CHAPTER XI.

GREEK PAINTING.

The art of painting was in as high esteem in Greece as the art of

sculpture and, if we may believe the testimony of Greek and Roman

writers, achieved results as important and admirable. But the

works of the great Greek painters have utterly perished, and

imagination, though guided by ancient descriptions and by such

painted designs as have come down to us, can restore them but

dimly and doubtfully. The subject may therefore here be dismissed

with comparative brevity.

In default of pictures by the great Greek masters, an especial

interest attaches to the work of humbler craftsmen of the brush.

One class of such work exists in abundance--the painted

decorations upon earthenware vases. Tens of thousands of these

vases have been brought to light from tombs and sanctuaries on

Greek and Italian sites and the number is constantly increasing.

Thanks to the indestructible character of pottery, the designs are

often intact. Now the materials and methods employed by the vase-

painters and the spaces at their disposal were very different from

those of mural or easel paintings. Consequently inferences must

not be hastily drawn from designs upon vases as to the composition

and coloring of the great masterpieces. But the best of the vase-

painters, especially in the early fifth century, were men of

remarkable talent, and all of them were influenced by the general

artistic tendencies of their respective periods. Their work,

therefore, contributes an important element to our knowledge of

Greek art history.

Having touched in Chapter II. upon the earlier styles of Greek

pottery, I begin here with a vase of Attic manufacture, decorated,

as an inscription on it shows, by Clitias, but commonly called

from its finder the Francois vase (Fig. 188). It may be assigned

to the first half of the sixth century, and probably to somewhere

near the beginning of that period. It is an early specimen of the

class of black-figured vases, as they are called. The propriety of

the name is obvious from the illustration. The objects represented

were painted in black varnish upon the reddish clay, and the vase

was then fired. Subsequently anatomical details, patterns of

garments, and so on were indicated by means of lines cut through

the varnish with a sharp instrument. Moreover, the exposed parts

of the female figures--faces, hands, arms, and feet--were covered

with white paint, this being the regular method in the black-

figured style of distinguishing the flesh of female from that of

male figures.

The decoration of the Francois vase is arranged in horizontal

bands or zones. The subjects are almost wholly legendary and the

vase is therefore a perfect mine of information for the student of

Greek mythology. Our present interest, however, is rather in the

character of the drawing. This may be better judged from Fig. 189,

which is taken from the zone encircling the middle of the vase.

The subject is the wedding of the mortal, Peleus, to the sea-

goddess, Thetis, the wedding whose issue was Achilles, the great

hero of the Iliad. To this ceremony came gods and goddesses and

other supernatural beings. Our illustration shows Dionysus

(Bacchus), god of wine, with a wine-jar on his shoulder and what

is meant for a vine-branch above him. Behind him walk three female

figures, who are the personified Seasons. Last comes a group

consisting of two Muses and a four-horse chariot bearing Zeus, the

chief of the gods, and Hera, his wife. The principle of isocephaly

is observed on the vase as in a frieze of relief-sculpture (page

145). The figures are almost all drawn in profile, though the body

is often shown more nearly from the front, e.g., in the case of

the Seasons, and the eyes are always drawn as in front view. Out

of the great multitude of figures on the vase there are only four

in which the artist has shown the full face. Two of these are

intentionally ugly Gorgons on the handles; the two others come

within the limits of our specimen illustration. If Dionysus here

appears almost like a caricature, that is only because the

decorator is so little accustomed to drawing the face in front

view. There are other interesting analogies between the designs on

the vase and contemporary reliefs. For example, the bodies, when

not disguised by garments, show an unnatural smallness at the

waist, the feet of walking figures are planted flat on the ground,

and there are cases in which the body and neck are so twisted that

the face is turned in exactly the opposite direction to the feet.

On the whole, Clitias shows rather more skill than a contemporary

sculptor, probably because of the two arts that of the vase-

painter had been the longer cultivated.

