

Copies of Greek originals, 51

Compared with Pergamene and Rhodian art, 52, 97

Noailles, Hotel de, 235

Nollekens, 284

Normandy, 145

Northern Europe, Mysticism of, 221-223

Effect on sculpture, 222-223

Nôtre Dame, 148

Olympia, 57, 119

Olympian Games. _See_ Athletic Statues

Opera del Duomo, Florence, 187

Opera House, Paris, 268

Orcagna, 170, 171

“Orestes and Electra,” 122

“Orpheus,” by Swan, 301

Or San Michele, 168-173, 179, 180, 199

“Outram, Sir James,” statue by Foley, 285

Padua, 175

“Paetus and Arria,” 89

Painting, influence on Renaissance sculpture, 157, 161, 167

Pajou, 257

Palgrave, F. T., 283, 284

Palazzo Vecchio, 187

Pan-Athenaic procession on Parthenon frieze, 30

Panathenaic Stadion, Athens, 67

Pan-Hellenic League, 27

Pantheon, Paris, 276

“Pandora,” by Bates, 300

Paola and Francesca, 275

Papacy. _See_ Catholic Church

Paris, 254, 289

Park (sculptor), 284

Paros, 12

Parthenon, 28-33

Gothic Cathedral compared, 147-149

Statuary on, 29-31, 150-151

Parthian War, 133, 137

Parma, 195

Pasiteles, school of, 121-123

Pater, Walter, 80, 96, 126

Pauline Borghese, Statue by Canova, 249-250

Pausanias, 120

“Zeus,” by Phidias, 37, 38

“Hermes” of Praxiteles, 57

Scopas and Temple of Athena at Tegea, 72

Library of Hadrian, 137

Paul III., 213

Pavilion de Flora, Paris, 267

Peloponnesian War, 114

Pentathlon, 20, 24

“Pentathlon Winner” of Alcamenes, 23

Pentelicus, Marble Quarries, 29

Pergamus, Kingdom of, 88-93

Gaulish invasion, 90, 91, 107

Effect on sculpture, 88-92

“Dying Gaul,” 88-92

Altar of Zeus, 91-93

Loss of emotional balance, 92, 93

Absence of great masters, 100

Comparison with Hellenistic Greece, 100

Willed by Attalus III. to Rome, 116

Pericles, 26

Characterised, 77

Statue by Cresilas, 77-79, 126, 127

Creator of Parthenon, 32

His political purpose, 32, 33, 46

Compared with Lorenzo de Medici, 181, 182

“Perixyomenus” of Diappus, 74

“Perseus and Andromeda,” by Puget, 236

“Perseus,” by Cellini, 205-210

Persia, 26-28, 84, 91, 106

Perugino, 179

Pharsalia, 124

Phidias, 84, 161

Argive School, connection with, 23

Early life, 28

Parthenon, 28-32

Athena, statue of, 28, 29

Pedimental groups, 29, 30, 31

Frieze, 29, 30, 31

Metopes, 29, 30

Zeus, chryselephantine statue of, 36-38, 41

Death at Elis, 31

Praxiteles, compared with, 64, 114, 195

Gothic sculptors, compared with, 151

Giotto, compared with, 157

Rodin and, 279

Philetairus, 90

Philip of Macedon, 66

Philippe, Louis, 255

Philosophy, Hellenic, 39, 40, 221-223

Phocion, 67

Statue of, 77, 78

“Augustus,” compared with, 127

“St. Mark,” by Donatello, compared with, 173

Phryne, 59-61

“Eros” of Praxiteles and, 60, 61

“Aphrodite of Cnidus” and, 61-63

French courtesans compared with, 232, 233

Pauline Borghese compared with, 249, 250

Piero di Cosimo, 187

“Pieta” of Michael Angelo, 188-189

Pigalle, Jean Baptiste, 241

Tomb of Marshal de Saxe, 241-242

“Mercury,” in Louvre, 242

Pilon, Germain, 225, 226, 227

Pisa, 153, 154-158

Second crusade, 154

Growth of prosperity, 154

Really an aristocracy, 154, 169

Sculpture, eclectic character of, 155, 156, 174

Captured by Florence, 169

Fifteenth-century Italian sculpture compared with, 177, 178

Pisano, Niccola

Architect, 155

Græco-Roman influences, 155, 156

Gothic sculpture compared, 155

Quercia compared with, 178

Giovanni, compared with Niccola, 156, 157

Gothic influences, 156

Andrea, compared with Niccola, 157, 158

Giotto, influence of, 157

Pictorial character of work, 158

Florentine Baptistery, 158, 162, 164

Pisistratus, 12, 13, 154

Pius IV., 213

Platonists, Italian influence of, 173-179

Plessis, Hotel du, 235

Pliny, 73, 120

Lysippus and followers, 70, 74, 79

Hellenistic realists, 103

Rhodian Colossus, 104

Pasiteles, 121, 122

Plutarch, 78

Poetry, 217, 223

Pollaiuolo, 184

Polyclitus

Head of Dorian school, 22, 23

Compared with Phidias, 31

Compared with Praxiteles, 64

Compared with Lysippus, 68, 69

“Hera,” chryselephantine statue of, 36, 38, 41, 42, 157

“Diadumenus,” 22

“Doryphorus,” 22, 23

Preference for bronze, 22, 68

Polydorus, 94

Polygnotus, 114

Polyzalus, 14

Pomeroy, F. W., 288

Pompadour, Madame de, 243

Pompeii, evidence of wall paintings as to colouring statuary, 129

“Narcissus,” found at, 173

Pope’s “Rape of the Lock,” 114

Porte de l’Enfer. _See_ “Gate of Hell,” by Rodin

Portraiture

Greek, 77-79

Fifth century compared with fourth and Hellenistic, 77-79

Hellenic compared with Roman, 125, 127, 131, 132

Roman, 125-136

“Julius Cæsar” and “Augustus” compared with “Pericles”

