CHALDEAN AND ASSYRIAN ART.
The Chaldeans or Babylonians and the Assyrians came from one great
stock, the Assyrians being mostly colonists from Babylonia. The original
inhabitants of Chaldea spoke a Semitic dialect. At an early date Eastern
Chaldea was invaded by the Sumerians or Accadians, a Turanian race which
is supposed to have come from the plateau of Central Asia. The two
languages were used side by side, the Semitic as the common tongue, and
the Accadian as a literary language. The earliest known king of Chaldea
was named Eannadu (B.C. 4500). The Chaldeans advanced slowly along the
Tigris and pushed their kingdom towards Assyria in the north, where they
built the cities of Ashur (Kal’at Sherkât), Calah (Nimroud), and Ninua
(Nineveh).
The northern portion of the Chaldeo-Assyrian empire asserted its
independence about 1700 B.C., and Assyria became a separate kingdom.
From B.C. 1275, when Tukulti-Adar I., the Assyrian king, conquered
Babylonia, down to the destruction of Nineveh, B.C. 609, the Chaldean
kingdom took a place of secondary importance, while Assyria became the
greatest power of Western Asia.
Tiglath-Pileser I. (B.C. 1100), and Ashur-nasir-pal (B.C. 885), were
amongst the greatest kings of Assyria. The latter was a great builder.
He built the great palace at Calah (Nimroud), the place to which he
removed his seat of government from Ashur. Assyrian art reached a high
state of development in his reign. His son and successor, Shalmaneser
II. (B.C. 860-825) was no less powerful; he extended his kingdom by wars
from the Persian Gulf to the Armenian mountains, and from Media to the
Mediterranean. Jehu, King of Israel, sent him tribute. After his death
Assyria declined and shrank within its borders, but under
Tiglath-Pileser III. regained its lost ground again (B.C. 745). Sargon,
the “Son of no one” (B.C. 722-705), usurps the throne, makes great wars,
is the first King of Assyria that comes in contact with the Egyptians.
He built the great palace at Khorsabad, which in late years has been
excavated. Sennacherib, his son, succeeded him, whose wars with
Hezekiah, King of Judah, are recorded in the Bible in the Book of Kings.
He built a great palace at Nineveh, many of the wall slabs of which are
now in the British Museum.
The death of the succeeding monarch, Esarhaddon, took place before he
had completed his great palace at Calah (Nimroud). Another palace
supposed to be his has lately been excavated at Nineveh. It lies buried
under the mound of Nebi Yunus. The Assyrian kings were great builders of
palaces. Each one, it appears, thought it his duty either to add a large
portion to a palace of his predecessor, or to build a new one for
himself. Ashur-bani-pal, who reigned for forty-two years (B.C. 668-626),
was one of the most powerful and most cruel of all the Assyrian
monarchs. His victory over the Elamites is depicted on the sculptured
slabs that enrich the Ninevite gallery of the British Museum. At his
death the Assyrian power was broken up, partly by the Scythian hordes
that swept over that part of Asia, and partly by the Medes. Nineveh was
besieged by Cyaxares of Media, and by Nabopolassar, an Assyrian general
who held command in Babylonia. It was at length captured and destroyed
(B.C. 609). The whole empire was then divided between the Medes and the
Babylonians. The new Babylonian empire lasted seventy years, and in the
reign of its last king, Nabonidus, when under the command of Belshazzar,
his son, Babylon was captured by Cyrus of Persia (B.C. 539). From this
time until its subjugation by Alexander the Great Babylon was under the
Persians.
[Illustration: Fig. 154.—A Winged Bull, Assyria. (M)]
The religion of the Chaldeo-Assyrian nation was the worship of the sun,
moon, stars, and the various powers of nature. Their chief gods were
Shamash, the sun; Sin, the moon; Marduk, a sun-god, the carrier of
prayers from earth to heaven; Anum, the sky god; Bel, the god of the
earth; and Ea, the god of great knowledge: the last three were the
Trinity. Other gods were Dagon, the fish-god; Ishtar, their Venus; Nabu,
their Mercury and scribe of the gods; Rammânu, the god of wind and
thunder; and Negral, the god of war and hunting.
The Assyrian and Babylonian people have a proverbial name for being a
warlike and cruel race, in opposition to their contemporaries, the more
peaceful and gentle Egyptians. At the same time they have the reputation
of being highly skilled in arts and sciences.
