themselves to the notice of modern Europeans, are the Egyptians; and
their perfection in the use of the various colours which constitute the
compound idea we entertain when we think of painting, is well known
and appreciated; when we may any day consult our judgment by inspecting
those beautiful specimens of their eternal mode of colouring we have
in the exhibition on mummy-cases in the British Museum, and other
depositories of that species of antique preservation. The third people
who excelled in giving a beautiful and tasteful variety to surfaces in
colouring and effect, were the Etrurians, a people anciently inhabiting
a district of Italy, now known as Tuscany. Of the perfection to which
they brought the art we may form an adequate and proper judgment
by inspecting those beautiful vases preserved in the Hamiltonian
collection in the British Museum, and also in some very curious
specimens of ancient painting, procured from the ruins of Herculaneum,
collected likewise by Sir William Hamilton.
It cannot be doubted, that most distinct societies of men have,
after the gratification of their first wants, and when leisure hours
permitted the exercise of their ingenious and inventive faculties,
invented a great variety of useful and ornamental arts; therefore,
there cannot be a question, but various arts of utility as well as of
ornament, have been invented by a great variety of people, who all,
agreeably to our prior definitions, are well entitled to the distinct
appellation of original inventors; consequently in such a case question
must evidently submit to the determination of chronology.
Eudora, the daughter of a potter of Corinth, is presumed to have
introduced the art into Greece. The art of painting in Greece is also
claimed by Sicyon as the original. Mr. Fuseli has beautifully observed
in his first lecture illustrative of the former of these two claimants,
that “If ever legend deserved our belief, the amorous tale of the
Corinthian maid, who traced the shadow of her departing lover by the
secret lamp, appeals to our sympathy to grant it.” This invention is
becoming doubly interesting in that country, first, because of its
elegance and utility; and secondly, because it is ascribed to one of
the noblest and most powerful passions, which distinguish the human
species, the wonderful effects of which have given to humanity the most
exalted and illustrious of actions, which ennoble the character of
man--to delicate, refined, and almighty love. Numerous artists in the
Grecian school brought the art of painting to great perfection.
The restorer of this delightful art in Europe was Cimabue, a native of
Italy, who first studied under some Grecian artists, and furnished some
admirable productions in fresco, in several Italian churches about the
renovation of the arts in modern Italy; since which time, this purely
intellectual art has been successfully cultivated in almost all the
countries of Europe, certain masters in all schools of which have been
eminent for some peculiar eminence.
An analogy has been drawn by comparison between the fascinating effect
of music on the ear, and colour on the eye, wherein it is observed the
comparison very nearly approximates; whence the term _harmony_, applied
to the former, may correctly, and with singular propriety be used, when
speaking of the latter. And also, it is said, for the same reason, and
proceeding upon the like analogy, the term _tone_ is applicable to
both; they are accordingly used indiscriminately. Without questioning
their propriety, we give in to our sensations, and as far as our
judgment goes, believe they are not improperly introduced into the
pictorial art.
It cannot be presumed that we should have the temerity to aspire to
the task of giving a full and complete description of every variety
which constitutes perfection in the art; for this would be to infer
professional ability, equal, or perhaps, superior to what any one
individual ever was, or, we may venture to say, ever will be, known to
possess. Besides this inference, another must be presumed, because
perfection in description must also anticipate the most delicate,
refined, and, as termed, classically correct taste; neither to these
do we assume the possession of such well-known essentials as are
positively necessary to its formation. It is, besides, altogether
difficult, as the world acknowledges, to fix a standard to the ideal
faculty of taste, and which, we hereby take occasion to notice;
therefore we hope to avoid the sin of presumption, and trust that our
readers will observe that what we do state is upon good authority, if
we have not full confidence in our own experience; but our sin, if sin
there be, is rather that of omission than of commission--of saying too
little, rather than too much.
STATUARY.
The origin of Statuary, or what we would term its parent--modelling,
is of very great antiquity, as we are authoratively informed by the
Grecian historians, whose testimony is supported by Monsieur D’Anville
and Major Rennel, two of the most eminent geographers of modern times.
