Transcriber’s Note:
The single footnote has been placed to follow the paragraph in which it was referenced.
There are copious illustration, which have been moved to fall on paragraph breaks. Full page illustrations, which were paginated, often fall in mid-paragraph in the original, and so would have been disruptive when moved. The pagination of the illustrations has therefore been removed, and that of the text may contain gaps.
Some larger illustrations were rotated in mid-page. These are presented as full page illustrations in the correct orientation.
A number of captions refer to the image as ‘Actual Size’. This is difficult to substantiate and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Where references to illustrations are not local to the referent, links are provided for ease of navigation.
Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please see the transcriber’s [note] at the end of this text for details regarding the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation.
Any corrections are indicated using an underline highlight. Placing the cursor over the correction will produce the original text in a small popup.
Any corrections are indicated as hyperlinks, which will navigate the reader to the corresponding entry in the corrections table in the note at the end of the text.
Choragic Monument of Lysikrates.
HISTORIC ORNAMENT
Treatise on
DECORATIVE ART
AND
ARCHITECTURAL ORNAMENT
TREATS OF PREHISTORIC ART; ANCIENT ART AND ARCHITECTURE;
EASTERN, EARLY CHRISTIAN, BYZANTINE,
SARACENIC, ROMANESQUE, GOTHIC, AND
RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE
AND ORNAMENT.
BY
JAMES WARD
AUTHOR OF “THE PRINCIPLES OF ORNAMENT.”
*
With Four Hundred and Thirty-Six Illustrations
LONDON: CHAPMAN AND HALL, Limited
1909
LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
DUKE STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL STREET, W.
PREFACE.
The comprehensive nature of the subject of this work renders it impossible to deal with its various divisions and sub-divisions, except in a very condensed manner, within the limits of a handbook for students.
I have endeavoured to present to the reader, and to the student of ornamental and decorative art, some of the salient features which characterize the historic styles of ornament, and those that seem to me to show themselves as landmarks in the wide domain of Historic Ornament.
Realistic decoration was the earliest form of all art, as we find it in the etchings on the bones drawn by the prehistoric cave-dwellers; but ornamental design or pattern drawing is a kind of invention which implies the orderly decoration of architectural forms and other objects, and is generally applied to such objects with the view of adding some enrichment that shall make them more pleasing to the sight.
The former belongs more to pictorial art, while the latter is purely decorative.
As the construction of ornament, in a great measure, ought to be based on the laws that govern the design of good architecture—this we gather from the design of the best ornament of the historic styles—it has been thought necessary to give a slight sketch of each of the principal orders and styles of architecture, placing them, as far as possible, in a chronological sequence in regard to the periods of their existence, and countries in which they flourished.
In some cases I have also thought it desirable to give a brief account of the religion of those nations that have created distinct styles of architecture and ornament; for in many cases, such as in the art of the ancient world and of the Middle Ages, we find that the art of a country was so bound up with the religion of its people, that to understand the former it is indispensable to have some knowledge of their religious ceremonies and beliefs.
I have here to express my indebtedness to various writers on ornamental art whom I have named in the pages of these volumes for some useful points of information, and to them and the publishers of this work for the use of the greater portion of the blocks of illustrations.
I have also to thank Mr. T. M. Lindsay for the use of his drawing of the monument of Lysikrates, and the Science and Art Department for permission to use many of the illustrations of their excellent handbooks on decorative art.
In a succeeding volume to this work, the various divisions of the Industrial Arts and Crafts will be treated in their historical developments of decoration and workmanship.
In conclusion, I trust that the contents of these pages will be helpful to students in art schools, and to others who may desire to have an introduction to the fascinating study of Historic Ornament.
J. Ward.
CONTENTS.
| PAGE | |
| Introductory Chapter | [1] |
| CHAPTER II. | |
| Prehistoric Ornament—Palæolithic Period or Early Stone Age—River Drift and Cave-men | [7] |
| CHAPTER III. | |
| Neolithic Stone Period | [14] |
| CHAPTER IV. | |
| The Bronze Age | [21] |
| CHAPTER V. | |
| The Iron Age | [35] |
| CHAPTER VI. | |
| The Lake Dwellings of Switzerland and other parts of Europe | [48] |
| CHAPTER VII. | |
| Egyptian Art—History—Architecture—Industrial Arts | [55] |
| CHAPTER VIII. | |
| Chaldean and Assyrian Art—History—Architecture—Industrial Art | [112] |
| CHAPTER IX. | |
| Phœnician Art—History—Trading—Architecture—Industrial Art—Art in Cyprus | [158] |
| CHAPTER X. | |
| Art in Ancient Persia—History—Architecture—Decoration | [183] |
| CHAPTER XI. | |
| Grecian Art—People—Mythology | [208] |
| CHAPTER XII. | |
| Art in Primitive Greece—Mycenæ—Troy—Tiryns—Architecture—Industrial art | [225] |
| CHAPTER XIII. | |
| Greek and Roman Orders of Architecture—Lycian Tombs—Greek Orders—Etruscan Architecture—Roman Orders | [242] |
| CHAPTER XIV. | |
| Greek and Roman Architectural Ornament—Pompeian Architecture | [262] |
| CHAPTER XV. | |
| Indian art and Architecture | [271] |
| CHAPTER XVI. | |
| Chinese and Japanese Architecture | [281] |
| CHAPTER XVII. | |
| Early Christian Architecture—Byzantine Architecture | [285] |
| CHAPTER XVIII. | |
| Saracenic Architecture and Ornament | [301] |
| CHAPTER XIX. | |
| Romanesque Architecture and Ornament | [330] |
| CHAPTER XX. | |
| Gothic Architecture and Ornament | [348] |
| CHAPTER XXI. | |
| Renaissance Architecture and Ornament | [369] |
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
| FIG. | PAGE | |
| Monument of Lysikrates | [Frontispiece] | |
| 278. | Alabaster Frieze | [227] |
| 279. | Alabaster Frieze Plan | [227] |
| 343. | Alhambra Diaper, Superposed Ornament | [305] |
| 331. | Ambo or Pulpit from St. George’s at Salonica | [287] |
| 83. | Amen or Ammon | [58] |
| 93. | Amenophis III. Presenting an Offering to Amen | [67] |
| 319. | Ancient Panel, Florence | [267] |
| 193. | Andro-Sphinx, Robe of Assurbanipal | [144] |
| 162. | Anou, or Dagon, Nimroud | [120] |
| 314. | Anthemion, Carved | [264] |
| 71. | Animal Ornamented Patterns, Corrupted Figures of Lions | [44] |
| 72. | ” ” ” ” | [44] |
| 73. | ” ” ” ” | [44] |
| 132. | Antelope and Papyrus | [97] |
| 270. | Apollo Belvedere | [218] |
| 341. | Arabesque Ornament from the Wekāla of Kāit Bey | [302] |
| 350. | Arcades in the Mosque of Ibn-Tūlūn | [312] |
| 352. | Arches: a, Ogee; b, Horseshoe; c, Pointed | [313] |
| 282. | Architrave and Frieze, Mycenian Palace | [229] |
| 161. | Assyrian Standard | [120] |
| 180. | Assyrian Base in Limestone | [136] |
| 163. | Assurbanipal Attacked by Lions | [121] |
| 181. | Assyrian Capital | [137] |
| 183. | Assurbanipal and his Queen after his Victory over Teuman | [137] |
| 185. | Assyrian Stool | [139] |
| 217. | Astarte, Terra-cotta | [164] |
| 268. | Athene Polias (Villa Albani) | [216] |
| 169. | Babylonian Brick | [129] |
| 62. | Barbarian Copy of a Roman Medallion | [40] |
| 253. | Base of Pillar at Susa | [196] |
| 254. | Base and Capital from Persepolis, Propylæa | [198] |
| 255. | Base and Capital, from Hypostyle Hall of Xerxes, Persepolis | [199] |
| 307. | Bas-Relief on the Arch of Titus | [258] |
| 382. | Berkeley Castle, Gloucestershire | [341] |
| 400A. | Bishopstone Church, Wilts, Priests’ Entrance | [361] |
| 234. | Bottle with Incised Ornament, from Cesnola | [176] |
| 235. | Bottle with Geometric Decoration | [176] |
| 237. | Bowl in the Piot Collection | [178] |
| 196. | Bouquet of Flowers and Buds | [146] |
| 125. | Border from Thebes | [93] |
| 41. | Breast-plate, with Spiral Ornaments | [24] |
| 28. | Bronze Axes, Paalstabs, and Moulds | [22] |
| 29. | ” ” | [22] |
| 30. | ” ” | [22] |
| 31. | ” ” | [22] |
| 32. | ” ” | [22] |
| 33. | ” ” | [22] |
| 34. | ” ” | [22] |
| 35. | Bronze Swords and Spear-head | [23] |
| 36. | ” ” | [23] |
| 37. | ” ” | [23] |
| 38. | ” ” | [23] |
| 39. | Bronze Button for Sword Belt | [24] |
| 40. | ” ” | [24] |
| 45. | Bronze Bowl found in Sweden | [26] |
| 47. | Bronze Hatchet found in Sweden | [27] |
| 50. | Bronze Horn | [29] |
| 54. | ” | [32] |
| 57. | Bronze and Gold Buttons | [33] |
| 58. | ” ” | [33] |
| 63. | Bracteate, Golden | [40] |
| 64. | ” | [41] |
| 186. | Bronze Foot of a Piece of Furniture | [140] |
| 204. | Bronze Platter | [153] |
| 205. | Bronze Cups | [154] |
| 206. | Bronze Cup, Border of | [155] |
| 209. | Bronze Bucket | [157] |
| 326. | Brahminical Rock Temple at Ellora | [275] |
| 170. | Brick from Erech | [129] |
| 339. | Byzantine Capital from Santa Sophia | [298] |
| 264. | Cameo of Athenion | [211] |
| 177. | Capital of Temple, Assyrian | [135] |
| 178. | ” ” | [135] |
| 221. | Capital, Cypriot | [168] |
| 222. | ” | [168] |
| 223. | Capital at Djezza, Limestone | [169] |
| 224. | Capital from Kition | [169] |
| 225. | Capital from Golgos | [170] |
| 302. | Capital of the Lysikrates Monument | [251] |
| 336. | Capital from Santa Sophia | [297] |
| 337. | Capital from St. Demetrius at Salonica | [297] |
| 338. | Capital from St. Demetrius | [297] |
| 372. | Capital from Wartburg | [335] |
| 378. | Capital from Palace of Barbarossa | [338] |
| 379. | Capital from St. Cross, Winchester | [338] |
| 148. | Carpenters Making Chairs | [108] |
| 212. | Carthaginian Coin, Silver | [161] |
| 213. | Carthaginian Coin, Electrum | [161] |
| 388. | Cathedral of Nôtre Dame, Paris | [349] |
| 123. | Ceiling Decoration at Thebes | [92] |
| 431. | Ceiling by Serlio | [401] |
| 432. | Ceiling by Sansovino | [402] |
| 410. | Certosa of Pavia, portion of | [376] |
| 146. | Chair, Egyptian | [107] |
| 147. | ” | [107] |
| 191. | Chariot Horses | [142] |
| 426. | Cinquecento Ornament | [398] |
| 428. | ” ” | [399] |
| 429. | ” ” | [400] |
| 430. | ” ” | [400] |
| 216. | Coin of Byblos, Enlarged, with Sacred Cone | [163] |
| 265. | Coins of Elis, with the Phidian Zeus | [212] |
| 149. | Coffer in Wood | [108] |
| 55. | Collar of Bronze | [33] |
| 390. | Cologne Cathedral, Window Gable | [352] |
| 109. | Column of Thothmes III., from the Ambulatory of Thothmes | [83] |
| 110. | Column from Hypostyle Hall of the Ramesseum | [84] |
| 118. | Column from Bas-Relief | [88] |
| 252. | Column with Volute Capital, Persepolis | [196] |
| 189. | Combat between a Lion and a Unicorn | [142] |
| 335. | Cornice from Santa Sophia | [296] |
| 69. | Corrupted Figures of Lions | [44] |
| 70. | ” ” | [44] |
| 397. | Crockets, Lincoln | [359] |
| 258. | Crowing Wall of the Staircase, Palace of Xerxes, at Persepolis | [202] |
| 353. | Cusped Inter-Arching, Mosque of Cordova | [314] |
| 363. | Cursive Writing from the Alhambra | [323] |
| 207. | Cylinder from Soldi | [156] |
| 208. | Cylinder, Assyrian. Worship of Sacred Tree | [156] |
| 56. | Danish Bronze Knives | [33] |
| 317. | Decorated Mouldings from Temple of Minerva, Polias | [266] |
| 155. | Demons, from the Palace of Assurbanipal | [115] |
| 194. | Detail from the Enamelled Archivolt, Khorsabad | [145] |
| 238. | Detail of the Decoration of a Cup | [179] |
| 273. | Diana of Versailles | [221] |
| 441. | Dietterlin’s Architecture | [408] |
| 275.[275.] | Dionysus and the Lion | [223] |
| 25. | Dolmen at Hesbon | [20] |
| 359. | Doorway of a Private House | [320] |
| 384. | Door of St. Gabriel’s, South of France | [342] |
| 190. | Dog used for Lion Hunting | [142] |
| 399. | Dog’s Tooth Ornament, Stone Church, Kent | [360] |
| 7A. | Drawing of Human and Animal Forms by Bushmen | [12] |
| 7B. | Drawing of Animals by Bushmen | [13] |
| 157. | Eagle-headed Divinity from Nimrod, with Sacred Tree | [117] |
| 233. | Earring, Gold, from Cesnola | [175] |
| 21. | Earthenware of the New Stone Age | [18] |
| 22. | ” ” ” | [18] |
| 23. | ” ” ” | [18] |
| 24. | ” ” ” | [18] |
| 345. | East Colonnade of the Mosque of 'Amr | [307] |
| 152. | Egyptian Ship | [110] |
| 248. | Elevations and Sections of Doorways and Windows of a Palace at Persepolis | [192] |
| 162A. | Embroidery from a Royal Mantle, Assyrian | [123] |
| 163A. | Embroidery on the Upper Part of a King’s Mantle | [124] |
| 164. | Embroidery Detail of Upper Part of King’s Mantle | [125] |
| 165. | ” ” ” | [125] |
| 260. | Enamelled Ornament on Bricks from Susa | [204] |
| 140. | Enamelled Earthenware Dish | [102] |
| 141. | Enamelled Earthenware Bowl | [102] |
| 220. | Entablature from a Temple at Byblos | [167] |
| 283. | Entablature Restored, Mycenian Palace | [230] |
| 284. | Entablature of C. Selinous’ Temple | [231] |
| 301. | Entablature, Capital, and Base of Greek Ionic Temple | [249] |
| 306. | Entablature of Jupiter Tonans | [257] |
| 96. | Entrance to Hypostyle, Hall of Temple Amen | [71] |
| 4. | Esquimaux Carving | [9] |
| 5. | Etching of Reindeer on Bone | [10] |
| 6. | Etching of Reindeer on Slate | [11] |
| 7. | Etching of Mammoth on a Piece of Mammoth Ivory | [11] |
| 303. | Etruscan Door | [252] |
| 98. | Façade of the Great Rock-cut Temple, Ipsamboul | [73] |
| 192. | Fantastic Animal | [143] |
| 409. | Farnese Palace, Upper Story of | [375] |
| 184. | Feast of Assurbanipal, Enlarged Detail | [138] |
| 66. | Fibula in Gilt Bronze | [43] |
| 67. | ” ” | [43] |
| 158. | Figure of a Goddess in Act of Adoration | [118] |
| 245. | Fire Altars at Naksh-i-Rustem | [189] |
| 126. | Flattened form of Lotus-Leaf Ornament | [93] |
| 404. | Flamboyant Panel | [365] |
| 405. | Flamboyant Panelling | [365] |
| 8. | Flint Implements of the Neolithic Period | [15] |
| 9. | ” ” ” | [15] |
| 10. | ” ” ” | [15] |
| 11. | ” ” ” | [15] |
| 12. | ” ” ” | [16] |
| 13. | ” ” ” | [16] |
| 14. | ” ” ” | [16] |
| 15. | ” ” ” | [17] |
| 16. | ” ” ” | [17] |
| 424. | Floral Ornament, Italian | [396] |
| 396. | Florence Cathedral, Window Gable | [358] |
| 144. | Fragment of an Ivory Castanet | [105] |
| 167[167]. | Fragment of Border of Fig. 166; from a Threshold of Khorsabad | [127] |
| 179. | Fragment of an Assyrian Building, from a Bas-Relief | [136] |
| 247. | Fragment of Door Frame, from Hypostyle Hall, Susa | [191] |
| 281. | Fragment of Frieze, Mycenæ | [228] |
| 310. | Frets, Greek | [262] |
| 311. | Fret, Greek, Carved | [263] |
| 244. | Funeral Tower at Naksh-i-Rustem | [187] |
| 171. | Gates of the Harum at Dur Sargini | [130] |
| 330. | Gateway of Temple of Confucius | [282] |
| 27. | Giant’s Tomb, Sardinia | [20] |
| 86. | Goddess Bast or Pasht | [60] |
| 53. | Gold Bowl | [32] |
| 59. | Gold-plated Ornament | [38] |
| 143. | Golden Hawk, Egyptian | [104] |
| 230. | Gold Bracelet, from Tharros | [174] |
| 291. | Gold Pendant, from Troy | [237] |
| 292. | Gold Ornaments, from Troy | [237] |
| 293. | Gold Plate, from Troy | [238] |
| 294. | Gold Disc, from Troy | [238] |
| 295. | ” ” | [239] |
| 296. | Gold Cup, from Troy | [240] |
| 297. | Gold Ewer, from Troy | [241] |
| 101. | “Gorge,” Egyptian | [76] |
| 406. | Gothic Arches | [366] |
| 407. | Gothic Tracery | [367] |
| 401. | Gothic Mouldings | [362] |
| 102. | General Appearance of an Egyptian Temple | [77] |
| 87. | Great Pyramid of Kheops | [62] |
| 91. | Great Sphinx | [65] |
| 315. | Greek Border with Fret Bands | [265] |
| 316. | Greek Ivy Meander Border | [265] |
| 156. | Griffin in Egyptian Style | [116] |
| 200. | Guilloche Ornament on Enamelled Brick | [149] |
| 312. | Guilloche, Treble Ornament | [263] |
| 313. | Guilloche, Ornament, Double | [264] |
| 304. | Half Capital, Mars Ultor | [254] |
| 65. | Harness in Gilt Bronze, Fibula Decorations | [42] |
| 114. | Hathoric Pier | [85] |
| 120. | Hathor-headed Campaniform Capital, Temple of Nectanebo, at Philæ | [89] |
| 263. | Head of one of the Lions from Frieze at Susa | [207] |
| 267. | Head of Hera | [214] |
| 272. | Hermes, Statue of | [220] |
| 414. | Holland House, Ancient Parlour of | [385] |
| 1. | Horse, Upper Cave Earth, Robin Hood Cave | [8] |
| 127. | Hunting in a Marsh, from a Bas-Relief in the Tomb of Ti | [94] |
| 131. | Hunting in the Desert | [96] |
| 2. | Ibex Carved on an Antler | [8] |
| 80. | Ideal Lake Settlement | [52] |
| 360. | Illuminated Koran of the Sultan Sha’ Ban | [321] |
| 241. | Intaglio on Chalcedony | [182] |
| 427. | Italian Panel | [398] |
| 172. | Interior of a Temple after Layard’s Restoration | [131] |
| 329. | Interior of the Palace at Delhi | [279] |
| 369. | Intersecting Blind Arcade | [333] |
| 82. | Isis Nursing her Son Horus | [56] |
| 145. | Ivory Plaque | [106] |
| 201. | ” | [150] |
| 202. | Ivory Plaque found at Nimroud | [151] |
| 203. | Ivory Fragment in British Museum | [152] |
| 280. | Ivory Plaque from Mycenæ | [228] |
| 308. | Jewish Candlestick from Arch of Titus | [259] |
| 97. | Khita, Rout of the | [72] |
| 362. | Kufic Writing, from the Alhambra | [323] |
| 78. | Lacustrine Habitation in Lake Mohrya, Central Africa | [49] |
| 79. | Lake Dwellings, Sections and Plans | [50] |
| 385. | Landgrave’s Room at Wartburg | [344] |
| 81. | Lake Dwellings, Objects from[from] | [53] |
| 356. | Lattice-work, Saracenic | [317] |
| 357. | ” ” | [318] |
| 358. | ” ” | [318] |
| 138. | Lion from a Theban Bas-Relief | [101] |
| 187. | Lion coming out of his Cage | [140] |
| 188. | Lion and Lioness in a Park | [141] |
| 262. | Lion from the Lion Frieze in Enamelled Bricks at Susa | [206] |
| 277. | Lion’s Gate, Mycenæ | [226] |
| 122. | Lotus, Drawing from the Tomb of Ptah-Hotep | [91] |
| 124. | Lotus and Water-Leaf Ornament | [93] |
| 106. | Luxor, Plan of Temple | [80] |
| 107. | Luxor, as Restored, Bird’s-eye View | [81] |
| 298. | Lycian Rock-built Tomb | [243] |
| 299. | ” ” ” | [244] |
| 395. | Marienberg Town Hall | [357] |
| 290. | Marseilles Ewer | [236] |
| 348. | Mausoleum at Cairo | [309] |
| 228. | Medallion from a Cup from Griffi | [173] |
| 274. | Melpomene, Vatican | [222] |
| 26. | Menhirs, Sardinia | [19] |
| 92. | Memnon at Thebes, Statues of, Colossi of Amenophis III. | [66] |
| 347. | Minaret of the Mosque at Kaloum, Cairo | [309] |
| 105. | Model of an Egyptian House | [79] |
| 60. | Mountings, Metal | [39] |
| 61. | ” ” | [39] |
| 218. | Model of a Small Temple in Terra Cotta | [165] |
| 351. | Moorish Capital | [313] |
| 349. | Mosque of Kāit[Kāit] Bey, Cairo | [310] |
| 130. | Mummy-Case, Painting on | [96] |
| 420. | Mural Painting, Pompeii | [392] |
| 323. | Mural Painting, from Pompeii | [270] |
| 242. | Naksh-i-Rustem, General View of the Rock-cut Tombs | [184] |
| 416. | Nest of Scroll, Roman | [388] |
| 133. | Netting Birds, from a Tomb | [98] |
| 381. | Norman Doorway, Semperingham Church, Lincolnshire | [340] |
| 121. | Nymphæa Nelumbo | [90] |
| 104. | Oblong Building, Egyptian | [78] |
| 239. | Œnochœ, New York Museum | [180] |
| 240. | ” ” ” ” | [181] |
| 322. | Ogee Decorated—Astragal, Jupiter Stator | [269] |
| 324. | Ornament from Asoka’s Pillar | [272] |
| 361. | Ornament from the Portal of Sultan Hasan | [322] |
| 422. | Ornament, Ghiberti Gates | [393] |
| 365. | Ornament on an Arch of the Wekāla Kāit[Kāit] Bey | [326] |
| 439. | Ornament from Doorway, Crewe Hall | [407] |
| 321. | Ogee and Fluted Cavetto Moulding; Jupiter Tonans | [268] |
| 85. | Osiris | [60] |
| 318. | Ovolo with Egg and Tongue, from the Erectheum | [266] |
| 320. | Ovolo and Astragal Mouldings, Roman | [268] |
| 334. | Opus Alexandrinum Pavement | [293] |
| 198. | Painted Ornament on Plaster | [148] |
| 332. | Painting from the Catacombs of St. Agnese | [289] |
| 269. | Pallus Athene, Naples | [217] |
| 119. | Palm Capital from Sesebi | [88] |
| 300. | Parthenon; Greek Doric | [247] |
| 366. | Panel from the Maristan of Kalaun | [328] |
| 367. | ” ” ” ” | [328] |
| 434. | Panel, Carved, Henri II. Style | [404] |
| 435. | ” ” ” ” | [404] |
| 436. | ” ”French, Sixteenth Century | [404] |
| 437. | ” ”from Louvre | [405] |
| 440. | ” ”Elizabethan | [407] |
| 438. | Panelling, Elizabethan | [406] |
| 227. | Patera from Curium | [172] |
| 142. | Pectoral; Egyptian | [103] |
| 402. | Pedestal, Henry VII.'s Chapel | [363] |
| 232. | Pendant, Wild Goat; Gold | [175] |
| 150. | Perfume Spoons | [109] |
| 151. | ” ” | [109] |
| 243. | Persepolis; Tomb on the North-east | [185] |
| 246. | Persepolis; Staircase of the Palace of Darius | [190] |
| 249. | Persepolis; Doorway to Royal Tomb | [193] |
| 113. | Pier with Capital | [85] |
| 433. | Pilasters, Louis XII. | [403] |
| 421. | Pilaster by Donatello | [393] |