[Illustration: Fig. 155.—Demons, from the Palace of Assurbanipal,
British Museum. (P. & C.)]
The greatness of the Chaldeans in astronomy, in astrology, and as wise
men generally, is too well known to be repeated. Their skill in the arts
of building, sculpture, in the use of metals, in pottery, tiles, gem
cutting, painting, embroidery and weaving, excites our wonder and
admiration.
[Illustration: Fig. 156.—A Griffon in the Egyptian Style. (M.)]
The art of the Assyrians is intensely earnest and full of realism,
vigorous in the highest degree, and true art of its kind. It is the art
of a people who were brave and powerful, and of princes that were
despotic and stern. The keynote of their art was _force_, whether
displayed in its physical and realistic aspects, in the sculptural
representations of ferocious animals, as their lions and dogs, or
embodied in their mysterious and wonderful creations of human-headed
bulls, and other monsters and demons (Figs. 154, 155), or in the haughty
self-consciousness of strength and power, with which their sculptors
sought to invest the representations of the monarchs going forth to
battle or to the lion hunt (Fig. 163); everywhere, in the higher aspects
of Assyrian art, physical force, or personal force of will, is the
culminating point of expression aimed at in all their efforts.
The sculptured lion of the Egyptians is _couchant_, half slumbering; the
Assyrian lion is _rampant_ and roaring for his prey. The simile may be
used to illustrate the characteristic difference of the Art of both
countries. The Assyrian made his art minister to his worldly uses and
delights, the Egyptian lavished his on the tomb and for the hereafter.
The Assyrian religion and the Chaldean magicians’ and astrologers’
exposition of its mysteries, doubtless gave the subject-matter for the
creation of those strange combinations of chimeras, monsters, and
bi-form deities that are so common in Assyrian art.
The griffons and other curious hybrid creatures of the Middle Ages, and
those that adorn the Gothic buildings of our own days, can be traced to
their birthplace in Assyrian art.
[Illustration: Fig. 157—Eagle-headed Divinity from Nimroud, with the
Sacred Tree. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 158.—Figure of a Goddess in Act of Adoration,
British Museum. (P. & C.)]
The great god of the Assyrians was named Assur, the all-powerful god of
battles. In his name all kinds of cruelty and torture were practised on
heretics and apostates, and in his name, and to extend his kingdom of
Assyria, the Ninevite kings found their excuses to make war with nations
far and near. He seems to have been a later creation of the Assyrian
gods, but became supreme as Nineveh rose in power. He was supposed to
have descended from Sin, the moon-god. The winged-globe, with the god in
the centre holding the bow and arrow, or thunder-bolt (Fig. 159), is by
some thought to be a representation of Assur. A similar figure is seen
at the top of the Assyrian standard, as the “Director of Armies” (Fig.
161). This figure in the centre of the ring or solar disk, who is
evidently divine, by reason of his feathered lower garment, and his
wings that raise him in mid-air, above all humanity, is quite likely to
be the original type of the later Persian supreme god, Athurâ-Mazda (see
Fig. 243), and the emblematic symbol of his divinity is quite likely to
have been designed and adapted from the winged disk or “globe” of the
Egyptians.
[Illustration: Fig. 159—The Winged Globe with the Figure of a God. (P. &
C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 160.—The Winged Globe; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
The winged globe (Fig. 160) of the Assyrians is an imitation of that of
Egypt; this emblem having found its way into Assyria on many carvings in
ivory and on articles in bronze, carried hither by the trading
Phœnicians from Egypt, and the emblem in question was, according to
Perrot, appropriated by the Assyrians.
[Illustration: Fig. 161.—The Assyrian Standard. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 162.—Dagon, the Fish-God. (P. & C.)]
In their ornament and decoration they were more free and natural than
the Egyptians, and the execution was careful and refined, as witnessed
by their bronze bowls, gem-engraving, and the patterns on the enamelled
bricks.
[Illustration: Fig. 163.—Assurbanipal Attacked by Lions, British Museum.
(P. & C.)]