From them we learn that three massy statues of gold were erected
to ornament the temple of Jupiter Belus. Those were erected by the
Chaldeans about two thousand two hundred and thirty years before Christ.
There is also sufficient evidence, that the most eminent and
intellectual people, subsequent to the Chaldeans, were the Egyptians.
Every individual, who is in the slightest degree conversant with the
history of the arts, knows that the Egyptian artisans had from the
earliest periods been in the habit of constructing colossal statues
of their numerous deities, and also of their benefactors, raised from
gratitude and adulation.
To name only a single instance, the immense colossal statue of Memnon,
who perished before the fall of Troy, according to Homer: also Ovid,
who speaking of his mother Aurora, says,
“Nor Troy, nor Hecuba could now bemoan,
She weeps a sad misfortune now her own;
Her offspring, Memnon, by Achilles slain,
She saw extended on the Phrygian plain.”
Professor Flaxman has informed us, that this celebrated statue, had it
stood upright, would have measured ninety-three feet and a half high;
calculating from the dimensions of its ear, which is three feet long.
We are informed by Dr. Rees, in his valuable Cyclopedia, that sculpture
in marble was not introduced till eight hundred and seventy-three years
before Christ. But having said this much for the origin, let us proceed
to the art; and we candidly acknowledge that it is from the lectures
of that truly distinguished individual, Professsor Flaxman, we are
principally indebted for our information.
Sculpture in Greece remained long in a rude state; but we need not
wonder at that, when we reflect that art is only an imitation of
nature. Hence it follows that man, in a rude state of nature, for
want of proper principles to direct his inquiries, and determine
his judgment, is continually liable to errors, physical, moral, and
religious;--all his productions, of what kind soever, partake of this
primitive imbecility.
The early arts of design in Greece resembled those of other barbarous
nations, until the successive intellectual and natural, political and
civil advantages of this people raised them above the arts of the
surrounding nations. The science employed by the Greeks may be traced
in anatomy, geometry, mechanics, and perspective. From their earlier
authors and coeval monuments, Homer had described the figure with
accuracy, but insufficient for general purposes.
OF ANATOMY.--Hippocrates was the first who enumerated the bones, and
wrote a compendious account of the principles of the human figure; he
described the shoulders, the curves of the ribs, hips and knees; the
characters of the arms and legs, in the same simple manner in which
they are represented in the basso relievo of the Parthenon, now in the
National Gallery of the British Museum.
The ancient artists saw the figure continually exposed in all actions
and circumstances, so as to have little occasion for other assistance
to perfect their works; and they had also the assistance of casting,
drawing, and other subsidiary means. The succeeding ancient anatomists
did not describe the human figure more minutely or advantageously
for the artist, than had been done by Hippocrates, till the time of
Galen, whose external anatomy gave example for that analytical accuracy
of arrangement followed by more modern artists. Sculpture, however,
profited little from Galen’s labours, for the arts of design were in
his time in a retrogade motion towards anterior barbarism.
The anatomical researches from Alcmæon of Crotona, a disciple of
Pythagoras, to those of Hippocrates and his scholars, assisted Phidias
and Praxiteles, their contemporaries and successors, in giving select
and appropriate forms of body and limbs to their several divinities,
whose characters were fixed by the artists from the rhapsodies of
Homer, having then become popular among the Athenians.
Phidias was the first in this reformation. Minerva, under his hand,
became young and beautiful, who had before been harsh and elderly; and
Jupiter was awful, as when his nod shook the poles, but benignant, as
when he smiled on his daughter Venus. Apollo and Bacchus then assumed
youthful resemblances of their sire; the first more majestic, the
latter more feminine; whilst Mercury, as patron of gymnastic exercises,
was represented as more robust than his brother. Hercules became
gradually more powerful; and the forms of inferior heroes displayed
a nearer resemblance to common nature; from which, both sentiment
and beauty can alone be given to imitative art. The near approach of
ancient art to nature, considering their high advance to accuracy of
imitation, should likewise encourage the modern to imitate the ancient
artists. The moderns now also enjoy superior auxiliary assistance from
engraving, printed books, &c., which the ancients did not possess.