The black-figured ware continued to be produced in Attica through

the sixth century and on into the fifth. Fig. 190 gives a specimen

of the work of an interesting vase-painter in this style, Execias

by name, who probably belongs about the middle of the sixth

century. The subject is Achilles slaying in battle the Amazon

queen, Penthesilea. The drawing of Execias is distinguished by an

altogether unusual care and minuteness of detail, and if the whole

body of his work, as known to us from several signed vases, could

be here presented, it would be easily seen that his proficiency

was well in advance of that of Clitias. Obvious archaisms,

however, remain. Especially noticeable is the unnatural twisting

of the bodies. A minor point of interest is afforded by the

Amazon's shield, which the artist has not succeeded in rendering

truthfully in side view. That is a rather difficult problem in

perspective, which was not solved until after many experiments.

Some time before the end of the sixth century, perhaps as early as

540, a new method of decorating pottery was invented in Attica.

The principal coloring matter used continued to be the lustrous

black varnish; but instead of filling in the outlines of the

figures with black, the decorator, after outlining the figures by

means of a broad stroke of the brush, covered with black the

spaces between the figures, leaving the figures themselves in the

color of the clay. Vases thus decorated are called "red-figured."

In this style incised lines ceased to be used, and details were

rendered chiefly by means of the black varnish or, for certain

purposes, of the same material diluted till it became of a reddish

hue. The red-figured and black-figured styles coexisted for

perhaps half a century, but the new style ultimately drove the old

one out of the market.

The development of the new style was achieved by men of talent,

several of whom fairly deserve to be called artists. Such an one

was Euphronius, whose long career as a potter covered some fifty

years, beginning at the beginning of the fifth century or a little

earlier. Fig. 191 gives the design upon the outside of a cylix (a

broad, shallow cup, shaped like a large saucer, with two handles

and a foot), which bears his signature. Its date is about 480, and

it is thus approximately contemporary with the latest of the

archaic statues of the Athenian Acropolis (pages 151 f.). On one

side we have one of the old stock subjects of the vase-painters,

treated with unapproached vivacity and humor. Among the labors of

Heracles, imposed upon him by his taskmaster, Eurystheus, was the

capturing of a certain destructive wild boar of Arcadia and the

bringing of the creature alive to Mycenae. In the picture,

Heracles is returning with the squealing boar on his shoulder. The

cowardly Eurystheus has taken refuge in a huge earthenware jar

sunk in the ground, but Heracles, pretending to be unaware of this

fact, makes as though he would deposit his burden in the jar. The

agitated man and woman to the right are probably the father and

mother of Eurystheus. The scene on the other side of the cylix is

supposed to illustrate an incident of the Trojan War: two

warriors, starting out on an expedition, are met and stopped by

the god Hermes. In each design the workmanship, which was

necessarily rapid, is marvelously precise and firm, and the

attitudes are varied and telling. Euphronius belonged to a

generation which was making great progress in the knowledge of

anatomy and in the ability to pose figures naturally and

expressively. It is interesting to note how close is the

similarity in the method of treating drapery between the vases of

this period and contemporary sculpture.

The cylix shown in Fig. 192 is somewhat later, dating from about

460. The technique is here different from that just described,

inasmuch as the design is painted in reddish brown upon a white

ground. The subject is the goddess Aphrodite, riding upon a goose.

The painter, some unnamed younger contemporary of Euphronius, has

learned a freer manner of drawing. He gives to the eye in profile

its proper form, and to the drapery a simple and natural fall. The

subject does not call, like the last, for dramatic vigor, and the

preeminent quality of the work is an exquisite purity and

refinement of spirit.

If we turn now from the humble art of vase-decoration to painting

in the higher sense of the term, the first eminent name to meet us

is that of Polygnotus, who was born on the island of Thasos near

the Thracian coast. His artistic career, or at least the later

part of it, fell in the "Transitional period" (480-450 B.C.), so

that he was a contemporary of the great sculptor Myron. He came to

Athens at some unknown date after the Persian invasion of Greece

(480 B.C.) and there executed a number of important paintings. In

fact, he is said to have received Athenian citizenship. He worked

also at Delphi and at other places, after the ordinary manner of

artists.