| 287. | Pilgrim Bottle | [234] |
| 115. | Pillar, Octagonal, Beni-Hassan | [86] |
| 116. | Pillar, Sixteen-sided, Fluted | [86] |
| 117. | Pillar Osiride, from Medinet-Abou | [87] |
| 328. | Pillar and Bracket, Doorway of a Pagoda | [278] |
| 210. | Phœnician Merchant Galley | [159] |
| 211. | Phœnician War Galley | [160] |
| 226. | Phœnician Silver Platter | [171] |
| 51. | Pinak or Plate, from Rhodes | [30] |
| 139. | Pitcher of Red Earth | [102] |
| 403. | Place House, Cornwall | [364] |
| 168. | Plan and Elevation of a part of a Façade at Worka | [128] |
| 346. | Plan of the Mosque of 'Amr | [308] |
| 383. | Pointed Arcading from the Cathedral of Palermo | [341] |
| 17. | Polished Stone Hammer and Celts, Neolithic Period | [17] |
| 18. | ” ” ” ” ” | [17] |
| 19. | ” ” ” ” ” | [17] |
| 20. | ” ” ” ” ” | [17] |
| 417. | Pompeian Objects | [389] |
| 371. | Porch of the Heilsbronn Monastery | [334] |
| 380. | Porch of St. Zeno at Verona | [339] |
| 76. | Pottery of the Iron Age | [46] |
| 3. | Prehistoric Carving | [9] |
| 99. | Principal Hall in the Great Temple | [74] |
| 108. | Principal Façade of the Temple of Luxor | [82] |
| 84. | Ptah | [58] |
| 354. | Pulpit of the Sultan Kāit[Kāit] Bey | [315] |
| 364. | Pulpit in the Mosque of Barkuk; Stone | [328] |
| 111. | Quadrangular Pier | [84] |
| 112. | Quadrangular Pier, Tapering | [85] |
| 134. | Quadruped with Head of a Bird | [98] |
| 136. | Ram or Krisosphinx | [100] |
| 100. | Rameses II., Louvre, Portrait of | [75] |
| 68. | Rim of Fig. 67, Part of | [43] |
| 153. | River Transport of a Mummy | [110] |
| 305. | Roman Corinthian, Pantheon | [255] |
| 373. | Romanesque Shaft and Base | [335] |
| 375. | Romanesque Ornament, late | [335] |
| 376. | Romanesque Moulding Ornaments | [336] |
| 386. | Romanesque Ornament from Hinge from “Notre Dame” | [345] |
| 387. | Romanesque Panel from a Church at Bonn | [346] |
| 374. | Roof Cornice of Church at Alstadt | [335] |
| 370. | Rose Window | [333] |
| 342. | Rosette in Mosque of Suyurghatmish | [303] |
| 195. | Rosette of Lotus Flowers and Buds | [146] |
| 415. | Rosette from Trajan’s Scroll | [387] |
| 368. | Round-Arch Frieze | [333] |
| 309. | Roman Composite Order; Arch of Titus | [260] |
| 215. | Sacred Emblems from Carthaginian Votive Stele | [162] |
| 411. | San Marco Library | [377] |
| 325. | Sanchi Tope; Bhopal, Central India | [274] |
| 174. | Sargon’s Palace | [133] |
| 175. | Sargon’s Palace, a Bedroom in the Harem | [134] |
| 251. | Sarvistan, Palace of, Principal Façade | [195] |
| 88. | Section through the Great Pyramid of Kheops | [63] |
| 95. | Seti with Attributes of Osiris between Amen and Chnoum | [70] |
| 166. | Sill of a Door from Khorsabad | [126] |
| 231. | Silver Pin; Cesnola | [175] |
| 52. | Silver Brooch | [31] |
| 74. | Silver Goblet, with Gold-plated Decorations | [45] |
| 90. | Southern Pyramid of Dashour | [64] |
| 94. | Solar-Disk, Adoration of, by Amenophis IV. | [69] |
| 103. | Square Building; Egyptian | [78] |
| 257. | Staircase Wall of the Palace of Xerxes at Persepolis | [201] |
| 344. | Stalactite Vaulting | [306] |
| 89. | Stepped Pyramid | [64] |
| 412. | St. Paul and St. Louis façade | [381] |
| 340. | St. Nicholas at Moscow | [299] |
| 408. | Strozzi Palace, portion of | [374] |
| 355. | Street in Cairo | [316] |
| 48. | Sun Signs | [27] |
| 49. | Sun Snakes | [27] |
| 400. | Spandrel, Stone Church, Kent | [360] |
| 135. | Sphinx, or Man-headed Lion; from Tanis | [99] |
| 137. | Sphinx with Human Hands | [101] |
| 391. | St. Lawrence, Porch of | [353] |
| 392. | St. Lawrence, Interior of | [354] |
| 393. | St. Sebaldus, Shrine of | [355] |
| 394. | St. Sebaldus, Bride’s Door of | [356] |
| 197. | Tabernacle from the Balâwât Gates | [147] |
| 423. | Tabernacle, Fifteenth Century | [395] |
| 176. | Temple on the Bank of a River, Khorsabad | [135] |
| 259. | Temple in a Royal Park | [203] |
| 327. | Temple of Biskurma at Ellora | [276] |
| 398. | Temple Church, From the | [359] |
| 219. | Tomb at Amrit, restored | [166] |
| 377. | Towers and Round-Arch Frieze, Abbey of Komberg | [337] |
| 199. | Tree of Life, Upper Portion of | [149] |
| 173. | Triumphal Gate at Entrance of the Palace | [132] |
| 288. | Three-handled Amphora | [234] |
| 75. | Under Side of a Fibula | [45] |
| 42. | Urns of the Bronze Age | [25] |
| 43. | ” ” ” ” | [25] |
| 44. | ” ” ” ” | [25] |
| 46. | Urn of the Stone Age, found in Swedish Dolmen | [26] |
| 261. | Upper Part of Parapet Wall of Staircase, Susa | [205] |
| 256. | Upright of Royal Throne, Naksh-i-Rustem | [200] |
| 285. | Vase in Woman’s Form | [232] |
| 286. | ” ” ” ” | [233] |
| 289. | Vase with Geometric Decoration | [235] |
| 271. | Venus of Milo | [220] |
| 425. | Venetian Panel | [397] |
| 229. | Vessels Figured in Tomb of Rekhmara | [174] |
| 236. | Vessel in Shape of a Goat | [177] |
| 276. | Victory, Figure of | [224] |
| 250. | View of a Group of Domed Buildings, from an Assyrian Bas-Relief | [194] |
| 214. | Votive Stele from Carthage, with Sacred Emblems | [162] |
| 128. | Vultures on a Ceiling | [95] |
| 333. | Wall Painting, from Catacombs of S. Calixtus | [290] |
| 418. | Wall Painting, Pompeii | [390] |
| 419. | Wall Painting, Herculaneum | [391] |
| 389. | Westminster Abbey | [351] |
| 129. | Winged Globe with Uræus | [95] |
| 154. | Winged Bull, Assyria | [114] |
| 159. | Winged Globe, with the Figure of a God | [119] |
| 160. | Winged Globe | [119] |
| 182. | Winged Sphinx carrying Base of Capital | [137] |
| 413. | Wollaton House | [384] |
| 77. | Woollen Cloth with Gold and Silver Threads, Piece of | [46] |
| 266. | Zeus of Otricoli | [213] |
HISTORIC ORNAMENT.
INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.
It can hardly be doubted that, for the education of the student in ornamental design, or in architecture, a study of the history of ornament and a knowledge of the principal historic styles of architecture is indispensable.
Historic styles of ornament remain for us, vast accumulations of tried experiments, for the most part in the character of conventional renderings of natural forms; for however remote from nature some of these may be, they can, as a general rule, be traced back without much difficulty to their natural origin, where in most cases they were used symbolically. Even the most arbitrary forms—for instance, those found in Saracenic ornament—were only developments from natural forms, and the innocent Greek key pattern, that has earned the reputation of being the ornament most unlike anything in nature, is supposed by some to be but a rectilineal development of the rippling waves; and, on the other hand, there is the hypothesis that it is developed from the fylfot, a sacred sign that is supposed to symbolize the rotary motion of the planets.
There is no ornament more common or so universal in prehistoric, savage, Egyptian, Assyrian and Mediæval decoration than the ubiquitous zigzag, or chevron, and though extremely simple in itself, at least two-thirds of all conventional ornament is based or constructed on its lines: yet this simple ornament has been used as a symbol of totally opposite and different things, by nearly all the various tribes and nations that have used it in decoration. With the Egyptians and Assyrians it has been a symbol of water, with some savage tribes it denotes lightning, with others it does duty for a serpent, with some others it represents a series of bats, birds, and butterflies; as with the original tribes of Brazil, with the magic-loving Semang tribes of East Malacca, it means a frog, and in some instances the branches of trees; and lastly, with the natives of the Hervey Islands, it symbolizes the human figure when placed in duplicate parallel rows.
(For a fuller description, and illustrations of this and cognate savage ornament, the reader is referred to Haddon’s “Evolution in Art,” 1895.) We can hardly think of an ornament more simple or more common than the zigzag, and yet how varied in different countries are the sources from which it springs.
This may be taken as a warning that it is not safe to accept the same forms as always having the same origin, when we find them in the art of different countries.
Apart from the symbolic origin of ornamental forms, students of to-day may learn, from examples of the past, how far they can go, in the converting of natural forms to conventional ornament, without absolutely adapting such examples to their present needs. The past styles in ornament have, in one sense, died out with the nations that created them, and can never be satisfactorily revived, although, as we have often seen, a new style may be built on their foundations. The tendency of to-day is to undervalue the teachings of historic art, and, as a result, we see much work in which both fitness and beauty are conspicuous by their absence.
In any notice of the historical development of ornamental art, the concurrent styles of architecture should, in their general features at least, be illustrated, for it is not always possible to divorce ornament from architecture, and it is hardly possible to design or construct good ornament otherwise than according to the laws that govern good architecture. Of course, we must admit that some very beautiful ornament, or rather decoration, has been designed otherwise than on architectural lines, but this kind of decoration has its beauty of technique and execution to recommend it, rather than its constructive qualities. Chinese and Japanese ornament will occur to the reader as examples of this kind of work, but the best ornament the world has ever seen has been constructed and is based on the laws that govern good architecture.
Some of these laws, such as stability, repose, variety, and proportion, are derived from nature. As all architectural styles, however, possess them more or less in common, we must look elsewhere for the sources from which the peculiar characteristics that distinguish the styles are developed and derived. The causes and forces are so subtle and the developments so gradual, that it is almost impossible to arrive at a satisfactory explanation, as religions, inventive faculty, and symbolism play an important rôle in style development. It is rather to the inventive faculties of man, than to hints supplied by nature, that we must look for the origin and development of what is called style in architecture or ornament. In every case this is arrived at by a slow process, and by the extensive and persistent use of distinguishing features selected according to the needs and requirements of the time, to satisfy the prevailing tastes. “Style” is then the something that man has invented or created; it may be called the soul of architecture, without which, a building, however pretentious, ceases to exist as an artistic conception.
Apart from the greatest or more striking features in the various divisions of historic architecture, such as the horizontal beam in Greek, the round arch in Roman and Romanesque, the pointed arch in Gothic and Mohammadan buildings, there are the mouldings that are so important in determining the period—they alone of themselves will often determine the style or date of a building—and these features, above all others, are the least derived from nature. On the other hand, the decoration of mouldings, though suggested by their contours, is generally derived from natural forms.
The “best period” in the life of historic styles and its duration corresponds with that of the highest culture and religious thought of the people, at their settled and most flourishing epochs. When a change or revolution in the order of things sets in, we find generally the style of architecture changing also to adapt itself to the new laws and new thought. This illustrates, to a certain degree, the reason why the so-called Victorian Gothic has not developed to any great extent in England, although some of our best architects sought to revive the earlier Gothic some years ago.
The Mediæval mysticism, love for symbolism, and reverence are wanting in the mass of the people of this century, which characterized the people of Europe in the palmy days of Gothic architecture.
It has always been found that whatever the people ask for the artist is generally able to give, although he may not be always willing; but he must satisfy the popular demand if he is to live by his work, otherwise he must make way for others who are willing to produce work that will reflect the taste of the period.
We are handicapped in the development of anything new in the way of an architectural style by traditions of the past. Our knowledge of what has been done in the past, paradoxical as it may appear, has proved itself a great stumbling-block to the progress of new ideas. This partly accounts for the slowness of style-development in the present century. If fashion does not step in and disturb the march of events in the immediate future, we may hope for something distinct, if not exactly new, as an architectural style, in which a mixture of Gothic and Renaissance forms will be seen, the latter perhaps predominating. It may happen that later generations will look back and be able to discern something distinct in the way of style in buildings erected in the last quarter of this century, in the midst of much that is somewhat chaotic and confused.
In a book like this, which is intended chiefly as an introduction to the study of historic ornament, one cannot pretend to criticise the various styles of ornament, either from an artistic or scientific standpoint. It will be enough to attempt to point out the principal beauties or characteristics, to trace the history and overlapping of one style with another, and to trace, where possible, some units of ornamental forms to their symbolic ancestry. It is absurd to criticise the ornament of any period or country dogmatically, for we must remember, that although certain forms of art may not conform to the critics’ idiosyncrasy, they may be quite orthodox and good art when judged by the artistic laws of their own country. The difference in race, religion, manners, and customs, must always be taken into account, before we begin to criticise the art of a nation to which we do not belong.
As already remarked, we are hampered by tradition in our attempts to produce originality in ornament, but there is very little tradition for the absolute copying of a particular style, except from nations who have had no decided art of their own. As far as we know of the history and practice in the whole field of ornamental design, from its remote beginnings it has been mostly all along a series of systems of developments, sometimes for good and sometimes for the opposite, but rarely, if ever, a system of copying. Some notable exceptions to this may be noticed, as when, for the expediencies known as “tricks of the trade,” the Phœnicians made ivory carvings in exact imitation of Egyptian designs, and sold them to the Assyrians; and likewise bronze bowls and platters in both Assyrian and Egyptian imitations, and traded with them throughout the Ægean and Mediterranean, or when the Siculo-Arabian silks were made at Palermo in imitation of Saracen designs, with mock-Saracenic inscriptions, and sold for the real articles. Other instances might be cited, but these were among the most successful.
As regards the purity of styles it may be safely said, that, with rare exceptions, it is well-nigh impossible to find a well-designed and complete scheme of decoration, or a building that will stand the test of having perfect unity in style; in fact, it may be more artistic on account of its incompleteness in this respect, for any work of art that is designed by receipt, like the Egyptian temples or Mohammadan ornament, is rather wearisome. It is pleasant to see at times a little bit showing here and there of the designer’s individuality. When the monotonous repetition of the laws peculiar to any arbitrary style are broken by a wilful and, perhaps, sinful artist, we often get a refreshing and original rendering that is not by any means displeasing.
In transitional design from one style to another, much beautiful work may be seen. In connection with this the Byzantine style may be mentioned, with its Classic and Oriental forms, Elizabethan, Jacobean, Lombard Gothic, and the French styles of Henri Deux and François 1er, in most of which Gothic and Renaissance forms are happily blended; and in the beautiful Siculo-Arabian textiles, where Italian and Saracenic forms make an interesting union. We learn from these examples that the successful designer of ornament should have a thorough knowledge of the historic styles, not for the purpose of reproducing their forms, but in order to discover for himself the methods by which the old artists arrived at the successful treatment of nature and of former styles, so that by the application of his knowledge, derived from the study of nature and the works of former artists, he may be enabled to give to the world some original and interesting work.
CHAPTER II.
PREHISTORIC ORNAMENT—PALÆOLITHIC PERIOD OR
EARLY STONE AGE—RIVER DRIFT AND CAVE-MEN.
The first indications of the presence of man in Britain was brought to light in the shape of a flint flake found by the Rev. O. Fisher, in the presence of Professor W. Boyd Dawkins, in the lower brick earth of the Stoneham pit at Crayford, in Kent, in the year 1872. In the year 1876 a second flake was found in a similar situation at Erith, in Kent, considerably worn by use. This form of implement was used in the late Pleistocene age, and also in the Neolithic (Newer Stone age) and Bronze ages. It was employed in the historic ages by the Egyptians, and by the Romanized Britons of Sussex, in whose tombs it has been found. This implement is the latest survival of the Palæolithic age. Geologists have proved that Ireland, England and Europe were united in the Palæolithic age, and this accounts for the similarity of stone implements and other remains found in the river-drift deposits, in caves, and other situations in the river valley over this vast area. The roughly chipped flint implements are termed Palæolithic, or of the Old Stone age, in contradistinction to the smoother, finer chipped, or polished implements of the Neolithic or Newer Stone age.
It seems highly probable that the Asiatic Palæolithic man first swarmed off the great plateau of Central Asia, which in later times was the home of all those tribes that invaded Europe, India, and China, and certainly were of a race that is now as extinct as the prehistoric Mammoth itself. The relation between the River-drift men of Asia and Europe is doubtful. We may not be able to refer the Palæolithic Cave-men to any present branch of the human race, but as regards their artistic abilities, the only savage people that bear any analogy to them in the present day is the South African tribe of Bushmen. These people, however, are much inferior as artists to the early Cave-men, which may be seen by comparing the work of both (Figs. [7A] and [7B]).
Fig. 1.—Horse, Upper Cave Earth, Robin Hood Cave.
Fig. 2.—Ibex Carved on Antler.
From the drawings of animals which have been found etched and carved on bone, horn, and stones, we can judge of the high qualifications of the Cave-men as artists. Their work in animal drawing ranks higher than that of any historic savage race, and as artists they were infinitely of a higher order than their more scientific successors, the Neolithic men, or the men of the Bronze age.
Fig. 3.—Prehistoric Carving.
Fig. 4.—Esquimaux Carving.
It was owing to the discovery of these bone and ivory etchings that geologists were able to definitely connect the Cave-men of the Thames Valley with those of France, Belgium, and Switzerland. At Cresswell Crags, in Derbyshire, in the caves, caverns, and fissures known as the Pin Hole, Robin Hood’s Cave, Mother Grundy’s Parlour, a great quantity of bones have been found, some of which were broken by the hand of man, and amongst these some flint implements in the lower cave earth. Above this in the stalagmatic breccia more bones were found and implements made of quartzite and flint, together with fragments of charcoal. Lance heads, flint borers, a bone awl, and a fragment of bone ornamented with a zigzag or chevron pattern—probably the oldest bit of ornament known—were found together with the most important find of all, namely, a piece of rib bone with an etching of a horse’s head and neck with a hogged mane (Fig. 1), the first instance of an animal form found in England. These objects may be seen in the British Museum.
Fig. 5.—Etching of Reindeer on Bone, Kesslerloch Cavern.
Evidences of the Palæolithic men have been found in the Mendip Hill caves in Somerset, and at Kent’s Hole, near Torquay, Devon. Harpoons of deers’ antlers, barbed on one or both sides, also hammer stones, half spherical in shape, have been brought to light from these places.
Fig. 6.—Etching of Reindeer on Slate.
Fig. 7.—Etching of Mammoth on a piece of Mammoth Ivory.