The bronze gates from Balâwât in the British Museum are examples of
highly skilful repoussé work. Their palaces must have presented a
gorgeous and glittering appearance in their rich colouring and enamelled
brilliancy. Although not a single specimen of Assyrian weaving has been
discovered, we have abundant and sufficient evidence from the sculptured
patterns of textiles and embroideries on the kings’ robes and wall
decorations that both weaving and embroidery must have been one of their
most glorious arts.
The Asiatic love of colour would lead us to suppose that these
embroideries were excessively rich in colour (Figs. 162A, 163A, 164,
165) as they were in design.
The details of this embroidery design (Fig. 162A) are well drawn, and
the design is full of rich variety without heaviness or too much
crowding. The king is seen twice represented in the circle doing homage
to the sacred tree and to the winged disk; and in other places he is
between two genii or deities; combats of lions and bulls, palmate
borders, fir-cones, and spirals, with bands that divide the work in
varied spaces, complete these rich designs in embroidery, which are
among the very finest efforts of Assyrian decorative art.
[Illustration: Fig. 162A.—Embroidery upon a Royal Mantle; from Layard.
(P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 163A.—Embroidery on the upper part of a Royal
Mantle; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
Details of embroidery patterns are shown at Figs. 164, 165.
The sills or thresholds of the doors of the palaces were sometimes
sculptured in low relief on large slabs of alabaster stone. The design
is evidently copied from an embroidered carpet; perhaps the central part
of the one given (Fig. 166) is a copy from a fabric woven in the loom,
and the border, enlarged at Fig. 167, would have its original in
embroidery.
[Illustration: Fig. 164.—Detail of Embroidery; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 165.—Detail of Embroidery; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
The figure of the plan and elevation of part of a Chaldean façade in
enamelled bricks, from Warka, is decorated with patterns that, no doubt,
had their origin in weaving and matting (Fig. 168). The surface of this
façade is composed of terra-cotta cones, with their bases turned
outwards. These bases were previously dipped in enamelled colours before
they were inserted into the clay cement; so they form a kind of
terra-cotta mosaic work (_Loftus_).
[Illustration: Fig. 166.—Sill of a Door from Khorsabad: Length, 40 ins.
(P. & C.)]
The land of Chaldea was devoid of stone for building purposes, but
extremely rich in immense banks of clay, which was used for brick making
from the earliest times in Chaldea. The Chaldean brick is rather more
than one English foot square, and about four inches in thickness; of a
dark red colour to light yellow. Nearly all of them have an inscription
with the name of the king, &c. (Fig. 169).
[Illustration: Fig. 167.—Fragment of Border of Fig. 166; from a
Threshold of Khorsabad. (P. & C.)]
The brick from Erech, or ancient Warka, gives a good idea of one of the
oldest forms of Chaldean writing known (Fig. 170). It consists of an
abridgment of the representation of natural objects, as all alphabets in
their original state were merely pictures or pictographs. This
inscription shows the stage of conventional signs or ideographic writing
before it underwent the change into the _cuneiform_, or wedge-shaped
writing of the Assyrians.
[Illustration: Fig. 168.—Plan and Elevation of Part of a Façade at
Warka; from Loftus. (P. & C.)]
Some of the bricks were made wedge-shaped, for use in the building of
arches and vaults. The common bricks were sometimes used in the crude
state, or unburnt, and burnt. Enamelled bricks were greatly used in
Chaldea, but the clay of which they were made was softer and more
friable. This was used purposely, so that the enamel would sink deeper
into the soft material, and thereby make a more lasting surface
protection.
[Illustration: Fig. 169.—Babylonian Brick, 16 ins. square, 4 ins. thick.
(P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 170.—Brick from Erech. (P. & C.)]
Assyria copied most of her art and sciences from her older sister in
civilisation, and had the advantage over Chaldea in a good supply of
building stone, that formed the substructural bed for the clay deposits.
This was a sulphate of chalk known as alabaster, grey in colour, and
easy to work. The great wall slabs used for the bas-reliefs and the
winged bulls and other statuary, were carved out of this material; but
the Assyrians used bricks for the main structure of their buildings,
like the Chaldeans. Timber was scarce in Assyria, but was used very much
in the palaces. It was brought from the mountains of Upper Mesopotamia,
on the left bank of the Tigris, and, later, cedar and other woods were
transported from the forests of Lebanon for the beams of the palaces and
temples. All kinds of metals, burnished and unburnished, were used as
decorative accessories, especially by the Chaldeans.