Painting in this period, as practiced by Polygnotus and other

great artists, was chiefly mural; the painting of easel pictures

seems to have been of quite secondary consequence. Thus the most

famous works of Polygnotus adorned the inner faces of the walls of

temples and stoas. The subjects of these great mural paintings

were chiefly mythological. For example, the two compositions of

Polygnotus at Delphi, of which we possess an extremely detailed

account in the pages of Pausanias, depicted the sack of Troy and

the descent of Odysseus into Hades. But it is worth remarking, in

view of the extreme rarity of historical subjects in Greek relief-

sculpture, that in the Stoa Poicile (Painted Portico) of Athens,

alongside of a Sack of Troy by Polygnotus and a Battle of Greeks

and Amazons by his contemporary, Micon, there were two historical

scenes, a Battle of Marathon and a Battle of OEnoe. In fact,

historical battle-pieces were not rare among the Greeks at any

period.

As regards the style of Polygnotus we can glean a few interesting

facts from our ancient authorities. His figures were not ranged on

a single line, as in contemporary bas-reliefs, but were placed at

varying heights, so as to produce a somewhat complex composition.

His palette contained only four colors, black, white, yellow, and

red, but by mixing these he was enabled to secure a somewhat

greater variety. He laid his colors on in "flat" tints, just as

the Egyptian decorators did, making no attempt to render the

gradations of color due to varying light and shade. His pictures

were therefore rather colored drawings than genuine paintings, in

our sense of the term. He often inscribed beside his figures their

names, according to a common practice of the time. Yet this must

not be taken as implying that he was unable to characterize his

figures by purely artistic means. On the contrary, Polygnotus was

preeminently skilled in expressing character, and it is recorded

that he drew the face with a freedom which archaic art had not

attained. In all probability his pictures are not to be thought of

as having any depth of perspective; that is to say, although he

did not fail to suggest the nature of the ground on which his

figures stood and the objects adjacent to them, it is not likely

that he represented his figures at varying distances from the

spectator or gave them a regular background.

It is clear that Polygnotus was gifted with artistic genius of the

first rank and that he exercised a powerful influence upon

contemporaries and successors. Yet, alas! in spite of all research

and speculation, our knowledge of his work remains very shadowy. A

single drawing from his hand would be worth more than all that has

ever been written about him. But if one would like to dream what

his art was like, one may imagine it as combining with the

dramatic power of Euphronius and the exquisite loveliness of the

Aphrodite cup, Giotto's elevation of feeling and Michael Angelo's

profundity of thought.

Another branch of painting which began to attain importance in the

time of Polygnotus was scene-painting for theatrical performances.

It may be, as has been conjectured, that the impulse toward a

style of work in which a greater degree of illusion was aimed at

and secured came from this branch of the art. We read, at any

rate, that one Agatharchus, a scene-painter who flourished about

the middle of the fifth century, wrote a treatise which stimulated

two philosophers to an investigation of the laws of perspective.

The most important technical advance, however, is attributed to

Apollodorus of Athens, a painter of easel pictures. He departed

from the old method of coloring in flat tints and introduced the

practice of grading colors according to the play of light and

shade. How successfully he managed this innovation we have no

means of knowing; probably very imperfectly. But the step was of

the utmost significance. It meant the abandonment of mere colored

drawing and the creation of the genuine art of painting.

Two artists of the highest distinction now appear upon the scene.

They are Zeuxis and Parrhasius. The rather vague remark of a Roman

writer, that they both lived "about the time of the Peloponnesian

War" (431-404 B.C.) is as definite a statement as can safely be

made about their date. Parrhasius was born at Ephesus, Zeuxis at

some one or other of the numerous cities named Heraclea. Both

traveled freely from place to place, after the usual fashion of

Greek artists, and both naturally made their home for a time in

Athens. Zeuxis availed himself of the innovation of Apollodorus

and probably carried it farther. Indeed, he is credited by one

Roman writer with being the founder of the new method. The

strength of Parrhasius is said to have lain in subtlety of line,

which would suggest that with him, as with Polygnotus, painting

was essentially outline drawing. Yet he too can hardly have

remained unaffected by the new chiaroscuro.