MECHANISM OF THE HUMAN FRAME.--The human figure with the limbs
extended, may be inclined and bounded by the circle and square;
the centre of gravity, its change of situation, is susceptible of
description, and may be exemplified in rest and motion;--running,
striving, leaping, walking, rising, and falling. Those principles of
motion may be exhibited in a skeleton, by the bending of the backbone
backwards and forwards, whilst the limbs uniformly describe sections of
circles in their motions, constantly moving on their axis.
DIMENSIONS OF THE HUMAN FIGURE, as exhibited in Grecian Statuary.--The
height, eight heads (or usually ten faces); two heads across the
shoulders; one head and a half across the hips; three noses, the
thickest part of the thigh; two, to the calf of the leg; one, the
narrowest part of the shin, &c. The above is the general proportion of
the male figure. The female figure is narrower across the shoulders,
and wider across the hips than the male.
The _beauty_ of the human figure is found in its proportion, symmetry,
and expression; it really appears that the beauty of the human figure
is the chief or ultimate of beauty observed in the visible works
of creative Omnipotence. From thence every other species of beauty
graduates in just _ratios_ of proportion. From considering the
intellectual faculties of man, we assimilate the idea, and connect
beauty with utility, as this union of his physical and mental powers
unquestionably renders him one of the most beautiful objects in the
creation. This consideration leads us involuntarily to a train of
thought, suggested by a principle laid down by Plato, “That nothing is
beautiful which is not truly good;” which also induces the following
corollary, and which is confirmed by reason, and sanctioned by
revelation, that _perfection of human beauty consists of the most
virtuous soul in the most healthy and perfect body_.
Inasmuch as painters and sculptors adhered to those principles in
their work, they assisted to enforce a popular impression of divine
attributes and perfections, even in ages of gross idolatry.
In the highest order of divinities, the energy of intellect was
represented above the material accidents of passion and decay.
The statues of the Saturnian family, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto,
were the most sublime and mighty of the superior divinities.
Apollo, Bacchus, and Mercury, were youthful resemblances of the
Saturnian family, in energetic, delicate, and more athletic beauty:
Apollo-Belvidere supplies Homer’s description to the sight; he looks
indignant, his hair is agitated; he steps forward in the discharge of
his shafts; his arrows are hanging on his shoulder.
A youthful and infantine beauty of the highest class distinguish the
Cupid of Praxiteles, and the group of Ganymede and the Eagle. The
order of heroes or demigods excel in strength, activity, and beauty;
Achilles, Ajax, Hæmon, Zethos, and Amphion, are examples in Grecian
statuary to establish this remark.
The Giants are human to the waist; their figures terminate in
serpentine tails. Ocean and the great Rivers have Herculean forms, and
faintly resemble the Saturnian family, and have reclining positions.
The Tritons resemble the Fauns in the head, and upper features, with
finny tails, and gills on their jaws; their lower parts terminate in
the tails of fish.
In the highest class of female characters, the beauty of Juno, is
imperious; that of Minerva, wise, as she presides over peaceful
arts; or warlike, as the protectress of cities. Venus is the example
and patroness of milder beauty and the softer arts of reciprocal
communication; of which the Venus Praxiteles and Venus de Medicis are
instances. The Greeks had also a Venus Urania, the goddess of hymenial
rites and the celestial virtues.
The Graces are three youthful, lovely sisters embracing: they represent
the tender affections, as their name implies; while their character
gives the epithet _graceful_ to undulatory and easy motion. The
universe was peopled by genii, good and evil demons, which comprehends
every species and gradation from the most sublime and beautiful in
Jupiter and Venus, to the most gross in the Satyr, resembling a goat,
and in the terrific Pan.
As the public have now an opportunity of consulting many of the objects
above referred to, in our great national gallery in the British Museum,
those of our readers who can obtain this advantage will do well to pay
a visit to that celebrated depository for the relics of antiquity,
where they will have it in their power to convince themselves of the
truth of the foregoing remarks.