[Illustration: Fig. 171.—One of the Gates of the Harumat, Dur-Sarginu.
(M.)]
The historians’ descriptions, the foundations that have been excavated,
and the sculptured buildings on the bas-reliefs, are the materials,
together with well-preserved fragments of architecture, which
archæologists and architects have used to enable them to restore some of
the wonderful temples and palaces of ancient Assyria (Fig. 172).
[Illustration: Fig. 172.—Interior of a Temple, after Layard’s
Restoration.]
The bird’s-eye view of the palace of Dur-Sarginu will give a good idea
of the typical Assyrian palaces (Fig. 174), and the triumphal gate with
its man-headed winged bulls at the base and sides (Fig. 173), and also
the other gate at Fig. 172, both with their crenallated battlements,
serve to show the imposing character of these edifices. It will be
noticed from the bird’s-eye view and the gateways that the general
character of Assyrian architecture was rectangular in the highest
degree. The arch and vaulted structures were known to the Assyrians, who
used them to great advantage (Figs. 175 and 250), and much more so than
the Egyptians, although the latter people occasionally employed them.
[Illustration: Fig. 173.—Triumphal Gate at the entrance of the Palace.
(M.)]
The Chaldeans, as would naturally be expected, used the arch
construction very much in their brick buildings, as it would be the only
means of carrying roofs and upper floors, where stone and timber could
not easily be obtained (Fig. 175).
[Illustration: Fig. 174.—The Royal Palace of Dur-Sarginu (Sargon’s
Palace); restored by Chipiez. (M.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 175.—A Bedroom in the Harem at Dur-Sarginu (Sargon’s
Palace). (M.)]
The use of the column in Chaldea is proved by the bas-reliefs before it
developed itself in Assyria; but in either country it was not an
important feature in the architecture, being mostly used for awnings
supporting light tents or tabernacles; sometimes, indeed, used in a
disengaged way, as proved by the views of small temples on the
bas-reliefs (Figs. 176, 177, 178). The use of the column was not in
accord with the principles of their architecture, and was only to be
found in small porches, or in an engaged way against outer walls and
piers (Fig. 179). The only capital found in a fragment, and restored by
Place, is shown at Fig. 181, and two bases (Figs. 180 and 182). From
these remains it is assumed that the shaft was smooth and cylindrical.
[Illustration: Fig. 176.—Temple on the bank of a river, Khorsabad, from
Batta. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 177.—Capital of Temple at Fig. 176. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 178.—Capital. (P. & C.)]
An incipient form of the Ionic volute is seen at Fig. 177 in the capital
of the small columns to the little temple (Fig. 176).
The kings of Assyria had in their palaces a great deal of luxurious
furniture. The couches, chairs, and tables were made of wood, with
bronze fittings, and decorated with ivory, gold, and lapis lazuli. The
bas-relief in the British Museum representing Assurbanipal and his queen
at a banquet (Figs. 183 and 184) will give a good idea of the extreme
richness in design and decoration of these sumptuous articles of
furniture (Fig. 185).
Bronze sockets (Fig. 186) and all kinds of fragments in metal and ivory
fittings, and decorations corresponding to the designs on the
bas-reliefs, all indicate that the anathemas of the prophet Nahum (Nahum
ii. 9) gave a good picture of Nineveh’s richness in the sumptuary arts.
“Take ye the spoil of silver,” he exclaims, “take the spoil of gold; for
there is none end of the store and glory out of all the pleasant
furniture.”
[Illustration: Fig. 179.—Fragment of an Assyrian Building from a
bas-relief, B.M. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 180.—Ornamented Base of Limestone. (P. & C.)]
Animals have been represented with such faithfulness, especially in
their most vigorous and ferocious aspects, by the sculptors of Assyria,
that in any notice of Assyrian art they must have a place. Lions
especially were rendered in all their ferociousness, and were the
favourite game for kingly sport (Figs. 187, 188, 189). Lions were kept
in cages, and let out when the monarch decided to have a day’s hunting
(Fig. 187). Dogs were specially trained for lion-hunting (Fig. 190).
[Illustration: Fig. 181.—Assyrian Capital compiled from Place. (P. &
C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 182.—Winged Sphinx carrying Base of Capital. Layard.