The River-drift men preceded the Cave-men, as two different sets of implements found at different depths testify. Those found at the greatest depths are rougher, rounder, and more massive in character, with the outer surface of flint or quartzite nodule still remaining, as seen in some wedge-shaped hâches and hammer stones, they consequently belong to the Older Drift period; while the oval carefully chipped all round, and occasionally polished implements, belong to a much later and higher cultured state of the Palæolithic period. Both the River-drift men and the Cave-men lived in caverns in this country and in France, as some savages do now. Implements of the Palæolithic age have been found in Europe, North Africa, Asia Minor and India. The earlier River-drift man was a savage and lived by hunting, as no evidence of culture has been found that can be ascribed to him. After unknown ages perhaps had elapsed the Cave-men appear with more perfect instruments, and at least cultured in the knowledge of drawing and carving, which they did, as can be judged by the illustration given, with astonishing ability. The accurate forms of animals, as horses, mammoths, bears, aurochs, elks, reindeers, fish, seals, &c., and even attempts at the human figure, are evidences of this.
Fig. 7A.—Human and Animal Form, drawn by Bushmen of South Africa.
Some authors see a certain analogy between the Cave-men and the Esquimaux of the present day. In artistic culture, however, the Cave-men are immeasurably superior to the latter, as may be seen by comparing their respective efforts (Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5).
The Cave-men disappeared from Britain after it became an island. Similar discoveries of implements and other remains in Europe and Britain prove that the Cave-men of both countries were in the same stage of culture. Pottery has never been found in connection with the remains of these people.
In France many important finds have been brought to light illustrating the art work of the European Cave-men. In the caves at Perigord, at Bruniquel on the Aveyron, at Le Moustier, at La Madelaine in the Dordogne, and in the Duruthy cave at Laugerie Basse, in the Western Pyrenees, have been found many engravings of animals, and carvings on bone, smooth teeth, and antlers, also on sandstone, slate, and schist. Evidences of the Cave-men using skins for clothing is inferred from the engraving of skin-gloves and other things found incised on the teeth of the great cave-bear in the Duruthy caves. Hunting scenes were often engraved with great fidelity, and carved dagger-handles made from the antlers of deer, with the animal itself sometimes carved on them. One of the highest art examples yet found is that of a reindeer grazing, and is the only object on which an attempt is made to represent herbage, and perhaps water (Fig. 5). This interesting relic was found in the Kesslerloch Cavern.
Fig. 7B.—Animal Forms, drawn by Bushmen.
CHAPTER III.
NEOLITHIC STONE PERIOD.
This period is divided from the Palæolithic Stone age by a great unknown gap. It is sometimes called the Later or Newer Stone age. In this period the flint implements were better shaped, many of them were ground and polished (Figs. [17], [18]). Some of the flint and other stone implements were very like in form to those of the Bronze period, and as these implements were made, and continued to be used, in Northern Europe after the Bronze periods of the East had developed, it is quite possible that they were copied from the bronze objects (Figs. 10, 11, 17, 18).
A remarkable sickle or knife fourteen inches long is seen at Fig. 11; a flint saw (Fig. 12), semicircular knives or saws at Figs. 15, 16, and a bone and flint harpoon at Fig. 9. Some of the stone hammers or axes are of great beauty in shape and in workmanship (Figs. 17, 18); also pottery slightly burnt, but well decorated by incised straight lines and zigzags (Figs. [21] to [24]).
Fig. 8.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 10.
Fig. 11.
Figs. 8 to 11.—Flint Implements of the Neolithic Period (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 12.
Fig. 13.
Fig. 14.
Figs. 12, 13, 14.—Flint Implements of the Neolithic Period. (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 15.
Fig. 16.
Figs. 15, 16.—Flint Implements of the Neolithic Period. (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 17.
Fig. 18.
Fig. 19.
Fig. 20.
Figs. 17 to 20.—Polished Stone Hammers and Celts, Neolithic Period. (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 21.
Fig. 22.
Fig. 23.
Fig. 24.
Figs. 21 to 24.—Pottery of the Neolithic Age. (From Danish Arts.)
The cultivation of land, the breeding and rearing of domestic animals, plaiting, and weaving was known and practised by these people. Amber, bone beads, and shells were used as personal adornments. Their burials were with or without cremation. The burial-places of these people are found all over the world, in Europe, Japan, India, and other parts of Asia, and in North America. They are named “Cromlechs” (stone circles), “Dolmen” (stone tables) (Fig. 25), “Menhir” (long stone). The burial-place, called a “Tumulus,” is a great mound of earth, usually containing a burial chamber constructed in stone in the centre of the mound. The illustrations of the “Menhir” (long stones) (Fig. 26), and of the so-called Giants’ Tombs (Fig. 27) belong to the Stone age, and are found in the island of Sardinia.
Fig. 25.—Dolmen at Hesbon (P. & C.).
Fig. 26.—Menhirs, Sardinia (P. & C.).
We have seen that the Palæolithic men were hunters, and evidently had a lot of leisure time on their hands, which they turned to good account by devoting some of it to their artistic culture; while the Neolithic men were more of a race of mechanics and farmers, who had neither time nor inclination for the cultivation of art, but were altogether more scientific and mechanical than the men of the Palæolithic period.
Fig. 27.—Giants’ Tomb, Sardinia (P. & C.).
CHAPTER IV.
THE BRONZE AGE.
The people of the Bronze age introduced a higher civilisation into the world than their predecessors of the Stone ages. There appears to be a great overlap between the Neolithic, Bronze, and Iron ages of Central and Northern Europe, and the historic periods of the Eastern countries bordering on the Mediterranean. We have evidence that great periods of time must have marked the epochs of the prehistoric ages, and that the Bronze age, like the Stone and Iron ages, began at different times in different countries. The tribes who brought with them the age of Bronze into Europe composed the Celtic van of the Aryan race. The earliest productions of this period were the simple wedges resembling flat stone axes, the sides of which are slightly thickened to form ridges or flanges; the centres are also raised, which produces a ridge to prevent the head from going in too far in the handle; in some the flanges are much developed, and have also a loop cast on the side for the purpose of tying it on to the haft. Some are made with a socket and loop; these have been called “Paalstabs,” and have a flat chisel-like shape (Figs. 28, 30).
Fig. 28.
Fig. 29.
Fig. 30.
Figs. 28 to 30.—Bronze and Paalstabs. (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 31.
Fig. 32.
Fig. 33.
Fig. 34.
Figs. 31 to 34.—Bronze Axes, Paalstabs, and Moulds. (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 35.
Fig. 36.
Fig. 37.
Fig. 38.
Figs. 35 to 38.—Bronze Swords and Spear-Head. (From Danish Arts.)
Figs. 39 and 40.—Bronze Button for Sword Belt.
(From Danish Arts.)
These earlier implements are often made of pure copper. Bronze is a mixture of copper and tin, generally from two to four per cent. of tin, and is consequently harder than copper. Knives, hammers, gouges, sickles, daggers, spears, swords, shields, many kinds of vessels, and articles of personal adornment made in bronze, belong to the earlier time of the Bronze period, and similar articles were made in this material in the prehistoric Bronze ages all over the known world (Figs. 35 to 40).
An interesting object is a breast-plate, belonging to this early Bronze period; it is decorated with zigzags in bands, and a well-arranged scheme of spiral ornamentation (Fig. 41). Urns of earthenware, sometimes decorated with zigzags and sacred signs, have been found in graves. These urns contained ashes of the dead (Figs. 43, 44).
Fig. 41.—Breast-plate, with Spiral Ornaments. (From Danish Arts.)
Many of the bronze implements and other articles have been found in tombs, in caves in great quantities, both finished and unfinished, in “Kitchen Middens,” or refuse heaps, in river-beds, and in bogs.
Fig. 42.
Fig. 43.
Fig. 44.
Figs. 42, 43, and 44.—Urns of the Bronze Age (From Danish Arts.)
Fig. 45.—Bronze Bowl found in Sweden. (Scand. Arts.)
Fig. 46.—Urn of the Stone Age found in Swedish Dolmen. (Scand. Arts.)
Some of the objects found in North Germany, and particularly in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, are exceedingly beautiful in their shape and decoration. From nowhere else in the world come so many objects, and so much that is characteristic of the prehistoric Bronze age. This period has been ably treated, and at great length, by Mr. J. J. A. Worsaae, in his “Danish Arts,” and by Mr. Hans Hildebrand, in his “Arts of Scandinavia,” to which books we are indebted for the accompanying illustrations. It may be noticed that much of the decoration on these objects consists of a few simple elements with much geometric repetition. The varied forms are chiefly spirals interlocking at regulated distances, concentric rings, triangles, zigzag lines, and bands formed of lines which are reminiscences of the earlier withy lashings, with which the stone celts were fastened to their hafts. The raised, as well as the flat twisted-like bands, are derivatives from the twisted strings that would naturally be tied around the pottery of an early date to carry it by (Fig. 45).
Fig. 47.—Bronze Hatchet found in Sweden. (Scand. Arts.)
The spirals, zigzags, ring-crosses, wheels, triskeles, reciprocal meanders, semicircles, &c., are geometrical developments of sun-snake, lightning, the sun itself, cloud-forms, moon-forms, star-forms, and the sacred fylfot or swastika, all of which had their origin in Egypt, India, Central Asia, or Greece. At first they were used as isolated signs, or pictographs, to represent physical phenomena, that were objects of Nature-worship with almost all the nations of the world after the dawn of civilisation, and when these signs migrated into the art of other nations or later peoples, who were either ignorant of their meaning or understood them in an imperfect way, they ceased to be employed as isolated signs of the various divinities they originally represented, and were copied, and repeated, as required, to fill in a geometrical way the space at hand to be ornamented.
Fig. 48.—Sun Signs.
A, Wheel Cross or Wheel; B, Sun God Signs; C, Fylfot, or Swastika; D, Triskele; E, Stars or Sun Signs.
A beautiful piece of workmanship is the bronze horn (Fig. 50). Worsaae thinks that this horn was used in the worship of the gods in the early Bronze age, owing to the great number of sacred signs engraved on it. Sun-wheels, sun-snakes, and sun-boats, developed into spiral ornament, may be seen on it.
Fig. 49.—Sun Signs. (From Danish Arts.)
F, Sun-snakes; G. Swastika; H, Triskele; I, Star or Sun.
N.B.—The Swastika here is evidently a double Sun-snake.
Fig. 50.—Bronze Horn or Trumpet, found at Wismar, in Mecklenburg. (From Danish Arts.)
There is one ornament that plays an important part in the Bronze and Iron periods, of which much has been written, the “fylfot” or “swastika.” It has been found in nearly every quarter of the ancient world, except Egypt and Assyria, both in savage ornament and in the art of cultured races. The “fylfot” or “many” or “full-footed” cross in Anglo-Saxon, it is also known by the names of “gammadion,” “croix gammée,” “croix cramponée,” “tetraskele,” &c. The Indian name for it is the “swastika” or “svastika,” which means “good luck,” or “it is well.” The fylfot, according to the opinion of many archæologists, was originally the sign of the sun, and used as a sacred symbol in the worship of the sun; others think it was a sign used to symbolize the rotatory motion of the planets; it is quite likely it has been used by different early peoples for both. It has been associated with other sun signs, as the circle, concentric circles, with the S-shaped sun-snakes, as on the prehistoric whorls from Hissarlik, and very frequently with the solar divinities, as the horse, boar, ram, lion, ibex, and goose, &c. It is found on Cyprian and Rhodian pottery and on the “geometric” pottery of Greece. Its appearance on many objects of early Christian art can be accounted for. In these cases the Christian missionaries permitted the continued use of it to their pagan converts, but they themselves attached a new meaning to it, regarding it as merely a substitute for the symbol of the cross.
Fig. 51.—Pinak or Plate, Archaic Period, from Camiros, Rhodes, showing Fylfot, and Sun Signs, and Sacred Boar. (British Museum.)
Some writers have argued, with a good deal of plausibility, that the Greek fret pattern, Chinese and Japanese frets, were only developments from the fylfot. This is purely conjectural, for as regards the Greek fret, it is more likely that it had an Egyptian source, as so many of the Greek ornaments are but developments of Egyptian and Assyrian forms. The fret used by the Greeks has been found in Egypt in the ceiling ornament of tombs more than a thousand years before it appeared in Greece. The Chinese frets may have in some instances a fylfot origin, but at present this is doubtful, as it has not yet been proved. The drawing of the archaic Greek plate (pinak), in the British Museum, given at Fig. 51, from the Greek colony of Rhodes, is very interesting, as it shows a well-developed fylfot between the legs of the boar, and an early Greek fret band; the fret here may only be a water-sign, or a river-edge representation. The spaces around the boar (animal sacred to the sun) are filled up with sun-signs and star-signs; even the large segment of radiating lines, and the form over the animal’s back may typify the sun. The whole decoration has a high religious meaning in reference to sun-worship, and is evidently a copy by a Greek artist of an oriental embroidery motive.
Fig. 52.—Silver Brooch, Plated with Gold, in the form of a Double Sun-snake or Swastika; found in Iceland. (Danish Arts.)
Fig. 53.—Gold Bowl, with Bronze Handle and Sacred Horse’s Head. (Danish Arts.)
Fig. 54.—Bronze Horn found in Denmark. (Danish Arts.)
The fylfot has been found stamped on the pottery of the lake dwellings of the Zuni, Yucatan, and other American pottery, and on objects from Iceland, Ireland, and Scandinavia. A circular form of it is seen on the gold Scandinavian ornament (Fig. 52).
Whether it originally was a pure sun-sign, or whether it signified the axial rotation of the earth round the North Pole, it is full of remarkable interest, and enters more than any other symbolic sign into historic ornament generally. In India, China, and Japan, it has been much used; this was owing to the spread of the Buddhist religion in these countries. It is found on the toes of the “Footprint” of Buddha, at the Amarávati Tope, India; and owing to its great religious significance in China, Japan, and Ceylon, we find it stamped on the account books, coins and dresses of both the living and the dead, as a universal sign of good luck.
Fig. 55.—Collar of Bronze found in Sweden. (Scand. Arts.)
Fig. 56.—Danish Bronze Knives, decorated with Sun-ships and other Sacred Figures. (Danish Arts.)
Fig. 57.
Fig. 58.
Figs. 57 and 58.—Bronze and Gold Buttons found in Women’s Graves, with the Triskele, Moon-Signs, and Sun Snakes. (Danish Arts.)
The swastika, both straight and curved-armed variety, was used indiscriminately in the decoration of objects of the Iron age, whether in bronze, iron, gold, silver, wood, or stone. It was the sign among the Romans of Jupiter Tonans, who wielded the thunder and lightning; was the sign used for Thor, the god of thunder and lightning, with the early German peoples, and the curved variety of it was used as a symbol of their highest divinity by the northern nations of Scandinavia. From this widespread use of the swastika it is conjectured that it is an Aryan symbol, brought by the people of the Bronze age from their primitive home in the plateau of Central Asia.
CHAPTER V.
THE IRON AGE.
The age of Iron, like the Bronze ages, varies very much in point of time in Europe as compared with Asia, and also there is a great overlapping between the times of the Iron age in the northern, middle, and southern parts of Europe. It is safe to say that the early part of this age belongs to prehistoric times as far as Central and Northern Europe is concerned, and although the Grecian Archipelago and Western Asia were in a high state of civilised culture five or six centuries before the Christian era, and were acquainted with the use of iron, it is clear that the extensive employment and decoration of iron implements and arms were chiefly in Switzerland, Northern Italy, and in the Valley of the Danube. This iron culture soon spread over to Gaul and Spain, and to the British Islands in the West, and Scandinavia in the North. The Romans, under their first emperors, imported their swords and other arms from Spain and the West on account of their good workmanship. From the many “finds” that have been brought to light in the above countries it is evident that, for five or six centuries before the commencement of the Christian era, there was a great activity going on in the manufacture of iron objects in these countries, principally swords and other warlike arms. The two most important “finds” are the “Halstaat” in Austria, and the La Têne “finds” near Marin, Lake Neuchâtel. The Halstaat find was composed of many gold and bronze articles, pottery, and a few iron weapons. The place where these things were found was a Celtic tomb, and the iron articles found in it are among the earliest known in Europe, which proves them to have been made at the transition period from the Bronze to the Iron ages. Besides the purely geometric work the decoration on these articles consists of sun and moon signs, wheel crosses, half moons, the sacred ship, the swastika, triskele, &c.; crude representations of men and animals, as horses, oxen, stags, he-goats, and geese, all of which have a religious and symbolic meaning. All these forms were used in the Bronze and Iron ages alike. The find at La Têne, near Marin, Lake Neuchâtel, belongs to a later period and is more important from an art point of view, for besides the usual sacred decorations engraved on the objects, some of the sword handles and sheaths are beautifully sculptured or chiselled in iron, with well-designed ornament and animal forms. (See Fig. [81], D, of Gaulish or late Celtic workmanship.)
The shapes and materials of the weapons found at La Têne, or of what is called the “La Têne Period,” do not bear much resemblance to the weapons of the Bronze age, and the sheaths of the swords and daggers are sometimes bronze and sometimes iron, but the blades are of iron.
Communication with the Etruscans and the Greeks by the people of Central Europe is proved by the coins, vases, and objects of personal ornament, and by the imitations of Greek and Macedonian coins found in great quantities in Middle and Western Europe and in Britain, that belong to this late Celtic period. This accounts for the more “advanced” nature of the decoration on the Marin swords and daggers of the “La Têne Period,” and this particular culture-wave brought with it the beginnings of that ornament which, in later centuries, developed into the peculiar Celtic and Runic twistings and interlacings that are so common to Danish, Norwegian, Swedish, Anglo-Saxon and Irish phases of decorative art, that was practised so largely from the first to the twelfth centuries of our era. This Celtic interlacing, though often more distressing than a Chinese puzzle, and in some instances barbarous in the extreme, yet is often very interesting and beautiful in execution. Most of it can be traced to its origin in sacred signs and animal forms in classical ornament.
It will be interesting to trace briefly some of these developments of the Northern Runic and Celtic art of the Iron age. In the development of nearly all historic art, we find that the religious aspirations of man were the chief factors. In Egypt, Asia, Europe, or America, wherever art had an individuality, the greatest monuments were erected, and the finest works of art were created for the honour of the nation’s gods. We have seen how the forms of ornament were generally derived from the figurative signs of sacred animals, plants, and other mystic symbols of a religious meaning, and were in the end converted in meaningless but æsthetic ornament. This is the history of nine-tenths of historic ornament that has survived the decay of nations. The ancient religion and beliefs of the pre-Christian peoples were those which they had brought with them when they first migrated from their Asiatic home, namely, the worship of the sun, moon, and lightning. Cæsar mentions in his “De Bello Gallico,” VI., 21, that the “Germani people worshipped the visible helping gods, the sun, moon, and fire, and knew nothing whatever of other divinities.” The symbolic signs and animal forms sacred to these phenomena, already mentioned, are found more or less on the utensils and weapons of the Gallic-German peoples of the Iron age, and in addition to these we see the representation of the Northern gods, the Trinity of the North, Thor, Odin and Frey, with and without the sacred animals peculiar to each. In the earlier times close intercourse with the Romans brought about a high degree of culture to the barbarian people of the Rhine Valley and more northern places; many statuettes of bronze inlaid with gold and silver, representing Roman gods, have been dug up in Denmark and other places in the north.
Fig. 59.—Gold-plated Ornament found at Thorsberg. (Danish Arts.)
These statuettes were transformations of the Roman and Etruscan gods that served for the Gallo-Germanic gods. An illustration of the Roman influence is seen in a round ornament of this period plated with gold, found at Thorsberg, Slesvig. It is the decoration of an iron coat of mail. The illustration of this (Fig. 59) is taken from Worsaae’s “Danish Arts,” and is thus described by him:
“Five suns are placed crosswise, and between two of the outer ones is seen a barbarised figure of Jupiter with horns on his helmet; the sun in the centre is surrounded by a circle of helmeted heads. Just as this recalls to our minds the Germanic and Scandinavian god of thunder, Thor, who, later, was often represented with a helmet on his head, so the thin barbaric golden figures of horses, geese, and fish, riveted on the ornament or brooch itself, remind us of the sun-god Frey.” The Figs. 60 and 61 are metal mountings decorated with the triskele formed of sun-snakes, the swastika with straight arms, and the compound variety of the fylfot on the larger mounting. These illustrate a transition of the sacred sun form to more purely ornamental designs.
Fig. 60
Fig.61
Figs. 60 and 61.—Metal Mountings from Thorsberg. (Danish Arts.)
The imitation of Roman coins and medallions of the time of Constantine to ornaments that have been called “bracteates” was extensively carried on by the Germanic people. These bracteates have the design on one side only, with a loop or ring at the top to suspend them around the neck as an amulet. These golden bracteates have been found in great numbers in Scandinavia and Denmark, and scarcely anywhere else, which proves they were indigenous to these countries.
It is interesting to notice how they have been transformed from their Roman and Byzantine originals to purely sacred Celtic amulets of a new national type of ornament. Fig. 62, from Hildebrand’s “Scandinavian Arts,” is a barbaric copy of a Roman medallion. It is a poor attempt to copy the Imperial head, and the inscription is badly and meaninglessly copied. On the reverse is a figure of Victory, with signs of the cross, surrounded by a wreath and legend.
Fig. 62.—Barbarian Copy of a Roman Medallion found in Sweden.
(Scand. Arts.)
It appears that after the age of the Constantines, the intercourse of the Germanic people with the Romans was broken, owing to the invasion of the Huns, and for a long time afterwards they were left to themselves without foreign influence, and were enabled to develop their national art on the foundation of Roman culture, at the same time substituting their own emblems of their national gods in place of the classic ones in their decorative work. We can safely gather from this that the Hunnic invasion of the Roman Empire was the indirect means of giving to Northern Europe a distinct national style of art.
Fig. 63.—Golden Bracteate from Scandinavia. (Danish Arts.)
The illustrations of the golden bracteates here given (Figs. 63, 64) partly show how this development began. On Fig. 63 is Thor’s head with his tiara or helmet, the he-goat sacred to Thor, the triad three dots, and the swastika. On the border is the triskele (Odin’s sign), Frey’s cross, and the zigzag or lightning.
