Page:The American Cyclopædia (1879) Volume XIV.djvu/742

 716 SCULPTURE at least, were made of small plates hammered into the desired shape, and fastened by nails or cramps, or of solid pieces beaten into shape. Sometimes, according to ancient authors, pe- culiar effects of color, such as a blush or pallor upon the cheeks, were given by Greek sculptors to works of this class by a fusion of different metals ; but the descriptions by Plutarch and others do not afford a very satisfactory account of the process, and it seems more probable that the statues were colored after being cast, as Pliny says was the practice with the Egyp- tians. Coloring was not confined to bronzes, but among eastern nations, as well as with the Greeks, statues in marble and other mate- rials were frequently heightened by color and a profusion of ornament, whence they were termed by the Greeks polychromic. When different kinds of marble or stone and of dif- ferent colors were combined in the same work, it was called polylithic, to distinguish it from the simpler monolithic sculpture. Both meth- ods are distinct from the so-called toreutic art of the ancients, which included the working of precious metals combined with other substan- ces, as exemplified in Homer's description of the shield of Achilles. The Greek sculptors sometimes introduced foreign substances into marble statues, as precious stones or glass for eyes. A species of sculpture called chrysele- phantine, in which the flesh parts of the figure were of ivory and the draperies of gold, was also employed by the Greeks for statues of tutelar divinities intended to testify to the wealth, liberality, or piety of a state or indi- vidual. The statue of the Olympian Zeus by Phidias affords the most illustrious example of this. Sculpture was probably the earliest de- veloped of the imitative arts. So far as experi- ence has shown, it had no special birthplace, but sprung up naturally in all parts of the world, taking its origin everywhere in the imitative faculty of man, although the practice of it in certain countries was undoubtedly influenced by the higher civilization of others. The first efforts in sculpture were probably monumental. A block of stone rudely fashioned into some simple form, or even a pile of atones, original- ly sufficed for a memorial ; and repeated in- stances occur in the Mosaic history of the erec- tion of monuments of this kind. The next step may be traced to the desire in a primi- tive state of society for some visible, tangible object representing the deity commonly wor- shipped. But as the deities worshipped by the earliest races were heavenly bodies or abstract qualities, such representations could only be symbolical ; hence in all probability the first statues of gods were simple pillars of stone having no resemblance to the human figure, and indicating their purpose only by certain marks or hieroglyphics carved upon them ; and the first statues fulfilling in any considerable degree the conditions of art were of men dis- tinguished as heroes, benefactors, or founders of nations. When in process of time such indi- viduals became invested with divine attributes, the visible representation of their forms as ob- jects of worship became necessary, and sculp- ture first assumed its legitimate functions. The art, thus early associated with religious wor- ship, was naturally considered inapplicable to ordinary purposes, and in many instances was wholly controlled by hierarchical influence. The supernatural character assigned by grossly superstitious races to the forms of these newly created deities, as exemplified in the monstrous creations of the Chinese, Hindoo, and Egyptian mythology, was gradually embodied in certain fixed types from which no deviation was per- mitted; and this circumstance, together with the limited field of practice, caused sculpture in many parts of the world to remain almost from its birth a mere mechanical art. The first artists on record as sculptors are Bezaleel and Aholiab (about 1500 B. C.), who made the or- naments of the tabernacle (Exod. xxxi.), al- though long previous to their time the art of working in metal, stone, and wood was known to various eastern nations. Abundant passages in the Old Testament show that the Hebrews practised it with success, as did also the Phoe- nicians ; but no specimens of the sculpture of either nation remain. Of Assyrian sculpture nothing was known from actual observation previous to the excavations of Botta, Layard, and their successors, by which the arts of a race whose history is lost in the mythical ages have been suddenly and minutely brought to light. The specimens exhumed are for the most part bass reliefs on alabaster slabs, the subjects delineated being colossal human- headed bulls and other grotesque personages from the Assyrian mythology, battles, hunting scenes, processions, ceremonials, &c., executed according to a code of conventional rules. (See NINEVEH.) Although none of them can be assigned a high rank as works of art, the spec- tator cannot but be struck by the majesty and even the severe grandeur of some of the larger figures, and by the skill with which the char- acteristics of individual animals and the de- tails of elaborate compositions are represented. The Assyrians also excelled in bronze castings. Of th wonders of Babylon and the perfec- tion to which the Chaldeans carried the art of casting in bronze and the precious metals, we know nothing beyond the accounts of Herod- otus and other ancient writers. Among the Persians sculpture was never employed for religious purposes, and the art as practised by them was evidently derived from the Assyri- ans. Worshipping no deity which could bo represented by any form, they regarded images of gods as marks of barbarism and impie- ty ; and wherever they appeared as conquerors such works, with the temples enclosing them, were invariably destroyed. But their art, notwithstanding it was unrestrained by hie- rarchical influences, was never marked by taste or in any sense progressive. The sculptures of Persepolis represent principally processions