CHAPTER VI.

THE ARCHAIC PERIOD OF GREEK SCULPTURE SECOND HALF 550-480 B.C.

Greek sculpture now enters upon a stage of development which

possesses for the modern student a singular and potent charm True,

many traces still remain of the sculptor's imperfect mastery. He

cannot pose his figures in perfectly easy attitudes not even in

reliefs, where the problem is easier than in sculpture in the

round. His knowledge of human anatomy--that is to say, of the

outward appearance of the human body, which is all the artistic

anatomy that any one attempted to know during the rise and the

great age of Greek sculpture--is still defective, and his means of

expression are still imperfect. For example, in the nude male

figure the hips continue to be too narrow for the shoulders, and

the abdomen too flat. The facial peculiarities mentioned in the

preceding chapter--prominent eyeballs, cheeks, and chin, and

smiling mouth--are only very gradually modified. As from the

first, the upper eyelid does not overlap the lower eyelid at the

outer corner, as truth, or rather appearance, requires, and in

relief sculpture the eye of a face in profile is rendered as in

front view. The texture and arrangement of hair are expressed in

various ways but always with a marked love of symmetry and

formalism. In the difficult art of representing drapery there is

much experimentation and great progress. It seems to have been

among the eastern Ionians perhaps at Chios, that the deep cutting

of folds was first practiced, and from Ionia this method of

treatment spread to Athens and elsewhere. When drapery is used,

there is a manifest desire on the sculptor's part to reveal what

he can, more, in fact, than in reality could appear, of the form

underneath. The garments fall in formal folds, sometimes of great

elaboration. They look as if they were intended to represent

garments of irregular cut, carefully starched and ironed. But one

must be cautious about drawing inferences from an imperfect

artistic manner as to the actual fashions of the day.

But whatever shortcomings in technical perfection may be laid to

their charge, the works of this period are full of the indefinable

fascination of promise. They are marked, moreover, by a simplicity

and sincerity of purpose, an absence of all ostentation, a

conscientious and loving devotion on the part of those who made

them. And in many of them we are touched by great refinement and

tenderness of feeling, and a peculiarly Greek grace of line.

To illustrate these remarks we may turn first to Lycia, in

southwestern Asia Minor. The so called "Harpy" tomb was a huge,

four sided pillar of stone, in the upper part of which a square

burial-chamber was hollowed out. Marble bas-reliefs adorned the

exterior of this chamber The best of the four slabs is seen in Fig

87 [Footnote: Our illustration is not quite complete on the right]

At the right is a seated female figure, divinity or deceased

woman, who holds in her right hand a pomegranate flower and in her

left a pomegranate fruit To her approach three women, the first

raising the lower part of her chiton with her right hand and

drawing forward her outer garment with her left, the second

bringing a fruit and a flower the third holding an egg in her

right hand and raising her chiton with her left. Then comes the

opening into the burial-chamber, surmounted by a diminutive cow

suckling her calf. At the left is another seated female figure,

holding a bowl for libation. The exact significance of this scene

is unknown, and we may limit our attention to its artistic

qualities. We have here our first opportunity of observing the

principle of isocephaly in Greek relief-sculpture; i.e., the

convention whereby the heads of figures in an extended composition

are ranged on nearly the same level, no matter whether the figures

are seated, standing, mounted on horseback, or placed in any other

position. The main purpose of this convention doubtless was to

avoid the unpleasing blank spaces which would result if the

figures were all of the same proportions. In the present instance

there may be the further desire to suggest by the greater size of

the seated figures their greater dignity as goddesses or divinized

human beings. Note, again, how, in the case of each standing

woman, the garments adhere to the body behind. The sculptor here

sacrifices truth for the sake of showing the outline of the

figure. Finally, remark the daintiness with which the hands are

used, particularly in the case of the seated figure on the right.

The date of this work may be put not much later than the middle of

the sixth century, and the style is that of the Ionian school.

Under the tyrant Pisistratus and his sons Athens attained to an

importance in the world of art which it had not enjoyed before. A

fine Attic work, which we may probably attribute to the time of

Pisistratus, is the grave-monument of Aristion (Fig. 88). The

material is Pentelic marble. The form of the monument, a tall,

narrow, slightly tapering slab or stele, is the usual one in

Attica in this period. The man represented in low relief is, of

course, Aristion himself. He had probably fallen in battle, and so

is put before us armed. Over a short chiton he wears a leather

cuirass with a double row of flaps below, on his head is a small

helmet, which leaves his face entirely exposed, on his legs are

greaves; and in his left hand he holds a spear There is some

constraint in the position of the left arm and hand, due to the

limitations of space In general, the anatomy, so far as exhibited

is creditable, though fault might be found with the shape of the

thighs The hair, much shorter than is usual in the archaic period,

is arranged in careful curls The beard, trimmed to a point in

front, is rendered by parallel grooves The chiton, where it shows

from under the cuirass, is arranged in symmetrical plaits There

are considerable traces of color on the relief, as well as on the

background Some of these may be seen in our illustration on the

cuirass.