Fig. 64.—Golden Bracteate from Scandinavia. (Danish Arts.)
The larger bracteate (Fig. 64) has Thor with the he-goat surrounded by the swastika, triskele, and the cross (four suns forming the cross), the signs for Thor, Odin, and Frey. The inner border has the three dots, or triad; next border, Thor’s head; and the outer border is composed of he-goats. On the loop are signs of the sun and moon, and under it sun-snakes (developed into spirals). The above descriptions of the bracteates are chiefly taken from the “Danish Arts.”
Fig. 65.—Parts of Harness in Gilt Bronze, Gotland. (Scand. Arts.)
Characteristic ornament of this period is shown at Fig. 65, which are parts of a harness in gilt bronze from a tomb in Gotland; the patterns are composed of corrupted animal and bird forms.
Fig. 66.—Fibula in Gilt Bronze, Gotland. (Scand. Arts.)
Fig. 67.—Fibula in Gilt Bronze, Gotland. (Scand. Arts.)
Figs. 66 to 68 are fibula decorations of the interlacing animal forms, which are characteristic of the more attenuated and later development of Scandinavian art.
Fig. 68.—Part of Rim of Fig. 67.
The series of designs, Figs. 69 to 73, are of great interest in showing the development of patterns from lion forms to the twisted snake ornament. The figures are taken from Hildebrand’s “Scandinavian Arts.” According to that author, Fig. 69 is a Scandinavian copy or adaptation of a Roman design, which consists of two lions couchant. The other patterns (Figs. 70 to 73) are further developments of corrupted lion forms. It is quite possible that the peculiar interlacings of Scandinavian ornament may have been the result of imperfect copying of lion and bird forms. They were never intended for snake forms, as many of these have legs and feet, and serpents and snakes were unknown in the north. Many stranger derivatives of ornament have existed in the ornament of savage tribes.[[A]] When the Gotlandic artist had reduced his lion forms to snakes he carried his work to the verge of monotony with interminable interlacings.
[A]. See Haddon’s “Evolution of Ornamental Art,” 1895.
Fig. 69.
Fig. 70.
Figs. 69 and 70.—Corrupted Figures of Lions. (Scand. Arts.)
Fig. 71.
Fig. 72.
Fig. 73.
Figs. 71, 72, 73.—Animal Ornamental Patterns, Corrupted Figures of Lions. (Scand. Arts.)
Fig. 74.—Silver Goblet, with Gold-plated Decoration, found in Zeeland.
(Danish Arts.)
Fig. 75.—Under Side of a Fibula. (Scand. Arts.)
The decoration on the goblet (Fig. 74) is the sun-god Frey, with his horse and geese; the masks are intended for those of Thor; his he-goat and sun signs are also seen. This goblet was evidently used in the sun-worship festivals.
Fig. 76.—Pottery of the Iron Age. (Danish Arts.)
Fig. 77.—Piece of Woollen Cloth with Gold and Silver Threads, Viking Period.
(Danish Arts.)
A restrained and agreeable design is seen on the under side of a fibula (Fig. 75); a well-shaped earthen pot is decorated with zigzag work, and has the symbolical triad mark impressed on it (Fig. 76); and a remnant of woollen cloth, woven with silver and gold threads, has the swastika and the hammer of Thor as decoration. This was found in a grave at Randers of the tenth century. It belongs to the Viking period of the Iron age (Fig. 77).
CHAPTER VI.
THE LAKE DWELLINGS OF SWITZERLAND AND OTHER PARTS OF EUROPE.
In Switzerland and in Upper Italy evidences have been found of numerous lake dwellings, and in Ireland and Scotland analogous dwellings on islands in lakes and morasses have been found, to which the name of “crannoges” (“wooden islands”) has been given. The exact age of these dwellings has not been accurately defined, but an approximate date has been assigned to them. From the nature, kind, and decoration of the numerous articles that have been dug up from the foundation relic beds in the lakes of Switzerland, it appears that the duration of the “lake dwellings” period was from about the time of the later Stone age to the early Iron age; it therefore embraces portions of the Stone age, the Bronze age, and early Iron ages of Europe.
The lake dwellings were erected by certain tribes of the early inhabitants of Europe, for the better security of themselves and their property from the savage animals of the mainland, and from their enemies, the still more savage fellow-men. As far as can be made out from the remains found in the lakes, the lake dwellers were more civilised and less warlike than their neighbours that lived on land. The lake dwellings are the most ancient evidences of man’s first constructive capabilities in the art of building. Herodotus tells us of a settlement on Lake Prasias (Tachyus), in Rumelia, where “men live on platforms supported by tall piles.” Some tribes of the Papuans of New Guinea still live on pile dwellings. The lacustrine habitation (Fig. 78), from “Les Races Sauvages,” by M. Bertillon, is a representation of a pile dwelling on the Lake Mohrya, in Central Africa, of the present day.
Fig. 78.—Lacustrine Habitation in Lake Mohrya, Central Africa. (From Les Races Sauvages, by M. Bertillon.)
The substructures, Fig. 79, A, B, and C, taken from Keller’s “Lake Dwellings,” will give general ideas of the foundations of the dwellings in Switzerland and Upper Italy. At A is seen the earliest type, which reveals the section of the piles, upper flooring, water-line, and sloping bank of the lake. The piles were sometimes composed of split trees or stems, but more often of stems with the bark on, and were of various kinds of wood; they were sharpened at the end by stone hatchets, and in later times by bronze or iron axes, and were driven into the sand or mud at a short distance from the shore. The heads of the piles were brought to a level, and planks or whole trees were fastened on them as beams; sometimes they were fastened on by wooden pins, and sometimes were “notched” into the heads of the piles. Cross-beams were often forced in between the uprights under the platform to steady the structure, and outside there was often fastened a clothing of wattle-work to act as a fender from various accidents. If it were found difficult to drive the piles into the bed of the lake to any great depth, artificial raising of the bottom was resorted to, by bringing cargoes of stones in boats and dropping them between the piles, thereby securing a perfectly secure substructure (Fig. 79, B). These artificial risings are called “stein-bergs.”
Fig. 79.—Section and Plans, Lake Dwelling Substructures from Keller.
A, General idea of arrangement of Piles; B, shows the Piles driven into the mud, with stones thrown between them; C, Section of Fascine Dwelling; D, Diagram of Floor Fascine Construction from Niederwyl; E, Section of Irish Crannoge in Ardakillin Lough; F, Construction of Wooden Form (Niederwyl); G, Section of Lake Dwelling Beds at Robenhausen.
Another and later variety of substructure is known as “fascine-work” (Fig. 79, C). Probably this fascine construction was the safest when the water of the lake rose in height. It consisted of layers of small trees or stems laid lengthwise, built from the bottom of the lake; these sticks or trees were interwoven, and at intervals upright piles were driven in to keep them in position, and on the top of this structure, above high-water mark, the flooring platform was laid.
Fig. 80.—An Ideal Lake Settlement or Town. (From Keller’s Lake Dwellings.)
The “crannoges” or “wooden islands,” of Ireland and Scotland, resemble very much the Swiss fascine dwellings. The Irish “crannoges” were often placed on natural islands, or on shallows or loughs, but sometimes were built up, like those in Switzerland, from the bottom of the lake. These “crannoges” were used as chieftains’ fastnesses or places of retreat. They were built chiefly in the Stone age, and were used long after the age of Iron. At Fig. 79, E, may be seen a section of an Irish “crannoge” in Ardakillin Lough. At Fig. 79, F and D, are shown diagrams of platform and floor construction respectively of a lake dwelling at Niederwyl, Switzerland. On the top of this floor a plaster made of mud, loam, and gravel, was laid and beaten firmly down. As far as can be ascertained from the remains of upright corner posts that have been found in position, the houses were rectangular, though some may have been round like the huts of the contemporary people on the mainland. The walls of the houses are supposed to have been built of wattle-work plastered over with mud and thatched, as evidences of this are seen in the large pieces of burnt clay with wattle impression on it that have been found; this also points out the fact of the houses or settlements being burnt down. In some cases the walls were of fascine construction. Every hut was provided with its hearth, which consisted of three or four large flat stones. Clay weights used for the loom have been found in great quantities, which proves, together with many fragments of flax cloth and woven “bast” which have come to light, that weaving was known and practised by the lake dwellers (Fig. 81, K). Pottery has been found in the relic beds, but is usually of a very coarse description. Many broken bits of pottery have been found ornamented with lines, chevrons, or zigzags, and often with the “rope” ornament, raised or impressed by a twisted string or rope; this kind of decoration is evidently suggested by the band of string tied around the primitive vessels of clay to keep them together, or for carrying purposes. See Fig. 81, B, F, G, H, I, and J.
Fig. 81.—Objects from the Lake Dwellings (from Keller).
A, Bronze Knife (Lake of Bienne); B, Ornamented Pottery; C, Moon Image of earthenware; D, Part of an Iron Sword (Gaulish work); E, Moon Image of bronze; F, G, H, I, J, Earthenware Vessels; K, Embroidered Cloth.
The builders of the lake dwellings are supposed to have been a branch of the Celtic population of Switzerland, belonging to prehistoric times, and was in its last stage of decadence before the Celts took their place in the history of Europe. Although many remains of bronze and iron implements have been brought to light from the relic beds of the lake dwellings, this does not prove that the inhabitants were acquainted with their manufacture, for most of the articles were probably obtained by barter from the people of the mainland.
A beautiful bronze knife is seen at Fig. 81, A, found in the lake of Bienne, and part of a sword in iron, of Gaulish, or “late Celtic” workmanship, from Marin, Lake Neuchâtel (Fig. 81, D).
Highly interesting are the “moon-stones” and “moon-images” of this period, made in stone, earthenware, and bronze. These crescent moon-images have a religious significance, and have doubtless been used to decorate the tops of their entrance doors (Keller) or other conspicuous places in their dwellings, as emblematic images of their worship of the moon.
The figure at C represents an earthenware moon-image with a flat base for standing purposes. The decoration on this is peculiarly interesting, as showing one of the earliest fascine patterns, doubtless derived from the floor construction of the dwellings, or from the lashings of withy bands used to fasten the stone axes and celts to their hafts. This kind of ornament has been used very much in the Bronze age weapons, implements, and other objects. The moon-image at E is made of bronze, with a handle and a ring to hang it by. It was probably worn as an amulet or decoration suspended from the neck of a Celtic priest. Remains of many kinds of plants, seeds, corn, and fruit have been found, usually in coarse earthen pots; also cakes and loaves of bread, and mill-stone “crushers” for grinding corn. Domestic animals, such as cows, goats, and dogs, were kept by the lake dwellers. Fishing and fish-curing, as may be easily inferred, was an important industry with these interesting people.
CHAPTER VII.
EGYPTIAN ART.
According to their most ancient traditions, the Egyptian race descended from a point high up on the Nile, or the land of Ethiopia, but modern science proves them to belong to a Caucasian race, and not of the Negro type. The name Egypt has been derived from “Het-ka-Ptah,” one of the titles of the city of Memphis, which means “The Temple of the Genius of Ptah,” and has been interpreted by the Greeks as “Aiguptos,” the latter being the old name for the Nile.
On the south of Egypt dwelt the Nubians or Ethiopians; on the west the Libyans, a fair-skinned race, who, being a warlike people, were employed by the Egyptians as mercenary troops; and on the north-east the nomadic Semitic tribes of Edom and Southern Syria. The latter people often wandered west to feed their flocks in the Delta of Lower Egypt, and in course of time formed, with the Phœnician traders, a large proportion of the population of the lower kingdom of Egypt. It was on the north-east frontier, on the Isthmus of Suez, that Egypt had most to fear from her foreign enemies.
Nearly all the art of the various peoples and nations of the world was developed in relation to their religion, and most of it—as elsewhere stated—originated in symbolic signs that represented, under various forms, human or otherwise, the original objects or phenomena which they worshipped. This was the case especially so in Egypt; and this must be our plea to describe here briefly the principal outlines of the Egyptian religion.
Fig. 82.—Isis nursing her Son, Horus. (P. & C.) Height, 19 ins.
The religion of the Egyptians had two developments, one tending towards Monotheism, and the other to Polytheism. They believed in one god, who was the king of all gods; and, on the other hand, they had their mythical gods, who personified whatever was permanent in natural phenomena, such as the sun, moon, sky, stars, earth, light, darkness, floods, the seasons, the year, and the hours. The goddess Nut represented the sky, and was known also under the names of Neith, Isis, Hathor, Sekhet, &c., which were the names of the sky at sunrise or sunset (Fig. 82). The sun had names without number, as Rā, Horus, Ptah, Tmu, Setek, Amen, &c. (Figs. 83, 84). Osiris and Sekru are names of the sun after he has set, or is “dead and buried” (Fig. 85). Osiris is king of the dead, and, in mythological language, he is slain by his brother Set, who personified night, who in his turn is slain by Horus (Fig. 82), who is the heir of Osiris. Horus signifies the “one above,” and Amen-Rā, the great king of all the gods, signifies “the one who hides himself.” The great Amen-Rā was the mightiest god in all the Egyptian pantheon. He was the great god of Thebes.
The gods were represented in human shape, and also m animal form. The animals, or animal combinations, were simply symbolical of the gods on account of certain attributes common to each, or in some cases because they bore the same name.
The Egyptians were intense believers in a future state, hence the great care bestowed on their dead, for they believed that the body should be preserved in order to insure a state of bliss for the soul in the future world. Every human being had its “double,” or ghost “Ka,” as well as its ghost “Ba,” which we often find represented under the form of a human being with a hawk’s head. Sometimes the image of a man was buried with him. This was to represent his “double,” and is, therefore, called a “Ka” statue, or image. The “Ba,” or soul, was supposed to be “luminous.”
Fig. 83.—Amen, or Ammon, bronze. (P. & C.)
Fig. 84.—Ptah, from a bronze Actual Size. (P. & C.)
It is supposed that many of the animals and animal forms buried with and painted on the coffins of the Egyptian dead were, in remote times, the sacred animals or “Totems” belonging to the dead man’s family. “Totem worship” may have been the most ancient form of the Egyptian religion. The Temple of Bubastis (in the Delta) was sacred to the goddess Bast, or Pasht, the cat-headed goddess (Fig. 86). The cat was, therefore, a sacred animal or a “Totem,” in ancient Egypt, like the ibis, hawk, asp, beetle, &c., totems; and so in the district or town of Bubastis the Cat Clan, or worshippers of the cat-headed goddess Pasht, built the rock-cut temple called Speos Artemidos, near Beni-Hasan, and dedicated it to her worship.
Fig. 85.—Osiris. (P. & C.)
Fig. 86.—The Goddess Bast, or Pasht. Actual Size. (P. & C.)
The writing of the Egyptians is classified under three heads: the “Hieroglyphic,” or the form in which it appears on the monuments; the “Hieratic,” or priestly writing, as used on the papyrus documents; and the “Demotic,” a cursive or running kind of writing similar to the Hieratic, and a later development of it. In the year 1798 the famous “Rosetta Stone,” now in the British Museum, was found near the Rosetta mouth of the Nile by a French officer. It passed into the hands of the British in 1802. On this stone is inscribed a decree of the priests of Memphis conferring divine honours on Ptolemy V., King of Egypt, B.C. 195. The inscription is in three forms, the Hieroglyphic, the Demotic, and in Greek characters. From this inscription was first obtained the key to the decipherment of the hieroglyphics, and interpretation of the ancient language of Egypt, and the names of the kings which in the hieroglyphics are enclosed in cartouches or oblong rings. Thus the clue was obtained to the identification of the letters of the Egyptian alphabet, which had hitherto baffled all the attempts of Egyptologists to find out. The credit of the identification is chiefly due to the French savant, Champollion, but a considerable share of the honour must be given to Thomas Young, who was the first to find out the correct value of many of the phonetic signs. The Egyptians, from the earliest period known, were acquainted with and skilled in medicine, in astronomy, in mathematics, philosophy, poetry, and fiction. The oldest literary papyrus at present known dates from the Third to the Fifth Dynasties (3966 to 3333 B.C.).
Egyptian art was at its best in the earliest Dynasties. The Fourth Dynasty was the great pyramid-building period, and the statues of this great epoch were more natural and artistic, and altogether were less conventional than those of later times.
It is notable that in the Eighteenth and Twenty-sixth Dynasties, after a long period of art depression, the artists went back for inspiration and better models to the work of the men of the Fourth and Twelfth Dynasties.
The history of Egypt can be traced back from 4,400 years before the Christian era, and is divided into thirty Dynasties, whose succession was the result of failure in any of the original lines of marriage, or marriage with a female of lower rank, or of a revolution. The thirty Dynasties are divided into three groups:—
| Dynasties I.-XI. | (B.C. 4400-2466) | The Ancient Empire. |
| ” XII.-XIX. | (B.C. 2466-1200) | The Middle Empire. |
| ” XX.-XXX. | (B.C. 1200-340) | The New Empire. |
These dates and arrangements are formulated chiefly on the basis of a work written in Greek, and compiled by Manetho, an Egyptian priest who lived in the third century B.C.
The kings of Egypt have been named Pharaohs from the title “Peraa”—"great house." The seat or centre of the government shifted its position according to dynastic reasons, or from policy. During the ancient empire it was first at Memphis, and then moved to Abydos and other places in the south as the empire extended. When Egypt was in the height of its glory the centre of government was chiefly at Thebes, but moving often according to revolution or foreign oppression. Rameses and his near successors held their court at the northern city of San, or Tanis. The time of the New Empire was chiefly a period of foreign rule and slow decadence, the seat of the empire shifted to nearly all the former places or capitals and to Bubastis or Sais with each political change.
Fig. 87.—The Great Pyramid of Kheops, and Small Pyramids; from Perring. (P. & C.)
Menes was the first historical king of Egypt, and was supposed to have founded Memphis, where the worship of the god Ptah, “Creator of gods and men,” was first instituted, as well as that of Apis or Hapi, the sacred bull—the Serapis of the Greeks. For the next six hundred years we know scarcely anything of Egyptian history except the names of the kings, until we come to the great period of the Fourth Dynasty (B.C. 3766-3566). Seneferu was the founder of this Dynasty. He conquered the peninsula of Sinai, and worked the valuable mines of copper and turquoise found in that country. His son and successor, Khufu, better known as Kheops (B.C. 3733-3700), was the builder of the Great Pyramid at Gizeh (Fig. 87), which he erected for his tomb. The king Kha-f-Rā (Kephren) (B.C. 3666-3600), built the Second Pyramid, and his son, Men-kau-Rā (Mykerinos) was the builder of the Third Pyramid. Men-kau-Rā was a wise and humane sovereign, and it is recorded to his honour, as an exceptional qualification, that “he did not oppress his people.” In this he was different to most of the Pharaohs. His mummified remains are now in the British Museum. The Sphinx, or man-headed lion, carved out of the solid rock, is near the Great Pyramid, and is supposed to be the work of a much earlier period (Fig. 91).
Fig. 88.—Section through the Great Pyramid of Kheops. (P. & C.)
The Fifth Dynasty (B.C. 3566-3300) is not an important one as far as art is concerned.
The Sixth (B.C. 3300-3100) was noted for the erection of its pyramid tombs and for the religious texts that were inscribed on their interior walls.
Fig. 89.—The Stepped Pyramid. (P. & C.) Supposed to be the most ancient building in Egypt.
Fig. 90.—The Southern Pyramid of Dashour. (P. & C.)
Fig. 91.—The Great Sphinx. (P. & C.)
Fig. 92.—Colossi of Amenophis III. Statues of Memnon at Thebes. (P. & C.)
Fig. 93.—Amenophis III. Presenting an Offering to Amen. (P. & C.)
From the Seventh to the Eleventh Dynasty (B.C. 3100-2466) is a period whose history is almost lost. It meant to the Egyptians a period of more than six hundred years of tribal jealousies and fighting, at the end of which Egypt was consolidated from north to south, and a powerful Dynasty succeeded these internal struggles. The Twelfth Dynasty was a brilliant one for the arts, and for great works of engineering skill. The names of the Pharaohs of this dynasty, Amenemhāt and Usertsen, are among the most renowned in Egyptian history. Great temples were restored or newly built at Thebes, Heliopolis, Tanis, and Abydos. The great artificial lake, Mauur (Moeris of the Greeks), or “great water,” was constructed to receive the surplus waters of the Nile, and to control its floods. The Arabs call this lake “El-Fayyum,” from another of its Egyptian names “Phiom,” the sea. It was completed in the reign of Amenemhāt III. (B.C. 2300-2266). The same king built the celebrated Labyrinth, the “Erpa-re-hent,” or “Temple at the entrance of the Lake,” in which the king himself was interred. His successor was the last king of the Twelfth Dynasty. The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Dynasties are dark periods in which the invasion of the Elamites and the Nomad tribes from Syria and Western Asia took place. The Fifteenth and Sixteenth Dynasties are the “Hyksos” dynasties. The Hyksos, or Shepherd Kings, were the chief of the above Nomad Asiatic tribes, and consequently usurpers of the native rule. A revolt took place in the reign of one of these kings of the Seventeenth Dynasty, and under Amāsis I., the founder of the Eighteenth Dynasty, the Shepherd Kings were finally driven out of Egypt.
About the end of the Hyksos rule the patriarch Joseph was sold into Egypt. King Nubti (B.C. 1750) is supposed to have been the Pharaoh of that time, and the Hyksos king, Apepa II., is supposed to have been the king that raised Joseph to power. The explorer, M. Jacques de Morgan, expresses the opinion that the Shepherd Kings were the tomb-robbers, who, either from cupidity, or a wish to annihilate the last traces of a conquered race, pillaged every pyramid of its dead, and the treasures there concealed, for not a single pyramid has been found unviolated that was built before the Hyksos Dynasty. Thothmes III. (B.C. 1600) was a powerful and warlike king who compelled Assyria to pay him tribute. In the Eighteenth Dynasty, Egypt was more powerful than at any other period of her history. The great Temples of Thebes, Karnak, and Luxor were built during this dynasty.
A later monarch of this dynasty, Amenophis III., erected on the west of the Nile at Thebes two colossal statues of himself, that the Greeks have named the statues of Memnon, the fabled king of Egypt that was supposed to have been slain in the Trojan wars (Fig. 92).