(P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 183.—Assurbanipal and his Queen feasting in the
gardens of the Harem after the battle. The head of Teuman, the Elamite
King, hangs on the left on the sacred tree. (M.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 184.—The Feast of Assurbanipal. (B.M.) (P. & C.)
Enlarged detail of Fig. 183, showing the Assyrian Furniture. Drawn by
Gautier.]
[Illustration: Fig. 185.—Assyrian Stool; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
We add two illustrations of the sphinx variety of fantastic animals; one
is the most remarkable creation of all the fantastic animals of Assyria
(Fig. 192). It has the horns of a ram, a bull’s head, a bird’s beak;
body, tail, and fore-legs of a lion; and the hind-legs and wings of the
eagle. The Andro-Sphinx (Fig. 193) from the robe of Assurbanipal
foreshadows the fabulous centaurs of Grecian art. Other bi-form
creations have been found in Assyrian art bearing a close resemblance to
the Greek centaur.
[Illustration: Fig. 186.—Bronze Foot of a Piece of Furniture.]
[Illustration: Fig. 187.—Lion coming out of his Cage. (B.M.) (P. & C.)]
The purely ornamental forms from the vegetable world that have been used
in Assyrian and Chaldean art are limited in number. The daisy or rosette
is the commonest (Figs. 194 and 198). In the illustration of the “Lion
and Lioness in a Park” (Fig. 188) the daisy is beautifully though
conventionally rendered; the large leaves at the bottom are typically
the common daisy leaves; the vine is no less well executed, and the
lioness on the same bas-relief is treated with consummate skill. The
vine is also seen to great advantage in its conventional treatment at
Figs. 184 and 188.
[Illustration: Fig. 188.—Lion and Lioness in a Park. (B.M.) (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 189.—Combat between a Lion and a Unicorn; from
Layard. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 190.—Dog used for Lion Hunting. (M.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 191.—Chariot Horses; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 192.—Fantastic Animal, drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)]
There is an Assyrian ornament called the “knop and flower” ornament,
which occurs in various forms and in endless profusion in Egyptian,
Assyrian, Persian, and Greek, and even is copied down to Indian and
Roman ornament. It may be native, or some forms of it at least, to
Assyrian ornament, but is undoubtedly Egyptian in its earliest source;
we have spoken of it before in our notice of Egyptian ornament as being
derived from the lotus (page 90). It appears on the rich border of the
carved threshold (Fig. 167); the flower there is undoubtedly a lotus,
and the bud or “knop” may be a representation of a “fir-cone,” or may be
meant for the closed lotus-bud. Another form of the same elements occurs
at Fig. 195, in a beautiful design enclosed in a square, forming one of
the central patterns of a similar sill or threshold, and this form of it
would doubtless also be used for a ceiling decoration of the palaces. A
bouquet of similar flowers is seen at Fig. 196 of the date of
Assurbanipal (885-860 B.C.). It is very difficult to say whether this
bouquet represents the lotus or not, as, according to the testimony of
Layard, the lotus flower is only to be found on the most recent of
Assyrian monuments dating from the eighth and seventh centuries B.C., at
the time when Assyria had invaded and occupied the Delta of Egypt. If
not the lotus flower, something very like has been found on monuments in
Assyria much older than these dates.
[Illustration: Fig. 193.—Andro-Sphinx, Robe of Assurbanipal; from
Layard. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 194.—Detail from the Enamelled Archivolt, Khorsabad;
from Place. (P. & C.)]
As the result of some recent scientific examinations into the origin of
pattern, some investigators have decided that the “knop and flower”
patterns of Assyrian ornament (Figs. 167, 195, and 198) are but
evolutions of tassels, and knotted fringes of matting and embroideries,
just because they bear a not very clear resemblance to such trimmings as
we see on the tabernacle on the Balâwât gates (Fig. 197), &c. We admit
that there is a fancied resemblance in many ornamental forms to patterns
that have been evolved from constructed articles, especially from woven
and matted examples, but it is an insult to the intelligence of an
artist to ask him to believe that the beautiful and clearly distinctive
floral bud and palmate borders in Egyptian, Assyrian, and Greek art have
resulted from tyings and knottings of the fringed ends of mats, when one
can clearly see the daisy—in some cases turned to a disk—the palm, and,
above all, the lotus, almost naturally drawn and modelled; even the
connecting lines of flower and buds, where scientific connection with
the fringed-end idea seems the strongest in the eyes of the
evolutionist, will be found on examination to be always used in the
exact reverse way to that which is formed by the constructive joinings
of the knotted fringe. (See Figs. 198 and 167.)