Our knowledge of early Attic sculpture has been immensely

increased by the thorough exploration of the summit of the

Athenian Acropolis in 1885-90 In regard to these important

excavations it must be remembered that in 480 and again in 479 the

Acropolis was occupied by Persians belonging to Xerxes' invading

army, who reduced the buildings and sculptures on that site to a

heap of fire-blackened ruins This debris was used by the Athenians

in the generation immediately following toward raising the general

level of the summit of the Acropolis. All this material, after

having been buried for some twenty three and a half centuries, has

now been recovered. In the light of the newly found remains, which

include numerous inscribed pedestals, it is seen that under the

rule of Pisistratus and his sons Athens attracted to itself

talented sculptors from other Greek communities, notably from

Chios and Ionia generally. It is to Ionian sculptors and to

Athenian sculptors brought under Ionian influences that we must

attribute almost all those standing female figures which form the

chief part of the new treasures of the Acropolis Museum.

The figures of this type stand with the left foot, as a rule, a

little advanced, the body and head facing directly forward with

primitive stiffness. But the arms no longer hang straight at the

sides, one of them, regularly the right, being extended from the

elbow, while the other holds up the voluminous drapery. Many of

the statues retain copious traces of color on hair, eyebrows,

eyes, draperies, and ornaments; in no case does the flesh give any

evidence of having been painted (cf. page 119). Fig. 89 is taken

from an illustration which gives the color as it was when the

statue was first found, before it had suffered from exposure. Fig.

90 is not in itself one of the most pleasing of the series, but it

has a special interest, not merely on account of its exceptionally

large size--it is over six and a half feet high--but because we

probably know the name and something more of its sculptor. If, as

seems altogether likely, the statue belongs upon the inscribed

pedestal upon which it is placed in the illustration, then we have

before us an original work of that Antenor who was commissioned by

the Athenian people, soon after the expulsion of the tyrant

Hippias and his family in 510, to make a group in bronze of

Harmodius and Aristogiton (cf. pages 160-4) This statue might, of

course, be one of his earlier productions.

At first sight these figures strike many untrained observers as

simply grotesque. Some of them are indeed odd; Fig. 91 reproduces

one which is especially so. But they soon become absorbingly

interesting and then delightful. The strange-looking, puzzling

garments, [Footnote: Fig 91 wears only one garment the Ionic

chiton, a long; linen shift, girded at the waist and pulled up so

as to fall over conceal the girdle. Figs 89, 90, 92 93 wear over

this a second garment which goes over the right shoulder and under

the left This over-garment reaches to the feet, so as to conceal

the lower portion of the chiton At the top it is folded over, or

perhaps rather another piece of cloth is sewed on. This over-fold,

if it may be so called, appears as if cut with two or more long

points below] which cling to the figure behind and fall in formal

folds in front, the elaborately, often impossibly, arranged hair,

the gracious countenances, a certain quaintness and refinement and

unconsciousness of self--these things exercise over us an endless

fascination.

Who are these mysterious beings? We do not know. There are those

who would see in them, or in some of them, representations of

Athena, who was not only a martial goddess, but also patroness of

spinning and weaving and all cunning handiwork. To others,

including the writer, they seem, in their manifold variety, to be

daughters of Athens. But, if so, what especial claim these women

had to be set up in effigy upon Athena's holy hill is an unsolved

riddle.

Before parting from their company we must not fail to look at two

fragmentary figures (Figs. 94, 95), the most advanced in style of

the whole series and doubtless executed shortly before 480. In the

former, presumably the earlier of the two, the marvelous

arrangement of the hair over the forehead survives and the

eyeballs still protrude unpleasantly. But the mouth has lost the

conventional smile and the modeling of the face is of great

beauty. In the other, alone of the series, the hair presents a

fairly natural appearance, the eyeballs lie at their proper depth,

and the beautiful curve of the neck is not masked by the locks

that fall upon the breasts. In this head, too, the mouth actually

droops at the corners, giving a perhaps unintended look of

seriousness to the face. The ear, though set rather high, is

exquisitely shaped.

Still more lovely than this lady is the youth's head shown in Fig.

96. Fate has robbed us of the body to which it belonged, but the

head itself is in an excellent state of preservation. The face is

one of singular purity and sweetness. The hair, once of a golden

tint, is long behind and is gathered into two braids, which start

from just behind the ears, cross one another, and are fastened

together in front; the short front hair is combed forward and

conceals the ends of the braids; and there is a mysterious puff in

front of each ear. In the whole work, so far at least as appears

in a profile view, there is nothing to mar our pleasure. The

sculptor's hand has responded cunningly to his beautiful thought.