Another king of this dynasty, Amenophis IV., made himself exceedingly notorious by trying to introduce a new religion, and for this he had his memory execrated, and was deeply cursed as a heretic by priests and people of the succeeding generations. It appears he had imbibed from his mother, Ti, who was an Assyrian princess, certain religious opinions which he determined to force on his own people. In order to do this he removed his capital from Thebes, where the national worship of the great god Amen was celebrated, to Khu-en-aten, the modern Tell-el-Amarna, which name he took for himself, and which means the “splendour of the sun-disk”; there he set up the sun-disk god, Aten (the radiant sun). The new religion, however, was obnoxious to the conservative Egyptians, and soon died out (Fig. 94).
The Nineteenth Dynasty (B.C. 1400-1200) was founded by Rameses I. He was a successful king, but his son Seti (Fig. 95) was a greater one, and had the reputation of being a great builder. It was he who built the great “Hall of Columns,” at Karnak, which joins the pylon of Amenophis III. (Fig. 96).
Fig. 94.—The Adoration of the Solar-disk by Amenophis IV. (P.)
He also built the temple at Kûrnah, and remains of his work is seen at Abydos, Memphis, and Heliopolis. He was succeeded by his famous son Rameses II., the Sesostris of the Greeks, the supposed oppressor of the Israelites. He was a very powerful monarch, and, from all accounts, in order to glorify himself in the eyes of posterity, did not scruple to erase the names of former kings from off their cartouches on their monuments and inscribe his own in their place. That he has accomplished the end he had in view by so doing there is not the slightest doubt, for no monarch of Egypt is better known than he. But apart from this he was certainly a mighty chieftain, who “enriched the land with memorials of his name.”
Fig. 95.—Seti with Attributes of Osiris between Amen and Chuoam. (P. & C.)]
The greatest of his many battles (he was always fighting) was fought with the Khita (Hittites), under the walls of Kadesh, in the valley of the Orontes. His forces were almost defeated when by his personal valour he turned the tide of the battle and entirely routed the Khita (Fig. 97).
Fig. 96.—Entrance to the Hypostyle Hall of the Temple of Amen at Karnak. (M.)
The most famous building of his time is the rock-hewn temple, the “Great Temple,” that he built and dedicated to Amen, Ptah, and Harmachis, which faces the Nile at Ipsamboul, in Nubia.
Fig. 97.—The Rout of the Khita; Egyptians to the left, the Khita to the right. (M.)
On the façade of this temple are sculptured in situ four seated colossal figures of Rameses, two on each side of the doorway. From the soles of the feet to the top of the pschent on the head measures sixty-five feet; they are the largest statues in Egypt, and the workmanship is careful in finish. Over the entrance is carved in relief on the rock a colossal figure of the god Rā, and on either side of it are single figures in low-relief of Rameses in the act of adoration (Fig. 98).
Fig. 98.—Façade of the Great Rock-cut Temple at Ipsamboul.
Fig. 99.—Principal Hall in the Great Temple. (H.; P. & C.)
Menephthah (B.C. 1300-1266) was the successor of Rameses II. and his successor was Seti II. The latter was the last king of the Middle Empire. With the commencement of the Twentieth Dynasty the New Empire dates (about B.C. 1200-358). Towards the Twenty-second Dynasty (B.C. 966-776) Egypt began to pass into a state of dissolution. In the Twenty-fourth Dynasty (B.C. 733-700) she was at the mercy of Assyria on the north and Ethiopia on the south. In 672 B.C. the Assyrian King Esarhaddon invaded Egypt and occupied the whole of the Delta, afterwards capturing Memphis and Thebes, which he pillaged. The Assyrian king died suddenly, and Taharka, a native usurper, succeeded in driving out the Assyrians, but soon after Egypt was again conquered by Ashurbanipal, a powerful Assyrian King (B.C. 666). The Assyrians, however, after a short time of occupation withdrew from Egypt, owing to their troubles at home with the Medes, who were laying siege to Nineveh, and Egypt again revived. Under Amāsis the country enjoyed peace for about forty years (B.C. 572-528). The Egyptians possessed a fleet at this time with which they advanced to the Phœnician coast and took the city of Sidon, and also annexed the island of Cyprus to Egyptian rule.
Fig. 100.—Portrait of Rameses II. (Louvre; P. & C.)
Egypt submitted to the Persian army under Cambyses in B.C. 527, and was for more than one hundred years afterwards a mere vassal of Persia. The Twenty-seventh Dynasty (B.C. 527-424) was composed solely of Persian kings. A successful revolt broke out in the last Persian king’s reign, Darius II., when Egypt was free once more. Amenrut was the only king of the Twenty-eighth Dynasty, and after the Twenty-ninth and Thirtieth Dynasties were ended, the latter, by the conquest of Egypt once more by the Persians under Artaxerxes III. (B.C. 340), we find the country under Persian rule for the space of eight years. About this time the Persian monarch was defeated by Alexander the Great, which brought Egypt under the Greek rule. At the death of Alexander Egypt was governed by the Macedonian kings, the Ptolemies, from 330 to 30 B.C. After the Roman wars and the death of Cleopatra, Egypt found itself a Roman province.
Fig. 101.—The Egyptian “Gorge.”
In A.D. 638 the Arabs under Omar conquered the country, and it was ruled by them till 1517, when it passed into the hands of the Turks.
Fig. 102.—General Appearance of an Egyptian Temple.
The Pyramids of Egypt have doubtless derived their shape from the prehistoric grave mounds. Although elaborately and ingeniously contrived for the concealment of the remains of the kings, and are stupendous monuments of building skill, they are not examples of architecture in the true sense of the word. Perhaps the earliest examples of Egyptian architecture, properly speaking, are seen in the ancient shrines, with sloping walls and flat roof, and having the peculiar cavetto cornice moulding called the Egyptian “Gorge” (Figs. 101 and 109). Horizontally is the great feature of Egyptian architecture, which is typically expressed by the illustration Fig. 102, an ideal generalisation of an Egyptian temple.
Fig. 103.—Square Building.
Fig. 104.—Oblong Building.
As hardly any, or no, rain falls in most parts of Egypt, a sloping roof was not a necessity. The external walls in the case of a square building are in the form of a trapezium, making the whole edifice of the shape of a truncated pyramid, and pyramid-like in either the square or rectangular-planned buildings (Figs. 103 and 104), except when the end walls are vertical (Fig. 104), then it tends toward the ridge-form.
Fig. 105.—Model of an Egyptian House. (P. & C.)
Fig. 106.—Plan of the Temple of Luxor. (P. & C.)
In regard to the scarcity of voids and narrow sloping doorways, the similarity in Egyptian buildings of every kind is very striking (Fig. 105). This absence of voids gives a dark and gloomy character to the buildings, when compared with the architecture of other countries. The horizontal element and solidity of construction impart a look of powerful strength and of deep repose to the Egyptian temple. Even the tall and slender obelisks placed in front of the mighty pylons have little, if any, effect in removing the horizontal appearance of the whole building.[building.] We give the ground plan, perspective view, and front elevation of the great Temple of Luxor, as a typical illustration of an Egyptian temple from restorations by Chipiez (Figs. 106, 107, and 108). Its construction is described by Champollion as the “Architecture of giants.”
This double-temple was the work of two kings. From the second pylon to the further end of the Temple is the portion built first, by the King Amenophis III. The other portion, from first to the second pylon, is the part built by Rameses II. The sanctuary is placed in the centre of a hall, surrounded by small chambers. It has two doors, one at either end, and on the axis of the building it has a vestibule in front and a hall beyond, supported by twelve columns. Another hall in front of the Naos (or interior apartment) is supported by thirty-two lofty columns. In front of this again is a large square open court. This court is connected to the larger front peristylar court by a grand and lofty gallery, similar to a hypostyle hall. It is 176 ft. long, enclosed and covered, and richly decorated like the hypostyle hall at Karnak (Fig. 96). Four colossal seated statues are in front of the first pylon, and two obelisks, one on each side of the door-way. Four large flagstaffs and a double row of sphinxes in front of the temple complete the accessories to this great edifice. The whole building and obelisks were covered over with bas-reliefs and inscriptions.
Fig. 107.—Bird’s-eye View of Luxor, as restored by Chipiez. (P. & C.)
Fig. 108.—Principal Façade of the Temple of Luxor, restored by Chipiez. (P. & C.)
Fig. 109.—Column of Thothmes III.; from the Ambulatory of Thothmes at Karnak. (P. & C.)
Fig. 110.—Column of the Hypostyle Hall of the Ramesseum; from Horeau. (P. & C.)
The typical Egyptian columns or supports are of two distinct and well-marked kinds, the lotus-headed and the campaniform or bell-shaped. The former is so called from its resemblance to a closed lotus-bud (Fig. 109), and the latter from its resemblance to a bell with the mouth uppermost (Fig. 110). An earlier and simpler form of column or support is the quadrangular pier (Fig. 111), and the next development is the tapering quadrangular pier (Fig. 112), both undecorated. Next we have the pier with a capital which, in profile, is a simple cavetto or “gorge,” and square abacus (Fig. 113).
Fig. 111.—Quadrangular Pier (P. & C.)
Fig. 112.—Tapering Quadrangular Pier. (P. & C.)
Between the abacus and the entablature or beam is a square thickness of stone; this is the great defect in the Egyptian orders, and distinguishes the latter from the Greek orders. This space between the abacus and the architrave is bad, both from a scientific and artistic point of view. It robs the capital of its legitimate appearance as a supporting member. This pier, with capital and the Hathoric pier (Fig. 114), with the head of the goddess Hathor, are both decorated.
Fig. 113.—Pier with Capital. (P. & C.)
Fig. 114.—Hathoric Pier. (P. & C.)
We next come to the octagonal (Fig. 115), and the sixteen-sided pillars (Fig. 116), which are almost Greek in their classic simplicity; the latter is fluted. All forms of Egyptian columns have either square slabs or circular discs as bases, on which the column rests. The two latter mentioned pillars are exceptional, and therefore not typical Egyptian, in having the abacus directly under the architrave; the sixteen-sided pillar is especially Doric-like in this respect, and also in its fluted shaft (Fig. 116).
Fig. 115.—Octagonal Pillar, Beni-Hassan. (P. & C.)
Fig. 116.—Sixteen-sided Pillar; Fluted. (P. & C.)
Fig. 117.—Osiride Pillar from Medinet-Abou. (P. & C.)
Fig. 118.—Column from Bas-Relief. (P. & C.)
The supports known as “Osiride” pillars are chiefly of the date of the Nineteenth Dynasty. They have a kind of analogy to the caryatid Grecian pillars, but are unlike them in respect that they do not support the entablature, as they are only placed in front of the quadrangular supporting pier for purposes of decoration, and are usually meant as representations of the kings who erected the temples they decorate, with a head-dress ornament consisting of the attributes of Osiris (Fig. 117).
Another variety of column has a fanciful combination of floral forms for its capital (Fig. 118). This and others of fanciful design are from the bas-reliefs and wall-paintings, and remind us of similar creations of the artist’s pencil, as seen in the Pompeian wall decorations.
The upper parts of the capital are developments from the calyx of the lotus, with the sepals curled outwards, and look very much like the first notions of the Greek Ionic capital, as indeed we shall find the Ionic volute to be a development of the lotus calyx more than anything else. An example of the faggot-shaped column, with its base, lotus-capital, and entablature, is given at Fig. 109. The ornamental parts of this column were painted in bright yellow and blue, and, as a rule, the sculptured ornament of the Egyptian columns, architrave, and cornices were relieved by the painter in bright colours.
Fig. 119.—Palm-Capital from Sesebi. (P. & C.)
The illustration at Fig. 119 is that of the palm-shaped capital from Sesebi. This type of capital is a frank imitation of a bunch of palm-leaves tied by the circular bands around the top of a column. A later development of the palm capital shows the bell shape with a more complicated decoration, and has the Hathor-headed abacus, surmounted by a Naos (Fig. 120).
Egyptian Ornament and Industrial Art.
Fig. 120.—Hathor-headed Campaniform Capitals, Temple of Neetanebo, at Philæ. (P. & C.)
A great part of Egyptian ornament and decoration is composed of symbolic forms, the remainder is made up of geometrical ornament, such as checkers, meanders, frets, rosettes, diapers of lotus and other forms. Natural forms of flowers and foliage were not copied direct, but only used in shape of geometric abstractions, and their arrangement as diapers in surface decoration was derived, in the first instance, from the older arts of weaving and matting. The old Egyptians were skilled in weaving both plain and figured fabrics, chiefly from flax and hemp fibre. The lotus form was pre-eminently the leading motive in Egyptian floral ornament. The papyrus (from which our word paper is derived) and the palm are next in importance as motives from which Egyptian ornament is derived.
The lotus-plant (Nymphæa nelumbo) the variety in which the leaves grow up out of the water and do not lie on its surface, is shown at Fig. 121, and drawings, evidently from nature, at Fig. 122, from the tomb of Ptah-Hotep.
The lotus flower in ornament may be seen in the ceiling decorations from tombs at Fig. 123, Nos. 3 and 5; at Figs. 118, 124; and in the painted frieze from Thebes (Fig. 125), where the similarity between this and the Assyrian lotus, fir-cone and daisy may be noticed (see Fig. [167]).
Fig. 121.—The Nymphæa[Nymphæa] nelumbo; Flower, Leaf, and Fruit. (P. & C.)
The bi-lateral rendering of the lotus plant is not common in Egyptian ornament, though it is the oldest form of the lotus known, as it occurs on the prehistoric pottery of Koptos, and on tombs of the Fourth Dynasty (Fig. 126), and earlier. Two lotus flowers are here seen tied together; the general outline of the flower is only rendered which would enclose the sepals and petals when seen in a side view.
Fig. 122.—Drawings of the Lotus from the Tomb of Ptah-Hotep. (P. & C.)
The lotus flower and bud alternating in a border ornament may be regarded as the prototype of the Greek palmate borders. We are inclined to believe in Professor Goodyear’s theory, that the egg and tongue decoration on the Greek ovolo moulding is nothing more than a disrupted lotus and bud ornament developed in transition through the Rhodian pottery decoration. The shells and the tongue were originally the lotus calyx, and the egg or pebble the lotus bud.
Fig. 123.—Specimens of Ceiling Decoration at Thebes; from Prisse. (P. & C.)
Other plants, as the thistle, convolvulus, daisy, vines, and grapes, &c., were used very much in decoration, especially during the Akhenaten period (Eighteenth and Nineteenth Dynasties), when the decoration was of a florid kind. The papyrus is seen in the ceiling ornament Fig. 123, No 6, at Fig. 127, and on the perfume spoon of carved wood (Fig. 151). The ceiling decorations (Fig. 123), from the Theban tombs, show the fine sense and feeling the Egyptians had for the appropriate decoration of flat surfaces, and the judicious balance maintained in the contrasting units of the ornament.
Fig. 124.—Lotus and Water Ornament.
Fig. 125.—Painted Border: from Thebes, after Prisse. (P. & C.)
Fig. 126.—Flattened Form of Lotus-leaf Ornament; Front View and Section 1. (P. & C.)
In animal forms found in Egyptian decoration there are a few distinct and typical varieties, that have been used times without number, both in painting and in carving in the round, and in the bas-reliefs of stone, wood, and in gold, silver, ivory, and bronze. Among the most frequent is the vulture, with outstretched wings, having sacred symbols in his claws. It has been used appropriately in this form as ceiling decoration in the great temples at Thebes, on a blue ground diapered with golden stars; the ceilings thus are symbolic representations of the heavens at night (Fig. 128).
Fig. 127.—Hunting in a Marsh; from a Bas-Relief in the Tomb of Ti. (P. & C.)
Fig. 128.—Vultures on a Ceiling. (P. & C.)
Similar outstretched wings have been added to the scarabs or sacred beetles. These winged scarabs, together with similar winged-globe and uræus creations, have been used as ceiling decorations in tombs and on mummy-cases, and sometimes the goddess Isis, or Nepththys, was furnished with these wings as guardian of the tomb (Figs. 129 and 130).
Fig. 129.—Winged-Globe with Uræus. (P. & C.)
The Uræus and winged-globe was a favourite decoration for cornices and for heads of doorways (Fig. 108). The colouring of the winged-globe decoration was generally, in the case of the globe, a red colour, as the emblem of the sun; the wings green, and the striped ground behind the figure was painted in alternating stripes of red, blue, and white, which produced an effective arrangement of colour. The Egyptians excelled in the drawing of animals and birds in outline, and in bas-relief carvings of them, some examples of which are given at Figs. 131, 132, 133.
Fig. 130.—Painting on Mummy-Case. (P. & C.)
Fig. 131.—Hunting in the Desert. (M.)
Many chimerical animals or monsters were used in Egyptian decoration, as sphinxes, or imaginary animals of the desert, which were really fanciful creations of the artist’s pencil (Figs. 134, 135, 136, 137).
Their representations of lions always have an expression of dignity, though more mild in aspect than the Assyrian lion in art (Fig. 138).
Fig. 132.—Antelope and Papyrus. (P. & C.)
Pottery, glass, and earthenware were manufactured in Egypt from the earliest times. The country was well supplied with good potter’s clay; bricks were made and dried in the sun, not burned, and were used very much in building. The common pottery was unglazed, and their decorated pottery was in glazed earthenware, but not so highly decorated as many other objects of industrial art. Fig. 139 is a common pitcher of fairly good form, in red earth. The decoration on the enamelled earthenware dish (Fig. 140) is composed of bouquets of lotus flowers; and that on the larger basin or bowl is a design of lotus and mystic signs (Fig. 141). The three objects are in the British Museum.
Fig. 133.—Netting Birds; from a Tomb. (P. & C.)
Fig. 134.—Quadruped with Head of a Bird. (P. & C.)
Rosettes and plaques have been found enamelled in colours, and probably used for floor or wall tiles. The doorway to the stepped pyramid at Sakkarah is decorated with rows of convex-shaped rectangular plaques of enamelled earthenware of a greenish-blue glaze. Some are black in colour.
Fig. 135.—Sphinx or Man-Headed Lion, in Black Granite, from Tanis. (P. & C.)
The Egyptians were particularly skilful in glass making, but they never produced quite a clear glass; it was always slightly opaque, but generally bright and rich in colour. Vases, cups, pateræ, statuettes, necklaces, goblets, bracelets, and, above all, enormous quantities of beads, which they used to make a network of to cover their dead. Great quantities of glass objects were exported in trade with the Phœnicians.
Fig. 136.—Ram, or Kriosphinx, from Karnak. (P. & C.)
The Venetians during the Middle Ages imported soda in large quantities from Alexandria, for purposes of glass making, the soda of Egypt being famed for this purpose, as it was prepared from the many marsh-loving plants that grew luxuriantly in the Delta.
Fig. 137.—Sphinx with Human Hands; Bas-Relief from Prisse. (P. & C.)
Fig. 138.—Lion from a Theban Bas-Relief. (P. & C.)
Fig. 139.—Pitcher of Red Earth, British Museum. (P. & C.)
Fig. 140.—Enamelled Earthenware Dish, British Museum. (P. & C.)
Fig. 141.—Enamelled Earthenware Bowl, British Museum. (P. & C.)
Gold had always been more plentiful than silver in ancient Egypt. It was found in the hills of Ethiopia, but silver had to be imported from Asia. This accounts for the great quantities of gold objects and ornaments that have been found in the tombs, and the scarcity of silver ornaments. The Egyptian goldsmiths made all kinds of vessels and personal jewellery in gold, set with lapis lazuli and other precious stones. We shall have to be content with giving, as examples of this art, the famous pectoral of Kha-em-uas, son of Rameses II. (Fig. 142), and the golden hawk (Fig. 143).
Fig. 142.—Pectoral; Actual Size. (P. & C.)
Fig. 143.—Golden Hawk; Actual Size. (P. & C.)
The former is a splendid and unique specimen of a pectoral, or breast ornament for the dead. These pectorals have been found in great numbers, made of wood, metal, and earthenware. The general shape is that of a naos, or little temple. The Kha-em-uas pectoral is made of gold inlaid with lapis lazuli, and is thus described by M. Pierret: “Jewel in the form of a naos, in which a vulture and an uræus are placed side by side; above them floats a hawk with extended wings, in his claws are seals, emblems of eternity. Under the frieze of the naos an oval, with the prenomen of Rameses II., is introduced. Two tet (or dad, symbol of stability) are placed in the lower angles of the frame.” The golden hawk is a similar kind of ornament, with crescent wings and seals in its claws, emblems of reproduction and eternity. The workmanship in these articles looks like that of cloisonné enamels, but they are not enamels. The thin ribs of gold that surround the lapis lazuli stones in the pectoral and hawk are cloisons, but the stones are cut to fit into the spaces accurately, and are therefore inlaid, while in the true enamels the enamel is put in the cells and fused to the metal by fire afterwards. Enamelling as known to the Chinese was not practised in Egypt.
As ivory could be obtained from Ethiopia in great quantities, it was natural that the Egyptians would make good use of it. It was a favourite material with the sculptors, and many fine examples of ivory carvings and incised work have been found in the tombs. The incised outlines on the ivory were usually filled in with black (Figs. 144 and 145).
Fig. 144.—Fragment of an Ivory Castanet, Louvre.
Fig. 145.—Ivory Plaque; Late Work. (P. & C.)
Gold, silver, ivory, and ebony were worked in usually by the same Egyptian artist, as we learn from an inscription on a stele of Iritesen, an Egyptian sculptor, thus translated by Maspero: “Ah! there is no one excels at this work except myself, and the eldest of my legitimate sons. God decided that he should excel, and I have seen the perfection of his handiwork as an artist, as the chief of those who work in precious stones, in gold, silver, ivory, and ebony.”
Fig. 146.—Egyptian Chair. (P. & C.)
Fig. 147.—Chair or Throne. (P. & C.)
Fig. 148.—The Carpenters Making Chairs. (M.)
Fig. 149.—Coffer in Wood. (P. & C.)
