for details, and many accessories are rendered entirely in this way, especially in the earlier art, while in the Hellenistic period we find very low relief employed to assist the painter. The Greek attitude toward the use of color was very different from that which now prevails; but the statues from the Acropolis and the beautifully tinted Alexander sarcophagus at Constantinople show that Greek taste in this regard was at least as good as our own.

HISTORY.

In sketching the history of Greek art, it is convenient to distinguish the following periods (see ARCHEOLOGY):

I. The Archaic Period, extending to about B.C. 480, the era of the Persian wars.

II. The Attic Period, from about B.C. 480 to B.C. 323, during which the centre of Greek life is Athens.

III. The Hellenistic Period, which ends with the Roman Conquest (B.C. 146).

IV. The Roman Period, which may be extended to the foundation of Constantinople (A.D. 330), though constructive Greek art ceased long before.

These divisions are in their nature arbitrary, and no sharp line divides one from the other. ARCHAIC PERIOD (till B.C. 480). This period may be conveniently divided into two parts: (a) The era of the formation of types and schools, and (b) the period of developed archaism, from about

B.C. 550 to B.C. 480.

Formative Period.-The earliest Doric temples and other monuments of Greek art do not belong much before the year B.C. 700, unless Professor Dörpfeld is right in assigning the Heræum at Olympia to a date not far from B.C. 1000. The evidence here is very uncertain; but even if it is accepted, the building stands alone. The earliest sculptures in the round are probably not earlier than B.C. 650, though here any positive date is unattainable. All the evidence shows that the artists were not confined to any one part of Greece, but that a general activity developed throughout the Greek world, using much the same types, but treating them with certain differences. Much has already been accomplished in distinguishing the several local schools and identifying their products. Their characteristics, however, are so dependent on details that their discussion lies outside the scope of this article, and it will be more convenient to consider the works with reference to types rather than schools. Statues may be male or female, draped or nude, standing or seated. An examination of the monuments shows that not all the possible variations were adopted by these early artists. The standing figure, if male, is usually nude; if female, draped; while the seated figures are generally clothed. The male standing figure bears a striking resemblance to the Egyptian statues in its pose, and the suggestion may have come from Egypt, with which the Greeks of the seventh century carried on an active trade; but the Greek artist, even at first, is no mere copyist, but endeavors to embody in the traditional form his own observations. These so-called 'Apollo' statues stand firmly on both feet, with the left foot advanced and the arms close to the sides. Little by little we may observe greater freedom, the arms are worked free from the body, though the hands are still pressed to the thighs, and a

greater care in modeling, which seeks to bring out the muscles and bones, is manifest. Later in the period the type is modified, as in such a figure as the Calf-Bearer of the Acropolis, where the position of the hands has been completely altered, and the artist is fast freeing himself from some of the established conventionalities. The draped female statues are scarcely more, at first, than slabs of stone carved into a rude outline of the human form. The head and long locks of hair, the arms at the sides, and the two feet side by side just showing beneath the long robe, are the only details attempted. The body is clothed in a long garment, girded at the waist and hanging perfectly straight to the feet. Probably the ancient color indicated detail that has now disappeared. A good example is the native statue of Nicandra, at Delos. Later more care is used in the treatment of the drapery, and the style begins which is best represented in the sixth century by the Acropolis 'Maidens' (kópa1). The seated draped figures are best represented by the figures from Branchide in the British Museum. Draped in large mantles, whose stiff folds are barely indicated in low relief, their hands resting on their knees, they sit in their high-backed thrones, without life or dignity, though recalling in their pose some of the earlier Babylonian work.

through modifications of stereotyped forms, a While sculpture in the round is developing greater advance seems to have been made in reliefs, especially in those of an architectural character. These are typified by the metopes of the oldest temple of Selinus, in Sicily, which, in spite of their ugliness, at least show some freedom in design. Even more interesting, though no more beautiful, are the remains of pediments in 'poros stone found on the Acropolis. They are among the earliest specimens of Attic art, and show it even then possessing characteristics of its own. Among these is the heavy build of the figures, which appears also in the 'Calf-Bearer, seems to cling to the Athenian School throughout the sixth century, if not longer. At the very end of this period a work survives which can at least be dated approximately-viz. the great Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, which was rebuilt during the reign of Croesus (B.C. 560-46). The Ionic columns of this temple were adorned with sculptures in relief upon the lower drum, some of the fragments of which are now in the British Museum. They show an advanced technique, and give promise of high future development.

and

Developed Archaism.-With the period of developed archaism come the beginnings of real beauty and charm in the products of Greek sculpture. True, there are still serious technical defects, but the artists are fast emerging from the trammels of formalism, and already show much simplicity and devotion, combined with a true Greek grace and sense of proportion. The nude male type still clings to the old position, but the artist is now able to render the muscles better, to free the arms from the sides, and give some expression to the face. It is, however, in the draped female statue that the greatest advance is made, apparently by the Ionian artists of the Cyclades, especially of Chios. They developed the deep cutting of the folds of the drapery, and the change which this brought about is well indicated in the important series of statues discovered on the Acropolis of Athens. The gen

eral pose is the same in most of the series. The figure rests squarely on both feet, one of which is slightly advanced. One arm is bent at the elbow, and the extended hand probably held a patera or flower. The other arm hangs at the side, and the hand draws up the long skirt, thus giving an opportunity for the introduction of diagonal folds to relieve the perpendicular lines. The drapery, which varies somewhat in the different figures, is carefully worked out, and given much detail by the free employment of color. For the face in general not much can be said; the eyes and mouth still cause the artist trouble, and his attempts to secure expression too often produce only the exaggerations of the archaic smile. At the end of the period, however, the skill of the artist has so far increased as to give us the beautiful heads of a boy and girl, which in dignity and sweetness of expression compare favorably with many products of a later age.

