Page:History of Art in Primitive Greece - Mycenian Art Vol 2.djvu/291

 238 Primitive Grkkce: Mycenian Art. imperfections — he comes off best in the hunting-scene, where the end aimed at has to a large extent been reached. The draughts- manship is more compact than in the second picture ; it implies a more observant and inquiring eye into scenes of every-day life, and discloses points marvellously true to nature. These will be felt by any one who has closely observed the habits of the beast who figures here as the hero of the drama. If he has ever seen a bull-fight, he will know that the animal's tail, which hangs down behind when at rest, is immediately raised when excited. Here, the bull who has stretched his body preparatory to clearing the obstacle, has not only raised his tail, but sent it forward in front as if to help the movement of the body ; whilst fury has caused that of the bull who has overthrown the hunts- man to stand erect and rigid in mid-air. The most vicious and murderous blows which can overtake a toreador are not those which the bull deals straight out at his foe» but those he dispenses with one horn only. In the first instance he may overthrow his adversary and inflict sharp pain ; but the blow is hardly if ever fatal ; the beast's horns have had no grip on the vital parts of the body. With regard to the netted bull, we stated why it is open to criticism ; yet how instinct with life and .passion that head is withal ! We seem to hear the impotent and enraged lowing which issues from that wide-open mouth. If, as has been said, it might just be possible that the artist, having to treat the two subjects one after the other, felt his interest stirred to greater depths in the one case than in the other, this would assuredly appear in inequality of inspiration, relative feebleness, and lack of expression. But manipulation, acquired by long training and ex- perience, becomes mere routine work, and is not likely to betray faltering inspiration ; in spite, then, of inferiority of conception, the workmanship would be practically alike in the two pieces. Here, however, the two compositions are of equal merit ; they finely balance each other, and both point to unity of arrangement and presentation ; but difference of make is observable from one to the other. Hence, these facts would incline us to infer that the two scenes were imagined and sketched out by one artist only ; he kept the hunting-scene for himself, as that which was most difficult and attractive ; and he allotted the second vase to a pupil, who, though slavishly carrying out his conception, had neither the same feeling for, nor the same knowledge of,