[Illustration: Fig. 195.—Rosette of Lotus Flowers and Buds. (P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 196.—Bouquet of Flowers and Buds; from Layard. (P. &
C.)]
[Illustration:
Fig. 197.—Tabernacle from the Balâwât Gates. (B.M.) (P. & C.)
Date, B.C. 859 to 824.]
]
It will require an amazing quantity of scientific proof to get rid of
the lotus in Egyptian ornament, and much also to turn it and the daisy
into tassel knots in Assyrian ornament, when we have overwhelming
evidence as to the natural representations of such floral forms, as well
as the conventional designs derived from them, on the very oldest
monuments in both countries.
[Illustration: Fig. 198.—Painted Ornament on Plaster; from Layard. (P. &
C.)]
The “Sacred Tree,” or “Tree of Life,” is often represented in Assyrian
art, and under different forms, but generally with a king or some
divinity on either side of it, paying homage (Figs. 157, 162A, 208).
An enlarged portion of it is seen at Fig. 199.
[Illustration: Fig. 199.—Upper Portion of a Tree of Life; from Layard.
(P. & C.)]
The exact meaning of the “Sacred Tree” has not yet been satisfactorily
explained, but, at any rate, it seems likely enough that it represents a
palm-tree, shown by the palmate head and by the conventional markings on
the trunk, no doubt meant for the bark roughening lines. The surrounding
palmates may be meant to represent a leafy enclosure for the sacred tree
in the centre, or the whole thing may be a conventional picture of a
sacred grove.
Owing to the comparative lateness of the universal use of the lotus in
Assyrian art, we can well imagine that this flower form was introduced
into Assyria by the articles in bronze, ivory, and other material by the
Phœnician traders, that were both of Egyptian and Phœnician design, as
there was scarcely an article of commerce on which the lotus was not
represented in those early days of Phœnician trade (900 to 300 B.C.)
[Illustration: Fig. 200.—Guilloche Ornament on Enamelled Brick. (B.M.)
(P. & C.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 201.—Ivory Plaque; Actual Size. Drawn by Gautier.
(P. & C.)]
Another very characteristic ornament of the Assyrian decorations is the
double-interlacing meander, or guilloche (Figs. 200 and 201). It is
generally found in combination with the other ornaments just spoken of,
both on tiles and in ivory engraving. It is sometimes called “cable
ornament” or “snare-work,” from the appearance it has to a rope or cable
twisted around the eyes of posts. It has been used very much by the
Greeks and Romans.
[Illustration: Fig. 202.—Ivory Plaque found at Nimroud. (B.M.) (P. &
C.)]
The art of ivory carving and engraving was practised in Assyria, judging
from some plaques and carvings that have been found that are distinctly
Assyrian in motive and design (Fig. 201), and from many elephants’ tusks
that have come to light from the ruins of the buried palaces; but it has
been clearly established that the art was first introduced into Assyria
by the importation of the Egyptian plaques and other carvings, and also
by the imitations of Egyptian articles made by Phœnician artists, and
probably sold to the Assyrians as the product of Egypt.
Fig. 202, a small plaque, is quite likely to be one of these imitations
of Egyptian design with the lotus-tree of life which rests on a support
or top of a capital. This form of lotus capital is found everywhere in
Cyprus, and in all countries where Phœnician trade extended. It is
distinctly Egyptian in origin, and more than likely is the origin of the
Ionic volute capital of the Greeks. The small and beautifully carved
sphinx (Fig. 203) is one of the many Egyptian ivories that had found its
way to Assyria, and is immeasurably superior in workmanship to any of
the Assyrian carvings.
[Illustration: Fig. 203.—Ivory Fragment in British Museum; Actual Size.
Drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)]
It may be remarked here that the Assyrian artist excelled in the flat or
engraved treatment of his designs in nearly every branch of art, but was
inferior in workmanship to the Egyptian in carved work in the round;
though in expressing intense life, virility, and movement, especially in
the representation of animals, he was superior to the Egyptian artist.
[Illustration: Fig. 204.—Bronze Platter, 9 ins. diameter. (B.M.) Drawn
by Wallet. (P. & C.)]