In these female figures a close analysis can detect differences which warrant the belief that some are the work of Chian or island Ionian artists, probably brought to Athens by the tyrants; while others, such as the statue by Antenor, seem to show, in their somewhat heavy build and plainness of conception, which holds aloof from the over-elaboration and excess of ornament, the work of the native Attic School, which had taken up the refinements and improvements of the newcomers, but without loss of its earlier characteristics. To the same native school must belong the figures of Athena and a fallen giant from the old Temple of Athena on the Acropolis. Interesting examples of the work of the Ionian schools have been found at Delphi, where the treasuries of Cnidos and Siphnos show the adaptation of the female type to a new use in Greek architecture. The columns between the antæ of these buildings were formed of a lofty base on which stood a draped figure bearing on her head a lofty polos,' which served as the capital, and furnished a suitable transition from the perpendicular lines of the column to the horizontal of the roof.

In general, the works of this period have not yet been classified in a thoroughly satisfactory manner. It seems clear that there were flourishing schools of sculpture in Asia Minor, Chios, Paros, and Naxos, and of bronze-workers at Egina and Argos, while at Athens there is a school with well-defined local tradition. The study of the present is largely an endeavor to analyze minutely each new work, and in this way determine the characteristics of the different schools. This task is complicated by the crosscurrents of influence which tended to obliterate local differences and produce a thoroughly national type of art. On some of the characteristics of this early art, see Lange, Die Darstellung des Menschen in der älteren griechischen Kunst (German trans. from the Danish, Strassburg, 1899). ATTIC PERIOD (B.C. 480-323). The Persian wars gave a tremendous impulse to the whole sphere of Hellenic life, and especially to the field of art. By the end of the archaic period the sculptor had obtained a mastery over his material, which enabled him to strive for new effects, and finally to produce the most perfect specimens of ancient art. This period may be divided into three parts: (a) The transitional period, extending to about the middle of the

fifth century; (b) the age of Phidias and his immediate followers, ending with the century; (c) the age of Praxiteles and Scopas, which may be considered to end with the death of Alexander.

Transitional Period. - The works of the transition still show the traces of the archaic period, and the uncertainty as to some of the limits of their art. In this period belong probably the Æginetan sculptures (q.v.), and certainly those of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia (q.v.), and the metopes of the later temples at Selinus; but original works are few, and we are largely dependent upon more or less certainly identifiable copies in marble of the bronze statues of the masters. Of these few originals one of the best-indeed, the finest example of an ancient bronze statue is the charioteer of Delphi, part of the group dedicated to the god by Polyzelus, brother of Hiero, Tyrant of Syracuse, between B.C. 478 and 472, in consequence of a victory in the Pythian games. Full of grace and charm, yet with a trace of archaic hardness still visible, this work of an unknown artist conveys some suggestion of the qualities that must have marked the work of the great masters.

The development of the artists of this period was much helped by the growing demand for statues of the victorious athletes, which were frequently dedicated at Olympia and the seats of the great games. The influence of the palæstra on Greek art has been often discussed, and in certain directions can scarcely be overestimated. Here the artist was enabled to see the perfectly developed human form to the best advantage, while the whole people became familiar with living beauty. The sculptor was at once furnished with the best of models, and intelligent and appreciative judges of his work. To this period belong Calamis, famous for his Attic grace: Pythagoras of Rhegium, whose athlete statues were especially celebrated; and above all Myron, whose Discobolus (q.v.) shows at once the skill and daring of the artist, who chose to fix the athlete at the height of his endeavor, and also the deficient grasp of the real limits of his material, which is not adapted for the permanent rendering of a transitory condition. Lastly may be mentioned the charming bronze, possibly a Greek original, now in the Palazzo dei Conservatori in Rome. It represents a boy drawing a thorn from his foot, and, as has been well said by Tarbell, "might be regarded as an epitome of the artistic spirit and capacity of the age."