and “Phocion,” 125-127

Imperialism and Roman, 131-136, 140

Comparison with style of Kipling, 134, 135

“Nerva,” statue of, 131, 132, 135

“Voltaire,” by Houdon, 244, 245

Poseidon and Athena on Parthenon pediment, 29, 31

Poussin, Nicolas, 240

Pradier, 265

Praxiteles

Historical circumstances, 44-49

Social circumstances, 55, 56, 58, 59

Characteristics of his art, 57, 61, 63, 64, 211

Lyrical note in art of, 54

Influence of Greek womanhood, 58-60, 110, 111

Phryne and, 60-63, 232, 249

Female form, preference for, 193, 194

Marble, preference for, 58

“Hermes,” 57, 107, 120

“Hermaphroditus,” 194

“Aphrodite of Cnidus,” 61-63, 111, 195

“Barberine Hera,” 42

Ceramicus, statue in, 55

Lysippus, compared with, 65, 66

Michael Angelo, compared with, 193-195

Followers of, 84, 105-115

Primaticcio, 228, 229, 257

“Prince,” Terme Museum, 121

Prince Consort, 284

Prix de Rome, Grand, 244, 254, 267, 269

Propylæa, 77

Ptolemy, 86

Puget, Pierre

His early life, 237, 251

Visit to Italy, 237

Connection with Louis XIV., 236

Influenced by Catholic reaction, 237

“Milo of Crotona,” 236

“Perseus and Andromeda,” 236

“Immaculate Conception,” 237

Introducer of “morbidezza,” 237

Pythis, 50

Quercia, Jacopo della

Competes for Baptistery gates commission, 163, 169

Compared with the Pisani, 177

Tomb of Ilaria del Carretto by, 178, 226

Quincey, De, 115

Rambouillet, Madame de, 232

“Rape of Proserpine,” by Girardon, 211

Raphael 184, 228, 250, 261

Rasbourg, Van, 273

Ravenna, basilicas of, 145

Realism

In art of Lysippus, 65-80

In Hellenistic art, 101-104

In Roman portraiture, 131, 135

Modern French realists, 272

Reformation, 213, 224

Religion

Greek, 16, 34, 35, 36, 39, 222, 223

Early images, 8-11, 18, 19

Religious statuary in Fifth Century, 28, 29, 33-43

Compared with Gothic, 148, 152

Sense of, dulled in Fourth Century, 63

Effect on sculpture, 41, 42, 57, 63

Christianity, influence of, 43, 140, 141

Gothic, 145-154, 222, 223

Effect on sculpture, 149-152

Italian, 153, 157, 179, 196, 202

Reformation, effects of, 213, 224

Catholic reaction, effects of, 212-218, 237

Rembrandt, 222, 261

Revolution, French, 253, 264

Reynolds, Sir J., 256, 262

Rheims, 148

Robbia, The della. _See_ Luca della Robbia

Rhodes, 93-97, 100

Compared with Hellenistic Greece, 100

Influence upon Rome, 120

“Laocoon group,” 93-97

“Farnese Bull,” 97

“Colossus” at, 104

Richelieu, Cardinal, 234

Richmond, Charles Duke of, 260

Robespierre, 256

Rochester, 46, 257

Rodin

Early life, 272

Fails to enter École des Beaux Arts, 271

Pupil of Barye, 266, 272, 273

“Age of Brass,” 273, 275

“St. John the Baptist,” 273, 277

“The Kiss,” 275-276

“The Thinker,” 276

“Danaid,” 274

“Gate of Hell” (Porte de l’Enfer), 274-276

Attitude towards human form, 277

Impressionism compared with Rosso’s, 278, 279

Philosophy based on Dante and Baudelaire, 275

Sympathy with Gothic ideal, 279

