Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 17.djvu/259

KOMAN ART. 233 ROMAN ART. sculpture, the decoration of ti'inples, was origi- nail}' absent at Rome, auJ seulpuuc for a long time found its principal channel in portrait stat- ues, rcipiired by the ancestor worship and self- glorilication of Koman citizens. This tendency was fostered by the custom of keeping the images of ancestors in the houses and bearing them in funeral processions, and the practice early arose of erecting honorary statues to distinguished citi- zens. Jlythological subjects were not much rep- resented until the reign of Augustus, but here Greek originals were merely copied. At (irst bronze was the favorite material, and sculpture in the round the only form practiced, but with the advent of Greek influences nutrble became more common. The great architectural works of the Imperial period, the amphitheatres, baths, basilicas, bridges, etc., called for the decoration with innumerable statues. Specially Ronuin are those fine combinations of architecture, the tri- lunphal arches, commemorative coUnnns, and the ' like, in which the sculpture relief received a development which made it, ne.xt to portraiture, the most characteristic form of Roman art. Etruscan Epoch. As in the architecture, the first influences in Roman sculpture and painting were Etruscan. (See Etruria. paragraph on Archaology ami Art.) Recent discoveries under tlie lj(ii>iii Xifirr in the Roman Forum (ISOfl- 10(10) sliow that as early as the sixth century 11. c. statuarj- and other objects of art were im- ported from Etruria. There are hazy traditions also of Greek artists in Rome, as Damophilus and Gorgasus, who decorated the Temple of Ceres in B.C. 493, but until the end of the third century the chief influence remained Etruscan. The in- numerable bronze statues with which the Forum was adorned were practically all of Etruscan origin. The Greek Epoch. The conquest of the Hel- lenic world, beginning with the capture of Tareu- tum in B.C. 275, opened the eyes of the Romans to the charm of Greek sculpture and painting, and Rome soon became a veritable museinn of masterpieces torn from Greek temples and palaces. Every general brought back ship-loads of art works as a part of his booty. The decora- tions of the Temple of Honor and Virtue (B.C. 207 ) were carried olT from Syracuse by ilarcel- lus; those of the Temple of Fortune (B.C. 173) were seized from that of Juno Lacinia on a prom- ontory between Crotona and Sybaris. Fulvius Nobilior built a temple to Hercules and the muses as a resting place for their statues captured in the ^Etolian War. and when the rude JIummius took Corinth (B.C. 146), he gave his soldiers a free hand to sack the city of its art treasures. The crude Etruscan art was eclipsed and for- gotten, but the Romans could only admire — not imitate — the Greek works that met them on ever}' side. Greek artists of the later school flocked to Rome — Pasiteles, Stephanus, ilenelaus, Arcesi- laus — and their works found admirers as readily as those of Myron and Praxiteles. In fact, the popular taste called rather for the vigorous and the sensual than the ideal, and loved the Perga- mene School, the 'Medici' Venus, and the Tor- tured Marsyas, which the ateliers of the day turned out in great numbers. The very large majority of ancient statues that fill our museums are works of this and the following periods. Greco-Roman Epoch. The first two centuries of the Empire continued without limit the repro- VOL. XVII.— 16. diiction of Greek artistic types; but from the end of the Republic there grew up, ulinost unpcr- ceived, a new s])irit, which may be called distinc- tively Roman, and which showed il.self esiH'cially in realistic portraiture and in historical sculp- tured reliefs. The Greek conception of a por- trait statue or bust was largely ideal, a.s in the Alexander-heads of Ly>ippus. Roman portraiture was a development of Etruscan art, and under the Republic was represented by the iiiiiiiiiius miti-_ onoii, wax masks, which Imng in the atria of' noble houses. The "Voung .Vvigustus" and the armored statue of the same Kniperor from Prima Porta represent Roman portraiture in its most ])erfect form, still influenced by (ireek idealism. In the "Ca^cilius Incundus" from Pompeii, and in the busts of Nero and Caracalla, we have the I'oman realism, which never hesitated to repro- duce personal peculiarities, however revolting. Tlie realistic tendency sliows itself also in reliefs ■ — at first feebly, as in the noble senl|)tures from the "Ara Pacis" of Augustus; then more forcibly in the Arch of Titus and the cohunns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius. Hadrian's travels in Greece and E_g}pt caused a momentary idealizing and archaizing reaction, shown in the noble melancholy of the Antinous busts and in the copies of old Egyptian motives. With the fall of the Antonine dynasty real creative art began to deteriorate. The course of development in painting was similar to that of .sculpture. It is impossible to .say whether Gorgasos and Damophilos had any influence on contemporary painters. We indeed know from literature that temples were decorated with frescoes and that pictures of the victories of the Roman generals were borne in their triumphal processions; as. for example, of the siege of Carthage. Even the names of paint- ers of Roman birth have been transmitted, the most celebrated being Fabius Pietor (c.300 n.c. I, and the decorative painter Ludius (Tadius, Studius), a contemporarv of Augustus. All were essentially Greek in technique and methods, as is evident from the few surviving works, which follow the forms of the Hellenistic period. Only mural decorations survie, but we know that ])anel painting was also largelv practiced. The principal of these works is noticed in the ap- propriate place in the history of Greek painting (see Painting), but in many of the surviving examples there is a trend toward realism which can only be attributed to Roman influence. Such is the case with the famous "Aldolirandini Mar- riage," and in the delicate ganlcn scenes, with birds and flowers, in Livia's villa ad (lallinas; while Pompeian frescoes show the same ten- dencies under Alexandrian influence. The Decline. There is little to be said of this period. Previous tendencies continued, but the technique suffered a gradual decadence which seems almost incredible. Colored marbles, and even materials most difficult to work, such n» granite and por|)hyi', were used for sculptures, the hardship involved in the workmanship seem- ing to compensate for the crudity of the art. When Constantine built his arch, he did not hesi- tate to cover it with sculptures stripped from the earlier arch of Trajan — fine speeinu'ns of Roman realistic art which stand out in strong contrast with the later reliefs, puerile in concep- tion and execution, that were set among them. A few examples of early Christian art are ecu-