Age of Phidias.-In passing to the age of Phidias, we pass at once into the full splendor of Greek art in its noblest form. It was the time when great works were planned and executed, for the most part in honor of the gods, for the great buildings are temples and the great statues are their adornment. Thus at Athens we have the whole series of buildings on the Acropolis, the Parthenon, the Propylæa, Erechtheum, and little Temple of Athene Nike, and in the lower city the so-called Theseum, still the most perfectly preserved of the ancient temples: at Rhamnus the Temple of Nemesis, with the statue of Agoracritus, which some attributed to Phidias; at Sunium the Temple of Poseidon; at Eleusis the great hall of the mysteries, the work of Ictinus, the architect of the Parthenon; at Argos the new Temple of Hera, with its chryselephantine statue of the goddess by Polyclitus; and the Temple of Apollo at Phigaleia, another work of

Through the best work of this period runs the spirit of self-restraint; the work is not for the display of technical skill, though every line shows the sureness of the artist's touch, but for the embodiment of a high ideal. In this nobility of conception lies the great superiority of this period over the ages that follow. Less full of grace and variety of expression, the works of the last half of the fifth century show a loftier moral tone and greater elevation of feeling. Nor is this wholly confined to the great works. The delicacy and simplicity of Greek art are seen even in the work of artisans, such as carved the great majority of the Attic tombstones, and who even, when working in the fourth century, show themselves but little affected by its spirit. The technique of these monuments is often faulty, but the good taste is unfailing. The deceased is represented as in daily life, alone or in the family circle; there is no direct suggestion of the grave, though in some of the later monuments of this class there seems to be a suggestion of melancholy in the attitude and expression; notably is this the case in a stone of the fourth century, in the style of Scopas, which seems to commemorate a young man mourned by his father and a little slave. The questions of interpretation to which this class of monuments has given rise are too numerous and intricate to be here discussed; nor is their settlement necessary to the appreciation of the merit of one of the most interesting and attractive products of Greek art.

Age of Praxiteles and Scopas.-With the fourth century we pass from the era of great State undertakings and enter the field of the individual. Not only do the personal characteristics of the artists seem to become more marked, but the works are more frequently the result of private munificence. The style of the sculpture shows the continuance of the two great schools of Athens and Argos, Praxiteles being the chief representative of the former and Scopas of the latter; but the points of divergence are not so strongly marked, and the differences in many cases may quite as well be assigned to the personality of the artist as to the tendency of the school. In the choice of subjects and their treatment, the same individuality is prominent. The earlier group of artists had idealized even their portraits, and in their statues of divinities, whether gods or heroes, had given what seemed like a final form to the loftiest aspirations of the popular religion. The religious beliefs of the fourth century were not so deeply rooted, nor was the general ethical standard so high as in the previous period: moreover, it was needful for the artist to seek a fresh point of view if he was to be other than a mere imitator, and this was found in a presentation of those traits which were more directly individual. This is especially marked in portraiture, which in the

work of Demetrius of Alopeke, in Attica, became realistic in every detail, and the art of Silanion, famous for his statues of living men, seems to represent the same tendency as does Parrhasios in painting-the depiction of men as they lived. This tendency to individualize influenced also the statues of the gods, which are shown by a Scopas or Praxiteles less in their ideal perfection than in momentary and varying moods. They are more like men, and it is the desire of the artist to bring out the finer distinctions of personality which entered into the conception of the gods. This leads to an increased effort to render expression and personality in the features, and in this such an artist as Scopas far outstripped his predecessors. The mutilated heads from Tegea and the good copies of the Meleager show how, by concentrating his effort on certain parts of the face, the most intense energy and emotion could be brought home to the spectator without any painful distortion of the features. This endeavor to convey certain impressions to the spectator leads the artist to greater care in the finer points of rendering the texture of the skin, the play of the muscles, the folds and quality of the drapery, and the Hermes of Praxiteles is an example of the mastery of technique attained by a great artist. In all this tendency to realism, and sometimes toward sentimentalism, the high standards of the past and the Greek worship of moderation, which had not yet passed away, kept the greater artists within bounds, and we seldom find the extremes which became too common in a later age.

In architecture this period sees the development of the great stone theatres, such as that designed by the younger Polyclitus for the sanctuary of Asclepius at Epidaurus, and the theatre of Dionysus at Athens, which was probably rebuilt near the end of the period by the statesman Lycurgus. Other buildings on which the great sculptors labored were the temple of Asclepius at Epidaurus, with a cult statue made by Thrasymedes of Paros and acroteria and pediments designed by Timotheus; the Temple of Athene Alea at Tegea, built and supplied with pediment sculptures by Scopas; and, above all, the Mausoleum (q.v.), the funeral monument of Mausolus, Satrap of Caria, which was decorated with a multitude of reliefs and statues by the four artists, Praxiteles, Scopas, Timotheus, and Bryaxis. The rebuilding of the great temple of Ephesus also furnished Scopas an opportunity to display his skill on one of the new sculptured bases for the columns. One such base has been found, and is now in the British Museum. The scene has never been satisfactorily explained. though it is commonly referred to the story of Alcestis; but its style shows close affinity to that of Scopas, though it is scarcely probable that it is a work of his chisel. Among the other works of this period, attention should be called to the beautiful Demeter from Cnidos, now in the British Museum, which has been claimed for both Praxiteles and Scopas, and the famous Niobe group at Florence, a collection of Roman copies of a lost Greek original of this time. Pliny tells us that there was a difference of opinion as to whether a certain Niobe group was by Scopas or Praxiteles; but if these statues go back to that original, which is doubtful, it seems likely that the former must be chosen.

THE HELLENISTIC AGE (B.C. 323-146). In en