Judging from the small remains left to us, the furniture and woodwork of the Egyptians must have been of an excellent description. We have evidence also of this in the wall paintings and bas-reliefs that give representations of tables, chairs, and couches. Some of the chairs or thrones are of special beauty (Figs. 146 and 147). A carpenter’s shop showing the workmen making chairs is seen at Fig. 148, and a coffer (Fig. 149). The feet of chairs and thrones were usually imitated from those of animals.
Figs. 150-51.—Perfume Spoons, Louvre. (P. & C.)
In wood-carving nothing could be daintier than the perfume spoons with figures and water plants decoratively treated (Figs. 150, 151).
Fig. 152.—An Egyptian Ship, Sailing and Rowing. (M.)
The Egyptian ships were singularly beautiful in their outlines, with their prows and sterns ending usually in a metal stalk and carved lotus flower or ram’s head (Figs. 152, 153). The “bari,” or sacred boat which transported the dead, decorated at each end with the carved metal lotus, and pavilion or chapel in the centre, with its freight of the mummy and the mourners (Fig. 152), is represented as it sails off towards Abydos, the city of the dead, to the west of Thebes, and the crowds of friends on the banks of the river will salute the dead, saying: “In peace, in peace towards Abydos! Descend in peace towards Abydos, towards the Western Sea!”
Fig. 153.—The River Transport of a Mummy from Maspero.
CHAPTER VIII.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Fig. 157—Eagle-headed Divinity from Nimroud, with the Sacred Tree. (P. & C.)
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.
Fig. 159—The Winged Globe with the Figure of a God. (P. & C.)
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.
Fig. 161.—The Assyrian Standard. (P. & C.)
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.
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.
Fig. 162A.—Embroidery upon a Royal Mantle; from Layard. (P. & C.)
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.
Fig. 164.—Detail of Embroidery; from Layard. (P. & C.)
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).
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).
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.
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.
Fig. 169.—Babylonian Brick, 16 ins. square, 4 ins. thick. (P. & C.)
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.
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).
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.
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).
Fig. 174.—The Royal Palace of Dur-Sarginu (Sargon’s Palace); restored by Chipiez. (M.)
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.
Fig. 176.—Temple on the bank of a river, Khorsabad, from Batta. (P. & C.)
Fig. 177.—Capital of Temple at Fig. 176. (P. & C.)
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[none] end of the store and glory out of all the pleasant furniture.”
Fig. 179.—Fragment of an Assyrian Building from a bas-relief, B.M. (P. & C.)
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).
Fig. 181.—Assyrian Capital compiled from Place. (P. & C.)
Fig. 182.—Winged Sphinx carrying Base of Capital. Layard. (P. & C.)
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.)
Fig. 184.—The Feast of Assurbanipal. (B.M.) (P. & C.) Enlarged detail of Fig. 183, showing the Assyrian Furniture. Drawn by Gautier.
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.
Fig. 186.—Bronze Foot of a Piece of Furniture.
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.
Fig. 188.—Lion and Lioness in a Park. (B.M.) (P. & C.)
Fig. 189.—Combat between a Lion and a Unicorn; from Layard. (P. & C.)
Fig. 190.—Dog used for Lion Hunting. (M.)
Fig. 191.—Chariot Horses; from Layard. (P. & C.)
Fig. 192.—Fantastic Animal, drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)[(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.
Fig. 193.—Andro-Sphinx, Robe of Assurbanipal; from Layard. (P. & C.)
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].)
Fig. 195.—Rosette of Lotus Flowers and Buds. (P. & C.)
Fig. 196.—Bouquet of Flowers and Buds; from Layard. (P. & C.)
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.
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.
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.)
Fig. 200.—Guilloche Ornament on Enamelled Brick. (B.M.) (P. & C.)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Fig. 207.
Cylinder; from Soldi.
(P. & C.)
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.
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).
CHAPTER IX.
PHŒNICIAN ART.
The origin of the Phœnician people remains in obscurity. According to Herodotus, we learn that they came as an Eastern branch of the Canaanitish peoples, of which race the Greeks were also a part, and who settled at the foot of Lebanon, on the Syrian sea-coast, between Mounts Carmel and Casius.
The Phœnician and Hebrew languages resembled each other very closely, and from this it has been argued that the Phœnicians belonged to the Semitic race of the Hebrews. Ancient Phœnicia was a narrow strip of land, 130 miles long by only a few miles in width at its widest part. The three principal towns in ancient times were Tyre, Sidon, and Joppa; three others of importance were Arvad, Gebal or Byblos, and Accho or Acre.
Arvad in the north, was, like Tyre in the south, built on a rock some little distance from the mainland. Tyre was for a long time impregnable on its rocky seat, with a channel of about three-quarters of a mile dividing it from the coast of the mainland. Owing to its peculiar position, it could defy all unmaritime nations, and it was not until Alexander the Great built an isthmus connecting it with the Phœnician coast that it fell. The inhabitants of Gebal or Byblos were, according to Rénan, more Jewish-like than any other Phœnician people.
Sidon was the first town of Phœnicia to rise to importance, and Tyre afterwards, with greater vigour, rose to power and greatness; and both, from being originally colonies of poor fishermen, became the famous ports which sent forth ships to all points of the Mediterranean, and even to the British Isles, carrying all kinds of merchandise to barter for silver, gold, and tin, as well as for other raw materials from the barbarians beyond the seas, and carrying these raw materials back to supply the artists and artificers of the East. No two cities of the ancient world did so much for the spread and progress of human civilisation as the maritime cities of Tyre and Sidon.
Fig. 210.—Phœnician Merchant Galley; from Layard. (P. & C.)
Like the rest of Phœnicia, Sidon, the first in power, accepted without resistance the supremacy of Egypt. This was indeed to her great advantage, for the ships of Sidon could fly the Egyptian flag in any part of the Mediterranean or other seas, and so exist secure under the protection of the mighty monarchs of that great country. In return for this protection the Phœnicians carried on a successful trade with Egyptian goods, thus benefiting themselves, and their masters to even a greater degree.
The Phœnician fleets were, in fact, at the entire disposal of the Egyptians, who possessed, in the early days, no fleet of their own.
Sidon was sacked and taken by the Philistines about B.C. 1000 or 900, and from that period Tyre rose in supremacy. The first Tyrian king known by name was Abibaal, the contemporary of David; his son was Hiram, the friend of Solomon.
Fig. 211.—Phœnician War Galley; from Layard. (P. & C.)
Afterwards Tyre, with its close intercourse with Egypt, established colonies on the Delta of the Nile, the most renowned of which was called the “New City,” Karthadast, called by the Greeks Carchedon, and by the Romans Carthage.
This daughter of Tyre rose to great prosperity, but never forgot her allegiance to the mother city. Their combined fleets sailed to, and founded, colonies in Sardinia, Cyprus, the Grecian Archipelago, and to Spain, doing enormous trade with both East and West. The Phœnician ships that are known to us from the relief representations are of two kinds, the round-prowed galleys, or cargo-carriers (Fig. 210), and the ram-stemmed vessels, or war galleys (Fig. 211). There is no record that has been found of their larger sea-going “merchantmen” ships.
Fig. 212.—Carthaginian Coin, Silver. (P. & C.)
The growing power of the Greeks and Etruscans, and their improvement in shipbuilding, was a new competition with the ships of Tyre in the East, and at length forced the Tyrians to find new markets in the West.
Fig. 213.—Carthaginian Coin, Electrum. (P. & C.)
The staple trade of the Tyrians had now become that of metals, the chief of which was tin, owing to the great demand for it in the manufacture of bronze in this period.
Their ships went as far as the Scilly Isles, to Cornwall, and to Ireland. Diodorus mentions that the inhabitants of Great Britain were much softened in their manners by their intercourse with the “strangers” who came to their shores for tin. It is supposed that the strangers alluded to were the Phœnician Carthaginians.
Fig. 214.—Votive Stele, from Carthage, with Sacred Emblems. (P. & C.)
Fig. 215.—Sacred Emblems, from a Carthaginian Votive Stele. (P. & C.)
In the fourth century B.C. the Carthaginians waged a war against the Sicilian Greeks, and carried off the statues of gods from their temples, and went so far as to copy their money the early Phœnician coins being copies of Greek ones (Figs. 212, 213). The votive stele (Fig. 214), from Carthage, shows the Greek Ionic-like columns, with the “blessing hand,” and a collection of sacred Phœnician emblems. Greek architects were employed in Carthage about this time. Phœnician architecture in every case consisted of borrowed forms from surrounding nations.
Fig. 216.—Coin of Byblos, with Sacred Cone, enlarged. (P. & C.)
The sacred emblems (Fig. 215) are supposed to represent the cone-shaped stones, betylæ, from Bethel, the “House of God,” the great worship of the Phœnicians. The sign at the top is meant for a rude idea of the head and arms of a god (Tanit, face of Baal?). The figure on the right is the cone again, with the emblems of the goddess Astarte (Aphrodite), the lunar signs. The sacred cone is seen surrounded by the temple court on the coin of Byblos (Fig. 216).
Fig. 217.—Astarte, terra-cotta, height 10½ ins. (P. & C.)
The small statuettes of the Phœnician gods and goddesses (Fig. 217) were the originals from which the Greeks developed their sculptured figures in the round.[round.] Among the gods of the Phœnicians were: Baal, the Master, the Bel of Assyria, which seems to be a generic title for any chief divinity of a town or place, such as Baal Peor, Baal-Sidon, Baal-Tsour, or the Baal of Tyre; Tanit, or the face of Baal, worshipped at Carthage; Moloch, or Melek. Melkart-Baal-Tsour was the full name of the Great God of Tyre, which means “Melkart, Master of Tyre.” Baalat was the title for “mistress,” the goddess who shared the throne of Baal. Sidon-Astoret was the Baalat of Sidon, the goddess Astarte, the Istar of the Assyrians, and the Aphrodite or Venus of the Greeks and Romans (Fig. 217). She was a favourite divinity with the Phœnicians, and more personal than any of their other divinities. She was nature itself, the great goddess of life, presiding over creation and also destruction. This Syro-Phœnician goddess of the Sidonians was adopted by Cyprus, Cythera, Paphos, and Eryx, in Sicily. She is also supposed to be the Moon-Goddess. The dove was sacred to her, and was offered to her in sacrifice; a Phœnician statuette (Fig. 217) represents her with a dove in her hand. The Phœnicians had many other minor gods.
Fig. 218.—Model of a Small Temple, in terra-cotta, Louvre. (P. & C)
A terra-cotta model of a small temple is peculiar in design (Fig. 218); it was found in Cyprus, and may have been the model of the shrine sacred to Astarte. As before mentioned, Phœnician architecture, from the few remains of it that have been found, consists of borrowed forms from other nations, and if any development even in the ornamental forms is noticeable, it can generally be traced to the rising influence of the Greeks, especially in Cyprus and Carthage. The tomb at Amrit (Fig. 219) is, on the other hand, decidedly Assyrian in every detail, and is a happy example of architectural proportion.
The fragment of an entablature from a temple at Byblos (Fig. 220) is of a later date, and has for design and decoration of the moulding the strongly marked features of Græco-Roman work, with the addition of the Egyptian winged globe and asps.
Fig. 219.—Tomb of Amrit, restored from Renan. (P. & C.)
Cyprus was a Phœnician dependency; many vases, and a great multitude of other objects of art and treasures, have been brought to light from tombs and from the subterranean chambers of former temples, mainly through the instrumentality of General di Cesnola.
Fig. 220.—Entablature, from a Temple at Byblos. Drawn by Wallet. (P. & C.)]
The series of capitals (Figs. 221 to 224) show strongly the principle of the Ionic volutes. The first (Fig. 221) is the simplest, the next (Fig. 222) has the triangular point between the lower volutes that we see in so many lotus forms in Egyptian work (see Fig. 202), and has besides the curious double boat-shaped volutes above, with other lotus-buds under the abacus. Another capital (Fig. 223) has all the elements of the Erectheum Ionic capital, but arranged in a totally different order, and is more Byzantine than anything else. The capital found at Kition, in Cyprus, is decidedly Ionic Greek, but in its earlier stage, just before the period of the fully developed Ionic (Fig. 224). It can hardly be doubted that the first two of decidedly Egyptian elements are derived from the lotus, and may certainly be taken as the forerunners of the pure Ionic Greek. The capital from Kition belonged to a temple of Astarte, that once stood on the mound at Kition.
Fig. 221.—Cypriot Capital. (P. & C.)
Fig. 222.—Cypriot Capital. (P. & C.)
The capital found at Golgos (Fig. 225) is distinctly an early form of Greek Doric. If little remains of Phœnician architecture have been found, on the other hand many objects of minor art have been brought to light, bearing on their face the unmistakable stamp of Phœnician workmanship.
Fig. 223.—Capital at Djezza, limestone. Drawn by Saladin. Height, 26 ins. (P. & C.)
Fig. 224.—Capital from Kition, height 18 ins. Drawn by Saladin. (P. & C.)
Some of the bronze bowls and platters, and cups of silver, and also carvings in ivory, although generally composed of Egyptian or Assyrian design, were really the work of Phœnician artificers. The latter were not slow in copying the motives of the above-named nations, but the workmanship, especially in bronze and silver, was their own. The Phœnicians were highly skilled in metal work, and we have proof that they were employed in the building and decorating of the Temple at Jerusalem. The bronze and silver bowls and platters were carried to all countries where the Phœnicians had trading transactions, and they have been found at Mycenæ, Etruria, Cyprus, Sardinia, &c. As stated before in our notice of these objects in Assyrian art, the Assyrians were the first to make these articles from copies of Egyptian design, and then producing others with purely Assyrian designs. The Phœnicians in their turn imitated both, and did a great trade with them. The silver platter (Fig. 226) was found, in 1876, in the Necropolis of ancient Præneste, in Latium, and in the same tomb was found a quantity of vases, diadems, and jewels, all of Phœnician workmanship. On this platter a clearly engraved inscription occurs in Phœnician characters, giving the name of the first owner, Esmunjair-ben-Asto. The Phœnician inscriptions, and above all, the want of method or arrangement of themes or motives on the articles, stamp them to be of Phœnician origin. The silver platter has more meaning in the use of the Egyptian motives than some others, but the hieroglyphics[hieroglyphics] are not to be relied on as correctly Egyptian.
Fig. 225.—Capital from Golgos (Ceccaldi). (P. & C.)
Fig. 226.—Phœnician Platter, Silver, diameter 7 ins. Drawn by Wallet. (P. & C.)
The silver-gilt cup or patera from Curium (Fig. 227) is a fair illustration of this mixture of Egyptian and Assyrian ideas put together from a multitude of stock-in-trade subjects or patterns. The centre piece is Assyrian, and also the cable ornament. The inner row of animals are Assyrian in feeling, but an Egyptian sphinx is introduced amongst them; but the outer border is the most curious of all, as it contains six or seven distinct Egyptian scenes, each divided by the tree of life or palmates, taken at haphazard from designs of bas-reliefs. The Phœnician goldsmith, evidently not understanding the story of these Egyptian mysteries, used them merely as decorative units. The workmanship is admirable; first the work is beaten up in repoussé and then chased afterwards, and may be described as a mixture of the two methods.
Fig. 227.—Patera from Curium, diameter 8 ins. (P. & C.)
A beautiful Egyptian design of a cow and calf in a papyrus brake forms the centre medallion of a Phœnician cup found at Caere (Fig. 228).
Fig. 228.—Centre Medallion; from a Cup from Griffi. (P. & C.)
The Egyptian vessels figured in the tomb of Rekhmara (Fig. 229) are mostly made in metal and are of Phœnician design. They would be sold to the Egyptians, as the former supplied the latter in most articles of metal workmanship; many rims and handles of elaborate workmanship have been found, but scarcely any whole forms of these vases, though we have many of their forms preserved in Greek and Etruscan work.
Fig. 229.—Vessels figured in the Tomb of Rekhmara; from Wilkman.
In articles of personal jewellery the Phœnicians were as skilful as the Greeks and Etruscans; it was only in the matter of higher motives in design that the Greeks excelled the Phœnicians. We give one or two specimens of their jewellery at Figs. 230 to 233.
Fig. 230.—Gold Bracelet; from Tharros. (B.M.) (P. & C.)
Cyprus was inhabited from the earliest time with a mixture of races in which the Greek or Hellenic element was represented, and though nominally a Phœnician dependency, the Greek superiority of artistic genius asserted itself at a very early date in the art of the country. Some of the architectural features already noticed, notably the Ionic capitals, may be given as examples of this; and another very important branch, the minor art of pottery, may furnish further examples of the Greek art tendency, though infused with a mixture of Phœnician influences.
Fig. 231. Silver Pin, Cesnola.
Fig. 232.—Pendant, Wild Goat, Gold. (B.M.)
Fig. 233. Earring, Gold, from Cesnola.
Cyprus has always been particularly noted for its ceramic products. The island is rich in potter’s clay of two kinds—a black earth, and a red kind. The oldest kind of Cyprian known is of a good shape, and is generally furnished with handles according to the uses of the vase. The making and fitting on of handles is only achieved when the art of the potter has been well advanced.
Fig. 234.—Bottle with Incised Ornament, from Cesnola. (P. & C.)
Fig. 235.—Bottle with Geometric Decoration. (P. & C.)
The two vases (Figs. 234, 235) are of the oldest dates, and are decorated purely in the oldest form of geometric ornament. The one with the handle is particularly good in form, and has the decoration incised like sgraffito work. Fantastic shapes of animals made as vases and drinking vessels were very common in Cyprus. Although not many of them can be called beautiful, still it required considerable skill and knowledge to model them (Fig. 236). The goat-shaped vessel is very lifelike. The bowl or crater (Fig. 237) has the lotus flower and geometric bands and divisions for its decoration; it is painted with light brown and red on a cream-coloured ground. The decoration from a cup is more elaborate, it has a new element in the shape of some kind of water bird arranged Assyrian-like on each side of the sacred tree, and has a sun sign filling up a space close to one of the bird’s legs (Fig. 238). Another very interesting and beautiful vase is the Œnochoé (Fig. 239). Another bird is painted on this, and at the same time the geometric checkers and lines still cling to it as part of the decoration. On this vase, also, may be seen two moon signs, and the sacred sun sign, the fylfot, or swastika, repeated four times. These sacred signs are often found on Cyprian pottery. The latter vase in shape and decoration is more Greek in feeling than most Cyprian vases. The larger Œnochoé (Fig. 240) has the human figure with some kind of water fowls; it has a sacred sign on its lips. Though the subject recalls Egypt, the design and execution might have been done by a clever Greek artist. The style of execution and drawing on these vases may be a little archaic, but the design and bold manner of execution is eminently correct and could not be better for the decoration of pottery.
Fig. 236.—Vessel in the Shape of a Goat. (P. & C.)
Fig. 237.—Bowl in the Piot Collection, height 6¾ ins. (P. & C.)
The discovery of glass making has been attributed to the Phœnicians, but this is not correct; the Egyptians made glass articles, and used glass in their vitreous enamelled tiles and bricks long before the Phœnicians had any connection with Egypt. It was most likely because the Phœnicians traded so much in glass, and for the reasons also that they had large glass manufactories at Tyre and other places, that they have received the credit from early times of being the inventors of glass. The oldest dated glass bottle or vase in the world is one from Egypt, and now in the British Museum. It bears the name of Thothmes III. (B.C. 1600). The body is turquoise blue with yellow details of decoration and hieroglyphics; the handle is dark blue with yellow and white markings.
The Phœnicians at a later period were extensive makers of glass articles, and made glass of three kinds, the clear and transparent, but always with a slight greenish hue, the coloured and transparent, and the opaque.
Fig. 238.—Detail of the Decoration of a Cup. (P. & C.)
A great quantity of glass bottles, statuettes, vases, plaques, and beads have been found in Cyprus. The bottles and vases that were prized most highly were decorated chiefly in alternating lines of bright colours, such as blues, greens, yellows, white, and purple. Beads, cones, amulets, scarabs, heads of animals, and statuettes, as well as bottles and vases, were made both by Phœnician and Egyptian workmen, some cast in moulds and some blown. There is a cup in the French National Library called the cup of Chosroes II., made of glass, and decorated with artificial gems. The finest work of art in glass is the famous Portland vase in the British Museum. The decoration on this vase is in relief in cameo glass.
Fig. 239.—Œnochoé, New York Museum. (P. & C.)
The small cylindrical perfume bottles in glass known as alabastrons are of the highest antiquity; they were usually placed in the hands of the dead.
In the art of weaving and making textiles the Phœnicians are not credited with making anything different from the Orientals or Egyptians, and perhaps supplied themselves with the Egyptian muslins and linens, and had their rugs and carpets from the East, which were famed then as now for their soft nature and brightness of colouring. We have evidence from Homer that the Sidonian slaves were very skilful at embroidery. “With threads of gold, or with a colour contrasting with that of the ground, they drew fantastic beasts of every kind.”
These embroideries would likely have similar decoration to that which is found on the metal platters, and perhaps imitations of those decorations we see on the embroidered robes of the Assyrian kings’ mantles (Figs. 162A, 163A), and the scheme of decoration would likely be a division of the field into bands and circles, each filled with Egyptian or Assyrian motives.
Fig. 240.—Œnochoé, New York Museum. (P. & C.)
In Cyprus, we can easily infer that the textiles would be strongly influenced, as other manufactures were, by Egyptian art. The Phœnicians were noted for their famous purple dye obtained from the Murex and Purpura families of shell-fish. This purple dye was of world-wide renown. Its great advantage was that on its exposure to light and sunshine it became more fast and more intense in colour, which is contrary to most dyes. It was very costly by reason of the difficulty in extracting it from the fish, and of the enormous quantities required to produce even a small quantity of the dye. The city of Tyre had extensive factories for the manufacture of the Tyrian purple. It is not obtained now from the shell-fish, as, of course, many other ways and cheaper have been found to produce a similar colour.
Fig. 241.—Intaglio on Chalcedony.
(P. & C.)
The Phœnicians were adepts at ivory-carving, shell-engraving, and gem-cutting (Fig. 241), as many examples of these arts have been found, but we regret that the limitations of this volume prevent us from going into these subjects as fully as we might wish.
CHAPTER X.