Easel pictures now assumed a relative importance which they had

not had a generation earlier. Some of these were placed in temples

and such conformed in their subjects to the requirements of

religious art, as understood in Greece. But many of the easel

pictures by Zeuxis and his contemporaries can hardly have had any

other destination than the private houses of wealthy connoisseurs.

Moreover, we hear first in this period of mural painting as

applied to domestic interiors. Alcibiades is said to have

imprisoned a reluctant painter, Agatharchus (cf. page 278), in his

house and to have forced him to decorate the walls. The result of

this sort of private demand was what we have seen taking place a

hundred years later in the case of sculpture, viz.: that artists

became free to employ their talents on any subjects which would

gratify the taste of patrons. For example, a painting by Zeuxis of

which Lucian has left us a description illustrates what may be

called mythological genre. It represented a female Centaur giving

suck to two offspring, with the father of the family in the

background, amusing himself by swinging a lion's whelp above his

head to scare his young. This was, no doubt, admirable in its way,

and it would be narrow-minded to disparage it because it did not

stand on the ethical level of Polygnotus's work. But painters did

not always keep within the limits of what is innocent. No longer

restrained by the conditions of monumental and religious art, they

began to pander not merely to what is frivolous, but to what is

vile in human nature. The great Parrhasius is reported by Pliny to

have painted licentious little pictures, "refreshing himself"

(says the writer) by this means after more serious labors. Thus at

the same time that painting was making great technical advances,

its nobility of purpose was on the average declining.

Timanthes seems to have been a younger contemporary of Zeuxis and

Parrhasius. Perhaps his career fell chiefly after 400 B. C. The

painting of his of which we hear the most represented the

sacrifice of Iphigenia at Aulis, The one point about the picture

to which all our accounts refer is the grief exhibited in varying

degrees by the bystanders. The countenance of Calchas was

sorrowful; that of Ulysses still more so; that of Menelaus

displayed an intensity of distress which the painter could not

outdo; Agamemnon, therefore, was represented with his face covered

by his mantle, his attitude alone suggesting the father's poignant

anguish. The description is interesting as illustrating the

attention paid in this period to the expression of emotion.

Timanthes was in spirit akin to Scopas. There is a Pompeian wall-

painting of the sacrifice of Iphigenia, which represents Agamemnon

with veiled head and which may be regarded, in that particular at

least, as a remote echo of Timanthes's famous picture.

Sicyon, in the northeastern part of Peloponnesus--a city already

referred to as the home of the sculptor Lysippus--was the seat of

an important school of painting in the fourth century. Toward the

middle of the century the leading teacher of the art in that place

was one Pamphilus. He secured the introduction of drawing into the

elementary schools of Sicyon, and this new branch of education was

gradually adopted in other Greek communities. A pupil of his,

Pausias by name, is credited with raising the process of encaustic

painting to a prominence which it had not enjoyed before. In this

process the colors, mixed with wax, were applied to a wooden panel

and then burned in by means of a hot iron held near.

Thebes also, which attained to a short-lived importance in the

political world after the battle of Leuctra (371 B.C.), developed

a school of painting, which seems to have been in close touch with

that of Athens. There were painters besides, who seem to have had

no connection with any one of these centers of activity. The

fourth century was the Golden Age of Greek painting, and the list

of eminent names is as long and as distinguished for painting as

for sculpture.

The most famous of all was Apelles. He was a Greek of Asia Minor

and received his early training at Ephesus. He then betook himself

to Sicyon, in order to profit by the instruction of Pamphilus and

by association with the other painters gathered there. It seems

likely that his next move was to Pella, the capital of Macedon,

then ruled over by Philip, the father of Alexander. At any rate,

he entered into intimate relations with the young prince and

painted numerous portraits of both father and son. Indeed,

according to an often repeated story, Alexander, probably after

his accession to the throne, conferred upon Apelles the exclusive

privilege of painting his portrait, as upon Lysippus the exclusive

privilege of representing him in bronze. Later, presumably when

Alexander started on his eastern campaigns (334 B.C.), Apelles

returned to Asia Minor, but of course not even then to lead a

settled life. He outlived Alexander, but we do not know by how

much.