Compared with English sculptors, 290-291

Influence upon Meunier, 292

Roman Catholic Church. _See_ Catholic Church

Romantic movement, 264

Effect on sculpture, 265, 266

Rome

Conquest of Greece, Syria, Egypt, 116

Republican age, 117-125

Culture borrowed from Greece, 118-121

School of Pasiteles, 121-123

Imperialism, rise of, 124-131

Augustan age, 129, 130

Climax under Trajan, 131-136

Effect on sculpture, 131, 136

Portraiture, 125-127, 131-136, 140

Reaction under Hadrian, 136-138

Reversion to Greek models, 137, 138

Post-Hadrian sculpture, 138, 139

Germanic invasion, 139, 140, 146

Christianity, influence of, 140, 141

Pisani, influence of Roman art upon, 155

Michael Angelo in, 190, 191

Sack of, 198, 199, 204

Morality, decline of in sixteenth century, 196, 201, 202

Effect on sculpture, 202, 203

Catholic Reaction, 212, 218

Historical circumstances, 212-214

Ideals of, 215, 216

Effect on sculpture, 214, 218

Austrian ascendency, 200, 218

Neo-classical revival, 247, 251, 252, 261

Romney, 232

Roselli, Cosimo, 187

Rosso, Il (painter), 205, 228, 229

Rosso (sculptor), 278, 279

Roubilliac, 257

Rouen, 230

“Rowland Hill,” by Onslow Ford, 299

Royal Exchange, 299

Rude, François, 253-256

Early life, 254

École des Beaux Arts, and 254

French sculpture, after, 265

“Neapolitan Fisher Boy,” by, 254

“Chant du Départ,” 255, 267

Master of Carpeaux, 267

Rue de l’Université, Paris, 275

“Sabine Women,” by David, 253

“Sacrifice of Isaac,” by Brunelleschi and by Ghiberti, 163

Saida (Sidon), 76

Salamis, 26, 28

Salisbury Cathedral, 148

Salon, 265, 273, 274

Salon of Venus at Versailles, 239

Salvestro, the jeweller, 187

Samos, 77

Sandwich, fourth Earl of, 259

San Gallo, Giuliano di, 187

Santa Sophia, 145

“Sarcophagus of Alexander,” 76

Sarcophagi, Roman Pisa, 155

Sarto, Andrea del, 257

“Satyr and Nymph,” by Clodion, 243

“Satyr with Flute,” by Clodion, 243

Savonarola, 195-196

Saxe, Marshal de, tomb by Pigalle, 241

Schubart, Baron de, 251

Science, growth of, in fifth-century Greece, 39-41

Scholasticism, 165

Scopas, 42, 44

Historical circumstances, 45-49

Growth of individualism, 53-56

Passionate note in his art, 53, 64, 75, 101

Athenian by adoption, 48

Temple of Athena at Tegea, 48, 72, 73

Mausoleum, 49-51

“Menelaus and Patroclus,” 53, 75

“Niobe,” 51-53, 75, 195

“Ares Ludovisi,” 71, 72, 74

“Meleager,” 72-74

“Venus of Milo,” 113

Scotland, 213, 258

Scott, Sir Gilbert, 284

Scott, Sir W., 266

Sculpture and Sculptors

Prehistoric, 6

Birth of the art, 7-11

Limitations compared with painting and poetry, 167, 197, 222, 223

Impressionism in, 278, 279

Sculptors’ dependence upon human form, 16, 17, 18, 69, 152, 164,

165, 172, 193, 194, 215, 216, 277

Sculptor’s relation to his age, 4, 302, 303

Settignano quarries, 184

Seleucia in Pieria, 87

Seleucus, Empire of, 83, 86-88, 116

Seleucus Nicator, 86

“Seated Boxer,” Terme Museum, 121