ART IN ANCIENT PERSIA.
Persia occupies what is known as the tableland of Iran, and is a plateau bounded on the north by the Elburz Mountains, Armenia, and Afghanistan; the Bol-ur and Hindu-Kush in the east; the heights that are parallel to the Indian Ocean in the south; and the Persian Gulf, the chains of Zagros, and Ararat in the west.
The Zagros Mountains separated Persia on that portion of the Iran plateau from Assyria, which was known as part of Media. The Assyrians under Tiglath-Pileser scaled these mountains and conquered the Medes.
The Medes have always been considered with the Persians as forming part of one nation, being closely related to each other in language, religion, manners, and customs.
The Medes were the first to emerge from barbarism, owing to their nearness to the Assyrians. After the conquest of Babylon (B.C. 539) the Medes and the Persians descended from their mountains into the valley of the Tigris, under Cyrus, the first Persian king of the Achæmenidæan dynasty. The name Achæmenidæ was given by the Greeks to the descendants of a native chief called Akhamanish, and one of the oldest families of Persia. Cyrus marched through Asia Minor to Asiatic Greece, seized all the cities on his way, and made them pay tribute. Under Cambyses (B.C. 527) the countries of Syria, Palestine, Phœnicia, Assyria, Babylonia, and Egypt—nearly all the old-world civilisation from the Mediterranean to the Indus—belonged to the Persian Empire. Hostilities were kept up between the Asiatics and Hellenes for two hundred years, until Alexander the Great ended them at the battles of Issus and Arbela (334-330 B.C.). For nearly a century Persia was under the vassalage of the Greeks, but still kept her ancient customs and her ancient cult of fire-worship, the national religion, although this was in a great measure undermined and weakened by the teachings of the Greek conquerors.
Fig. 242.—Naksh-i-Rustem, General View of the Rock-cut Tombs. (F.C.)
Fig. 243.—Persepolis. Tomb on the North-east. Elevation. (F.C.)
The Greeks were, in turn, overthrown by the Parthians, a northern Asiatic tribe who ruled in Persia down to B.C. 226, when the native Sassanidæ family of the south restored Persia to her former freedom, and installed again the ancient worship of Ahurâ-Mazda, and also tried to restore the art of the First Dynasty. The Greek and Roman influence was, however, too strong at this period to be entirely shaken off, in spite of the renewed display of patriotism. For instance, a great quantity of Greek furniture, utensils, and figures of Greek gods must have found their way into Persia during the reign of the Seleucidæ—the Greek rulers—and must have influenced the native Persian art; besides borrowed ideas from the art objects and other things that the Persians at a former time pillaged from the Greek temples and carried home with them. When the Arabs finally overthrew the Sassanid Dynasty and conquered Persia, the state religion of fire-worship was proscribed, but the Moslem religion never took the same hold in Persia as it did in other countries, the Persians adopting the secular form of it—the Shiah—as opposed to the more devout form, the Sunni. To this reason is assigned the independence of Persia to the present day amongst the other Moslem countries of the world.
Fig. 244.—Funeral Tower at Naksh-i-Rustem. (D.) (P. & C.)
It was during the period of the First Empire that the greatest works in architecture first appeared in Persia. It is clear from the remains of this period that the national architecture of Persia was composed of a mixture of Assyrian, Egyptian, and Greek elements, blended together in an original way. The artists and architects who produced the national Persian style were hardly native Persians, as there was no previous style of any importance in Persia on which such great works as the famous palaces could be founded or developed from. It is, therefore, quite likely that the artists and architects were of Phœnician or Greek nationality. Indeed, records of Greek names appear on the buildings as architects of some of the palaces of the best periods, and ancient history mentions the names of more than one Greek sculptor that was brought to Persia for this purpose by the victorious kings, and induced to work for them by being well treated and cared for. Many of the Greek artists were also political refugees who found employment and a hearty welcome in Persia.
It was when Cyrus had become master of Western Asia that the Persians began to think of building the famous palaces at Persepolis, Susa, and Pasargadæ. Most of these palaces and the tombs were built of a close-grained limestone that is found very plentiful in the mountainous country of Persia. The royal tombs were, as a rule, cut out of the living limestone rock (Fig. 242). They are of the time of Darius, and are all of one type that seems to have been invented by one mind, and, after the first was cut, speos-like, out of the native rock—probably that of Darius itself—the rest were copied faithfully from it. The great height from the ground of the tomb itself was arranged for safety from violation. The sculptured figure of the king is represented near the top, in the act of worshipping the sacred fire seen on the right; at the centre of the top of the field is seen the emblem of the god Ahurâ-Mazda and the sun disk (Fig. 243). An older form of tomb, the “built” tomb, is seen at the right of the rock-cut tombs, and a larger illustration of this rectangular cemetery is seen at Fig. 244. The latter type of tomb belongs to the time of Cyrus.
We must not look for much in the way of religious architecture in Ancient Persia. Where temples in other countries were required, fire-altars took their place in Persia (Fig. 245). These altars, by reason of their uses, were generally found in “high places,” on summits of hills and on rocks.
Fig. 245.—Fire Altars, Naksh-i-Rustem. (F.C.) (P. & C.)
The fire-altars at Naksh-i-Rustem are really one with the rock on which they stand. Remains of a fire-temple have been discovered at Ferûz-abad, which is supposed to have had a roof; but the ends of the temple would be open, with the sacred hearth on the top and centre of a lofty flight of steps, on a quadrangular plan.
Fig. 246.—Persepolis; Staircase of the Palace of Darius. (D.) (P. & C.)
Fig. 247.—Fragment of a Door-Frame from a Hypostyle Hall, Sausa. (D.) (P. & C.)
The buildings in Persia of the Achæmenidæ Dynasty, both palaces and tombs, are of the pillar and beam, or the architrave system of construction. The horizontal ceilings were of wood, and were panelled very elaborately, and rested on stone supports. The doorways and windows are square-headed, upholding a lintel (Fig. 248).
Face and Profile of Principle Doorways. Face and Profile of Lateral Doorways. Profile of Window. Face of Cornice. Profile of Niche.
Fig. 248.—Elevations and Sections of Doorways and Windows of a Palace at Persepolis. (F.C.) (P. & C.)
Fig. 249.—Persepolis, Doorway to Royal Tomb. (D.) (P. & C.)
The doorway, at Fig. 249, of a royal tomb, is a very rich specimen of a decorated Persian doorway. The Egyptian “gorge” is seen in the cornice, but the Persian treatment of this feature is shown in the channelled grooves, with imbricated markings between each channel. The rosettes, too numerous here to be in good taste, are evidently borrowed from the Assyrians. The door-frame, from Susa (Fig. 247), restored by Dieulafoy, is, on the contrary, a beautiful example of good proportion and restraint in decoration. It would pass for an example of Greek work in its classic simplicity.
Fig. 250.—View of a Group of Domed Buildings, from an Assyrian Bas-relief.
Layard. (P. & C.)
The walls of the palaces were usually crenellated or embattled (Figs. [246] and [261]).
Fig. 251.—Palace at Sarvistan, Principal Façade. (F.C.) (P. & C.) Example of Domed and Vaulted Structure.
The staircase walls and other parts of the buildings were often covered with tiles made of a white cement, and enamelled in colour decoration. These have been found chiefly at Susa. The principal parts or body of the building were of stone or brick, and the upper parts were supposed to be of wood. This is correctly inferred by the stepped notches still to be seen in the antæ, or corner piers of stone, which must have been cut in this way to receive the ends of the ceiling beams (Perrot & Chipiez). Wood was a scarce material in Persia, and must have been brought from the Elburz Mountains at a great cost of time and labour; but this would be nothing to a king like Darius, whose revenue was reckoned at about £27,000,000 of English money.
Fig. 252.—Column with Volute Capital, Persepolis.
Fig. 253.—Base of Pillar at Susa. (D.) (P. & C.)
Remains of Persian buildings of another order, the vaulted structures (Fig. 251), have been found at Sarvistan and Ferūz-abad, in the province of Fars (Ancient Persia), which some archæologists have ascribed to the time of the Sassinid Dynasty, the construction of which is supposed to have been derived from their prototypes, the domed and vaulted buildings of Assyria (see Fig. 250).
Fig. 254.—Base and Capital from Persepolis; Propylæa. (F.C.) (P. & C.)
Fig. 255.—Capital and Base from Hypostyle Hall of Xerxes, Persepolis. (F.C.) (P. & C.)]
Fig. 256.—Upright of Royal Throne, Naksh-i-Rustem. (F.C.) (P. & C.)
The most distinctly Persian feature in all the architecture of Persia is undoubtedly the column with its double-bull-headed capital (Fig. 254). Archæologists are divided in opinion as to whether it is derived from Egyptian or from Assyrian sources. If it is a borrowed idea, the Persians may certainly be credited with developing the supposed idea into something wonderfully unique and interesting as a capital. The name Zoophoros (life-bearing) has been given to it. Perrot and Chipiez (from whom the illustrations are taken) say that the capital was in design an inspiration from the Assyrian national standard (Fig. 161), while Dieulafoy ascribes to it an Egyptian origin. The former appear to have the best of the argument, for there is nothing in Egyptian ornament that comes so near it as the animals of the Assyrian standard, as regards position, but the supposed resemblance of idea even is not very clear in this case.
Fig. 257.—Staircase Wall of the Palace of Xerxes at Persepolis. (F.C.) (P. & C.)
Fig. 258.—Crowning Wall of Staircase, Palace of Xerxes, Persepolis.
The base of the Persian bull-headed columns is almost as unique in its way as the capital. It is of the shape known as Campaniform, and consists of an inverted bell of beautiful contour, richly decorated with falling leaves, a torus moulding and fillet connecting it with the shaft (Fig. 253).
Fig. 259.—Temple in a Royal Park. (B.M.) (P. & C.)
Another capital has, instead of the bull heads, a lion’s head, with the horn of a unicorn. This capital is wanting in the volutes and lower capital. It is as poor, in this respect, as the voluted capital is doubly rich, and can hardly be called beautiful (Fig. 255). It belongs to the hypostyle hall of Xerxes, at Persepolis.
The shaft of the Persian column is channelled or fluted in nearly all cases, and the number of flutings is very great, being from thirty-two to fifty-two, while the Egyptian column has never more than sixteen, and the Greek from sixteen to twenty-four. The great characteristic of the Persian column is its slender and airy appearance. At Persepolis the total height is twelve diameters of its shaft. Some are even more slender than this. The Egyptian averages, in contrast, from five to six diameters, and the Greek seven to nine. The Persian column had its origin in timber supports.
Fig. 260.—Enamelled Ornament on Bricks from Susa. Drawn by Gautier. (P. & C.)
Besides the unique capitals and bases in Persian art there is not much of the ancient Persian ornament and decoration that does not strongly partake of foreign influences. The upright support of the royal throne (Fig. 256) is distinctly Assyrian in feeling, and the upper horizontal moulding is very like Greek work. A moulding is seen on the upper rounded edges of the staircase (Fig. 246) and on the inner portion of the parapet wall (Fig. 257) of an elongated egg shape, which is one of the rare exceptions of ornament that is really Persian.
Fig. 261.—Upper Part of Parapet Wall, Susa. (P. & C.)
The Assyrian daisy, patera, or rosette is a very characteristic ornament in Persian decoration (Figs. 249, 258). This is also a typical ornament in Greek architecture. Two well-known ornamental forms of Assyrian ornament occur on the crowning wall of the staircase of the Palace of Xerxes (Fig. 258), the cone-shaped pine-tree form, and the palmate-crowned tree stem. The prototype of the former may be seen as an ideal rendering from nature of the cypress or pine-tree (Fig. 259) in the Assyrian illustration of a royal park. The contour of this ornament may have reminded the Persian fire-worshippers of the flame shape, which circumstance may have accounted for their fondness for using it so much. The other adjoining palmate ornament is distinctly Assyrian; as also are the daisy borders. A common form of ornament is seen on the enamelled bricks from Susa (Fig. 260) consisting of a double palmate or lotus form of flower, alternating and joined to concentric circles to form a band. Below is an Egyptian chevron rather out of proportion to the rest of the design. The whole thing has a decided Egyptian look, and may be a copy of the enamelled ornament of that country.
Fig. 262.—Lion, from the Lion Frieze in Enamelled Bricks at Susa. (P. & C.)
The Persian palaces were richly decorated with enamelled bricks and tiles, in strong blue, orange, white, and brown colouring, as the archer’s and lion’s friezes from Susa (now in the Louvre) testify. These two works are reproduced in colours in Perrot and Chipiez’ “History of Art in Persia.” The upper part of the crenellated parapet wall of the staircase at Susa gives an idea of the extreme richness of the decoration in glazed tiles with enamelled covering (Fig. 261). The Persians learnt their art of enamelling tiles and bricks from the Chaldeans, and they have never lost it. Under the Moslem rule in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, the tiles and majolica that were made for the decoration of the mosques reached a high stage of perfection, especially in the colouring. This beauty is seen more particularly in the deep azure grounds, and in their treatment of conventional flower decoration that has never been surpassed in any country. This subject will be further treated in the future notice of modern Persian ornament.
Fig. 263.—Head of one of the Lions from the Frieze at Susa. (P. & C.)
In animal and figure design, the Persians closely imitated the Assyrians and Chaldeans, but were not so successful in their general treatment of them. The lion was one of the most favourite animals in Persian art. The lions in the “lion frieze” at Susa were represented with more than usual vigour and ability. This frieze remains the finest work of Persian design that is yet known to us, and probably was the work of a Chaldean artist employed by the great Persian king, Darius, to decorate his palace at Susa. (See Figs. 262, 263).
CHAPTER XI.
GRECIAN PEOPLE AND MYTHOLOGY.
The early inhabitants of Greece were the Pelasgians, a people who had the reputation of being great builders. At Athens, around the Acropolis, and at other places, remains of huge walls, made of unsquared stones laid in mud, have been found; these are the remains of the Pelasgian walls. The oldest historians were not disposed to make any difference between the Hellenes and the Pelasgians, but see in the former a continuation merely of the old Pelasgi stock. The Dorians came from the mountains of Thessaly, and steadily gained an ascendancy over the other tribes of Greece.
The Ionians in the East gave an Oriental colouring to Hellas, both in manners, customs, and in art. There were three dialects in the language of the Greeks: the Doric, broad and soft; the Ionic, melodious and rich; and the Æolic, a mixture to which nothing of a special character is given, except that it is the nearest to the Latin.
The Greeks were a light-hearted and joyous race: they worshipped their gods in everything they did—in running, wrestling and dancing, in building, carving, and painting, in writing and reciting of poetry; their whole life was one of intense artistic devotion, and all their works of art were so many prayers to their gods. Whatever may have been the racial differences of the Hellenic peoples, they united all their physical and intellectual efforts to perfect their civilisation. They emerged from archaic barbarism step by step, to such a refinement of culture that has had no parallel in the history of nations.
It would be impossible to give an outline of Grecian or Roman art without describing at least the outlines of their religious beliefs as shadowed forth in their myths and in their plastic representations of the same. It would be advisable, therefore, to sketch, in as brief a manner as possible, some of the superior deities and their attributes, in order to understand better the art that was the glory of Greece and the grandeur of Rome.
The Theogony, or myths that relate to the origin of the Greek gods, includes that of the Romans, since the latter did not trouble themselves with the inventing of any origins for their gods, but simply borrowed them, as they did all their art, direct from the Greeks, merely substituting Latin names for their borrowed deities, instead of the original Greek ones.
Zeus (Jupiter) was the Supreme god of the Greeks, chief of the Olympian deities, the “Sky Father,” the ruler and controller of the universe, dispenser of the thunder and lightning, rain, hail, and fertilising dew. Before the birth of Zeus, the Greek poets tell us that Ge (the earth) first emerged from Chaos, and separated itself immediately from Tartarus (the abyss beneath), and that Eros, or love, then first sprang into existence. Ge (the earth) then begat Uranus (the mountains and the heavens), and Pontus (the sea).
By the union of the earth and Uranus, the twelve Titans came into existence. They represented the elementary forces of nature; there were also from this union the three Cyclops, thunder, lightning, and sheet-lightning, and the three Centimanes (hundred-handed), which are supposed to represent the stormy winds, the stormy sea, and the earthquakes.
By union with Pontus, the earth became the mother of many fabulous sea-deities. Other deities, offspring of the Titans, are Helios, the Sun; Selene, the Moon; Eos, the dawn. From Cœus and Phœbe, deities of the night, are Leto (dark night) and Asteria, (starry night). Cronus and Rhea, of the family of the Titans, had six children, the youngest of whom was the great god Zeus. He was rescued from the fate of being swallowed by his father, as his five brothers and sisters had been, and was brought up secretly in a grotto, on Mount Dicte, in Crete, was nursed by nymphs and the she-goat Amalthea, whilst the bees brought him honey to eat. Thus the youthful Zeus grew up in secrecy until he became a mighty god. The first of his exploits was to attack his father, and compel him to restore to life again his five brothers and sisters. He then found it was necessary for his supremacy to fight the Titans, who disputed his authority, which he did from his stand on Mount Olympus, in Thessaly, while the Titans fought from the opposite Mount Othrys. This fight lasted for ten years, and ended in the defeat of the Titans.
After this battle Zeus shared the ruling of the world with his two brothers, Poseidon (Neptune) and Hades (Pluto); the former he set as ruler over the sea, and the latter as king of the infernal regions. About this time the earth had produced another enemy to vex the peace of Zeus—Typhœus, a monster with a hundred fire-breathing dragons’ heads, which Zeus was obliged to fight also. After a mighty battle the thunderbolts of Zeus prevailed, and the monster was cast into Tartarus, or as Virgil and Pindar have it, into Mount Ætna, in Sicily, where he still shows his anger at times, by breathing out fire and flames against the majesty of heaven. Another battle still is recorded to the credit of Zeus before he was able to enjoy his undisputed dominion over the world, that is the battle with the Giants, when they attempted to scale the sacred Olympus by “piling Ossa on Pelion.” Zeus and his adherent gods were again victorious, and remained ever after the undisputed lords of Olympus.
The story of the battle with the Giants, the Giganto-Machia, formed a favourite subject for illustration with the Greek sculptors. The cameo of Athenion depicts Zeus in his chariot, and the Giants attacking, having snakes for their legs (Fig. 264).
Zeus was the national god of the Greeks, and was first worshipped on high places and mountain tops long before any temples were raised to his honour. He was worshipped all over Greece, and one of his earliest shrines was at Dordona, in Epirus. The greatest of all his shrines was at Olympia, on the northern banks of the Alpheus. It was here that the Olympian games were celebrated.
Fig. 264.—Cameo of Athenion.
It was also here that the great statue of Zeus was set up, which was the work of the renowned Greek sculptor Phidias (B.C. 500-432). This famous statue of the supreme god of the Greeks was a seated figure on a lofty throne, and was more than 40 feet high. It was made of, or probably covered over with, plates of ivory and gold (chryselephantine); the ivory plates covered the exposed parts of the flesh. In his right hand he held a figure of Victory, also made of ivory and gold. The sculptor sought to give his statue a look of sublime majesty, as the ruler of gods and men, and, at the same time, a kindly expression of benevolence, as the gracious father and dispenser of good gifts to mankind. Thousands are said to have come from great distances in order to gaze on this masterpiece of the greatest sculptor of Greece. It remained in its place for more than eight hundred years, and was supposed to have been destroyed by fire in the time of Theodosius III. The coins of Elis have a seated figure, and the head of Zeus on them (Fig. 265).
Fig. 265.—Coins of Elis with the Phidian Zeus (after Overbeck).
A supposed copy of the head of the god is in the Vatican Museum. It was found at Otricoli in the last century (Fig. 266).
The worship of Jupiter was also universal in Italy; many temples have been erected to his honour. The most famous of these was the one erected by Tarquin on the Capitol at Rome. It had a statue of Jupiter, the work of the Greek artist Apollonius, made of ivory and gold, and said to be a copy of the Phidian Zeus.
Fig. 266.—Zeus of Otricoli, Vatican Museum.
Zeus is credited with a numerous family. He produced Pallas Athene from his own head; the birth of Athene is supposed to have formed part of the subject of the sculptures on the pediment of the Parthenon (Temple of Athene at Athens) the remains of which are in the British Museum, but unfortunately the central figures of the pediment are wanting which depicted the event.
One of his goddess-wives was Themis, of the Titan family, whose children are the Fates. Dione was his Dodonian wife, by whom he had as daughter Aphrodite (Venus). The Arcadian Zeus had for his wife Maia, who was the mother of Hermes (Mercury). By Demeter (Ceres) he had a daughter Persephone (Proserpina), the flower goddess. By Eurynome, the Graces, and by Leto (Latona) Apollo and Artemis (Diana).
Later mythology recognises Hera (Juno), his sister, to be his only legitimate wife (Fig. 267), and by her he had his children Ares (Mars), Hephæstus (Vulcan), and Hebe.
Fig. 267.—Head of Hera, perhaps after Polycletus.
His earthly mistresses were Semele, daughter of Cadmus, King of the Greek Thebes, and mother of Dionysus (Bacchus) and others; Leda, Danaë, Alcmene, Europa, and Io.
The Roman Jupiter had at first no family, nor wives, but later, when the Greek influences were more strongly developed in Roman mythology, he was made to be the son of Saturn, and had Juno for his wife, and Minerva (Athene) for his daughter.
Hera (Juno) is the feminine counterpart of Zeus (Jupiter). She represents air or atmosphere, is the queen of heaven, and is the guardian goddess of marriage ties with both Greeks and Romans. The peacock, goose, and the cuckoo as the herald of spring, are sacred to her. The beautiful head (Fig. 267) of Hera is supposed to be the work of Polycletus, a celebrated Greek sculptor.
Pallas Athene (Minerva) is the great virgin goddess of wisdom, of the dawn, and of war. According to some Greek accounts she sprang forth to life from her father’s head (Zeus) fully armed with helmet and spear, chanting a war song, at which event the whole earth and sea trembled with commotion. She is represented in sculpture as the war goddess, in flowing robes with helmet and spear, and wearing the dreadful ægis, the breastplate of mail, with the snakes and head of Medusa, that “turned all men to stone who gazed on it” (Fig. 268). The serpent, the owl, and the cock are sacred to her.