Of his many portraits of the great conqueror four are specifically

mentioned by our authorities. One of these represented the king as

holding a thunderbolt, i.e., in the guise of Zeus--a fine piece of

flattery. For this picture, which was placed in the Temple of

Artemis at Ephesus, he is reported, though not on very good

authority, to have received twenty talents in gold coin. It is

impossible to make exact comparisons between ancient and modern

prices, but the sum named would perhaps be in purchasing power as

large as any modern painter ever received for a work of similar

size. [Footnote: Nicias, an Athenian painter and a contemporary of

Apelles, is reported to have been offered by Ptolemy, the ruler of

Egypt, sixty talents for a picture and to have refused the offer.]

It has been mentioned above that Apelles made a number of

portraits of King Philip. He had also many sitters among the

generals and associates of Alexander; and he left at least one

picture of himself. His portraits were famous for their truth of

likeness, as we should expect of a great painter in this age.

An allegorical painting by Apelles of Slander and Her Crew is

interesting as an example of a class of works to which Lysippus's

statue of Opportunity belonged (page 239). This picture contained

ten figures, whereas most of his others of which we have any

description contained only one figure each.

His most famous work was an Aphrodite, originally placed in the

Temple of Asclepius on the island of Cos. The goddess was

represented, according to the Greek myth of her birth, as rising

from the sea, the upper part of her person being alone distinctly

visible. The picture, from all that we can learn of it, seems to

have been imbued with the same spirit of refinement and grace as

Praxiteles's statue of Aphrodite in the neighboring city of

Cnidus. The Coans, after cherishing it for three hundred years,

were forced to surrender it to the emperor Augustus for a price of

a hundred talents, and it was removed to the Temple of Julius

Caesar in Rome. By the time of Nero it had become so much injured

that it had to be replaced by a copy.

Protogenes was another painter whom even the slightest sketch

cannot afford to pass over in silence. He was born at Caunus in

southwestern Asia Minor and flourished about the same time as

Apelles. We read of his conversing with the philosopher Aristotle

(died 322 B.C.), of whose mother he painted a portrait, and of his

being engaged on his most famous work, a picture of a Rhodian

hero, at the time of the siege of Rhodes by Demetrius (304 B.C.).

He was an extremely painstaking artist, inclined to excessive

elaboration in his work. Apelles, who is always represented as of

amiable and generous character, is reported as saying that

Protogenes was his equal or superior in every point but one, the

one inferiority of Protogenes being that he did not know when to

stop. According to another anecdote Apelles, while profoundly

impressed by Protogenes's masterpiece, the Rhodian hero above

referred to, pronounced it lacking in that quality of grace which

was his own most eminent merit. [Footnote: Plutarch, "Life of

Demetrius," Section 22.] There are still other anecdotes, which give an

entertaining idea of the friendly rivalry between these two

masters, but which do not help us much in imagining their artistic

qualities. As regards technique, it seems likely that both of them

practiced principally "tempera" painting, in which the colors are

mixed with yolk of eggs or some other sticky non-unctuous medium.

[Footnote: Oil painting was unknown in ancient times.] Both

Apelles and Protogenes are said to have written technical

treatises on the painter's art.

There being nothing extant which would properly illustrate the

methods and the styles of the great artists in color, the best

substitute that we have from about their period is an Etruscan

sarcophagus, found near Corneto in 1869. The material is

"alabaster or a marble closely resembling alabaster." It is

ornamented on all four sides by paintings executed in tempera

representing a battle of Greeks and Amazons. "In the flesh tints

the difference of the sexes is strongly marked, the flesh of the

fighting Greeks being a tawny red, while that of the Amazons is

very fair. For each sex two tints only are used in the shading and

modeling of the flesh. ... Hair and eyes are for the most part a

purplish brown; garments mainly reddish brown, whitish grey, or

pale lilac and light blue. Horses are uniformly a greyish white,

shaded with a fuller tint of grey; their eyes always blue. There

are two colors of metal, light blue for swords, spear-heads, and

the inner faces of shields, golden yellow for helmets, greaves,

reins, and handles of shields, girdles, and chain ornaments."