It is a pity not to be able to illustrate another group of Attic

sculptures of the late archaic period, the most recent addition to

our store. The metopes of the Treasury of the Athenians at Delphi,

discovered during the excavations now in progress, are of

extraordinary interest and importance; but only two or three of

them have yet been published, and these in a form not suited for

reproduction. The same is the case with another of the recent

finds at Delphi, the sculptured frieze of the Treasury of the

Cnidians, already famous among professional students and destined

to be known and admired by a wider public. Here, however, it is

possible to submit a single fragment, which was found years ago

(Fig. 97). It represents a four-horse chariot approaching an

altar. The newly found pieces of this frieze have abundant remains

of color. The work probably belongs in the last quarter of the

sixth century.

The pediment-figures from Aegina, the chief treasure of the Munich

collection of ancient sculpture, were found in 1811 by a party of

scientific explorers and were restored in Italy under the

superintendence of the Danish sculptor, Thorwaldsen. Until lately

these AEginetan figures were our only important group of late

archaic Greek sculptures; and, though that is no longer the case,

they still retain, and will always retain, an especial interest

and significance. They once filled the pediments of a Doric temple

of Aphaia, of which considerable remains are still standing. There

is no trustworthy external clue to the date of the building, and

we are therefore obliged to depend for that on the style of the

architecture and sculpture, especially the latter. In the dearth

of accurately dated monuments which might serve as standards of

comparison, great difference of opinion on this point has

prevailed. But we are now somewhat better off, thanks to recent

discoveries at Athens and Delphi, and we shall probably not go far

wrong in assigning the temple with its sculptures to about 480

B.C. Fig. 52 illustrates, though somewhat incorrectly, the

composition of the western pediment. The subject was a combat, in

the presence of Athena, between Greeks and Asiatics, probably on

the plain of Troy. A close parallelism existed between the two

halves of the pediment, each figure, except the goddess and the

fallen warrior at her feet, corresponding to a similar figure on

the opposite side. Athena, protectress of the Greeks, stands in

the center (Fig. 98). She wears two garments, of which the outer

one (the only one seen in the illustration) is a marvel of

formalism. Her aegis covers her breasts and hangs far down behind;

the points of its scalloped edge once bristled with serpents'

heads, and there was a Gorgon's head in the middle of the front.

She has upon her head a helmet with lofty crest, and carries

shield and lance. The men, with the exception of the two archers,

are naked, and their helmets, which are of a form intended to

cover the face, are pushed back. Of course, men did not actually

go into battle in this fashion; but the sculptor did not care for

realism, and he did care for the exhibition of the body. He

belonged to a school which had made an especially careful study of

anatomy, and his work shows a great improvement in this respect

over anything we have yet had the opportunity to consider. Still,

the men are decidedly lean in appearance and their angular

attitudes are a little suggestive of prepared skeletons. They have

oblique and prominent eyes, and, whether fighting or dying, they

wear upon their faces the same conventional smile.

The group in the eastern pediment corresponds closely in subject

and composition to that in the western, but is of a distinctly

more advanced style. Only five figures of this group were

sufficiently preserved to be restored. Of these perhaps the most

admirable is the dying warrior from the southern corner of the

pediment (Fig. 99), in which the only considerable modern part is

the right leg, from the middle of the thigh. The superiority of

this and its companion figures to those of the western pediment

lies, as the Munich catalogue points out, in the juster

proportions of body, arms, and legs, the greater fulness of the

muscles, the more careful attention to the veins and to the

qualities of the skin, the more natural position of eyes and

mouth. This dying man does not smile meaninglessly. His lips are

parted, and there is a suggestion of death-agony on his

countenance. In both pediments the figures are carefully finished

all round; there is no neglect, or none worth mentioning, of those

parts which were destined to be invisible so long as the figures

were in position.

The Strangford "Apollo" (Fig. 100) is of uncertain provenience,

but is nearly related in style to the marbles of Aegina. This

statue, by the position of body, legs, and head, belongs to the

series of "Apollo" figures discussed above (pages 129-32); but the

arms were no longer attached to the sides, and were probably bent

at the elbows. The most obvious traces of a lingering archaism,

besides the rigidity of the attitude, are the narrowness of the

hips and the formal arrangement of the hair, with its double row

of snail-shell curls. The statue has been spoken of by a high

authority [Footnote: Newton, "Essays on Art and Archaeology" page

81.] as showing only "a meager and painful rendering of nature."

That is one way of looking at it. But there is another way, which

has been finely expressed by Pater, in an essay on "The Marbles of

Aegina": "As art which has passed its prime has sometimes the

charm of an absolute refinement in taste and workmanship, so

immature art also, as we now see, has its own attractiveness in

the naivete, the freshness of spirit, which finds power and

interest in simple motives of feeling, and in the freshness of

hand, which has a sense of enjoyment in mechanical processes still

performed unmechanically, in the spending of care and intelligence

on every touch. ... The workman is at work in dry earnestness,

with a sort of hard strength of detail, a scrupulousness verging

on stiffness, like that of an early Flemish painter; he

communicates to us his still youthful sense of pleasure in the

experience of the first rudimentary difficulties of his art

overcome." [Footnote: Pater, "Greek Studies" page 285]

A History of Greek Art With an Introductory Chapter on Art in Egypt and Mesopotamia · 第 6 / 11 章