Apollo was the favourite son of Zeus, and was a great god with both Greeks and Romans. He is the god of light, of music, and of healing. He is sometimes the god of death, sending out his arrows of sunshine that often breeds pestilence, as well as giving health. His favourite instrument is the lyre, which he plays at the feasts of the gods. His sons were Orpheus, the god of music, and Asclepius (Æsculapius), god of healing. Delphi was the chief seat of his worship, where a gorgeous temple was erected to him.
There the priestess Pythia uttered the oracles that were supposed to come to her ears alone, from out of a cleft in the rock under the sacred tripod, from which also issued gaseous vapours. These oracles were sacred words of advice or warning for those who came to consult them. Other oracles of Apollo were at Didyma near Miletus, at Clarus, and at Thebes.
Fig. 268.—Athene Polias (Villa Albani).
The Roman Emperor Augustus erected a great temple to Apollo on the Palatine Hill, in which was placed the celebrated statue of Apollo Citharædus (Apollo with the lyre), a work by the famous Greek sculptor Scopas. The statues of Apollo are of two kinds: one represents him as a conquering deity, strong and handsome, of youthful beauty both in face and body (Fig. 270); the other is in the more benign character of the Pythian lute player, with long flowing garments of a feminine nature, and with a pleasing expression. Scopas and Praxiteles made many statues of Apollo; copies of some of these are still in existence. These sculptors flourished about B.C. 400. The celebrated statue of the youthful Apollo known as the Apollo Sauroctonus (the lizard slayer) is a work of Praxiteles.
Fig. 269.—Pallas Athene, Naples.
Fig. 270.—Apollo Belvedere, Vatican.
Aphrodite (Venus) was “born of the sea foam,” as some say near to the island of Cyprus, where she was first supposed to touch the land; many temples were built to her worship in this island. She was the goddess of love and beauty, and of the generative and creative forces in nature; the goddess of spring, and all kinds of fertility, both in celestial and terrestrial regions. She was the favourite deity of the Grecian mariners, and was worshipped in Cyprus and the isles of Greece more than any other divinity. Iris in the Tempest, in referring to Venus, says—
“I met her deity
Cutting the clouds towards Paphos, and her son
Dove-drawn with her.”
The story of her love for Adonis, and of his death and coming to life again, is but the decay of nature in autumn, and its resuscitation in the spring. The Seasons and the Graces are her attendants, who dress and adorn her. She is accompanied by Eros and Hymen, the gods of love and marriage. Venus of the Romans is the goddess of spring, and the month of April was held sacred to her by the early Italians. She was also, with them, the goddess of love and marriage.
The best artists of Greece put forth all their powers in painting and sculpture in their representations of the seaborn Aphrodite, and if we except Zeus himself, there is no other divinity of the Greek mythology that has served so much as a model for the loveliest creations of the plastic genius of the Greeks. The grandest conception of the goddess as a work of art is the Venus of Milo, found in 1820 in the island of Melos (Milo) (Fig. 271), and now in the Louvre. The grandeur and majesty of this famous piece of sculpture is beyond praise. It ought to be seen in the Louvre, to be appreciated at its worth, as drawings and casts do not give an adequate idea of its beauty. The Medicean Venus is a work of the Athenian artist Cleomenes, of the later Attic school, in the second century B.C. A statue of Venus Anadyomene (rising from the sea), of “Venus crouching in the Bath” (Vatican collection), and of “Venus loosing her Sandal,” are all of this later and declining period of Greek sculpture, where the goddess is represented undraped and more realistic in conception. Venus had many attributes. The dove, sparrow, and the dolphin, and in plants the myrtle, rose, apple, poppy, and lime-tree, were sacred to her, but varied according to the locality and times.
Fig. 271.—Venus of Milo.
Fig. 272.—Statue of Hermes, Capitol.
Hermes (Mercury) is the god of shepherds and of pastures, and also of commerce and trade. When a child he invented the lyre from a tortoise-shell which he was forced to give up to Apollo. He is represented with wings on his cap and feet, and a herald’s staff as the messenger of the gods, and with a well-filled purse as an emblem of trade (Fig. 272).
Fig. 273.—Diana of Versailles.
Artemis (Diana) was the twin-sister of Apollo, and was at first the goddess of the moon. Her favourite amusement is the chase, but in the statue (Fig. 273) from the Villa Hadrian, now in the Louvre, she is represented as the protectress of wild animals.
Fig. 274.—Melpomene, Vatican.
Mnemosyne (Memory) is the mother of the Muses. The nine Muses are—Clio (history), Melpomene (tragedy) (Fig. 274), Terpsichore (dancing), Polyhymnia (religious service), Thalia (comedy), Urania (astronomy), Euterpe (lyric poetry), Erato (erotic poetry and geometry), and Calliope (epic poetry and science generally).
Fig. 275.—Dionysus and the Lion, from the Monument of Lysikrates.
Dionysus or Bacchus is, with both Greeks and Romans, the god of wine, of vineyards, and of autumn blessings. Naxos was the chief seat of his worship. It was on this island that he met and married Ariadne, the daughter of Minos, King of Crete, who had been deserted here by Theseus, her former lover. The story of Dionysus punishing the Tyrrhenian pirates who took him prisoner, intending to sell him as a slave, and of his changing himself to a lion and so terrifying the sailors, who jumped overboard and were changed into dolphins, is the subject of the fine relief on the frieze of the Lysikrates monument (Fig. 275 and [Frontispiece]).
The lion, tiger, bull, and ram are his favourite animal attributes.[attributes.] Among plants, the vine, the ivy, and the laurel were sacred to him.
Bacchanalian subjects and festivals of Dionysus occupy a large and important place in the art of Greece, Rome, and Pompeii.
Fig. 276.—Victory, Munich Collection.
Nice, Victoria, or Victory is always represented with wings, a palm branch, and holding a laurel wreath, and, as would be expected, was more extensively venerated at Rome than in Greece. In the latter country her statues are generally of a small size, and she is an accompanying goddess to Athene and Zeus (Fig. 276).
CHAPTER XII.
ART IN PRIMITIVE GREECE.
It was not only on their temples and images of their gods that the Greeks put their best efforts in art; but in their vases, jewellery, furniture, and humbler utensils of the household and of every-day life, we find the Greek artist pouring out some of his richest fancies, and the same spell of beauty is cast over them all. And did not Pericles, the son of Xanthippus, eulogise his countrymen in his famous speech on those who had fallen in the Peleponnesian War, as “lovers of justice and wisdom,” “philosophers, lovers of beauty, and foremost among men”?
In Egypt, Assyria, and Persia we find all the artistic knowledge of these countries was lavished on the temples, and to the glorification of their autocratic rulers; but scarcely any remains are found that would imply a fostering of the minor arts among the common people. On the contrary, in Greece art impregnated the life and work of all classes, from the highest to the lowest in the state. This was only possible when entire freedom prevailed, as it did in the mass of the Greek people.[people.]
Some of the oldest monuments of primitive Greece have been found at Mycenæ, Troy (Hissarlik), and Tiryns. These consist of domed tombs, such as the tomb of Agamemnon, or the so-called “Treasure-house” of Atreus, and others, as the rock-cut tombs. The site of ancient “Troy divine” was discovered by Dr. Schliemann in the year 1875, under the mound of the modern Hissarlik, in the Trojan plain, in the north-west corner of Asia Minor. The character of the stone, clay, wood, and lime materials, and similarity of the construction, enable the archæologist to place the remains found at these three places as belonging to the same epoch of time and style of art which has been called Mycenian. The oldest monument of Greek sculpture yet discovered is supposed to be the Lion’s Gate of the Mycenian Acropolis (Fig. 277).
Fig. 277.—Perspective View of the Lion’s Gate. (P. & C.)
Fig. 278.—Alabaster Frieze, Tiryns. (P. & C.)
Fig. 279.—Plan of Fig. 278, Alabaster Frieze. (P. & C.)
Pausanias thus alludes to Mycenæ and Tiryns:—"A portion of the enclosure wall still remains, and the principal gate, with the lions over it. These (the walls) were built by the Cyclops who made the wall at Tiryns for Præteus. Among the ruins at Mycenæ is the fountain called Perseia, and the subterraneous buildings of Atreus and his children, in which their treasures were stored."
Fig. 280.—Ivory Plaque from Mycenæ. (P. & C.)
Fig. 281.—Fragment of Frieze from Mycenæ. (P. & C.)
The sculptured lions are still there, so is the spring Perseia, and the wonderful treasure-house of Atreus is still the best preserved of all the domed tomb buildings of Mycenæ.
Fig. 282.—Mycenian Palace, Second Epoch. Architrave and Frieze. (P. & C.)
Fig. 283.—Mycenian Palace, Second Epoch. Restoration of Entablature. (P. & C.)
Fig. 284.—Entablature of C. Selinous Temple. (P. & C.)
From the remains of Mycenian architecture, Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez have ingeniously restored some of the wooden construction of the palaces of that early period, and have assumed that, from these early wooden constructions of Mycenæ, the Greeks developed the renowned order of Doric architecture. We have seen that, in most countries, stone architecture, in its earliest stages, was but copies of the earlier wooden construction. The Doric order seems to have been no exception to this rule, for here again the stone-cutter has borrowed from the carpenter. To go back for some of the supposed beginnings of the Doric frieze, the alabaster frieze, shown in plan and elevation at Figs. 278 and 279, has been found in the ruins of a palace at Tiryns.
Fig. 285.—Vase of Woman’s Form, Troy. (P. & C.)
The pattern of this frieze is the same as that which has been frequently found on other fragments from Mycenæ. It resembles the Doric triglyphs and metopes in consisting of a double design; two semicircles back to back, divided by a vertical rectangular band, which is subdivided by a vertical central division, having rosettes arranged vertically on either side. Two similar designs are seen on the ivory plaque (Figs. 280 and 281) and fragment of frieze from Mycenæ. The same design appears also on the red porphyry fragments of the façade decoration on the Mycenian beehive tombs.
Fig. 286.—Vase from Troy. (P. & C.)
An illustration from Perrot and Chipiez shows an assemblage of the component parts of this frieze pattern, with a portion of the architrave in wood (Fig. 282).
We refer the reader for a fuller description of the transition of the Doric entablature from the Mycenian wood construction to Perrot and Chipiez’ “Art in Primitive Greece,” Vol. II. We extract a portion in explanation of the illustrations (Figs. 282 and 283), where the analogy between the wooden construction of the former and the stone construction of the latter is clearly established.
Fig. 287.—Pilgrim’s Bottle, Ialysos. (P. & C.)
Fig. 288.—Three-Handled Amphora, Ialysos. (P. & C.)
In Fig. 284 we have the entablature of the C. Temple of Selinous (one of the oldest examples of Doric architecture), rendered famous by the archaic sculptures embellishing its metopes. There is not one of all the members we have passed in review but which appears in it. Thus, a pair of stone beams, corresponding with the like number of timbers in the Mycenian wood frame, constitute the architrave; and under listel C surmounting it, peers, flush with the triglyphs, the small plank B.
Fig. 289.—Vase with Geometric Decoration. (P. & C.)
Its lower section is adorned by the ornament known as guttæ, the origin and meaning of which had hitherto been unsatisfactorily explained. The guttæ are cylindrical in shape detached from the walls, and in every respect identical with the wooden pegs which occur in this situation below the timber entablature. These same pegs again appear above the frieze in the semblance of another ornamental form, the “mutules” which, until lately, had seemed every whit as strange and problematical as the guttæ. The stone table N, in the lower surface of which the guttæ are carved, is no other than our old wood-plate, which in the Mycenian carpentry work exhibits these same saliences or pegs, and served to fix the lining of the joists below. If the Selinous mutules are sloped, it is because they are associated with a ridged roof; but as a flat covering has been assumed for Mycenæ, it involved—without prejudice to the system—a horizontal position for the mutules. As regards the frieze, both here and in every Doric building, it invariably consists, like the alabaster frieze, of pillars D alternating with slabs E. The function of the pillars (triglyphs) is to maintain the slabs (metopes) in place.
Fig. 290.—The Marseilles Ewer. (P. & C.)
Comparison between these two figures will further show all the details, with slight modifications, to be practically similar. Thus, the whole of the Doric order, the basis of all Greek architecture, including the column, longitudinal beams, and joists supporting the roof, as well as the secondary decorative construction, had its origin in wooden construction, and there is hardly any doubt but that the Mycenian palace was its prototype. The Greeks of later days forgot the borrowing of the timber construction, and have given names to some parts, such as “guttæ” (drops), which ought to be more correctly pegs.
Fig. 291.—Gold Pendant, from Troy. (P. & C.)
Fig. 292.—Gold Ornaments, from Troy. (P. & C.)
Great quantities of pottery and objects of industrial art in metal—more especially in gold—have been found in the excavations at Mycenæ, Tiryns, and Troy. The earthenware pottery is generally decorated in colours of brown, red, and greyish white. The patterns are very simple, bands and squares arranged in rows, some animal forms, leaves with wavy stems, and spirals; some of the pottery is decorated with marine animals, such as the octopus, cuttle-fish, argonaut, and with seaweed. Some curious shaped vases of woman forms (Figs. 285, 286) have been found by Dr. Schliemann.
Fig. 293.—Gold Plate Ornament, from Troy.
Fig. 294.—Gold Disc. (P. & C.)
A pilgrim’s bottle from Ialysos decorated with circular bands, and an amphora with three handles, from the same place, decorated with bands and lily forms with curled-back petals, are very beautiful, and a small vessel with geometric ornament are all of the same character (Figs. 287, 288, and 289). The most beautiful form of Mycenian pottery is the Marseilles vase or ewer, in the Borély collection (Fig. 290).
Fig. 295.—Gold Disc. (P. & C.)
The decoration is a brown-black on a light ground, and consists of the argonaut shellfish and seaweed. It is likely to have been a copy from a metal object owing to its shape, which is characteristic of metal.
Fig. 296.—Gold Cup, Troy. (P. & C.)
In metal-work generally, and in the inlaying of gold and electrum in a bronze ground, the Mycenian artists have produced some splendid work. There are six chromolithographs in Messrs. Perrot and Chipiez’s “Art in Primitive Greece” of bronze Mycenian daggers inlaid with gold and electrum of various shades: one has the representation of panthers hunting birds on a river-bank—the river is stocked with fish; another has a lion hunt by armed men; a third, lions hunting gazelles; a fourth has running lions; a fifth, spiral ornamentation; and the sixth a free rendering of lilies both on handle and blade. The art and workmanship of them all are of a high order.
Some gold ornaments from Troy (Figs. 291 and 292) show their skill in hand-wrought jewellery.
Fig. 297.—Gold Ewer, Troy. (P. & C.)
The golden butterfly (Fig. 293) and the two gold discs (Figs. 294 and 295) are stamped on the metal, and were used as dress decorations; they were found in great quantities in the tombs of the women at Mycenæ. One is an octopus design, and the other a butterfly.
The gold cup (Fig. 296) and ewer (Fig. 297), found at Troy along with many others in silver, gold, and bronze, give a fair idea of the beauty of shape and design of such articles of this period. They show marks of injury by fire.[fire.]
CHAPTER XIII.
THE GREEK AND ROMAN ORDERS OF ARCHITECTURE.
Although Egypt and Assyria are justly credited with the creation of the models and the invention of the methods that subsequently aroused to life the artistic genius of the Greeks, yet the fact remains that, from all the wealth of artistic forms bequeathed to succeeding ages by the nations of hoary antiquity, prior to the Grecian period, nothing has survived except those forms which Greece has selected from her predecessors, and after remodelling them by her own standards of beauty and fitness, has left them as imperishable models of art for all nations that follow her. All historic art and architecture, whether classic or what not, since the days of Pericles, is based on Greek art, notwithstanding the many modifications which we see in Byzantine, Saracenic, Romanesque, and their offshoots. All of them owe their life and vitality to Greek traditions and to Greek principles.
We have seen that in the earlier Greek buildings, such as Mycenian palaces, timber construction must have largely entered into the architecture of that period, and it is quite likely that timber was used for the greater part of the Greek domestic dwellings, which may account for no remains of them having been found.
The rock-cut tombs of Lycia, in Asia Minor, afford to us a further proof of timber construction which may have been in use in the Early Greek period in Europe, and these tombs of Lycia tend to throw a side light on the probable forms of Greek construction that existed between the date of the Mycenian buildings and that of the oldest Doric remains that are at present known, for the Lycians had free intercourse with the Ionians and European Greeks. The earlier Lycian tombs are of a great antiquity, and the same form of tomb has been used in Lycia down to periods when Greece was far advanced in art (Figs. 298 and 299).
Fig. 298.—Lycian Rock-built Tomb at Pinara. (P. & C.)
The Lycians formed a connecting link with the Anterior Asiatics and the Ionian Greeks. Their origin and their language were Asiatic, but the greater part of their art was the product of Hellenic artists from Ionian Greece, and, therefore, the Lycians must have been intimately connected with the Greeks, and must have played an important part in the development of Hellenic culture.
Fig. 299.—Lycian Rock-built Tomb at Pinara. (P. & C.)
The Greek temples were in some respects related to the Egyptian temple. The pillar and beam construction was copied from Egypt, and also the rectangular plan. The great distinction between the two was that rows of columns were placed outside the temples of the Greeks, which gave to them a light and airy appearance, while in contradistinction the Egyptians had their rows of columns inside the great hypostyle halls and galleries of their temples which gave to them the effect of oppressive gloominess. Broadly speaking, the Greek temple was something of the model of an Egyptian temple turned inside out.
The interior of a Greek temple was simply a rectangular cella or cell where the statue of the god or goddess was set up, and sometimes a smaller chamber behind called the treasury. The smaller temples consisted of the cella only. A row of lighter columns sometimes supported the roof of the cella, as in the case of the Parthenon. It was only in the case of the larger temples that we find more than one cell, while the Egyptian temple was often a maze of large and small chambers, the multitude adding to the mystery sought for in all Egyptian architecture. The Greek temples were usually placed on a basement of steps, and built on elevated positions. The Greeks sought all publicity in the honouring of their deities, and in pleasing the passer-by with the sight of their beautiful buildings, on which their best decoration was shown on the outside.
Greek architecture dates from the end of the Archaic age down to the death of Alexander the Great, from about B.C. 600 to B.C. 333.
It is usually divided into three Styles or, as they are called, “Orders,” namely, the Doric, the Ionic, and the Corinthian. The Doric represents the European phase of the Greek style, the Ionic and Corinthian having more of the Asiatic features. The three orders were in use in Greece at the same time, that is to say, a more severe and correct phase of the Doric—the older order—was used after buildings in the newer orders had appeared. Thomson, in his “Ode to Liberty,” has alluded to the orders in the lines—
“First, unadorn’d
And nobly plain, the manly Doric rose;
The Ionic then, with decent matron grace,
Her airy pillar heaved; luxuriant last,
The rich Corinthian spread her wanton wealth.”
The Greeks made use of the vertical and horizontal line in their architecture; the curved line was not used, except, of course, in decoration. The half-diameter of the column was the module or unit by which the whole building was measured, and the column was limited in height according to the diameter of its base. This did not preclude freedom in design; on the contrary, freedom was allowed and practised to such an extent that hardly two Grecian buildings of any one order were alike in proportion or design. Even the mouldings were varied in curve and proportion; these members that were with the Romans merely segments of circles, were in section with the Greeks either parts of the curve of the ellipse or parabola, and in many cases were designed by freehand. Some very subtle devices to overcome natural optical effects when viewing the buildings have been discovered by Mr. Pennethorne and Mr. Penrose, more especially in the Parthenon.
It is well known that the entasis, or slight swelling made in Greek columns, which makes a convex line of their profiles, is done to prevent the column from looking hollowed in the centre, which it would do if it were perfectly straight; but in addition to this the architects above named have discovered in the Parthenon a correction in the vertical lines, to prevent the apparent tendency which all high vertical lines have to spread out at the top, in the making of the columns to incline slightly inwards; and the steps of the basement and horizontal lines of the architraves are found to be slightly curved upwards in the middle to prevent the tendency that all long horizontal lines have to droop in the middle.
Thus we learn how admirably painstaking, and how well the Greeks applied their profound knowledge to their architecture, as they did in everything else.
The joints of their marble masonry were as a rule so fine and accurate in the fitting together, that it has been said a razor edge could not be inserted between them.
Fig. 300.—The Parthenon. Greek Doric, enlarged Section of Annulets at A.
The Greek Doric order (Fig. 300) is without a base; the shaft of the column has twenty flutings; sunk lines or rings encircle the shaft a little below the moulding of the capital. This moulding—the echinus—is of the best possible profile that a supporting member could have; it is divided from the shaft by three or five annulets. Above the echinus rests the square tile-like cap—the abacus—which carries the architrave. The latter is a marble beam with square ends, and above the architrave is the frieze separated by a band (taenia). The frieze has triglyphs alternating with metopes. The former consists of channelled pier-like forms one over and one between each column, and the metopes are square panels between two triglyphs on which are usually found sculptured subjects. At the bottom of each triglyph, separated by a fillet, is a row of pegs, cylindrical or conical in shape, called “guttæ” or drops.
Above the frieze the cornice projects, which in profile consists of a flat band—the corona—and the crowning member, an ovolo moulding. Under the projecting eave of the cornice are slanting slabs of marble—parallel to the roof tiles—placed one over each triglyph, and one over each metope. These are called mutules, and they have rows of guttæ on their under surface.
The crowning members of the cornice are carried around the sloping lines of the triangular pediments at each end of the building. On the pediments were sculptured the figure subjects that had usually some relation to the divinity to whom the temple was dedicated; as, for example, on the Parthenon pediment the story of the birth of Athene was the subject executed and designed by Phidias, who also was the sculptor of the celebrated Panathenic frieze that adorned the outer part of the cella of the Parthenon. Ictinus was the architect of the Parthenon and also of the temples of Apollo Epicurius at Bassæ and at Phigallia, both in Arcadia. The Parthenon was finished about B.C. 438.