Our illustration (Fig. 193) is taken from the middle of one of the

long sides of the sarcophagus. It represents a mounted Amazon in

front of a fully armed foot-soldier, upon whom she turns to

deliver a blow with her sword. "Every reader will be struck by the

beauty and spirit of the Amazon, alike in her action and her

facial expression. The type of head, broad, bold, and powerful,

and at the same time young and blooming, with the pathetic-

indignant expression, is preserved with little falling off from

the best age of Greek art. ... In spirit and expression almost

equal to the Amazon is the horse she bestrides." [Footnote: The

quotations are from an article by Mr. Sidney Colvin in The Journal

of Hellenic Studies, Vol. IV., pages 354 ff] The Greek warrior is

also admirable in attitude and expression, full of energy and

determination.

Although the paintings of this sarcophagus were doubtless executed

in Etruria, and probably by an Etruscan hand, they are in their

style almost purely Greek. The work is assigned to the earlier

half of the third century B.C. If an unknown craftsman was

stimulated by Greek models to the production of paintings of such

beauty and power, how magnificent must have been the achievements

of the great masters of the brush!

For examples of Greek portrait painting we are indebted to Egypt,

that country whose climate has preserved so much that elsewhere

would have perished. It will be remembered that Egypt, having been

conquered by Alexander, fell after his death to the lot of his

general, Ptolemy, and continued to be ruled by Ptolemy's

descendants until, in 30 B.C., it became a Roman province. During

the period of Macedonian rule Alexandria was the chief center of

Greek culture in the world, and Greeks and Greek civilization

became established also in the interior of the country; nor did

these Hellenizing influences abate under Roman domination. To this

late period, when Greek and Egyptian customs ere largely

amalgamated, belongs a class of portrait heads which have been

found in the Fayyurn, chiefly within the last ten years. They are

painted on panels of wood (or rarely on canvas), and were

originally attached to mummies. The embalmed body was carefully

wrapped in linen bandages and the portrait placed over the face

and secured in position. These pictures are executed principally

by the encaustic process, though some use was made also of

tempera. The persons represented appear to be of various races--

Greek, Egyptian, Hebrew, negro, and mixed; perhaps the Greek type

predominates in the specimens now known. At any rate, the artistic

methods of the portraits seem to be purely Greek. As for their

date, it is the prevailing opinion that they belong to the second

century after Christ and later, though an attempt has been made to

carry the best of them back to the second century B.C.

The finest collection of these portraits is one acquired by a

Viennese merchant, Herr Theodor Graf. They differ widely in

artistic merit; our illustrations show three of the best. Fig. 194

is a man in middle life, with irregular features, abundant, waving

hair, and thin, straggling beard. One who has seen Watts's picture

of "The Prodigal Son" may remark in the lower part of this face a

likeness to that. Fig. 195 is a charming girl, wearing a golden

wreath of ivy-leaves about her hair and a string of great pearls

about her neck. Her dark eyes look strangely large, as do those of

all the women of the series; probably the effect of eyes naturally

large was heightened, as nowadays in Egypt, by the practice of

blackening the edges of the eyelids. Fig. 196 is the most

fascinating face of all, and it is artistically unsurpassed in the

whole series. This and a portrait of an elderly man, not given

here, are the masterpieces of the Graf collection. It is much too

little to say of these two heads that they are the best examples

of Greek painting that have come down to us. In spite of the great

inferiority of the encaustic technique to that of oil painting,

these pictures are not unworthy of comparison with the great

portraits of modern times.

The ancient wall-paintings found in and near Rome. but more

especially in Pompeii, are also mostly Greek in character, so far

as their best qualities are concerned. The best of them, while

betraying deficient skill in perspective, show such merits in

coloring, such power of expression and such talent for

composition, as to afford to the student a lively enjoyment and to

intensify tenfold his regret that Zeuxis and Parrhasius, Apelles

and Protogenes, are and will remain to us nothing but names.

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