Museum of Antiquity: A Description of Ancient Life

by L. W. Yaggy; T. L. Haines

The following are some of the more particular characteristics of the human form, adopted by the Grecian sculptors of this age:

In the profile, the forehead and lips touch a perpendicular line drawn between them. In young persons, the brow and nose nearly form a straight line, which gives an expression of grandeur and delicacy to the face. The forehead was low, the eyes large, but not prominent. A depth was given to the eye to give to the eyebrow a finer arch, and, by a deeper shadow, a bolder relief. To the eyes a living play of light was communicated by a sharp projection of the upper eyelid, and a deep depression of the pupil. The eye was so differently shaped in the heads of divinities and ideal heads that it is itself a characteristic by which they can be distinguished. In Jupiter, Apollo, and Juno the opening of the eye is large, and roundly arched; it has also less length than usual, that the curve which it makes may be more spherical. Pallas likewise has large eyes, but the upper lid falls over them more than in the three divinities just mentioned, for the purpose of giving her a modest maiden look. Small eyes were reserved for Venuses and voluptuous beauties, which gave them a languishing air. The upper lip was short, the lower lip fuller than the upper, as this tended to give a roundness to the chin; the short upper lip, and the round and grandly-formed chin, being the most essential signs of genuine Greek formation. The lips were generally closed; they slightly open in the statues of the gods, especially in the case of Venus, but the teeth were never seen. The ear was carefully modeled and finished. The beauty, and especially the execution of them, is, according to Winkelman, the surest sign by which to discriminate the antique from additions and restorations. The hair was curly, abundant, and disposed in floating locks, and executed with the utmost imaginable care; in females it was tied in a knot behind the head. The frontal hair was represented as growing in a curve over the temples in order to give the face an oval shape. The face was always oval, and a cross drawn in the oval indicated the design of the face. The perpendicular line marked the position of the brow, the nose, the mouth, and the chin; the horizontal line passed through the eyes, and was parallel to the mouth. The hands of youth were beautifully rounded, and the dimples given; the fingers were tapered, but the articulations were not generally indicated. In the male form the chest was high, arched, and prominent. In the female form, especially in that of goddesses and virgins, the form of the breasts is virginal in the extreme, since their beauty was generally made to consist in the moderateness of their size. They were generally a little higher than nature. The abdomen was without prominence. The legs and knees of youthful figures are rounded with softness and smoothness, and unmarked by muscular movements. The proportion of the limbs was longer than in the preceding period. In male and female figures the foot was rounded in its form; in the female the toes are delicate, and have dimples over their first joints gently marked.

It is evident that this type of beauty of form, adopted by the Grecian sculptors, is in unison with, and exhibits a marked analogy to the type of face and form of the Greeks themselves, for, as Sir Charles Bell observes, the Greek face is a fine oval, the forehead full and carried forward, the eyes large, the nose straight, the lips and chin finely formed; in short, the forms of the head and face have been the type of the antique, and of all which we most admire.

The sculptors of this age, instead of aiming at an abstract, unattainable ideal, studied nature in its choicest forms, and attained the beautiful by selecting and concentrating in one those charms which are found diffused over all. They avoided the representation of all violent motions and perturbations of the passions, which would have completely marred that expression of serene repose which is a prominent characteristic of the beautiful period of Greek sculpture. Indeed, the chief object of the Greek sculptor was the representation of the beautiful alone, and to this principle he made character, expression, costume, and everything else subordinate.

Lysippus, the successor of Praxiteles and Scopas, was a contemporary of Alexander the Great. He contributed to advance their style by the peculiar fullness, roundness, and harmonious general effect by which it appears that his works were characterized. His school exhibited a strong naturalistic tendency, a closer imitation of nature, leading to many refinements in detail. It was unquestionably greater in portrait than in ideal works. Pliny thus speaks of his style: "He is considered to have contributed very greatly to the art of the statuary by expressing the details of the hair, and by making the head smaller than had been done by the ancients, and the body more graceful and less bulky, a method by which his statues were made to appear taller."

The portrait statues of Alexander the Great by Lysippus were very numerous. The great King would only allow himself to be modeled by Lysippus. The head of Alexander, as the young Ammon on the coins of Lysimachus, is said to have been designed by him. An athlete, scraping his body with a strigil, was the most famous of the bronze statues of Lysippus. The statue of an athlete in the Vatican, in a similar position, is supposed to be a marble copy of the original bronze of Lysippus; though an inferior work, it illustrates the statements of Pliny regarding the proportions adopted by Lysippus—a small head and the body long and slim. The bas-reliefs also on the monument of Lysicrates, representing the story of Dionysus and the Tyrrhenian pirates, presented all the characteristic features of the school of Lysippus. It was erected in the archonship of Euænetus, B.C. 335.

The canon of Polycletus began to be generally adopted at this period. It was followed by Lysippus, who called the Doryphoros of that artist his master. In his practice of dealing with the heads and limbs of his figures, Lysippus was followed by Silanion and Euphranor, and his authority may be said to have governed the school of Greece to a late period of the art.

Pliny tells us that Euphranor was the first who represented heroes with becoming dignity, and who paid particular attention to proportion. He made, however, in the generality of instances, the bodies somewhat more slender and the heads larger. His most celebrated statue was a Paris, which expressed alike the judge of the goddesses, the lover of Helen, and the slayer of Achilles. The very beautiful sitting figure of Paris, in marble, in the Vatican, is, no doubt, a copy of this work.

Subsequently to these sculptors we have Chares, the Rhodian, who constructed the famous colossus of Helios at the entrance of the harbor of Rhodes, which was 105 feet high. It appears there is no authority for the common statement that its legs extended over the mouth of the harbor.

Of the later Asiatic or Rhodian schools we have the famous groups of the Laocoon, on page 555, and of Dirce tied to a bull, commonly called the Toro Farnese. In both of these the dramatic element is predominant, and the tragic interest is not appreciated. In the Laocoon consummate skill is shown in the mastery of execution; but if the object of the artist was to create pity or awe, he has drawn too much attention to his power of carving marble. The Laocoon was executed, according to Pliny, by Agesander, Polydorus and Athenodorus, natives of Rhodes. This group, now in the Vatican, was found in the baths of Titus. From the evidence of an antique gem, on which is engraved a representation of this group, we find the right arm of the Laocoon has been wrongly restored. In the gem the hand of Laocoon is in contact with his head, and not, as restored by Giovanni da Montorsoli, raised high.