The progeny of Ham, the son of Noah, we find, peopled Egypt, Medea,
Chaldea, Phœnicia, and several other adjoining countries. It will be
remembered that two of the three sons of Noah possessed these countries
which the folly of idolatry overflowed; whilst it was in the line of
Shem alone, that the true faith was continued. The Mosaiac narrative
is chiefly descriptive of events which occurred in the posterity of
that patriarch, because from it the righteous line of the faithful in
Abraham, David, Solomon, and ultimately Christ, proceeded. Thus more
than two-thirds of the inhabitants of the world were gross idolators:
we often find the Omniscience of the Highest forewarning the sacred
line to avoid its fascinations. Nay, when, upon more occasions than
one, the descendants of the faithful forgot themselves, and those
admonitions of the Creator were neglected, we find the sacred race
flying before the face of puny foes, which defeat was declared to be
from their having prostrated themselves before strange gods: they were
bowed thus low in battle. Not to mention their disobedience immediately
beneath Mount Sinai, which protracted their journey through the
wilderness to forty years, which, perhaps, under other circumstances,
would not have required as many days. All those troubles, their
subsequent captivities, and national afflictions, were the produce of
disobedience. This is one of those means which retributive justice
resorts to punish wilful sin; so, however, it was with the seed of
Abraham. And so it is presumed to be with the present race of men;
either immediate or remote punishment vindicates the Omnipotence of
Heaven. From the frequent maledictions we discover in the sacred volume
against idol worship, we cannot doubt that it was peculiarly offensive
to the Deity. that the great majority of the world were addicted to
this proscribed practice is equally certain. And as the Spirit of
Truth had declared in the decalogue, that “It would not be worshipped
under any form in the heavens above, in the earth below, or in the
waters under the earth;” so was image-worship, and consequently the
construction of such things, forbidden.
We discover that as this mania infected all nations, tongues, and
people, so did not the Israelites escape it; but immediately after
their departure from Egypt we find an exact similitude of the sacred
calf of the Egyptians, cast in melted gold, which they constructed
below Mount Sinai. In Egypt, metallic statues, as well as those of
stone, must have existed anterior to that event, as they actually
had done to our own knowledge, and long before idolatry had made its
appearance in Egypt, it had existed in Chaldea, as already shown.
As that worship had first its being in Chaldea, so had the art of
statuary its origin in that country; it was improved, perhaps, in
Egypt, and perfected in Greece, from the time of Pericles to that of
Alexander, commonly called the Great.
DRAWING.
THE HUMAN FIGURE.
From what has been said in the previous article, it would appear
that drawing of the human figure was nearly coeval with the art of
statuary, or perhaps prior to it in Greece. As there is ample room
to suppose the rude aboriginal inhabitants of Greece borrowed their
art, as they did their religious and civil policy, from the Egyptians,
and in fact from every nation where they discovered anything worthy
their attention, so must we suppose they had also this art, in its
infancy it is true, from the same people. Upon reflecting for a single
moment, we are fully satisfied that the origin of the art now under
contemplation came from Egypt. An ancient philosopher expressed himself
with great truth, when he said, “Necessity was man’s first instructor.”
We accordingly perceive the necessity of the earliest inhabitants
of Egypt to exercise the art of drawing, they having determined to
record their transactions by hieroglyphical representation. We have
not the slightest doubt but we have now in the British Museum some of
the earliest specimens of Egyptian hieroglyphical delineation, in the
_sarcophagi_; from its inscription, it has been discovered that that
identical monument cannot be less than three thousand five hundred and
ninety-eight years old!
Previous to this, we can have no doubt that the art of drawing must
have existed.
Like its sister art, sculpture, it received every improvement of which
it was susceptible, from the mature conceptions and the delicate hand
of Grecian artisans; words are, perhaps, inadequate to convey this art
to a second person. Years of incessant labour, with an attention to
principles established and found to correspond correctly with nature,
are the only means to obtain a just knowledge of its principles, and to
judge tastefully of its correct execution.