There is one important product of Assyrian art that deserves notice—the
exquisite bronze bowls, cups, and platters, made in repoussé and
finished off with the engraver’s burin (Fig. 204, 205). In these
products we may recognise the renaissance of Assyrian art, based on the
art of the Egyptians. That they must have had their origin in Assyria no
one can doubt, when we think that the working in bronze was so well
known in Assyria and Babylonia; for example, we quote the magnificent
Balâwât plates, of repoussé bronze, of Shalmaneser II. (B.C. 859-824)
now in the British Museum; and although the designs on some of them are
distinctly Egyptian (Fig. 204), not one specimen of such bowls or
platters has yet been found in the Valley of the Nile.
[Illustration: Fig. 205.—Bronze Cup, diameter 11 ins.; from Layard.]
It may be reasonably assumed that the Egyptian motives were copied from
ivories or painted vases brought to Assyria by the Phœnicians, and that
those master workers in bronze, the Assyrians, copied such designs on
their platters and cups, and afterwards introduced their own distinctive
designs, as may be seen in Fig. 205, a design which is Assyrian in every
detail, with no Egyptian trace. Designs like the latter disprove the
theory that these bronze bowls and dishes were altogether made in
workshops of Tyre and Byblos, but undoubtedly the Phœnician artists—who
really invented nothing—may have in their turn copied these designs on
their wares, when they found such handy and portable goods might be
easily transported, and would be sure to find a ready market in other
countries bordering on the Mediterranean, as we shall see when treating
of Phœnician Art. The importance of the design on such handy and
indestructible articles on the art of the Greeks, Cypriots, and
Etruscans, not only from the workmanship point of view, but from the
themes portrayed on them suggesting ornament, and other subject matter,
perhaps religious motives as well, to the rising civilisation of the
countries named, can hardly be exaggerated.
[Illustration: Fig. 206.—Border of a Bronze Cup; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
In painting on plaster (Fig. 198) or enamelling on tiles (Figs. 194 and
200) and bricks, the Babylonians and Assyrians used very few colours,
not more than five or six, but they used them with great advantage and
decorative effect, and always in flat tints. Their painted figures were,
as a rule, not intended for any other meaning than their geometric
ornament, and merely used as units in the ornamental scheme (Fig. 194).
The colours were: blue from the lapis lazuli; yellow, an antimoniate of
lead and a little tin; white, an oxide of tin; black, an animal
charcoal; red, an oxide of iron; and another blue from the oxide of
copper completes, as near as possible, the range of their palette.
[Illustration:
Fig. 207.
Cylinder; from Soldi.
(P. & C.)
]
[Illustration: Fig. 208.—Assyrian Cylinder. Worship of Sacred Tree.
(B.M.) (P. & C.)]
The nearly universal colour of the groundwork was blue, a deep dark blue
from the lapis lazuli. At Khorsabad M. Place found a mass of powdered
blue, over two pounds in weight, that was found to be made from the
lapis lazuli for the purpose of enamelling. The main portion of the
decoration was yellow, but often white was used with black outlines, and
red sparingly. A green tint was less common, but was supposed to be
obtained from a mixture of the yellow and copper blue oxide.
Remains of pottery are not very plentiful, and the forms have nothing
distinctive that calls for special notice. The vessels, such as vases,
cups, and buckets of bronze, are elegant in form and decoration (Fig.
209).
Jewellery and personal decoration have only been found in a limited
quantity, and not of a very good quality in design or material: the
bas-reliefs furnish our best information on what existed in these
articles.
[Illustration: Fig. 209.—Bronze Bucket; from Layard. (P. & C.)]
Gem cutting and cylinder engraving were arts very much practised in
Babylonia and Assyria (Fig. 208). The cylinders usually were engraved
with subjects of a religious character. The illustration shows one of
the best engraved Assyrian cylinders that has yet been found. It
represents the king and deities at the worship of the Sacred Tree, and
the God Assur. In the hands of the deities may be seen the bronze
buckets shown at Fig 209.
This subject is supposed to be a copy from a bas-relief. The material of
these cylinders was generally of serpentine, chalcedony, agate, black
marble, jasper, &c., and they were used to impress clay documents with,
in a similar way as in the use of ordinary seals (Fig. 207).