Sepulchral statuary

Greek legislation against, 54, 55

Ceramicus at Athens, 54, 55

Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, 49-51

“Sarcophagus of Alexander,” 76

Roman sarcophagi at Pisa, 155

Tomb of Ilaria del Carretto, 178

Tomb of Julius II., 190, 191

Medici tombs, 191-197

Tomb of Maximilian, 223, 224

Tombs at St. Denis, royal, 225, 226

Tomb of Marshal de Saxe, 241

Duke of Clarence Memorial, 297, 298

Sforza, family of, 181

Shelley, 264

Shakespeare, 46, 114, 183, 256

Shaftesbury Memorial, by A. Gilbert, 295, 296

Sicyon, 79, 87, 108

Signorelli, 179

Siena, 160, 163, 171, 178

Silk Merchants’ Guild of Florence, 171

Simonetta, La Bella, 232

Sistine Chapel, 191

Skeuotheke of Philo, 66

Society of Dilettanti, 8, 260

Socrates, 210

Sophocles, 114

Statue of, 77, 78, 173

Soranzo, Giacomo, 201

Sosthenes, 106

South Kensington School of Art, 272, 288

Spain, 213

Sparks (Lambeth School of Art), 288

Sparta

Insistence upon physical fitness, 17-19

Patronise Olympian games, 20

Argive school, relationship with, 22-24

Spartan supremacy, age of, 46, 48

Imitated in revolutionary France, 253

“Spartan Girl,” 17, 122

“Spring,” by Botticelli, 196

St. Angelo, Castle of, 204, 205

St. Denis, royal tombs at, 225, 226

St. Maclou, 230

St. Paul’s Cathedral, 285

St. Peter’s, Rome, 190, 214

Statuettes, modern, 299

“Stephen, St.,” by Ghiberti, 172

Stevens, Alfred

Visit to Italy, 285

Decorative designer, 286

Fireplace at Dorchester House, 286

Michael Angelo, indebtedness to, 286

Wellington Memorial, 285, 286, 291, 295

“Baptist of English Naturalism,” 286, 287

Stone, Nicholas, 257

Stroganoff, Count Sargei, bronze statuette of, 106

Strozzi, epigram on Angelo’s “Night,” 197

Sully, 234

Swan, J. M., 290, 301

Sykes, Godfrey, 286

Symonds, J. A., 196, 277

Syracuse, 14, 47, 119

Syria. _See also_ Seleucus, empire of, 84, 124

Tate Gallery, 282, 284, 287, 288, 290, 300

Taygetus, Mount, 18

Tegea, Temple of Athena Alea at, 48, 72

Temple Statuary. _See_ under Religion

Terme Museum, Rome, 115, 121

Terra-cotta, 179

Theban supremacy, 46, 48, 66

Theed, “Africa,” in Albert Memorial, 285

Theodora, Empress, decree regarding sculpture, 141

Theresa, Saint, 216, 217

Statue, by Bernini, 216, 217

“Theseus,” from Parthenon, 31, 248

Thespiae, “Eros” of, 61

Thetis, Temple of, 238

“Thetis and Achilles,” by Banks, 284

“Thinker,” by Rodin, 276

Thomson, James, 95, 105

Thornycroft, the elder, 285, 291

Thornycroft, W. Hamo, 290-293

Defeats Gilbert for Academy Gold Medal, 291

“Warrior bearing Wounded Son from Battle,” 291

“Mower,” 291-293

Thorvaldsen

A borrowed Hellenism, 174, 247, 254, 262, 281

Early life, 251

Visit to Rome, 247, 251, 261

Compared with Flaxman, 261, 262

“Jason,” 251

“Cupid and Psyche,” 251

“Venus,” 252, 284

Thrasymedes of Paros, 42

“Three Fates” from Parthenon, 31, 261

Throne Room at Versailles, 239

“Tiber,” 98