However, in addition to the rules laid down in the preceding article,
we add the following, which have been approved by Sir Joshua Reynolds,
by no means a contemptible judge of the art:--
1. That from the crown of the head to the forehead is the third part of
a face.
2. The face begins at the root of the lowest hairs that grow on the
forehead, and ends at the bottom of the chin.
3. The face is divided into three proportionate parts; the first
contains the forehead or brow; the second, the nose; and the third, the
mouth and chin.
4. From the chin to the pit between the collar-bones, is two lengths of
a nose.
5. From the pit between the collar-bones to the bottom of the breast,
one face.
6. From the bottom of the breast to the navel, one face.
7. From the navel to the genitories, one face.
8. From the genitories to the upper part of the knee, two faces.
9. The knee contains half a face.
10. From the lower part of the knee to the ancle, two faces.
11. From the ancle to the sole of the foot, half a face.
12. A man with his arms extended, is from his longest finger on each
hand, as broad as he is long.
13. From one side of the breast to the other, two faces.
14. The bone of the arm called _humerus_, i.e., from the shoulder to
the elbow joint, is the length of two faces.
15. From the end of the elbow to the joint of the little finger, the
bone called _cubitus_, with a part of the hand, is also two faces.
16. From the box of the shoulder-blade, to the pit between the
collar-bones, one face.
17. To be satisfied in measures of breadth. From the extremity of one
finger to the other, so that his breadth should be equal to the length,
it should be observed, that the bones of the elbows with the _humerus_,
and the _humerus_ with the shoulder-blade, or _scapula_, bear the
proportions of a face when the arms are extended.
18. The sole of the foot is one-sixth part of the length of the entire
figure.
19. The hand is the length of a face.
20. The thumb contains a nose in length.
21. The inside of the arm, from the place where the muscle disappears,
which is connected with the breast (called the pectoral muscle,) to the
middle of the arm, four noses long.
22. From the middle of the arm, at the top, to the beginning of the
head, five noses.
23. The longest toe is one nose.
24. The outermost parts of the paps, and the pit between the
collar-bones of a female, form an equilateral triangle.
The knowledge of the preceding proportions, are as mere rudiments
essential to the delineation of the human figure; but they relate to
a body in a quiescent state only. The more difficult task remains
to become thoroughly acquainted with its actions. To obtain this, a
rudimental and even an intimate acquaintance with the skeleton, and
assiduous and incessant practice are necessary.
However, the lectures delivered to the Royal Academy have furnished us
with the probable extent to which the motions of the human frame may be
carried.
First, premising that the motions of the head and trunk of the body are
limited by the several joints of the spine.
2. The motion of the body upon the lower limbs takes place at the
hip-joints, at the knees, and at the ancles.
3. Those limbs, called great limbs (the whole frame being technically
divided, and denominated the upper and lower extremities), have
rotatory motions at their junctions with the trunk, by means of a ball
and socket joints, at the shoulders and the hips. The analogy of parts
between the upper and lower extremities is not carried through the
structure of those limbs in the body.
4. The fulcrum of the upper limb is itself moveable upon the trunk, as
appears from the extensive motions of the scapula, which so generally
accompany the rotation of the shoulder, and supply the limb with a
great variety of motion, much more than the lower limb possesses.
5. The junction of the thigh with the mass without motion, called the
_pelvis_, limits its rotation to the ball and socket-joint without
farther extension.
6. The rotation of the head and neck takes place at the joint between
the first and second vertebræ.
7. When the nose is parallel with the _sternum_, the face may be turned
towards either shoulder, through an angle of 60 deg. on each side; the
whole range of its motion being 120 degrees.
8. The lateral bending of the neck is equally divided between the
seven vertebræ; but the bowing of the head, and violently tossing it
backward, are chiefly effected at the joint of the skull, and the first
bone of the vertebral column called the atlas.
9. Although the preceding motions are consistent with an erect stature
of the neck, yet the lateral motions demand a curvature of its whole
mass.
10. The movements of the trunk are regulated by rotary and lateral
motions, nearly equally divided among the several joints of the
vertebræ of the back and loins.