“Tinted Venus,” by Gibson, 282, 284

Titian, 184

Titus, Baths of, 94

Tomb of Francis II. of Brittany, by Colombe, 225

Torrigiano, 256, 257

Toto, Antonio, 257

Tours, school of, 225

Trajan, 132, 133, 137

Transtevere, Vicolo delle Palme in, 68

Trent, Council of, 202

“Triumph of Athena” from Pergamus, 92

“Triumph of Silenus,” by Dalou, 272

“Truth tearing out Tongue of Falsehood,” by Stevens, 286

Tuileries, palace of, 267

Turner (painter), 264, 266, 277

Turquet, M., 273

“Tyche of Antioch,” 87, 96

Uccello, 164

“Ugolino and his Sons,” by Carpeaux, 267

Urban VIII., 214

Urbino, 181

Vasari, 173

Vatican, works at, 24, 51, 62, 68, 71, 87, 89, 97, 105,

122, 125, 131, 138, 190, 191

Venice, 160, 200, 251

Venus. _See also_ Aphrodite

Of Capua, 113

Of Medici, 112, 261

Of Milo, 71, 112, 113

By Thorvaldsen, 252

In mid-Victorian times, 284

Verocchio, Andrea del, 179-180, 184

“Doubting Thomas,” by, 179-180

Colleoni monument, by Leopardi and, 180

Versailles, palace of, 234-240

Historical necessity for, 234, 235

Palaces of nobility at, 235

Preferred by Louis to Louvre, 235, 236

Sculpture at, 211, 237-239

Victoria Memorial, 290, 294

Villevieille, Marquis de, 244, 245

Vinci, Leonardo da, 184, 187

Virgil, 94, 95, 125, 129, 175

Virgin, Michael Angelo upon the, 188-189

Vischer, Peter, 223, 225, 297, 298

Maximilian Tomb, 223, 224, 226

Age of reformation, 224, 297

Visconti, family of, 181

Vittorino of Feltre, 174-175

“Voltaire,” by Houdon, 244-245

Waldstein, Dr. and “Ares Ludovisi,” 72

Walker Art Gallery, 291

Wallace Collection, 243

Walpole, Sir Robert, 258

Walpole, Horace, 259

“Warrior bearing Wounded Son from Battle,” by Hamo Thornycroft, 291

Watteau, 240, 242

Watts, G. F., 165

“Clytie,” 287

Watson (sculptor), 284

Watson, William, 149

Wedgwood, 261

Wellington Memorial, by Stevens, 285, 286

Westmacott, 281, 284

Westminster Abbey, 257, 284

Westphalia, Peace of, 234

Whistler, 291

Wickhoff, on Roman portraiture, 131

“Wilberforce,” by Joseph, 284

Wilton, 260

Winckelmann, 246, 248, 255, 260, 261, 281

Windsor, Clarence Memorial at, 297-299

Wolsey, Cardinal, 256

Wolsey Chapel, Windsor, 297

Women

Physical training of Greek, 17

Position in fifth century B.C., 58, 59

Effect upon sculpture, 17, 42, 58, 111

During fourth century, B.C., 60, 61

Effect upon sculpture, 60, 64, 111, 233, 249, 250

During Hellenistic age, 110-111

Effect upon sculpture, 111-113

During French monarchy, 230-232

Influence upon sculptors, 233, 241-243

Pauline Borghese and Canova, 249, 250

Wood, Early Temple statues in Greece, 8, 9

Wool Merchants Guild of Florence, 172

Woolner, 284

Wordsworth, 157

Wren, Sir C., 256

Wyatt, 281, 284

Zethus, 97

Zeus, 33-36

On Parthenon pediment and frieze, 29-31

Chryselephantine statue, by Phidias, 36-43

Otricoli, 41, 42

Altar of, at Pergamus, 91-93, 112, 130

Printed by BALLANTYNE & CO. LIMITED

Tavistock Street, London